20180665 Ver 1_Mit Plan Draft IRT_2019_20190709

ID#* 20180665
Select Reviewer:*
Mac Haupt
Initial Review
Completed Date
07/09/2019
Mitigation Project Submittal - 7/9/2019
Version* 1
Is this a Prospectus, Technical Proposal or a New Site? *
Type of Mitigation Project:*
W Stream r Wetlands r Buffer r Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name:*
Paul Wiesner
Project Information
Existing 20180665
(DWR) (nunbersonly ...nodash)
ID#:*
Project Type: F DMS r Mitigation Bank
Project Name: Alexander Farm
County: Alexander
Document Information
(- Yes (--
Email Address:*
[e-mail]
Existing
Version: (nurrbersonly)
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Plans
File Upload: Alexander Farm 100048 Mit Plan Draft
31.13M6
IRT_2019.pdf
Rease upload only one RDF of the complete file that needs to be submitted...
Signature
Print Name:* Paul Wiesner
Signature:*

MITIGATION PLAN
Draft IRT Submittal
ALEXANDER FARM MITIGATION SITE
Alexander County, NC
NCDEQ Contract No. 7416
DMS Project No. 100048
Catawba River Basin
HUC 03050101
July 3, 2019
RFP #: 16-007277
PREPARED FOR:
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
5 Ravenscroft Drive
Suite 102
Asheville, NC 28801

w
WILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
MEMORANDUM
TO: Harry Tsomides, NC DMS
FROM: Aaron Earley, PE
DATE: June 3, 2019
RE: Draft Mitigation Plan Report and Construction Plans
Alexander Farm Site
Catawba River Basin Cataloging Unit 03050101
DMS Project ID #100048
This memo documents DMS's Mitigation Plan review comments (in italics) received from Harry
Tsomides's letter dated 05/13/19, the project team's responses, and where the revisions have been
included in the final Mitigation Plan.
Please indicate in the narrative that a contracting meeting was held on 3/29/2018 among
Wildlands, DMS and IRT, and the meeting minutes can be found in an Appendix (and include as
an appendix).
a. The initial IRT site walk minutes are referenced in section 1.0 and were added as
Appendix 11.
2. Section 3.1.2 (Geology and Soils) - How do soils and geologic formations and/or individual units
described in the geology and soils section influence the stream form and substrate? The purpose
of this section is to provide multi -scale information for the proposed work and the stream
processes that will be restored. This task does not require more than a few sentences. DMS has
asked WEI countless times to provide the relevance of geology and soils. If WEI does not believe
this information is valuable to the reader and the project context, please say so and/or leave it
out.
a. The parenting material of the soils was described along with sources of sediment on
Site. Further description was added to this section describing how the mapped soil
characteristics will/won't affect project implementation and design.
3. Section 3.1.2 (Geology and Soils) - To what degree is bedrock exposed in the system? Is bedrock
expected to be a major factor potentially requiring design changes, or only occasionally present?
a. The statement "Bedrock was not observed in the channel during the existing conditions
assessment work. Since the channel will be relocated and/or raised to the valley
bottom, bedrock is not anticipated to be a factor in restoration implementation." was
added.
4. Section 3.1.2 (Geology and Soils) -Please provide a reference for the geology description.

a. The reference was added to the References:
i. North Carolina Geological Survey (NCGS), 2017. NCGS Publications.
https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/energy-mineral-land-resources/north-
carolina-geological-survey/ncgs-publications
5. Section 3.1.2 (Land Use/ Land Cover) -Why is figure 2 (Site Map) referenced in this section? The
reference seems out of place. Please clarify or remove.
a. Figure 2 is used to show the current conditions of the Site, including land use (pastures,
forested areas, etc.)
6. Section 3.4 (Project Resources) -It is indicated that NCSAM forms are included in Appendix 3;
these are not there.
a. NCSAM forms were added to Appendix 3 for the resubmittal.
7. Section 3.4 (Project Resources) -It is indicated that streams were classified using the NCDWR
Classification Forms. What DWR stream classification is WEI referencing? Intermittent and
perennial stream identification? The 1/P identification is not a classification; please revise.
a. The term classification was changed to identification. The forms were only used to
determine if the stream was ephemeral, intermittent, or perennial.
8. Section 3.4.1 (Project Streams) -Please describe the exposed subsurface material at the head
cuts (soil, saprolite or rock).
a. The exposed materials at the headcuts were noted.
9. Section 3.4.1 (Project Streams) -It is indicated that ATV paths cross UT1 Reach 3 (preservation
section); has this been addressed with the landowner and are they aware that ATV traffic is not
allowed through the easement areas?
a. Wildlands has made the landowner aware that vehicular traffic is not allowed with the
Conservation easement and that they will need to use either Elk Shoals Church Loop
Road or the existing timber bridge crossing outside of the downstream limits of the
easement.
10. Section 4.1 (Hydrology) - What is the intended purpose of the second paragraph?
a. The second paragraph was removed from the section.
11. Section 4.2 (Hydraulics) - The first sentence is very direct (this is good). Adding the range of BHRs
in parentheses would tell the reader everything necessary to start this paragraph. The
confinement statement is confusing and seems to contradict the info in table 4. Uplift in
hydraulic function will result from (insert your words here).
a. The confinement statement was removed for clarity. A statement on the uplift
potential was added to the section.
12. Section 4.4 (Physicochemical) - Please state that the proposed storm water BMP will be located
within the easement.
a. A statement saying the stormwater BMP will be located within the proposed
conservation easement was added in the section.

13. Section 4.4 (Biology) - If WEI has made the decision to utilize to functional pyramid framework
to address uplift, DMS asks that the biology be addressed as the framework is designed. That is,
habitat is part of geomorphology, not biology. Furthermore, the last sentence suggests that all
other functions were 'rated',- were they?
a. The Biology section 4.5 was reworded to remove references to habitat and implications
that other functions were rated.
14. Section 7.2 (Reference streams) - Does WEI truly use all the eight reference streams for design?
a. Reference ratios and parameter ranges for all references were used when determining
design discharge and parameters. The reference reaches by stream types: Reach 1A/1B
referenced B type streams and UTI Reach 4A/4B referenced C/E type streams.
15. Section 7.6 (Project Implementation) - Recommend noting if a farm improvement plan (livestock
watering system, etc.) is being installed for the landowner as part of the project commitment.
a. A statement about implanting cattle watering systems was added to section 7.6.
16. Section 7.6 (Project Implementation) - Please provide more detail in the reach -by -reach section
detail than "invasive vegetation will be treated,- it would be good to list the most prevalent
species at least.
a. The dominant invasive species that are going to be treated along each reach were listed
within the specific sections.
17. Section 7.6 (Project Implementation) - It is noted that timbering expected to occur soon adjacent
to preservation reaches. Is this expected to affect or impact the project reaches via
sedimentation/runoff?
a. Wildlands coordinated with the landowner and timber company to set the timbering
limits 30' — 50' away from the conservation easement. This additional undisturbed
vegetated buffer will act as a streamside management zone for the timber harvest
activities. The mature vegetative buffer along with the understory and forest floor will
allow for the runoff to slow and drop sediment before flowing into the stream.
Additionally, vernal pools are placed at discreet runoff locations from the timbering area
to provide additional treatment. This explanation was added to section 7.6.
18. Section 7.6.2 (UT1 Reach 1A) - Please ensure the installation of a channel plug(s) is sufficient to
maintain flow at the increased elevation.
a. Wildlands has had success with the use of strategically placed channel plugs. Removing
vegetation from the existing stream banks is crucial to achieving an effective channel
plug. Wildlands will ensure that the plugs are installed correctly during construction.
19. Figure 2 (Site Map) - Wetland A label appears missing.
a. Wetland A label was added to Figure 2.
20. Figure 9 (Concept Design) - a 50 foot easement break is noted along the roadway culvert
however the stationing from Table 17 (Assets) indicates a 60 foot break (130+50 to 131+10).
Please clarify.

a. The easement break width was changed to 60' on Figure 9.
21. Please include a credit release schedule and footnotes. Please use the NCDMS credit release
table version from the October 2016 NCIRT guidance. This can be either in the main body or
included as an appendix.
a. A credit release schedule was added to Appendix 11.
22. Table 4 (Project Attributes) - Ut1 Reach 1A/18 and UT1 Reach 4/48 - Degradation and widening
is unrealistic. If the evolutionary stage cannot be interpreted, please do not reference the stage.
a. UTI Reach 1A/113 was changed to Class III —Degradation. UTI Reach 4A/413 was kept as
Class IV — Degradation and Widening. The existing conditions of UTI Reach 4A/413 show
the channel as being deeply incised with transverse bars indicating lateral instability.
23. Table 8 (Goals and Objectives) — (a) please refrain from using the word 'significantly'since you
are not quantifying sediment inputs (channel stability goal); (b) the function supported column
for the 'improve habitat' goal should include hydraulics and physicochemical. DMS can explain
further if needed.
a. The term 'significantly' was removed when describing sediment inputs. Hydraulics and
physicochemical was added in the 'function supported' column in the 'improve habitat
goal'.
24. Tables 10 and 11 (Morphological Parameters) - The table is formatted to include information
about grain size distribution and substrate, but WEI has deleted this item. Please revise.
Additionally, DMS recently realized the word 'design' in the parameter column of the
spreadsheet template is incorrect. Please remove the word and/or download the revised
spreadsheet.https.Ildeq.nc.gov/about/divisions/mitigation-services/dms-vendors/rfp forms -
templates Tables 05-2019.
a. Sediment data was added to Table 10 and 11 to match the DMS required table
templates. The term 'design' was removed from the table.
25. Table 17 (Asset table) - This is not internally consistent. Please check over the math. For example,
the total proposed credits summed up in the credits column (4258.1) do not match the total
credits shown at the top split out by RIPE (3561.0 + 575.8 = 4136.8); and the restoration LF
(4472) does not match the sum of the individual restoration components. Additionally, please
note that RE (listed as 575.8 credits) should only represent stream preservation credits.
a. The proposed credits were reviewed, and the summary of credits was adjusted. The RE
now only represent stream preservation credits.
26. Table 17 (Asset table) - Footnote references a credit memo in Appendix 4 but not included.
Please include the 4/16/2018 credit memo in an appendix and reference accordingly.
a. The reference to the credit memo was corrected to say Appendix 11.
27. Please determine the need for a Floodplain Requirements Checklist and add if necessary; it looks
like Flood Zone AE extends up from Elk Shoals Creek into the project area.
a. A Floodplain Requirements Checklist was added as Appendix 12.
4

28. Appendix 2 (Preliminary JD) - Please provide any updates since the draft submittal regarding
verification of JD by the USACE. There needs to be a final approved JD prior to IRT review and
approval.
a. A JD meeting with the USACE was held on June 3, 2019. The final approved JD is
included in Appendix 2.
29. Appendix 3 (DWR stream 0 forms) - Even though coordinates are provided, it would be helpful in
the future to include a simple sketch on the DWR stream M forms showing the reach location or
segment where the assessments were performed. Alternately, the locations could be mapped on
Figure 2 (Site Map).
a. Descriptions were added to the stream ID forms relating the location to the project
reaches.
30. Appendix 4 (Cross -Sections) - Add reach names to the cross-sections.
a. Reach names were added to the existing cross-sections.
31. Appendix 5 (Categorical Exclusion) —please include only the signed form and checklist. The full
Categorical Exclusion Summary document will be posted separately on Share Point when the
mitigation plan is posted.
a. Only the categorical exclusion signature page and checklist is included in Appendix 5.
32. Correct PM phone number is -7057 (not -7097).
a. The phone number was changed to the correct number on the Title Sheet (Sheet 0.1) of
the plans.
33. Typical Sections - Thank you for providing both the existing and the proposed channel surfaces.
a. You're welcome.
34. Plan Views - Existing trees are shown on the plans, please indicate any that must be protected
during construction.
a. Tree protection was added to questionable trees located close to the grading limits.
35. Sheet 2.1.5 (Culvert) - Consider adding grade control at the culvert outfall to reduce the potential
of downcutting in the future.
a. A rock sill was added at the outfall of the culvert.
36. Vernal Pools - Thank you for including a specification for the outlets.
a. You're welcome.

PREPARED FOR:
PREPARED BY:
DRAFT MITIGATION PLAN
ALEXANDER FARM MITIGATION SITE
Alexander County, NC
NCDEQ Contract No. 7416
DMS Project No. 100048
Catawba River Basin
HUC 03050101
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
5 Ravenscroft Drive
Suite 102
Asheville, NC 28801
WILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104
Charlotte, NC 28203
Phone: [phone]
This mitigation Plan has been written in conformance with the requirements of the following:
• Federal rule for compensatory mitigation project sites as described in the Federal Register Title
33 Navigation and Navigable Waters Volume 3 Chapter 2 Section § 332.8 paragraphs (c)(2)
through (c)(14).
• NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services In -Lieu Fee Instrument signed and dated July 28, 2010.
These documents govern DMS operations and procedures for the delivery of compensatory
mitigation.
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page i July 3, 2019

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0
Introduction.............................................................................................................................. 3
2.0
Watershed Approach and Site Selection....................................................................................
3
3.0
Baseline and Existing Conditions...............................................................................................
4
3.1 Landscape Characteristics............................................................................................................
4
3.2 Land Use/Land Cover....................................................................................................................
6
3.3 Existing Vegetation.......................................................................................................................
6
3.4 Project Resources.........................................................................................................................
6
4.0
Functional Uplift Potential......................................................................................................
10
4.1 Hydrology....................................................................................................................................11
4.2 Hydraulics...................................................................................................................................
11
4.3 Channel Geomorphology............................................................................................................
11
4.4 Physicochemical..........................................................................................................................11
4.5 Biology........................................................................................................................................
12
4.6 Overall Functional Uplift Potential.............................................................................................
12
4.7 Site Constraints to Functional Uplift...........................................................................................
12
5.0
Regulatory Considerations......................................................................................................
12
5.1 Biological and Cultural Resources...............................................................................................
13
5.2 FEMA Floodplain Compliance and Hydrologic Trespass.............................................................
14
5.3 401/404......................................................................................................................................14
6.0
Mitigation Site Goals and Objectives.......................................................................................
15
7.0
Design Approach and Mitigation Work Plan............................................................................
16
7.1 Design Approach Overview........................................................................................................
16
7.2 Reference Streams......................................................................................................................
17
7.3 Design Channel Morphological Parameters...............................................................................
18
7.4 Design Discharge Analysis...........................................................................................................
22
7.5 Sediment Transport Analysis......................................................................................................
23
7.6 Project Implementation..............................................................................................................
24
7.7 Vegetation and Planting Plan.....................................................................................................
26
7.8 Project Risk and Uncertainties....................................................................................................
26
8.0
Performance Standards...........................................................................................................
27
8.1 Streams.......................................................................................................................................27
8.2 Vegetation..................................................................................................................................
28
8.3 Visual Assessments.....................................................................................................................
28
9.0
Monitoring Plan......................................................................................................................
28
9.1 Monitoring Components............................................................................................................
30
10.0 Long -Term Management Plan.................................................................................................
32
11.0 Adaptive Management Plan....................................................................................................
32
12.0 Determination of Credits.........................................................................................................
33
13.0 References..............................................................................................................................
35
W Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page i July 3, 2019

TABLES
Table 1: Project Attribute Table Part 1......................................................................................................... 3
Table 2: Project Attribute Table Part 2.........................................................................................................4
Figure 1
Table3: Project Soil Types............................................................................................................................5
Figure 2
Table 4: Project Attribute Table....................................................................................................................9
Figure 3
Table 5: Regulatory Considerations............................................................................................................12
Figure 4
Table 6: Federally Protected Species in Alexander County, NC..................................................................13
Figure 5
Table 7: Estimated Impacts to Project Wetlands........................................................................................14
Figure 6
Table 8: Mitigation Goals and Objectives...................................................................................................15
Figure 7
Table 9: Stream Reference Data Used in Development of Design Parameters..........................................17
Figure 8
Table 10: Summary of Morphological Parameters for UTI Reach 1A and 113 ............................................
20
Table 11: Summary of Morphological Parameters for UTI Reach 4A and 413 ............................................
20
Table 12: Summary of Design Discharge Analysis.......................................................................................
23
Table 13: Results of UTI Competence Analysis..........................................................................................
24
Table14: Monitoring Plan...........................................................................................................................29
Table 15: Monitoring Components.............................................................................................................31
Table 16: Long-term Management Plan.....................................................................................................
32
Table 17: Project Asset Table......................................................................................................................34
FIGURES
Figure 1
Vicinity Map
Figure 2
Site Map
Figure 3
Watershed Map
Figure 4
USGS Topographic Map
Figure 5
Soils Map
Figure 6
FEMA Floodplain Map
Figure 7
Reference Reach Vicinity Map
Figure 8
Design Discharge Analysis
Figure 9
Concept Design Map
Figure 10
Monitoring Components Map
APPENDICES
Appendix 1
Historic Aerial Photos
Appendix 2
Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination
Appendix 3
DWR and NCSAM Stream Identification Forms
Appendix 4
Supplementary Design Information
Appendix 5
Categorical Exclusion and Resource Agency Correspondence
Appendix 6
Invasive Species Plan
Appendix 7
Site Protection Instrument
Appendix 8
Maintenance Plan
Appendix 9
Financial Assurance
Appendix 10
Preliminary Construction Plans
Appendix 11
Crediting Information
Appendix 12
Floodplain Checklist
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page ii July 3, 2019

1.0 Introduction
The Alexander Farm Mitigation Site (Site) is in Alexander County approximately 6 miles west of
Statesville and 15 miles northeast of Hickory (Figure 1). Unnamed tributaries to Elk Shoals Creek
originate within the project limits, and will be restored, enhanced, and preserved as part of this project.
Elk Shoals Creek drains to Lookout Shoals Lake on the Catawba River, the primary water supply for the
City of Statesville. The Site is located within the Elk Shoals Creek targeted local watershed Hydrologic
Unit Code (HUC) 03050101130010 and is being submitted for mitigation credit in the Upper Catawba
Catalog Unit 03050101.
The Site is bisected by Elk Shoals Church Loop Road. UTI originates within a small section of grazed
woods in a moderately confined valley surrounded by open pasture. Approximately 600 feet
downstream of the headwaters, the woods narrow to a band of mature trees along the top of bank as
the valley widens. Continuing towards Elk Shoals Church Loop Road, trees are sporadically present as
UTI flows through open cattle pasture. Downstream of the Elk Shoals Church Loop Road culvert
crossing, UTI flows through a short section of forest for approximately 700 feet before re-entering open
cattle pasture. The woods are fenced to exclude cattle. UTI continues to flow south through the open
pasture until it exits the Site, just upstream of the stream's confluence with Elk Shoals Creek. UT1A also
originates within the Site limits in the southern pasture from the left floodplain of UTI. UT1A's valley is
within the broad floodplain of UTI.
The streams throughout the Site are in various stages of impairment related to the current and historical
agricultural uses. The project proposes to restore and preserve 6,940 existing linear feet of streams. A
stormwater BMP will be established within the conservation easement to capture and treat the drainage
from the adjacent pasture. The work proposed on the Site will provide 4,258 SMUs and will be protected
in perpetuity by a 21 -acre conservation easement. The Site Protection Instrument detailing the
proposed terms and restrictions of the conservation easement is in Appendix 7.
A site walk was held on March 29, 2018 with DMS, IRT, and Wildlands in attendance. The minutes from
this contracting meeting and the subsequent credit ratio discussion can be found in Appendix 11.
Table 1: Project Attribute Table Part 1
Project Information
Project Name
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site
County
Alexander
Project Area (acres)
21
Project Coordinates (latitude and longitude)
35o 48' 42.36"N 810 7' 14.46"W
Planted Acreage (acres of woody stems planted)
15
2.0 Watershed Approach and Site Selection
At its confluence with UTI, Elk Shoals Creek is defined in the 2014 North Carolina Integrated Report as
Class WS -IV waters. Class WS -IV waters are protected for drinking, culinary, food processing, aquatic life,
secondary recreation, and fresh water purposes, and are generally in highly developed watersheds. Elk
Shoals Creek is listed as exceeding conditions for Fish Tissue Mercury, but a TMDL is in place (Category
4t). The Site streams are included in the 2009 Upper Catawba River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP).
The RBRP lists specific watershed goals of restoring nutrient and sediment impaired waters to water
supply reservoirs (including Lookout Shoals Lake), and implementing agricultural BMPs within heavily
agricultural sub -watersheds, including the Elk Shoals Creek watershed.
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 3 July 3, 2019

The Catawba River Basin is also discussed in the 2015 North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission's
(NCWRC) Wildlife Action Plan (WAP). This report notes that riparian habitat loss, excessive
sedimentation, and nutrient loading from poorly managed agricultural operations are widespread
problems within the basin. The WAP discusses the importance of habitat conservation and restoration
to address problems affecting non -game species.
Restoration of the Site streams will directly and indirectly address stressors identified in the RBRP and
the WAP by excluding livestock, creating stable stream banks, restoring a forest in agriculturally
maintained buffer areas, and preserving existing forested buffers. These actions will reduce fecal,
nutrient, and sediment inputs to project streams, and ultimately to Elk Shoals Creek, as well as
reconnect in -stream and terrestrial habitats on the Site. Restoration of the Site is directly in line with
recommended management strategies outlined in the Upper Catawba River Basin RBRP. Approximately
21 acres of land will be placed under permanent conservation easement to protect the Site in
perpetuity.
3.0 Baseline and Existing Conditions
The following sections describe the existing conditions of the Site, watershed, and watershed processes,
including disturbance and response. A summary of watershed information is presented in Table 2 and
Figure 3.
Table 2: Project Attribute Table Part 2
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province
Piedmont
Ecoregion
Northern Inner Piedmont
River Basin
Catawba River
USGS HUC (8 digit, 14 digit)
03050101, 03050101130010
NCDWR Sub -basin
03-08-32
Project Drainage Area (acres)
256 (UT1), 7.4 (UT1A)
Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area
1.13%
Hay/Pasture'
73%
Forest'
20%
Developed'
5%
Shrubland'
1%
Grassland
1%
'Landuse data is for UT1 based on the 2011 NCLD Land Use Classification
3.1 Landscape Characteristics
3.1.1 Physiography and Topography
The Site is in the Inner Piedmont Belt of the Piedmont physiographic province. The Piedmont is
characterized by gently rolling, well-rounded hills with long low ridges, with elevations ranging from 300
to 1500 feet above sea level. The Site topography and relief are typical for the region, as illustrated in
Figure 4. The Site topography, as indicated on the Stony Point, NC USGS 7.5 topographic quadrangle,
shows a gradually sloped valley running through the center of the Site. The Site upstream of Elk Shoals
Church Loop Road is characterized by a moderate slope. The downstream end topography consists of a
broad gently sloping floodplain to Elk Shoals Creek. The valley through the project transitions from a
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 4 July 3, 2019

moderately confined valley to a broad, alluvial floodplain at the downstream extents as it approaches
Elk Shoals Creek.
3.1.2 Geology and Soils
The Site is located in the Cat Square terrane of the Piedmont physiographic province. The Cat Square
terrane is composed of metamorphic rocks that have been intruded by younger granitic rocks. The
underlying geology of the Site is mapped as Late Proterozoic -Cambrian (500 to 900 million years in age)
amphibolite and biotite gneiss (CZab) and mica schist (CZms). The amphibolite and biotite gneiss unit is
described as interlayered with minor layers or lenses of hornblende gneiss, metagabbro, mica schist,
and granitic rock. The mica schist unit includes garnet, staurolite, kyanite, or sillimanite that occurs
locally and interlayered with layers or lenses of quartz, calc-silicate rock, biotite gneiss, amphibolite, and
phyllite rock.
The Site is mapped by the USDA Web Soil Survey for Alexander County. Site soils are described below in
Table 3 and shown in Figure 5.
Table 3: Project Soil Types
Soil Name
Description
CoA - Codorus loam, 0 to 2
This series consists of somewhat poorly drained soils, on nearly level floodplains
percent slopes, frequently
and valleys with a slope of 0- 2%. These soils are subject to frequent flooding, and
flooded
they have a loamy surface layer and subsoil. The parent material consists of loamy
alluvium derived from igneous and metamorphic rock.
This series consists of 50% Dan River and 40% Comus soils on nearly level to gently
DaA - Dan River and
sloping valleys and floodplains with a slope of 0-4%. Dan River soils are very deep
Comus soils, 0 to 4 percent
and well drained. They have a loamy surface layer and loamy subsoil. Comus soils
slopes, occasionally
are very deep and well drained. They have a loamy surface layer and subsoil.
flooded
These soils are subject to occasional flooding. The parent material consists of
loamy and sandy alluvium derived from igneous and metamorphic rock.
FcD2 - Fairview sandy clay
These soils are located on ridges and low hills in the piedmont uplands. The profile
loam, 15 to 25 percent
consists of a sandy loam surface layer and clay to sandy loam subsoil. They are
slopes, moderately eroded
very deep soils that are well drained with slopes of 15-25%.
RdE - Rhodhiss sandy
The series is a deep, well -drained soil found on hillslopes. The profile consists of
loam, 25 to 45 percent
sandy loam surface layer and sandy clay loam subsoil. The parent material is
slopes
saprolite derived from granite and gneiss or schist.
Ya B2 - Yadkin clay loam, 8
This series is a deep, well -drained soil found on hillslopes. The profile consists of a
to 15 percent slopes
clay loam to clay surface layer and sandy clay subsoil. The parent material is old
alluvium derived from granite and gneiss.
Source: Soil Survey of Alexander County, North Carolina, USDA-NRCS,
http://websoilsurvey.sc. ego v. usda. gov/App/WebSoi1Survey. aspx
The mapped soils are a combination of alluvium derived from igneous and metamorphic rock and
saprolite residuum weathered from granite and gneiss or schist. On Site there are two sources of
sediment to the project streams: agricultural fields and watershed stream bank erosion. The runoff from
the agricultural fields contribute fine sediments while stream bank erosion contributes a mix of fines
and small gravels. Bedrock was not observed in the channel during the existing conditions assessment
work. The soils where the majority of the restoration work will be occurring (CoA and FcD2)
characteristically have depths to bedrock 60 -in or greater. Since the restoration channels will be raised
to the valley bottom, bedrock is not anticipated to be a factor in restoration implementation.
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 5 July 3, 2019

3.2 Land Use/Land Cover
The current tenant farmer maintains a 175 head herd on the farm. He rotates the herd between the
northern pasture in spring and summer and the southern pasture in fall and winter. Wildlands has
visited the Site several times since 2010 and has confirmed this land management practice. The existing
streams and pastures are presented in Figure 2.
Land use and cover, both past and present, were investigated throughout the Site and its watershed
using historical aerials from 1956-2012 (Appendix 1). The most common historical and current land use
in the watershed are forest and agricultural. One major change in land use occurred sometime between
1961-1976. The northern section of the stream, upstream of Elk Shoals Church Loop, was historically
forested but cleared for pasture. Clearing also occurred on the adjacent wooded areas on the
downstream extents of UTI. No other significant land use changes have occurred since these impacts.
The extents of riparian buffers and agricultural land on Site have remained consistent over that time.
There are no signs of impending land use changes or development pressure that would impact the
project throughout the watershed. However, clearing of the forested areas adjacent to the downstream
end of UTI is set to occur in the future.
3.3 Existing Vegetation
Mature canopy species upstream of Elk Shoals Church Loop Road are primarily red maple (Acer rubrum),
shagbark hickory (Carya ovata), sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera),
and white oak (Quercus alba), with occasional black willow (Salix nigra). The understory layer consists of
American holly (Ilex opaca), Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), Eastern red cedar (Juniperus virginiana),
and tree of heaven (Ailanthus altissima). Herbaceous species include beefsteak plant (Perilla frutescens),
common boneset (Eupatorium perfoliatum), dogfennel (Eupatorium capillifolium), Japanese stiltgrass
(Microstegium vimineum), New York ironweed (Vernonia noveboracensis), pasture grasses (such as
fescue and millet species), joe pye weed (Eutrochium sp.), pokeweed (Phytolacca Americana), and
wingstem (Verbesina alternifolia).
Canopy species south of Elk Shoals Church Loop road include American beech (Fagus grandifolia), red
maple, sycamore, and tulip poplar. Understory species include American holly, Chinese privet, and
Russian olive (Elaeagnus angustifolia). The sparse herbaceous layer consists of Christmas fern
(Polystichum acrostichoides), grapevine (Vitis sp.), and Japanese stiltgrass. The left floodplain and hillside
through the remaining project area is dominated by pasture grasses and other herbaceous species with
scattered trees. The narrow right floodplain is a mix of mature trees and dense herbaceous that quickly
transition to the steep, forested right hillslope immediately adjacent to the project area. Canopy species
in these areas are similar to those upstream of Elk Shoals Church Loop Road. Understory and sapling
species include black cherry (Prunus serotina), black walnut (Juglans nigra), Eastern red cedar, flowering
dogwood (Cornus florida), pawpaw (Asimina triloba), persimmon (Diospryos virginana), redbud (Cercis
canadensis), river birch (Betula nigra), and sugarberry (Celtis laevigata). In addition to pasture grasses
the dense herbaceous layer includes beefsteak plant, beggars tick (Bidens frondosa), Carolina elephant's
foot (Elephantopus carolinianus), jewelweed (Impatiens capensis), New York ironweed, joe pye weed,
pink knotweed (Polygonum pennsylvanicum), pokeweed, and wingstem.
Herbaceous vegetation consists of grazed fescue and other species including jewelweed, pink knotweed,
and wingstem.
3.4 Project Resources
Wildlands investigated on-site jurisdictional waters of the United States (US) within the proposed
project area. Potential jurisdictional areas were delineated using the US Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) Routine On -Site Determination Method. This method is defined by the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetlands Delineation Manual and the subsequent Eastern Mountain and Piedmont Regional
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 6 July 3, 2019

Supplement. Streams were identified using North Carolina Department of Water Resources (NCDWR)
Identification Forms. Jurisdictional waters of the US were surveyed for inclusion on plans and figures.
Wetland determination forms representative of on-site jurisdictional areas as well as non -jurisdictional
upland areas are included in Appendix 2.
The North Carolina Stream Assessment Method (NC SAM) evaluation was performed on each project
reach. The rapid assessment methodology evaluates field conditions to generate qualitative function
ratings (Low, Medium, High) for the overall reach relative to reference conditions for the specific stream
type. Project reaches proposed for restoration scored as low functioning systems when compared to
reference conditions due to impairment to one or more of the primary functions (habitat, hydrology,
and water quality). Low -scoring functions are the result of channel instability, agricultural activities and
managed buffers. Project reaches proposed for enhancement generally exhibited less instability relative
to restoration reaches, however, reduced function was still evident. Enhancement reach overall ratings
ranged from low to medium. NC SAM Field Assessment Forms and Rating Sheets are enclosed in
Appendix 3.
The results of the on-site investigation include two jurisdictional stream channels (UTI and UT1A) and
18 wetlands (A -R) as discussed below. Table 4 provides a summary of water resources within the project
limits. Existing conditions are illustrated in Figure 2. Reach specific cross-sections and geomorphic
summaries are provided in Appendix 4.
3.4.1 Project Streams
UTI Reach 1A/18
UTI Reach 1 originates within the Site limits at a spring head. The valley is slightly confined and wooded
with minimal understory. Cattle are present throughout the reach and wallow in the spring, resulting in
trampled, muddy conditions. Just downstream of the wallow area, the stream drops over a headcut
consisting of exposed soil and becomes incised with bank height ratios over 3. Downstream of the
headcut, the stream widens, and cattle paths in and out of the channel are frequent. Fine sediments
choke the bedform on this reach, with silted in pools and embedded riffles throughout. Approximately
100 feet upstream of the wood line, the bank heights decrease and the stream regains floodplain
connectivity, but the stream is still scoured and impacted from cattle access. At the wood line, as UTI
enters the open pasture, the stream drops over a series of 4 bare clay soil headcuts in 200 feet, each
approximately 3 feet high. The stream channel is incised and actively eroding, with bank vegetation
falling into the channel. Bank heights gradually decrease going downstream until the stream is no longer
incised. Although cattle activity is widespread, with numerous trails in and out of the channel and
wallows throughout, the stream banks are well vegetated with annual species. The stream continues in
this condition until approximately 200 feet upstream of the UTI Reach 1/Reach 2 break, where the
stream again is incised and eroded until it regains connectivity at the reach break.
Overall, UTI Reach 1's condition is predominantly incised and disconnected from the floodplain, with
short segments of floodplain connectivity. The bed is trampled and severely impacted by cattle; bedform
diversity and habitat is very poor, primarily due to sedimentation and incision. UTI Reach 1 may be
classified as Simon Evolutionary Stage III.
UTI Reach 2
UTI Reach 2 is overwide and trampled but is well vegetated with herbaceous species. This reach drops
over a few small 6 -inch exposed clay soil headcuts and shows evidence of local erosion in these areas.
Reach 2 appears to be in the Simon Evolutionary Stage V. As UTI Reach 2 approaches the Elk Shoals
Church Loop culvert and enters the woodline, the creek again alternates between areas of incision and
floodplain connection. The bed is choked with fine sediments and is trampled, with several active cattle
wallow areas. UTI Reach 2 ends at the Elk Shoals Church Loop 48 -inch culvert.
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 7 July 3, 2019

UTI Reach 3
UT1 Reach 3 begins just downstream of the Elk Shoals Church Loop culvert. The valley is moderately
confined and wooded, and the stream meanders through the valley bottom. This section of the farm is
fenced to exclude cattle. UT1 Reach 3 is incised directly downstream of the culvert, but regains
connectivity quickly with low, stable stream banks. Spot areas of scour are present thoughout the reach
and are largely related to ATV paths which crisscross the stream. The stream bed is processing a heavy
fine sediment load from the upstream bank erosion, but coarse substrate is visible through the fine
sediment. Desirable aquatic habitat is present throughout the reach and includes undercut banks, root
mats, leaf packs, and small debris jams. UT1 Reach 3 ends at a two- to three-foot exposed soil headcut,
just upstream of an eroded meander into the valley toe.
UTI Reach 4A/48
UT1 Reach 4 is extensively eroded and incised within the wooded valley, with erosion present on both
banks, transverse bars indicative of lateral instability, and sharp meander bends into valley walls. As the
stream exits the wood line, the bank heights decrease, the channel narrows, flow deepens, and the
stream banks are well vegetated with annual species. The floodplain is broad and alluvial down to the
Elk Shoals Creek confluence. Approximately 350 feet downstream from the wood line, a large debris jam
has formed at an old fence across the channel. The debris jam has captured fines and appears to
function as grade control for the stable area directly upstream. Downstream of the jam is a three-foot
exposed soil headcut, and the stream is highly sinuous, eroded, and incised for 100 feet.
Downstream of the instability associated with the debris jam and headcut, the stream is largely stable
with little erosion. This reach of UT1 Reach 4 had raw eroding banks during site visits in 2010 and 2014,
but the absence of cattle over the past two years has promoted vigorous regrowth of vegetation on the
stream bank and riparian area. Bars present throughout the channel are vegetated with tall, herbaceous
species giving the illusion of low, stable stream banks. Looking closer through the tall vegetation reveals
that UT1 Reach 4 is still deeply incised and disconnected from the historic floodplain, despite the
herbaceous regrowth. It is expected that the return of cattle will quickly destroy the stabilization of this
reach.
UTIA
UTIA originates at a wetland seep within the project limits. The valley is broad and alluvial, but the
stream is deeply incised and disconnected from the historic floodplain. Despite the incision, UTIA is
stable with tall, herbaceous vegetation present throughout.
3.4.2 Project Wetlands
There are 18 wetlands located within or immediately adjacent to the project area (Wetlands A — R).
Refer to Figure 2 for a figure depicting wetland locations. The wetland features are classified as
headwater forest wetland types using the North Carolina Wetland Assessment Method (NCWAM)
classification key and best professional judgement. The wetlands occur on the side slopes and
floodplains that drain to on-site stream channels. The features exhibit one or more of the following
wetland hydrology indicators: high water table, iron deposits, saturated within the upper 12 inches of
the soil profile, and water -stained leaves. Soils within on-site wetlands have a low chroma (depleted)
matrix and redoximorphic features. Common hydrophytic vegetation includes Asian spiderwort
(Murdannia keisak), common rush (Juncus effusus), New York ironweed (Vernonia noveboracensis),
Pennsylvania smartweed (Persicaria pennsylvania), and shallow sedge (Carex lurida). Wetland
determination forms are provided in Appendix 2.
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 8 July 3, 2019

Table 4: Project Attribute Table
Stream Summary Information
UT1 Reach
UT1 Reach
Parameter
1A/1B
UT1 Reach 2
UT1 Reach 3
4A/4B
UT1A
Length of Reach (LF)
1901
1324
732
2825
158
ModeratelyConfined
Valley Confinement
Confined
Unconfined
Unconfined
Unconfined
Drainage Area (acres)
71
117
141
256
7.4
Perennial, Intermittent,
Perennial
Perennial
Perennial
Perennial
Intermittent
Ephemeral
NCDWR Water Quality
WS -IV
Classification
Stream Classification'
B4
B4
N/A
G4c
N/A
Evolutionary Stage
1/11: Sinuous
(Simon and Rinaldi,
III: Degradation
V: Aggradation
&
IV: Degradation
III:
2006)'
&Widening
Channelized
&Widening
Degradation
NC SAM Ratin=g=
Low
Low
High
Low
Medium
FEMA Classification
N/A
N/A
N/A
Zone AE
N/A
Wetland Summary Information
Wetland Location
A
B
C
D
Size of Wetland (acres)
<0.01
<0.01
0.01
0.18
Wetland Type (non -riparian,
riparianriverine or riparian non-
Riparian Non-Riverine
riverine)
Mapped Soil Series
Fairview
Fairview
Fairview
Fairview
Drainage Class
Well drained
Well drained
Well drained
Well drained
Soil Hydric Status
No
No
No
No
Groundwater &
Groundwater &
Groundwater &
Groundwater in
Source of Hydrology
overbank
overbank
overbank
overbank flooding
flooding
flooding
flooding
Restoration or enhancement method
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
(hydrologic, vegetative, etc.)
Wetland Location
E
F G
H
Size of Wetland (acres)
0.36
0.02 <0.01
0.01
Wetland Type (non -riparian, riparian
riverine or riparian non-riverine)
Riparian Non-Riverine
Mapped Soil Series
Fairview
Fairview
Fairview
Fairview
Drainage Class
Well drained
Well drained
Well drained
Well drained
Soil Hydric Status
No
No
No
No
Groundwater &
Groundwater &
Groundwater &
Groundwater &
Source of Hydrology
overbank
overbank
overbank
overbank
flooding
flooding
flooding
flooding
Restoration or enhancement method
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
(hydrologic, vegetative, etc.)
Wetland Location
I
J
K
L
Size of Wetland (acres)
0.05
0.62
<0.01
0.02
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 9 July 3, 2019

Wetland Type (non -riparian, riparian
riverine or riparian non-riverine)
Riparian Non-Riverine
Mapped Soil Series
Fairview
Fairview
Fairview
Fairview
Drainage Class
Well drained
Well drained
Well drained
Well drained
Soil Hydric Status
No
No
No
No
Groundwater &
Groundwater &
Groundwater &
Groundwater &
Source of Hydrology
overbank
overbank
overbank
overbank
flooding
flooding
flooding
flooding
Restoration or enhancement method
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
(hydrologic, vegetative, etc.)
Wetland Location
M
N O
P
Size of Wetland (acres)
0.01
0.25 0.01
0.06
Wetland Type (non -riparian, riparian
riverine or riparian non-riverine)
Riparian Non-Riverine
Mapped Soil Series
Fairview
Codorus
Yadkin
Codorus/ Yadkin
Somewhat poorly
Drainage Class
Well drained
Somewhat
Well drained
drained/ Well
poorly drained
drained
Soil Hydric Status
No
No
No
No
Groundwater &
Groundwater &
Source of Hydrology
overbank
overbank
Groundwater
Groundwater
flooding
flooding
Restoration or enhancementmethod
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
(hydrologic, vegetative, etc.)
Wetland Location
Q
R
Size of Wetland (acres)
0.02
0.05
Wetland Type (non -riparian, riparian
riverine or riparian non-riverine)
Riparian Non-Riverine
Codorus/Dan
Mapped Soil Series
Codorus
River
Somewhat
Drainage Class
Somewhat
poorly drained/
poorly drained
Well drained
Soil Hydric Status
No
No
Groundwater &
Groundwater &
Source of Hydrology
overbank
overbank
flooding
flooding
Restoration or enhancement method
N/A
N/A
(hydrologic, vegetative, etc.)
1 The Rosgen classification system is for natural streams. These channels have been manipulated for agriculture purposes and,
therefore may not fit the classification category exactly as described. Results of the classification are provided for illustrative
purposes only.
Functional Uplift Potential
The potential for functional uplift is qualitatively described in this section using terminology from the
Stream Functions Pyramid (Harman, 2012). The Stream Functions Pyramid describes a hierarchy of five
stream functions, each of which supports the functions above it on the pyramid (and sometimes
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 10 July 3, 2019

reinforces those below it). The five functions in order from bottom to top are hydrology, hydraulics,
geomorphology, physicochemical, and biology. Neither the Stream Functions Pyramid nor the
Quantification Tool are proposed to determine success of the mitigation site.
4.1 Hydrology
Site hydrology has been altered by the deforestation of approximately 78% of the project watershed.
Intensive management of the watershed for livestock has been the major watershed disturbance. These
alterations in land cover typically result in reductions in rainfall interception and evapotranspiration
which lead to increases in runoff and water yield (Dunne and Leopold, 1978). The primary result of these
changes is an increase in both peak flows and base flows. The watershed has adjusted to its landcover
changes and the hydrologic regime has stabilized. Based on observations in the watershed, landcover
will continue to be dominated by agricultural activities and population growth in the rural area will
continue to be low.
A stream restoration project performed at a specific site does not often result in uplift to hydrology
(Harmon, 2012). Even though trees will be planted within the conservation easement, this will not
significantly improve the rainfall -runoff relationship for the watershed. Therefore, there are no
significant opportunities for this project to improve the hydrology function of the watershed.
4.2 Hydraulics
UTI and UT1A are hydraulically impaired due to their lack of consistent floodplain connection (BHR = 2.0
— 6.4). Medium to large headcuts ranging from 0.5 to 3 feet tall are present throughout the channel.
Uplift in hydraulic function will result from reconnecting the streams to the floodplain. Bankfull and high
flow velocities, along with channel shear stresses, will be reduced. The channels will be designed to
experience out of bank events at a recurrence interval typical of a naturally functioning stream system.
All restoration reaches on the project will be constructed with a bank height ratio of 1.0 to 1.1. Changes
in stream dimension and improvement of floodplain connectivity will raise the hydraulic function of the
Site streams.
4.3 Channel Geomorphology
Years of anthropogenic manipulation and watershed impacts for agricultural practices have degraded
the streams on Site. Approximately 81% of the length of restoration reaches are incised and 54% are
actively eroding. Apart from UTI Reach 3, which is slated for preservation, the riparian vegetation along
much of the stream consists of grazed herbaceous cover with only sporadically mature trees. Bedform
diversity and habitat is very poor due to sedimentation and incision. Much of the stream is choked with
fine sediment due to the active erosion and cow wallows on the upstream extents of the project stream.
There is a significant opportunity to improve the geomorphologic function on the Site. Channel
dimension will be stabilized on restoration reaches and the incision and bank erosion will be corrected.
Aquatic habitat and large woody debris (LWD) will be added to the system through construction of in -
stream log structures, bank revetments, and meander pools. A riparian buffer will be planted, resulting
in the improved long-term geomorphic function of UTI and UT1A.
4.4 Physicochemical
No water quality sampling has been conducted on the Site and there are no water quality monitoring
stations within the project watershed. The 2009 Upper Catawba River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP)
noted the importance of the implantation of agricultural BMPs within heavily agricultural sub -waters of
TLWs, including Elk Shoals Creek.
Upon execution of the project, the exclusion of cattle within the Site provides a great potential to
improve the physicochemical functioning of the streams. A storm water BMP will be installed within the
proposed conservation easement at a point of concentrated agricultural input to reduce sediment,
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 11 July 3, 2019

nutrient, and fecal coliform inputs from an adjacent farm field. A riparian buffer will be established
within the conservation easement, reducing runoff and erosion of nutrient -rich bank sediments and
eventually providing stream shading resulting in reduced water temperatures. Water will flow over in -
stream structures, providing aeration. The stream will be reconnected to its floodplain and adjacent
floodplain wetlands to provide storage and treatment of overbank flows, and streambank erosion will
be greatly reduced, eliminating a source of sediment and nutrients. Time and development of a mature
canopy will be required to realize the extent of physicochemical functional lift. For these reasons,
physicochemical improvements will not be explicitly monitored for success, although visual observations
will be documented, and these observations are expected to show that the Site is trending towards
improved function.
4.5 Biology
Since no data on the existing communities are available and biologic assessment is not proposed to
evaluate the current level of biologic functioning, this function is not rated.
Despite the proposed stream and buffer improvements, the biological response may be slow until the
physicochemical function is significantly improved. Since the long-term level of improvement is not
expected to occur within the seven years of monitoring, the functional uplift potential will not be
explicitly monitored. Improvements in biological activity of the Site will likely be noted during visual
assessments of the project.
4.6 Overall Functional Uplift Potential
Overall, the Site has functional uplift potential consistent with goals outlined in the RBRP, from the
improvement in potential habitat to the improvements in stream hydraulics that will be seen
throughout the Site with the stream restoration and BMP installation, to the improvements in
geomorphology that will come with restoring streams that are suited to the valley types throughout the
Site. Physicochemical and biological improvements are a likely result of the project. However, there is no
existing basis for classifying the existing condition of these functions and the likely improvements will
occur gradually after construction.
4.7 Site Constraints to Functional Uplift
The existing road culvert on the easement break of Elk Shoals Loop could potentially affect the
functional uplift of the project, but it is not likely it will have any affect on the project since the culvert is
functioning and is relatively stable. There are no other known Site constraints that will affect the
functional uplift of the project. The valley width on the Site will allow for the development of pattern
and dimensions to restore stable, functioning streams and wetlands. The degree to which the
physicochemical and biology functions can improve on the Site is limited by the watershed conditions
beyond the conservation easement.
Regulatory Considerations
Table 5, below, is a summary of regulatory considerations for the Site. These considerations are
expanded upon in Sections 5.1-5.3.
Table 5: Regulatory Considerations
Parameters
Applicable?
Resolved?
Supporting Docs?
Water of the United States - Section 404
Yes
No
PCN1
Water of the United States - Section 401
Yes
No
PCN1
Endangered Species Act
Yes
Yes
Appendix 5
Historic Preservation Act
Yes
Yes
Appendix 5
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 12 July 3, 2019

Parameters
Applicable?
Resolved?
Supporting Docs?
Coastal Zone Management Act
No
N/A
N/A
FEMA Floodplain Compliance
Yes
No
N/AZ
Essential Fisheries Habitat
No
N/A
N/A
1. PCN to be provided to IRT with Final Mitigation Plan.
2. A floodplain development permit will be submitted to the local floodplain administrator.
5.1 Biological and Cultural Resources
5.1.1 Biological Resources
Wildlands searched the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and NHP databases for federally listed
threatened and endangered plant and animal species in Alexander County, NC. Currently, there are four
species federally listed for this specific county, which include the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus),
the bog turtle (Glyptemys muhlenbergii), dwarf -flowered heartleaf (Hexastylis naniflora), and the
northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) (Table 6). A pedestrian survey conducted on September
7, 2017, indicated that the Site provides potential habitat for the bog turtle, dwarf -flowered heartleaf,
and potential summer roosting for northern long-eared bat (NLEB), but no individuals were located at
the time.
Table 6: Federally Protected Species in Alexander County, NC
Species
Federal Status
Habitat
Vascular Plant
Dwarf -flowered heartleaf
Along bluffs and adjacent slopes, in boggy areas next
(Hexastylis naniflora)
Threatened
to streams and creek heads, and along the slopes of
nearby hillsides and ravines.
Vertebrate
Bald eagle (Haliaeetus
Bald and Golden Eagle
Near large open water bodies: lakes, marshes,
leucocephalus)
Protection Act
seacoasts, and rivers
Inhabit open -canopy, herbaceous sedge meadows and
Bog turtle (Glyptemys
Threatened (Similarity
fens, wet cow pastures, and shrub swamps bordered
muhlenbergii)
of Appearance)
by wooded areas. Depend on wetland microhabitats
for foraging, nesting, basking, hibernation, and
shelter.
Northern long-eared bat
Roost in 3" dbh dead and alive trees with exfoliating
(Myotis septentrionalis)
Threatened
bark, crevices or hollows during summer months.
Caves or mines during winter months.
Habitat information from the following website: https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/alexander.html
Forested habitats containing trees at least 3 -inch dbh in the project area provide suitable habitat for
NLEB. Due to the decline of the NLEB population from the white -nose syndrome (WNS), the USFWS has
issued the finalization of a special rule under section 4(d) of the ESA to addresses the effects of the NLEB
resulting from purposeful and incidental take based on the occurrence of WNS. Because the project is
located within a WNS zone and will include removal/clearing of trees, it is subject to the final 4(d) ruling.
A review of the NCNHP records did not indicate any known NLEB populations within 2.0 mile of the
study area; therefore, the project is eligible to use the NLEB 4(d) Rule Streamlined Consultation Form to
meet regulatory requirements for section 7(a)(2) compliance 4(d) consultation.
A letter requesting comment from the USFWS was sent on February 16, 2018. No response from the
USFWS was received within the 30 -day response period. Therefore, the signing of the NLEB 4(d) Rule
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 13 July 3, 2019

Streamlined Consultation Form by the FHWA determines that this project may affect the NLEB, but that
any resulting incidental take of the NLEB is not prohibited by the final 4(d) rule. A FHWA signed 4(d)
consultation form and the correspondence associated with this determination are included in the
Appendix.
5.1.2 Cultural Resources and Significant Natural Heritage Areas
Wildlands requested review and comment from the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) with
respect to any archeological and architectural resources related to the Site on February 16, 2018. SHPO
responded on March 22, 2018 and stated they were aware of "no historic resources which would be
affected by the project" and would have no further comment. All correspondence is included in
Appendix 5.
5.2 FEMA Floodplain Compliance and Hydrologic Trespass
The Site is represented on the Alexander County Unincorporated Areas Flood Insurance Rate Map Panel
3775J, with an effective date of 12/18/2007. Within the Site, Reach 4B is located within a Zone AE
Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) regulatory floodplain associated with Elk Shoals Creek. None of the
project streams are mapped under the regulatory authority of FEMA. Current Effective FEMA mapping
for the Site is overlain with project streams on Figure 6. The stream and floodplain grading within the
regulatory floodplain of Elk Shoals Creek will be designed to achieve a no -rise condition and a floodplain
development permit will be obtained from the Alexander County floodplain administrator.
The proposed design associated with the Site has limited or no risk of potential hydrologic trespass since
UTI originates on-site. In addition, wide buffers adjacent to project streams are protected under
conservation eliminating the risk to adjacent farm fields.
5.3 401/404
Impacts to existing wetlands will be minimized or avoided as much as possible. The project design will
avoid impacting wetlands along relatively stable project reaches designated for Enhancement II or
preservation. Approximately 0.32 acres of wetlands will be impacted due to realignment of stream
channels and floodplain grading within narrow valleys of restoration reaches. A majority of proposed
wetland impacts, approximately 0.30 acres, are in areas currently impacted by cattle grazing. Most
existing wetlands will be improved by planting native vegetation and fencing out livestock. Project
streams and wetlands will be protected in perpetuity under the conservation easement placed on the
property. During construction safety fence will be installed to prevent unintended impacts on site
wetlands outside the limits of disturbance. This will fencing be denoted in the final construction plans.
Table 7 estimates the anticipated impacts to wetland areas on this project. The Pre -Construction
Notification, including this data, will be submitted to the IRT with the Final Mitigation Plan.
Table 7: Estimated Impacts to Project Wetlands
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 14 July 3, 2019
Permanent (P) Impact
Temporary (T) Impact
Wetland
Classification
Acreage
Impact
Impact
Feature
Type of Activity
Area
Type of Activity
Area
(acres)
(acres)
A
Riparian
0.01
Floodplain Grading
0.01
-
-
B
0.01
Floodplain Grading
0.01
-
-
C
Non-Riverine
0.01
Floodplain Grading
<0.01
-
-
Stream Realignment
D
0.18
0.04
Floodplain Grading
0.03
& Floodplain Grading
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 14 July 3, 2019

Wetland
Feature
Classification
Acreage
Permanent (P) Impact
Temporary (T) Impact
Type of Activity
Stream Realignment
& Floodplain Grading
Impact
Area
(acres)
0.05
Type of Activity
Impact
Area
(acres)
E
0.36
Floodplain Grading
0.04
M
0.01
Stream Realignment
0.01
Floodplain Grading
0.01
N
0.25
Stream Realignment
0.03
Floodplain Grading
0.06
Q
0.02
Floodplain Grading
0.02
-
-
R
0.05
Stream Realignment
0.01
Floodplain Grading
0.01
Total P Impact
0.17
Total T Impact
0.15
6.0 Mitigation Site Goals and Objectives
The project will improve stream functions as described in Section 4 through stream restoration and the
conversion of maintained agricultural fields into riparian buffer within the Upper Catawba River Basin,
while creating a functional riparian corridor at the site level. Project goals are desired project outcomes
and are verifiable through measurement and/or visual assessment. Objectives are activities that will
result in the accomplishment of goals. The project will be monitored after construction to evaluate
performance as described in Section 9 of this report. The project goals and related objectives are
described in Table 8.
Table 8: Mitigation Goals and Objectives
Goal
Objective
Expected Outcomes
Function
Supported
Restore stream channels that will
maintain a stable pattern and profile
considering the hydrologic and sediment
Reduce sediment inputs from bank
Hydraulic,
Improve stream
inputs to the system, the landscape
erosion. Reduce shear stress on
Geomorphology,
channel stability.
setting, and the watershed conditions.
channel boundary. Support all
Physicochemical,
Create stable tie-in for tributary joining
stream functions above hydrology.
Biology
restored channel. Add bank revetments
and in -stream structures to protect
restored streams.
Allow more frequent flood flows to
disperse on the floodplain and
Reconnect
create overbank floodplain and
Hydraulic,
channels with
Reconstruct stream channels with bankfull
depression storage for overland
Geomorphology,
historic
dimensions relative to the floodplain.
flow retention. Decrease direct
Physicochemical,
floodplains.
runoff, increase infiltration. Support
Biology
all stream functions above
hydrology.
Increase and diversify available
Install habitat features such as
habitats for macroinvertebrates,
Hydraulic,
Improve in-
constructed riffles, cover logs, and brush
fish, and amphibians. Promote
Geomorphology,
stream habitat.
toes into restored streams. Add woody
aquatic species migration and
Physicochemical,
materials to channel beds. Construct pools
recolonization from refugia, leading
Biology
of varying depth.
to colonization and increase in
biodiversity over time. Add
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 15 July 3, 2019

Goal
Objective
Expected Outcomes
Function
Supported
complexity including LWD to the
streams.
Reduce
sediment and
Reduce agricultural and sediment
Hydrology,
fecal coliform
Construct a step pool stormwater
inputs to the project, which will
Hydraulic,
conveyance system to slow and treat
and nutrient
runoff from farm field before entering Site
reduce likelihood of accumulated
Geomorphology,
input from
fines and excessive algal blooms
Physicochemical,
adjacent farm
streams.
from nutrients.
Biology
fields
Reduce sediment inputs from bank
erosion and runoff. Increase
Hydrology
Restore and
Plant native tree and understory species in
nutrient cycling and storage in
(local),
enhance native
riparian zone where currently insufficient.
floodplain. Provide riparian and
Hydraulic,
floodplain and
wetland
Remove invasive species within the
wetland habitat. Add a source of
Geomorphology,
riparian corridor.
LWD and organic material to
Physicochemical,
vegetation.
stream. Support all stream
Biology
functions.
Reduce nutrient, sediment, and
Exclude livestock
fecal coliform inputs. Protect
Hydraulic,
Exclude livestock from stream channels
restored aquatic habitat. Protect
Geomorphic,
from stream
and riparian areas.
the site from encroachment from
Physicochemical,
channels.
livestock. (permanent livestock
Biology
exclusion)
Permanently
Protect Site from encroachment on
Hydraulic,
protect the
Establish a conservation easement on the
the riparian corridor and direct
Geomorphic,
project site from
Site.
impact to streams and wetlands.
Physicochemical,
harmful uses.
Support all stream functions.
Biology
7.0 Design Approach and Mitigation Work Plan
7.1 Design Approach Overview
The design approach for this Site was developed to meet the goals and objectives described in Section 6
which were formulated based on the potential for uplift described in Section 4. The design is also
intended to provide the expected outcomes in Section 6, though these are not tied to performance
criteria.
The design approach for this Site utilized a combination of analog and analytical approaches for stream
restoration, and also relies on empirical data and prior experiences and observations. Reference reaches
were identified to serve as the basis for design parameters. Channels were sized based on design
discharge hydrologic analysis which uses a combination of empirical and analytical data as described
within this report. Designs were then verified and/or modified based on sediment transport analysis.
These design approaches have been used on many successful Piedmont restoration projects and are
appropriate for the goals and objectives of this Site.
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 16 July 3, 2019

7.2 Reference Streams
Reference streams provide geomorphic parameters of a stable system, which can be used to inform
design of stable channels of similar stream types in similar landscapes and watersheds. Eight reference
reaches were identified for this Site and used to support the design of streams of the Site (Figure 7).
These reference reaches were chosen because of their similarities to the Site streams including drainage
area, valley slope, morphology, and bed material. Geomorphic parameters for these reference reaches
are summarized in Appendix 4. The references to be used for the specific streams are shown in Table 9.
A description of each reference reach is included below.
Table 9: Stream Reference Data Used in Development of Design Parameters
7.2.1 Agony Acres UT1
Agony Acres reference reach (UTI - Reach 3) is located in northeast Guildford County, NC. It was
identified as a high quality preservation area on the Agony Acres Mitigation Site and was used as a
reference reach for that project. Wildlands performed a detailed morphologic survey in March of 2013.
The Agony Acres reference reach has a drainage area of 0.3 square miles and is classified as a Rosgen E4
stream type. This site was specifically chosen because the position of the Agony Acres reference reach in
the landscape is similar to that of UTI Reach 1A and Reach 113.
7.2.2 UT to Kelly Branch
The UT to Kelly Branch reference reach is a small, steep, headwater channel located in the McDowell
County. It has a drainage area of 0.08 square miles and is part of the Broad River Basin. The reach
classifies as an B4 step -pool channel, but pool depths are negligible as they are filled with sediment from
the leaching of an upstream, anthropogenic sediment source. Bankfull channel dimensions of riffle
features were fairly uniform and consistent throughout the reach. The channel is sinuous for a high
gradient system (sinuosity of 1.19), exhibiting a stable planform while maximizing the width of the valley
where possible. Several long gravel/cobble riffles were observed at the site that cascaded into pools
over rootmass, woody debris or a boulder step at the tail of riffle.
7.2.3 UT to Austin Branch
Located in Buncombe County on the West Range of the Biltmore property, this reference reach is
drained by a small forested watershed (0.12 square miles) that empties into Austin Branch which flows
directly into the French Broad River. Most of the watershed is wooded except for narrow patches of
open, lightly used pastureland located around the upper periphery of the watershed. Surrounding plant
communities included various mature hardwoods (white oak, tulip poplar) and understory shrubs
(rhododendron, American holly). The channel exhibits a meander pool system with a channel slope of
4% and sinuosity of 1.2. This reach of UT to Austin Branch classifies as an A4/134a type channel with a
width to depth ratio of 8.8. Stream access to the floodplain is ample reporting an entrenchment ratio of
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 17 July 3, 2019
Design Stream
UT1
Reach
1A
1B
4A
4B
Reference Stream
Stream Type
Agony Acres UT1
E4
X
X
UT to Kelly Creek
134/134a
X
X
UT to Austin Branch
B4a/A4
X
X
Timber Tributary
B4
X
X
UT to Lyle Creek
C5
X
X
UT to Varnals Creek
C4/E4
X
X
Walker Branch
E4
X
X
Box Creek
C4
X
X
7.2.1 Agony Acres UT1
Agony Acres reference reach (UTI - Reach 3) is located in northeast Guildford County, NC. It was
identified as a high quality preservation area on the Agony Acres Mitigation Site and was used as a
reference reach for that project. Wildlands performed a detailed morphologic survey in March of 2013.
The Agony Acres reference reach has a drainage area of 0.3 square miles and is classified as a Rosgen E4
stream type. This site was specifically chosen because the position of the Agony Acres reference reach in
the landscape is similar to that of UTI Reach 1A and Reach 113.
7.2.2 UT to Kelly Branch
The UT to Kelly Branch reference reach is a small, steep, headwater channel located in the McDowell
County. It has a drainage area of 0.08 square miles and is part of the Broad River Basin. The reach
classifies as an B4 step -pool channel, but pool depths are negligible as they are filled with sediment from
the leaching of an upstream, anthropogenic sediment source. Bankfull channel dimensions of riffle
features were fairly uniform and consistent throughout the reach. The channel is sinuous for a high
gradient system (sinuosity of 1.19), exhibiting a stable planform while maximizing the width of the valley
where possible. Several long gravel/cobble riffles were observed at the site that cascaded into pools
over rootmass, woody debris or a boulder step at the tail of riffle.
7.2.3 UT to Austin Branch
Located in Buncombe County on the West Range of the Biltmore property, this reference reach is
drained by a small forested watershed (0.12 square miles) that empties into Austin Branch which flows
directly into the French Broad River. Most of the watershed is wooded except for narrow patches of
open, lightly used pastureland located around the upper periphery of the watershed. Surrounding plant
communities included various mature hardwoods (white oak, tulip poplar) and understory shrubs
(rhododendron, American holly). The channel exhibits a meander pool system with a channel slope of
4% and sinuosity of 1.2. This reach of UT to Austin Branch classifies as an A4/134a type channel with a
width to depth ratio of 8.8. Stream access to the floodplain is ample reporting an entrenchment ratio of
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 17 July 3, 2019

4.3. Habitats identified in UT to Austin Branch (downstream) include cobble riffles, boulder/cobble
steps, plunge pools, and meander pools.
7.2.4 Timber Tributary
Timber Tributary Reference Reach is a B4 classified channel in the northern portion of the Yadkin River
Basin. It has a drainage area of approximately 0.04 square miles. The stream meanders through confined
valley surrounded by mature trees. The channel has a moderate slope of 3.2%, and a channel sinuosity
of 1.12. This system supports varied habitats which included woody debris, rock riffles and meander
pools.
7.2.5 UT to Lyle Creek
UT to Lyle Creek is a perennial stream flowing through the broad, flat floodplain of Lyle Creek. UT to
Lyle's watershed is wooded, and the stream is fully connected to the floodplain with a bank height ratio
of 1.0 and an entrenchment ratio of over 2.5. The width -to -depth ratio ranges from approximately 15 to
18, and the overall valley slope is approximately 0.8%. UT to Lyle Creek has a sinuosity of 1.1 and
classifies as a straight, C5 stream channel. In -stream habitat features within this reach include shallow
pools, woody debris, and small sections of tree roots.
7.2.6 UT to Varnals Creek
The UT to Varnals reference reach is located in south central Alamance County, NC near the Cane Creek
Mountains. Wildlands visited UT to Varnals in September 2014 and visually confirmed that the land use
is unchanged from reported conditions and that the stream is laterally and vertically stable. Wildlands
conducted a detailed morphological survey in October 2014. UT to Varnals has a drainage area of 0.41
square miles and is classified as a Rosgen E4 stream type for the majority of the reach. UT to Varnals has
a valley slope of 2.0% and a channel slope of 1.7%. The riffle pool sequences and spacing of grade
control structures on UT to Varnals were used in the plan and profile development for these reaches
where native bedrock control is lacking.
7.2.7 Walker Branch
The Walker Branch reference is located in Northeastern Rutherford County. The dataset was used as a
reference stream for the Cane Creek Restoration prepared by Restoration Systems and Axiom
Environmental in 2007. The drainage area is 0.29 square miles and the land use within the drainage area
is a semi -mature forest. The Walker Branch reference site was classified as a C4/E4 stream type with a
sinuosity of 1.4. The channel has a width to depth ratio ranging from 8.9 —12.2 and an entrenchment
ratio greater than 2.5. The reach has a valley slope of 2.6% while the channel slope is 1.5%. The bed
material d50 for the reach is 27.8 mm.
7.2.8 Box Creek
The Box Creek reference reach site is part of the Broad River Basin located in Rutherford County and has
a drainage area of 2.13 square miles. The entire watershed is forested, and the reference reach site is
located approximately a quarter mile upstream from a large pond. The reach is characterized by short
riffles, deep pools, and long shallow runs. This moderately sinuous reach (1.19) classifies as a C4 channel
and has a high width/depth ratio of 21.9. This reach reported a bank height ratio of 1.5 but banks were
typically stable due to a large extent of woody vegetation lining each bank, especially along the outer
bends of a few tight meanders. In -stream habitat structures included undercut banks, woody debris, and
coarse substrate from which fish have built several gravel piles for nesting.
7.3 Design Channel Morphological Parameters
Reference reaches were an important source of information to develop the cross-section, pattern, and
profile design parameters for the restoration reaches. Ranges of pattern parameters were developed
within the reference reach parameter ranges with some exceptions based on best professional
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 18 July 3, 2019

judgement and experience from previous projects. For example, radius of curvature ratio has been kept
above 2.0 on all reaches. Wildlands has found this minimum ratio, and others, support stable geometry.
Pool depths were designed to be a minimum of 1.2 times deeper than riffles to provide habitat
variation. Cross-section parameters such as area, depth, and width were designed based on the design
discharge, stable bank slopes, and width to depth ratios similar to reference conditions. Key
morphological parameters for the restoration reaches are listed in Table 10 and Table 11. Complete
morphological tables for existing, reference, and proposed conditions are included in Appendix 4.
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 19 July 3, 2019

Table 10: Summary of Morphological Parameters for UT1 Reach 1A and 1B
Table 11: Summary of Morphological Parameters for UT1 Reach 4A and 4B
Parameter
Existing
Existing
References
References
Proposed
Parameter
UT1 Reach 1A UT1 Reach 1B
Agony Acres
UT1
UT to Kelly
Creek
UT to Austin
Branch
Timber
Tributary
UT1 Reach
1A
UT1
Reach 1B
Valley Width (ft)
20-45 20-45
---
---
---
---
20-45
20-45
Contributing Drainage Area (sq
mi)
0.05 0.11
0.15
0.08
0.12
0.04
0.05
0.11
Channel/Reach Classification
--- B4
B3
B4/B4a
B4a/A4
B4
B4
B4
Discharge Width (ft)
--- 5.7-7.2
11.1
7.9
6.2
8.9
6.9
8.2
Discharge Depth (ft)
--- 0.6-0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.5
0.5
0.6
Discharge Area (ftZ)
--- 4.0-4.4
7.4
5.7
4.4
4.6
3.6
5
Discharge Velocity (ft/s)
--- 5.5-5.8
4.9
5.9
6.2
3.7
4.5
5
Discharge (cfs)
--- 23
36.5
23
27.3
17
15
23
Channel Slope (%)
--- 3.46
4.9
3.0-6.5
4
3.34
3.40
3.40
Sinuosity
--- 1.08
1.04
1.19
1.2
1.12
1.08
1.08
Width/Depth Ratio
--- 8.5-12
16.6
10.9
8.8
17
14
15
Bank Height Ratio
--- 5.9-6.4
1
2.5
1
1
1.0-1.1
1.0-1.1
Entrenchment Ratio
--- 1.2
2.3
1.2
4.3
1.5
>2.9
>2.4
d16/ d35/ d50/ d84/ d95/ dip/
d isp
1.22/
81.25/256/---/--
2.0/12.9/50.6/111.15/13.63/45.00/ 68.1/2048.0/---
/---
0.49/3.5/6.5/48 /83/128/ - ---- ----
-
Table 11: Summary of Morphological Parameters for UT1 Reach 4A and 4B
Parameter
Existing
References
Proposed
UT1 Reach 4A UT1 Reach 4B
UT to Lyle UT to Varnels Walker
Creek Creek Branch Box Creek
UT1 Reach UT1 Reach
4A 4B
Valley Width (ft)
15-54
50-200+
---
---
---
---
25-200+
25-200+
Contributing Drainage Area (sq
mi)
0.29
0.4
0.25
0.41
0.29
2.13
0.29
0.4
Channel/Reach Classification
G4c
G4c
C5
C4/E4
E4
C4
C4
C4
Discharge Width (ft)
8.3-15.0
8.2-8.6
7
9.3-10.5
11.5-12.3
23.5
11.5
12
Discharge Depth (ft)
1
1.2
0.5
1.1-1.2
0.77-0.99
1.2
0.9
0.9
Discharge Area (ftZ)
8.6-15.6
10.1-10.3
3.5-4.1
10.3-12.3
8.9-12.2
28.9
10.1
11.3
Discharge Velocity (ft/s)
6.5-3.6
3.9-4.0
4.7
4.4-5.2
3.8
3.4
3.5
3.9
Discharge (cfs)
31-54.6
40.1
18
54
40
99
32
40
Channel Slope (%)
1.04
1.04
0.4
1.7
1
0.84
0.93
0.93
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 20 July 3, 2019

Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 21 July 3, 2019
Existing
References
Proposed
Parameter
UT to Lyle
UT to Varnels
Walker
UT1 Reach
UT1 Reach
UT1 Reach 4A
UT1 Reach 4B
Box Creek
Creek
Creek
Branch
4A
4B
Sinuosity
1.14
1.14
1.1
1.2
1.4
1.33
1.2
1.2
Width/Depth Ratio
8.0-14.3
6.6-7.2
14.9-18.3
8.1-9.3
12.3-14.4
19.1
13
13
Bank Height Ratio
1-1.5
2.0-2.1
0.6-0.9
1
---
1.5
1.0-1.1
1.0-1.1
Entrenchment Ratio
1.8-3.6
1.0-1.1
5.7-6.4
5.7-10
2.5-2.7
3.3
>2.2
>2.2
d16/ d35/ d50/ d84/ d95/ dip/
6.69/15.27/41.32/
2.9/9.2/15/56/
4.1/11/22/50/
--
/0.1/0.2/0.5/
--
---
---
dlsp
69.69/128/ /
4.0/8.0/ --- / ---
88/256/ /
78/ /
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 21 July 3, 2019

7.4 Design Discharge Analysis
Multiple methods were used to develop bankfull discharge estimates for each of the project restoration
reaches: the NC Rural Piedmont regional curve (Harman et al., 1999), NC Piedmont/Mountain regional
curve (Walker, unpublished), a Wildlands regional USGS flood frequency analysis, a site-specific
reference reach curve, existing bankfull indicators using Manning's equation, and data from previous
successful design projects. The resulting values were compared, and best professional judgment was
used to determine the specific design discharge for each restoration reach. Each of the methods is
described below.
7.4.1 Regional Curve Data
Bankfull discharge was estimated using the published NC Rural Piedmont Curve (Harman et al., 1999) as
well as the updated NRCS curve for rural Piedmont and mountain streams (Walker, unpublished) as
shown on Figure 8.
7.4.2 Wildlands Regional USGS Rural Piedmont Calculator
Wildlands developed a regional flood frequency analysis tool that tailored the USGS 2009 publication
Magnitude and Frequency of Rural Floods in the Southeastern United States, through 2006 to the
Piedmont of North Carolina. Of the 103 stations referenced in the publication, 23 were used in the
development of the tool. To fill gaps in data, five additional stations were added by Wildlands to
represent streams with drainage areas less than one square mile. The Hosking and Wallis homogeneity
test was performed in R© to identify the most appropriate gages based on homogeneity (Hosking and
Wallis, 1993). The gages used were:
• USGS 02096740 — Gun Branch near Alamance, NC (DA = 4.06 mi')
• USGS 02096846 — Cane Creek near Yadkin Grove, NC (DA = 7.54 mi')
• USGS 02097010 — Robeson Creek near Pittsboro, NC (DA = 1.71 mi')
• USGS 02101030 — Falls Creek near Bennett, NC (DA = 3.43 mi')
• USGS 0210166029 — Rocky River at SR1300 near Crutchfield Crossroads, NC (DA = 7.42 mi')
The data from these 28 gage stations were used to develop flood frequency curves for the 1.2 -year and
1.5 -year recurrence interval discharges. These relationships can be used to estimate discharge of those
recurrence intervals for ungaged streams in the same hydrologic region and were solved for each
project reach's discharge with the drainage area as the input. The discharge estimates are shown on
Figure 8 as the USGS Rural Piedmont Calculator 1.2 -yr Predictions.
7.4.3 Site Specific Reference Reach Curve
Eight reference reaches were identified for this project; four B -type channels and four C-type channels.
Each reference reach was surveyed to develop information for analyzing drainage area -discharge
relationships as well as development of design parameters. Stable cross-sectional dimensions and
channel slopes were used to compute a bankfull discharge with the Manning's equation for each
reference reach. The resulting discharge values were plotted with drainage area and compared the
other discharge estimation methods.
7.4.4 Maximum Discharge (Manning's Equation)
A riffle cross-section was surveyed on each restoration reach on the Site. Due to the existing
impairments throughout Site streams, bankfull indicators were weak and not considered reliable for
estimating a bankfull discharge. Instead, Manning's equation was used to calculate a discharge
associated with the top of banks for all project streams. Stream slope was calculated from the surveyed
channel slope, and roughness was estimated using guidelines from Chow (1959).
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 22 July 3, 2019

7.4.5 Design Discharge Analysis Summary
The design discharges for each restoration project reach were developed so that the reconstructed
channels will flood with the desired frequency. Results from each of the methods described above were
evaluated and compared to the other methods. For this analysis the most emphasis was placed on the
results from the regional flood frequency (1.2), piedmont regional curve, and reference reach curve.
Because of the desire to achieve frequent floodplain interaction, design discharges were selected close
to the lower end of the range of values produced by the estimation methods. Tables 12 gives a summary
of the discharge analysis.
Table 12: Summary of Design Discharge Analysis
7.5 Sediment Transport Analysis
To assess the magnitude of the bed load supply on the project streams, Wildlands performed a
qualitative assessment of the sediment volume and sources in the project watershed through aerial
photography and field reconnaissance.
On-site streams were visually inspected to qualitatively asses aggradation and degradation within the
channels. At the site level, lack of pool habitat and an abundance of fine sediment in project reaches
provides evidence that the current lack of riparian vegetation and disturbance in the floodplain from
livestock is overloading the carrying capacity of the project streams and their ability to move on-site
sediment. Additionally, observations of incised channels and actively eroding banks provide evidence
the channels are actively degrading, due to incision and a lack of an established riparian buffer. Once the
project is constructed, on-site sediment sources will be addressed by protecting streambanks, stabilizing
concentrated flows, excluding livestock and stabilizing the riparian corridor with vegetation. The focus of
sediment transport analysis for this design was to verify that the design channels will be stable over time
and can pass sediment from the watershed.
7.5.1 Competence Analysis
Competence analyses were performed during design for each of the restoration reaches by comparing
shear stress associated with the design bankfull discharge, proposed channel dimensions, and proposed
channel slopes with the size distribution of the existing bed load. The analysis utilized standard
equations based on a methodology using the Shields (1936) curve and Andrews (1984) equation
described by Rosgen (2001). This analysis is used to verify that the design will move the bed load
material supplied to the stream. The results of the analysis are shown in Table 13.
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 23 July 3, 2019
Reach 1A
UT1
Reach 113
Reach 4A
Reach 413
DA (acres)
32
71
186
256
DA (sq. mi.)
0.05
0.11
0.29
0.40
NC Rural Piedmont Regional Curve (cfs)
10
18
36
46
Alan Walker Curve (cfs)
5
10
21
27
Wildlands Regional USGS
Flood Frequency Analysis (cfs)
1.2 -year event
9
15
31
40
1.5 -year event 13 23 45
57
Site Specific Reference Reach Curve
18
28
32
39
Selected Design Q (cfs)
12
20
32
40
7.5 Sediment Transport Analysis
To assess the magnitude of the bed load supply on the project streams, Wildlands performed a
qualitative assessment of the sediment volume and sources in the project watershed through aerial
photography and field reconnaissance.
On-site streams were visually inspected to qualitatively asses aggradation and degradation within the
channels. At the site level, lack of pool habitat and an abundance of fine sediment in project reaches
provides evidence that the current lack of riparian vegetation and disturbance in the floodplain from
livestock is overloading the carrying capacity of the project streams and their ability to move on-site
sediment. Additionally, observations of incised channels and actively eroding banks provide evidence
the channels are actively degrading, due to incision and a lack of an established riparian buffer. Once the
project is constructed, on-site sediment sources will be addressed by protecting streambanks, stabilizing
concentrated flows, excluding livestock and stabilizing the riparian corridor with vegetation. The focus of
sediment transport analysis for this design was to verify that the design channels will be stable over time
and can pass sediment from the watershed.
7.5.1 Competence Analysis
Competence analyses were performed during design for each of the restoration reaches by comparing
shear stress associated with the design bankfull discharge, proposed channel dimensions, and proposed
channel slopes with the size distribution of the existing bed load. The analysis utilized standard
equations based on a methodology using the Shields (1936) curve and Andrews (1984) equation
described by Rosgen (2001). This analysis is used to verify that the design will move the bed load
material supplied to the stream. The results of the analysis are shown in Table 13.
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 23 July 3, 2019

Table 13: Results of UT1 Competence Analysis
The initial competence analysis was based on the size material naturally found in the stream to mimic
potential bed load. The results were used to inform further design of the reach. The excess shear
throughout all existing Site streams influenced the design of rock and wood step structures to provide
grade control and increase roughness within the channel. Riffles with larger materials, such as chunky
riffles, were also integrated into the design as grade control. The proposed D5o and Dioo for the
constructed riffles on all stream reaches will be sized so that the reconstructed channels will not
produce enough shear stress to entrain the largest particles in these structures. This will ensure a stable
pavement while allowing for bed load material to be active within the system. It is important to note
that while the proposed channel slope of Reach 4A/413 exceeds the critical slope, degradation will be
avoided through grade control structures and properly sized stone in the riffles.
7.6 Project Implementation
7.6.1 Overview
The mitigation approaches proposed for the streams on the Site have been developed to achieve the
potential for functional uplift relative to the existing conditions on the site (described in Section 4). The
site plan includes elements of stream restoration, enhancement II, and preservation as described below.
Figure 9 shows the approaches proposed for the project reaches.
Restoration reaches will be constructed as Priority 1 except where Priority 2 grading is needed to
transition with existing grade elevations. Restoration reaches have been designed to create stable,
functional stream channels based on reference reach parameters, design discharge analysis, and
sediment transport analysis. Dimension, pattern and profile have been designed for all restoration
reaches to provide a cross-sectional area sized for frequent overbank flows, a stable bed with variable
bedforms, well -vegetated bank slopes, and improvements to aquatic habitat and water quality enabling
biological life. Improved vertical and lateral stability will reduce stream channel erosion. Diverse
bedforms will be established using in -stream structures appropriate for the geomorphic settings. These
structures will provide grade control to prevent incision and serve as habitat features. Pools will have
varied depths to increase habitat diversity and mimic natural streams.
For Enhancement II the dimension, pattern, and profile will remain the same, and mitigation activities
will include localized bank stabilization and repairs in areas where damage is more significant. Mid
channel bars will be excavated, and the existing alignment will be stabilized. Invasive vegetation will be
treated by either excavation or herbicide. Cattle will also be excluded from the stream. The localized
repairs, invasive treatment, and cattle exclusion will return the stream to a functional state, enhancing
water quality and improving aquatic and terrestrial habitat along the reach.
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 24 July 3, 2019
Reach 1A/113
UT1
Reach 4A/413
Dbkf (ft)
0.50
0.90
Schan (ft/ft)
0.0370
0.0093
Bankfull Shear Stress, t (Ib/sq ft)
1.21
0.49
Dmax Bar/Subpavement (mm)
76.2
50.8
Dcrit (ft)
0.30
0.45
Scrit (ft/ft)
0.02062
.00461
Movable particle size (mm)
175.0
90.3
Predicted Shear Stress to move Dmax
0.39
0.23
The initial competence analysis was based on the size material naturally found in the stream to mimic
potential bed load. The results were used to inform further design of the reach. The excess shear
throughout all existing Site streams influenced the design of rock and wood step structures to provide
grade control and increase roughness within the channel. Riffles with larger materials, such as chunky
riffles, were also integrated into the design as grade control. The proposed D5o and Dioo for the
constructed riffles on all stream reaches will be sized so that the reconstructed channels will not
produce enough shear stress to entrain the largest particles in these structures. This will ensure a stable
pavement while allowing for bed load material to be active within the system. It is important to note
that while the proposed channel slope of Reach 4A/413 exceeds the critical slope, degradation will be
avoided through grade control structures and properly sized stone in the riffles.
7.6 Project Implementation
7.6.1 Overview
The mitigation approaches proposed for the streams on the Site have been developed to achieve the
potential for functional uplift relative to the existing conditions on the site (described in Section 4). The
site plan includes elements of stream restoration, enhancement II, and preservation as described below.
Figure 9 shows the approaches proposed for the project reaches.
Restoration reaches will be constructed as Priority 1 except where Priority 2 grading is needed to
transition with existing grade elevations. Restoration reaches have been designed to create stable,
functional stream channels based on reference reach parameters, design discharge analysis, and
sediment transport analysis. Dimension, pattern and profile have been designed for all restoration
reaches to provide a cross-sectional area sized for frequent overbank flows, a stable bed with variable
bedforms, well -vegetated bank slopes, and improvements to aquatic habitat and water quality enabling
biological life. Improved vertical and lateral stability will reduce stream channel erosion. Diverse
bedforms will be established using in -stream structures appropriate for the geomorphic settings. These
structures will provide grade control to prevent incision and serve as habitat features. Pools will have
varied depths to increase habitat diversity and mimic natural streams.
For Enhancement II the dimension, pattern, and profile will remain the same, and mitigation activities
will include localized bank stabilization and repairs in areas where damage is more significant. Mid
channel bars will be excavated, and the existing alignment will be stabilized. Invasive vegetation will be
treated by either excavation or herbicide. Cattle will also be excluded from the stream. The localized
repairs, invasive treatment, and cattle exclusion will return the stream to a functional state, enhancing
water quality and improving aquatic and terrestrial habitat along the reach.
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 24 July 3, 2019

Reaches that are stable and functioning will be preserved to protect them from future impacts from
cattle, agricultural production, timbering and/or site development. Timbering is set to occur in the near
future on the adjacent forested buffer along UTI Reach 4. Timber limits are established approximately
30 -ft — 50 -ft outside of the conservation easement to provide additional wooded buffer. Vernal pools
will be placed at discrete runoff locations within the conservation easement to provide additional
protection from timbering practices. Preservation protection will protect against habitat degradation
from these land disturbing activates.
In -stream structures for restoration reaches will include riffles, boulders sills, log sills, log j -hooks, log
vanes, brush toe, geolifts and lunker logs. The structures will reinforce channel stability and serve as
habitat features. Constructed riffles will be built from excavated on-site rock when possible. Quarry
stone may be used if an on-site source cannot be found. Constructed riffles will incorporate woody
material and logs, which will provide varied pore spaces within the riffles and benefit hyporheic
exchange processes and habitat formation. The diverse range of constructed riffle types will provide
grade control, habitat diversity and will create varied flow vectors. Log j -hooks and vanes will deflect
flow vectors away from banks while adding to habitat diversity. Log and boulder sills will be used to
allow for small grade drops across pools. At select outer meander bends, the channel banks will be
constructed with brush toe revetments to reduce erosion potential, encourage pool maintenance, and
provide varied pool habitat. Lunker logs will also be used in the meander bends to provide pool habitat
variability and provided stream bank stability. Sod harvested on-site and/or coir fiber matting will be
used to provide bank protection.
Each of the project reaches will be placed in a conservation easement to protect the project in
perpetuity. Cattle will be excluded from the entire easement area. The streambanks and floodplains will
be planted with native tree and shrub species to re-establish a wooded riparian buffer in areas that are
currently lacking a buffer.
Wildlands is working with the landowners to install cattle watering systems at several location as part of
the project implementation.
7.6.2 UT1 Reach 1A and 18
UTI Reach 1A and 113 will be improved through Priority 1 restoration. The channel will be raised to
reconnect to the existing floodplain. In -stream structures will be added for stream stability, grade
control and habitat variability. A native vegetative buffer will be established, and invasive multiflora rose
and Japanese honeysuckle will be treated. Livestock will also be excluded from the project reach.
7.6.3 UT1 Reach 2
UTI Reach 2 will be improved through an enhancement II approach. A native riparian buffer will be
established, and invasive species will be treated. At one significant cattle wallow area, mid channel bars
will be excavated, and the channel will be stabilized to create a single thread channel. Cattle will be
excluded from the reach.
7.6.4 UT1 Reach 3
Reach 3 is slated for Preservation. The reach is currently stable and exhibits mature vegetation. The
major stressor on this reach is from the fine sediment load from bank erosion upstream, however coarse
substrate is visible through the fine sediment. Desirable aquatic habitat is present throughout the reach
and includes undercut banks, root mats, leaf packs, and small debris jams. Stabilizing the upstream
reaches will allow for this reach to remain stable and reduce the sediment load. Chinese privet will be
removed along the reach.
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 25 July 3, 2019

7.6.5 UT1 Reach 4A and 48
UTI Reach 4A and 4B will be improved through a combination of Priority 1 and Priority 2 restoration.
Priority 2 restoration will occur on the first 200 linear feet of the upstream tie-in and the last 100 feet of
the downstream tie-in. The majority of the channel will be raised to connect to the existing floodplain.
In -stream structures will be added for grade control, bank stability, and habitat creation. A buffer will be
established along the reach and livestock will be excluded from the project reach. Invasive alligator
weed, Chinese privet, and multiflora rose will be removed along the project reach.
7.6.6 UT1A
Enhancement II is slated for UT1A. While the channel will be raised to be connected to the existing
floodplain, stream alignment will not be changed. A native vegetative buffer will be established, and
invasive multiflora rose will be treated. Livestock will be excluded from the reach.
7.6.7 Step Pool Stormwater Conveyance (SPSC)
A step pool stormwater conveyance system will be constructed to treat storm flows within the
ephemeral channel that confluences with UTI Reach 4B. The step pool system will convey runoff from
the adjacent pasture in a stable manner. Additional activities along this reach include cattle exclusion,
treatment of invasive Chinese privet and multiflora rose, and the of replanting native vegetation.
7.7 Vegetation and Planting Plan
The objective of the planting plan is to establish, over time, a 50 -foot riparian buffer composed of native
tree species. This restored buffer will improve riparian and wetland habitat, help the restored streams
remain stable, shade the streams, and provide a source of LWD and organic material to the streams.
Non -forested areas within the conservation easement will be planted with bare root tree species and
permanent riparian seed mix. In shaded areas, existing canopy will be supplemented where necessary
with additional bare root planting (trees and shrubs) to increase the density of woody species and
seeded with riparian seed mix in disturbed areas. Proposed buffer plantings are generally early
successional native vegetation which have been chosen to develop species diversity and are listed on
Sheet 3.0 of the preliminary design plans located in Appendix 10. The specific species composition to be
planted was selected based on the community type, observation of occurrence of species in riparian
buffers adjacent to the Site, and best professional judgement on species establishment and anticipated
Site conditions in the early years following project implementation. In addition, the stream banks will be
planted with live stakes and the channel toe will be planted with multiple herbaceous species.
Permanent herbaceous seed will be spread on streambanks, floodplain areas, and disturbed areas
within the project easement.
Invasive species within the riparian buffers will be treated at the time of construction. The extent of
invasive species coverage will be monitored, mapped, and controlled as necessary throughout the
required monitoring period.
7.8 Project Risk and Uncertainties
In general, this project has low risk. Due to the rural nature of the watershed, there is very little risk that
changes in land use upstream in the project watershed would alter the hydrology or sediment supply
enough to damage the project streams after construction.
Two easement breaks will be part of the Site: a new internal culvert crossing on UTI Reach 1 and an
external existing culvert crossing under Elk Shoals Church Loop road, between UTI Reach 2 and Reach 3.
Stone will be placed along the entrance and exit of the UTI Reach 1 culvert to dissipate energy and
provide stability. The existing culvert under Elk Shoals Church Loop appears stable and functioning.
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 26 July 3, 2019

8.0 Performance Standards
The stream performance standards for the project site will follow approved performance standards
presented in the NC IRT Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update
(10/24/2016) and presented in the DMS Stream and Wetland Mitigation Plan Template and Guidance
(June 2017). Annual monitoring and semi-annual site visits will be conducted to assess the condition of
the finished project. Specific performance standard components are proposed for stream morphology,
hydrology, and vegetation. Performance standards will be evaluated throughout the seven-year post -
construction monitoring.
8.1 Streams
8.1.1 Dimension
Riffle cross-sections on the restoration reaches should be stable and should show little change in
bankfull area, maximum depth ratio, and width -to -depth ratio. Per NC IRT guidance, bank height ratios
shall not exceed 1.2 and entrenchment ratios shall be at least 1.4 for restored B channels and 2.2 for
restored C channels to be considered stable. All riffle cross sections should fall within the parameters
defined for channels of the appropriate stream type. If any changes do occur, these changes will be
evaluated to assess whether the stream channel is showing signs of instability. Indicators of instability
include a vertically incising thalweg or eroding channel banks. Changes in the channel that indicate a
movement toward stability or enhanced habitat include a decrease in the width -to -depth ratio in
meandering channels or an increase in pool depth. Remedial action would not be taken if channel
changes indicate a movement toward stability.
8.1.2 Pattern and Profile
Visual assessments and photo documentation should indicate that streams are remaining stable and do
not indicate a trend toward vertical or lateral instability. Signs of instability may include bank scour,
bank migration, and bed incision.
8.1.3 Substrate
Restoration reaches should show maintenance of coarser materials in the riffle features and smaller
particles in the pool features. A reach -wide pebble count will be performed in each restoration reach
each monitoring year for classification purposes. A pebble count will be performed at each surveyed
riffle to characterize the pavement during the baseline monitoring only. Riffles may fine over the course
of monitoring due to the stabilization of contributing watershed sediment sources.
8.1.4 Photo Documentation
Photographs should illustrate the Site's vegetation and morphological stability on an annual basis. Cross-
section photos should demonstrate no excessive erosion or degradation of the banks. Longitudinal
photos should indicate the absence of persistent of mid -channel bars or vertical incision. Grade control
structures should remain stable. Deposition of sediment on the bank side of vane arms is preferable.
Maintenance of scour pools on the channel side of vane arms is expected.
8.1.5 Bankfull Events
The occurrence of bankfull events will be documented throughout the monitoring period. Four bankfull
flow events must be documented within the seven-year monitoring period. The four bankfull events
must occur in separate years.
Bankfull events will be documented using photographs and either a crest gage or a pressure transducer,
as appropriate for Site conditions. The selected measurement device will be installed in the stream
within a surveyed riffle cross section. The device will be checked at each site visit to determine if a
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 27 July 3, 2019

bankfull event has occurred. Photographs will also be used to document the occurrence of debris lines
and sediment deposition.
8.2 Vegetation
The final vegetative success criteria will be the survival of 210 planted stems per acre in the riparian
corridors at the end of the required monitoring period (MY7). The interim measure of vegetative
success for the site will be the survival of at least 320 native species stems per acre at the end of the
third monitoring year (MY3) and at least 260 stems per acre at the end of the fifth year of monitoring
(MY5). Planted vegetation must average 7 feet in height in each plot at the end of MY5 and 10 feet in
height at Year 7. The extent of invasive species coverage will also be monitored and controlled as
necessary throughout the required monitoring period. If this performance standard is met by year five
and stem density is trending towards success (i.e., vigor) and invasive species are not threatening
ecological success, monitoring of vegetation on the Site may be terminated with written approval by the
USACE in consultation with the NC IRT.
Vegetation monitoring quadrants will be installed across the Site to measure the survival of the planted
trees. The number of monitoring quadrants required, and frequency of monitoring will be based on the
DMS monitoring guidance documents. Vegetation monitoring will occur between July 1St and leaf drop
and will follow the CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation (2008) or another DMS approved
protocol.
8.3 Visual Assessments
Visual assessments should support the specific performance standards for each metric as described
above.
9.0 Monitoring Plan
The Site monitoring plan has been developed to ensure that the required performance standards are
met, and project goals and objectives are achieved. Annual monitoring data will be reported using the
DMS Annual Monitoring Reporting Template (June 2017). The monitoring report shall provide project
data chronology that will facilitate an understanding of project status and trends, ease population of
DMS databases for analysis and research purposes, and assist in close-out decision making.
Using the DMS As -Built Baseline Monitoring Report Template (June 2017), a baseline monitoring
document and as -built record drawings of the project will be developed following the planting
completion and monitoring installation on the restored site. Monitoring reports will be prepared in the
fall of each monitoring year and submitted to DMS by November 30. These reports will be based on the
DMS Annual Monitoring Template (June 2017) and Closeout Report Template (June 2017). Full
monitoring reports will be submitted to DMS in monitoring years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7. Abbreviated
monitoring reports will be submitted in monitoring years 4 and 6. The closeout monitoring period will
extend seven years beyond completion of construction or until performance standards have been met.
Table 14, below, describes how the monitoring plan is set up to verify that project goals and objectives
have been achieved.
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 28 July 3, 2019

Table 14: Monitoring Plan
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 29 July 3, 2019
Performance
Monitoring
Likely Functional
Goal
Treatment
Outcome
Standards
Metric
Uplift
Reduction in
sediment inputs
Restore stream
Bank height ratios
Cross-
from bank
Improve
Stable stream
channels with bankfull
stay below 1.2. Visual
section
erosion,
stream
channels with bank
channel dimension and
assessments showing
monitoring
reduction of
channel
height ratios below
pattern suited to the
progression towards
and visual
shear stress, and
stability.
1.2.
valley type.
stability.
assessment.
improved overall
hydraulic
function.
Visual assessments
Dispersion of
Reconstruct stream
indicate progression
high flows on the
channels with bankfull
towards stability.
Stream profile and
floodplain,
dimensions relative to
Cross-
Entrenchment ratios
Reconnect
the floodplain. Restore
Pattern must remain
section
between 1.4 - 2.2 for
increase in
channels
stable (note
biogeochemical
with historic
stream plan form to
description of
monitoring
restored B channels
cycling within the
promote development
and visual
and greater than 2.2
floodplains.
stability in Section
system, and
of mutually beneficial
8.1).
assessment
for restored C
recharging of
stream/wetland
channels. Bank height
complex.
ratios remain below
riparian
wetlands.
1.2.
Install habitat features
Increase in
such as constructed
available habitat
The visual inspection
riffles, cover logs, and
niches for
There is no required
of in -stream aquatic
Improve in-
brush toes into
macroinvertebrat
stream
restored/enhanced
performance
Visual
habitat would
es and fish
standard for this
assessment
progress, showing
habitat.
streams. Add woody
leading to an
metric.
increase complexity
materials to channel
over time.
increase in
beds. Construct pools
biodiversity over
of varying depth.
time.
Reduction in
Reduce
Construct a step pool
Stormwater
floodplain
sediment
stormwater
There is no required
conveyance BMP
sediment inputs
and nutrient
conveyance system to
performance
remain functional,
None
from runoff,
input from
slow and treat runoff
standard for this
trap sediment and
improved aquatic
adjacent
from farm fields before
metric.
treat agricultural
habitat and
farm fields
entering Site streams.
runoff.
water quality.
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 29 July 3, 2019

9.1 Monitoring Components
Project monitoring components are listed in more detail in Table 15. Approximate locations of the
proposed monitoring components are illustrated in Figure 10
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 30 July 3, 2019
Performance
Monitoring
Likely Functional
Goal
Treatment
Outcome
Standards
Metric
Uplift
In planted open areas
Reduction in
the survival of 210
floodplain
planted stems per
Permanent
sediment inputs
acre at MY7. Interim
and mobile
from runoff,
survival of at least
100 square
increased bank
320 planted stems at
meter
Restore and
stability,
Plant native tree and
MY3 and at least 260
vegetation
Planted open area
enhance
increased LWD
understory species in
planted stems per
plots within
stem densities will be
native
and organic
open and shaded
acre at MY5.
planted
at or above 210
floodplain
material in
and wetland
riparian areas where
Additionally, trees in
open areas.
planted stems per
streams,
currently insufficient.
each plot must
Shaded
acre at MY7.
vegetation.
increased
average 7 feet in
areas
b
height by MY5 and 10
planted will
cling
cycling in
feet by MY7. No
be visual
i
floodplain, and
success criteria is
assessed.
improved
associated with
riparian habitat.
shaded area planting.
Visual
Exclusion fencing to
Reduction in
assessment
be maintained if
pollutant inputs
Exclude
of
Exclude livestock from
livestock are present.
to streams
livestock
Prevent easement
fencing and
stream channels and
Livestock are not
including fecal
from stream
encroachment.
signs
channels.
riparian areas.
of livestock
Permitted within the
coliform,
conservation
nitrogen, and
encestoc a
easement area.
phosphorous.
nt.
Protection of the
Site from
Permanently
encroachment
protect the
Record and close
Site remains protected
Establish a
nto the
i
project site
conservation
Visual
by conservation
from
conservation easement
easement prior to
assessment
easement in
conservation
on the Site.
easement and
harmful
implementation.
perpetuity.
direct impact to
uses.
stream. Supports
all functions.
9.1 Monitoring Components
Project monitoring components are listed in more detail in Table 15. Approximate locations of the
proposed monitoring components are illustrated in Figure 10
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 30 July 3, 2019

Table 15: Monitoring Components
1. Cross-sections will be permanently marked with rebar to establish location. Surveys will include points measured at all breaks in slope, including top of bank, bankfull, edge of water, and
thalweg.
2. Pattern and profile will be assessed visually during semi-annual site visits. Longitudinal profile will be collected during as -built baseline monitoring survey only, unless observations indicate
widespread lack of vertical stability (greater than 10% of reach is affected) and profile survey is warranted in additional years to monitor adjustments or survey repair work.
3. Riffle 100 -count substrate sampling will be collected during the baseline monitoring only. Substrate assessments in subsequent monitoring years will consist of reachwide substrate
monitoring.
4. Crest gages and/or transducers will be inspected quarterly or semi-annually, evidence of bankfull events will be documented with a photo when possible. Transducers, if used, will be set to
record stage once every 2 hours. The transducer will be inspected and downloaded semi-annually.
5. Both mobile and permanent vegetation plots will be utilized to evaluate the vegetation performance for the open areas planted. 2% of the open planted acreage will be monitored with
permanent plots and mobile plots. Permanent vegetation monitoring plot assessments will follow CVS Level 2 protocols. Mobile vegetation monitoring plot assessments will document
number of planted stems and species using a circular or 100 mz square/rectangular plot. Planted shaded areas will be visually assessed.
6. Locations of exotic and nuisance vegetation will be mapped
7. Locations of vegetation damage, boundary encroachments, etc. will be mapped.
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 31 June 3, 2019
Quantity/Length by Reach
UT1
UT1
UT1
UT1
UT1
UT1
Parameter
Monitoring Feature
Reach 1A
Reach 1B
Reach 2
Reach 3
Reach 4A
Reach 4B
UT1A
Frequency
Notes
Riffle Cross-sections
1
1
N/A
N/A
2
3
N/A
Dimension
Year 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7
1
Pool Cross-sections
1
1
N/A
N/A
2
3
N/A
Pattern
Pattern
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2
Profile
Longitudinal Profile
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Substrate
Reach wide (RW)
1RW
1 RW
N/A
N/A
1 RW
1RW
N/A
Year 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7
3
Pebble Count
Hydrology
Crest Gage (CG) and/or
1
N/A
Semi -Annual
4
Transducer (SG)
CVS Level 2/Mobile
Vegetation
12 (9 permanent, 3 mobile)
Year 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7
5
Plots
Visual Assessment
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Semi -Annual
Exotic and nuisance
Semi -Annual
6
vegetation
Project Boundary
Semi -Annual
7
Reference Photos
Photographs
30
Annual
1. Cross-sections will be permanently marked with rebar to establish location. Surveys will include points measured at all breaks in slope, including top of bank, bankfull, edge of water, and
thalweg.
2. Pattern and profile will be assessed visually during semi-annual site visits. Longitudinal profile will be collected during as -built baseline monitoring survey only, unless observations indicate
widespread lack of vertical stability (greater than 10% of reach is affected) and profile survey is warranted in additional years to monitor adjustments or survey repair work.
3. Riffle 100 -count substrate sampling will be collected during the baseline monitoring only. Substrate assessments in subsequent monitoring years will consist of reachwide substrate
monitoring.
4. Crest gages and/or transducers will be inspected quarterly or semi-annually, evidence of bankfull events will be documented with a photo when possible. Transducers, if used, will be set to
record stage once every 2 hours. The transducer will be inspected and downloaded semi-annually.
5. Both mobile and permanent vegetation plots will be utilized to evaluate the vegetation performance for the open areas planted. 2% of the open planted acreage will be monitored with
permanent plots and mobile plots. Permanent vegetation monitoring plot assessments will follow CVS Level 2 protocols. Mobile vegetation monitoring plot assessments will document
number of planted stems and species using a circular or 100 mz square/rectangular plot. Planted shaded areas will be visually assessed.
6. Locations of exotic and nuisance vegetation will be mapped
7. Locations of vegetation damage, boundary encroachments, etc. will be mapped.
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 31 June 3, 2019

10.0 Long -Term Management Plan
The Site will be transferred to the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ)
Stewardship Program. This party shall serve as conservation easement holder and long-term steward for
the property and will conduct periodic inspection of the site to ensure that restrictions required in the
conservation easement are upheld. The NCDEQ Stewardship Program is developing an endowment
system within the non -reverting, interest-bearing Conservation Lands Conservation Fund Account. The
use of funds from the Endowment Account will be governed by North Carolina General Statue GS 113A -
232(d)(3). Interest gained by the endowment fund may be used for stewardship, monitoring,
stewardship administration, and land transaction costs, if applicable.
The Stewardship Program will periodically install signage as needed to identify boundary markings as
needed. Any future livestock or associated fencing or permanent crossings will be the responsibility the
owner of the underlying fee to maintain.
The Site Protection Instrument can be found in Appendix 7.
Table 16: Long-term Management Plan
Long -Term Management Activity
Long -Term Manager Responsibility
Landowner Responsibility
The landowner shall report
damaged or missing signs to the
long-term manager, as well as
Signage will installed and
The long-term steward will be
contact the long-term manager if
maintained all ong the Site
responsible for inspecting the Site
a boundary needs to be marked,
boundary to denote the area
boundary and for maintaining or
or clarification is needed
protected by the recorded
replacing signage to ensure that the
regarding a boundary location. If
conservation easement area is clearly
land use changes in future and
conservation easement.
marked.
fencing is required to protect the
easement, the landowner is
responsible for installing
appropriate approved fencing.
The long-term manager will be
responsible for conducting annual
inspections and for undertaking
The Site will be protected in its
actions that are reasonably calculated
The landowner shall contact the
entirety and managed under the
to swiftly correct the conditions
long-term manager if clarification
terms outlined in the recorded
constituting a breach. The USACE, and
is needed regarding the
their authorized agents, shall have the
restrictions associated with the
conservation easement.
right to enter and inspect the Site and
recorded conservation easement.
to take actions necessary to verify
compliance with the conservation
easement.
11.0 Adaptive Management Plan
Upon completion of Site construction, Wildlands will implement the post -construction monitoring
defined in Sections 8 and 9. Project maintenance will be performed during the monitoring years to
address minor issues as necessary (Appendix 8). If, during annual monitoring it is determined the Site's
ability to achieve Site performance standards are jeopardized, Wildlands will notify the members of the
IRT and work with the IRT to develop contingency plans and remedial actions.
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 32 July 3, 2019

12.0 Determination of Credits
Mitigation credits presented in Table 17 are projections based upon the proposed design. Upon
completion of the as -built survey, the project components and credits data will be revised if necessary
with explanations of how and why any adjustments occurred. As -built stream linear footage will be
based on surveyed stream center lines for credit calculations.
The requested stream restoration credit ratio of UTI Reach 1A, 113, and 2 is 2:1. While Reach 1A and 1B
consist primarily of restoration and Reach 2 consists primarily of Enhancement II activities (spot repair,
cattle exclusion, and buffer planting), Wildlands requests a ratio of 2:1 for the three reaches. This is due
to the length of transition from full restoration to heavy enhancement upstream of the proposed culvert
crossing and transitional channel stabilization downstream of the culvert crossing.
Preservation is requested at a ratio of 10:1 for UTI Reach 3.
UTI Reach 4A begins with a section that transitions from preservation to Priority 1 restoration. This
transition section is request at a 2.5:1 ratio. The remainder of Reach 4A and the entire length of Reach
4B is restoration requested at a 1:1 ratio.
UT1A consists of Enhancement II. No credit is being requested for this reach since it primarily consists of
adjusting the profile to tie into the raised UTI elevation.
No credit is being requested for the storm water BMP.
Appendix 4 contains the IRT site meeting minutes and subsequent credit release memo that provides
more details on how the credit ratios were developed.
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 33 July 3, 2019

Table 17: Project Asset Table
Mitigation Credits
Stream
Riparian Wetland
Non -Riparian Wetland
Riparian Buffer
Type
R
RE
R
RE
R
RE
R
RE
Totals
4,186.3
71.8
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Project Components
Project
Component or
Reach ID
Existing
Footage/
Acreage
Proposed Stationing
Location
Approach
(P1, P2, etc.)
Restoration
(R) or
Restoration
Equivalent
(RE)
Restoration
Footage/
Acreage
Mitigation
Ratio
Proposed
Credit',
UT1 Reach 1A
1,901
100+00-107+70
P1, P2
R
770
23
385.0
UT1 Reach 1B
107+70 —117+39
P1, P2
R
969
23
484.5
UT1 Reach 2
1,324
117+90 —130+50
Enhancement II
R
1,260
23
630.0
UT1 Reach 3
732
131+10 —138+28
Preservation
RE
718
10
71.8
UT1 Reach 4A
2,825
138+28— 140+80
P2
R
252
2.54
100.8
UT1 Reach 4A
140+80— 150+00
P1
R
920
1
920.0
UT1 Reach 4B
150+00— 166+66
P1, P2
R
1,666
1
1,666.0
UT1A
158
200+00-202+03
Enhancement II
R
203
-
0.0
TOTAL
6,758
4,258.1
Component Summation
Restoration Level
Proposed
Stream (LF)
Riparian
Wetland
(Acres)
Non -Riparian Wetland
(AC)
Buffer
(sq.ft.)
Upland
(AC)
Restoration
4,577
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Enhancement II
1,463
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Preservation
718
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Notes:
1. No direct credit for BMP or UT1A.
2. Internal culvert crossing and external break excluded from stationing listed.
3. Although UT1 Reach 1A and 113 are primarily restoration and UT1 Reach 2 is primarily Enhancement II, a credit ratio of 2:1
is requested for all three reaches based on the Credit Memo in Appendix 11.
4. A credit ratio of 2.5:1 is requested for the transition length between preservation and full Priority 1 restoration.
W Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 34 July 3, 2019

13.0 References
Dunne, T. and L. B. Leopold. 1978. Water in Environmental Planning. W.H. Freeman and Company. New
York.
Giese, G.I and Robert R. Mason Jr. 1993. Low -Flow Characteristics of Streams in North Carolina. U.S.
Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 2403.
Harman, W.A. and C.J. Jones. 2016. Functional Lift Quantification Tool for Stream Restoration Projects in
North Carolina: Spreadsheet User Manual Version 2. Environmental Defense Fund, Raleigh, NC.
Harman, W. R. Starr, M. Carter, K. Tweedy, M. Clemmons, K. Suggs, C. Miller. 2012. A Function Based
Framework for Stream Assessment and Restoration Projects. US Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Washington, DC EPA 843-K-12-006.
Harman et al. 1999. Bankfull Hydraulic Geometry Relationships for North Carolina Streams. AWRA
Wildland Hydrology Symposium Proceedings. Edited by: D. S. Olsen and J.P. Potyondy. AWRA Summer
Symposium. Bozeman, MT.
Hosking, J. R. M., and J. R. Wallis. 1993. Some statistics useful in regional frequency analysis, Water
Resour. Res., 29(2), 271-281, doi:10.1029/92WR01980.
Montgomery County Department of Environmental Protection Division of Water Resources
Management. 1996. Rapid Stream Assessment Technique (RSAT) Field Methods. Montgomery County,
Maryland.
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). Web Soil Survey of Alexander County.
http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov/app/HomePage.htm
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services. 2009. Upper Catawba River Basin Restoration Priorities.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ), 2011. Surface Water Classifications.
http://deg.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/planning/classification-standards/classifications
North Carolina Geological Survey (NCGS), 1985, Geologic Map of North Carolina: Raleigh, North Carolina
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development, Geological Survey Section, scale
1:500,00, in color.
NCGS, 2013. Mineral Resources. http://deg.nc.gov/about/divisions/energy-mineral-land-
resources/north-carolina-geological-survey/mineral-resources
North Carolina Geological Survey (NCGS), 2017. NCGS Publications.
https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/energy-mineral-land-resources/north-carolina-geological-
s u rvey/n cgs -p u b l i cation s
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NHP), 2009. Natural Heritage Element Occurrence Database,
Alexander County, NC.
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission. 2015. North Carolina Wildlife Action Plan. Raleigh, NC.
Rosgen, D. L. 1994. A classification of natural rivers. Catena 22:169-199.
Rosgen, D.L. 2001. A stream channel stability assessment methodology. Proceedings of the Federal
Interagency Sediment Conference, Reno, NV, March 2001.
Schafale, M.P. 2012. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina, Fourth
Approximateion. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh, North Carolina.
Simon, A. 1989. A model of channel response in disturbed alluvial channels. Earth Surface Processes and
Landforms 14(1):11-26.
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 35 July 3, 2019

Shields, D. F., Copeland, R. R, Klingman, P. C., Doyle, M. W., and Simon, A. 2003. Design for Stream
Restoration. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering 129(8): 575-582.
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2016. Federal Public Notice: Notification of Issuance of
Guidance for Compensatory Stream and Wetland Mitigation Conducted for Wilmington District.
October 24, 2016.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 2014. Endangered Species, Threatened Species, Federal
Species of Concern and Candidate Species, Alexander County, NC.
http://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/alexander.html
Walker, Alan, unpublished. NC Rural Mountain and Piedmont Regional Curve.
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Draft Mitigation Plan
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 36 July 3, 2019

FIGURES

L ( ------- - - - - ----Is-- -
■ Project Location �•_ _• Hydrologic Unit Code (14 -Digit) Significant Natural Heritage Areas
County Line Targeted Local Watersheds NC Natural Heritage Program Managed Areas
_Ah__ Municipalities :::: Water Supply Watershed 303d Listed Streams
QCatawba 01 River Basin NC Historic Preservation Areas
Taylorsville - . . . . . . .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . �. .. .. .. . . . . . ....
030500112003( 030401020,10010, ,/,4 .. ,
. . . . . . . JZ :_ti �oivCree
NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program Easement, a : .... • • • :: . :: • • • •
.1J�:� © r :.... .. ..... .
. ..
:03650101120074 . •� • . . . . . .. .. .. . . • . . . . . . . . .�
. . . . :: : m'Enhancement Program Easement, `�� •� �, f LA..` . . • :: : : : : : : : , 03040102 100
• .. ........ ................. � � ,� � .. ��^...... � ..�� 1.
.
:Third Creek Rare Plant Site
• •03050101120050 y
03050101110020 % 03040102040010 1
Catawba•River Corridor . . . • • , 03040102030010
. . . .. . .. . .. . . . 03040102040010
^� ��. '�, •,^'� ,03050,10,1130010. .. . . • r
�' r' :::::: :: ::::::::: '� : • ::.. 64 �..
50101090020`
03050101090030 Catawba County -Open Space . : : : : :: . J� : : : : : . . . . •'• v�,�
y' .. •'�•. . . . • . . . �St!aates�v�ill(
.. . . ...
•awbaRive?Corrid'oi���....j'..:.
..... 99�♦� •..............._
......�9�0 �..�� ......... .....
j G - • • • • • • • • • • r 03040102040020
• • • • • • . • • 0305b101150. . • • •' • ' '
....� .............. '`........... .....T..�. •....
.....:.... ............. •1.... 70 .......�................
03050,1010 .. .. ..f .. .. . .
Conover 16 • 03Q5010115004Q ,
.. .Claremont. . . . . . . .'�, .'moi/.
.. .. .. . ���.
CroPk .. Catawba �- • 0305010,1.150010 '
...... ......r......r .........
50402030040 .. .. .. . . . . . . . . .. .. . X
Newton •_ • • Y, • 03050101150030 ' ' ' ' ' ' •��
` ------i
WILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
0 1 2 Miles
I I I I I
Figure 1 Vicinity Map
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site
Catawba River Basin (03050101)
Alexander County, NC

loss 1
z �.
ogs
y v
N'
1025
.� XS1 -
t
t t
f1 A
f �
f B z}
• O�S L V r
XS2
f Y
XS3 t
- •tom N,�r, _
■ •E
t
Ow1
I F r v Y
In Hf,�}
t r U
J
f � 1
1 f
_ f
f I
f t
4J
J
Ks
S
AL
s"
Ln
•� 1 f
1 /
r
N XS 4
1. Ute'
t' t
t t ,
t ►i •
♦� rrO�: 1
XS 5
■
r
- Q
zt
90S
XS 7 .w
s
Proposed Conservation Easement XS 8 tt
Existing Wetlands t
Perennial Project Stream,'
P .
Intermittent Project Stream YY
Reach Breaks
p 01 t
t Non -project Streams F
Existing Cross Section rts°i'
Ditch
0 "p +
Existing Culvert
10' Contours
1"05
kt�W I L D L A N D S 0 200 400 800 Feet
ENGINEERING I I I I I I I I I t
Mr— .
g�5
9N5
MOEFr _:.
g55
Figure 2 Site Map
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site
Catawba River Basin (03050101)
Alexander County, NC

Reach 2
117 AC
UT1 A
14 AK
each 4A
86 AC
ti
Reach 4B
256 AC
INN .1,
0.
%
%
21:
P�
4'
.. SoO00000
Proposed Conservation Easement
_J UTIIA
Reach 1 A
Reach 1 B
Reach 2
Reach 4A
Project Watershed
Project Streams
Non -Project Streams
O Reach Break
WILD LAND S
VW E N G I N E E R I N G
I -P
0 500 1,000 Feet
I I I I I
'T"
Figure 3 Watershed Map
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site
Catawba River Basin (03050101)
Alexander County, NC
X5.,1
...................... .
. . . . . . . . . . .
X�v
it AA P,
Reach 1
4.1
32 AC
Reach 2
117 AC
UT1 A
14 AK
each 4A
86 AC
ti
Reach 4B
256 AC
INN .1,
0.
%
%
21:
P�
4'
.. SoO00000
Proposed Conservation Easement
_J UTIIA
Reach 1 A
Reach 1 B
Reach 2
Reach 4A
Project Watershed
Project Streams
Non -Project Streams
O Reach Break
WILD LAND S
VW E N G I N E E R I N G
I -P
0 500 1,000 Feet
I I I I I
'T"
Figure 3 Watershed Map
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site
Catawba River Basin (03050101)
Alexander County, NC
...................... .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............. .....
X�v
Reach 1
32 AC
Reach 1 B
71 AC
TL
Reach 2
117 AC
UT1 A
14 AK
each 4A
86 AC
ti
Reach 4B
256 AC
INN .1,
0.
%
%
21:
P�
4'
.. SoO00000
Proposed Conservation Easement
_J UTIIA
Reach 1 A
Reach 1 B
Reach 2
Reach 4A
Project Watershed
Project Streams
Non -Project Streams
O Reach Break
WILD LAND S
VW E N G I N E E R I N G
I -P
0 500 1,000 Feet
I I I I I
'T"
Figure 3 Watershed Map
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site
Catawba River Basin (03050101)
Alexander County, NC

Proposed Conservation Easement
rim Project Location
10
do
I • ,1 $sn '�■moi,.
1
r cyJ 1 1
{
Ste: '¢off +" � j �'' � � ♦ r -' �__: - \ �j1 ` _�
dr ce
010
Stony Point USGS 7.5 minute Topographic Quadrangle
Vq WILDLANDS
E N G I N E E R I N 0
Figure 4 USGS Topographic Map
0 1,000 2,000 Feet Alexander Farm Mitigation Site
I I I I I Catawba River Basin (03050101)
Alexander County, NC

Proposed Conservation Easement
Q Project Location
-11 CoA - Codorus loam, 0 to 2% slopes, frequently flooded
DaA - Dan River and Comus soils, 0 to 4% slopes, occasionally flooded
FcD2 - Fairview sandy loam, 15 to 25% slopes
RdE - Rhodhiss sandy loam, 25 to 45% slopes
Ya B2 - Yadkin clay loam, 8 to 15% slopes, moderately eroded
lot
ea
oT M1 _ Project Streams
Non -Project Streams
e i
1:
w �
\ e
4 �
1 �
1 \
t t
# #
l
1 }
4 �
\ Fc D2
\ 1 1
i #
\
r i
S �
1 f
1 }
} M1
M1 i
t M1
1 � �
i A
WTL.DI.ANDS
ENGINEERING
s
#
s
}
#
#
#1
\
t � #
F \ FY 21
CO
r
� r
a ,
.i
S �
k � �
� s
'RdE q ' •
.paA.
j . t
• q-
�aa
2*
0 250 500 1,000 Fe
I I I
Figure 5 Soils Map
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site
Catawba River Basin (03050101)
Alexander County, NC

Elk
O -V

Project Location
OReference Reach
= County Boundaries
Greene
r %” F€allldn
'6'^�^d St1 In S.tGn
f Gray sort, Galax an --
011 pi v e,
Irl -.I •V a VIkGINIA [ lu, ld " Q�
l lt�gsport --
F'r ppolf
1' Irl NOIRTII-Aft-:�Ll!..� ----------- VIRGINIA
Sal Ir, an \ ---- I---------------
ee
Al 9 / NORTH CAROLINA
So ore
n -. •-,i � `� % I � I � Nyco saPFo
Lake Sdts
L
P,±�,1_hingham I I
PEr54n
I
Timber Tributary
Agony Acres U I I
National
Forest i A I-------------------- - — — - — -
Spartanburg
v I A r
GrLenville 1 1-4 Hill
Flrllll_Inl /\
Greenville
SparPank,urq I
WILD LAND S
ENGINEERING
Figure 7 Reference Reach Vicinity Map
0 15 30 Miles Alexander Farm Mitigation Site
I I I I I Catawba River Basin (03050101)
Alexander County, NC
Sapor Sdtsa
\
Burlington I
-Vinston-
i oro
41
��------------;--
�
Salem
� -
-
Adamance
t_
Alexander Farm
�
rur I
�
Lenoir
i
Ir - 1
I
/
UT to Varnals Creek
_— —
Branch � ��-1-
UT to Kelly1019
/ /
`� �
I
I
/
1
/
Z
l l`-I'I
z
to Austin Branch US
j
Asheboro
%
1
r,
South
1
,'UT
�. ►�1cuntvin
c.V
-
I
/
f
1 3, II
-----
_ s �
UT to Lyle Creek
l -------------
-- --- -
— -—
,, ��
w �-`,.-i, �
_
i Z�
I 1
'
— -�
Z
------- �I
1
� �
Shining
`_•,Irl _•i1
---------------------
��
Concord
Vit r
Box Creek
Walker Branch
Catrarrus
�
�`ti
�^
Rackyoy"y
;
Albemalli
%
P��Ih
j
r/
j
faun 0 �nM r
�
Gasta�a
St 3-11
'
:
1-k0arriie I
Charlotte
National Z
1 r
c --- — —
!
-
J stem
.h„_.r,.t
Spartanburg
v I A r
GrLenville 1 1-4 Hill
Flrllll_Inl /\
Greenville
SparPank,urq I
WILD LAND S
ENGINEERING
Figure 7 Reference Reach Vicinity Map
0 15 30 Miles Alexander Farm Mitigation Site
I I I I I Catawba River Basin (03050101)
Alexander County, NC

10000
1000
w
d
100
0
10
0.01
0.10
♦ Selected Design Discharges
— Rural Lower and Upper 95% Limit
X Selected Reference Reaches for Curve - C Type
1.00
Drainage Area (square miles)
— Power (Rural Data)
Power (Selected Reference Reaches for Curve - C Type)
Rural Data
10.00
Selected Reference Reaches for Curve - B Type
Alan Walker Curve
100.00
Power (Selected Reference Reaches for Curve - B Type)
Power (Alan Walker Curve)
Figure 8
Design Discharge Analysis
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site
Catawba River Basin (03050101)
Alexander County, NC

Figure 9 Concept Design Map
WI LIQ LANDS 0 400 800 Feet Alexander Farm Mitigation Site
E N G I N E E R I N G I i I i I Catawba River Basin (03050101)
Alexander County, NC

MR
1
Project Location
Proposed Conservation Easement
Shaded Riparian Planting
Open Riparian Planting
[--' Existing Wetlands
Permanent Vegetation Plot
0 Mobile Vegetation Plot
Proposed Crossing
Stream Restoration
Stream Enhancement II
Stream Preservation
Stormwater BMP
Reach Breaks
Proposed Cross-section
M Proposed Stream Gauge
W I L D L! A N D S 0 400 800 Feet
ENGINEERING I I I I I
REA6H 4B
Figure 10 Monitoring Components Map
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site
Catawba River Basin (03050101)
Alexander County, NC

APPENDIX 1
Historic Aerial Photos

r•. j y.or
0 .
M
f,+�:, = r �. y' v ��'7 ��� :fill f�� •i _=, tf• -> -
call" � r A+•t _-' .� r �,'
i I'�` ' 1r� R I ' `�� .� r ' - f � ,�;'� .� �T /,`r•• � � ./ tri. j� �;� f
ale.}��, ytrlF
•as / r4"y F , c rr. 7
+• �, n � .�'%• - •f -f S�}� .'ljr- s r. -�'r"� i'.�✓' .`r � I''_t f'' - .rr •a _
INQUIRY #: 5042160.5 `�pJ� /►� N
YEAR: 2012
= EpFi
500'
wc
�jcr ,SCJ al"'`,,► ! � � ,�(s•fi � f '-tt ! �s_ l�}y, Y'�'.
Ar r�,.f., it t�^i �r�. l'r ,. % P � � �'.�r' •T � f r,� -
Y
ap

F
Az
-Adam".

k
INQUIRY #: 5042160.5 1 N
YEAR: 2012 - reEDR
500' It
fY?

P#r-
j7

4
r 45V
ot
'r
s
�f
W
ot

a
INQUIRY #: 5042160.5 1 N
YEAR: 2010 - reEDR
500' It
1�1

1ry
Q-4
I A, 2, P—
.. w .: '
'A'l' r . r R4M E Wt, I
W
JI 4
, 4,
Jb
FV
if K,
')AA
V.
All
1Y,
INQUIRY #: 5042160.5
YEAR:2009 1 N dW w S, lo iJ . - 'v• r+ j }
—reIL
500' EDR k
2C

i .r.�'
�. $
r � 1' !r �ry �'��. 'ice' ��.f' �' r'-
x 1
F
�.
r
f�
r
r
ice: r�}'7�3,it�a'liR�,'
. �, i
M - .,� .' _
," '�
3 �..,_

-I
1'f f
rk1
f
r,. r
�.%,`�_. •f��F�f�"�+tr'-,4'+�.t Tri;"
J
1
w
q
* 4, 1

INQUIRY #: 5042160.5 1 N
YEAR: 2008 - reEDR
500' It
,rl 11 t ..r
4C-
ef'
IF
INQUIRY #: 5042160.5 1 N
YEAR: 2008 - reEDR
500' It
,rl 11 t ..r
4C-

4
IIVQUERY #: 5042160.5
i
YPAP- )nnr

Lag
1.6

IL
'04
IiN. 'A
az
INQUIRY #: 5042160.5
YEAR: 2006
- reEDR
500' It-_- a A

.I
'C.� •�`�.,:}v }rev 1+�
si
Oki
•
LN
Clk
♦ 6
YA
ti
•
*0 dLAb
z,

a
xj
INQUIRYLU
it. wv�z
.0
.5 N
YEAR: 2005 -
i `
tr

4
I
ti-
INQUIRY #:5042160.5
1 N
YEAR: 1993
reEDR
500' It-_-
I
ti-
S.
vA I LO
777rrriii
*,
I
ti-

7 jam.. YVa 1• "r �Kf.'
i .t. .Y -.k- / � +�t'•.P T � vim'',
r .
P
•j t ni' � : fir,
S
rte:
H„b
INQUIRY #: 5042160.5
YEAR: 1993
= 500' EpR t.�py

m
m

I Y'
INQUIRY #: 5042160.5 `IpJ� /�, N
YEAR: 1984
= EpR
1000
Subject boundary not shown because it
exceeds image extent or image is not
georeferenced.

L
YEAR: 1976

it
ro"
wow—
. :.A
-AV
wow—
. :.A

-
t -=3 �• Iri ' e -
let
t.K
,� • •, � .lift** '
Nk
% C Subject boundary not shown because it
exceeds image extent or image i!
1
1
" �` � • - 1 � � !`• ". mow.
�' 1S} "t J F� ��•- WJE ...
r• �Y Jam,`. - aO_ ., l
11 i • . s
1

APPENDIX 2
Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id. 2018-00451 County: Alexander U.S.G.S. Quad: NC- Stony Point
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Requestor: Jennifer & Scott Combs, Pollv & Henry Van Hov
Address: 10 Court Square
Mocksville, NC 27028
Telephone Number: 704-332-7754 ext 108
Size (acres) 20.3 Nearest Town Stonv Point
Nearest Waterway Elk Shoals Creek River Basin Catawba
USGS HUC 03050101 Coordinates Latitude: 35.812060
Longitude: -81.120889
Location description: The site is located at/near 795 Elk Shoals Church Loot) Road, near Stonv Point, NC.
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
® There appear to be waters, including wetlands on the above described project area/property, that may be subject to Section 404
of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). The
waters, including wetlands have been delineated, and the delineation has been verified by the Corps to be sufficiently accurate
and reliable. The approximate boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map dated 7/3/2019. Therefore
this preliminary jurisdiction determination may be used in the permit evaluation process, including determining compensatory
mitigation. For purposes of computation of impacts, compensatory mitigation requirements, and other resource protection
measures, a permit decision made on the basis of a preliminary JD will treat all waters and wetlands that would be affected in any
way by the permitted activity on the site as if they are jurisdictional waters of the U.S. This preliminary determination is not an
appealable action under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 331). However, you may
request an approved JD, which is an appealable action, by contacting the Corps district for further instruction.
❑ There appear to be waters, including wetlands on the above described project area/property, that may be subject to Section 404
of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403).
However, since the waters, including wetlands have not been properly delineated, this preliminary jurisdiction determination
may not be used in the permit evaluation process. Without a verified wetland delineation, this preliminary determination is
merely an effective presumption of CWA/RHA jurisdiction over all of the waters, including wetlands at the project area, which
is not sufficiently accurate and reliable to support an enforceable permit decision. We recommend that you have the waters,
including wetlands on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland
delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that can be verified by the Corps.
B. Approved Determination
❑ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described project area/property subject to the permit
requirements of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403) and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for
a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ There are waters, including wetlandson the above described project area/property subject to the permit requirements of Section
404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ We recommend you have the waters, including wetlands on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be
able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that
can be verified by the Corps.
❑ The waters, including wetlands on your project area/property have been delineated and the delineation has been verified by
the Corps. The approximate boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map dated DATE. We strongly
suggest you have this delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be reviewed and verified by the Corps. Once

2018-00451
verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA jurisdiction on your property which, provided
there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years.
❑ The waters, including wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed by the
Corps Regulatory Official identified below onDATE. Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described project area/property which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA).
You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Morehead City, NC, at [phone] to determine their
requirements.
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US, including wetlands, without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). Placement of dredged or fill material, construction or
placement of structures, or work within navigable waters of the United States without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Sections 9 and/or 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 USC § 401 and/or 403). If you have any questions
regarding this determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact Amanda Jones at 828-271-7980 ext. 4225 or
amanda. iones(dusace.armv.mil.
C. Basis For Determination: See the preliminary jurisdictional determination form and maps (Figure 3)
dated 07/03/2019.
D. Remarks: This determination applies to the assessment area outlined on the attached maps and in
association with the development of a compensatory mitigation bank site known as Alexander Farm
Mitigation Site.
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the particular site
identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security
Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in USDA programs, you should request
a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in B.
above)
This correspondence constitutes an approved jurisdictional determination for the above described site. If you object to this
determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. Enclosed you will find a
Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and request for appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal this determination you
must submit a completed RFA form to the following address:
US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Attn: Jason Steele, Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW, Room IOM15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for appeal
under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP. Should you
decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by Not applicable.
**It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this correspondence.**
Corps Regulatory Official:
FUEMMELER.AMAND Digitally signed by
FUEMMELER.AMAN DAJON ES.1242835090
A.JONES.1242835090 Date: 2019.07.0313:19:55-04'00'
Date of JD: 07/03/2019 Expiration Date of JD: Not applicable

2018-00451
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we
continue to do so, please complete the Customer Satisfaction Survey located at
http://corpsmapu.usace.anny.mil/cm_apex/Vp=136:4:0
Copy furnished:
Agent: Wildlands Engineering
Ian Eckardt
Address: 1430 S. Mint Street, Suite 104
Charlotte, NC 28203
Telephone Number: 704-332-7754
E-mail: ieckardtnwildlandseng.com

NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: Jennifer & Scott Combs, Polly & Henry Van
File Number: 2018-00451
Date: 07/03/2019
Hov, Ian Eckardt
Attached is: See Section below
❑ INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT Standard Permit or Letter ofpermission) A
❑ PROFFERED PERMIT Standard Permit or Letter ofpermission B
❑ PERMIT DENIAL C
❑ APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION D
® PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION E
SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision.
Additional information may be found at or http://www.usace.gM.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/Res4ulatoiyPros4ramandPennits.aspx
or the Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331.
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all
rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the
permit.
• OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request
that the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district
engineer. Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will
forfeit your right to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your
objections and may: (a) modify the permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your
objections, or (c) not modify the permit having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After
evaluating your objections, the district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in
Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all
rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the
permit.
• APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein,
you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of
this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days
of the date of this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by
completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division
engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or provide new
information.
• ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the
date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
• APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers
Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the district engineer. This form
must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.

E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps regarding the
preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved JD (which may be appealed),
by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may provide new information for further consideration by the
Corps to reevaluate the JD.
SECTION II - REQUEST FOR APPEA BJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an initial
proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons or
objections are addressed in the administrative record.)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum for the
record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to
clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record.
However, you may provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative
record.
POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION:
If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the
If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may
appeal process you may contact:
also contact:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division
Mr. Jason Steele, Administrative Appeal Review Officer
Attn: Amanda Jones
CESAD-PDO
Asheville Regulatory Office
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
U.S Army Corps of Engineers
60 Forsyth Street, Room 1OM15
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
Phone: [phone]
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government
consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15 day
notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportuni to participate in all site investi ations.
Date:
Telephone number:
Signature of appellant or agent.
For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits send this form to:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, Attn: Amanda Jones, 69 Darlington Avenue, Wilmington, North Carolina
28403
For Permit denials, Proffered Permits and Approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this form to:
Division Engineer, Commander, U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic, Attn: Mr. Jason Steele, Administrative Appeal
Officer, CESAD-PDO, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 1OM15, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]

PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD: 07/03/19
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: Wildlands Engineering Inc., Ian Eckardt, 1430 S. Mint
Street, Suite 104,Charlotte, NC 28203
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Wilmington District, Alexander Farms Mitigation Site
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The project is a stream mitigation project
which will provide in-kind mitigation for unavoidable stream impacts for the North Carolina Division of Mitigation
Services (NCDMS). The project is located on a parcel located at 795 Elk Shoals Church Loop Road, Stony Point, NC
27028.
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES AND/OR
AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: NC County: Alexander City: Stony Point
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Latitude: 35.812060 Longitude: -81.120889
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Elk Shoals Creek
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
® Field Determination. Date(s): 9/27/18 - 9/28/18, 12/6/18 - 12/8/18, & 12/20/18
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES INREVIEW AREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO REGULATORY
JURISDICTION.
Estimated amount of
Geographic authority to
Type of aquatic
Latitude (decimal
Longitude
aquatic resources in
resources (i.e.,
which the aquatic resource
Site Number
review area (acreage
'may be" subject (i.e.,
degrees)
(decimal degrees)
wetland vs. non -
and linear feet, if
wetland waters)
Section 404 or Section
applicable
10/404)
non -wetland
1.) UT1
35.818249
-81.122099
6,805
Section 404
waters
non -wetland
2.) UT1A
35.808313
-81.119009
153
Section 404
waters
3.) Wetland A
35.816602
-81.121834
0.01
wetland waters
Section 404
4.) Wetland B
35.816505
-81.121763
0.01
wetland waters
Section 404
5.) Wetland C
35.816064
-81.121967
0.01
wetland waters
Section 404
6.) Wetland D
35.815883
-81.121777
0.18
wetland waters
Section 404
7.) Wetland E
35.815474
-81.121383
0.36
wetland waters
Section 404
8.) Wetland F
35.814481
-81.121317
0.02
wetland waters
Section 404

9.) Wetland G
35.814280
-81.121440
0.01
wetland waters
Section 404
10.) Wetland H
35.814095
-81.121403
0.01
wetland waters
Section 404
11.) Wetland 1
35.813684
-81.121401
0.05
wetland waters
Section 404
12.) Wetland 1
35.812771
-81.121288
0.62
wetland waters
Section 404
13.) Wetland K
35.810888
-81.120254
0.01
wetland waters
Section 404
14.) Wetland L
35.810610
-81.120401
0.02
wetland waters
Section 404
15.) Wetland M
35.810133
-81.120062
0.01
wetland waters
Section 404
16.) Wetland N
35.809634
-81.120210
0.25
wetland waters
Section 404
17.) Wetland O
35.808549
-81.118955
0.01
wetland waters
Section 404
18.) Wetland P
35.808581
-81.119351
0.06
wetland waters
Section 404
19.) Wetland Q
35.807763
-81.118693
0.02
wetland waters
Section 404
20.) Wetland R
35.806172
-81.116267
0.05
wetland waters
Section 404

1) The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review
area, and the requestor of this PJD is hereby advised of his or her option to request and obtain an
approved JD (AID) for that review area based on an informed decision after having discussed the
various types of JDs and their characteristics and circumstances when they may be appropriate.
2) In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or a Nationwide General
Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring "pre- construction notification" (PCN), or
requests verification for a non -reporting NWP or other general permit, and the permit applicant has
not requested an AID for the activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware that: (1) the permit
applicant has elected to seek a permit authorization based on a PJD, which does not make an official
determination of jurisdictional aquatic resources; (2) the applicant has the option to request an AID
before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit authorization, and that basing a permit
authorization on an AID could possibly result in less compensatory mitigation being required or
different special conditions; (3) the applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than
accepting the terms and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4) the applicant
can accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply with all the terms and conditions of that
permit, including whatever mitigation requirements the Corps has determined to be necessary; (5)
undertaking any activity in reliance upon the subject permit authorization without requesting an AID
constitutes the applicant's acceptance of the use of the PJD; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g.,
signing a proffered individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps
permit authorization based on a PJD constitutes agreement that all aquatic resources in the review area
affected in any way by that activity will be treated as jurisdictional, and waives any challenge to such
jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance or enforcement action, or in any
administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7) whether the applicant elects to use either an AID
or a PJD, the JD will be processed as soon as practicable. Further, an AID, a proffered individual
permit (and all terms and conditions contained therein), or individual permit denial can be
administratively appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331. If, during an administrative appeal, it
becomes appropriate to make an official determination whether geographic jurisdiction exists over
aquatic resources in the review area, or to provide an official delineation of jurisdictional aquatic
resources in the review area, the Corps will provide an AID to accomplish that result, as soon as is
practicable. This PJD finds that there "may be" waters of the U.S. and/or that there "may be"
navigable waters of the U.S. on the subject review area, and identifies all aquatic features in the
review area that could be affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information:

SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply)
Checked items should be included in subject file. Appropriately reference sources below where
indicated for all checked items:
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor:
Map: GIS figures including Vicinity, USGS Topographic, Delineation, & Soils.
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor.
❑ Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Rationale:
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: 1:24,000 Scale, Stony Point Quad.
® Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Alexander County Soil Survey.
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs: ®Aerial (Name & Date): 2014 aerial photography Figures 3 - 4
or ®Other (Name & Date): Representative site photos.
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Other information (please specify):
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily been
verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for later jurisdictional determinations.
Signature and date of Regulatory
staff member completing PJD
Signature and date of person requesting PJD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining the signature is
impracticable) t
1 Districts may establish timeframes for requester to return signed PJD forms. If the requester does not respond within the
established time frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is necessary prior to finalizing an
action.

Figure 3: Delineation Map (Overall)
WI LD L1AN D S 0 400 800 Feet Alexander Farm Mitigation Site
E N G I N E E R I N G I i I i I Catawba River Basin (03050101
Alexander County, NC
07/03/19

I 'r
%
I
(0 .01
h
b
(0.01
, w �
#, }k rfi.
t 4 p
Project Parcel �?!+
Assessment Areas
- Potential Wetland Waters
Potential Non -Wetland Waters (Perennial)
Potential Non -Wetland Waters (Intermittent)
o Stream Classification Points (SCP#) 01�
0 Wetland/Upland Data Points (DP#) t
wkv W I L D L A N D S 0 200 Feet
ENGINEERING I I I
Figure 3.1: Delineation Map
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site
Catawba River Basin (03050101
Alexander County, NC
07/03/19

r
7CA
inIII
(0.05 AC)
Project Parcel
Assessment Area. `
y - Potential Wetland Waters
Potential Non -Wetland Waters (Perennial) •.
Ic .
Potential Non -Wetland Waters (Intermittent)
O Stream Classification Points (SCP#) ; a
O Wetland/Upland Data Points (DP#) .
WILDLANDS
0 200 Feet
ENGINEERING I I I
Z-
Figure 3.2: Delineation Map
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site
Catawba River Basin (03050101
Alexander County, NC
07/03/19

Figure 3.3: Delineation Map
WI LD L1AN D S 0 200 Feet Alexander Farm Mitigation Site
EN GI N EER 1 NG I i I Catawba River Basin (03050101
Alexander County, NC
07/03/19

WILDLANDS
% &* ENGINEERING
Figure 3.4: Delineation Map
300 Feet Alexander Farm Mitigation Site
I i I Catawba River Basin (03050101
Alexander County, NC
07/03/19

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Requirement Control Symbol
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region EXEMPT
(Authority: AR 335-15,
See ERDC/EL TR -07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: Alexander Farm Mitigation Site City/County: Stony Point/Alexander Sampling Date: 9/27/18
Applicant/Owner: Wildlands Engineering State: NC Sampling Point: W.t.1d1A a c-oP
Investigator(s): I. Eckardt Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): none Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.816602 Long: -81.121834 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Fairview sandy loam, 15-25% slopes NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation X Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No X
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Natural vegetative composition has been altered by cattle grazing.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
—Surface Soil Cracks (136)
X Surface Water (Al) —True
Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) —Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (Cl)
X Drainage Patterns (1310)
—Saturation (A3) —Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
—Moss Trim Lines (1316)
—Water Marks (131) —Presence
of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
—Sediment Deposits (132) —Recent
Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
—Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (134) —Other
(Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
X Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
X FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 1
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 4
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: Wetlands A, B,C-DP1
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
Absolute Dominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1.
Number of Dominant Species
2.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A)
3.
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Species Across All Strata: 1 (B)
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100.0° (A/B)
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
=Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
OBL species 20 x 1 = 20
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species 5 x 2 = 10
1.
FAC species 5 x 3 = 15
2.
FACU species 0 x 4 = 0
3.
UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
4.
Column Totals: 30 (A) 45 (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 1.50
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
X 3 - Prevalence Index is !-3.0'
=Total Cover
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
-Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1. Murdannia keisak
20 Yes
OBL
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2. Microstegium vimineum
5 No
FAC
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3. Persicaria pensylvanica 5 No FACW
4.
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5.
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6
height.
7.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9
(1 m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
30 =Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover:
15 20% of total cover:
6
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
=Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: Mtl.IdSA a C -PP,
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
Redox Features
(inches)
Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Types Loc2
Texture Remarks
0-6
10YR 4/2 98
7.5YR 4/6 2 C PL/M
Sandy Prominent redox concentrations
6-14
10YR 5/4 85
5YR 5/8 15 C PL/M
Sandy
D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
—Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
—Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
—Sandy Mucky Mineral (Sl)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
X Sandy Redox (S5)
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
—Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Requirement Control symbol
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region EXEMPT
(Authority. AR 335-15,
See ERDC/EL TR -07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: Alexander Farm Mitigation Site City/County: Stony Point/Alexander Sampling Date: 9/27/18
Applicant/Owner: Wildlands Engineering State: NC Sampling Point: PP2-UP1.1dA B C
Investigator(s): I. Eckardt Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): hillside Local relief (concave, convex, none): none Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.816615 Long: -81.121721 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Fairview sandy loam 15-25% slopes NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation X Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No X
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No X Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
Native vegetation has been altered by cattle grazing. Upland sampling point is located on hillside to the east of UT1.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
—Surface Soil Cracks (136)
—Surface Water (Al) —True
Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) —Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (Cl)
—Drainage Patterns (1310)
—Saturation (A3) —Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
—Moss Trim Lines (1316)
—Water Marks (131) —Presence
of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
—Sediment Deposits (132) —Recent
Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
—Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (134) —Other
(Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
—Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes No X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
No hydrology indicators.
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: DP2-Upland A,B,c
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
Absolute Dominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1. Liriodendron tulipifera
35 Yes
FACU
Number of Dominant Species
2.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 (A)
3.
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Species Across All Strata: 4 (B)
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0.0% (A/B)
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
35 =Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
18 20% of total cover:
7
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Saplinq/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species 0 x 2 = 0
1. Ilex opaca
20 Yes
FACU
FAC species 0 x 3 = 0
2. Ligustrum sinense
5 Yes
FACU
FACU species 147 x 4 = 588
3.
UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
4.
Column Totals: 147 (A) 588 (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 4.00
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
- Dominance Test is >50%
9.
-2
3 - Prevalence Index is !-3.0'
25 =Total Cover
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
13 20% of total cover:
5
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
-Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1. Festuca rubra
80 Yes
FACU
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2. Trifolium repens
5 No
FACU
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3. Perilla frutescens 2 No FACU
4.
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5.
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6
height.
7.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9
(1 m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
87 =Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover:
44 20% of total cover:
18
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
=Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Present? Yes No X
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: DP2-Up1andA,e,c
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Types Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-3 10YR 3/4 100 Loamy/Clayey
3-14 10YR 5/8 100 Loamy/Clayey
D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
—Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
—Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
—Sandy Mucky Mineral (Sl)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
No hydric soil indicators.
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
—Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Requirement Control symbol
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region EXEMPT
(Authority. AR 335-15,
See ERDC/EL TR -07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: Alexander Farm Mitigation Site City/County: Stony Point/Alexander Sampling Date: 9/27/18
Applicant/Owner: Wildlands Engineering State: NC Sampling Point: DP3-WenaIdso-
Investigator(s): I. Eckardt Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Hillside Local relief (concave, convex, none): none Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.815883 Long: -81.121777 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Fairview sandy loam, 15-25% NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation X Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No X
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Sampling point is located in a hillside seep feature. Native vegetation has been altered by cattle grazing.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
—Surface Soil Cracks (136)
—Surface Water (Al) —True
Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) —Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (Cl)
—Drainage Patterns (1310)
X Saturation (A3) —Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
—Moss Trim Lines (1316)
—Water Marks (131) —Presence
of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
—Sediment Deposits (132) —Recent
Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
—Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (134) —Other
(Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
—Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
X Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 10
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1. Nyssa sylvatica
2. Liriodendron tulipifera
3. Acer rubrum
4.
5.
6.
7.
50% of total cover: 25
Saplinq/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 )
1. Ligustrum sinense
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
% Cover
Species?
Status
20
Yes
FAC
15
Yes
FACU
15
Yes
FAC
50
=Total Cover
10
20% of total cover:
10
10 Yes
10 =Total Cover
50% of total cover: 5 20% of total cover:
FACU
2
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
4
(A)
Total Number of Dominant
1. Murdannia keisak
40
Yes
OBL
2. Persicaria pensylvanica
15
Yes
FACW
3. Vernonia noveboracensis
5
No
FACW
4. Juncus effusus
10
No
FACW
5. Carex lurida
10
No
OBL
6.
FAC species 35 x 3 =
105
7.
FACU species 25 x 4 =
100
8.
0
Column Totals: 140 (A)
9.
(B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
2.25
10.
is
50% of total cover: 40
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
80 =Total Cover
20% of total cover: 16
=Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Sampling Point: DP3- Wetlands D -i
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
4
(A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
6
(B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
66.7°
(A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species 50 x 1 =
50
FACW species 30 x 2 =
60
FAC species 35 x 3 =
105
FACU species 25 x 4 =
100
UPL species 0 x 5 =
0
Column Totals: 140 (A)
315
(B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
2.25
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
X 3 - Prevalence Index is !-3.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
(1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: DP3-wenandsD-
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
Redox Features
(inches)
Color (moist)
%
Color (moist) % Types
Loc2
Texture Remarks
0-3
10YR 3/1
90
5YR 3/4 10 C
PL/M
Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
3-10
10YR 4/1
95
7.5YR 4/6 5 C
PL
Loamy/Clayey
10-14
5Y 4/1
90
7.5YR 4/6 10 C
PL/M
Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
—Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
—Stratified Layers (A5)
_2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
X Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
—Sandy Mucky Mineral (Sl)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
—Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Requirement Control symbol
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region EXEMPT
(Authority. AR 335-15,
See ERDC/EL TR -07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: Alexander Farm Mitigation Site City/County: Stony Point/Alexander Sampling Date: 9/27/18
Applicant/Owner: Wildlands Engineering State: NC Sampling Point: DPa-uPiando-
Investigator(s): I. Eckardt Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): hillside Local relief (concave, convex, none): none Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.815897 Long: -81.121664 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Fairview sandy loam, 15-25% slopes NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation X Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No X
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No X Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
Sampling point located on a dry hillside adjacent to Wetland D. The sampling point is located in a grazed pasture where vegetation has been altered
for agricultural purposes.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
—Surface Soil Cracks (136)
—Surface Water (Al) —True
Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) —Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (Cl)
—Drainage Patterns (1310)
—Saturation (A3) —Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
—Moss Trim Lines (1316)
—Water Marks (131) —Presence
of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
—Sediment Deposits (132) —Recent
Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
—Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (134) —Other
(Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
—Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes No X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
No hydrology indicators present.
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: DP4 - Upland D - i
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
Absolute Dominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1. Acer rubrum
25 Yes
FAC
Number of Dominant Species
2.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A)
3.
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Species Across All Strata: 3 (B)
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 33.3° (A/B)
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
25 =Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
13 20% of total cover:
5
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Saplinq/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species 0 x 2 = 0
1. Ligustrum sinense
35 Yes
FACU
FAC species 30 x 3 = 90
2.
FACU species 105 x 4 = 420
3.
UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
4.
Column Totals: 135 (A) 510 (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.78
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
3 - Prevalence Index is !-3.0'
35 =Total Cover
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
18 20% of total cover:
7
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
-Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1. Festuca rubra
70 Yes
FACU
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2. Verbesina alternifolia
5 No
FAC
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3.
4.
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5.
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6
height.
7.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9
(1 m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
75 =Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover:
38 20% of total cover:
15
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
=Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Present? Yes No X
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: DP4-UplandD-1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Types Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-5 10YR 3/6 100 Loamy/Clayey
5-14 7.5YR 4/6 100 Loamy/Clayey
D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
—Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
—Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
—Sandy Mucky Mineral (Sl)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
No hydric soil indicators.
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
—Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Requirement Control symbol
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region EXEMPT
(Authority. AR 335-15,
See ERDC/EL TR -07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: Alexander Farm Mitigation Site City/County: Stony Point/Alexander Sampling Date: 12/6/18
Applicant/Owner: Wildlands Engineering State: NC Sampling Point: wetland J-DP5
Investigator(s): C. Neaves Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): <2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.812771 Long: -81.121288 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Fairview sandy loam, 15-25% slopes NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation X Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No X
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Sampling point is located within a saturated floodplain immediately adjacent to UT1. The sampling point is located in a grazed pasture where
vegetation has been altered for agricultural purposes.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
—Surface Soil Cracks (136)
X Surface Water (Al) —True
Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
X High Water Table (A2) —Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (Cl)
—Drainage Patterns (1310)
X Saturation (A3) —Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
—Moss Trim Lines (1316)
—Water Marks (131) —Presence
of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
—Sediment Deposits (132) —Recent
Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
—Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (134) —Other
(Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
X Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
X FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 1
Water Table Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 0
Saturation Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 0
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
50% of total cover:
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
50% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
1. Juncus effusus
2. Carex lurida
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
50% of total cover: 25
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
% Cover Species? Status
_=Total Cover
20% of total cover:
=Total Cover
20% of total cover:
30 Yes FACW
20 Yes OBL
20% of total cover: 10
=Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Vegetation impacted by cattle grazing.
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018
Sampling Point: Wetland J - DP 5
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
2
(A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
2
(B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
100.0°
(A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species 20 x 1 =
20
FACW species 30 x 2 =
60
FAC species 0 x 3 =
0
FACU species 0 x 4 =
0
UPL species 0 x 5 =
0
Column Totals: 50 (A)
80
(B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
1.60
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
X 3 - Prevalence Index is !-3.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
(1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: Wetland J-DP5
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-2 10YR 4/2 100 Loamy/Clayey
2-12 10YR 4/1 90 10YR 5/6 10 C M Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
—Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
—Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
—Sandy Mucky Mineral (Sl)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
—Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Requirement Control symbol
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region EXEMPT
(Authority. AR 335-15,
See ERDC/EL TR -07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: Alexander Farm Mitigation Site City/County: Stony Point/Alexander Sampling Date: 12/8/18
Applicant/Owner: Wildlands Engineering State: NC Sampling Point: DP6- Upland J
Investigator(s): I. Eckardt Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): hillside Local relief (concave, convex, none): none Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.812588 Long: -81.120956 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Fairview sandy loam (FcD2) NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation X Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No X
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No X Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
Sampling point located on a dry hillside adjacent to Wetland J. The sampling point is located in a grazed pasture where vegetation has been altered
for agricultural purposes.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
—Surface Soil Cracks (136)
—Surface Water (Al) —True
Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) —Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (Cl)
—Drainage Patterns (1310)
—Saturation (A3) —Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
—Moss Trim Lines (1316)
—Water Marks (131) —Presence
of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
—Sediment Deposits (132) —Recent
Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
—Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (134) —Other
(Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
—Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes No X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
No wetland hydrology indicators present.
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: DP6 - Upland J
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
Absolute Dominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1
Number of Dominant Species
2.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 (A)
3.
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Species Across All Strata: 1 (B)
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0.0% (A/B)
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
=Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Saplinq/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species 0 x 2 = 0
1.
FAC species 0 x 3 = 0
2.
FACU species 97 x 4 = 388
3.
UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
4.
Column Totals: 97 (A) 388 (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 4.00
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
3 - Prevalence Index is !-3.0'
=Total Cover
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
-Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1. Festuca rubra
80 Yes
FACU
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2. Trifolium repens
15 No
FACU
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3. Solanum carolinense 2 No FACU
4.
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5.
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6
height.
7.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9
(1 m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
97 =Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover:
49 20% of total cover:
20
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
=Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Present? Yes No X
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: DP6-Upland J
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Types Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-3 7.5YR 3/4 100 Loamy/Clayey
3-14 5YR 4/6 100 Loamy/Clayey
D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
—Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
—Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
—Sandy Mucky Mineral (Sl)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
No hydric soil indicators.
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
—Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Requirement Control symbol
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region EXEMPT
(Authority. AR 335-15,
See ERDC/EL TR -07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: Alexander Farm Mitigation Site City/County: Stony Point/Alexander Sampling Date: 12/8/18
Applicant/Owner: Wildlands Engineering State: NC Sampling Point: DP7-W.t.1dK&L
Investigator(s): C. Neaves Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.810888 Long: -81.120254 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Fairview sandy loam, 15-25% slopes NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation X Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
The sampling point is located in a small saturated depression in the left floodplain of UT1. Natural conditions including a mature canopy and
saturation/ inudation appear to impede vegetation establishment.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
—Surface Soil Cracks (136)
X Surface Water (Al) _True
Aquatic Plants (1314)
X Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
X High Water Table (A2) —Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (Cl)
—Drainage Patterns (1310)
X Saturation (A3) —Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
—Moss Trim Lines (1316)
—Water Marks (131) —Presence
of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
—Sediment Deposits (132) —Recent
Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
—Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (134) —Other
(Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
—Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 0
Water Table Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 0
Saturation Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 0
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: DP7-Wetland K& L
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
The sampling point is located in a concave depression devoid vegetation. The area is located in a small depresssion near the toe of slope in the
floodplain of UT1. The area is located under a mature forested canopy that exhibits saturated hydrology which may impede the establishment of
vegetation. No vegetation presesnt within wetland boundary during the winter delineation.
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover Species? Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1.
Number of Dominant Species
2.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
3.
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Species Across All Strata: (B)
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
=Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species x 2 =
1.
FAC species x 3 =
2.
FACU species x 4 =
3.
UPL species x 5 =
4.
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
- Dominance Test is >50%
9.
-2
3 - Prevalence Index is !-3.0'
=Total Cover
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
X Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2.
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3.
4.
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5.
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6
height.
7.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9
(1 m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
=Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
=Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
The sampling point is located in a concave depression devoid vegetation. The area is located in a small depresssion near the toe of slope in the
floodplain of UT1. The area is located under a mature forested canopy that exhibits saturated hydrology which may impede the establishment of
vegetation. No vegetation presesnt within wetland boundary during the winter delineation.
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: DP7-wenaneK&L
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Types Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-12 10YR 4/1 96 10YR 5/6 4 C M Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
—Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
—Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
—Sandy Mucky Mineral (Sl)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
—Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Requirement Control symbol
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region EXEMPT
(Authority. AR 335-15,
See ERDC/EL TR -07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: Alexander Farm Mitigation Site City/County: Stony Point/Alexander Sampling Date: 12/8/18
Applicant/Owner: Wildlands Engineering State: NC Sampling Point: DP9-UplandK&L
Investigator(s): C. Neaves Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 2%
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.810994 Long: -81.120250 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Fairview sandy loam, 15-25% slopes NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No X Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
Sampling point is located in the left floodplain of UT1 adjacent to Wetland K. The sampling point is within a relatively undisturbed forest.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
—Surface Soil Cracks (136)
—Surface Water (Al) _True
Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) —Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (Cl)
—Drainage Patterns (1310)
—Saturation (A3) —Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
—Moss Trim Lines (1316)
—Water Marks (131) —Presence
of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
—Sediment Deposits (132) —Recent
Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
—Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (134) —Other
(Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
—Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes No X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
No hydrology indicators.
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: DP9- Upland K&L
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
Absolute Dominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1. Fagus grandifolia
35 Yes
FACU
Number of Dominant Species
2. Liriodendron tulipifera
25 Yes
FACU
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A)
3. Acer rubrum
35 Yes
FAC
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Species Across All Strata: 5 (B)
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 20.0° (A/B)
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
95 =Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
48 20% of total cover:
19
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species 0 x 2 = 0
1. Ilex opaca
5 Yes
FACU
FAC species 37 x 3 = 111
2. Fagus grandifolia
5 Yes
FACU
FACU species 70 x 4 = 280
3.
UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
4.
Column Totals: 107 (A) 391 (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.65
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
- Dominance Test is >50%
9.
-2
3 - Prevalence Index is !-3.0'
10 =Total Cover
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
5 20% of total cover:
2
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
-Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2.
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3.
4.
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5.
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6
height.
7.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9
(1 m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
=Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1. Smilax rotundifolia
2 No
FAC
2.
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
2 =Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
1 20% of total cover:
1
Present? Yes No X
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: DP9-upland K&L
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Types Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-4 5YR 4/3 100 Loamy/Clayey
4-12 2.5YR 4/8 100 Loamy/Clayey
D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
—Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
—Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
—Sandy Mucky Mineral (Sl)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
No hydric soil indicators.
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
—Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Requirement Control symbol
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region EXEMPT
(Authority. AR 335-15,
See ERDC/EL TR -07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: Alexander Farm Mitigation Site City/County: Stony Point/Alexander Sampling Date: 12/8/18
Applicant/Owner: Wildlands Engineering State: NC Sampling Point: QP9-wet1andN-Q
Investigator(s): C. Neaves Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.809634 Long: -81.120210 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Codorus loam, 0-2% slopes NWI classification: NAD 83
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation X Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No X
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
The sampling point is located in the right floodplain of UT1 in the lower half of the project. The sampling point is located in a grazed pasture where
vegetation has been altered for agricultural purposes.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
—Surface Soil Cracks (136)
—Surface Water (Al) —True
Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) —Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (Cl)
—Drainage Patterns (1310)
X Saturation (A3) X
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
—Moss Trim Lines (1316)
—Water Marks (131) —Presence
of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
—Sediment Deposits (132) —Recent
Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
—Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (134) —Other
(Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
—Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
X FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 0
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: DP9-wet1andN-Q
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Unable to identify the remaining 50 percent of herbacous cover due to the time of year. Area is within a grazed pasture with altered vegetation
dominated by herbaceous species.
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
Absolute Dominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1
Number of Dominant Species
2.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A)
3.
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Species Across All Strata: 2 (B)
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100.0° (A/B)
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
=Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species 25 x 2 = 50
1.
FAC species 25 x 3 = 75
2.
FACU species 0 x 4 = 0
3.
UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
4.
Column Totals: 50 (A) 125 (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.50
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
X 3 - Prevalence Index is !-3.0'
=Total Cover
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
X Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1. Vernonia noveboracensis
25 Yes
FACW
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2. Microstegium vimineum
25 Yes
FAC
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3.
4.
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5.
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6
height.
7.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9
(1 m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
50 =Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover:
25 20% of total cover:
10
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
=Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Unable to identify the remaining 50 percent of herbacous cover due to the time of year. Area is within a grazed pasture with altered vegetation
dominated by herbaceous species.
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: DP9-wetlandN-Q
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
Redox Features
(inches)
Color (moist)
%
Color (moist) % Types
Loc2
Texture Remarks
0-2
10YR 5/2
80
10YR 5/8 20 C
PL
Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
2-6
10YR 5/1
85
10YR 5/8 15 C
PL
Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
6-12
10YR 4/1
90
10YR 2/1 10 C
PL
Loamy/Clayey Manganese Concentrations
D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
—Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
—Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
—Sandy Mucky Mineral (Sl)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
—Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Requirement Control symbol
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region EXEMPT
(Authority. AR 335-15,
See ERDC/EL TR -07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: Alexander Farm Mitigation Site City/County: Stony Point/Alexander Sampling Date: 12/8/18
Applicant/Owner: Wildlands Engineering State: NC Sampling Point: DP10-uplandN
Investigator(s): C. Neaves Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 1
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.809971 Long: -81.120180 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Codorus loam, 0-2% slopes NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation X Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No X
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No X Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
The sampling point is located in the right floodplain of UT1 in the lower half of the project. The sampling point is located in a grazed pasture where
vegetation has been altered for agricultural purposes. Unable to identify approximately 50 percent of vegetation at sampling location due to time of
year.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
—Surface Soil Cracks (136)
—Surface Water (Al) —True
Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) —Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (Cl)
—Drainage Patterns (1310)
—Saturation (A3) —Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
—Moss Trim Lines (1316)
—Water Marks (131) —Presence
of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
—Sediment Deposits (132) —Recent
Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
—Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (134) —Other
(Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
—Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes No X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
No hydrology indicators.
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
50% of total cover:
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
50% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
1. Solidago
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
50% of total cover: 25
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Sampling Point: DP10 - Upland N
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Total % Cover of:
% Cover Species? Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
OBL species 0
Number of Dominant Species
0
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 (A)
FACW species 0
Total Number of Dominant
0
Species Across All Strata: 1 (B)
FAC species 0
Percent of Dominant Species
0
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0.0% (A/B)
50
_=Total Cover
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
20% of total cover:
OBL species 0
x 1 =
0
FACW species 0
x 2 =
0
_
FAC species 0
x 3 =
0
_
FACU species 0
x 4 =
0
_
UPL species 0
x 5 =
0
_
Column Totals: 0
(A)
0 (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
_=Total Cover
20% of total cover:
Yes
20% of total cover: 10
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
-2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is !-3.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
(1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
=Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover: I Present? Yes No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Unable to identify approximately 50 percent of the vegetation due to dormant season at time of observation. Area is in a grazing pasture dominated
by herbaceous vegetation.
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: DP10- Upland N
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Types Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-2 10YR 2/2 100 Loamy/Clayey
2-12 10YR 5/3 80 7.5YR 5/8 20 C M Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
—Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
—Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
—Sandy Mucky Mineral (Sl)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
—Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
Local relief is concave, but does not appear to pond water therefore failing to meet indicator F8
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Requirement Control symbol
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region EXEMPT
(Authority. AR 335-15,
See ERDC/EL TR -07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: Alexander Farm Mitigation Site City/County: Stony Point/Alexander Sampling Date: 12/8/18
Applicant/Owner: Wildlands Engineering State: NC Sampling Point: DP„-wetlandR
Investigator(s): C. Neaves Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.806172 Long: -81.116267 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Dan River and Comus soils, 04% slopes NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation X Soil X or Hydrology X significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No X
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Ditch within grazed pasture constructed to drain off-site wetland to UT1.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
—Surface Soil Cracks (136)
X Surface Water (Al) _True
Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
X High Water Table (A2) —Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (Cl)
—Drainage Patterns (1310)
X Saturation (A3) X
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
—Moss Trim Lines (1316)
—Water Marks (131) —Presence
of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
—Sediment Deposits (132) —Recent
Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
—Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (134) —Other
(Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
—Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
X FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 0
Water Table Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 0
Saturation Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 0
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: DP11 -wetland R
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
Absolute Dominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1
Number of Dominant Species
2.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A)
3.
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Species Across All Strata: 1 (B)
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100.0° (A/B)
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
=Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
OBL species 95 x 1 = 95
Saplinq/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species 5 x 2 = 10
1.
FAC species 0 x 3 = 0
2.
FACU species 0 x 4 = 0
3.
UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
4.
Column Totals: 100 (A) 105 (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 1.05
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
X 3 - Prevalence Index is !-3.0'
=Total Cover
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
-Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1. Carex lurida
95 Yes
OBL
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2. Vernonia noveboracensis
5 No
FACW
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3.
4.
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5.
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6
height.
7.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9
(1 m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
100 =Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover:
50 20% of total cover:
20
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
=Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: DP11-Wetland R
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Types Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-12 10YR 5/1 85 7.5YR 5/6 15 C PL Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
—Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
—Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
—Sandy Mucky Mineral (Sl)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
—Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Requirement Control symbol
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region EXEMPT
(Authority. AR 335-15,
See ERDC/EL TR -07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: Alexander Farm Mitigation Site City/County: Stony Point/Alexander Sampling Date: 12/8/18
Applicant/Owner: Wildlands Engineering State: NC Sampling Point: DP12-uplandR
Investigator(s): I. Eckardt Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): hillside Local relief (concave, convex, none): none Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.805638 Long: -81.162180 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Dan River and Comus soils, 04% slopes NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation X Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No X
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No X Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
Sampling point located within the left floodplain of UT1 near the downstream limits of the assessment area. The sampling point is located in a grazed
pasture where vegetation has been altered for agricultural purposes.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
—Surface Soil Cracks (136)
—Surface Water (Al) —True
Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) —Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (Cl)
—Drainage Patterns (1310)
—Saturation (A3) —Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
—Moss Trim Lines (1316)
—Water Marks (131) —Presence
of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
—Sediment Deposits (132) —Recent
Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
—Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (134) —Other
(Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
—Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes No X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
No wetland hydrology indicators present.
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: DP12 - Upland R
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
Absolute Dominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1
Number of Dominant Species
2.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 (A)
3.
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Species Across All Strata: 1 (B)
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0.0% (A/B)
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
=Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species 0 x 2 = 0
1.
FAC species 0 x 3 = 0
2.
FACU species 100 x 4 = 400
3.
UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
4.
Column Totals: 100 (A) 400 (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 4.00
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
- Dominance Test is >50%
9.
-2
3 - Prevalence Index is !-3.0'
=Total Cover
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
-Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1. Festuca rubra
95 Yes
FACU
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2. Solanum carolinense
5 No
FACU
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3.
4.
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5.
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6
height.
7.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9
(1 m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
100 =Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover:
50 20% of total cover:
20
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
=Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Present? Yes No X
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: DP12- Upland R
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Types Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-5 7.5YR 3/4 100 Loamy/Clayey
5-14 5YR 4/6 100 Loamy/Clayey
D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
—Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
—Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
—Sandy Mucky Mineral (Sl)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
No hydrologic soil indicators.
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
—Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
ENG FORM 6116 -4 -SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

i
V
_ 1 r
I
i
wkv WILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
t 0
5 �
e rr` r a
�1
Existing Wetlands Map
0 400 800 Feet Alexander Farm Mitigation Site
I i I i I Catawba River Basin (03050101)
Alexander County, NC
V
_ 1 r
�, •i
1 ,
/
1
1
1 _ 1
1
1
1
/
- i
` Proposed Conservation Easement
+' ♦♦ ♦�
Project Location
ti
-Existing Wetlands
Perennial Project Stream
Intermittent Project Stream
1
Non -Project Streams
wkv WILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
t 0
5 �
e rr` r a
�1
Existing Wetlands Map
0 400 800 Feet Alexander Farm Mitigation Site
I i I i I Catawba River Basin (03050101)
Alexander County, NC

APPENDIX 3
DWR and NCSAM Stream Identification Forms

\t DWC) Strpnim frfpntifivrition-Form Vpreinn 1 1 I
Date: I / '.�/�
c
Pro ect/Site: A �i
J �ea� A,r c.trvr
I Latitude: 35, 8 19 2o 1 ON
Evaluator: `r+ �C.1f+�
County:A(uc,.. ��
Longitude: o
-ill. ia�o99
Total Points:
Stream is at le33t intermittent.
Stream Determination (c' ne
Ephemeral Intermitten
Other USI
ify t3 orpennnialif> 30`
Perennia
e.g. quad Name:
A_ ueomor nolo y (subtotal = fif •)
Absent
4`leak •
Moderate I
Strong
I"Continuity of channel bed.and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
p
1
01
3
3. In -channel structure: ex, riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool_ sequence
0
1
2
0
3
4. Particle sizz'of stream substrate
0
1
2
26. Weiland plants in streambed I
5. Activelrelict floodplain
0
1
3
6, Depositional -bars or'benches
0
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
Sketch:
Identification performed at upstream project limits of UT1 Reach
1
2
3 ,
8. Headcuts
I 0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
00.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
11. Second or greater order channel
o = 0
Yes ='3
ar'dncaal ditches are not rated; sea discussions in manual
R Hvrirnlnnv (Siihtntal = In 1
12. Presence of Basefloy'/
0 1
2
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria -
0 1
2- ( 3
14. Leaf litter ,
I' ('1' 1 I
0.5 ( 0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0 0.5
1 ( 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or plies
0 L CF5-)1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
i . nininnv (aunrnrai = x i
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 3
2 1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 3
2 1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 0Cl)
2 I
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
1 2
3
22. Fish
0.5 1
1.5
23. Crayfish T0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians 0
0,5 1
1.5
25. Algae • 0
0,5 I 1
1.5
26. Weiland plants in streambed I
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Qt6r = 0
a ore.
" 'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:
Identification performed at upstream project limits of UT1 Reach
1.

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: /a� I
Project/Site: Rl�.�r�^ ,r r'e� w,�s
Latitude: 35. 86e 39.3 W
Evaluator: ��
County: {��ejcan�e�
Longitude: 81, I+Qp�gpW
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent �5�
Stream Dete ination circle one)
Other UTI l�
3
EphemeralQ1,9termittent Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
If >_ 19 or perennial ff a 30"
2
3
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a' Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
sequence
02
(29
1
3
-ripple-pool
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
co
3
5. Active/relict floodplain 5 rA A\
0
0.5
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
00.2
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.
1
1.5
10. Natural valley l�k ', Toed 1.:,A
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
Sketch:
Identification performed at upstream project limits of UT1A.
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal = q.5 )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0 1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
2
3
14. Leaf, litter
1.5 1
O.A
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0 0.
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0 0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
0.5
(Yes= 3
C. Biolow (Subtotal= 4. ;L5 )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
.0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
00.2
0.
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1 1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed -5 ft.4w,A ;
(FAC
= 0.75. OBL = 1.5
Other = 0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: D ( .servos
Sketch:
Identification performed at upstream project limits of UT1A.

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
USACE AID #: NCDWR #
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5 -minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property,
identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for
detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes" section if supplementary measurements were
performed. See the NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): ,•. l f 7' 2. Date of evaluation: %
3. Applicant/owner name: i) j 'l. 4. Assessor namelorganization: M
5. County: `F.r C?_ r,r-q +_ f- 6. Nearest named water body
7. River basin: on USGS 7.5 -minute quad:
B. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): �! r 7L
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): 1,,f � ' '. ' r , 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 9U
j O
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): � - IJ ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): ` (� --Z C) 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? ❑Yes )ANo
14. Feature type:.Perennial flow []Intermittent flow Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑Mountains (M) 12ri-edmont (P) ❑Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic
valley shape (skip for ❑a 11 1
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less -sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ❑Size 1 (< 0.1 mit) []Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 miz) []Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 m12) []Size 4 (? 5 mit)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? [�es [:]No If Yes, check all thatapJ�y to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters 71ater Supply Watershed (❑I [III ❑111 E?(Iv ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area C3 High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicty owned property ❑NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
[]Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in 'Notes/Sketch" section or attached? rZYes []No
1. Channel Water - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
❑? Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2.Ev
ence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or7:bb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates; debris jams,
beaver dams)- -'
❑B Not A
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
_ET_ A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
❑B Not
4.lea re Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming,
over widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of
these disturbances).
❑B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability - assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
,E > 25% of channel unstable
vii

6. Streamside Area Interaction — streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
❑A ❑A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
❑B ❑B Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area,
leaky or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
❑C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplainfintertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision,
disruption of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples:
impoundments, intensive mosquito ditching]) or floodpiain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a
man-made feature on an interstream divide
7. Water Quality Stressors — assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
❑A • Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
❑B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
❑0 Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
❑E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in "Notes" section.
fl�l Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
❑G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
❑H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
❑I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
❑J Little to no stressors
S. Recent Weather — watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, 131 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a
drought.
❑A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑B _ Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
©C No drought conditions
9. Large or Dangerous Stream — assessment reach metric
❑Yes_;Dl�o Is stream too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types —assessment reach metric
10a. ❑Yes []No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs If > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
❑A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses ❑F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
_ (including liverworts, lichens, and algal mats),E, ❑G Submerged aquatic vegetation
-[j13 Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o ❑H Low -tide refugla (pools)
vegetation Y tC ❑I Sand bottom
_®i'_ Multiple snags and logs (including tap trees)t ❑J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
❑❑ 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots ❑K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
❑E Little or no habitat
****""***'*****"******�REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS***'*'*'`*'`""* **"** ***"
11. Bedform and Substrate —assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11a. []Yes �UNo Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11b. Bpdform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11 c)
,�QB Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
❑C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11c, In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach — whether or not submerged.
Check at least one box in each row. Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare (R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%,
Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) = > 70%. Cumulative percentages should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Bedrock/saprolite
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Boulder (256 — 4096 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Cobble (64 — 256 mm)
❑ '❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Gravel (2 — 64 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Sand (.062 — 2 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ Q ❑ Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
❑ [l ❑ ❑ ❑ 0etritus
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. t7Yes ❑No Are pools filled with sediment?
viii

�A 11 i1 i /n r .;
12. Aquatic Life — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. )]Yes ❑No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. ❑No Water [-]Other:
12b. =❑Yes ❑No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to 'individuals" for Size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa' for Size 3 and 4 streams.
❑ ❑Adult frogs
❑ ❑Aquatic reptiles
❑ ❑Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
❑ ❑Beetles (including water pennies)
❑ ❑Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera [T])
❑ ❑Asian clam (Corbicula)
❑ ❑Crustacean (isopodlamphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans (true flies)
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
❑ ❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ❑IVIdges/mosquito larvae
❑ ❑Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels1Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ ❑Other fish
❑ ❑Salamanders/tadpoles
❑ ❑Snails
❑ ❑Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera [P])
❑ ❑Tipulid larvae (Cranefiy)
❑ ❑Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and 8 valley types)__
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland
runoff.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑B ❑B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
11C _ ❑C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil
compaction, livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage — streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valleytyp s) .
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water t 6 inches deep
❑B ❑B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
❑C ❑C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
❑Y ❑Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
❑N _:ON
16. Baseflow Contributors — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
❑A Streams and/or springs {jurisdictional discharges)
❑B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
❑C Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods affecting assessment reach (ex: beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
'CD Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
❑E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
❑F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors — assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
❑A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
❑B Obstruction not passing flow during low -flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
❑C Urban stream (? 24% impervious surface forwatershed)
06 Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
❑E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
❑F None of the above
18. Shading —assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
❑A _ _ Stream shading is appropriate for the stream category (may Include gaps associated with natural processes)
_= ❑8 Degraded (example: scattered trees)
❑C Stream shading is gone or largely absent
ix

19, Buffer Width -- streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
[jA ❑A❑A ❑A a 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B From 50 to < 100 feet wide
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C From 30 to < 50 feet wide
❑D ❑D ❑D -❑D From 10 to < 30 feet wide
[]E ❑E ❑E ❑E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB
RB
❑A
❑A
Mature forest
❑B
❑B
Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
❑C
❑C
Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
❑D
❑D
Maintained shrubs
❑E
❑E
Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but
is within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22: ❑
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A Row crops
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B Maintained turf
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C Pasture (no livestock)fcommercial horticulture
�D ❑0 •❑D ❑D -,E]10 .❑D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density— streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
❑A ❑A Medium to high stem density
❑B ❑B Low stem density
❑C ❑C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.
LB RB
❑A ❑A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
❑B ❑B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
❑C ❑C The total length of buffer breaks is n 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — First 100 feet of streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
❑B ❑B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
❑C ❑C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity — assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ❑Yes ❑No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
❑A < 46 ❑B 46 to < 67 ❑C 67 to < 79 ❑D 79 to < 230 ❑E >_ 230
Notes/Sketch:
ov"elr
rC tJt W � t,,N
u offj-.Aj
—(r,IY'Cpov*+
— jYlo l-ep - (wt f
0hts' 1 —
L� VR
Ikkf S�

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM t. t
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
USACE AID #: NCDWR #
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5 -minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. if multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same prop",
identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for
detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the 'Notes" section if supplementary measurements were
performed. See the NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECTISITE INFORMATIOT
1. Project name (if any): /` Y 2. Date of evaluation:
3. Applicant/owner name: r-_ ! �� r 7l 4. Assessor namelorganization: ;� l , (,
5. County: 6. Nearest named water body
7. River basin:on USGS_7.5 minute quad: �` k `: 11 r`„
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 2 ) 7 i l co nn► . 12-1 .4449 -
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): ( 1- i , ('. ' ; r , , , 10. length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): % 1
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): _� - �' ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): l,- 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? ❑Yes:❑No
14. Feature type:; j3Perennial flow ❑Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑Mountains (M) , iedmont (P) Dinner Coastal Plain (1) ❑Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic L J
valley shape (skip for ❑a
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip SSize 1 (< 0.1 mi) ❑Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mix) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mix) []Size 4 (? 5 mix)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
1 B. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? Ev/'es ❑No If Yes, check all that a7ly to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters LdWater Supply Watershed (❑I ❑11 Dill �Iv ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑LAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section orattached? WYes ❑No
1. Channel Water- assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
❑Q Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
-❑13 Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
EIA A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
Not A
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
❑A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming,
over widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of
these disturbances),
❑B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability - assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability Include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap),
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
❑C ? 25% of channel unstable
VII

6. Streamside Area Interaction - streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
❑A ❑A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
❑B ❑B Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference Interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area,
leaky or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
tIG- [IC Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplainrntertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision,
disruption of flood flows through streamside area] or loo much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples:
impoundments, intensive mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a
man-made feature on an interstream divide
7. Water Quality Stressors - assessment reachlintertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
❑A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
El Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
❑D Odor (not Including natural sulfide odors)
❑E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in "Notes" section.
❑F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
❑G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
❑H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
❑I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
❑J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather - watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a
drought
❑A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
IDC No drought conditions
9. Large or Dangerous Stream - assessment reach metric
❑Yes . ❑No Is stream too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types - assessment reach metric
10a. ❑Yes ❑No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b, Check all that occur (occurs if> 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
❑A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses N ❑F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(including liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) ,a, ❑G Submerged aquatic vegetation
'`t]B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergento ❑H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation Y r 1-11 Sand bottom
❑C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) t ,e, ❑J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
❑D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots " ❑K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
❑E Little or no habitat
**'**'t************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****"`***"*****'********"*"*
11. Bedform and qubstrate - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11a. [--]Yes t]No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11b. $edform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
❑B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
❑C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach - whether or not submerged.
Check at least one box in each row. Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare (R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) = > 10-40%,
Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) = > 70%. Cumulative percentages should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP_ R C A P
n" ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Bedrock/saproiite
-0- ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Boulder (256 - 4096 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Cobble (64 - 256 mm)
❑ -❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Gravel (2 - 64 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ _0 ❑ Sand (.062 - 2 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ -0— ❑ Slit/clay (< 0.062 mm)
❑ _E1 ❑ ❑ ❑ Detritus
❑ Y _ E❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. -.❑Yes ❑No Are pools filled with sediment?
viii

12. Aquatic Life - assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. []Yes ❑No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. ❑No Water []Other.
12b. ❑Yes ❑No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to `individuals" for Size 1 and 2 streams and 'taxa" for Size 3 and 4 streams.
❑ ❑Adult frogs
❑ ❑Aquatic reptiles
❑ ❑Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
❑
[]Beetles (including water pennies)
❑ ❑Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera (T])
❑ ❑Asian clam (Corbicula)
❑ []Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfishlshrimp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans (true flies)
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
❑ ❑Megaioptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ 'E Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ ❑Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ ❑Other fish
❑ ❑ Salam anders/tadpoles
❑ ❑Snails
❑ ❑Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera (P))
❑ ❑Tipulid larvae (Cranefiy)
❑ ❑Worms/leeches
1 Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams an �valleyypes)Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to bothk flow and upland
runoff.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑B ❑B _-Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑C" ,[]C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil
/ compaction, livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
S4. Streamside Area Water Storage -streamside area metric (skip for Size 7 streaDTidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water a 6 Inches deep
❑B ❑B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
❑C ❑C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 Inches deep
15. Wetland Presence - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
❑Y ❑Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
❑N ❑N
16. Baseflow Contributors - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
❑A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
❑B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
❑C Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flaw periods affecting assessment reach (ex: beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
❑O_ Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water Indicates seepage)
�E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
❑F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors - assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
❑A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
El Obstruction not passing flow during Idw-Flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)'
❑C . Urban stream (Z 24% impervious surface for watershed)
❑D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
❑E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
❑F None of the above
18. Shading - assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
--❑A Stream shading is appropriate for the stream category (may Include gaps associated with natural processes)
❑B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
❑C Stream shading is gone or largely absent
ix

19. Buffer Width — steeamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RS) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RS
❑A ❑A ❑A dA ? 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B From 50 to < 100 feet wide
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C From 30 to < 50 feet wide
❑D ❑4 ❑D M From 10 to < 30 feet wide
❑E ❑E ❑E ❑E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB
RB
❑A
❑A
Mature forest
IB
❑B
Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
❑C
❑C
Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
❑D
❑D
Maintained shrubs
❑E
❑E
Little or no vegetation
21_ Buffer Stressors — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but
is within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
if none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22: ❑
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RS LB RS LB RB
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A Row crops
❑B ❑B 0 ❑B ❑B ❑B Maintained turf
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C Pasture (no lives tock)/commercial horticulture
CID ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RS
❑A ❑A Medium to high stem density
❑B ❑B Low stem density
❑C ❑C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer — strearnside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.
LB RB
❑A ❑A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent,
❑B ❑B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
❑C ❑C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — First 100 feet of streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RS
❑A ❑A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
❑B ❑B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing ar
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
❑C ❑C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity — ass sent reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ❑Yes -]No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
❑A < 46 ❑B 46 to < 67 ❑C 67 to < 79 ❑D 79 to < 230 ❑E z 230
Notes/Sketch:
— - 1
V
t(0o) V1()11

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
USACE AID #: NCDWR #
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs, Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5 -minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. if multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property,
identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for
detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes" section if supplementary measurements were
performed. See the NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECTISITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): -� , s 2. Date of evaluation: ! 1
3. Applicant/owner name: J l 7(:7 4, Assessor name/organization:
S. County: rk 6. Nearest named water body
7. River basin: (� ; .•� ,_ on USGS 7.5 -minute quad:
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower and of assessment reach): (depth de th and width can be approximations)
`� 12 �n '; ��•� Jam- 2'—
STREAM INFORMATION: a r -J
�
9. Site number (show on attached map): . ' ! -i 1 0_ 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): f 6d
11, Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): �2_— 1—t \ []Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? []Yes No
14. Feature type: Perennial flow ❑Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream ',``
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑Mountains (M) Piedmont (P) El inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic \.,�
valley shape (skip for ❑a -Ob--
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ❑Size 1 (< 0.1 mit) '❑Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 miZ) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 min) []Size 4 (? 5 miZ)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
16. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? Oyes ❑ No If Yes, check all thatap ly to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters Water Supply Watershed (❑I ❑11 ❑III 21V ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
[]Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(4) List ❑CAMAArea of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? MYes MNo
1. Channel Water — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
OX Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction — assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
❑B Not A
3. Feature Pattern — assessment reach metric
❑A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
❑13 Not A
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile —assessment reach metric
❑A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming,
over widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of
these disturbances).
❑B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability—assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap),
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
❑C > 25% of channel unstable
vii

6. Streamside Area Interaction — streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
❑A ❑A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
'G113 013 Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
— reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area,
leaky or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
❑C ❑C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplainlintertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision,
disruption of flood flows through streamside area] or too much ffoodplainlinterfidal zone access [examples:
impoundments, intensive mosquito ditching]) or floodplainlintertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a
man-made feature on an interstream divide
7. Water Quality Stressors — assessment reachlintertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
❑A - Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
❑B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
❑D Odor (not Including natural sulfide odors)
❑E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in "Notes' section.
Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
❑G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
❑H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidat zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
01 Other: (explain in 'Notes/Sketch" section)
❑J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather — watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a
drought.
❑A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
]C` No drought conditions
9. Large or Dangerous Stream — assessment reach metric
❑Yes ❑No is stream too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types — assessment reach metric
10a. ❑Yes ❑No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
❑A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses N ❑F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(including liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) ❑G Submerged aquatic vegetation
]� Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent ❑H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation .6 C ❑I Sand bottom
iQC Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees)t ❑J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
❑D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots ❑K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
❑E Little or no habitat
******* 1**;****************"*REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS"**""''""***'***"**"
11. Bedform and Substrate — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Ila. ❑Yes .❑No Is assessment reach In a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
❑A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11 c)
013 Pool -glide section (evaluate 11 d)
❑C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach — whether or not submerged.
Check at least one box 1n each row. Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare (R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%,
Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative percentages should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach,
NP R C A P
b ❑ ❑ ❑ • ❑ Bedrock/saprolite
.❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Boulder (256 — 4096 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Cobble (64 — 256 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Gravel (2 — 64 mm)
❑ ❑ -Ej ❑ Sand (.062 — 2 mm)
❑ ❑ f0. ❑ ❑ Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
❑ Ey ❑ ❑ ❑ Detritus
❑ a- ❑ ❑ ❑ Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. Yes ❑No Are pools filled with sediment?
Viii

12. Aquatic Life — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a..'❑Yes ❑No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. ❑No Water []Other
12b. ❑Yes ❑No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals' for Size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for Size 3 and 4 streams.
❑ ❑Adult frogs
❑ ❑Aquatic reptiles
❑ ❑Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
❑ ❑Beetles (including water pennies)
❑ ❑Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera [Tj)
❑ ❑Asian clam (Corbicula)
❑ ❑Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayflshishrimp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans (true flies)
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [EI)
❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
El.Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ []Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ ❑Other fish
❑ ❑Salamandersitadpoles
❑ ❑Snails
❑ ❑Stonefly larvae (ptecoptera [P])
"o ❑Tipulid larvae (Cranefly)
❑ ❑Worms/leeches ---
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition —stream side area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B -Valley -types} -
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland
runoff.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
(]B ❑B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
.CC _❑C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil
compaction, livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage — streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water >_ 6 inches deep
❑B ❑B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
:1C '❑C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water a 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
,LB RB
[]Y >E]Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
❑N ❑N
16. Baseflow, Contributors — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
❑A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
❑B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
❑C Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods affecting assessment reach (ex: beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
.0D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
.❑E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
❑F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors — assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
❑A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
❑B Obstruction not passing flow during low -flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
. ❑C Urban stream (? 24% impervious surface for watershed)
Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
❑E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
❑F None of the above
18. Shading — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
❑A Stream shading is appropriate for the stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
❑B Degraded (example; scattered trees)
OC Stream shading is gone or largely absent
ix

19. Buffer Width — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LS) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
.LB RB LB RB
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A s_ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B From 50 to < 100 feet wide
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C From 30 to < 50 feet wide
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D From 10 to < 30 feet wide
❑E ❑E ❑E ❑E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure -- streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider
for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB
RB
❑A
❑A
Mature forest
❑B
❑B
Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
�13C
.❑Q
Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
❑D
❑D
Maintained shrubs
❑E
❑E
Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but
is within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22: ❑
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A Row crops
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑S ❑B ❑B Maintained turf
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C Pasture (no livestock)lcommercial horticulture
-❑D ❑D [3D pD ❑D Qb Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
❑A ❑A Medium to high stem density
❑B ❑B Low stem density
❑C
_--OC; No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation a 10 feet wide.
LB RB
❑A ❑A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
❑B ❑B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
❑C ❑C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition -- First 100 feet of streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
❑B ❑B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
❑C OC Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity— assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ❑Yes FINo Was conductivity measurement recorded?
25b, Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
❑A < 46 ❑B 46 to < 67 ❑C 67 to < 79 ❑D 79 to < 230 ❑E >_ 230
Notes/Sketch: L " �� !� } 1 ro Of-! t�+
16EJL n Yr -A
Y
x --- F.
C

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
les user Manual Version;!A
USACE AID #: NCDWR # I
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5 -minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property,
identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for
detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes' section if supplementary measurements were
performed. See the NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECTISITE INFORMATIONh• _
1. Project name (if any): 1-` I t_ / „i_ F ,.I t I 1 2. Date of evaluation:
3. Applicant/owner name: A) 1 �� ,� 4. Assessor name/organization:
5. County: } 1. n < <. ; ' Y 6. Nearest named water body
7. River basin: r, on USGS 7.5 -minute quad: ti �L LX(Y-A (r.wp
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): �,, y (U, ``, ,- rl i , ; n � f
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations) v
9. Site number (show on attached map): to -j � V_ 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): �p 0o
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present to top of bank (feet): '1_ -, 1 ❑Unable to a3:;
hannel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet}: - « 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? ❑Yes
14. Feature type: pPerennial flow ❑Intermittent flow []Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑Mountains (M) QPiedmant (P) ❑Inner Coastal Plain (I) ❑Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic L J
valley shape (skip for z❑a ❑b
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ❑size 1 (< 0.1 mi)W ize 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 min) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mit) ❑Size 4 (z 5 mit)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
IS. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? [94s ❑No If Yes, check all thatap to the assessment area. ,,��
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters [Nater Supply Watershed (01 E11111 ❑111 L7//1V ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat E] Primary Nursery Area ❑High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? j Ves ❑No
1. Channel Water- assessment reach metric (skip for Size I streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
A Water throughout assessment reach.
B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
�8B Not A
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
❑A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
jj�B Not A
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile -assessment reach metric
❑A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming,
over widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of
these disturbances).
-15B Not A
5. Signs of Active Instability- assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
actin bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
,ETAf < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
❑C n 25% of channel unstable
VII

S. Streamside Area Interaction — streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
❑A ❑A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
❑B -.-OB Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area,
leaky or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
El ❑C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision,
disruption of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplainlintertidai zone access [examples:
impoundments, intensive mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a
man-made feature on an interstream divide
7. Water Quality Stressors — assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
❑A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
❑B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
❑D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
❑E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in "Notes" section.
❑F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
❑G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
❑H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
01 Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
]� Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather — watershed metric (ski for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a
drought.
❑A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 46 hours
,❑B_ Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
_JKJC_ No drought conditions
9. Large of Dangerous Stream — assessment reach metric
❑Yes ❑No Is stream too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition),
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types —assessment reach metric
10a. ❑Yes tlNo Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
,❑A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses N ❑F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(including liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) ,E, ❑G Submerged aquatic vegetation
�3B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o ❑H Low -tide refugia (pools)
-,
vegetation h Ell Sand bottom
,t3C, Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) t ❑J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
,Qb 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots ❑K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
❑E Little or no habitat
*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****
11. Bedform and Substrate —assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11a. ❑Yes ONo Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
']A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
t]B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
❑C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach — whether or not submerged.
Check at least one box in each row. Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare (R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) = > 10-40°x,
Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative percentages should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
_17 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Bedrock/saprolite
❑ --S-- ❑ ❑ ❑ Boulder (256 — 4096 mm)
❑ ❑ —E- ❑ ❑ Cobble (64 — 256 mm)
❑ ❑
- ]— El El Gravel (2 — 64 mm)
E3 [-3 ❑ ❑ Sand (.062 — 2 mm)
❑ Ea ❑ ❑ ❑ Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Detritus
;.❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. ❑Yes-- -❑No Are pools filled with sediment?
viii

�' r
12. Aquatic Life — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. c}.yes ❑No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. ❑No Water []Other:
12b.:❑Yes ❑No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for Size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for Size 3 and 4 streams.
❑ ❑Adult frogs
❑ ❑Aquatic reptiles
❑ ❑Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
❑ ❑Beetles (including water pennies)
❑ ❑Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera [T])
❑ ❑Asian clam (Corbicula)
❑ QCrustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfishlshrimp)
❑ ❑Damseifly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans (true flies)
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
❑ ❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ❑Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ ❑Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ ❑Other fish
❑ ❑Salamanders/tadpoles
❑ ❑Snails
❑ ❑Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera (P])
❑ ❑Tipulid larvae (Granefly)
❑ ❑Wormslleeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland
runoff.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑B ❑B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑C ❑C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil
compaction, livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage — streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water Z 6 inches deep
]B -�E]B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
❑C ❑C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
Y ❑Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
N QN
16. Baseflow Contributors — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
❑A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
❑B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
❑C Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods affecting assessment reach (ex: beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
❑D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
❑E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
❑F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors — assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
❑A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
❑B Obstruction not passing flow during low flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
❑C Urban stream (Z 24% impervious surface for watershed)
❑D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
❑E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
OF None of the above
18. Shading — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
,Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
- j�A Stream shading is appropriate for the stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
❑13 Degraded (example: scattered trees)
❑C Stream shading is gone or largely absent
Ix

19. Buffer Width — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB
RB
❑A ❑A --EDA
_.❑A a 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
❑B ❑B ❑B
❑B From 50 to < 100 feet wide
❑C 0 0
F1 From 30 to < 50 feet wide
❑D ❑D ❑D
❑D From 10 to < 30 feet wide
❑E ❑E ❑E
❑E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB RB
❑A ❑A
Mature forest
❑B ❑B
Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
❑C ❑C
Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
❑D ❑D
Maintained shrubs
❑E ❑E
Little or no vegetation
21, Buffer Stressors -- streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but
is within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A Row crops
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B F Maintained turf
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
❑A ❑A Medium to high stem density
❑B ❑B Low stem density
❑C ❑C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.
LB RB
❑A ❑A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
❑B ❑B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
❑C El The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — First 100 feet of streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
❑B El Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
❑C ❑C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity— assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ❑Yes ❑No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
❑A < 46 ❑B 46 to < 67 ❑C 67 to < 79 ❑D 79 to < 230 ❑E ? 230
Notes/Sketch: 11-e(- UY1 � S'rGV �rr�
4 frtri ' 1
X y
1I L

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies user manual version z.1
USACE AID #: NCDWR #
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5 -minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property,
identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for
detailed descriptions and explanations of requested Information. Record in the "Notes" section if supplementary measurements were
performed. See the NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION_
1. Project name (if any): .(?'� (�.. '1 : �, ; i ..: 1, !; � 2. Date of evaluation:
3. Applicantiowner name: l_U t A , v ',t, 4. Assessor name/organization: ..t . ( C-�
5. County: 1-c o'y01 l' i 6. Nearest named water body
7. River basin: p,, . +, 1 ', n. on USGS 7.5 -minute quad: -)Oc• t
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 2 �r) ! A �'>`, ',', i / 5 T 33
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): 10. Length of assessment reach evakiaied (feet):
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): (,- - , ()" ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): ��, - (� 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? ❑Yes o
14. Feature type:APerennial flow ❑Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑Mountains (M) 'Piedmont (P) Dinner Coastal Plain (1) ❑Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic
valley shape (skip for[:Ib
Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ❑Size 1 (< 0.1 mi) _ _-❑5ize 2 (0,1 to < 0.5 mit) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mit) ❑Size 4 (> 5 mit)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? dyes ❑No If Yes, check all thatap ly to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ater Supply Watershed (❑1 ❑II ❑III M(v ❑v)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish 0303(d) List ❑LAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑ Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? @Yes ❑No
1. Channel Water — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
'[ZA
Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B
No flow, water in pools only.
❑C
No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction — assessment reach metric
❑A
At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
fl�
Not A
3. Feature Pattern — assessment reach metric
❑A
A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
'3B
Not A
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile — assessment reach metric
,(]f{
Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming,
over widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of
these disturbances).
❑B
Not A
S. Signs of Active Instability — assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability Include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A
< 10% of channel unstable
❑B
10 to 25% of channel unstable
UC
> 25% of channel unstable
VII

B. Streamside Area Interaction — streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
❑A ❑A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
❑B ❑B Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area,
leaky or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
.O Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining wails, fill, stream Incision,
disruption of Flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples:
impoundments, intensive mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a
11 man-made feature on an interstream divide
7. Water Quality Stressors — assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
❑A Discolored water in stream or Intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
❑B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
❑D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
❑E Gurrent published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in "Notes" section.
❑F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
❑G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
❑H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
❑I Other: (explain in "NoteslSketch" section)
❑J Little to no stressors L ti V , , y
8. Recent Weather — watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a
drought.
❑A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑B - Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
,[C No drought conditions
9. Large o.� �D ngerous Stream — assessment reach metric
❑Yes (�4No Is stream too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. NaturalIn-streamHabitat Types — assessment reach metric
10a. ❑Yes ❑No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach)
(skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
❑A
Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses
row.
❑F
5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
Predominant
(including liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
~2.2
❑G
Submerged aquatic vegetation
.❑B
Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent
❑H
Low -tide refugia (pools)
❑
vegetation
t
❑I
Sand bottom
❑C
Multiple snags and logs {including lap trees}
M
❑J
5% vertical bank along the marsh
❑D
5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots
02
❑K
Little or no habitat
Cobble (64 — 256 mm)
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
❑
yQ
❑
❑E
Little or no habitat
❑
❑
❑
*****"'************REMAINING
QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS**************** **********
11. Bedform and Substrate —assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11a. ❑Yes ' E]No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
EA Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
❑B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
❑C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach — whether or not submerged.
Check
at least one box
In each
row.
Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare (R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) = > 10-40%,
Abundant (A) = > 40-70%,
Predominant
(P) = > 70%. Cumulative percentages should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP
R
C
A
P
-}
❑
❑
❑
❑
Bedrocklsaprolite
`❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
Boulder (256 — 4096 mm)
❑
_El _
❑
❑
❑
Cobble (64 — 256 mm)
❑
❑
yQ
❑
❑
Gravel (2 — 64 mm)
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
Sand (.062 — 2 mm)
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
Detritus
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11 d. 0Yes [--]No Are pools filled with sediment?
viii

12. Aquatic Life — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a..Myes ❑No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. []No Water ❑Other:
12b. ❑Yes []No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "Individuals" for Size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for Size 3 and 4 streams.
❑ []Adult frogs
❑ []Aquatic reptiles
❑ ❑Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
❑
[]Beetles (including water pennies)
r0J ❑Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera [T])
❑'
[]Asian clam (Corbicula)
❑ ❑Crustacean (isopodlamphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans (true flies)
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
❑ ❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ❑Midgeslmosquito larvae
❑ ❑Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ ❑Other fish
❑ ❑Salamanders/tadpoles
❑ ❑Snails
❑Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera [P])
❑ ❑Tipulid larvae (Cranefly)
❑ ❑Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland
runoff.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑B ❑B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
�jC _-Od Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil
compaction, livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage — streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water z 6 inches deep
B ❑B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
C _0C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water a 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
,:❑Y =pY Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
❑N ❑N
16. Baseflow Contributors — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
--MA Streams andlor springs (jurisdictional discharges)
❑B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
❑C Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods affecting assessment reach (ex: beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
=❑D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
_ ❑I= Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
❑F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors — assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
❑A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
❑B Obstruction not passing flow during low -flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
❑C Urban stream (Z 24% impervious surface for watershed)
-❑D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
❑E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
❑F None of the above
18. Shading — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
❑A Stream shading is appropriate for the stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
SOB Degraded (example: scattered trees)
❑C Stream shading is gone or largely absent
ix

•19. Buffer Width - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
_[']A -UK- ❑A ❑A ? 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
❑B ❑_B ❑B ❑B From 50 to < 100 feet wide
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C From 30 to < 50 feet wide
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D From 10 to < 30 feet wide
❑E ❑E ❑E ❑E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure
- streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left
bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB
RB
lf`
❑A
❑A
Mature forest
❑B
❑B
Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
❑C
❑C
Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
❑D
❑D
Maintained shrubs
El
❑E
Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but
is within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22: ❑
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A Row crops
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B Maintained turf
--E3C ,❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
❑A - ❑A Medium to high stem density
❑B 7 Low stem density
❑C ❑C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.
,LB RB
_❑A ❑A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
❑B ❑B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
❑C ❑C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition - First 100 feet of streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
El R Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
❑C ❑C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation,
25. Conductivity - assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ❑Yes '❑No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
❑A < 46 ❑B 46 to < 67 ❑C 67 to < 79 ❑D 79 to < 230 ❑E a 230
Notes/Sketch: {rrt-�c
lf`
�-

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
I USACE AID #: NCDWR # I
INSTRUCTIONS. Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5 -minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property,
identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for
detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes" section if supplementary measurements were
performed. See the NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION-
1.
NFORMATION _ _
1. Project name(� if an _ f { { Z
y): f1 I P % (:x. r�_� �� ; 2. Date of evaluation: (l
3. Applicant/owner name: .k ; , ; , �l 4. Assessor name/organization:
5. County: ; r I , 6. Nearest named water body
7. River basin: on USGS 7.5 -minute quad:
B. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): Z-5, 210 X;_ U ' ?, 1; ° P / • ! i i (c c % i ?
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can b$ approximations) n
9. Site number (show on attached map): ' ` �- Cl 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): p�
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): I-, — (- ' ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 2— .? ' 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? []Yes Pio
14. Feature type: ❑Perennial flowZ�Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑Mountains (M) `Piedmont (P) ❑Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic l J
valley shape (skip for ❑b
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip Size 1 (< 0.1 ml') ❑Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mit) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 min) ❑Size 4 (z 5 mit)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? dyes 0No If Yes, check all that apsgly to the assessment area.
El Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters RfNater Supply Watershed (❑I []it ❑III �v ❑v)
❑Essential Fish Habitat []Primary Nursery Area ❑High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMAArea of Environmental Concern (AEC)
[]Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
[]Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
section or attached? ®Yes ❑No
1. Channel Water — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
❑A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction — assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
OB Not A
3. Feature Pattern — assessment reach metric
❑A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
SIB Not
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile — assessment reach metric
❑A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming,
over widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of
these disturbances).
❑B Not A
5. Signs of Active Instability— assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
actiyte bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
A < 10% of channel unstable
8 10 to 25% of channel unstable
❑C a 25% of channel unstable
vii

6. Streamside Area Interaction — streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
❑A ❑A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
`
.EJB Up Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area,
leaky or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
❑C ❑C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision,
disruption of flood flows through streamside area] ar too much floodplainlintertidal zone access [examples:
impoundments, intensive mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a
man-made feature on an interstream divide
7. Water Quality Stressors — assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
❑A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
❑B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or Intertidal zone)
❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
❑D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
❑E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in "Notes" section.
❑F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
❑G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
❑H Degraded marsh vegetation in the Intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
❑I , Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather —watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a
drought.
❑A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
jQG No drought conditions
9. Large or Dangerous Stream — assessment reach metric
❑Yes bNo Is stream too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types — assessment reach metric
10a. []Yes [:]No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening (for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses N ❑F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(including liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) ,e, ❑G Submerged aquatic vegetation
�t- Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent y CIH Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation r -1Eli bottom
❑C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) r W ❑J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
❑D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots 02 ❑K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
❑E Little or no habitat
*****REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS***"*****"**"'*****"**""'*"*
11. Bedform and Substrate —assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11a. ❑Yes ,,rNo Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
. Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
❑B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11 d)
❑C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11c. in riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach — whether or not submerged.
Check at least one box in each row. Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare (R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) = > 10-40%,
Abundant (A) = > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative percentages should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Bedrock/saprolite
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Boulder (256 — 4096 mm)
❑ ,0' ❑ ❑ ❑ Cobble (64 — 256 mm)
❑ l ❑ ❑ ❑ Gravel (2 — 64 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ El ❑ Sand (.062 — 2 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Silt/clay (r 0.062 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Detritus
;0- ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. ❑Yes nNo Are pools filled with sediment?
viii

(, , I I �.�
12. Aquatic Life — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a.,�QYes ❑No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described In the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. []No Water ❑Other:
12b. ❑Yes ❑No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for Size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for Size 3 and 4 streams.
❑ ❑Adult frogs
❑ ❑Aquatic reptiles
❑ ❑Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
❑
[I Beetles (including water pennies)
❑Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera (T])
Cl ❑Asian clam (Corbicula)
❑ ❑Crustacean(isopod/amphipodlcrayfishlshrimp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans (true flies)
❑ []Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
❑ ❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ❑Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ []Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ ❑Other fish
❑ ❑Salamandersltadpoles
❑ []Snails
ID ❑Stonefly larvae (Pleooptera [P])
❑Tipulid larvae (Cranefly)
❑Wormslleeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland
runoff,
LB -RB
,❑A ❑A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑B ❑B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑C ❑C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil
compaction, livestock disturbance, buildings, manmade ees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage — streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tld@l Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) -&the streamside area. -
LB RB
❑A ❑A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water a 6 inches deep
❑B ❑B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
❑C ❑C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
❑Y ❑Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
ID14 ❑N
16. Baseflow Contributors — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
❑A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
❑B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
❑C Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods affecting assessment reach (ex: beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
❑ None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors —assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
❑A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
❑B Obstruction not passing flow during low -flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
5C Urban stream (a 24% impervious surface for watershed)
D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
❑E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
❑F None of the above
18. Shading — assessment reach metric (skip for Ttdal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf --on" condition.
❑A Stream shading is appropriate for the stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
❑B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
QC Stream shading is gone or largely absent
ix

19. Buffer Width — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A z 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
❑B ❑8 7 ❑B From 50 to < 100 feet wide
❑C ❑C 0 ❑C From 30 to < 50 feet wide
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D From 10 to < 30 feet wide
❑E ❑E BE ❑E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure — streamside area metric (skip far Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB RB
❑A ❑A Mature forest
❑B ❑B Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
❑C ❑C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
❑D E Maintained shrubs
❑E ❑E Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but
is within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22: ❑
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A Row crops
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B Maintained turf
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C .❑C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
❑A ❑A Medium to high stem density
❑B ❑B Low stem density
❑C ❑C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.
LB RB
❑A ❑A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
❑B ❑B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
❑C ❑C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — First 100 feet of streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
❑B ❑B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
❑C ❑C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity — assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a- ❑Yes ❑No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
25b, Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
❑A < 46 ❑B 46 to < 67 ❑C 67 to < 79 ❑D 79 to < 230 ❑E >_ 230
Notes/Sketch: ems if rte'
_
r����VxX�VW-jr

APPENDIX 4
Supplementary Design Information
(Existing Conditions, Reference Reach, Design Conditions)

Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Appendix 4
Existing Conditions Geomorphic Parameters
Parameter
Notation
Units
UTI Reach 1A/113
min I max
UTI Reach 4A
min F max
UTI Reach 4B
min I max
stream type
B4
C4c
G4c
drainage area
DA
sq mi
0.05/0.11
0.29
0.40
bankfull cross-sectional
area
Abkf
SF
4
4.4
8.6
8.8
10.1
10.3
avg velocity during
bankfull event
ubkf
fps
5.5
5.8
3.4
3.8
3.9
4
width at bankfull
Wbkt
feet
5.8
7.2
6
9.1
8.2
8.6
maximum depth at
bankfull
dmax
feet
0.8
0.9
1.9
2
2
2.1
mean depth at bankfull
dbkt
feet
0.6
0.7
1.0
1.4
1.2
1.2
bankfull width to depth
ratio
Wbkf/dbkf
8.5
12
9.4
4.1
6.6
7.2
low bank height
feet
4.5
5.9
1.9
4.2
4.1
4.4
bank height ratio
BHR
5.9
6.4
1.0
2.1
2.0
2.1
floodprone area width
Wfpa
feet
7.2
9.0
24.4
54.0
8.1
9.7
entrenchment ratio
ER
1.2
1.2
3.0
9.1
1.0
1.1
max pool depth at bankfull
dpool
feet
1
2.1
N/AZ
pool depth ratio
dpool/dbkt
1.4
1.1
N/AZ
pool width at bankfull
wpool
feet
5.4
6.6
N/AZ
pool width ratio
Wpool/Wbkf
0.9
1.1
N/AZ
Bkf pool cross-sectional
area
Apool
SF
4
8.9
N/AZ
pool area ratio
Apool/Abkt
1.00
1.0
N/AZ
pool -pool spacing
p -p
feet
8
24
11
19
N/AZ
pool -pool spacing ratio
p-p/Wbkf
1.3
3.8
1.0
1.9
N/AZ
valley slope
Svalley
feet/foot
0.0370
0.0130
0.0130
channel slope
Schannel
feet/foot
0.0340
0.0080
0.0080
sinuosity
K
1.14
1.13
1.13
belt width
Wblt
feet
N/A1
N/A'
9.0
99.0
9.0
99.0
meanderwidth ratio
Wblt//Wbkf
N/A'
N/A'
1.5
10.9
1.1
11.5
meander length
Lm
feet
N/A1
N/A'
58.0
201.0
58.0
201.0
meander length ratio
Lm/Wbkt
N/A'
N/A'
9.7
22.1
7.1
23.4
linear wavelength
LW
N/A1
N/A1
112.0
309.0
112.0
309.0
linear wavelength ratio
LW/wbkt
N/A'
N/A1
18.7
34.0
13.7
35.9
radius of curvature
Rc
feet
N/A1
N/A1
27.0
65.0
27.0
65.0
radius of curvature ratio
RJ Wbkf
N/A1
N/A1
4.5
7.1
3.3
7.6
N/A' - Pattern data not applicable for B -type streams.
N/A2 - Pool section not present in field.
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Appendix 4

Cross -Section Plots Alexander Farm
Mitigation Site NCDMS Project No. 100048
Existing Conditions - 2018
Cross -Section XS 1- UTI Reach 1B
+ Pool
x -section area (ft.sq.)
99
width (ft)
0.7
mean depth (ft)
1.0
max depth (ft)
6.2
wetted perimeter (ft)
0.6
hydraulic radius (ft)
7.2
width -depth ratio
97
95
93
c
4 91
v
w 89
87
85
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Width (ft)
+Existing Condtions - Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
4.0
x -section area (ft.sq.)
5.3
width (ft)
0.7
mean depth (ft)
1.0
max depth (ft)
6.2
wetted perimeter (ft)
0.6
hydraulic radius (ft)
7.2
width -depth ratio
Survey Date: 09/2018
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Cross -Section Plots Alexander Farm
Mitigation Site NCDMS Project No.
100048 Existing Conditions - 2018
Cross -Section XS 2 - UTI Reach 1B
+ Riffle
x -section area (ft.sq.)
99
width (ft)
0.7
mean depth (ft)
0.9
max depth (ft)
6.6
wetted perimeter (ft)
0.6
hydraulic radius (ft)
8.5
width -depth ratio
7.4
W flood prone area (ft)
97
entrenchment ratio
95
93
c
91
v
w 89
87
85
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Width (ft)
Existing Conditions -Bankfull -Flood prone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
4.0
x -section area (ft.sq.)
5.8
width (ft)
0.7
mean depth (ft)
0.9
max depth (ft)
6.6
wetted perimeter (ft)
0.6
hydraulic radius (ft)
8.5
width -depth ratio
7.4
W flood prone area (ft)
1.3
entrenchment ratio
6.4 low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 08/2018
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Cross -Section Plots Alexander Farm
Mitigation Site NCDMS Project No.
100048 Existing Conditions - 2018
Cross -Section XS 3 - UTI Reach 1B
+ Riffle
x -section area (ft.sq.)
99
width (ft)
0.6
mean depth (ft)
0.8
max depth (ft)
7.8
wetted perimeter (ft)
0.6
hydraulic radius (ft)
12.0
width -depth ratio
8.2
W flood prone area (ft)
97
entrenchment ratio
95
93
c
4 91
v
w 89
87
85
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Width (ft)
Existing Conditions -Bankfull- FloodproneArea
Bankfull Dimensions
4.4
x -section area (ft.sq.)
7.2
width (ft)
0.6
mean depth (ft)
0.8
max depth (ft)
7.8
wetted perimeter (ft)
0.6
hydraulic radius (ft)
12.0
width -depth ratio
8.2
W flood prone area (ft)
1.1
entrenchment ratio
5.9 low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 08/2018
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Cross -Section Plots Alexander Farm
Mitigation Site NCDMS Project No.
100048 Existing Conditions - 2018
Cross -Section XS 4 - UTI Reach 4A
+ Riffle
100
9.1
width (ft)
1.0
mean depth (ft)
1.9
max depth (ft)
10.3
98
0.9
hydraulic radius (ft)
9.4
width -depth ratio
27.4
W flood prone area (ft)
3.0
entrenchment ratio
96
c
0
v
w
94
92
0 10 20 30 40 50
Width (ft)
Existing Conditions -Bankfull -Flood prone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
8.8
x -section area (ft.sq.)
9.1
width (ft)
1.0
mean depth (ft)
1.9
max depth (ft)
10.3
wetted perimeter (ft)
0.9
hydraulic radius (ft)
9.4
width -depth ratio
27.4
W flood prone area (ft)
3.0
entrenchment ratio
1.0 low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 08/2018
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Cross -Section Plots Alexander Farm
Mitigation Site NCDMS Project No.
100048 Existing Conditions - 2018
Cross -Section XS 5 - UTI Reach 4A
+ Riffle
100
6.0
width (ft)
1.4
mean depth (ft)
2.0
max depth (ft)
8.6
98
1.0
hydraulic radius (ft)
4.1
width -depth ratio
54.0
W flood prone area (ft)
9.1
entrenchment ratio
2.1
low bank height ratio
96
c
0
v
w
94
92
0 10 20 30 40 50
Width (ft)
Existing Conditions -Bankfull -Flood prone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
8.6
x -section area (ft.sq.)
6.0
width (ft)
1.4
mean depth (ft)
2.0
max depth (ft)
8.6
wetted perimeter (ft)
1.0
hydraulic radius (ft)
4.1
width -depth ratio
54.0
W flood prone area (ft)
9.1
entrenchment ratio
2.1
low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 08/2018
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Cross -Section Plots Alexander Farm
Mitigation Site NCDMS Project No.
100048 Existing Conditions - 2018
Cross -Section XS 6 - UTI Reach 4A
+ Pool
100
6.6
width (ft)
1.3
mean depth (ft)
2.1
max depth (ft)
9.6
98
0.9
hydraulic radius (ft)
5.0
width -depth ratio
96
c
0
v
w
94
92
0 10 20 30 40
Width (ft)
+ Existing Condtions - Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
8.9
x -section area (ft.sq.)
6.6
width (ft)
1.3
mean depth (ft)
2.1
max depth (ft)
9.6
wetted perimeter (ft)
0.9
hydraulic radius (ft)
5.0
width -depth ratio
Survey Date: 09/2018
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Cross -Section Plots Alexander Farm
Mitigation Site NCDMS Project No.
100048 Existing Conditions - 2018
Cross -Section XS 7 - UTI Reach 4B
+ Riffle
x -section area (ft.sq.)
101
width (ft)
1.2
mean depth (ft)
2.0
max depth (ft)
10.0
wetted perimeter (ft)
1.0
hydraulic radius (ft)
99
c
0
width -depth ratio
15.4
W flood prone area (ft)
1.8
v 97
w
95
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Width (ft)
Existing Conditions -Bankfull -Flood prone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
10.3
x -section area (ft.sq.)
8.6
width (ft)
1.2
mean depth (ft)
2.0
max depth (ft)
10.0
wetted perimeter (ft)
1.0
hydraulic radius (ft)
7.2
width -depth ratio
15.4
W flood prone area (ft)
1.8
entrenchment ratio
2.0 low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 09/2018
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Cross -Section Plots Alexander Farm
Mitigation Site NCDMS Project No.
100048 Existing Conditions - 2018
Cross -Section XS 8 - UTI Reach 4B
+ Riffle
x -section area (ft.sq.)
105
width (ft)
1.2
mean depth (ft)
2.1
max depth (ft)
9.6
wetted perimeter (ft)
103
hydraulic radius (ft)
6.6
width -depth ratio
16.5
W flood prone area (ft)
2.0
entrenchment ratio
101
c
0
99
v
w
97
95
0 10 20 30 40 50
Width (ft)
Existing Conditions -Bankfull -Flood prone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
10.1
x -section area (ft.sq.)
8.2
width (ft)
1.2
mean depth (ft)
2.1
max depth (ft)
9.6
wetted perimeter (ft)
1.1
hydraulic radius (ft)
6.6
width -depth ratio
16.5
W flood prone area (ft)
2.0
entrenchment ratio
2.1 low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 09/2018
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering

UT1 Reach 4 - XS 5
Pavement- Subpavement Particle Distribution
100
-7 1 _7
Silt/Clay Sand'
90
Gravel '
Cobble
Boulder
Bedrock
80
/
70
o
1
a�
60
50
'
U
U
A
40
UOA
a..
30
,
20
00
10
0
&-*,
AOO
0.01
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
-- Pavement Summary Subpavement Summary

100
90
80
70
0
> 60
50
U
40
U
30
20
10
0
0.01
UT1 Reach 4 - XS 4
Pavement- Subpavement Particle Distribution
Silt/Clay Sand
Gravel
Cobble
; Boulder
Bedrock11 r
,
,
,
0.1 1 10
Particle Class Size (mm)
100
— Pavement Summary Subpavement Summary
1000
10000

UT1 Reach 1 - XS 3
Pavement- Subpavement Particle Distribution
100
i
Silt/Clay Sand
90
Gravel
Cobble
Boulder
• % Bedrock
80
70
'
o
o
;
>
60
'
50
U
40
•
,'
U
�
30
20
,
10
-
0.01
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
-- Pavement Summary Subpavement Summary

UT1 Reach 1 - XS 2
Pavement- Subpavement Particle Distribution
100
Silt/Clay
Sand
90
Gravel
Cobble
•
Boulder
Bedrock
80
70
�
o
60
'
a�
50
'
U
'
+�
a� 40
A'
'
U
is
;
30
'
20
10
-'
-
0
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
-- Pavement Summary Subpavement Summary

Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Appendix 4
Reference Reach Geomorphic Parameters
Notation
Units
Agony Acres UTI
UT to Kelly Creek
UT to Austin Branch Timber Tributary
UT to Lyle Creek
UT to Varnels Creek
Walker Branch
Box Creek
min max
min I max
min max min max min max min max Min Max min
max
stream type
133
134/134a
Slightly entrenched 134a
or A4
134
C5
C4/E4
E4
C4
drainage area
DA
sq mi
0.15
0.08
0.12
0.04
0.25
0.41
0.29
2.13
design discharge
Q
cfs
37
23
27
17
18
54
40
99
bankfull cross-sectional area
Abkf
SF
7.4
5.74
4.4
4.6
3.5
4.1
10.3
12.3
8.9
12.2
28.9
average velocity during
bankfull event
vbkf
fps
4.9
5.9
6.2
3.7
4.7
4.4
5.2
3.8
3.4
Cross -Section
width at bankfull
Wbkf
feet
11.1
7.91
6.2
8.9
7
9.3
10.5
11.5
12.3
23.5
maximum depth at bankfull
dmax
feet
1
1.13
1.2
0.7
1.0
1.1
1.5
1.7
1.2
1.6
1.92
mean depth at bankfull
dbkf
feet
0.7
0.73
0.7
0.5
0.47
1.1
1.2
0.8
1.0
1.23
bankfull width to depth
ratio
wbrf/dbkf
16.6
10.9
8.8
17
15
18
8.1
9.3
12.3
14.4
19.1
depth ratio
dmax/dbkf
feet
1.00
1.30
1.71
1.40
2.10
2.30
1.4
1.4
---
3.6
bank height ratio
BHR
1
2.47
1
1
1
1
1.0
1.0
---
1.5
floodprone area width
wfpa
feet
25
9.1
26.6
13.6
45
49
60.0
100.0
31
76.3
entrenchment ratio
ER
2.3
1.15
4.3
1.5
6
6
5.7
10.0
2.5
2.7
3.3
Slope
valley slope
S-lle,
feet/foot
0.050
0.049
0.048
0.041
0.009
0.020
0.030
2.250
channel slope
Schnl
feet/foot
0.049
0.03-0.065
0.040
0.033
0.004
0.017
0.010
0.840
Profile
riffle slope
Sra+le
feet/foot
---
---
0.025 0.073 0.020
0.150
0.006
0.060
0.024
0.057
0.0
0.1
0.6
riffle slope ratio
Sr;ffle/Schnl
---
---
0.6 1.8 0.7
4.5
1.4
14.9
1.4
3.4
1.3
4.7
0.8
pool slope
SP
feet/foot
---
---
0.0 0.0 0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0
pool slope ratio
SP/Schnl
---
---
0.0 0.4 0.0
2.5
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.9
0.0
0.7
1.2
pool -to -pool spacing
Lp_p
feet
---
---
14 31 6
49
15
28
7.8
82.2
27.0
73.0
28.8
pool spacing ratio
Lp_WWbkf
---
---
2 5 1
6
2
4
0.5
5.6
2.3
6.1
1.2
pool cross-sectional area
Apool
SF
9.8
---
9.4
---
4
22.0
22.7
11.9
49.9
pool area ratio
Apool/Abkf
1.3
---
2.1
---
1.0
1.1
1.8
1.9
1.0
1.3
1.7
maximum pool depth
dpool
feet
1.6
---
1.7
---
1.34
2.5
2.6
1.8
2.3
4.4
pool depth ratio
dpool/dbkf
2.3
---
2.4
---
2.9
3.0
3.1
2.3
3.6
pool width at bankfull
I Nod
Ifeet
8.5
8.8
6.1
15.1
18.6
8.5
18.8
pool width ratio
wpool/Wbkf
0.8
1.4
---
0.8
1.0
1.3
0.7
0.8
Pattern
sinuosity
K
1.04
1.0
1.2
1.12
1.1
1.2
1.4
1.3
beltwidth
wbit
feet
---
18 1 34
---
---
21
15
45
102
62.0
87.8
meander width ratio
Wblt/Wbkf
---
---
---
---
2
3
1
3
8.3
8.9
2.6
3.7
linear wavelength (formerly
meander length)
Lm
feet
27
94
39
44
16
47
45.0
81.0
38.8
76.2
linear wavelength ratio
(formerly meander length
ratio
Lm/Wbkf
---
---
---
---
5.1
7.0
1.1
3.2
3.9
6.6
1.7
3.2
meander length
feet
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
meander length ratio
---
---
---
---
radius of curvature
Rc
feet
---
8 1 26
---
---
19
32
8
47
23.0
38.0
7.5
38.1
radius of curvature ratio
Rc/ wbkf
---
---
---
---
2.7
3.7
0.6
3.2
2.0
3.1
0.3
1.6
Particle Size Distribution from Reach -wide Pebble Count
d5o Description
---
---
---
---
Very Coarse Sand
---
Coarse Gravel
---
d16
mm
2.0
N/A
11
0.49
---
2.9
0.6
4.1
d35
mm
12.9
N/A
42
3.5
0.1
9.2
12.2
11
d50
mm
50.6
N/A
59
6.5
0.2
15
27.8
22
d84
mm
168.1
N/A
130
48
0.5
56
74.5
50
d95
mm
2048.0
N/A
170
83
4
88
128
78
dloo
mm
>2048
N/A
256
128
8
256
>2048
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Appendix 4

Proposed Geomorphic Parameters
Notation Units
UT1 Reach 1A
UT1 Reach 1B
UT1 Reach 4A
UT1 Reach 4B
Typical
Section
Values
Min
Max
Typical
Section
Values
Min
Max
Typical
Section
Values
Min
Max
Typical
Section
Values
Min
Max
stream type
B4
B4
C4
C4
drainage area DA sq mi
0.05
0.11
0.29
0.4
design discharge Q CJS
12
20
32
40
bankfull cross- Abkf SF
sectional area
3.0
4.3
10.1
11.3
average velocity
vbkf fps
during bankfull event
4.1
4.5
3.5
3.9
Cross -Section
width at bankfull
Wbkf
feet
6.5
8.0
11.5
12.0
maximum depth at
bankfull
dmax
feet
0.6
0.7
0.6
0.8
1.1
1.3
1.1
1.4
mean depth at
bankfull
dbkf
feet
0.5
0.5
0.9
0.9
bankfull width to
depth ratio
d
wbk/bk
14
15
13
13
max depth ratio
dmaxidbkf
feet
1.2 1.5
1.2 1.5
1.2 1.5
1.2 1.5
bank height ratio
BHR
1.0 1.1
1.0 1.1
1.0 1.1
1.0 1.1
floodprone area
width
Wfpa
feet
9 14
11 18
25 58
26 60
entrenchment ratio
ER
1.4 2.2
1.4 2.2
2.2 5.0
2.2 5.0
Slope
valley slope
S„aiiey
feet/foot
0.0370
0.0370
0.0130
0.0150
channel slope
Sehr,l
feet/foot
0.0362
0.0362
0.0093
0.0093
Profile
riffle slope Sr;ff1e feet/foot 0.009 0.052 0.018 0.049 0.002 0.024 0.002 0.026
riffle slope ratio Srafle/Sehni 0.25 1.4 0.5 1.4 0.2 2.58 0.2 2.8
pool slope SP feet/foot 0.000 0.014 0.000 0.014 0.000 0.003 0.000 0.004
pool slope ratio SP/SehnI 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.30
pool -to -pool spacing Lp_p feet 7.0 33.0 8 40 26.0 81.0 28.0 84.0
pool spacing ratio Lp_p/wbkf 1.0 5.0 1.0 5.0 2.3 7.0 2.3 7.0
pool cross-sectional A SF 6.1 9.1 8.6 13.0 15.1 30.2 16.9 33.8
area pool
pool area ratio ApooliAbkf 2.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 1.5 3.0 1.5 3.0
maximum pool depth dpool feet 0.9 1.4 1.1 1.6 1.8 2.6 1.9 2.8
pool depth ratio dpoolidbkf 2.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 3.0
pool width at bankfull Wpool feet 7.2 9.8 8.8 12.0 11.5 17.3 12.0 18.0
pool width ratio WpooliWbkf 1.1 1.5 1.1 1.5 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.5
Pattern
sinuosity
K
1.03
1.03
1.11
1.11
beltwidth
Wbft
feet
N/A
N/A
23.0
92
24.0
96
meander width ratio
Wblt/Wbkf
N/A
N/A
2
8
2
8
linear wavelength
(formerly meander
length)
LW
feet
N/A
N/A
58
161
60
168
linear wavelength
ratio (formerly
meander length
ratio
LW/why
N/A
N/A
-
5.0
14.0
-
5.0
14.0
meanderlength
Lm
feet
N/A
N/A
58
161
60
168
meander length ratio
Lm/Wbkf
N/A
N/A
5.0
14.0
5.0
14.0
radius ofcurvature
Re
feet
N/A
N/A
23.0
35.0
24.0
36.0
radius ofcurvature
ratio
Re/Wbkf
N/A
N/A
2.0
3.0
2.0
3.0
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Appendix 4

APPENDIX 5
Categorical Exclusion and Resource Agency Correspondence

Categorical Exclusion Form for Ecosystem Enhancement
Program Projects
Version 1.4
Note: Only Appendix A should to be submitted (along with any supporting documentation) as the
environmental document.
Part 1: General Project Information
Project Name: Alexander Farm Mitigation Site
County Name: AlexanderCounty
EEP Number: 100046
Project Sponsor: Midlands Engineering, Inc.
Project Contact Name: Andrea S. Eckardt
Project Contact Address: 1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104, Charlotte, NC 26203
Project Contact E-mail: [e-mail]
EEP Project Mana er: Harry Tsomides
ProjectDescription
The Alexander Farm Mitigation Site is a stream mitigation project located approximatety 13 miles west of Statesville
and 15 miles northeast of Hickory in Alexander County, NC- The project includes 2 unnamed tributaries to Elk
Shoals Creek for a total of more than 6,500 linear feet of stream. The site has historically and is currently being used
for cattle pasture The project will provide stream and wetland mitigation units to the Division of Mitigation Services in
the Catawba River Basin (03050101),
For Official Use Only
Reviewed By:
Date v EEP Proj ct Manager
Conditional Approved By:
Date For Division Administrator
FHWA
❑ Check this box if there are outstanding issues
Final Approval By:
�-
1-J3 `--
Date For Division Administrator
FHWA
6 Version 1.4, 8118105

Part 2: All
Regulation/Question Response
Coastal Zone Management Act CZMA
1. Is the project located in a CAMA county?
❑ Yes
✓❑ No
2. Does the project involve ground -disturbing activities within a CAMA Area of
❑ Yes
Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ No
❑✓ N/A
3. Has a CAMA permit been secured?
❑ Yes
❑ No
✓❑ N/A
4. Has NCDCM agreed that the project is consistent with the NC Coastal Management
❑ Yes
Program?
❑ No
✓❑ N/A
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liabilit Act CERCLA
1. Is this a "full -delivery" project?
✓❑ Yes
❑ No
2. Has the zoning/land use of the subject property and adjacent properties ever been
❑ Yes
designated as commercial or industrial?
❑✓ No
❑ N/A
3. As a result of a limited Phase I Site Assessment, are there known or potential
❑ Yes
hazardous waste sites within or adjacent to the project area?
❑✓ No
❑ N/A
4. As a result of a Phase I Site Assessment, are there known or potential hazardous
❑
Yes
waste sites within or adjacent to the project area?
❑
No
❑✓
N/A
5. As a result of a Phase 11 Site Assessment, are there known or potential hazardous
❑
Yes
waste sites within the project area?
❑
No
❑✓
N/A
6. Is there an approved hazardous mitigation plan?
❑
Yes
❑
No
❑✓
N/A
National Historic Preservation Act Section 106
1. Are there properties listed on, or eligible for listing on, the National Register of
❑ Yes
Historic Places in the project area?
❑✓ No
2. Does the project affect such properties and does the SHPO/THPO concur?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑✓ N/A
3. If the effects are adverse, have they been resolved?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑✓ N/A
Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act Uniform
Act
1. Is this a "full -delivery" project?
❑✓ Yes
❑ No
2. Does the project require the acquisition of real estate?
❑✓ Yes
❑ No
❑ N/A
3. Was the property acquisition completed prior to the intent to use federal funds?
❑ Yes
❑✓ No
❑ N/A
4. Has the owner of the property been informed:✓❑
Yes
* prior to making an offer that the agency does not have condemnation authority; and
❑ No
* what the fair market value is believed to be?
❑ N/A
Version 1.4, 8/18/05

Version 1.4, 8/18/05
Part 3: Ground-Disturbing Activities
Regulation/Question
Response
American Indian Religious Freedom Act AIRFA
1.
Is the project located in a county claimed as "territory" by the Eastern Band of
❑ Yes
Cherokee
Indians?✓❑
No
2.
Is the site of religious importance to American Indians?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑✓ N/A
3.
Is the project listed on, or eligible for listing on, the National Register of Historic
❑ Yes
Places?
❑ No
❑✓ N/A
4.
Have the effects of the project on this site been considered?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑✓ N/A
Antiquities Act AA
1.
Is the project located on Federal lands?
❑ Yes
❑✓ No
2.
Will there be loss or destruction of historic or prehistoric ruins, monuments or objects
❑ Yes
of antiquity?
❑ No
❑✓ N/A
3.
Will a permit from the appropriate Federal agency be required?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑✓ N/A
4.
Has a permit been obtained?
❑ Yes
❑ No
✓❑ N/A
Archaeological Resources Protection Act ARPA
1.
Is the project located on federal or Indian lands (reservation)?
❑
Yes
❑✓
No
2.
Will there be a loss or destruction of archaeological resources?
❑
Yes
❑
No
❑✓
N/A
3.
Will a permit from the appropriate Federal agency be required?
❑
Yes
❑
No
❑✓
N/A
4.
Has a permit been obtained?
❑
Yes
❑
No
❑✓
N/A
Endangered Species Act ESA
1.
Are federal Threatened and Endangered species and/or Designated Critical Habitat
❑✓ Yes
listed for the county?
❑ No
2.
Is Designated Critical Habitat or suitable habitat present for listed species?
❑✓ Yes
❑ No
❑ N/A
3.
Are T&E species present or is the project being conducted in Designated Critical
❑ Yes
Habitat?
❑✓ No
❑ N/A
4.
Is the project "likely to adversely affect" the species and/or "likely to adversely modify"
❑ Yes
Designated
Critical Habitat?
❑ No
✓❑ N/A
5.
Does the USFWS/NOAA-Fisheries concur in the effects determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
✓❑ N/A
6.
Has the USFWS/NOAA-Fisheries rendered a "jeopardy" determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
✓❑ N/A
Version 1.4, 8/18/05

Executive Order 13007 Indian Sacred Sites
1. Is the project located on Federal lands that are within a county claimed as "territory"
❑ Yes
by the EBCI?
❑✓ No
2. Has the EBCI indicated that Indian sacred sites may be impacted by the proposed
❑ Yes
project?
❑ No
✓❑ N/A
3. Have accommodations been made for access to and ceremonial use of Indian sacred
❑ Yes
sites?
❑ No
✓❑ N/A
Farmland Protection Policy Act FPPA
1. Will real estate be acquired?
❑✓ Yes
❑ No
2. Has NRCS determined that the project contains prime, unique, statewide or locally
❑✓ Yes
important farmland?
❑ No
❑ N/A
3. Has the completed Form AD-1006 been submitted to NRCS?
❑✓ Yes
❑ No
❑ N/A
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act FWCA
1. Will the project impound, divert, channel deepen, or otherwise control/modify any
❑✓ Yes
water body?
❑ No
2. Have the USFWS and the NCWRC been consulted?
❑✓ Yes
❑ No
❑ N/A
Land and Water Conservation Fund Act Section 6 f
1. Will the project require the conversion of such property to a use other than public,
❑ Yes
outdoor recreation?
❑✓ No
2. Has the NPS approved of the conversion?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑✓ N/A
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish
Habitat
1. Is the project located in an estuarine system?
❑ Yes
❑✓ No
2. Is suitable habitat present for EFH-protected species?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑✓ N/A
3. Is sufficient design information available to make a determination of the effect of the
❑ Yes
project on EFH?
❑ No
❑✓ N/A
4. Will the project adversely affect EFH?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑✓ N/A
5. Has consultation with NOAA-Fisheries occurred?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑✓ N/A
Migratory Bird Treat Act MBTA
1. Does the USFWS have any recommendations with the project relative to the MBTA?
❑ Yes
✓❑ No
2. Have the USFWS recommendations been incorporated?
❑ Yes
❑ No
✓❑ N/A
Wilderness Act
1. Is the project in a Wilderness area?
❑ Yes
❑✓ No
2. Has a special use permit and/or easement been obtained from the maintaining
❑ Yes
federal agency?
❑ No
❑✓ N/A
Version 1.4, 8/18/05

APPENDIX 6
Invasive Species Plan

Appendix 6 Invasive Species Plan
Annual monitoring and semi-annual site visits will be conducted to assess the condition of the finished
project. These site inspections may identify the presence of invasive vegetation. If, during the
monitoring period, invasive species threaten the survivability of planted woody vegetation in an area
that exceeds 1% of the planted easement acreage, the invasive species shall be treated. Smaller areas
may be treated at the discretion of the project engineer and biologist, if deemed in the best interest of
the Site. Generally, the treatment plan shall follow the below guidelines in Table 1 for common invasive
species found in riparian areas; however, the treatment may be changed based on the professional
judgement of the project engineer and biologist. For invasive species not listed in the below table that
threaten the survivability of the planted woody vegetation, Wildlands shall notify DMS of the invasive
species observed and the plan for treatment prior to treating the species. All invasive species treatment
will be reported in the following year's monitoring plan.
Table 1. Invasive Species Treatment —Alexander Farm Mitigation Site
Invasive Species
Recommended Removal Technique
Small infestations of L. japonica can be pulled by hand. Monitor to remove any re -sprouts.
Care should be taken to bag and remove the plants, including mature fruits to prevent re -
Japanese
establishment. Large infestations of L. japonica will usually require a combination of cut
Honeysuckle
stump and foliar herbicide treatments. Where vines have grown into the tree canopy, cut
(Lonicera
each stem as close to the ground as possible. Treat the freshly cut surface of the rooted
japonica)
stem with a 25 percent solution of glyphosate or triclopyr. Remove the twining vines to
prevent them from girdling and killing desirable vegetation. Groundcovers of L. japonica
can be treated with a foliar solution of 2 percent glyphosate or triclopyr plus a 0.5 percent
non-ionic surfactant to thoroughly wet all the leaves.
Thoroughly wet all leaves with one of the following herbicides in water with a surfactant: a
glyphosate herbicide as a 3 -percent solution (12 ounces per 3 -gallon mix) in the late fall or
early winter when safety to surrounding vegetation is desired, or elsewhere, Arsenal AC*
as a 1 -percent solution (4 ounces per 3 -gallon mix). Backpack mist blowers can broadcast
glyphosate as a 3 -percent solution (12 ounces per 3 -gallon mix) or Escort XP* at 1 ounce
per acre (0.2 dry ounces per 3 -gallon mix and 10 gallons per acre) during winter for safety
to dormant hardwoods. Summer applications of glyphosate may not be as effective as
other times and require a higher percent solution. The best time for Arsenal AC* and Escort
XP* is summer to fall. For stems too tall for foliar sprays and when safety to surrounding
vegetation is desired, apply a basal spray of Garlon 4 as a 20 -percent solution (5 pints per
Chinese Privet
3 -gallon mix) in a labeled basal oil product, vegetable oil or mineral oil with a penetrant, or
(Ligustrum
fuel oil or diesel fuel (where permitted); or undiluted Pathfinder II. Elsewhere, apply
sinense)
Stalker* as a 6- to 9 -percent solution (1.5 to 2 pints per 3 -gallon mix) in a labeled basal oil
product, vegetable oil or mineral oil with a penetrant, or fuel oil or diesel fuel (where
permitted) to young bark as a basal spray making certain to treat all stems in a clump; or
cut and immediately treat the stump tops with Arsenal AC* as a 5 -percent solution (20
ounces per 3 -gallon mix) or Velpar L* as a 10 -percent solution in water (1 quart per 3 -
gallon mix) with a surfactant. When safety to surrounding vegetation is desired,
immediately treat stump tops and sides with Garlon 3A or with a glyphosate herbicide as a
20 -percent solution (5 pints per 3 -gallon mix) in water with a surfactant. ORTHO Brush-B-
Gon and Enforcer Brush Killer are effective undiluted for treating cut -stumps and available
in retail garden stores (safe to surrounding plants). For large stems, make stem injections
using Arsenal AC* or when safety to surrounding vegetation is desired, Garlon 3A or a
glyphosate herbicide using dilutions and cut -spacings specified on the herbicide label
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Appendix 6
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 1 March 2019

Invasive Species
Recommended Removal Technique
(anytime except March and April). An EZ-Ject tree injector can help to reach the lower part
of the main stem; otherwise, every branching trunk must be hack -and -squirt injected.
Foliar Spray Method: This method should be considered for large thickets of seedlings and
small saplings where risk to nontarget species is minimal. Air temperature should be above
65'F to ensure absorption of herbicides.
Glyphosate: Apply a 2% solution of glyphosate or triclopyr and water plus a 0.5% non-ionic
surfactant to thoroughly wet all leaves. Use a low pressure and coarse spray pattern to
reduce spray drift damage to non -target species. Glyphosate is a non-selective systemic
herbicide that may kill non -target partially -sprayed plants.
Tree of Heaven
Cut Stump Method: This control method should be considered when treating individual
(Ailanthus
trees or where the presence of desirable species precludes foliar application. Stump
altissima)
treatments can be used if the ground is not frozen.
Triclopyr: Horizontally cut stems at or near ground level. Immediately apply a 25% solution
of triclopyr and water to the cut stump making sure to cover the outer 20% of the stump.
Hack and Squirt and Stem Infection Methods: To effectively treat larger saplings to mature
trees using the hack and squirt methods, make cuts to the cambium spaced 1" apart and
arranged horizontally around the stem. Immediately apply a 50% solution of triclopyr or
25% solution of glyphosate into the cuts. An EZ-Ject tree injector or other similar tool can
be used to treat saplings to mature trees. These treatments should occur from mid -late
summer to late fall.
Foliar Spray Method: This method should be considered for large thickets of paulownia
seedlings where risk to non -target species is minimal. Air temperature should be above
65'F to ensure absorption of herbicides.
Glyphosate: Apply a 2% solution of glyphosate and water plus a 0.5% non-ionic surfactant
to thoroughly wet all leaves. Use a low pressure and coarse spray pattern to reduce spray
drift damage to non -target species. Glyphosate is a non-selective systemic herbicide that
may kill non -target partially -sprayed plants.
Triclopyr: Apply a 2% solution of triclopyr and water plus a 0.5% non-ionic sur-factant to
thoroughly wet all leaves. Use a low pressure and coarse spray pattern to reduce spray
drift damage to non -target species. Triclopyr is a selective herbicide for broadleaf species.
In areas where desirable grasses are growing under or around paulownia, triclopyr can be
used without non -target damage.
Princess Tree
Cut Stump Method: This control method should be considered when treating individual
(Paulownia
trees or where the presence of desirable species precludes foliar application. Stump
tomentosa)
treatments can be used if the ground is not frozen.
Glyphosate: Horizontally cut stems at or near ground level. Immediately apply a 25%
solution of glyphosate and water to the cut stump making sure to cover the outer 50% of
the stump.
Triclopyr: Horizontally cut stems at or near ground level. Immediately apply a 50% solution
of triclopyr and water to the cut stump making sure to cover the outer 20% of the stump.
Hack and Squirt and Stem Infection Methods: To effectively treat larger saplings to mature
trees using the hack and squirt methods, make cuts to the cambium spaced 1" apart and
arranged horizontally around the stem. Immediately apply a 50% solution of triclopyr or
25% solution of glyphosate into the cuts. An EZ-Ject tree injector or other similar tool can
be used to treat saplings to mature trees. These treatments should occur from mid -late
summer to late fall.
https://www.se-eppc.org/manual/princess.htmi
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Appendix 6
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 2 March 2019

Invasive Species
Recommended Removal Technique
Foliar Spray Method: Apply MSM at 1 ounce per acre between April and June. May to
October apply a 4% solution of glyphosate and water plus a 0.5% non-ionic surfactant to
thoroughly wet all leaves. Use a low pressure and coarse spray pattern to reduce spray
drift damage to non -target species. Glyphosate is a non-selective systemic herbicide that
Multiflora Rose
may kill non -target partially -sprayed plants.
(Rosa multiflora)
Cut Stump Method: This control method should be considered when treating individual
stems or where the presence of desirable species precludes foliar application. Stump
treatments can be used if the ground is not frozen.
Glyphosate: Horizontally cut stems at or near ground level. Immediately apply a 20%
solution of glyphosate and water to the cut stump making sure to cover the outer 50% of
the stump.
Alligator edera
Two herbicide treatments with a 2 percent solution of glyphosate plus a surfactant
(Alternanth
(formulations approved for aquatic sites), 1 in the spring and 1 in the fall, have shown to be
philoxeroides)
most effective for the initial treatment of alligatorweed. When the weed is reduced to a
maintenance level, only annual treatments should be required.
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Appendix 6
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 3 March 2019

APPENDIX 7
Site Protection Instrument

Appendix 7 Site Protection Instrument
The land required for construction, management, and stewardship of this mitigation project includes
portions of the parcels listed in Table 1. All parcels are optioned for purchase by Wildlands Engineering,
Inc. (Wildlands). Upon transfer of lands to Wildlands, a conservation easement will be recorded on the
parcels and includes streams and wetlands being restored and preserved along with their corresponding
riparian buffers.
Table 1: Site Protection Instrument —Alexander Farm Mitigation Site
*Agreement for temporary construction easement
The conservation easement template that will be used for recordation is included in this appendix. All
site protection instruments require 60 -day advance notification to the USACE and or DMS prior to any
action to void, amend, or modify the document. No such action shall take place unless approved by the
State.
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Appendix 7
DMS ID No. 9100048 Page 1 March 2018
Memorandum of
Under
Option/Temporary
Option to
Access and
Acreage to be
Current Landowner
PIN
County
Purchase
Conservation
protected
by
Easement Deed Book
Wildlands?
(DB) and Page Number
(PG)
Jennifer A. Combs,
0010480
Scottie A. Combs,
Alexander
Yes
Book 602 Page 493-499
Polly A. Van Hoy,
Henry P Van Hoy, II
*Agreement for temporary construction easement
The conservation easement template that will be used for recordation is included in this appendix. All
site protection instruments require 60 -day advance notification to the USACE and or DMS prior to any
action to void, amend, or modify the document. No such action shall take place unless approved by the
State.
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Appendix 7
DMS ID No. 9100048 Page 1 March 2018

APPENDIX 8
Maintenance Plan

Appendix 8 Maintenance Plan
The site shall be visited semi-annually and a physical inspection of the site shall be conducted a
minimum of once per year throughout the post -construction monitoring period until performance
standards are met. These site inspections may identify site components and features that require
routine maintenance. Routine maintenance should be expected most often in the first two years
following site construction and may include the following:
Table 1. Maintenance Plan —Alexander Farm Mitigation Site
Component/
Feature
Maintenance through project close-out
Routine channel maintenance and repair activities may include chinking of in -stream
structures to prevent piping, securing of loose coir matting, and supplemental installations
of live stakes and other target vegetation along the channel — these shall be conducted
where success criteria are threatened or at the discretion of the Designer. Areas where
Stream
storm water and floodplain flows intercept the channel may also require maintenance to
prevent bank failures and head -cutting. Beaver activity will be monitored and beaver dams
on project streams will typically be removed, at the discretion of the Designer, during the
monitoring period to allow for bank stabilization and stream development outside of this
type of influence.
Vegetation shall be maintained to ensure the health and vigor of the targeted community.
Routine vegetation maintenance and repair activities may include supplemental planting,
Vegetation
pruning, mulching, and fertilizing. Exotic invasive plant species requiring treatment per the
Invasive Species Treatment Plan (Appendix 6) shall be treated in accordance with that plan
and with NC Department of Agriculture (NCDA) rules and regulations.
Site boundaries shall be identified in the field to ensure clear distinction between the
mitigation site and adjacent properties. Boundaries may be identified by fence, marker,
Site boundary
bollard, post, tree -blazing, or other means as allowed by site conditions and/or conservation
easement. Boundary markers disturbed, damaged, or destroyed will be repaired and/or
replaced on an as -needed basis.
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Appendix 8
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 1 March 2019

APPENDIX 9
Financial Assurance

Appendix 9 Financial Assurances
Pursuant to Section IV H and Appendix III of the Division of Mitigation Service's In -Lieu Fee Instrument
dated July 28, 2010, the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources has provided
the US Army Corps of Engineers Wilmington District with a formal commitment to fund projects to
satisfy mitigation requirements assumed by DMS. This commitment provides financial assurance for all
mitigation projects implemented by the program.
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Appendix 9
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 1 March 2019

APPENDIX 10
Preliminary Construction Plans

Alexander Farm Mitigation Site
Alexander County, North Carolina
Catawba River Basin 03050101
for
NCDEQ
Division of Mitigation Services
yqd j
rte.,
Ston-, Point
SITE
Loray Q
0" StatEsville
CaowF�o
Pair ©
y Kyles Cros!,"*ds
C19renwnt
Troutrnan
h t
Vicinity Map
Not to Scale
BEFORE YOU DIG!
CALL 1-800-632-4949
N.C. ONE -CALL CENTER
IT'S THE LAW!
Environmental
Quality
DMS MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW
ISSUED JUNE 3, 2019
Sheet Index
Title Sheet
0.1
Project Overview
0.2
General Notes and Symbols
0.3
Typical Sections
1.1-1.4
Stream Plan and Profile
UTI
2.1.1-2.1.15
UTIA
2.2.1
BMP
2.3.1
Planting Sheets
3.0-3.6
Sediment Erosion Control
Reserved
Details
5.1-5.7
Project Directory
Engineering:
Wildlands Engineering, Inc
License No. F-0831
1430 South Mint Street
Suite 104
Charlotte, NC 28203
Aaron Earley, PE
704-332-7754
Surveying:
Turner Land Surveying, PLLC
P.O. Box 148
Swannanoa, NC 28778
Lissa Turner, PLS
919-827-0745
NC DEQ - Division of
Mitigation Services
5 Ravenscroft Dr, Ste. 102
Asheville, NC 28801
Harry Tsomides
828-545-7057
DMS Project No. 100048
11
o
o U
(�
O
Z
w o
U
75
r. 7�
X C5
X

_ I
0' 200' 400' 600' �
o
hm6
«zmm
lz
\ �L
\ Q+
STA: 100+00
BEGIN UTI REACH IA \ 04 O
�F
SPP \ 7 JENNIFER A. PALMER
STA: 107+70 & POLLY A VAN HOY
END UT1 REACH lA
1 PIN: 0010480
BEGIN UT1 REACH 1B
D13:551 PG:1186
10
S
%OO g
\ ,Z STA: 117+39
'lot11\0 (Ja END UT1 REACH 1B
Z�2 a 00 \ Ch BEGIN EASEMENT BREAK r
i—I
cE 4-
STA :117+90 '~ O
S.� END EASEMENT BREAK
BEGIN UT1 REACH 2
hePtz 13 115+00:...
3j 33 STA: 130+50 -I�
END UTI REACH 2
Sheet 2.14 BEGIN EASEMENT BREAK STA.131+10` Q
END EASEMENT BREAK
0..,� 'SPP ° c �d BEGIN UTI REACH 3 H
h ds as C6 2
i
UT1A 4N Q
Q3. xO0 cF Stormwater BMP
C 33 7 STA: 138+28 N
loo.,. Sheet Z. 6 e Ox00 ��4 RP BEGIN UTI EACH 4A (END UTI REACH 3Ol
a
51
Sheet 2.1.7 135+00 ''' 16 eae
Sheet "� �T7 rtiti 1 R a3 33/�i��—rayVlo s o Cr eet 3J 360+5+
E
a�S i ��4 Sheet 2.1.15
�SrO She 5+00 3' 2 03 ISOx0 cE c
C� et
` �I.zO E Sheet 2.1.13
c c Sheet21,2
STA: 166+66
Sheet 2.1.11
END UTl REACH 4B
STA: 150+00
END UT1 REACH 4A
BEGIN UTI REACH 4B

990
985
STA =
ELD
980
975
970
100+00 100+50 101+00 101+50 102+00
-- - - - - --------------- --------------------------------
102+50 103+00
----------- ------------------- ------ -- ---------------
---------- ------------------
--- ------------------ ----- -------
--- - --- ---------------- ---------------- : -------
-------- ---- -- ------------ -----------------
-------------- ---- ---- ---- ---------- I -------
-- - ------------- c -- ------- ----------
:�:� CE -----------
------------------------- -------------------
:��, CE ------------ - - - - - -
-------- 000
----- - --- -
-- ---------- ------- —.-
"CE --- - --
------- — -----
- ----- - --------------
---- ---------
:-::: ----------
STA:
iuu+uu
.990----" - - - - --------
-
BEGIN UT1 REACH 1A RESTORATION ---
-----------
---
-------
--------- - ---
MINES
wwA
--- ---- ----
-------- ----------
DRAINAG -- -------
RIFF LE MATERIAL
2.1.2
-- -----
-K -H
-
----------
- - -
-----------
(HORIZONTAL)
990
990 ---- --- ------- -------
-------------------------
------
------- ------
-------
2.1.6
----- -------------------
-------------
-----------
---------
--------------
--=-----=-'-----------------------
-------------- - -------------------------------- -- --- --- ----------
- ---------------- -------------
---------- ---------------- ---------------------------------------------------
995 --------
oars
---------
------
------------
------ --- -------
------------------------------------------------------
------------------------ ------------------------------
---
2.1.9
----- ---------
- - - -
------------ - -----------
: ----- ------------------------------------------ --- -----------
----------------------------------------------------
- -------------------------------------------- ----------
---
lool
2.1.11
-------
990
985
980
975
970
103+50 104+00 104+50
--------
---------
---------------- - - ------------------------ ----------
--------------
--------------------------------------------E�-6 ------------------------------------------
-------
C+
------------------ ------------ [T
---------------------------
)
-------, --- ------------------------- --- --c-
--- -----1 <
-- l,-
--I-- --- - -------- Q
- --------------------
LU
--- - - - - - - --------- -
---------- $z---YG
-----
----------
Cl?, ------ ------ "':', ----- ------------- ----- ---
C�
1-2---- --- - ------- -- ------------------------ :------:------------------------
-------------------- -
I- ------ ----- --
---
---------
-
------------------------- ---- ---I----------
0'
-- ----------
2'
4' 6'
2.1.2
20'
40' 60'
(HORIZONTAL)
- �101 --**'
Sheet Index
2.1.1
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.1.4
2.1.5
oQ
2.1.6
2.1.7
oars
2.1.8
2.1.9
2.1.10
2.2.1
2.1.11
2.3.1
2.1.12
2.1.13
2.1.14
2.1.15

w
00
2'
we ncnq
4' 6'
960
0'
20'
40' 60'
975
STA = 106+93.53
A = 106+96.98
m
STA = 107+43.99J
ELEV = 962.67
_
STA = 107+17.23
ELEV = 959.95
STA = 107+96.984-
07+96.98ELEV
E LEV= 960.96
m ++
O
2.1.12
ELEV = 959.69
STA = 107+58.98
STA= 107+98.48
ELEV = 957.90 I _ _ �•
- \
2.1.14
STA = 107+18.98
ELEV = 960.96
ELEV = 959.38
I I
-
STA = 108+14.98 /
m
ati
105+35.45
STov~Ai
=mwI
STA = 107+65.98
ELEV = 956.96
v?
STA=107+47.98
II
¢
I
II
+
m°o
o
m
w_�
m +
ELEV96 8.42
O
o
ELEV = 9Fn Fn
ELEV = 956.49 1
¢
975
II o
m
w0+
m
a^
STA = 107+62.48
107+50
108+00 108+50
II
II
^
o
w
ELEV = 960.10
w
o
m
`n
o
o
o¢Vl
o
= 1\0
STAq^mW
.9
5+�V5II
+
a
mm
0o
m
ELEV
967.72
v
W
w
p�
^�
¢
Io
m
N
Q
J
0
an d
¢
W
II
4
W
o
cd
m +
STA= 105+70.14
05+70.14_
EXISTING
GR DE]
DmiwwoE
¢ �.o
-a
o
, • '
n
ELEV=
967.18o
I
wo
�HVII
m
6
oqvI�I
¢>o
II8
fOO
tWWo
l
Qw
O
M
+
nM
\omwJW•
l4
W
W
NVl
970
3
WwII
OM+
o
m
-
o¢
¢
+
10 +6348
-3'2%
o+
mSTA= rc
ELEV=
.
320\••
--
\
IIwM
Q
11-o Q
II II
STA = 104+87.48
ELEV = 969.60
_
STA = 105+15.23
965 ELEV = 968.33
1
STA = 105+16.48
ELEV = 968.33
4 1 1
PROPOSED GRADE
STA = 105+39.23
ELEV = 967.58
960
955
954
104+50
105+00
fA= 105+57.98)
ELEV = 966.77
STA =;V-059+56:473j9
ELE= 62
STA - 105+73.74
ELEV = 966.19
STA = 105+98.32
ELEV = 965.42
STA = 106+44.39
ELEV = 963.61
STA = 106+18.98
ELEV = 964.60 STA = 106+46.70
ELEV = 963.61
STA = 106+72
ELEV = 962
105+50 106+00 106+50
PROPOSED BANKFULL
0'
2'
we ncnq
4' 6'
960
0'
20'
40' 60'
975
STA = 106+93.53
A = 106+96.98
ELEV = 961.78
STA = 107+43.99J
ELEV = 962.67
_
STA = 107+17.23
ELEV = 959.95
STA = 107+96.984-
07+96.98ELEV
E LEV= 960.96
N
O
m
N C W
2.1.12
ELEV = 959.69
STA = 107+58.98
STA= 107+98.48
ELEV = 957.90 I _ _ �•
- \
2.1.14
STA = 107+18.98
ELEV = 960.96
ELEV = 959.38
I I
-
STA = 108+14.98 /
oO1_^
STA = 107+65.98
ELEV = 956.96
v?
STA=107+47.98
ELEV = 959.15
STA = 108+30.09
STA = 108+22.48 ELEV = 956.03
955
II
o
w_�
m +
ri
O
o
ELEV = 9Fn Fn
ELEV = 956.49 1
¢
II o
m
a
m
o�
STA = 107+62.48
107+00
107+50
108+00 108+50
II
II
^
o
w
ELEV = 960.10
w
o
m
`n
o
o
+
a
+
v
W
w
p�
^�
¢
o°
N
Q
J
0
an d
N
W
o
cd
m +
¢ �.o
-a
o
, • '
II
W ¢
C
>
W II
970
965
TA = 108+18.48
LE V = 957.40
STA = 108+33.98
io m ELEV = 956.40
o
¢ w o
o m
0'
2'
we ncnq
4' 6'
960
0'
20'
40' 60'
975
Q
o
A = 106+96.98
970
965
TA = 108+18.48
LE V = 957.40
STA = 108+33.98
io m ELEV = 956.40
o
¢ w o
o m
- - ---------------------- jr--
---------------------
/.4
Sheet Index
2'1'1
2
960
\
N w
Q
o
A = 106+96.98
ELEV = 961.78
STA = 107+43.99J
1 .g1ao •'•
_
STA = 107+17.23
ELEV = 959.95
STA = 107+96.984-
07+96.98ELEV
E LEV= 960.96
STA= 107+51.73J
ELEV 957.90 I
2.1.12
ELEV = 959.69
STA = 107+58.98
STA= 107+98.48
ELEV = 957.90 I _ _ �•
- \
2.1.14
STA = 107+18.98
ELEV = 960.96
ELEV = 959.38
I I
-
STA = 108+14.98 /
STA = 107+65.98
ELEV = 956.96
ELEV = 959.15
STA = 108+30.09
STA = 108+22.48 ELEV = 956.03
955
ELEV = 956.49 1
STA = 108+37.92
ELEV = 955.59
954
107+00
107+50
108+00 108+50
- - ---------------------- jr--
---------------------
/.4
Sheet Index
2'1'1
2
Q
o
°
2.1.12
2.1.13
2.1.14
11
I

STA = 108+84.69
m �
(1ET-)
MEMEMEM
ELEV = 953.68
°+' m
+
w
O
STA = 109+15.25
STA = 108+76.82
0
2.1.6
2.1.6
ELEV = 951.90
ELEV = 954.18
, j
o
m
STA= 108+68.02
� J
w w
rI
2.1.8
`^
2.1.9
ELEV - 954.68
2.1.10
¢
?
m
qo
2.1.13
v~i
w
m
o
Intio
m+
o O
+
N-�
o
II
Q
m
w o
O
+
IID
O
O-
W
955
W
Q
L
III
006�-O
W Q
N
J II
W Q
II
O
ti
N
+
O
nI
w
�
m
N
Q
~
w
wII
Q
w
+
m rc
r
II
M
H
J II
II O
w,�
Owl l�D C
C
W
I
O
I
W Q
N
w
J
II
N
J II
WQ
w o Q
I
W
1
`•. I
w l
06
�
�fl
m
J II II
J II
'
-
STA =
108+72.42
IQI
ELEV = 953.64
ti
m
m
O1^-
I
48%1
_
PROPOSED BANKFULL
950
STA = 108+79.5C
ELEV = 953.23
F
STA - 108+87.3
ELEV = 952.7
945
940
935 1
108+50
I
A - 109+10.82
ELEV = 951.39 STA = 109+36.99
ELEV = 949.60
STA'- 109+45.51
ELEV = 949.17'
I I
STA = 109+54.09
ELEV = 948.59 -
STA = 109+63.12
ELEV = 948.09-
1 1
STA = 109+72.10
ELEV = 947.95
109+00
>TA = 109+76.13
GRADE
(1ET-)
MEMEMEM
0' 20'
40' 60'
:LEV =
948.53
2.1 .5
Q
OR
2.1.6
2.1.6
m
w
�
2.1.7
fi
a\5
o
W
5r
2.1.8
2.1.9
2.1.10
+0
m
�
2.1.12
2.1.13
2.1.14
m
2.1.15
+
N-�
o
II
Q
m
w o
O
+
N
m
V
W
II
W
o
Vl
W Q
N
J II
W Q
II
O
ti
N
+
O
nI
w
�
m
N
Q
~
J
N
N
r
II
M
~
N
m
O
C
W
W
O
N
W Q
N
w
J
II
+ Is
II _0 Q
II
Q
W
1
Q
in
w l
I II i\
STA - 09+91. 79IA,\
ELEV = 946.75 -s
SIA = 110+02.18 I
ELEV = 946.47
STA = 110+12.81.
ELEV = 946.00
STA = 110+22.83
ELEV = 945.74
STA- 110+53.03_/
ELEV = 944.42
PROPOSED GRADE
109+50 110+00
EXISTIN
EXISTING
• V1 W II
J II W N
Vl W Q W II
GRADE
(1ET-)
MEMEMEM
0' 20'
40' 60'
2.1.4
2.1 .5
Q
OR
2.1.6
2.1.6
2.1.7
fi
a\5
o
W
5r
2.1.8
2.1.9
2.1.10
+0
W
n
2.1.12
2.1.13
2.1.14
2.1.15
+
N-�
\
V
W
II
W
o
m
Q
~
J
N
N
II
M
a
0
N
m
N
W
W
O
\
-/^
II
Q
W
1
ti
a
06
�
�fl
m
J II
IQI
w
ti
m
m
O1^-
PROPOSED BANKFULL
"'
II
¢
ELEV= 943.28
I
n
J
w
Q LL
a
JQ
= 111+11.43
EV = 942.14 / \\i \ -360
STA = 111+40.23 �
ELEV = 941.00
I
STA - 111+61.98 \
ELEV = 940.13 STA - 111+91.23 I
ELEV = 939.11
STA = 111+63.82 STA = 112+2(
ELEV- 940.13
1 1 1 ELEV = 93i
110+50 111+00 111+50 112+00
955
950
II^I
A = 48-71
STA = 112+91.48
ELEV - 936.77 ELEV = 935.51
935
112+50 113+00
-�-
---=--------------------
-
--------------
------------------------
---------------------
-----------------------------
-------------------- - ------------------------
----------
0' 2'
4' 6'
(1ET-)
MEMEMEM
0' 20'
40' 60'
2.1.4
2.1 .5
Q
OR
2.1.6
2.1.6
2.1.7
fi
a\5
o
o
5r
2.1.8
2.1.9
2.1.10
+0
W
n
2.1.12
2.1.13
2.1.14
2.1.15
\
V
W
II
W
Q
~
J
N
N
39'
N
W
W
O
\
-/^
N
W
II II
N
Oml
�
�fl
m
A= 110+82.31
ago
"'
II
¢
ELEV= 943.28
I
n
J
w
Q LL
= 111+11.43
EV = 942.14 / \\i \ -360
STA = 111+40.23 �
ELEV = 941.00
I
STA - 111+61.98 \
ELEV = 940.13 STA - 111+91.23 I
ELEV = 939.11
STA = 111+63.82 STA = 112+2(
ELEV- 940.13
1 1 1 ELEV = 93i
110+50 111+00 111+50 112+00
955
950
II^I
A = 48-71
STA = 112+91.48
ELEV - 936.77 ELEV = 935.51
935
112+50 113+00
-�-
---=--------------------
-
--------------
------------------------
---------------------
-----------------------------
-------------------- - ------------------------
----------
0' 2'
4' 6'
(1ET-)
MEMEMEM
0' 20'
40' 60'
2.1.4
Sheet Index
2 .1. 1
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.1.4
2.1 .5
Q
OR
2.1.6
2.1.6
2.1.7
fi
a\5
o
5r
2.1.8
2.1.9
2.1.10
2.2.1
2.1.11
2.3.1
2.1.12
2.1.13
2.1.14
2.1.15
z�N��oLL
o
12 -NN
^- `
H 0� o
1•� Z'^ s " LL E
11
I
4��5wCL��

940
935
STA = 11
ELEV =
930
925
920
113+00 113+50 114+00 114+50 115+00
cl
CE
-- CFs CE
i
' ----'� r-;---- --- ��' ''
REMOVE EXISTING
FENCE WITHIN
EASEMENT
wI
115+50 116+00 116+50 117+00
--------935---------------------- _ ---------------------------------------------------------------
__; -_'------------- - - -------
--------
- -
` ---- ---------------------------- ----
'--- -------------------- - ---- _
TIE TO EXISTING GROUND
_ -cR9
-` O CR_CR fZZq 0p_
O CR'
-.cy)CR_C''
y
----`~i- -- ,a -----
0'
2'
+
mm
O }
ti
0 N
20'
II�
m
Ol �_lD
II
¢
J II
>
2.1.6
r
_ FILL EXISTING CHANNEL
------------------
------------------ END UT1 REACH 1B - RESTORATION
BEGIN EASEMENT T BREA
EG K
2.1.7
-_-_ ,,_
935-
_
-
-----------------
\5
oa
--------------------------------------------
-_
2.1.8
' STABILIZE EXISTING �-----------------
---- - -
"DRAINAGE. ADD , __ _ - -----
= /
----____ - --___ rf
2.1.11
' RIFFLE MATERIAL _ '- a�
'---------- -
\ 3 --_ '- lz �
J ---
- ------------ 940---------------
2.1.14
2.1.15
Q).``_-
w
-ti
ti
>
w Q
m
�+°
m �
m-01 o
m -0-
m
PROPOSEDBANKFULL
in
m
vi
v~i
>
O
Vl
W
II N
II } nl
}
m
�
m + o>EXISTING
*68
m
m
GRADE
+
¢>
N
ON
W D
m m
\I
v~i w
Q
>
�'
N
STA= 113+45.48
STA=113+73.23
-
-
"-
`^
"I
II
w
m-+
io
`.-°I m
o�
+
vim
o
O -w
'-I
o
ELEV = 933.71
ELEV = 932.80
\
¢
II
Ju
-o
m
Lq
mm
STA
= 113+99.51
�\
`~"
W <
w-¢
ELEV=
931.98
114+63.48
1
-2.4%
¢
-STA
STA= 114+26.604
ELEV = 929.82
Ir
ELEV = 930.69
'
v~i
w
¢
> II
J_Q u
STA = 114+30.56
STA=
114+92.44
-2.6%
\
A
I��
N
"' N
ELEV = 930.69
ELEV
= 929.02
STA = 115+31.24
ELEV = 928.09
'2.4%
.
•\•
2.2 0
STA = 115+73.12
_
-2'2%
PROPOSED
GRADE
ELEV = 926.65
STA
= 116+07.77
ELEV = 926.23
-
_
=
- -
_
_1 8�
STA - 115+76.84
ELEV = 926.65
STA = 116+61.94
ELEV= 924.94
-1.4%
_
STA
= 116+32.58
ELEV
= 925.60
STA = 117+03.99
STA
ELEV
= 116+65.92
= 924.94
ELEV = 923.76
STA = 117+07.73
ELEV = 923.76 L_
115+50 116+00 116+50 117+00
--------935---------------------- _ ---------------------------------------------------------------
__; -_'------------- - - -------
--------
- -
` ---- ---------------------------- ----
'--- -------------------- - ---- _
TIE TO EXISTING GROUND
_ -cR9
-` O CR_CR fZZq 0p_
O CR'
-.cy)CR_C''
y
----`~i- -- ,a -----
935
930
925
920
117+50
Cy, .
0'
2'
4' 6'
12, 1'3
0'
20'
40' 60'
940
-= ------------
------------
935
930
925
920
117+50
Cy, .
2.1.2
12, 1'3
• •_ ' _- --_---------------
--
= -' --- ------
-= ------------
------------
2.1.6
r
_ FILL EXISTING CHANNEL
------------------
------------------ END UT1 REACH 1B - RESTORATION
BEGIN EASEMENT T BREA
EG K
2.1.7
-_-_ ,,_
935-
_
-
-----------------
\5
oa
--------------------------------------------
-_
2.1.8
' STABILIZE EXISTING �-----------------
---- - -
"DRAINAGE. ADD , __ _ - -----
= /
----____ - --___ rf
2.1.11
' RIFFLE MATERIAL _ '- a�
'---------- -
\ 3 --_ '- lz �
J ---
- ------------ 940---------------
2.1.14
2.1.15
Q).``_-
SF7
Sheet Index
Lil 2.1.1
2.1.2
12, 1'3
2.1.4
2.1.5
oQ
2.1.6
r
c�
2.1.7
\5
oa
r
2.1.8
2.1.9
2.1.10
2.2.1
2.1.11
2.3.1
2.1.12
2.1.13
2.1.14
2.1.15
U/•7�
H o
zz 11o9
�1`01�mmz
�iw«zmmv
^^Z`Y lo lo
�ZE
11
ri

930
925
920
915
117+50
118+00
118+50 119+00 119+50 120+00
VE
CE E_
CE
__- - -""-- - S CE CE C, CE 'CE CE'
_
E
--------------------------
F-- ---------- 5
0'
2
T
�
930
STA: 117+39
N
11
END UT1 REACH 113 -RESTORATION
---
---
0'
\ °-�"•- _
BEGIN EASEMENT BREAK
3
'
_ '" a-------------------
_ _
----_--'" ----`` - ---J-�--3-------------------------
---
x -
n
---------------------------
-----------------
"
------ _------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________ ""_ -_-- -----_ _ -------------- ----- — —
3J
r
------------------
------
_ ---------------------------------------------
i
__—=
- �`
____ _ -___ __ _--------------------------------------------_____
2.1.10
2.2.1
2.1.11
2.3.1
-
2.1.13
----
-------------------------------------
-
_------
•a
—---------
—
1 ;.
_ _ __--
------------
W
+
M
N
�
N
0
}
�
m
N
N
____---
w
—=
-z
--------------------------------------
Q
I I
W
�
W
II
II
w
EXISTING
GRADE
STA
ELEV=
= 117+92.49
922.03
PROPOSED GRADE
----
STA = 117+95.76
ELEV 922.03
1
=
117+50
118+00
118+50 119+00 119+50 120+00
VE
CE E_
CE
__- - -""-- - S CE CE C, CE 'CE CE'
_
E
--------------------------
F-- ---------- 5
120+50
0'
2
T
4' 6'
930
STA: 117+39
N
11
END UT1 REACH 113 -RESTORATION
---
---
0'
\ °-�"•- _
BEGIN EASEMENT BREAK
3
'
_ '" a-------------------
_ _
----_--'" ----`` - ---J-�--3-------------------------
---
x -
n
---------------------------
-----------------
"
------ _------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________ ""_ -_-- -----_ _ -------------- ----- — —
3J
r
------------------
------
_ ---------------------------------------------
i
__—=
- �`
____ _ -___ __ _--------------------------------------------_____
2.1.10
2.2.1
2.1.11
2.3.1
-
2.1.13
----
-------------------------------------
-
_------
•a
—---------
—
1 ;.
_ _ __--
------------
------
---------
_-- x
____---
w
—=
-z
--------------------------------------
120+50
925
920
915
121+00 121+50 172+00
/ ce ---- _
--------------
----------
GE ___ \_____________
-------------
STA: 117+90
END EASEMENT BREAK - —' " ESTABLISH SINGLE '
BEGIN UT1 REACH 2 - ENHANCEMENT IIT
HREAD CHANNEL AND
` —= 0 ____-- STABILIZE HEADCUTS '
---------------` _ __ DO NOT
DISTURB
_" _
lX2 1,
R
K "t `925 —X--„ —
�' ♦ / _
r
_ 0
_ 0 0' _
- 19 -- `
1 - _ � i
-`1N&TALLPERMANENT •:;--_``_ - -- - - - - ._ _ - _ - -------- k--
y1
i
�CULVERTCROSSING ---------------
SEE
_ _- _ -
SEE DETAIL 3 SHEET 5.6 - ----• ` ` --- ------ _ - -- ----
9�S• '-""
-------------
-7 ------ - ---'
_ -
i
-'-•• "-- - - "------- ---
_
- -------- =-"
— ,
Vr
" ---- ----
--------------
-- --
� �2
----_------------ _ --------- _-- ---------------------------- -' --
-------------- _
-------------
------- --------------------------------------
------------
------------- ------ --- ---- ------ ----
"
--------` ---- "_ " -- --------
------------
"3J-�—` `- -- --- -- ----
-`___--- ----- ------- ---_-
--------------------------------
---. 3J 3J — ---------- —---------` ---- --- _ _ ---------------------------
--------
--- - --- ---- -----
_ _ ''
-" -----
-- --- }
3J \-------`
0'
2
T
4' 6'
930
=-------
--------------------- -"-- ----------
- - - ` 3J - ---- _ ----
- - ---
-
(v
)
---
---
0'
20'
(HORIZONTAL)
40' 60'
925
920
915
121+00 121+50 172+00
/ ce ---- _
--------------
----------
GE ___ \_____________
-------------
STA: 117+90
END EASEMENT BREAK - —' " ESTABLISH SINGLE '
BEGIN UT1 REACH 2 - ENHANCEMENT IIT
HREAD CHANNEL AND
` —= 0 ____-- STABILIZE HEADCUTS '
---------------` _ __ DO NOT
DISTURB
_" _
lX2 1,
R
K "t `925 —X--„ —
�' ♦ / _
r
_ 0
_ 0 0' _
- 19 -- `
1 - _ � i
-`1N&TALLPERMANENT •:;--_``_ - -- - - - - ._ _ - _ - -------- k--
y1
i
�CULVERTCROSSING ---------------
SEE
_ _- _ -
SEE DETAIL 3 SHEET 5.6 - ----• ` ` --- ------ _ - -- ----
9�S• '-""
-------------
-7 ------ - ---'
_ -
i
-'-•• "-- - - "------- ---
_
- -------- =-"
— ,
Vr
" ---- ----
--------------
-- --
� �2
----_------------ _ --------- _-- ---------------------------- -' --
-------------- _
-------------
------- --------------------------------------
------------
------------- ------ --- ---- ------ ----
"
--------` ---- "_ " -- --------
------------
"3J-�—` `- -- --- -- ----
-`___--- ----- ------- ---_-
--------------------------------
---. 3J 3J — ---------- —---------` ---- --- _ _ ---------------------------
--------
--- - --- ---- -----
_ _ ''
-" -----
-- --- }
3J \-------`
--- - ---------------------
--- --- - -- ' ---------------------------------------------'
- -
--- --- - - --- --- -- --_____---
- -- 3J -
- -- --------------
_ �'
---
- —�--------------------- v
----- —
=-------
--------------------- -"-- ----------
- - - ` 3J - ---- _ ----
- - ---
-
------
— -----
---
---
rQ� `
30�\
935 --
3
_ '" a-------------------
_ _
----_--'" ----`` - ---J-�--3-------------------------
---
2.1.7
---------------------------
"
------ _------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________ ""_ -_-- -----_ _ -------------- ----- — —
3J
r
------------------
_ ---------------------------------------------
i
__—=
- �`
____ _ -___ __ _--------------------------------------------_____
2.1.10
2.2.1
2.1.11
2.3.1
-
2.1.13
�_ =01--i
ENHANCEMENT II TREATMENTS
1. EXCLUDE CATTLE
2. TREAT INVASIVE VEGETATION
3. PROVIDE SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTING
Sheet Index
2.1.1
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.1.4
2.1.5
OR
2.1.6
2.1.7
�5
oa
r
2.1.8
2.1.9
2.1.10
2.2.1
2.1.11
2.3.1
2.1.12
2.1.13
2.1.14
2.1.15
•
9

920
915
910
905 1--
122+00
�J- EXISTIING GRADEI
122+50 123+00 123+50 124+00 124+50 125+00 125+50
915
910
--+ 905
126+00
ENHANCEMENT 11 TREATMENTS
1. EXCLUDE CATTLE
----------------------------------- ------- ------ CE ------ ---- ------ ------- -
_--
- 2. TREATINVASIVE VEGETATION
--------- CE ---------- � 'c'E ------------------ Y- 3. PROVIDE SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTING
-----------
- - - - - CE
-----------
-------------------------- 0 ------ CE ------------ 925 to ----- --------
+ I CE ------------ ---------------- _rr- :Z::: ------
CECE ------------------------------- CE - ------------
/I I -------------- Ego
---------------------------- ------------_ CE
CE I r" -- CE
----------- --------------------
CE I:z
----------- - - - - - - - - - ------------- CE
-------- — - - - -
f-------------- ----------- - - - - - - 19 ------------ ------------ --------- ------------ ---------
------------ Lu ------- -------- t Lu
-- ---- ------
----------- ---------- - -- --------- ----------
-----------
-----------
xl -----------
- ju
V
----------- ------
I" � bi
------------ --------
-------------
---------------
---------- -
----- - -- - ----- ------ -- -- ------------- Sheet Index
'-------------------
--------- --------
- -------------------- 2.1.1
2.1.2
122 ------
2.1.3
2.1 .4
------------ - - ------- - 2.1.5
----- --------------------- -------------------- ------------------
-------------
---------------------- --------------- --------
------ 2.1.6
------------- ----- -------- ----- ------------------------- ------------------.7
2.1
------------- ------
- - - ------------------- --- --------
2.1.9------ ----------- ------- ---------------------------- ------- --------------- ---- --------------
- - - - - -------------- - ------------------------ 35
----- ------- - ----------------------------------- ------
3D 2.1.10
------ -----
11 ----- . .
.1
-- -------
- -- - 211q 1 2.3
- ------------ -- 3j� ------
- --- - - -
2.1..12
2.1.13
2.1.14
2.1.15
0
V
2'
4' 6'
920
we ncnq
20'
40' 60'
915
910
--+ 905
126+00
ENHANCEMENT 11 TREATMENTS
1. EXCLUDE CATTLE
----------------------------------- ------- ------ CE ------ ---- ------ ------- -
_--
- 2. TREATINVASIVE VEGETATION
--------- CE ---------- � 'c'E ------------------ Y- 3. PROVIDE SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTING
-----------
- - - - - CE
-----------
-------------------------- 0 ------ CE ------------ 925 to ----- --------
+ I CE ------------ ---------------- _rr- :Z::: ------
CECE ------------------------------- CE - ------------
/I I -------------- Ego
---------------------------- ------------_ CE
CE I r" -- CE
----------- --------------------
CE I:z
----------- - - - - - - - - - ------------- CE
-------- — - - - -
f-------------- ----------- - - - - - - 19 ------------ ------------ --------- ------------ ---------
------------ Lu ------- -------- t Lu
-- ---- ------
----------- ---------- - -- --------- ----------
-----------
-----------
xl -----------
- ju
V
----------- ------
I" � bi
------------ --------
-------------
---------------
---------- -
----- - -- - ----- ------ -- -- ------------- Sheet Index
'-------------------
--------- --------
- -------------------- 2.1.1
2.1.2
122 ------
2.1.3
2.1 .4
------------ - - ------- - 2.1.5
----- --------------------- -------------------- ------------------
-------------
---------------------- --------------- --------
------ 2.1.6
------------- ----- -------- ----- ------------------------- ------------------.7
2.1
------------- ------
- - - ------------------- --- --------
2.1.9------ ----------- ------- ---------------------------- ------- --------------- ---- --------------
- - - - - -------------- - ------------------------ 35
----- ------- - ----------------------------------- ------
3D 2.1.10
------ -----
11 ----- . .
.1
-- -------
- -- - 211q 1 2.3
- ------------ -- 3j� ------
- --- - - -
2.1..12
2.1.13
2.1.14
2.1.15
0
V

915
910
905
900 -1-
126+00
EXISTING GRADE
126+50 127+00 127+50 128+00 128+50 129+00 129+50 130+00
0' 2' 4' 6'
weancnq U/�)
915 H7
0' 20' 40' 60' w n m o
(Hoaizorvia,) �y v u m mN
1 «z qq
^~Z�Ynnc
H():E°_..
2 04Zo�F LL
910
905
--+ 900
130+50
Index
_------------------2.1.1
--------�,--
--------------------
____
\_- moi`• = ------
_!-
910
I " '
,
2.1.2
=�M,
,
---------------
��--�� - -
-
`
cc
WJ --------------
-------
o
,,:
j
m
A
-----------
/( -------------------
----- --
--------'" '-'------- /
----------_ 6
—W --------------
-----—'
------
2.1.7 fir°
/ 7—' x _
-915 --- __
=_--_- ---_;; '
�5
a
-------_ __= __=-----------
__ - -
0' 2' 4' 6'
weancnq U/�)
915 H7
0' 20' 40' 60' w n m o
(Hoaizorvia,) �y v u m mN
1 «z qq
^~Z�Ynnc
H():E°_..
2 04Zo�F LL
910
905
--+ 900
130+50
/--------Sheet
i
Index
_------------------2.1.1
--------�,--
____
D D
-------
2.1.2
=�M,
2.1.3
��--�� - -
-
`
cc
2.1.4
-----------/►- -----------
�---------------
o
U
m
ENHANCEMENT II TREATMENTS
—W --------------
-----—'
------
2.1.7 fir°
_
�5
a
O
1. EXCLUDE CATTLE
2.1.8
----------- U -----------
---------
1
z
2. TREAT INVASIVE VEGETATION
______ ��-
, �' �•�
2.1.10 2.2.1
3. PROM DESUPPLEMENTAL PLANTING
�
2.1.11 2.3.1
4F
-----___ ---�-
2.1.12
——
-------------------------------------
-------------------
_-----
----�------
2.1.13
2.1.14
w
o
U
x
�
/--------Sheet
i
Index
_------------------2.1.1
--------�,--
____
D D
-------
2.1.2
=�M,
2.1.3
��--�� - -
-
`
cc
2.1.4
-----------/►- -----------
�---------------
2.1.5 oQ
2.1.6
—W --------------
-----—'
------
2.1.7 fir°
_
�5
a
2.1.8
----------- U -----------
---------
1
2.1.9
______ ��-
, �' �•�
2.1.10 2.2.1
---------------------------"-'.'
---=-'-----------------------------------------
�
2.1.11 2.3.1
---------------------------------------------
-----___ ---�-
2.1.12
——
-------------------------------------
-------------------
_-----
----�------
2.1.13
2.1.14
2.1.15

0' 2' 4' 6'
we ncnq
0' 20' 40' 60'
�HORizorv.a��
C7 �
11
I
O
0 U
O
F O m P.
'
I
-
--
PRESERVATION - NO WORK COMPLETED ON THIS REACH
- -- -------------- _
- -- - ------
-
-
;
------ -------------_ -
- - -- _ ---
_ - —
- -_
y Lr)--
'
"-
------
-
�x-
cin
w
-i -------------------- -
-
M =___
-- =
__
— ----
- z-
- ------------
Z_- _
----------- - '-_
L J
z1 "---
'---- - --_133+00 ------------ _---
_
/-
` I
I
p `
-
I _ _
I _
Q --------- - '
-------- _- I - _
i i
r 4
I
i
_-_
_
i
_ - 9
I '
1
3
- —
5
0
'
---- 0
_ ------------- -
=--
-131+00--_ -
I.
I
--- _131+00- p. �P IrT+ __ ------ _ - --_--- - -- _ �`----� 0
' 'r/ --- — ------ _
' l� - --------- _ -------- - ---------
-
_ " _ -- `------------- ------------ - _ -'--- -------- --
_
'� _--- ----- ----
910 �� - � -
-- - --------
_
------- -
/ _ _ - - --- '-- -- - _ - _ _ _ _
` _ _ _ _--------- --- _ --- - - ------ ------
- -
- -
_
-- ----` STA: 131+10 - _ _
' - -- __- --- - ------------
--------
------ _ --- --
_ y
END EASEMENT BREAK -- _ — -'-"
--- BEGIN UT1 REACH 3 - PRESERVATION _ _-- ` ---- ----- -- -
------ -
/ ---- ------ ----_ •- ---- - — _ - - " _ " - - ------"'_ - 915-= -- -- -- -- -- -- -------- — _--_---_--- ----------- -
/ _ ___-------_ -----------------------------------_J _
,
-- --- -
-�] --- --------
------ ----- -----__-
,
----------' - _ ----------------------------
L
_----- - -
�E _t CE CE _ CE 5 - —_ ——_ __ _ - - -
_
_ , I
- , I
CE _ -
,
;7'
CE "
�
,
- __ _ - - -
Sheet Index
2 .1. 1
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.1.4
2.1 .5
2.1. 6
2.1.7
�roa�5`
2.1.8
2.1.9
6
w
//
2110 2.2.1
2.111 2.3.1
.
2.1.12
N
2.1.13
E
2.1.14
3
2.11 .11

905
900
895
890
138+00
13a
--- -
-----
-----------
_---.--- ;
------------
- '----- ----------------_ — _ ---- ---- 1 L.-
_
--__------------------ ------ =-_ _ --------- —
-- -- =-- --------------
— `--
OSE
�_-
138+50 139+00
0' 2' 4' 6'
weancnq /U'7�
905
H7
0' 20' 40' 60' H (i m ^ m o
(10-ONIL) m
1 «z mmv
^~^Z�Ynn�
Kha Zou~LLE
2 ✓W� LL
900
895
890
139+50
Sheet Index
2.1.1
Lie
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.1.4
2.1.5
OR
�O
lj\�lll
2.1.6
2.1.7
r
2.1.8
2.1.9
2.1.10
2.2.1
2.1.11
2.3.1
2.1.12
2.1.13
2.1.14
2.1.15
EXISTING
GRADE
PROPOSED
BANKFULL
O
W
0W
O
O
O
O+
O
O
O
W
Ol
+
m
m
+
M
w
G
w
G
w
G
w
G
-0.2%
STA = 138+89.56
PROPOSED GRADE
ELEV = 891.72
STA = 139+42.78
ELEV = 891.70
STA = 138+93.04
ELEV = 891.72
STA = 139+46.28
ELEV = 891.70
13a
--- -
-----
-----------
_---.--- ;
------------
- '----- ----------------_ — _ ---- ---- 1 L.-
_
--__------------------ ------ =-_ _ --------- —
-- -- =-- --------------
— `--
OSE
�_-
138+50 139+00
0' 2' 4' 6'
weancnq /U'7�
905
H7
0' 20' 40' 60' H (i m ^ m o
(10-ONIL) m
1 «z mmv
^~^Z�Ynn�
Kha Zou~LLE
2 ✓W� LL
900
895
890
139+50
Sheet Index
2.1.1
Lie
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.1.4
2.1.5
OR
�O
lj\�lll
2.1.6
2.1.7
r
2.1.8
2.1.9
2.1.10
2.2.1
2.1.11
2.3.1
2.1.12
2.1.13
2.1.14
2.1.15

900
895
890
885
139+50
m
d �
2.1.2
2.1.3
I
2.1.4
igam
2.1.5
OR
EXISTING GRADE
1�
2.1.6
�
2.1.7
�5
oa
r
2.1.8
2.1.9
2.1.10
2.2.1
2.1.11
2.3.1
I
2.1.13
2.1.14
2.1.15
N O
„m1 4
+ r^
m
N
N
m
N
N
ni
N
PROPOSED
BANKFULL
rO1,I w
+
m
+
a
o
m
w
o
m --mo+
N
n
N
m
m
c^i
chi
chi
c0
N
Q W
Q
W
Q
W
II
II
n
II
cO
W
�O
V~t
W
V~t
Q
11>
V~t W
W
¢
W
¢
W
y>j
N
Vt
w
Vt
w
Vt
W
w
Q
w
II
I I
W
+
y
W
�p
I�
�
V~t
w
Q w
II
II
W
+
O -c0
I�
O
�
___
-------
II
cO N
pl
Vt
w
II
Q
w-�
W
c^i
W
...
w
•
~
W
�
I I
W
�
_
w
STA = 139+99.16
STA = 140+63.36
STA = 141+23.54
\
ELEV = 891.44
ELEV = 891.44
ELEV = 891.00
I
'
2'S%
STA = 141+96.26
STA = 142+64.63
/
I
ELEV = 890.32
ELEV = 889.54
STA
= 143+19.72
ELEV = 888.76
\
STA 140+07.19
STA = 140+70.22
STA
= 141+30.28
/
E
ELEV = 891.44
ELEV = 891.44
ELEV =
891.00
PROPOSED
GRADE
STA = 142+03.56
ELEV = 890.32
STA= 142+71.69
STA
= 143+26.80
ELEV = 889.54
ELEV =
888.76
STA=
143+91.93
ELEV = 887.60
STA= 143+98.58
ELEV = 887.60
140+00 140+50 141+00 141+50
43z
L�
FILL EXISTING
CHANNEL --------------------------
142+00 142+50 143+00 143+50
i---------
------
--------
- Ili
0' 2' 4' 6'
(vean cnq U/'7�
900 I�
H N N
0' 20' 40' 60'F. z NN,^ m o
(10-0—L) �y v u m ri o
«zmmv
Z 2 Y n n C
aZou~LLE
H w� LL
z �
895
890
885
144+00 144+15
------ -----
--
- + — -
1
1
___ -
x 4{0
x_
--------- _ -
= lfl.------- ' , + ------
I 900------ _ - -
�1 - 4111 —
"; (^n REMOVE EXISTING - -- _ - - --- _ , ------__
---c-I�-- -- FENCE WITHIN _____ - - -- - --------- -- --- --- -- -- --- - - --- _--------- -
.- - - ----- ------- " - -- --- --- - -
Q-- ---x� EASEMENT -- t _ --------- - ---- - -- - '" -� ------ -__-
----------------------_ +
+ - -x x J-- _ --- �1 '-----------------
- -
-
cE-x-905- - -- --- __ _ ------ _ --------- ------ - - ; _ -- __ _ _ �5._ ______
895 ,�
E-_ _ _ _ - _ ---------
----- ----------
W �______"________ - - €-� _x- B -F
___ _ _ - _- _ __- _ ; ---_______________ _- ____- _ _ _ __ - _________________
c -- ---- _ - --_
---- -- -'---- _----_BOE--L;
------
-----------x-----------� _— -- -------------- ------------------ _— — ____ EF_ --900__x__ _ ______--_--._ _-- _ _ ___zE_�,zE_____Y1___________________
_`�� ___ ___
_____ ___________ _ _ ____ ____ _ __-____- __ _ _ _ _____________ _________ __ _ __ ______ __ -___
_ �_ -""_________ _ am_____ _ ______________
.� --£F Com.-_C{��ff
_ Z_
___ ___ ___ ____ _____- ----- --------- - F - - _ __ __ __ __ __ -----------------------------------------_----_-- ---- - - _ __ ---------
-
a ---------------_ - _" _ - _-:_ ---- - -----------
------- ---- ---- - -
----
- ---------- - - - ----- ----- - - --
j- ----- - ----------91 - - --
-------------915 ------ -------------- -------------------- __ _ --- - -- __
- ---------- — - - _ - - _ - -
_
Sheet Index
2.1.1
d �
2.1.2
2.1.3
I
2.1.4
igam
2.1.5
OR
1�
2.1.6
�
2.1.7
�5
oa
r
2.1.8
2.1.9
2.1.10
2.2.1
2.1.11
2.3.1
I
2.1.13
2.1.14
0' 2' 4' 6'
(vean cnq U/'7�
900 I�
H N N
0' 20' 40' 60'F. z NN,^ m o
(10-0—L) �y v u m ri o
«zmmv
Z 2 Y n n C
aZou~LLE
H w� LL
z �
895
890
885
144+00 144+15
------ -----
--
- + — -
1
1
___ -
x 4{0
x_
--------- _ -
= lfl.------- ' , + ------
I 900------ _ - -
�1 - 4111 —
"; (^n REMOVE EXISTING - -- _ - - --- _ , ------__
---c-I�-- -- FENCE WITHIN _____ - - -- - --------- -- --- --- -- -- --- - - --- _--------- -
.- - - ----- ------- " - -- --- --- - -
Q-- ---x� EASEMENT -- t _ --------- - ---- - -- - '" -� ------ -__-
----------------------_ +
+ - -x x J-- _ --- �1 '-----------------
- -
-
cE-x-905- - -- --- __ _ ------ _ --------- ------ - - ; _ -- __ _ _ �5._ ______
895 ,�
E-_ _ _ _ - _ ---------
----- ----------
W �______"________ - - €-� _x- B -F
___ _ _ - _- _ __- _ ; ---_______________ _- ____- _ _ _ __ - _________________
c -- ---- _ - --_
---- -- -'---- _----_BOE--L;
------
-----------x-----------� _— -- -------------- ------------------ _— — ____ EF_ --900__x__ _ ______--_--._ _-- _ _ ___zE_�,zE_____Y1___________________
_`�� ___ ___
_____ ___________ _ _ ____ ____ _ __-____- __ _ _ _ _____________ _________ __ _ __ ______ __ -___
_ �_ -""_________ _ am_____ _ ______________
.� --£F Com.-_C{��ff
_ Z_
___ ___ ___ ____ _____- ----- --------- - F - - _ __ __ __ __ __ -----------------------------------------_----_-- ---- - - _ __ ---------
-
a ---------------_ - _" _ - _-:_ ---- - -----------
------- ---- ---- - -
----
- ---------- - - - ----- ----- - - --
j- ----- - ----------91 - - --
-------------915 ------ -------------- -------------------- __ _ --- - -- __
- ---------- — - - _ - - _ - -
_
Sheet Index
2.1.1
d �
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.1.4
2.1.5
OR
1�
2.1.6
�
2.1.7
�5
oa
r
2.1.8
2.1.9
2.1.10
2.2.1
2.1.11
2.3.1
2.1.12
2.1.13
2.1.14
2.1.15
o. c8
d �
w
1�
E
�
3 V

895
890
885
880
144+15
95
144+50 145+00 145+50 146+00
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.1.4
PROPOSED
BAN KFULL
i
2.1.6
i
r
------------------------
/
3J
\5
oa
• -
--'-,
�
TING
REMOVE EXISTING
2.1.8
FILL EXISTING
CHANNEL
2.1.9
FENCE WITHIN
EASEMENT
2.1.10
\` �^
7\
2.1.11
2.3.1
2.1.12
2.1.13
2.1.14
2.1.15
mEXISTING
GRADE
m
+
m
m
o
m
W
+
N W
cdW
O
N
Q W
II
II
N
N
� J
Q
W
II W
II
W
W
+
W
Vl W
N
W
+
W
N
N
+
H
J
w
W
p
Q
_ •
W
V l
J
W
N
W
N
W
1.7%
—
..
\/
Z.
STA
ELEV
= 144+72.32
= 886.62
' '
" "
_• • • •
—•
—
—_•••_
I
�
-1.9%
STA= 144+79.85
STA
= 145+42.79
STA = 146+16.151
\
/
-1.3%
ELEV = 886.62
ELEV
886.122
Ei EV = 885.521
88
\\
/
-0.8%
STA
145+48.16
II \�
ELEV
= 886.22
1
STA= 146+87.07
ELEV = 884.55
I
PROPOSED
GRADE
STA =
146+23.66
I'
I
STA=
147+59.38
ELEV
= 885.52
STA = 146+95.13
ELEV =
884.55_—
ELEV = 883.71
STA
= 147+68.33
STA =
148+37.05
ELEV
= 883.71
ELEV
= 883.37--
I I
STA
= 148+43.58
ELEV 883.37
=
144+50 145+00 145+50 146+00
'890.
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.1.4
2.1.5
OR
i
2.1.6
i
r
------------------------
/
3J
\5
oa
• -
--'-,
�
TING
REMOVE EXISTING
2.1.8
FILL EXISTING
CHANNEL
2.1.9
FENCE WITHIN
EASEMENT
2.1.10
\` �^
7\
'890.
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.1.4
2.1.5
OR
�r
2.1.6
---
r
2.1.7
\5
oa
146+50 147+00 147+50
--------------
' INSTALL VERNAL
POOLWITH
OUTLET
148+00
148+50
Nao
----------------
Ar
Alir-----_-- -- ----
-- - _ „_
_ --------- -- - -
eA
(, ce —" ----- - -------- x�t - -- _ --_ ' �^
I
x
e.
- - - ---- - --__ - - — _"- -- -- ------ - _ -
--
x
---- -------
------- ------- -----
i
1
V'/
_
_
,'i
i
�--
-------------------
x �` �' cE-____ i --------- --- --- -ago _ --- ,�;% - . - "__"_ ------
4,\:::\
. `-\ �1 ----- CE cE CE`. CE r 4E cE.�.cE T c -f1 -_ cE � cE cE,T 2E,�, ,tF�.' �IE" rc'' C -ar' c� --- ,
-----------
---- I
r
5
--------------
t
i---- I - - _ -- ------ - _ ------------------
880
148+80
0' 2' 4' 6'
(v ncnq
0' 20' 40' 60'
Sheet Index
Lil 2.1.1
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.1.4
2.1.5
OR
2.1.6
2.1.7
\5
oa
r
2.1.8
2.1.9
2.1.10
2.2.1
2.1.11
2.3.1
2.1.12
2.1.13
2.1.14
2.1.15
U7
/1 0
z�No, om LLo
�`01�mmz
�w«zmq
N ZE
11
ri

890 w
885
STA = 1
ELEV
880
875
148+80 149+00
149+50 150+00 150+50 151+00
151+50 152+00 152+50 153+00 153+40
----------_ -- i
L.0
-------------- I H
-------- ���----------.-
0' 2' 4' 6'
we ncnq U7 �
0' 20' 40' 60' H (i N w^ m o
«z mmmz
^a^ Z`Y nn`
ol
I� Z'^o u F LL E
W ri LL
Sheet Index
Lil 2.1.1
2.1.2
2.1.11 2.3.1
2. 12
oQ
r
2.1.13
E
°
2.1.14
2 17
=
3
2.1.15
V
_
891
o
�+
N
PROPOSED
BANKFULL
ti
mryi
I
EXISTING
GRADE
m
o
O+
ti
'pH
N
m
M
Vl
W
¢
~
Vl
W
J
W
II
II
w
O
II
+ N
O
N
W
0
M
0
Q
O
N
N
t~/1
J
W
II
¢
W
II
N
W
ri
n
II
¢ W
II II
O
W
N W
o
O
vt
N
Vl W
cl
N
� �
II W
II
II
II
II
N�
N
W
W
N
W
q N
lD
¢
W
¢ W
II
W
II
W
>
+
O
>
88:
-1.3%
-
-
-
\
9+05.51
1.4%
_....
_
...
....
883.06
_
STA = 149+76.96
-0.9%
STA - 149+10.96
ELEV = 882.11
'1.4%
ELEV
= 883.06
STA = 151+15.27
STA
ELEV
= 150+40.49
= 881.24
ELEV = 880.90
881
STA = 149+84.86
ELEV = 882.11-
4--
STA
ELEV=
= 151+76.00
8180.22
STA = 152+50.29
ELEV
879.88
STA=151+22.86
STA=153+33.14
PROPOSED GRADE
STA
= 150+48.44
ELEV
= 881.24
ELEV = 880.90
STA
151+82.95
ELEV = 879.47
STA = 152+57.38
ELEV
E= 880.22
ELEV = 879.88
STA = 153+39.62
ELEV
= 879.47
87:
149+50 150+00 150+50 151+00
151+50 152+00 152+50 153+00 153+40
----------_ -- i
L.0
-------------- I H
-------- ���----------.-
0' 2' 4' 6'
we ncnq U7 �
0' 20' 40' 60' H (i N w^ m o
«z mmmz
^a^ Z`Y nn`
ol
I� Z'^o u F LL E
W ri LL
Sheet Index
Lil 2.1.1
2.1.2
2.1.11 2.3.1
2. 12
oQ
r
2.1.13
E
°
2.1.14
2 17
=
3
2.1.15
V
_
2.1.10 2.2.1
2.1.11 2.3.1
2. 12
r
2.1.13
E
L V
2.1.14
3
2.1.15
V

885
880
875
870
153+4(153+50 154+00 154+50
—PR(4P(4SFI) RANKFIII I
+ o
0'
2'
Ive ncnq
4' 6'
885
0'
20'
(HORIZONTAL)
40' 60'
2.1.5
OR
2.1.6
�
2.1.7
�r
a�5
r°
2.1.8
2.1.9
2.1.10
2.2.1
2.1.11
2.3.1
2.1.12
2.1.13
2.1.14
2.1.15
oq
i.
N
EXISTING
GRADE
II
+
M
M
n
M W
+ D7
to
N
N
n
¢ W
60
n
t~/1 W
II
II
N
} O1
N
W
W
LIl
W
n
W
011
0
o O
0011
W
W
LIl
n
M
M
N 0
N
0
W
N
m ;
N
V¢~1
W
II
>
II
>
II II
II
II
II
II
II
II
r
¢
¢
w
¢
w
L
-1.2
%
t/O
/
39.
STA 154+13.38
ELEV = 878.42
E
\
—
_ /
STA = 154+96.12
ELEV = 877.81
STA=
155+86.73
i
z
ELEV
= 877.11 �`i
STA= 156+62.37
STA= 157+36.69
0.1/
STA
ELEV
= 154+20.65
= 878.42
ELEV = 876.93
ELEV =
876.53
STA= 155+02.65
ELEV.= 877.81
STA
= 155+95.18
ELEV = 877.11
STA = 156+69.07
ELEV = 876.93
STA = 157+41.30
PROPOSED
GRADE
ELEV = 876.53
i
O
1�.f11 -
-----------
-� -- '
IJ -I
QCI
-------------------
155+00 155+50 156+00 156+50 157+00
INSTALL
VERNAL POOL
WITH nl ITI FT 71'
---880 --,
157+50
i
880
875
870
158+00
Sheet Index
2.1.1
0'
2'
Ive ncnq
4' 6'
885
0'
20'
(HORIZONTAL)
40' 60'
i
880
875
870
158+00
Sheet Index
2.1.1
¢ �
2.1.2
M
2.1.3
2.1.4
2.1.5
OR
2.1.6
�
2.1.7
�r
a�5
r°
2.1.8
2.1.9
2.1.10
2.2.1
2.1.11
2.3.1
2.1.12
2.1.13
2.1.14
2.1.15
/1 0
z�N��oo
�`01�mmz
` Wa`.Zmm N
~I^1I I
04Z,— E
11
I
0
P
V
5N
c8
¢ �
w
M
E
�
3

885
880
875
870
158+00
158+50 159+00
3J 3J —� J --...
3J _ 3J _' 3J
3J 3J 3J
INSTALL VERNAL
POOL WITH _
OUTLET ,
S`�/ rf �%� rr rr rrrrr rr / ri
rff��,r!�r�rr�rrrrrrr�✓rrrrr/rrrrrrrr/rrrrr
� ' err, r/f � � rr�rj�'�rrrrrrrjrr/rrrrr ri
I
\ �O
O'
O
i -t``
\�
G CECE CE CE
CE —i CE -
159+50 160+00 160+50 161+00 161+50 162+00
3J 3J
3J i 3J 3J
3J 3J 3J
3J 3J 3J
3J
3J 3J 3J 3J
co
------------
76
cRQy _�
160+00
0' 2' 4' 6'
(uE ncnq U7 �
885 0' 20' 40' 60'
(HOkiz0-)
« d"
^~^Z�«oo
KhaWZou Ff E
✓� LL
880
4��5wCL��
875
870
162+50
162+0
FILL EXISTING '
---r-- --- CHANNEL �'• " R• - •�•�
------ - _ - , ' INSTALL VERNAL \\ '
____\\ --__ POOL WITH \\
`__ _- OUTLET \\\
8>5 —
CE CE CE CE`s— CE CE
— CE CE CE CE CE —`CE CE
cp
im
Sheet Index
2.1. 1
Q
2.1.2
Q
,oo
3
lo
�\
°
2.1.9
2.1.10
2.2.1
2.1.11
2.3.1
2.1.12
2.1.13
2.1.14
2.1.15
0
0
a
PROPOSED BANKFULL
m
+
EXISTING
GRADE
+
Q
N
Vl
J
Wo
o
N
II
W
�
+ ^
+
N
a
wo
o
-
a
J
a
w
°�
°�
°�
N
°�
^
°�
0
o
_
t~/1
N
II >
a
II
a
>
N
N
N
M
N
W
W
N
6
+
—
—
'—
STA-
158+26.16
=
875.79
'1.3%
_
_—
—
•.-•
ELEV
STA
ELEV
= 159+24.69
= 873.65
STA = 160+07.08
-0.9%
ELEV = 872.82
STA = 161+64.79
STA= 159+31.53
STA = 160+89.60
ELEV= 872.26
ELEV= 871.77
STA= 162+48.00
ELEV= 873.65
STA =160+13.63
ELEV= 872.82-----tSTA
= 160+95.55
STA- 161+b9.34,
ELEV= 871.77
ELEV= 871.00
PROPOSED
GRADE
ELEV= 872.26
158+50 159+00
3J 3J —� J --...
3J _ 3J _' 3J
3J 3J 3J
INSTALL VERNAL
POOL WITH _
OUTLET ,
S`�/ rf �%� rr rr rrrrr rr / ri
rff��,r!�r�rr�rrrrrrr�✓rrrrr/rrrrrrrr/rrrrr
� ' err, r/f � � rr�rj�'�rrrrrrrjrr/rrrrr ri
I
\ �O
O'
O
i -t``
\�
G CECE CE CE
CE —i CE -
159+50 160+00 160+50 161+00 161+50 162+00
3J 3J
3J i 3J 3J
3J 3J 3J
3J 3J 3J
3J
3J 3J 3J 3J
co
------------
76
cRQy _�
160+00
0' 2' 4' 6'
(uE ncnq U7 �
885 0' 20' 40' 60'
(HOkiz0-)
« d"
^~^Z�«oo
KhaWZou Ff E
✓� LL
880
4��5wCL��
875
870
162+50
162+0
FILL EXISTING '
---r-- --- CHANNEL �'• " R• - •�•�
------ - _ - , ' INSTALL VERNAL \\ '
____\\ --__ POOL WITH \\
`__ _- OUTLET \\\
8>5 —
CE CE CE CE`s— CE CE
— CE CE CE CE CE —`CE CE
cp
im
Sheet Index
2.1. 1
Q
2.1.2
Q
,oo
3
lo
�\
°
2.1.9
2.1.10
2.2.1
2.1.11
2.3.1
2.1.12
2.1.13
2.1.14
2.1.15
c8
Q
W V
E
3
lo

880
875
870
STA - 162+54.00,
ELEV = 871.00
865
162+50 163+00 163+50 164+00 164+50 165+00 165+50 166+00 166+50 166+70
`
w ~
�m
0
m
N
N
D
oq
O
a
N
m
t~/1 W
W
W
D
II
II
D
II
II
W
II
N
�p
N
N
Vl
W
w
Q
N
W
II
V1
J
W
V1
J
W
II
II
J
J
W
II
II
W
M
o D
__--....
—
—
—
W
5
\
---_-
EASEMENT .-- ---
(Hokizorvia�)
4�
�LL�aYmnn
«z mv
�y�vum ry o
we ncnq U7 �
0'
2'
4' 6'
0' 20' 40' 60' E 3
VZ`
ZUo
�_ - ---
4qs
"
0
o UO
Sheet Index
,oo
Q
Lil 2.1.1
2.1.2
L VO
u
2.1.10 2.2.1
2.1.11 2.3.1
2.1.12
2.1.132.1.14
2.1.15ol
EXISTING GRADE PROPOSED BANKFULL
O m �0O
0
Q O D
cd
Q + O+0
Q Q Q Q o 87'
Q > w }
Q OOl
11
~ >
0% -.4% 871
STA= 163+23.82 STA=164+64.211
ELEV= 870.55 STA 164+00.21 ELEV = 870.00 STA = 165+42.3
16
A6ELEV 870.17 2
S163+29STA=164+69.25 ELEV= 869.41
ELEV = 870.55 TA= 164+05.78 ELEV= 870.00 1 1
ELEV= 870.17 STA - 165+47.7STA 166+12.49
PROPOSED GRADE ELEV = 869.41 ELEV = 867.77
STA = 166+16.53
ELEV= 867.77
L VO
u
2.1.10 2.2.1
2.1.11 2.3.1
2.1.12
2.1.132.1.14
2.1.15ol
EXISTING GRADE PROPOSED BANKFULL
O m �0O
0
Q O D
cd
Q + O+0
Q Q Q Q o 87'
Q > w }
Q OOl
11
~ >
0% -.4% 871
STA= 163+23.82 STA=164+64.211
ELEV= 870.55 STA 164+00.21 ELEV = 870.00 STA = 165+42.3
16
A6ELEV 870.17 2
S163+29STA=164+69.25 ELEV= 869.41
ELEV = 870.55 TA= 164+05.78 ELEV= 870.00 1 1
ELEV= 870.17 STA - 165+47.7STA 166+12.49
PROPOSED GRADE ELEV = 869.41 ELEV = 867.77
STA = 166+16.53
ELEV= 867.77

0' 2' 4' 6'
(veancnq U)
0
ass ass Q7
0' 20' 40' 60'
1 «z mmw
^~^ z 4o'o
Kha Zou~LLE
✓W� LL
2
a� m0Nt~/II 1
00 o
o oNt~+
+a
�Op �°0+>O
NN.QN-II I
��>JW�OO890
MWWJWII I nWOQGII
WNnNQ'
890> OO
JQ W N C�
Q + p
1Q OW
VII Q QW Q W
EXISTING GRADE 19,
885 --- 8851.5% -0.7%
PROPOSED GRADE STA = 201+45.53 STA= 201+72.74
ELEV883.12 ELEV= 882.93
880 880
200+00 200+50 201+00 201+50 202+00 202+15
\ •\Jdv , /l �i �'� ! ��I� �rn,( '�;;�'r'n„�,;yl�";o„I//'i,;�,'; , �,'; %'; /'`�.',�': \ �3� II J\ `1`�is
"LO
0 U
EXISTING
GRADE Typical Section (zC
` 4i�-
~O--QiI
2:1 4
_a , - I m1 Imi m/ E11I 1m1 'm 'm1 yrimIi �I ' I r i � / `i i �\ 11 / 1 �i�. � / -�'��-':' ' ' w'ee �--�/\/ , i 1�_ic_��' � � ,- - -2_--�--0� --c/;i -e/ `1 i /�� / '1 1, �\,;_-' -_c-e- ; _-''-' _ i '/ / .i c/ ' r '- 9�• , -_`.�e�i �C,R.�`�:-'-C_'�-R�- ,`,� -_'p�'1f-+�°^ �_`�X,�N_ �� \--�-,/,�_a'' /�-�-\1�`- ' -,�`/;'i '"a/-�ri_�_iif `"� �„i „''/ :-/-. '-a-�1�-='t-;�i1 _r / _�l\'i � _/w%_/r_'„'�_�i �;_',`'l1”�i i. / -_-_ .\/'`i;,\''\i'l '`,��i �;-��''l / `� �'Ir;b/-,I/ �-•__�-�20-2--0Yi1 •0 u ur l 1_ �5� �0 � C�R-C�N :jO�• !�';%',�•%,1„/i,;/;�,%;,;i.,/;;,;/,S/,/;S ;Ii%;,s/:',,,i;,%' /�;i;/fi%.%/I';,/ ;;rl l;'�,;�''',,; ';f'�/ l % ;/ ;',i % %./i,�”';°=I�''g';,l'sri`/ili';i1/I 11I'�l'�l/ l;''I%" i/' I/',�l�'lr:l';il,'�%„'I�;r,S' //`I1ll';(ll"i;,` lI'/;ll;Iil,�i`i��"/%I�`; I;i;i,,�i�l;fI//'';'%�',ll(„i/,I/ r`�illl;ii �,;,;r/i`�r;/l'/i,;�'fl;/f/,I;ii,rI/"i�„l'�%rr''i%�l%;rl'//i�li�lr,lii%, �,�i i il,lliiliIrl'/�;1i'I�i�,,i//il l;;!l'lr';;l.'/!l,';ri"/;,'l;i�l"''(i;/fi'//ll; `,;/1i�'ii'f;'"ly(lr;l'�r,iI1;�,ii,llI�;';��(r/"�;ll!; ii��'1r ';;11ili"lr'l/;„i1�l;/l;%l��;�ri/ll,';�i'"'l;lil;.ll.,/%'lr(l�li'lL�'/'l'.ic;';%;i'ei/1��'l';1r�;;i'l/�";i/`�''ll1!1ll�;r;lI;;';';'Ii�/"n.11i;1li%l''ir�'l/l/l°;�/l,,;r';h,;'i1i/;r��l;ii,i 'll % 'j lI°fI,,;'i,%,�i"'; /'l�r,d I%;l,'�IOi,I�;/l%,''i'iIi;;'ili/ir!I;iil'ii1'iii;;l„'�'�''ii,'ijri /.1;%/l;i;Nr. ' i I'%i�/ l„,`'l`l/%%i;;l/'iiI'L/'i(l;r;q'i t(%,;ri%AilllI,; Iyl;`l,,;l'i%;/'^'/ ;;�;r/1;,
,/ �'r, './ ;✓;/ �
—
.6
—
�\�
�r/
oJa
/L
/
2
:�I
1
PROPOSED
GRADE
EXISTING /
I
,
o
Q�
Vw
NN(+/ma
GRADE
' RIFFLE
— .... ..... ..... ..... .....
STA:200+00 1.5'BEGIN UT1A- ENHANCEMENT II PROPOSED 4.5'
GRADE
K-20
POOL_-- CR CR Sheet Index
CR-CR2.1.1STA:202+03CR-CR ENDUTIA- ENHANCEMENTII
2.1.2
STA
CONFLUENCE - UT1 2.1.3
.....lis 2.1.4
, ;I'l j ... 2.1.5
2.1.
.17 ' CE 2.1.8
CE
2.1.9
Ce 2
ee 2.1.10 2.2.1
2.1.11 2.3.1
1, 2.1.12
2.1.13 E
2.1.14
2.1.15 U$
y+�

895
EXISTING GRADE -
890
PROPOSED GRADE -
885
880
875
300+00
300+50 301+00 301+50 302+00
895
890
885
880
875
302+50302+62
STA:152+59
m p �
` UT1 REACH 46
2.1.2
STA: 302+62
BMP
CONFLUENCE
2.1.4
i
i
o m
00 a
+ m
oq
1. • \dJdJ
)
2.1.12
°o
l
,
N
o
2.1.7
=
�5
oa
i
r
_
2.1.8
2.1.15
2.1.9
,
,
m u o
w p W
¢ u °
+
o
o
Lq
,n w ¢w
m
ii
o N
Vl W
¢
W-Ol-N
oo
n
o
+
o
Q w
,n w
-o
'
¢
mo o .�
o + w
"
> o -+ m
'q
¢
u o
io .�
O1 oq
u >
o o
�o.
o�
¢ m y
°
ti
,n w u o o�
w m
+ m
N m
`�
r`
o
¢ ii
o�
m
o
N w
STA
= 300+40.00
¢ w
'o'
o
+
ELEV
= 888.74_
I
¢
o
STA = 300+51.88
ELEV = 888.28
,n
w
STA = 300+66.01
ELEV = 887.75
STA = 300+72.25
ELEV = 888.53
I I
STA = 300+78.17
STA -301+05,61
ELEV = 887.29
ELEV = 886.27
I
STA = 300+92.15
ELEV = 886.77
STA =1301+19.53
ELEV = 885.75
STA = 301+58.64
ELEV = 884.28
I
STA = 301+31.47
ELEV = 885.30
STA = 301+73.87
ELEV = 883.71
STA = 301+86.37
ELEV = 883.24
STA = 301+45.22
STA = 302+44.48
II
I
ELEV = 884.78
ELEV =
881.83
I
STA = 302+01.14
I
ELEV = 882.81
STA = 302+23.24
ELEV = 882.31
300+50 301+00 301+50 302+00
895
890
885
880
875
302+50302+62
STA:152+59
` UT1 REACH 46
2.1.2
STA: 302+62
BMP
CONFLUENCE
2.1.4
i
i
2.1.5
i
1. • \dJdJ
)
2.1.12
°o
l
,
N
2.1.13
2.1.7
=
�5
oa
i
r
_
2.1.8
2.1.15
2.1.9
,
,
,
,
,
,
0' 2' 4' 6'
we ncnq U7 �
0' 20' 40' 60'
(10-0-L) �y v u m ry o
«z mmv
lZou~LLE
�WN LL
'Y
GS,
Sheet Index
2.1.1
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.1.4
2.1.11 2.3.1
2.1.5
oQ
2.1.12
2.1.6
N
2.1.13
2.1.7
=
�5
oa
2.1.14
r
_
2.1.8
2.1.15
2.1.9
2.1.10 2.2.1
2.1.11 2.3.1
2.1.12
N
2.1.13
E
2.1.14
3
2.1.15
V

C,cE.G& T
ak�r% % R R
- C,
\R* I%k cr CE. cr cr C,
-j%N
c %\ \R
C&
%
•00
a a
N. \
102 + ob I%k R �%k It R R•
%* R \R It
%N N ss V-03+00: It R \R It I%k % %%
a R
a R \� \�' *
a %* �,k % , U� R \R a a N
: : It \ %\ \R a a N %\ %%
% % % %t % R \R It R % R lk R
%% %% %% a %% %% %
R a 'k N % % %
%
00 %\ a a %\ %\ a %\ %\ a
+ + + % % % C�
+M\ �� % % lk %\ '%"108+00k % %\ %\ %\ %\ %\ %\
%, % % % %\ %\ %\ % % % R \R It R %\ %\ \R %\ %\ %\ %\ l%k
% % a R %\ cw % %
% % % t %\ %\
% % ck %
c
+++ + +++ + +++++
+ + + " ; � : - % K'\
+ + . . .. . ..... . . . . . . . . . .. . . . + %\ a a %\ lk %\ R \R lk %\ R %\ V
%, %\
+ + + ++
+ + + + % \ IV
+++ + % Z %\ %\ \R It It R %\ %*
% %
+
�++++++l'++++ + + . . . . . . . .. + . - %\ R \R R % %
+�+ � . +++++ I + + + + :+++Q:+:+:+ % %\ R \R %\ It \ \ \R \ %\
DI + %\ %\ It R %\ %* %\ %\ It R %\ % % % % % % % % It R %\ %* %\ %\ %\ R \R
+ +2 1 * a %\ %\
+ + + %\ %\ %\ %\ a R %\ N \�
% a a % % % % % % % % % % % % %
.35 3�, +-+ '31 + + + %\ %\ %\ %\ % %\ %\ R %\
% & * lk %\ R %\ %\ %\ %\ %\ R %\ %k R %\
+ +SSS�% % % %\ %\ %\ %\ %\ It R %\ %\ %\ %\ 10
% % %
%kl05+00t %% %\ %\ %\ l%k %\ %\ a %\ %\ lk %\ %\ %\ R % %% %% % %% %
+ %\ % %\ %\%\ sss
I%k
% , \ \� a %% %% %%
%\ %\ %\ %\ R R %\ %\ %\ lk %\ R R It %\ R %\ V %\ %\
+ + + + + + + %\ %\ lo�Zo
t4 + + + \� * V %\ R \R R R %\ It %\ %\ It %\ R R \ It R %\ %\ \R a %\ v %* %
+ + + + * It R %\ %* It %\ %\
+ + + + "%+ N% \R %% +k %\ %\ R \R %\ It It R 1. 1
+ + % % %\ %\ %\
.. . . . . . .. + %% %, . . . . . . %\
+ " * %\ %A
+
+++++"+++++,++++++++,+ +++"++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + a \ \ a
+ %\ %\
+ + ++++"++ +
+++++ + + + . . . . . . . . . . . . +++
+ +
+ + + +++++ + + + + + +
++" ..... . . . . . . . . .
. . . . I +
t3 -++ + +
33 10
0
I+
<
IN
Iz
u
<
40' 80' 120'
Sheet Index
'2
z
04Z
c8
g g
E
W
V

Ml
%T V %\ SSS \%N % % % L%A % \ \% %
h % %\ %\ % %
v %\ % . %\ %
%\ % \% % N % %
P SASS %\
%\ \% %
k � 0 %\ SSSS %\ %\% 114+00, N
SSSS \,
- %V %'1112+00 %\% %\%
%
R
% V %\ %\% %\
%\
M, 't "I
%\% %\ N %\% V N %\% %\,
\% \, %\,
X X %t %\% %V 0 %\' N, \% %\% X %\ %N Q %\% %\%
%V QR %%\ \%
%\% %\ \% N %\% N, %\ %\%
X% Q \% \ I %v \' - %, \, \. W C\\\; N, , %\
, % 0 N %\% \% %
%\ R N \% %\, N
R %\ \% R 0 %\ % % %\% k% �'t Q %\ %\% 0 %\
0%\%\% N 0 N N %\ QN %\ %\% \ % 0
N %\% \% %\% * %\% 0 %\ %\% \ % % N N
%\ %\ % V N % % %
% N %\% N 0 %\ %\%
% N 0 %\% %\ N %\ N
1.
CE — CE —
%\ V r\\
\ %\%
N %\% N %\% %\ %\%
CDLn
+
IN
IN
z
.-j
Uf-
I<
, N
N N \% \
% % %\%
�5S
0 %\
0 %\ %\ SSN
0 %\ 0 N % 0 %*
0 %\ N % \% %\ % N %\% %\ % %
N % %\
% %
%\% % N X % %
%\ N N X % %
%% % N %\ %\
% %\ 0 %\ %* %\ \% %\ %\% x 0 %\
N %\% N %
N %\ 0 %\ %\% X% %* X N
% s
N
% X% %\
%
% %\ 0 %\ %\ 0 %\ % %
% N N
N %\ N 0 %\ %\% %, X% X %%
U _ N %\ %,% %\% %\ %\% %, %\, . - .- %, %\ 1% .. N 0 X% %\ %\% 11 % \% �% %\ %\% \% . - , %, %\ %\% %\
% %
%\ %* %* %\% \ % %\ 4 % N %\% N %\% % %
%
% X%
'V %\% \ % %\% %
0 %\ %\% % % X, N % %
X % %\ % % 0 %\ %\% %\ %\%
%\ %\ Qv %\% \% %\ %\
% X
\ Q \%\ ,%\ " \ 00
R%\ X% N%\ \ \\
\\ \IR
%\%
%\% %\ 0 %\
Sheet Index
40' 80' 120'
(H oaizorvra�)
z
T
m .6
lz "
d
oo
QOM o
Z Lo
c8
g g
CO P,
V NO
N
c�

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
c�C 7� ,,,E 1 , f , CE
ce•rl� cE„ ;�' ,, i, A , r r r e .q� cE v
as r x r,, \�`\ � o
`E r �E
� �� ��
��
o 6
�zmmv
�z_1 o
Q� o_..
a.o��LLE
I �W� LL
ti�°oma 0
J
- 3 J
3J
- 3J
LO
cr
v A;/ 133+pp I
r, x,
rr\ r�r �,r� rar ��a �� �' :x�� �x.r aux axe ��x,r�% �E �, a�, �a,, �� r�
a�a'a� ��� �xla,,,;.�x "�� �ax,r r a a a r r 4E r r, a,
h, a a/. h r °O "• r r a Alr A a a ,,^�!S ,r r r r y / 1+00, 13ti
a E 't x r �, o 13
s, a�,
r•�+� H ar+� �.•p �� � r, r 1 titi �. ra x ooti,� �, N �, r Al r`�, r �, r,a, r�` a ,r o
r r, r, r r, r, r, x, ,..
%
rt ,� a o.,.'a �� ar �a. .....,." r r, �r r� ar �� r� aar r� .r��° ,r / I z3
izz+oo�` x as N �r 1N N-%\%� ra �e�r arra x�; �x\ ��r air rix; gar �%\% � �• 0%\% ,;'� o p 4xoo
.r " I"' xx "�a %\( �'�'°`r %! 4,
° �' A\ �%� aWl\ �n �� r,r ,r r r,,,�
� ,14
� fi r \ \ `� ,a Ai a �r� a ; 1, %\% � � � I a � �' \ x lv %\% Iz H � ,•r � a r . %W � � � � a � � %\% �r , 9x0° u
x a r a•,, a s�5� zz a r rtiti A
�a r%x��r�ar"a' �,�a�''a��.�, .a� oo..� v...�r• '*oo, ra a r00
X% r r �, a� ,, x,` a r r'S r a a.,r -'5;,. h c" a 35r
%\% %\% %\%\ %��%r� a�� �, \ ��\ �a\ ria x�� �,,r•N' '�.,r,, r-. �.r,,.
%\% A, �� "�, `Ir, "�,r `,r1a aN- \� �a.,,.��a �A, %\% a.�•r ax,r.` x' r ';%a�
S a \a'S \3� r _ 3a aJ 3J ,%` � r r',, ,a•�'r ,A ;r �`',r a, W \ •,a \ ,
x, 37 3J 3J � 3J " \ h %\% � r, �. � •\ .� ,r ,r " f a r � � a �` >r � �1 W1,1,� \Iz$+oo 0i r
a\ r\%\%\
� r� H\� ��� ••r',r a�
ra\gar M\a r%A rr r� '�,r� rarer
oI �..3`rr�Nl
�a� \� %\% %\% r�
��r �a /
�a %\% ,% ,r
Rl
+I %\% %\% %r
tiI p
v ,
� p
z l
UI /
�I
a�x _ cE _ CE
/ E
h v CE
r cE CE
p c
y / � CE v / I cE
D j I �CE �c
F�
I+
IM
M
IN
I "'
z
1=
Iu
I<
I
I
I
I
0' 40' 80' 120'
(Hoaizorvra�)
Sheet Index
G
G
M
M

/v
D
I
\ ` \ \ S \ OO
\ \
x
I� r�"SSx;xSS%\Sx
SSS \SSS CC:
S S S
x
x
SSx,
x
Lu S • x
J
S x
I SSx
Sx
.a2: ,xS ,
xS� Sx Iii
.�°'S'%Sx%Sx\11 i
+ �, ,� 3J •� S C 3�• a `�' S S .0 3x � x S S]S `3% :\ S S 3S a S SSS x S \\ S a S x S %\%
S C a S S
+++ SSS �SSSSS �SSSSS a;SSS%S\ ; SSS �; SSS �;aCSS%N x@S\S�%\% .147+'pp\\a
++++ x S S S S ` S S S S S S S S S S S S S A S S A S S S ��
* + +
+ +
+ +*.* Sxxk SS a`�. .. .- SSSs-.. SS\ .. SSx -.. .. - SSSr Sw%\ m.. - Sxx SS\ ��-
+ - S S x x -- -• ,c S S CC S \ -- •� a, CC S \ S S a, S \ -- •..r. S ,\, S S - -- N S S \ \ SIS, S S -• ,.- S x S x S x
\ 1 +*+ S\\ S\\ \\x \\\ '\ \` \\\ \\ `
%
140+ S S �, .,S S S S S S S, \ S S S S S CC \ SSS S S \ S S SSS x S S S S x S S S .0 S S S S S CC SSS SSS / S S \SSS S
y 00 SS SS SSSS \SSSS 514 S �� SS SSSSS
o SSS \ S \ xSSS\a SSSSSa SSSy. 4+00. S\SSS S SS SSS S
�• S S SSSS SSS CCSSS r,SS x 146+00 `xS SSS
SSSS, AO \SS SSSSS\ SSSSSS @ / , S\ O S — SS SSA+
S,\, \`SSS pti x ASSS `SS ` �' p`� � SSS S •'\rS \ SSSr� * ++
Ot
N �k� �`��a S\ xx\x \ x/ •,• ,a @�43 �0'f x A x� x �, x,,r \SS C; SS �x+++++ + ++++
S S CC � + \ ; SSSS R \ a 142+00 :A ,S.CC'S•S S•\� .S' ,J %\% + S S S a, N %\% %* S a S S 'S"""lll,�-�, @ `�+S \*�* *++++++*�+%ce
+* * + + + + OSx S, `S S.S .S + * + + + +
++ + + +**+�+ ++ +*+* * * + + +* + ++�*+}* * + * +cE
.+ ++** ** +++++++++ + *+ +*S`` *+tZ ++ ++++*++*+ *'l. ++++*I++*+cE
*CE*SCE* + + + +* *+*++++('}{+*++ +++ +* *.0 E* ct + c + a
c CE � + Ct t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
0' 40' 80' 120'
(H oaizorvray
Sheet Index
Q
z
z LL
Z ' nm
0
��«zmmz
; Z�+y^^�
04 Z'^soLL E
11
I
E
3
W
x� x
�
135N��
139+00
\\\\\a
S S S x >+ ++
++ +
I
.E CE CE CE CE CI
Y J
8%00
\ \ � + + ++
r+ * *+ + ++ /
CE CE - CE
�J
CE
++
_ CE+
CEcE
+ + *E
+ +
_
CE +
OI
L(1
-I- I
M
M
HI
N
WI
zI
J
UI
QI
�I
I
I
I
\ ` \ \ S \ OO
\ \
x
I� r�"SSx;xSS%\Sx
SSS \SSS CC:
S S S
x
x
SSx,
x
Lu S • x
J
S x
I SSx
Sx
.a2: ,xS ,
xS� Sx Iii
.�°'S'%Sx%Sx\11 i
+ �, ,� 3J •� S C 3�• a `�' S S .0 3x � x S S]S `3% :\ S S 3S a S SSS x S \\ S a S x S %\%
S C a S S
+++ SSS �SSSSS �SSSSS a;SSS%S\ ; SSS �; SSS �;aCSS%N x@S\S�%\% .147+'pp\\a
++++ x S S S S ` S S S S S S S S S S S S S A S S A S S S ��
* + +
+ +
+ +*.* Sxxk SS a`�. .. .- SSSs-.. SS\ .. SSx -.. .. - SSSr Sw%\ m.. - Sxx SS\ ��-
+ - S S x x -- -• ,c S S CC S \ -- •� a, CC S \ S S a, S \ -- •..r. S ,\, S S - -- N S S \ \ SIS, S S -• ,.- S x S x S x
\ 1 +*+ S\\ S\\ \\x \\\ '\ \` \\\ \\ `
%
140+ S S �, .,S S S S S S S, \ S S S S S CC \ SSS S S \ S S SSS x S S S S x S S S .0 S S S S S CC SSS SSS / S S \SSS S
y 00 SS SS SSSS \SSSS 514 S �� SS SSSSS
o SSS \ S \ xSSS\a SSSSSa SSSy. 4+00. S\SSS S SS SSS S
�• S S SSSS SSS CCSSS r,SS x 146+00 `xS SSS
SSSS, AO \SS SSSSS\ SSSSSS @ / , S\ O S — SS SSA+
S,\, \`SSS pti x ASSS `SS ` �' p`� � SSS S •'\rS \ SSSr� * ++
Ot
N �k� �`��a S\ xx\x \ x/ •,• ,a @�43 �0'f x A x� x �, x,,r \SS C; SS �x+++++ + ++++
S S CC � + \ ; SSSS R \ a 142+00 :A ,S.CC'S•S S•\� .S' ,J %\% + S S S a, N %\% %* S a S S 'S"""lll,�-�, @ `�+S \*�* *++++++*�+%ce
+* * + + + + OSx S, `S S.S .S + * + + + +
++ + + +**+�+ ++ +*+* * * + + +* + ++�*+}* * + * +cE
.+ ++** ** +++++++++ + *+ +*S`` *+tZ ++ ++++*++*+ *'l. ++++*I++*+cE
*CE*SCE* + + + +* *+*++++('}{+*++ +++ +* *.0 E* ct + c + a
c CE � + Ct t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
0' 40' 80' 120'
(H oaizorvray
Sheet Index
Q
z
z LL
Z ' nm
0
��«zmmz
; Z�+y^^�
04 Z'^soLL E
11
I
E
3

1111x1 11r 3� IO
OhX/ '�'.�h 1 1111 1111 1111 111 �'\ M 1, I I I I I 1 1p 111 I I I IpU Ic-�I
�p' 111 111 '' 111 111 111 111
'�, / 111 111 111 111 111 1111 111 1 111 1 111 111 11 111 111 111 1111 IQ-
��? 111 111 111 111 111111,1,1'111 111 II. � 111 111 111 , 111 111 111 �
x\�/ 1' ',1 111 111 111 111 111 1 1 1 1 111 1, 111 111 11 ' , ,1, .1 I
11 11 I 1 \ 111 111 111 11 11 L
��1 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 1 1 111 11 11 ,1, 111 111 111 �
/ �11 111 111 111 111 111 111 111111,1,1'111 111 111 111 1 1 11 Iw
111 111 111 ,1, 111 111 111 111 111 j 1' ,1, 1' 111 I' 111 1111'1' 111'1' 111'1' 111
X11 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 �11 111 111 11 1 J
111 111 111 111 111 111 111
111 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 ,1, 111 111 11 111 111 111
11 11 11 111 111 I I ,11 111 111 111
/ \� I I I 111 111 111 11 11 , 111 111 11 , ,1, J
1 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 11 1 I
111 111 111 111 1 +
/��/ 1 I' 111'1' 111'1' 1111p'111 No 1111'1' 111'1' 1111111111111111111 111111111/ 11 '1 ' 11 11'1' 11"'1' I Q
'r �� I I 1111111/ 11 '1111111'11'1111'1'11'1'11111 , 11 11 11 , 11 11
111 '1'111 \ J / m 1 111 111 111 1 1 1 1 1 1 111 111 111 1 1 111 I I
11 \I 'l,� / \ 11p 41 Ip 41 Ip 41 Ip 41111 \ 111'11 1 41 1 41 11 41 1 41 1 'I' 111 � '"11'1' 1' 1 111 111 h I' 1,'1',1,'11,1, 1' 1
411p I Ip I Ip 1p 1' \ 1p 1p 1p 1p 1p h 1p d1 ,p 1p 1p 1p � II 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 p 1p '1''p
p �1 / 1 4'11'1111'111'1111
444 111 111
111 111
111
11 11 '1' ,11,'1' ,11, ;1i',1,11 111 1� 11''1' ,11,'h 111Th 111Th 11111h 11111h 111 n'h 'h 1 'h 1 'h 1 � 1111h111'p ,11,'h 11� __Tp_
1Ia�l1�l 1�,�1 ,1� ,1,3'' 1p X11 '3j1T1'Wlp 111 � -•- a
11 ��. �' 111'11''1''11''1''11' 11'114'111111111 11 111 Ip Ip,, ,,1111 111 11 11 1' 111 I I I 11 11 11 11 11 1 I
1' '1',1'1'111 111 111 111 111 / 111 "d1 '1111111 111 1 \ 111111111111 111 111 H /,1'1111111111111111,1111,1,11111111'1 11111111111111 ,1111 ,1, i1',p'I11h'i11h 1111111111'1'11'1'I,;1',h ill lh 111111'1'111'1'11111111111'11aI 1� 1'1i ��'1I'� ,1�1'I � ��
1, ' ,1 I 1 411,'1' 11'1' 111'1' 111'1'' 47 111. 111 111 111 Ih �p x ,1, 111 111 111 111 1111 3�. 111 1' 11 I' 11 I' 111 111 I 11 111 111 111 I 1 1' Ip' 111 I h 11 111 11111'1' 111'1' 111111 I I 111111 33 I 3Dq 1 '1'
11.1 111 111 I I , 111 11 111 111 111 1 0 , ,1, ,1, 111 111 11 111 111 111 I I 111 11 1 11 111 111 111 111 111 I 11 111 111 111 111 I 11 11 11 111 111 111 I
11
11 /11 111 111 111 111 111 , 1' 11 11 1\ 11 111 111 111 111 11 0 , 11 ,1, 111 111 111 111 �J 3�4 111 111 ' 111 "111 111111 111111 ,1, ' 11 111 111 1 '1 ,I,'1' ,1,'1' 111 1111 111 111 111 11111'11111'11111'11111'1' 1 111 111 ' 111 , ,'1' 11'1' 111'1' 111 1111 1111 1111 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 1111" 3J '
111 Ih 11 1 111 11 , 1 1 111 111 J 111 111 111 111 11111 1 111 111 111 111 11 11 111 - •1' 111 111 111 111 11 11 1 11 111 111 1 111 111 11 11 N 111 111 111 111 111 11 11 111 11 111 111 111 111 11 I 1
' 1 11 111 11 111 1 11 11 'I' 11� m 11 111 111 111 I 11 111 111 111 I 1 11 11 111 111 111 I 1 11 11 11 111 111 I I i�1jj .�,. �r� 1�111f1 x111 111 1 , ,
11 111 11 I , 1 111 1P 1 ] 1 1 11 I 1 11 111 1 I 1 11 111 I 1 1 , 11 111 111 111 111 111 11 ,, 1 ,1, 1 111 111 11�kp� 11 111 11 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1 1111111111111111111111111111, III ,1, III ,,, 11111; II IIIIIIII1111 II' 111 1'•,• 11'-.•"x;• ,r 11 . ,,; �1',,,'I',,,11 111 ,1
1 1 11 11 111 11 1 11 111 111 111 111 11 1 11 •3111 1 111 111 111 11 I , \ , 111 111 111 11 1 , 11 11 111 111 111 11 I '1I' 11 111 1,11'
• 1 11 11 111 111r 11 I 11 11 111 1 I 1 „• 11 1 11 111 111 111 11 1 1
1 I I 1 11 I I 1 11 I 3 �11 111 111 111 111 11 11 111 111 111 111 11 1 ,111 111 111 111 111 111 111,11111'I'111'I'111'I'111'111111I• 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 ,111"11', 5� 11 111 111 111 111 111 11 I I
1 1 1 11 111 111 11 I , 11 111 111 11 1 , 11 1 �I I , 11 111 111 I , 11 111 111 11 I , 11 11 111 11 1 I I I 11 111
111 111 11 1 , 1 1 111 111 111 111 11 1 , 1 1 111 111 111 111 11 I , 111 111 111 111 11 1 111 11 1 , 1 1 111 111 111 111 11 I I ,,, 111 111 111 111 1 1 1 1 , , , , , ,
111 1 I 1 ,, ,, 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 1, 11 ;'1 ,1, .1 111 I 1
1 1 1
11 , ! ,
11 I
0 11 11 111 111 111 111 111 1111 11 111 111 111 111 111 '111 11 , ! , 11 111 111','1'11'1'1 I 11 1 1 ,1, 1 ,, 1 1111 111 111 111 111 111 I I IN ,,��, %1 111 111 I I
sas+o 1 I 1 11 Ip Ip Ip I I „ 11 Ip Ip I , , , , 111 111 I I 1 11 Ip 1 11 p 1p 1p I I 11 11 1p 1p 111 I '_ "`„� 11 I „ „ � „ 1p 111 41 111 11 1ss b 11, 1p 1p
1 11 11 I I 1 1 1 11 1, 1, 1 1 1, 1 1 11 1� 111 111 1 1 11 11 I 1 1 1 1 „ 1 111 I 1' °0 11 111 111
11'11 11 I I I 1 I I 111 „ 1 111 I I I 1 I \I I 1 111 1 1 111 1,
11 11 11 11 I , , , , , I I I I 1 1p d xo ,p 1 11 , sa •11 '1' 1 '1.1 „ „ „ 1111 „ 1p 1p 111
11 I I I I I 1 ,11 1 '11 '11 '1' '1' '1' 4,4,4,4, ,i �4�44i��/4�4, 4 1p 1p 111 '11 111 � '1' 11 111 111 111 '11 1 1 � 4 :I'li ' *o ' 11 p1• i I 1 „ 1 11 111 .111 111 1 � .'T' 11 1p 111111'I'111'h 11'1, 1 11 111 �4�?�i,! �4�4� ,�
4 11 11 111111' ' 1 111 '1' 11 1p' 5 11 11 1p O p 1p I I 1 11
1 11 111 I 1 11 111 111 1 111 111 111 1111 1, 1, , ,, ,, ,, , ,, ,, , ,, ,, ,, , ,p 111 I 111 1 , 1 1, 111 ti ; 1. �I1 I 1 r tix° 11 ,111,1, 1 111 111 ,� 1, 111 111 111 111 111 x155+aa = '1' 1111 111111 Ip \1
1 1111 1, 1, ,1, 1p' 1p 1 1111 1, 1, 1p 11 _ zA II 1, 1, 4 , , p 1' 11'1' 1p'I' 1p 11p 11p 111' �p 41 111 1p I
x I 111 I I 11 11111 tis/ 1 41 1 1 111 111 111 I �1 111 111 111 111 111 111 11� 11 111 111 1 11 p 1 11111
111 111 1h 1 ,(1 p 1p 111 X h 1p 1� 1p I I 11 I orol 1 1 11 p 1p �1 1p p 1p' 1 p 1p 1p 1p 1p 111 p 1p 1p 1p 1h 1� 15 p
1 1 ,p (' p zS61j 1p 111 op 1p 1p' 111 41 41 41 4' p 1p 41 4' o '1' '1' 1' 'I' 1'I' 1p'I' 111 1' '1' 1p 11' 1p 11 41 41 41 1411111111111111111 1111' 1p 1p 1p 111 ' r »I' u� p 1p 1p
1, ,1�� 1p 1p 1p 1 1, ,1, 1p 1p 111 p 1p 1p 111 41 h 1 41 41 4 p 1 1 p 1p 1p 111 11 11 11 11 111 _ 41 h \ z a 11 h
r,°o 41 + 1 11 41 1 1, 111 411114111141111411p 111 111 111 11 11 1111 '1'x .'1' '1 11 1p p 111 111 111 111 411h 1111p 111 11 111 111 111 111 1p Sg +1 J11�
I 11 11' 41 11 41 41 '1' �.1.�ti .'1'111 1 ,p 111 11 1111 41111 a1 41 x1'11 'I' 1p 11, 11, 11, 11, 111 41 41 41 h 11 1" 11 Ip 111 11' '1' 1 *O
. x x �'L 111 111 1 11n 111 111 111 1 111 i �p 1p 111 41 oxo° \ '1' /111 111 111 ,p 111 111 111 111 Ip ,11 41 41 41 111 111 '1 '1' x x n x x x n x x x 111 1, 11 11 41 1p 1,'1' h 11 I I I I' h h 111 111 11 0
� 111 111 1 1 111 41 'a. >r x x x xlh 111 111 111 1 111 I 1 , '1', 111 1 1 1 11 11 1111111' 111 1, 1 ,
J, 111 1111 ' 1 ,1, p 111 111 411p 11 1 yp 111 111 tia 1 ' ,p 1p" 1p 1 s oo. 41 11' 'h 11 I Ih Ih 1 11 111 '1' 411111' Iha1 a1 111 111 , ;1' 11 d1 I' Ip I' 111 41 41 111 'h x x x n x x x x n x x x n x x n x x 111 111 '1' 4111' Ih 111 h 41 h 41 111 '1' 'I' 111p 1 111111 1111 11 ' ,1 ' 111' 1111 11111 111111111111'1' 111 ,r .
1 I 1 1 ,1,',p 1p 1p 411 11 11 � 111 11 11 11 11 11 11 111 I Ian xxnxx k„nxx x, 111 111 I
x x I I I ,11 111 111 111 111 x x x x n x 1 1
cF 1' x'' • '1' ,11'1' 11 11 ' 111'111111111111111 1 ,1 1 ,1 ,1 1 ,1, 1 111 111 111 1 11 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 ,1 111 41z til' ri x x x z x x z x x x n x x x n n x x z n x x x n x x n x x
z x �1 •�1` 111 111 1 111 111 111 111 111 '1' n x z x n x z x x x x z x n n x x z x n z z x n x z d SCE C'" x z x z x x z x n x n x x z z n x z x n x z z n z n z x z x z x x x x z x z
111 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 111
11 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 x x E CE CE
111 111 111 1 ,111 11'1' 11 1111 111 111 11 11 111 11 1 111111 1 1 1 1 11 1
1 111 111
11 111 111 111 111 111 111 ,11 111 111 111
111 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 .. 'k
E x n x z x n x z ,111 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 ,1• 11. x n n x x z n x z x n CE CE z x n n x z x z x n x x x x
111 111 111 111 111
111 111 111 111 111 11!
111 111 111 111 � 111
111 111
C x z x x z z n x z x n 11 11 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 - x x z x n x z x z z x n x z x CE CE n z x n z z x z z x x z x n x z x z x z x
�, 1 111 II1 11 11
E n n 1I/ I I 1. 1 I I I I 1 111 11 11 111 11 111 111 111 111x n x z z �- EE z- CE z z �f x n x x
z x x n x x z x x11 x1I1� 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 .. ' x x x x y n x x x
/ CE n z x n x z x z x z x'X x n z1 x l x z x% %'z% ndlx XII%1% x1 n x x XX
X''%n x z x n x n x n x z x n z x x x n \,L xJ-J' CE �� �E x x x x x x x n
CE •-� CE -{� CF x x n
_� CE 1 ¢E CE I CE ��xC2` �xCE �in(
/ CE CE �x x z x x x x n XXXIXX x x x x x n x x x n x x x n x x z x n x x x n x x CEngEx�
/ CEx x x x z x n x x x n% x% n >X x z x z x x x n x='CEx�-
FE x n z x xCEz �--CE xCE
/ Cfxx _CE_
_xC'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
0' 40' 80' 120'
(Hoaizorvra�)
Sheet Index
Q�
z�N��oo
awYzmm=
2:!
04 z1 E
� c8
E
3
Lr)
M

I
of
of
LI
NI
wl
zlLn
=I
U
�I
Q
�I
n� 3 �� � a ,1, 111 111 1 11� I IidJl
I 3J �1, ,1, ,1, 111 I' d' 1�'1' ,1, 11 � 1 �''I�1•- �
3J �, 3J11 111 ' '1' 11 111 111 111 1p' 111 11111 1p'1' 11' d' 'I'' 1j �' 11 �1�J ���
/,.3J 1�f '1' 11 �1' 11 �1' 11'1' 1p'1' 1p 1 1p 111 111 111 d' d' 1 1 111 111 111 111 11' 'I' I 1 I 1 ,1, 1 1 d
3J11 11 Ip 1p 1p I I 1 11 Ip 1p 1p Ip I 11 Ip 1p 1p I 11 111 " a.
I 3J1�(�3�'•' �''''1' 1'1' 1,'1'11'11pd'1p'1',p1111p I''I' 11p 1 I 1 Ip I'Ip 1d' d1 I Ip ,I, 1p 111 I
,1, 11111'1' 111'1' 111 11.. 111p 111 111 111 1 I 1 1 1x 161+p� '1' '1' ,p'1' 111 1 Ip 111 11' 'u 'I —1 �1 Ip 1p 'I' 'u 111'1' 111'1' 111'1' 111 1 �I' 1 'I'
,1,'1' 111 111 111 111 111 11 � , , 1 1 I 11 111 111 I ', r• '1' , 11 111 '1' 111 y.� � 111 1111 1 1 ' 111
111 111 111 'I' '1' , ,'1' 1 1 �1' 111'1' 111111 1 11' 1 Ip � 1• �Jt � �1 �r 131' 1 'I' 1 'I' 1 I ,1, 1' ,1, 111 111 1 11 I I'
111 ,1,1 ,1, 11111 1 � 1 I' 1 I' 111 111 ,1, ,1, 111 11' 11
1 ,1, 111 I I ,1, 111 1111 I p 111 / / h 11 11 11 1p I' 111 111 111 111 111 Ip 111 �.. ,1� t< i I� 1 ' 1 1 .1^ " 1 111,1,11111 111 1 111 1 11 1 '164
,1,11 Ip 1 11 1 1p 111 'I' �'1' 11'1' 1p'1' 11' 11 '1' 111 '1i / / 'I ' / ///�// i/ / 1 11 1 Ip 1 1p 1p 11 d' '1' '1' 11 11' '1' 1 ,p/:. � � / I ' 6 • 1 , , 1p d1
I I I I / � / / / I 111 111 1p ,1, 111 I �• 11 11 1' 111
"�•-�. 1 . 1 .1.
1d' . II �. ' --
I' 1 '1' , 'I' , 1,. 1 •' 11 •�� \\'I, .1.'ll ;' ,Yw-i 1 1r 11.1• � • 1 ,p ,p 1 1 �1 11 q1 •r 11 1!1 .,. -r
//,' ,
1 1p 11' d' 'I' 111 1p Ip Ip 'I' '1' 1'1'1' Ip S8x'' 1p 11' d' 'I' '1' 1 , , I 1 1p 11' ''W1' '1' .1.'1' • .1.
'1 '1' 11 Ip 'h d' 'x'•11 I' d' 'I' '1' 1 11 �- 11 11 1p 1p 1p I ,p dl '!' x , x x n x
1 1' 111'' 1 1 'h 1 '1' I '1' 11' I I I I' 111 1 111 1 1' 1 r I '1' 1 1 'I' 1 '1' , ,'1' d1'p a1'1' •�!•'`t,.J` %p x x x x x x x x n x e "
x'1'.1':1'1�'1>!11x'1'x :1'X•!%•X'1'x''x x'. x'''xl%1'x'' x11X %I.�1' xlxl x 1!%'
rtE x� CE
—`� CE x_ CE x' CE x _.�xC, CEx z x x •CE / ,'.CL.TT�� r�. J�
CE 4�xCE
�z
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3J1�—
' 11 IIaJ
A1' '1' 1 11 �1' 1 �1' 111 ' 1p x'11 •1. 3J1�. I
JJ
111 111 111 111 111 11 1 11 Ip ,1, 111 '1' 11 111 111 1I �' 31.,
I I 'I' 'I' 1111 I 1 '1' 11'1' 111 I 111 111 111
aN
/////i//iii/%/i//i//ii x x'1' •x'1'.a1�1� 11''' 1p'!� 11' ' 'I' � 'I' � 1'I' 1p'1' Ip''' 11�'' 1p�'� 1p•'. d' 11'1' 11 �1' � nl�:I' ��•'I' � d' • Ip Ip q' 11 11 1p ' 1p �
I. X1'
-CE
CE n x n x x
0' 40' 80' 120'
(H oaizorvra�)
Sheet Index
Qo
zzN��oo
�zv�mmz
aw:.zmmv
z�-11
,4 z �i E
I
i
4 4V
L
G
0
Is
70
H
rr0
i•N
0
U
7�
r.
x
G
V
W
\10
M
M

H o
zZN"goo
��vummz
1 «z mmv
^~Z;Ynn�
H ��°_..
a Zou~LLE
�WN LL
ti
N
�,
SEE PROFILE
12" MIN. DEPTH 3" TO 6" DIAMETER WOODY
FOR LENGTH OF RIFFLE
SALVAGED ONSITE DEBRIS WORKED DRO
COBBLE/GRAVEL RIFFLE SUBSTRATA;
B
BED MATERIAL NllCRO POOL HABITAT
BEHIND LARGER WOODY DEBRIS
SEE PROFILE
LENGTH OF RIFFLE
HEAD OF RIFFLE ELEVATIONFOR
POIlNTPERPROFII.E BOTTOM
NONWOVE 6"SALVAGEDONSTTE
AA,RIFFLE
FILTERWIDTHpER COBBLE/GRAVEL
TYPICAL SECTIONS
"SLOPE(FYWP)
FABRIC BED MATERIAL
SOWBSection
A -A'
q
q�
RIFFLE
EXCAVATE LOW FLOW
THALWEG IN RIFFLE
TAIL OF RIFFLE ELEVATION
POINT PER PROFILE
RIFFLE BOTTOM
TOP OFBANK (I'YP)
OW
WIDTH PER L
TYPICAL SECTIONS
ffm
Plan View
EXCAVATE LOW FLOW
B'
THALWEG IN RIFFLE
TOE OF SLOPE (TYP)
SALVAGED ONSITE
COBBLE/GRAVEL
BED MATERIAL
12" MIN. DEPTH
TOP OF BANK (TYP)
RIFFLE
SALVAGED ONSITE
B'
MATERIAL TO 3" TO 6" BRUSHY MATERIAL
COBBLE/GRAVEL
BED MATERIAL
MICRO POOL HABTTA
EXTEND UP TOE WORKED INTO ROCKY SUBSTRATE
OF SLOPES
BEHIND LARG
RIFFLE INVERT PER PROFILE
WOODY DEBRIS
TOP OF BANK
1�
Plan View
TOE OF SLOPE
�eeo TOP OF BANK (T'YP)
Profile A -A'
Section B -B'
6" SALVAGED ONSITE
COBBLE/GRA
BED MATERIAL NONWOVEN
NOTES:
Section B -B' FILTER
NOTES:
1 Constructed Riffle
FABRIC
S.0 Not to scae
FILTER FABRIC TO EXTEND 5'
• FILTER FABRIC TO EXTEND 5'
AM F, OM OF RIFFLE.
Woody Riffle LOG EXPOSED 1" TO 3" ABOVE
UPSTREAM FROM TAIL OF RIFFLE.
• SEE DE SHEET .8
/
FINISHED RIFFLE ELEVATION
• SEE DETAIL 4, SHEET 5.S FOR
SIZIDNGAIL4,SHEETS.SFOR
50
SIZING.
CR -CR
CR -WR
SEE PROFILE
HEAD OF RIFFLE ELEVATION
FOR LENGTH OF RIFFLE
POENT PER PROFII.
12" MIN. DEPTH
CR -1Z
CR -CH
SALVAGED ONSITE
o
COBBLE/GRAVEL
BURY INTO BANK 5' MIN.
B
BED MATERIAL
BANKFULL
TOP OF BANK
6" SALVAGED ONSITE
FLOW
COBBLE/GRAVEL
EXCAVATE LOW FLOW
BED MATERIAL
TOE OF SLOPE
THALWEG IN RIFFLE
HEAD OF RIFFLE
TAIL OF RIFFLE
ELEVATION POENT
ELEVATION POENT
-
PER PROFILE
PER PROFILE
Y C
FLOW
m
N
NONWOVEN
FILTER O O B
Profile View
FABRIC o O EXCAVATE LOW FLOW
A -A'
~ ~ THALWEG IN RIFFLE
RIFFLE
BURY INTO BANK 1' MIN.
TIE BOULDERS INTO
B' CLASS 1 STONE
TOE OF SLOPE OR
OR SALVAGED
MATERIAL TO
IA
PLACE MIlNIMUM OF 1'
ONSITE BOULDERS
EXTEND TOE
FROM TOE OF SLOPE
Plan View MIN 0.5'xl'xl.5'
OF SLOPES
LOG STRUCTURE
TOP OF BANK
EXPOSED UNTIL
CENTER OF C
12" MIN. DEPTH
SALVAGED ONSITE CLASSISTONE
TOE OF SLOPE
e ROCK VANES MAY
BE USED IN PLACE
OF LOGS AT
COBBLE/GRAVEL ONSITE BOULDERSBED MATERIAL
FLOW MIN 0.5'xl'xl.5'
CLASS 1 STONE
OR SALVAGED RIFFLE INVERT PER PROFILE
ONSITE BOULDERS
ENGENEER'S DISCRETION
3" MAX
MIN 0.5'xl'xl.5'
TOP OF BANK W)
LoB Section
NONWOVEN
3" MAX
B -B
FILTER
FABRIC
NOTES:
Section A -A'
• STRUCTURES SHOULD VARY IN SIZE AND
TAIL OF R ELEVATION
O�
TYPE WITHIN EACH RIFFLE.
POIlNT PER PROROFII.E
Section B -B'
• ROCK TO BE USED IN PLACE OF LOGS ON
ALL UTl REACH lA AND 1B. ROCK MAY BE
Plan View
SUBSTITUTED FOR LOGS AT ENGINEER'S
DISCRETION ON ALL OTHER REACHES.
r4--\ un Riffle
• FILTER FABRIC TO EXTEND 5' UPSTREAM
Jazz Riffle Structure
NOTES:
Not to So.[e
FROM TAIL OF RIFFLE.
3
5.0
• SEE DETAIL 4, SHEET 5.8 FOR SIZING.
5.0 Not to soele
• FILTER FABRIC TO EXTEND 5'
UPSTREAM FROM TAIL OF RIFFLE.
• SEE DETAIL 4, SHEET 5.8 FOR
SIZING.
H o
zZN"goo
��vummz
1 «z mmv
^~Z;Ynn�
H ��°_..
a Zou~LLE
�WN LL
ti
N
�,

5' MIN.
(TYP)
HEAD OF RIFFLE ELEVATION
POINT PER PROFILE
HEAD OF RIFFLE ELEVATION
- THALWEG BED MATERIAL POINT PER PB
TOPOFBANK NORMAL WATER BURY INTO BANK T MIP
SURFACE
0.5' MAX.
TAIL OF RIFFLE ELEVATION
POINT PER PROFILE
INSTALL BRUSH TOE OR
STONE BANK PROTECTION
Profile View
A -A'
TOP OF BANK TOE OF TAIL OF RIFFLE ELEVAT
SLOPE POINT PER PRO
5'M I N. 5' MIN.
(TYP) (TYP)
Log Section
B -B'
NOTE:
1. BOULDER MATERIAL CAN BE
SUBSTITUTED IN PLACE OF ANGLED
LOGS WITH APPROVAL OF
ENGINEER.
2. SEE DETAIL 4, SHEET 5.8 FOR SIZING.
SILL ELEVATION
PER PROFILE (TYP)
FLOW
a) Rock and Roll Riffle
5.1 of to cale
B
Plan View
NOTE:
1. ONE LOG MAY BE USED (NO FOOTER)
IF DIAMETER IS AT LEAST 18".
2. SEE DETAIL 4, SHEET 5.8 FOR SIZING.
;al
HEADER LOG
FOOTER LOG
7ENnWEDG SILLELEVATION
.) PER PROFILE (TYP)
3 Log Sill
5.1 Not to Scale
5° TO 65°
(TYP)
BANKFULL
" DIAMETER OR
BEATER (TYP)
,D MATERIAL
EXCAVATE LOW FLOW
THALWEG IN RIFFLE
INSTALL 12"
LIFTS WRAPPED
IN COIR
MATTING OT
TOP 01
LUNKERLOG`.
FOOTER LOG
BURIED 6" BELOW
MAX POOL DEPTH
NONWOVI
FILTI
FABRIC
Plan View
NOTE:
1. SEE DETAIL 4, SHEET 5.8 FOR SIZING.
PLACE HEADER BOULDERS
WITH 1' TO T CLEAR SPACE
BETWEEN ROCKS.
NO GAP BETWEEN FOOTERS
INVERT ELEVATION
PER PROFILE
FLg-WW
Y
2 Lunker Lo
5.1 Not to Scale
EXCAVATEPOC
PER PROFILE
SCOUR
POOL
\ _ PLACE HEADER BOULDER
TO PREVENT LOG FROM SHIFTING.
A Section B -B'
B-
A' BACKFILL MATERIAL
WANE ARM
LENGTH OFFSET HEADER LOG
(X) 0.25' TO 0.5' UPSTREAM
OF FOOTER LOG
Plan View HEADER LOG
FOOTER LOG
NONWOVEN
FILTER FABRIC
TRANSPLANT/
BRUSH TOE
NOTES:
1. BACKFILL MATERIAL SHALL BE A
WELL -GRADED MIX OF STONE:
DNIIN - 2" DMAX =12" D50 - 6"
2. SEE DETAIL 4, SHEET 5.8 FOR SIZING.
E
lu
H o
z�NloIoo
��vummz
�w«zmmv
^z-33.
az"svLLE
11
I
_ FILTER FABRIC
4
Log J -Hook EXTENOss'MIN.
5.1 Not to Scale
Section A -A'
E
3
CR -RR
0
D
INSTALL 12"
LIFTS WRAPPED
IN COIR
MATTING OT
TOP 01
LUNKERLOG`.
FOOTER LOG
BURIED 6" BELOW
MAX POOL DEPTH
NONWOVI
FILTI
FABRIC
Plan View
NOTE:
1. SEE DETAIL 4, SHEET 5.8 FOR SIZING.
PLACE HEADER BOULDERS
WITH 1' TO T CLEAR SPACE
BETWEEN ROCKS.
NO GAP BETWEEN FOOTERS
INVERT ELEVATION
PER PROFILE
FLg-WW
Y
2 Lunker Lo
5.1 Not to Scale
EXCAVATEPOC
PER PROFILE
SCOUR
POOL
\ _ PLACE HEADER BOULDER
TO PREVENT LOG FROM SHIFTING.
A Section B -B'
B-
A' BACKFILL MATERIAL
WANE ARM
LENGTH OFFSET HEADER LOG
(X) 0.25' TO 0.5' UPSTREAM
OF FOOTER LOG
Plan View HEADER LOG
FOOTER LOG
NONWOVEN
FILTER FABRIC
TRANSPLANT/
BRUSH TOE
NOTES:
1. BACKFILL MATERIAL SHALL BE A
WELL -GRADED MIX OF STONE:
DNIIN - 2" DMAX =12" D50 - 6"
2. SEE DETAIL 4, SHEET 5.8 FOR SIZING.
E
lu
H o
z�NloIoo
��vummz
�w«zmmv
^z-33.
az"svLLE
11
I
_ FILTER FABRIC
4
Log J -Hook EXTENOss'MIN.
5.1 Not to Scale
Section A -A'
E
3

ti
N
ral
P[.—W SILL ELEVATION PER
INSTALL ADDITIONAL VEGETATION SUCH AS
LIVE STAKES, ROOTED SEEDLINGS, AND ETC.
OUTER LAYER 26 OZ / YD z
COIR MATTING IlVNERLAYER11.2OZ. / YD'
COCONUT FIBER BLANKET
10°- 150 ANGLE
12' - 15' B DIAMETER LOG PROFILE
POOL LENGTH PER PROFILE
BACKFILL
STREAMBED
COMPACTED SOIL 12" TO 18" THICK
A'
POOL DEPTH PER PROFILE
LIVE CUTTINGSSILL
ELEVATION
'
BIODEGRADABLE EROSION _
Inset"A"
PER PROFILE (TYP)
NONWOVEN FILTER FABRIC OR C125BN
CONTROL FABRIC (SEE INSET "A")
Matting and Blanket
� 1
MATTING AS DIRECTED BY ENGINEER
FLS WW
EXTEND FILTER FABRIC
OPTIONAL LIVE FASCINE
2"
P -L1
5' MIN. UPSTREAM
BUNDLE OR T COIR LOG �,
HEIGHT VARIES
f\\� r
`
Profile View
SECURED WITH 36"
UPHILL
BACKFILL',
OT EOFSLOPE TYP
BRUSHTOE
OR STONE
TOP OF BANK (TYP)
TOE
CANEL
15°
A
\
BOTTOM WIDTH
18" TO 36"
Plan View
ROCK TOE PROTECTION
li5ogrmwmm,
(CLASS B - VARIES PER
STREAM SIZE)
0.2'
7ENMWEDOG
Section View
Typical
SILL ELEVATION12" - 15" DIAMETER LOG
NOTE:
Stakes
.) PER PROFILE (TYP)
1. ROOTED/LEAFED CONDITION OF THE
Section A - A'
LTVESIG PLANT MATERIAL IS NOT
REPRESENTATIVE OF THE TIME OF
INSTALLATION.
2. BOTTOM OF FIRST COMPACTED EARTH
LIFT TO BE PLACED 6" ABOVE NORMAL
BASEFLOW.
Vegetated Soil Lift
1
3. NUMBER OF COMPACTED EARTH LIFTS 5.z
Not to c e
I I
/--2--,, Angled Log Drop
TO VARY DEPENDING ON DESIGN TOP
1
s z
Not to Scale NOTE:
OF BANK HEIGHT.�//r
1. SEE DETAIL 4, SHEET 5.8 FOR SIZING.
Cl�CO
/
ONSHE
6.. SALVAGED COBBLGRAVEL
\
BED MATERIAL
MIN. 12" DEPTH
SALVAGED ONSITE
HEADER LOG
COBBLE/GRAVEL
NONWOVEN STREAMBED
Ow O
w
BED MATERIAL
FOOTER LOG
FILTER FABRIC
w A
F, O 5'
w
FLOW
p
FOOTER BOULDER
w�
� .•
O
Y
EXTEND FABRIC
A\ \ \ \ \ \
.UPSFILTER
5'MIN. UPSTREAM
B I B'
BSection
'—LA
ER FABRIC
H
A -A'
SILL ELEVATION
ND FILTER
INVERT ELEVATION
PER PROFILE
FABRIC 5' MIN.
PER PROFILE
UPSTREAM
Plan View
Profile A -A'
�
FLOW
X A
H
w
SLOPE
/ \
HEADER LOG
FOOTER LOG
I
STABILIZE VANE
Profile B - B'
TOP OF BANK SILL ELEVATION
PER PROFILE
5,
I SCOUR
WITH ONE BOULDER
POO
ON EACH SIDE
. ...... . %
✓
��
B'
\
/
FOOTER BOULDERS
\
EMBED 3' MIN.
IlVTO
EXCAVATE POOL
Section B -B'
BANK (TYP)
Plan View
PER PROFILE
Log Vane
4
3 Rock Sill
5.z
Not to Scale
\,E,1 Not to Scale
NOTE:
NOTE:
1. SEE DETAIL 4, SHEET 5.8 FOR SIZING.
1. SEE DETAIL 4, SHEET 5.8 FOR SIZING.
ti
N
ral

I SEED AND PLAN ASPER
PLANTIN
OLD
BE AbAINUU U.
V-1 P-1 Section
r r r r
r r r r r r r
r r r r r r r r
r r r r r r r
r r r r r r r r
r r r r r r
ILL TO
OF SOIL r r r r r r
)EBRIS AND BRUSH.
r r r r r r
r r r r r r
3' MIN
ELEVATION PER PROFILE J
EXTEND SILL TO TIE
INTO NATURAL GROUND
FILTER FABRIC
Vernal Pool
5.3iNottocale
r r r r
r r r r
STEP POOL
�►A —B
EXTEND FILTER FABRIC
KEY ROCKS
',OCK TOE BANK PROTECTION (TYP)
BACKFILL AROUND AND
BETWEEN ROCK WITH
WELL GRADED MIX
OF No.57, CLASS A,
CLASS B RIPRAP
f
7 BANKFULL
MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS
21M 6" MIN
qk MATAND SEED
`_____-
OUTLET CHANNEL SHALL BE
CONSTRUCTED TO DRAIN TO
NEAREST RIFFLE. LOCATION TO BE
3.0'
MATERIAL
DETERMINED DURING CONSTRUCTION.
ADD RIFFLE MATERIAL
RECOM ENDED COLOR
N/A
®wI& Ch—el Section
TENSILE YIELD
ADD LOG AS DIRECTED
AVE. 2000 LBS. PER 4' WIDE
ULTIMATE TENSILE STRENGTH
TO PREVENT HEAD CUT.
3' MIN
ELEVATION PER PROFILE J
EXTEND SILL TO TIE
INTO NATURAL GROUND
FILTER FABRIC
Vernal Pool
5.3iNottocale
r r r r
r r r r
STEP POOL
�►A —B
EXTEND FILTER FABRIC
KEY ROCKS
',OCK TOE BANK PROTECTION (TYP)
BACKFILL AROUND AND
BETWEEN ROCK WITH
WELL GRADED MIX
OF No.57, CLASS A,
CLASS B RIPRAP
f
7 BANKFULL
/1 o
HzcNmo­oo
�`01�mmz
�w«zmmw
^Z`Ynn
04 Z'^ s 1' LL E
6' MAX. WITH WIRE ����40�
ATTACH SAFETY FENCE
TO METAL POSTS USING
METAL WIRE TIES
ORANGE SAFTY GO
FENCE
"T" OR "U" POST DRIVEN
MINIMUM OF 18" INTO GROUND
E:] E:] E:]
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 4' MIN.
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 1
2 Safety Fence
5s Not to c e
18" MIN.
�!IecTion view H -H
NOTES:
MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS
OVER -EXCAVATE CHANNEL BED TO A DEPTH EQUAL TO THE
PHYSICAL PROPERTY
TESTS
REQUIREMENTS
MATERIAL
N/A
POLYETHYLENE
RECOM ENDED COLOR
N/A
"INTERNATIONAL ORANGE"
TENSILE YIELD
ASTM D638
AVE. 2000 LBS. PER 4' WIDE
ULTIMATE TENSILE STRENGTH
ASTM D638
AVE. 2900 LBS. PER 4' WIDE
ELONGATION AT BREAK )%)
ASTM D638
GREATER THAN 1000%
CHEMICAL RESISTANCE
N/A
INERTTO MOST CHEMICALS AND ACIDS
/1 o
HzcNmo­oo
�`01�mmz
�w«zmmw
^Z`Ynn
04 Z'^ s 1' LL E
6' MAX. WITH WIRE ����40�
ATTACH SAFETY FENCE
TO METAL POSTS USING
METAL WIRE TIES
ORANGE SAFTY GO
FENCE
"T" OR "U" POST DRIVEN
MINIMUM OF 18" INTO GROUND
E:] E:] E:]
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 4' MIN.
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 1
2 Safety Fence
5s Not to c e
18" MIN.
�!IecTion view H -H
NOTES:
a 1.
OVER -EXCAVATE CHANNEL BED TO A DEPTH EQUAL TO THE
TOTAL THICKNESS OF THE BOULDERS AND STONE BASE.
a 2.
STONE BASE SHALL BE A MIXTURE OF 2"-12" STONE. STONE
BASE DEPTH SHALL BE 15".
3.
PLACE BOULDERS IN TRENCH ON TOP OF STONE BASE. THERE
SHALL BE NO GAPS BETWEEN BOULDERS.
4.
MINIMUM SIZE FOR BOULDERS SHALL BE 2'x 2'x 1'.
5.
PLACE BACKFILL MATERIAL BEHIND THE ROCKS AND FILTER
FABRIC.
6.
FILTER FABRIC TO EXTEND 5'.
5 7.
PLACE COARSE BACKFILL BEHIND ROCKS AND FILTER FABRIC
ENSURING THAT ANY VOIDS BETWEEN THE ROCKS ARE FILLED.
Profile View
Rock Cascade with Pools
5.3 Not to Scale
Pool Section View 13-13'

Brush Toe - UT1 Reach 4A & 4B
5.4 Not to Scale
3' WIDTH PER TYPICAL SECTIONS —
BACKFILL IN 6" MIN. LIFTS
EROSION CONTROL MATTING
OL MATTING 3
%. ' MIN
ELEV.3" ABOVE FILTER FABRIC
DOWNSTREAM \G 6" MIN
LY PACKED WOODY DEBRIS
RIFFLE INVERT /i 6" MIN DENSELY PACKED BRUSH, WOODY DEBRIS AND SOIL
111 7%
i MATERIAL TO BE INSTALLED ELEV. 6" BELOW NATIVE SOIL
I WITH BANK POOL DEPTH
Brush Toe - UT1 Reach 1A & 1B
5.4 Not to Scale
NOTES:
1. OVEREXCAVATE 3' OUTSIDE OF TOP OF BANK (BANKFULL).
2. INSTALL BASE LOGS PARALLEL TO FLOW AT TOE OF SLOPE. DIAMETER
6"-12".
3. INSTALL BASE LOGS PERPENDICULAR TO FLOW AT INTERVALS ALONG
BANK, RESTING ON TOP OF PARALLEL BASE LOGS. BASE LOGS SHALL
BE 6"-12" DIAMETER.
4. INSTALL A DENSE LAYER OF BRUSH/WOODY DEBRIS, WHICH SHALL
CONSIST OF SMALL BRANCHES AND ROOTS COLLECTED ON-SITE AND
SOIL TO FILL ANY VOID SPACE. LIGHTLY COMPACT BRUSH/WOODY
DEBRIS LAYER.
5. BRUSH SHOULD BE ALIGNED SO STEMS ARE ROUGHLY PARALLEL AND
IS INSTALLED POINTING SLIGHTLY UPSTREAM.
6. INSTALL FILTER FABRIC OVER BRUSH/WOODY DEBRIS.
7. INSTALL EARTH BACKFILL OVER BRUSH/WOODY LAYER ACCORDING
TO TYPICAL SECTION DIMENSIONS.
8. SEED, MULCH AND INSTALL EROSION CONTROL MATTING AND BANK
STABILIZATION PER PLANS.
TOP OF BANK (BANKFULL)
NOTES:
1. OVEREXCAVATE 3' OUTSIDE OF TOP OF BANK (BANKFULL).
2. INSTALL A DENSE LAYER OF BRUSH/WOODY DEBRIS, WHICH SHALL
CONSIST OF SMALL BRANCHES AND ROOTS COLLECTED ON-SITE AND
SOIL TO FILL ANY VOID SPACE. LIGHTLY COMPACT BRUSH/WOODY
DEBRIS LAYER.
3. BRUSH SHOULD BE ALIGNED SO STEMS ARE ROUGHLY PARALLEL AND
IS INSTALLED POINTING SLIGHTLY UPSTREAM.
4. INSTALL FILTER FABRIC OVER BRUSH/WOODY DEBRIS.
5. INSTALL EARTH BACKFILL OVER BRUSH/WOODY LAYER ACCORDING
TO TYPICAL SECTION DIMENSIONS.
6. SEED, MULCH AND INSTALL EROSION CONTROL MATTING AND BANK
STABILIZATION PER PLANS.
W
Q
z�N��oo
�u
:.zmm v
�=�Y��=
A
3'
WIDTH PER TYPICAL SECTIONS
a wo u
DENSELY PACK BRUSH, WOODY DEBRIS AND SOIL
EROSION CONTROL MATTING
s
IN BETWEEN BASE LOGS
BASE LOGS PERPENDICULAR TO FLOW
BACKFILL IN 6" MIN. LIFTS
BASE LOGS PARALLEL TO FLOW 3
6" MIN
EROSION CONTROL MATTING
TO
OF BANK (BANKFULL)
����
SOP OF
ELEV. 3" ABOVE
\
\\/\\\/\\\`
6" MIN
FILTER FABRIC
DENSELY PACKED BRUSH, WOODY DEBRIS AND SOIL
S REM
6" MIN
RIFFLEDOWNSTREAM
Q�s\.OV-
BASE LOG
4"-6" DIAMETER
TOE OF SLOPE / /\\/.�OQ4��
\•\\/\\/\\/\\\
�QyV�J�,C)
pE0� Pl
BRUSH MATERIAL TO BE
\ .\\j \\�\\��`�
4V
Q� ]PI.. Vi—
O
INSTALLED FLUSH
WITH BANK
I �\/�\ �\/\\,�\ � �` 6-12" DIAMETER
L�
ELEV. 6" BELOW
2' MIN
NATIVE SOILKFILL
POOL DEPTH
Brush Toe - UT1 Reach 4A & 4B
5.4 Not to Scale
3' WIDTH PER TYPICAL SECTIONS —
BACKFILL IN 6" MIN. LIFTS
EROSION CONTROL MATTING
OL MATTING 3
%. ' MIN
ELEV.3" ABOVE FILTER FABRIC
DOWNSTREAM \G 6" MIN
LY PACKED WOODY DEBRIS
RIFFLE INVERT /i 6" MIN DENSELY PACKED BRUSH, WOODY DEBRIS AND SOIL
111 7%
i MATERIAL TO BE INSTALLED ELEV. 6" BELOW NATIVE SOIL
I WITH BANK POOL DEPTH
Brush Toe - UT1 Reach 1A & 1B
5.4 Not to Scale
NOTES:
1. OVEREXCAVATE 3' OUTSIDE OF TOP OF BANK (BANKFULL).
2. INSTALL BASE LOGS PARALLEL TO FLOW AT TOE OF SLOPE. DIAMETER
6"-12".
3. INSTALL BASE LOGS PERPENDICULAR TO FLOW AT INTERVALS ALONG
BANK, RESTING ON TOP OF PARALLEL BASE LOGS. BASE LOGS SHALL
BE 6"-12" DIAMETER.
4. INSTALL A DENSE LAYER OF BRUSH/WOODY DEBRIS, WHICH SHALL
CONSIST OF SMALL BRANCHES AND ROOTS COLLECTED ON-SITE AND
SOIL TO FILL ANY VOID SPACE. LIGHTLY COMPACT BRUSH/WOODY
DEBRIS LAYER.
5. BRUSH SHOULD BE ALIGNED SO STEMS ARE ROUGHLY PARALLEL AND
IS INSTALLED POINTING SLIGHTLY UPSTREAM.
6. INSTALL FILTER FABRIC OVER BRUSH/WOODY DEBRIS.
7. INSTALL EARTH BACKFILL OVER BRUSH/WOODY LAYER ACCORDING
TO TYPICAL SECTION DIMENSIONS.
8. SEED, MULCH AND INSTALL EROSION CONTROL MATTING AND BANK
STABILIZATION PER PLANS.
TOP OF BANK (BANKFULL)
NOTES:
1. OVEREXCAVATE 3' OUTSIDE OF TOP OF BANK (BANKFULL).
2. INSTALL A DENSE LAYER OF BRUSH/WOODY DEBRIS, WHICH SHALL
CONSIST OF SMALL BRANCHES AND ROOTS COLLECTED ON-SITE AND
SOIL TO FILL ANY VOID SPACE. LIGHTLY COMPACT BRUSH/WOODY
DEBRIS LAYER.
3. BRUSH SHOULD BE ALIGNED SO STEMS ARE ROUGHLY PARALLEL AND
IS INSTALLED POINTING SLIGHTLY UPSTREAM.
4. INSTALL FILTER FABRIC OVER BRUSH/WOODY DEBRIS.
5. INSTALL EARTH BACKFILL OVER BRUSH/WOODY LAYER ACCORDING
TO TYPICAL SECTION DIMENSIONS.
6. SEED, MULCH AND INSTALL EROSION CONTROL MATTING AND BANK
STABILIZATION PER PLANS.
W

W
6" MIN. OVERLAP IN
/ 1.25"
DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION
AT MAT ENDS
/
ECO -STAKE (TYP) TOP OF BANK
T
3' MAX.
1
TRANSPLANTED SOD AND ROOTMASS
SPACING
6" MIN
TRANSPLANTED SOD AND ROOTMASS
TOP OF BANK
TOE OF SLOPE
TOP OF BANK
Plan View
Eco -Stake
EROSION CONTROL
. • . • . • . • . • .
"
MATTING (TYP.)
TOE OF SLOPE
EROSION CONTROL
FLOW
MATTING (TYP) TOP OF BANK
Section View
Riffle Installation
Plan View CONSTRUCTED RIFFLE
ECO -STAKE (TYP)
Riffle Installation
RIFFLE MATERIAL TOE OF SLOPE �
NOTES:
1.
PREPARE THE BANK WHERE THE SOD MAT WILL BE
TRANSPLANTED BY RAKING & FERTILIZING.
2.
EXCAVATE TRANSPLANT SOD MATS WITH A WIDE
RUN MATTING UNDER Section View
BUCKET AND AS MUCH ADDITIONAL SOIL MATERIAL AS
RIFFLE MATERIAL STAKE (TYP)
POSSIBLE.
3.
PLACE TRANSPLANT ON THE BANK TO BE STABILIZED.
4.
SECURE WITH SOD STAPLES.
�1Erosion Control Matting
5.
FILL IN ANY HOLES AROUND THE TRANSPLANT AND
5.5 Not to Scale
COMPACT.
6.
ANY LOOSE SOIL LEFT IN THE STREAM SHOULD BE
REMOVED.
Transplanted Sod Mats
p
7.
PLACE MULTIPLE TRANSPLANTS CLOSE TOGETHER SUCH
-
THAT THEY TOUCH.
5.5 NottoScale
8.
INSTALL EROSION CONTROL MATTING ABOVE
TRANSPLANTED SOD MATS.
8' MAX. WITH WIRE
(6' MAX. WITHOUT WIRE)
MUD MATS
X' DIM
I� WATER DIVERSION CHANNEL
MIDDLE AND
VERTICAL WIRES
SHALL BE 12 z GAGE
-
Y
MIN. FILTER FABRIC
SUPPORT LOG
FILTER FABRIC
12" 0 MIN.
CLASS B
TOP AND BOTTOM STRAND
STONE
SHALL BE 10 GAUGE MIN.
WIRE
FILTER FABRIC
COMPACTED FILL EXISTING GROUND
NOTE:
1.
CONSTRUCT STREAM CROSSING WHEN
FLOW IS AT NORMAL BASEFLOW.
�8"
2.
MINIMIZE CLEARING AND EXCAVATION
_L
OF STREAMBANKS. DO NOT EXCAVATE
NOTES:
STEEL POST
3.
CHANNEL BOTTOM.
INSTALL STREAM CROSSING Temporary Stream Crossing
- Mud Mat
1. USE WIRE A MINIUM OF 32" IN WIDTH
EXTEND FABRIC _d4 2't0" DEPTH
INTO TRENCH �
PERPENDICULAR TO THE FLOW.
AND WITH A MINIMUM OF 6 LINES OF
4.
5.5 0 o e
MAINTAIN CROSSING SO THAT RUNOFF IN
WIRES WITH 12" STAY SPACING.
THE CONSTRUCTION ROAD DOES NOT
2. USE FILTER FABRIC A MINIMUM OF 36"
ENTER EXISTING CHANNEL.
IN WIDTH AND FASTEN ADEQUATELY TO
5.
STABILIZE AN ACCESS RAMP OF CLASS B
THE WIRES AS DIRECTED BY THE
Silt Fence
STONE TO THE EDGE OF THE MUD MAT.
ENGINEER.
4
6.
CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE AN
3. PROVIDE 5' STEEL POST OF THE
Not Scale
APPROPRIATE RAMP ANGLE ACCORDING
SELF -FASTENER ANGLE STEEL TYPE.
TO EQUIPMENT UTILIZED.
ANGLE STEEL TYPE.
W

NOTES:
1. PROVIDE TURNING RADIUS SUFFICIENT TO
ACCOMMODATE LARGE TRUCKS.
5. LOCATE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE AT ALL POINTS
OF INGRESS AND EGRESS UNTIL SITE IS STABILIZED.
PROVIDE FREQUENT CHECKS OF THE DEVICE AND
TIMELY MAINTENANCE.
6. MUST BE MAINTAINED IN A CONDITION WHICH
WILL PREVENTTRACKING OR DIRECT FLOW OF MUD
ONTO STREETS. PERIODIC TOP DRESSING WITH
STONE WILL BE NECESSARY.
7. ANY MATERIALTRACKED ONTO THE ROADWAY
MUST BE CLEANED IMMEDIATELY.
8. USE CLASS A STONE OR OTHER COARSE AGGREGATE
APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER.
9. PLACE FILTER FABRIC BENEATH STONE.
Construction Entrance
5.6 of to Scale
IMPERVIOUS DIKE
(SEE INSET "B")
/ /INTAKE HOSE
/PUMP
ACTIVE WORK AREA
DISCHARGE HOSE/
DEWATERING BAG
(SEE INSET "A")
DISCHARGE HOSE
HIGH STRENGTH
DOUBLE STITCHED
"J" TYPE SEAMS.
BAG PLACED ON
AGGREGATED OR STRAW.
10 DEWATERING
BAG
15
SEWN IN SPOUT EXISTING TERRAIN DEWATERING BAG
HIGH STRENGTH STRAPPING
FOR HOLDING HOSE
IN PLACE.
—WATER FLOW
FROM PUMP
FLEXIBLE 8" of CLASS B RIPRAP /
DISCHARGE HOSE FILTER FABRIC
Inset "A" 15' to 20'
Dewatering Bag NOTE:
1. PROVIDE STABILIZED OUTLETTO
STREAM BED.
�SAND BAG
(24" X12"X6")
OR
OR STONE.
1 IMPERVIOUS SHEETING
FLOW
BED
Inset "B"
OUTLET USING CLASS B
RIPRAP
RIPRAP TRENCHED INTO EXISTING
IMPERVIOUS DIKE Impervious Dike
"B")
GROUND A MINIMUM OF 6". SIZE AND
(SEE INSET
LOCATION TO BE DETERMINED IN THE
FIELD BY THE ENGINEER.
U
FLEXIBLE DISCHARGE HOSE FROM
10' MIN.
/ PUMP AROUND PUMP HELD IN PLACE
WITH SAND BAGS AS NEEDED.
10' X 5' STABILIZED OUTLET
USING CLASS B RIPRAP AND
NCDOT TYPE 2 FILTER FABRIC.
(SEE INSET "C")
(-,--)Pump Around System
5.6 Not to Scale
23.9
`\�SHOWN ON PROFILE.EMBEDCULVERT6"AS
CATTLE EXCLUSION FENCE \\-\\� �i\�� \������y�\�� �\�
UNDISTURBED NATIVE SOIL \j\,t 57" x 38" CMP ! ��i\�\\�\�� i\ BACKFILL WITH 50/50 MIX
INV. EL: 923.46 U/S Vii)\��\f� i^�i�'`\����\' CLASS A/B RIP RAP MATERIAL
INV. EL: 922.99 D/S 6' MIN. BEDDING,
#57 STONE
16'
12' CROSS SECTION VIEW AT CENTER OF ROAD
INITIAL BACKFILL, PLACED IN COARSE AGGREGATE 3"
LIFTS OF 6"-8" ONSITE SELECT
MATERIAL
57"X38" CMP
35 LF at 1.4%
11
50' EASEMENT BREAK
CLASS B STONE
MINIMUM
INSTALL SILL
PER PROFILE
Permanent Culvert Crossing
5.6 iNot to e
ILTER FABRIC
50/50 MIX CLASS A AND
CLASS B RIP RAP
PLAN VIEW OF CULVERT CROSSING
/1 o
zoN -goo
�`01�mmz
�w«zmmw
^Z�'nn�
�Z s�LLE
11
I
ro�
0
o
U
.1-1
M
bA
�
4�
F�
O
TIE TO EXISTING GRADE
AT ELEVATION 928.00'
y
4I
\ ��� 10-
x
�
,�
X

INSERT THE DIBBLE, OR
SHOVEL, STRAIGHT
DOWN INTO THE SOIL
TO THE FULL DEPTH OF
THE BLADE AND PULL
BACK ON THE HANDLE
TO OPEN THE PLANTING
HOLE. (DO NOT ROCK
THE SHOVEL BACK AND
FORTH AS THIS CAUSES
SOIL IN THE PLANTING
HOLE TO BE
COMPACTED,
INHIBITING ROOT
GROWTH.
REMOVE THE DIBBLE, OR
SHOVEL, AND PUSH THE
SEEDLING ROOTS DEEP
INTO THE PLANTING HOLE.
PULL THE SEEDLING BACK
UP TO THE CORRECT
PLANTING DEPTH (THE
ROOT COLLAR SHOULD BE
1 TO 3 INCHES BELOW THE
SOILSURFACE). GENTLY
SHAKE THE SEEDLING TO
ALLOW THE ROOTS TO
STRAIGHTEN OUT. DO
NOT TWIST OR SPIN THE
SEEDLING OR LEAVE THE
ROOTS 1 -ROOTED.
3' OUTSIDE TOP OF BANK
INSERT THE DIBBLE, OR
SHOVEL, SEVERAL
INCHES IN FRONT OF
THE SEEDLING AND
PUSH THE BLADE
HALFWAY INTO THE
SOIL. TWISTANDPUSH
THE HANDLE FORWARD
TO CLOSE THE TOP OF
THE SLIT TO HOLD THE
SEEDLING IN PLACE.
DIBBLE BAR
PLANTING BAR SHALL HAVE A
BLADE WITH ATRIANGULAR
CROSS-SECTION, AND SHALL
BE 12 INCHES LONG, 4
INCHES WIDE AND 1 INCH
THICK AT CENTER.
ROOTING PRUNING
ALL ROOTS SHALL BE PRUNED
TO AN APPORIATE LENGTH
TO PREVENTJ-ROOTING.
PUSH THE DIBBLE, OR
SHOVEL, DOWN TO
THE FULL DEPTH OF
THE BLADE.
Bare Root Planting
5.7 of to Scale
JUNCUS PLUG (TYP)
RIFFLE TOE OF SLOPE
MATERIAL
5' - 8' SPACING FOR LIVE STAKES
3'- 5' SPACING FOR JUNCUS PLUGS _
Plan View - UT1 Reach 1A, 1B, 2 & UT1A
NOTE:
1. LIVE STAKES TO BE PLANTED IN AREAS AS
SHOWN ON DETAIL AND DIRECTED BY THE
ENGINEER.
O
NOTES:
1. ALL SOILS WITHIN THE BUFFER
PLANTING AREA SHALL BE
DISKED, AS REQUIRED, PRIOR
TO PLANTING.
2. ALL PLANTS SHALL BE
PROPERLY HANDLED PRIOR TO
INSTALLATION TO INSURE
SURVIVAL.
O
PULL BACK ON THE
HANDLE TO CLOSE THE
BOTTOM OF THE
PLANTING HOLD. THEN
PUSH FORWARD TO CLOSE
THE TOP, ELIMINATING AIR
POCKETS AROUND THE
ROOT.
EROSION CO
MATTING
(SEE DETAIL)
Section View - UT1 Reach
1/2" TO 2" 3' LIVE STAKE
DIAMETER TAPERED AT BOTTOM
Live Stake Detail
REMOVE THE DIBBLE, OR
SHOVEL, AND CLOSE AND
FIRM UP THE OPENING
WITH YOUR HEEL. BE
CAREFUL TO AVOID
DAMAGING THE SEEDLING.
3' I IE SI.A N VIE )
SEE PLAN VIEW
r If FOR SPACING
'91
� �l/ii TOP OF BANK
1B, 2 & UT1A
20'
20'
_Dl__ v,...,
NO.57STONE
CLASS B
RIPRAP
INSTALL AND MAINTAIN THREE
CHECK DAMS LOCATED AT
DOWNSTREAM LIMITS OF PROJECT.
nJ,..., v,....
2' MIN. SPILLWAY CREST
NO. 57 STONE 4INCHES
WIDE ON UPSTREAM FACE
FLOW CLASS B RIPRAP
3
5' MIN.
TOP OF BANK
WORK FLOW 20 R 20
AREA ��
-
CLASS B RIPRAP
CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE
0
Profile View
SEDIMENT WHEN DEPTH
REACHES 12".
TOE OF SLOPE
TOP OF BANK
3 Streambank Planting
5.7 Not to cale
3'- 5'SPACING FOR JUNCUS PLUGS _
2 - 3' SPACING FOR LIVE STAKES
Plan View - UT1 Reach 4A & 4B
Section A -A'
zA STREAM
WIDTH
fi
� Temporary Rock Sediment Dam
57 Not to e
JUNCUS PLUG (TYP)
RIFFLE TOE OF SLOPE
MATERIAL
LIVE STAKE (TYP)
SEE PLAN VIEW
FOR SPACING
H o
z
Z' �
��v�mmz
�w«zmmv
H ()2 o
04 Z'^ s I LL E
MATTING
(SEE DETAIL)
P OF BANK
Section View - UT1 Reach 4A & 4B
ti
N
W
0
o
U
r
M
F�
O
4F
w
o
U
x
�
�
X
Q)
EROSION CONTROL
MATTING
(SEE DETAIL)
P OF BANK
Section View - UT1 Reach 4A & 4B
ti
N
W

GROUND STABILIZATION AND MATERIALS HANDLING PRACTICES FOR COMPLIANCE WITH
THE NCG01 CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PERMIT
Implementing the details and specifications on this plan sheet will result in the construction
activity being considered compliant with the Ground Stabilization and Materials Handling
sections of the NCG01 Construction General Permit (Sections E and F, respectively). The
permittee shall comply with the Erosion and Sediment Control plan approved by the
delegated authority having jurisdiction. All details and specifications shown on this sheet
may not apply depending on site conditions and the delegated authority having jurisdiction.
Required Ground Stabilization Timeframes
Permanent Stabilization
Stabilize within this
• Permanent grass seed covered with straw or
Site Area Description
many calendar
Timeframe variations
• Geotextile fabrics such as permanent sail
days after ceasing
reinforcement matting
without temporarygrass seed
land disturbance
• Appropriately applied straw or other mulch
(a) Perimeter dikes,
• Plastic sheeting
with mulch
swales, ditches, and
7
None
perimeter slopes
• Structural methods s uch as concrete, aspha It or
(b) High Quality Water
7
None
(HOW) Zones
(c) Slopes steeper than
If slopes are 10' or less in length and are
3:1
7
not steeper than 2:1, 14 days are
allowed
-7 days for slopes greater than 50' in
length and with slopes steeper than 4:1
-7 days for perimeter dikes, swales,
(d) Slopes 3:1 to 4:1
14
ditches, perimeter slopes and HOW
Zones
-10 days for Falls Lake Watershed
-7 days for perimeter dikes, swales,
(e) Areas with slopes
ditches, perimeter slopes and HOW Zones
flatter than 4:1
14
-10 days for Falls Lake Watershed unless
there is zero slope
Note: After the permanent cessation of construction activities, any areas with temporary
ground stabilization shall be converted to permanent ground stabilization as soon as
practicable but in no case longer than 90 calendar days after the last land disturbing
activity. Temporary ground stabilization shall be maintained in a manner to render the
surface stable against accelerated erosion until permanent ground stabilization is achieved.
GROUND STABILIZATION SPECIFICATION
Stabilize the ground sufficiently so that rain will not dislodge the soil. Use one of the
techniques in the table below:
11111 Temporary Stabilization EIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Permanent Stabilization
• Temporary grass seed covered with straw or
• Permanent grass seed covered with straw or
other mulches and tackifiers
other m ulches and tackifiers
• Hydroseeding
• Geotextile fabrics such as permanent sail
• Rolled erosion control products with or
reinforcement matting
without temporarygrass seed
•Hydroseeding
• Appropriately applied straw or other mulch
• Shrubs or other permanent plantings covered
• Plastic sheeting
with mulch
• Uniform and evenly distributed ground cover
sufficient to restrain erosion
• Structural methods s uch as concrete, aspha It or
retaining walls
• Rolled erosion control products with grass seed
1. Select flocculants that are appropriate for the soils being exposed during
construction, selecting from the NCDWR ListofApproved PAMS/Flocculants.
2. Apply flocculants at or before the inlets to Erosion and Sediment Control Measures.
3. Apply flocculants at the concentrations specified in the NC DWR ListofApproved
PAMS/Flocculants and in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions.
4. Provide ponding area for containment of treated Stormwater before discharging
offsite.
5. Store flocculants in leak -proof containers that are kept under storm -resistant cover
or surrounded by secondary containment structures.
EQUIPMENT AND VEHICLE MAINTENANCE
1. Maintain vehicles and equipment to prevent discharge of fluids.
2. Provide drip pans under any stored equipment.
3. Identify leaks and repair as soon as feasible, or remove leaking equipment from the
project.
4. Collect all spent fluids, store in separate containers and properly dispose as
hazardous waste (recycle when possible).
5. Remove leaking vehicles and construction equipment from service until the problem
has been corrected.
6. Bring used fuels, lubricants, coolants, hydraulic fluids and other petroleum products
to a recycling or disposal center that handles these materials.
TTER, BUILDING MATERIAL AND LAND CLEARING WASTE
1. Never bury or burn waste. Place litter and debris in approved waste containers.
2. Provide a sufficient number and size of waste containers (e.g dumpster, trash
receptacle) on site to contain construction and domestic wastes.
3. Locate waste containers at least 50 feet away from storm drain inlets and surface
waters unless no other alternatives are reasonably available.
4. Locate waste containers on areas that do not receive substantial amounts of runoff
from upland areas and does not drain directly to a storm drain, stream or wetland.
5. Cover waste containers at the end of each workday and before storm events or
provide secondary containment. Repair or replace damaged waste containers.
6. Anchor all lightweight items in waste containers during times of high winds.
7. Empty waste containers as needed to prevent overflow. Clean up immediately if
containers overflow.
8. Dispose waste off-site at an approved disposal facility.
9. On business days, clean up and dispose of waste in designated waste containers.
PAINT AND OTHER LIQUID WASTE
1. Do not dump paint and other liquid waste into storm drains, streams or wetlands.
2. Locate paint washouts at least 50 feet away from storm drain inlets and surface
waters unless no other alternatives are reasonably available.
3. Contain liquid wastes in a controlled area.
4. Containment must be labeled, sized and placed appropriately for the needs of site.
5. Prevent the discharge of soaps, solvents, detergents and other liquid wastes from
construction sites.
PORTABLE TOILETS
1. Install portable toilets on level ground, at least 50 feet away from storm drains,
streams or wetlands unless there is no alternative reasonably available. If 50 foot
offset is not attainable, provide relocation of portable toilet behind silt fence or place
on a gravel pad and surround with sand bags.
2. Provide staking or anchoring of portable toilets during periods of high winds or in high
foot traffic areas.
3. Monitor portable toilets for leaking and properly dispose of any leaked material.
Utilize a licensed sanitary waste hauler to remove leaking portable toilets and replace
with properly operating unit.
EARTHEN STOCKPILE MANAGEMENT
Show stockpile locations on plans. Locate earthen -material stockpile areas at least
50 feet away from storm drain inlets, sediment basins, perimeter sediment controls
and surface waters unless it can be shown no other alternatives are reasonably
available.
Protect stockpile with silt fence installed along toe of slope with a minimum offset of
five feet from the toe of stockpile.
Provide stable stone access point when feasible.
Stabilize stockpile within the timeframes provided on this sheet and in accordance
with the approved plan and any additional requirements. Soil stabilization is defined
as vegetative, physical or chemical coverage techniques that will restrain accelerated
erosion on disturbed soils for temporary or permanent control needs.
e o a s,aP«s
ONSITE CONCRETE WASHOUT
STRUCTURE WITH LINER
0 0 oaa�
0 0 �`;
0 0� 0 o sE� oN B B
oo,TNT.N.
NOT -
ABOVE GRADE WASHOUT STRUCTURE Ntt
BELOW GRADNmWa SHOUT STRUCTURE
rnKhrRFTF to/ASI-IfHITS
1. Do not discharge concrete or cement slurry from the site.
2. Dispose of, or recycle settled, hardened concrete residue in accordance with local
and state solid waste regulations and at an approved facility.
3. Manage washout from mortar mixers in accordance with the above item and in
addition place the mixer and associated materials on impervious barrier and within
lot perimeter silt fence.
4. Install temporary concrete washouts per local requirements, where applicable. If an
alternate method or product is to be used, contact your approval authority for
review and approval. If local standard details are not available, use one of the two
types of temporary concrete washouts provided on this detail.
5. Do not use concrete washouts for dewatering or storing defective curb or sidewalk
sections. Stormwater accumulated within the washout may not be pumped into or
discharged to the storm drain system or receiving surface waters. Liquid waste must
be pumped out and removed from project.
6. Locate washouts at least 50 feet from storm drain inlets and surface waters unless it
can be shown that no other alternatives are reasonably available. At a minimum,
install protection of storm drain inlet(s) closest to the washout which could receive
spills or overflow.
7. Locate washouts in an easily accessible area, on level ground and install a stone
entrance pad in front of the washout. Additional controls may be required by the
approving authority.
8. Install at least one sign directing concrete trucks to the washout within the project
limits. Post signage on the washout itself to identify this location.
9. Remove leavings from the washout when at approximately 75% capacity to limit
overflow events. Replace the tarp, sand bags or other temporary structural
components when no longer functional. When utilizing alternative or proprietary
products, follow manufacturer's instructions.
10. At the completion of the concrete work, remove remaining leavings and dispose of
in an approved disposal facility. Fill pit, if applicable, and stabilize any disturbance
caused by removal of washout.
HERBICIDES, PESTICIDES AND RODENTICIDES
1. Store and apply herbicides, pesticides and rodenticides in accordance with label
restrictions.
2. Store herbicides, pesticides and rodenticides in their original containers with the
label, which lists directions for use, ingredients and first aid steps in case of
accidental poisoning.
3. Do not store herbicides, pesticides and rodenticides in areas where flooding is
possible or where they may spill or leak into wells, stormwater drains, ground water
or surface water. If a spill occurs, clean area immediately.
4. Do not stockpile these materials onsite.
HAZARDOUS AND TOXIC WASTE
1. Create designated hazardous waste collection areas on-site.
2. Place hazardous waste containers under cover or in secondary containment.
3. Do not store hazardous chemicals, drums or bagged materials directly on the ground.
NCGO1 GROUND STABILIZATION AND MATERIALS HANDLING
n Ground Stabilization and Materials Handling
5.9 Not to Scale
EFFECTIVE: 04/01/19
to
Q
z0,_oo
�zv�mmz
aw zmmv
Z 13 lo
aZ�sLLE
0
It
U
4
4F
0
4N
0
U
X
N
�,

APPENDIX 11
Crediting Information

Appendix 11- Credit Release Schedule
All credit releases will be based on the total credit generated as reported by the as -built survey of the
mitigation site. Under no circumstances shall any mitigation project be debited until the necessary
Department of the Army (DA) authorization has been received for its construction or the District
Engineer (DE) has otherwise provided written approval for the project in the case where no DA
authorization is required for construction of the mitigation project. The DE, in consultation with the
Interagency Review Team (IRT), will determine if performance standards have been satisfied sufficiently
to meet the requirements of the release schedules below. In cases where some performance standards
have not been met, credits may still be released depending on the specifics of the case. Monitoring may
be required to restart or be extended, depending on the extent to which the site fails to meet the
specified performance standard. The release of project credits will be subject to the criteria described as
follows:
Table A: Credit Release Schedule
Monitoring
Interim
Total
Credit Release Activity
Year
Release
Released
0
Initial Allocation — see requirements below
30%
30%
First year monitoring report demonstrates performance
1
10%
40%
standards are being met
Second year monitoring report demonstrates performance
2
standards are being met
10%
50%
(60%)
(additional 10% released at second bankfull event in a separate year)
Third year monitoring report demonstrates performance
60%
3
standards are being met
o
10%
(70%)
Fourth year monitoring report demonstrates performance
65%
4
standards are being met
5%
(75%)
Fifth year monitoring report demonstrates performance
75%
5
standards are being met
100
(85%)
Sixth year monitoring report demonstrates performance
80°%
6
standards are being met
5%
(90%)
Seventh year monitoring report demonstrates performance
90%
7
standards are being met and project has received closeout approval
o
10%
(100%)
1.1 Initial Allocation of Released Credits
The initial allocation of released credits, as specified in the mitigation plan can be released by DMS
without prior written approval of the DE upon satisfactory completion of the following activities:
a. Approval of the final Mitigation Plan.
b. Recordation of the preservation mechanism, as well as a title opinion acceptable to the USACE
covering the property.
c. Completion of project construction (the initial physical and biological improvements to the
mitigation site) pursuant to the mitigation plan; per the DMS Instrument, construction means
that a mitigation site has been constructed in its entirety, to include planting, and an as -built
report has been produced. As -built reports must be sealed by an engineer prior to project
closeout, if appropriate but not prior to the initial allocation of released credits.
d. Receipt of necessary DA permit authorization or written DA approval for projects where DA
permit issuance is not required.
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Appendix 11
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 1 May 2019

1.2 Subsequent Credit Releases
All subsequent credit releases must be approved by the DE, in consultation with the IRT, based on a
determination that required performance standards have been achieved. For stream projects a reserve
of 10% of a site's total stream credits shall be released after two bankfull events have occurred, in
separate years, provided the channel is stable and all other performance standards are met. In the event
that less than two bankfull events occur during the monitoring period, release of these reserve credits
shall be at the discretion of the IRT. As projects approach milestones associated with credit release, the
DMS will submit a request for credit release to the DE along with documentation substantiating
achievement of criteria required for release to occur. This documentation will be included with the
annual monitoring report.
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site Appendix 11
DMS ID No. 100048 Page 2 May 2019

w
WILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
MEETING NOTES
MEETING: Post -Contract IRT Site Walk
ALEXANDER FARM Mitigation Site
Catawba 03050101; Alexander County, NC
DEQ Contract No. 7416
DMS Project No. 100048
Wildlands Project No. 005-02169
DATE: Thursday, March 29, 2018
LOCATION: Elk Shoals Church Loop
Stony Point, NC
Attendees
Steve Kichefski, USACE Harry Tsomides, DMS Mac Haupt, DWR
Olivia Munzer, WRC Kirsten Ullman, DMS Shawn Wilkerson, Wildlands
Todd Bowers, EPA Alan Johnson, DWR Christine Blackwelder, Wildlands
Paul Wiesner, DMS Ori Tuvia, DWR
Materials
• Wildlands Engineering Technical Proposal dated 9/21/2017 in response to DMS RFP 16-007277
Meeting Notes
The meeting began at 1 pm. Shawn presented an overview of the project at the parking location. From there,
the group walked upstream to the headwaters of UTI, retraced steps and reviewed UTI downstream of the
road, UT1A, and the potential wetland area in the left floodplain at the downstream site extents. The meeting
concluded at 3:30 PM.
1. Overall project comments
• Bald eagle is listed for Alexander County. No bald eagle nest noticed in vicinity, nor is there a record
adjacent to the site.
• Alexander family house (historical) located near the site.
• Olivia recommends that no trees are cleared during bat maternity roosting period (June/July).
2. Potential Wetland Credit Areas
Steve noted that if wetlands are included in the project, he or William Elliott (USACE) will do a more
thorough review of the site when they return for the jurisdictional determination.

ALEXANDER FARM Mitigation Site — IRT Meeting Notes
• Upstream of road
o There area few wetland pockets in the right floodplain just upstream of the road, and several
more in the left floodplain upstream of the proposed stream crossing.
o Steve asked that wetland pockets be encompassed by the easement, even if not for credit.
• Downstream of road
o If needed, the area in the left floodplain that is currently ditched has potential for wetland credits.
o Discussion about the need to drop a well into any wetland proposed for restoration credit to begin
pre -construction data collection asap.
3. Stream Restoration
• Upstream of the road
o The group walked up to the head of UTI. Cattle have been rotated out of this pasture and are in
the pasture downstream of the road.
o The start of UTI is a large cattle wallow area. Shawn discussed that Wildlands may install a BMP
to treat concentrated agricultural runoff above the reach.
o Mac noted the soils at the head of UTI and that this area may have been a wetland before the
headcut advanced through and formed a stream channel.
o Several members of the group noted that UTI here has a lot of side seeps and noted areas of
channel recovery from the absence of cattle over the last few months. One area of UTI here just
upstream of a headcut has very low banks and the group discussed tying design into this area.
Shawn noted the planar bed and lack of habitat but did agree that Wildlands may utilize good
areas of existing channel in the restoration design.
o Continuing downstream, Olivia expressed concern over how close the proposed crossing is to the
existing left floodplain wetland. The valley walls are relatively steep near the proposed crossing,
and Wildlands will likely shift this crossing further downstream to where crossing will be easier for
the farmer, which should also address any wetland concerns.
o The crossing shown in the proposal marks a transition from restoration upstream to enhancement
2 downstream, although the group agreed that there isn't a clearly defined transition point in the
field. The proposed enhancement 2 section will require some areas of restoration or
enhancement I, and some of the restoration area may be fine with a lighter touch.
o Overall, upstream of the road, the group discussed restoration at 1:1 credit from the head of the
channel down to the existing fence line, and enhancement 2 at 2:1 credit from the fence line to
the road. This would shorten the proposed restoration footage in this area by approximately 400
feet.
• Downstream of the road
o Within the woods, the group generally agreed with a preservation approach. At the headcut
which marked the proposed transition from preservation to restoration, the group agreed that a
transitional length of enhancement 2 was appropriate. This transitional length will continue until
the stream enters the active cattle pasture, where the approach will switch to restoration down to
the end of the project.
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. page 2
ALEXANDER FARM Mitigation Site
Post -Contract IRT Site Walk

ALEXANDER FARM Mitigation Site — IRT Meeting Notes
o The restoration downstream of the road was presented in the proposal at 1.5:1 credit due to the
amount of floodplain vegetation which had established in absence of the cattle over the last two
years. The group noted the extreme difference in the floodplain vegetation and channel condition
since the cattle have been rotated back into the field, and that the reach is worthy of traditional
1:1 crediting.
o Olivia noted underground flow from the left floodplain near the downstream project extent.
These may be drain tiles from the field. Wildlands will review this more carefully during the
existing conditions assessment.
These meeting minutes were prepared by Christine Blackwelder and reviewed by Shawn Wilkerson on April 13, 2018, and
represent the authors' interpretation of events. Olivia Munzer comments (May 7, 2018) were incorporated on May 15,
2018. These minutes are now final.
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. page 3
ALEXANDER FARM Mitigation Site
Post -Contract IRT Site Walk

w
WILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
MEMO
REGARDING: Credit Ratios
ALEXANDER FARM Mitigation Site
Catawba 03050101; Alexander County, NC
DEQ Contract No. 7416
DMS Project No. 100048
Wildlands Project No. 005-02169
DATE: Monday, April 16, 2018
In the September 26, 2017, Technical Proposal for the Alexander Farm Mitigation Site, Wildlands presented
various credit ratios for UTI upstream and downstream of Elk Shoals Church Loop road based on the channel
conditions at the time of the proposal. This memo reflects changes to the proposed credit ratios in response to
discussion during the IRT field walk of the site on March 29, 2018.
Upstream of the road
The stream crossing shown in the proposal marked the proposed transition from restoration at 1:1 credit to
enhancement 2 at 2.5:1 credit; however, during the IRT field walk, the group agreed that there isn't a clearly
defined transition point in the field. The proposed enhancement 2 section will require some areas of restoration
or enhancement I, and some of the restoration area may be fine with a lighter touch.
The IRT group discussed restoration at 1:1 credit from the head of the channel down to the existing fence line
(which crosses the channel upstream of the stream crossing), and enhancement 2 at 2:1 credit from the fence
line to the road. This would shorten the restoration footage presented in the proposal in this area by
approximately 400 feet.
After the meeting, Wildlands reviewed the contracted credit requirements, and given the large area of transition
from restoration to enhancement 2 upstream of the road, Wildlands will likely propose the entire area upstream
of the road as enhancement 2 at 2:1 credit in the mitigation plan and apply the appropriate level of intervention
needed throughout the reach.
Downstream of the road
Within the woods, the IRT group generally agreed with the preservation approach presented in the proposal. At
the headcut which marked the proposed transition from preservation to restoration, the group agreed that a
transitional length of enhancement 2 was appropriate. This transitional length will continue until the stream
enters the active cattle pasture, where the approach will switch to restoration down to the end of the project.
The Alexander Farm tenant farmer rotates his 175 -head herd between the pasture upstream of the road in
spring and summer and the downstream of the road in fall and winter. Wildlands visited the Site several times
between 2010 and 2015 and confirmed this land management practice. Over the 2 years prior to submittal of
the proposal, however, the tenant farmer kept the herd upstream of the road to allow for fencing repair and

ALEXANDER FARM Mitigation Site—Credit Memo
replacement downstream of the road. During this time, he cut hay downstream of the road, but allowed the
riparian area to grow with annuals. During the proposal process, the farmer told Wildlands that his repairs
would soon be complete and he would then move the herd downstream of the road. Despite incision
throughout the channel length, Wildlands proposed a lower credit ratio of 1.5:1 for restoration downstream of
the road to acknowledge the reach's heavy herbaceous cover due to the absence of recent cattle activity.
The farmer completed his fencing repairs after the proposal was submitted and moved his herd downstream of
the road. During the IRT site walk on March 29, 2018, the IRT group noted that all the riparian vegetation was
gone and impacted by cattle. IRT members, Wildlands, and DMS all felt that the restoration activities proposed
downstream of the road were now creditable at a 1:1 ratio. Wildlands proposes this section of restoration at 1:1
credit.
Please see the attached figure which illustrates the proposed shift in credit ratios. All proposed credit ratios will
be fully justified in the mitigation plan.
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. page 2
ALEXANDER FARM Mitigation Site
Credit Memo

IRT Credit Memo
WILD LANDS 0 200 400 Feet Alexander Farm Mitigation Site
ENGINEERING I i i i I Catawba River Basin (03050101)
Alexander County, NC

APPENDIX 12
Floodplain Checklist

EEP Floodplain Requirements Checklist
This form was developed by the National Flood Insurance program, NC Floodplain
Mapping program and Ecosystem Enhancement Program to be filled for all DMS
projects. The form is intended to summarize the floodplain requirements during the
design phase of the projects. The form should be submitted to the Local Floodplain
Administrator with three copies submitted to NFIP (attn. State NFIP Engineer), NC
Floodplain Mapping Unit (attn. State NFIP Coordinator) and NC DMS.
Project Location
Name of project:
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site
Name if stream or feature:
Elk Shoals Creek
County:
Alexander County
Name of river basin:
Catawba
Is project urban or rural?
Rural
Name of Jurisdictional
municipality/county:
Alexander County
DFIRM panel number for
entire site:
3775
Consultant name:
Wildlands Engineering
Phone number:
704-332-7754
Address:
1430 S. Mint Street, Suite 104
Charlotte, NC 28203
Page 1 of 4

Design Information
Provide a general description of project (one paragraph). Include project limits on a
reference orthophotograph at a scale of 1" = 500".
Summarize stream reaches or wetland areas according to their restoration priority.
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands) is completing a full -delivery project for the
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) to restore, enhance, or preserve
6,758 linear feet (LF) of perennial streams in Alexander County, NC. The project streams
are summarized below.
Reach Length
Unnamed Tributary (UTI) 6.,555 LF
Unnamed Tributary UTIA) 203 LF
UTI does not have a designated Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA), but lies within the
mapped SFHA Zone AE of Elk Shoals Creek on Alexander County Flood Insurance Rate
Map Panel 3775. Base flood elevations have been defined but non -encroachment limits
have not been established.
Floodplain Information
Is project located in a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA)?
r` Yes (` No
If project is located in a SFHA, check how it was determined:
Redelineation
F Detailed Study
r Limited Detail Study
F Approximate Study
F Don't know
List flood zone designation:
Check if applies:
P AE Zone
r Floodway
re Non-Fncroachment
r None
F A Zone
Page 2 of 4

(' Local Setbacks Required
C No Local Setbacks Required
If local setbacks are required, list how many feet:
Does proposed channel boundary encroach outside floodway/non-
encroachment/setbacks?
(` Yes 07 No
Land Acquisition (Check)
F State owned (fee sm1ple)
F Conservation easment (Design Bid Build)
r Conservation Easement (Full Delivery Project)
Note: if the project property is state-owned, then all requirements should be addressed to
the Department of Administration, State Construction Office (attn: Herbert Neily,
919 807-4101
Is community/county participating in the NFIP program?
Yes rNo
Note: if community is not participating, then all requirements should be addressed to
NFIP attn: State NFIP Engineer, 919 715-8000
Name of Local Floodplain Administrator: Mr. Jon Pilkenton
Phone Number: 828.632.1000
Floodplain Requirements
This section to be filled by designer/applicant following verification with the LFPA
F No Action
r No Rise
F Letter ofMap Revision
r Conditional Letter of Map Revision
F Other Requirements
List other requirements: Local floodplain development permit application to be filed with
no -impact certification and flood impact assessment report.
Comments:
Page 3 of 4

Name: Aaron Earley, PE, CFM Signature:"
Title: Senior Water Resources Engineer Date: 05/30/2019
Page 4 of 4