20040722 Ver 1_COMPLETE FILE_20040503

} \C) pG
CIO r
O ?
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
June 14, 2004
DWQ# 04-07902.?
WETLANDS/401 GROUP Alexander County
Joe Carroll
Restoration Systems, LLC
1101 Haynes St., Suite 203
Raleigh, NC 27604
JUN 2 2 2004
WATER QUALITY SECTION
Subject: Elk Shoals Creek and two associated unnamed tributaries to Elk Shoals
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification with Additional Conditions
Dear Mr. Carroll:
You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions and those listed below, to
impact 905 linear feet of unnamed tributaries to Elk Shoals Creek and 3342 linear feet of Elks Shoals
Creek for the restoration and enhancement of the subject waters in Alexander County, as described
in your application received by the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) on May 3, 2004. After reviewing
your application, we have determined that this project is covered by Water Quality General
Certification Number 3399, which can be viewed on our web site at
http://h2o.enr.state. nc. us/ncwetlands. The General Certification allows you to use Nationwide Permit
Number 27 once it is issued to you by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Please note that you
should get any other federal, state or local permits before proceeding with your project, including
those required by (but not limited to) Sediment and Erosion Control, Non-Discharge, and Water
Supply Watershed regulations.
The above noted Certification will expire when the associated 404 permits expire unless
otherwise specified in the General Certification. This approval is only valid for the purpose and
design that you described in your application. If you change your project, you must notify us in
writing, and you may be required to send us a new application for a new certification. If the property
is sold, the new owner must be given a copy of the Certification and approval letter; and is thereby
responsible for complying with all conditions.
For this approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed in the attached Certification, as
well as the additional conditions listed below:
One
VCana ur, y
N. C. Division of Water Quality, 401 Wetlands Certification Unit,
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 (Mailing Address)
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 (Location)
[phone] (phone), 919-733-6893 (fax), (http://h?o.enr state.nc.uvncwetlands)
Customer Service #: 1-877-623-66748
Deed notifications or similar mechanisms shall be placed on all lots with remaining jurisdictional
wetlands and waters or areas within 50 feet of all streams and ponds on the property. These
mechanisms shall be put in place within 30 days of the date of this letter or the issuance of the 404
Permit (whichever is later). A sample deed notification format can be downloaded from the
401/Wetlands Unit web site at http://h2o.enr.state. nc. us/ncwetlands.
WWI
NM ILA
If 2. No waste, spoil, solids, or fill of any kind shall occur in wetlands, waters, or riparian areas beyond
the footprint of the impacts depicted in the Preconstruction Notification application. All construction
activities shall be performed so that no violations of state water quality standards, statutes, or rules
occur.
3. Erosion and sediment control practices must utilize Best Management Practices (BMP) and be in full
compliance with all specifications governing the proper design, installation, and operation and
maintenance of such BMP in order to protect surface water standards:
a. The design, installation, operation, and maintenance of the sediment and erosion control
measures must be such that they equal, or exceed, the requirements specified in the most
recent version of the North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Manual. The devices
shall be maintained on all construction sites, borrow pit sites, and waste pile (spoil)
projects, including contractor-owned or leased borrow pits associated with the project.
b. For borrow pit sites, the erosion and sediment control measures must be designed,
installed, operated, and maintained in accordance with the most recent version of the North
Carolina Surface Mining Manual.
c. The reclamation measures and implementation of these measures must be in accordance
with the requirements of the Sedimentation Pollution Control Act.
4. Sediment and erosion control measures shall not be placed in wetlands or waters to the maximum
extent practicable. If placement of sediment and erosion control devices in wetlands and waters is
unavoidable, they shall be removed and the natural grade restored within six months of the date the
Division of Land Resources has released the project.
5. Upon completion of the project, the applicant shall complete and return the enclosed "Certificate of
Completion" form to the 401/Wetlands Unit of the NC Division of Water Quality. Please send
photographs upstream and downstream of each culvert site to document correct installation along
with the Certificate of Completion form.
6. Continuing Compliance. Restoration Systems, LLC shall conduct its activities in a manner
consistent with state water quality standards (including any requirements for compliance with section
303(d) of the Clean Water Act) and any other appropriate requirements of state and federal law. If
DWQ determines that such standards or laws are not being met (including the failure to sustain a
designated or achieved use) or that state or federal law is being violated, or that further conditions
are necessary to assure compliance, DWQ may reevaluate and modify this certification to include
conditions appropriate to assure compliance with such standards and requirements in accordance
with 15 A NCAC 2H.0507(d). Before codifying the certification, DWQ shall notify Restoration
Systems, LLC and the US Army Corps of Engineers, provide public notice in accordance with 15A
NCAC 21-1.0503, and provide opportunity for public hearing in accordance with 15A NCAC 2H.0504.
Any new or revised conditions shall be provided to Restoration Systems, LLC in writing, shall be
provided to the United States Army Corps of Engineers for reference in any permit issued pursuant
to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, and shall also become conditions of the 404 Permit for the
project.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory
hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send
a written petition that conforms to Chapter 1506 of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of
MEMORANDUM
TO: John Dorney Regional Contact: Alan Johnson
Non-Discharge Branch WQ Supervisor: Rex Gleason
Date:
SUBJECT: WETLAND STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Facility Name Elk Shoals Creek Stream Restoration County Alexander
Project Number 04 0722 County2
Recvd From APP Region Mooresville
Received Date 5/3/04 Recvd By Region
Project Type stream restoration
Certificates Stream Stream Impacts (ft.)
Permit Wetland Wetland Wetland Stream Class Acres Feet
Type Type Impact Score Index Prim. Supp. Basin Req. Req. ME
27 Stream O Y O N 11-73-(0.5) WSIV 30,832. F- 4,247.00 4,247.0 1
Mitigation Wetland
MitigationType Type Acres Feet
Is Wetland Rating Sheet Attached? 0 Y 0 N Did you request more info? 0 Y 0 N
Have Project Changes/Conditions Been Discussed With Applicant? 0 Y 0 N
Is Mitigation required? 0 Y QQ N Recommendation: QQ Issue 0 ISsue/Cond 0 Deny
Provided by Region: Latitude (ddmmss) 355100 Longitude (ddmmss) 810500
Comments:
Staff visited the site on June 9, 2004. This is a restoration project approved through the EEP.
Approximately 5,000 linear feet of stream is to be restored. In the 1940's the channel was relocated
and straighten. The current channel is highly incised. Aportion of the main channel (Elk Shoals) will
be diverted back into what appears to be the old channel. Bioengineering and other natural stream
channel design will be used on the remainder of the stream channels.
Approval recommended. Issued by MRO. (o i)LA
cc: Regional Office
Central Office Page Number 1
Triage Check List
E k hcul 5 Cc?e=
. Project Name:
Date:
DWQ#:
County: 1 ?? Q nd r ,.
To: ? ARO Mike Parker ?' WaRO Tom Steffens
? FRO Ken Averitte ? WiRO Noelle Lutheran
MRO Alan Johnson ? WSRO Daryl Lamb
? RRO Steve Mitchell
TelePhone : (919)
From:
The file attached is being forwarded to your for -your evaluation.
Please call if you need assistance.
? Stream length impacted
? Stream determination
? Wetland determination and distance to blue-line surface waters on USFW topo maps
? Minimization/avoidance issues
? Buffer Rules (Meuse; Tar-Pamlico, Catawba, Randleman)
? Pond fill
? Mitigation Ratios
? Ditching
?.* Are the stream and or wetland mitigation sites available and viable?
? Check drawings for accuracy
? Is the application consistent with pre-application meetings?
? Cumulative impact concern
Comments. betn3 LA?Spd A- L3011/'OK.
Office Use Only: Form Version May 2002
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No.
(If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".)
1. Processing
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit ? Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
? Section 10 Permit ? Isolated Wetland Permit fi-om DWQ
® 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NWP 27
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here: ?
4. If payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) is proposed for
mitigation of impacts (verify availability with NCWRP prior to submittal of PCN), complete
section VIII and check here: ?
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), check here: ?
II. Applicant Information
1. Owner/Applicant Information
Name: Joe Carroll
Mailing Address: Restoration Systems, LLC
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 203
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Telephone Number: 336-272-7190 Fax Number: 336-210-2699
E-mail Address: icarroll(),restorationsystems.com
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name:
Company Affiliation:
Mailing Address:_
Telephone Number: Fax Number:
E-mail Address:
Page 5 of 12
III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Restoration
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): N/A
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN)
3787-31-8309
4. Location
County: Alexander Nearest Town: Stony Point, NC
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): Not a subdivision - see plan set
Directions to site (include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): Take Exit 144 off I-40 and
go north on Old Mountain Rd. approximately 6 miles. Turn left onto
Old Concord Chruch Rd.; go 1 mile to culvert crossing.
5. Site coordinates, if available (UTM or Lat/Long): N 35°50.634'/ W 81°4.831
(Note - If project is linear, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that separately lists the
coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
6. Property size (acres): 14.96 - Conservation Easement
7. Nearest body of water (stream/river/sound/ocean/lake): Elk Shoals
8. River Basin: Catawba
(Note - this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/mgps/.)
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: Land use within the site consists .of agriculture fields,
Pasture, and fallow fields, all adjacent to Elk Shoals Creek.
Page 6 of 12
10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
See enclosed restoration plan and plan set for project detail.
Work to be conducted with pans, dozers, and track hoes.
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: _ Construction of a stable channel,
enhancement of water quality, creation of a vegetation buffer, and wildlife habitat
restoration. Also see enclosed restoration plan.
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules.
No prior jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or
obtained for this nroiect.
V. Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
No future permit requests are anticipated for this project.
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. The applicant must also
provide justification for these impacts in Section VII below. All proposed impacts, permanent
and temporary, must be listed herein, and must be clearly identifiable on an accompanying site
plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial) must be shown on a
delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems. Wetland and stream
evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate. Photographs may be
included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for wetland or stream
mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional space is needed for
listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
Page 7 of 12
1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts:
See enclosed restoration plan
2. Individually list wetland impacts below:
Wetland Impact
Site Number
(indicate on ma)
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
(acres) Located within
100-year Floodplain**
(yes/no) Distance to
Nearest Stream
(linear feet
Type of Wetland***

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: mechanized clearing, grading, fill,
excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams, separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
** 100-Year floodplains are identified through the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(FIRM), or FEMA-approved local floodplain maps. Maps are available through the FEMA Map Service Center at 1-800-358-9616, or
online at http://www.fema.gov.
*** List a wetland type that best describes wetland to be impacted (e.g., freshwater/saltwater marsh, forested wetland, beaver pond,
Carolina Bay, bog, etc.) Indicate if wetland is isolated (detennination of isolation to be made by USACE only).
List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: 0 - 0.5
Total area of wetland impact proposed: 0
3. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts below:
Stream Impact Length of Average Width Perennial or
Site Number Type of Impact* Impact Stream Name** of Stream Intermittent?
(indicate on ma) (linear feet) Before Impact (please secify)
Relocation and
Elk Shoals Creek enhancement 3342 Elk Shoals Creek 20 Perennial
UT #1 Relocation 412 UT #1 to Elk Shoals 8 Perennial
UT #2 Relocation 493 UT #2 to Elk Shoals 10 Perennial

See enclosed
plans
* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: culverts and associated rip-rap,
dams (separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding), relocation (include linear feet before and after, and net loss/gain),
stabilization activities (cement wall, rip-rap, crib wall, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is
proposed, plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams must be included.
** Stream names can be found on USGS topographic maps. If a stream has no name, list as UT (unnamed tributary) to the nearest
downstream named stream into which it flows. USGS maps are available through the USGS at 1-800-358-9616, or online at
www.usgs.gov. Several internet sites also allow direct download and printing of USGS maps (e.g., www.topozone.com,
www.mapquest.com, etc.).
Cumulative impacts (linear distance in feet) to all streams on site: 4,247
Page 8 of 12
4. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.) below:
Open Water Impact
Site Number
(indicate on ma)
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
(acres) Name of Waterbody
(if applicable) Type of Waterbody
(lake, pond, estuary, sound,
bay, ocean, etc.)

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: fill, excavation, dredging,
flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
5. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ? uplands ? stream ? wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.): No pond is being created.
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.): N/A
Size of watershed draining to pond: N/A Expected pond surface area: N/A
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts.
N/A - Site impacts for purposes of restoration
as described in Restoration Plan.
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
Page 9 of 12
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on March 9, 2000, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCWRP concurrence shall be placed on hold as
incomplete. An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration
in DWQ's Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/stn-ngide.html.
1. Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
N/A - Section I, item #4 is not checked
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration
Program (NCWRP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCWRP at
[phone] to determine availability and to request written approval of mitigation prior
to submittal of a PCN. For additional information regarding the application process for the
NCWRP, check the NCWRP website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htm. If use of
the NCWRP is proposed, please check the appropriate box on page three and provide the
following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet):
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet):
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Page 10 of 12
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state) funds or the use of public
(federal/state) land?
Yes ? No
If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ? No ?
If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please attach a
copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter.
Yes ? No ?
X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Neuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and
Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please identify )?
Yes ? No ® If you answered "yes", provide the following information:
Identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers. If buffer
mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the buffer
multipliers.
Zone* Impact
(square feet) Multiplier Required
Mitigation
1 3
2 1.5
Total
" Zone t extends out 30 feet perpendicular from near bank of channel; Gone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
Page 11 of 12
If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e., Donation
of Property, Conservation Easement, Riparian Buffer Restoration / Enhancement, Preservation or
Payment into the Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as
identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0260.
Buffer mitigation is not required.
XI.
XII.
Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (both existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site.
Discuss stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands
downstream from the property.
There is minimal impervious cover on the site. Silt checks will be used during construction
in order to minimize downstream impacts.
Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
There will not be any wastewater generated from the proposed project.
XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ? No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application?
Yes ? No
XIV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
It is not anticipated that there will be any constraints associated with construction or
y? Gam. % Z?zy?a
plicant/Agent's Signature 1-1 Date
signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 12 of 12
JCT-16-200 1038
FILED
03 OCT IS PM 2: 51
REGISTER OF DEEDS
ALEXANDER COUNTY. NC
146"d Oct 10 2003
/1 *00 AI
POS
North Cum" c?Mt r
NeW getate a.ora talc
?e? ? l r2 D. 00
Prepared by and mail to
bLNLLL bKH i H i Lul.r? HM-L
PE)
Permanent Address of Grantee:
William P. Aycock 11, Attomey
Schell Bray Aycock Abel & Livingston P.L.L.C.
P. O. Box 21847
Greensboro, North Carolina 27420
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 107
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
ALEXANDER COUNTY
SKI)LUIIG0254
DEED OF EASEMENT
THIS EASEMENT DEED, made this 15 day of September , 2003, by and between
JACOB M. LACKEY and spouse, HAZEL B. LACKEY; ARCOLA L. LUTZ (Widow); HELEN
L. HUNTER (Widow); WILLIAM LACKEY, JR. (Unmarried);,and BECKY L. HITS and
spouse, KEN V. HITE, (the "Grantors") and RESTORATION SYSTEMS, LLC, a North
Carolina limited liability company, (the "Grantee") whose mailing address is 1101 Haynes
Street, Suite 107, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604. The designations Grantors and Grantee as
used herein shall include said parties, their heirs, successors and assigns, and shall include
singular, plural, masculine, feminine or neuter as required by context.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Grantors own in fee simple certain real property situated, lying and being in
Alexander County, North Carolina (the "Property"); and
WFMREAS, Grantors are willing to grant a Conservation Easement on a portion of the
Property, thereby restricting, and limiting the use of that portion of the Property to the terms and
conditions and for the purposes hereinafter set forth, and Grantee is willing to accept such
casement;
130132 1.DOC
' OCT-1b-2003 10:3'J bLhtLL bKH i H i ?-uur. HritL 1- - u-
BK?11460PG0255
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, terms, conditions and
restrictions hereinafter set forth, Grantors unconditionally and irrevocably hereby grant and
convey unto Grantee, its successors and assigns, forever and in perpetuity, a Conservation
Easement of the nature and character and to the extent hereinafter set forth, over a portion of the
Property, referred to hereafter as the Easement Area, for the benefit of the Grantee, its successors
and assigns, and being all of the tract of land as identified on Exhibit "A" Attached hereto and
incorporated herein by reference.
The purposes of this Conservation Easement are to maintain, restore, enhance and create
wetland and/or riparian resources in the Easement Area that contributes to the protection and
improvement of water quality, flood prevention, fisheries, aquatic habitat, wildlife habitat and
recreational opportunities; to maintain permanently the Easement Area in its natural condition,
consistent with these purposes; and to prevent any use of the Easement Area that will
significantly impair or interfere with these purposes. To achieve these purposes, the following
conditions and restrictions are set forth:
1.
DURATION OF EASEMENT
This Conservation Easement shall be perpetual. It is an easement in gross, runs with the
land, and is enforceable by Grantee against Grantors, their personal representatives, heirs,
successors and assigns, lessees, agents and licensees.
II.
RESERVED USES AND RESTRICTED ACTIVITIES
The Easement Axea shall be restricted from any development or usage that would impair
or interfere with the purposes of this Conservation Easement. Unless expressly reserved as a
compatible use herein, any activity in, or use of, the Easement Area by the Grantors is prohibited
as inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation Easement. Any rights not expressly
reserved hereunder by the Grantors have been acquired by the Grantee. The following specific
uses are prohibited, restricted or reserved as indicated:
A. Recreational Uses. Grantors expressly reserve the right to undeveloped
recreational uses, including hunting and fishing, and access to the Easement Area
for the purposes thereof. Usage of motorized vehicles in the Easement Area is
prohibited except over designated crossing areas agreed upon by Grantors and
Grantee.
B. Educational Uses. Grantors reserve the right to undeveloped educational uses
and the right of access to the Easement Area for such purposes including
organized educational activities such as site visits, studies and observations.
C. Vegetative Cutting. Cutting, removal, mowing, harming or destruction of any
vegetation in the Easement Area is prohibited.
D. Industrial Use. Industrial activities in the Easement Area are prohibited.
2
E.
F.
G.
H.

5?nij,,0prio256
Residential Use. Residential use of the Easement Area is prohibited.
Commercial Use. Commercial activities in the Easement Area arc prohibited.
Agricultural Use. Agricultural use of the Easement Area including use for
cropland, waste lagoons or pastureland is prohibited.
New Construction. There shall be no building, facility, mobile home or other
structure constructed or placed in the Easement Area.
L Signs. No signs shall be permitted in the Easement Area except interpretive signs
describing restoration activities and the conservation values of the Easement
Area, signs identifying the owner of the Property and the holder of the
Conservation Easement, and signs giving directions or proscribing rules and
regulations for the use of the Easement Area
J. Dumping. Dumping of soil, trash, ashes, garbage, waste, abandoned vehicles,
appliance or machinery, or other material in the Easement Area is prohibited.
K. Grading, Mineral Use, Excavation, Dredging. There shall be no grading,
filling, excavation, dredging, mining or drilling; no removal of topsoil, sand,
gravel, rock, peat, minerals or other materials.
L. Water quality and Drainage.Patterns. There shall be no diking, draining,
dredging, channeling, filling, leveling, impounding or related activities, or altering
or tampering with water control structures or devices, or disruption or alteration
of the restored, enhanced or created drainage patterns.
M. Subdivision. Subdivision, partitioning or dividing the Easement Area is
prohibited.
N. Development Rights. No development rights which have been encumbered or
extinguished by this Conservation Easement shall be transferred pursuant to a
transferable development rights scheme or cluster development arrangement or
otherwise.
The Grantee, and authorized representatives of the Grantee and Grantee's successors and
assigns, shall have the right to enter the Easement Area and shall have the right of reasonable
ingress and egress to the Easement Area over the Property, at all reasonable times to undertake
any activities to restore, manage, maintain, enhance and monitor the wetland and riparian
resources of the Easement Area. These activities include planting of trees, shrubs and
herbaceous vegetation, installation of monitoring wells, modification of the hydrology of the site,
and installation of natural and manmade materials as needed to direct in-stream, above ground
and subterraneous water flow. In addition, the Grantee and Grantee's successors and assigns,
and authorized representatives of the Grantee, shall have the right to enter the Easement Area
and shall have the right of reasonable ingress and egress to the Easement Area over the Property,
UJ-I-ib-2Wj 10:-J'J 51.F1tLL L)Mr11 MI -r. HDLL
BX046OPGOZ53
at all reasonable times for the purpose of inspecting said property to determine if the Grantors are
complying with the terms, conditions, restrictions and purposes of this Conservation Easement.
The easement rights granted herein do not include public access rights.
The Grantors may request permission to vary from the above restrictions for good cause
shown, provided that any such request is consistent with the purposes of this Conservation
Easement. The Grantors shall not vary from the above restrictions without first obtaining written
approval of the Grantee, its successors or assigns.
III.
ENFORCEMENT AND REMEDIES
A. In the event that the Grantee determines that the Grantors have violated or are
threatening to violate any of these terms, conditions or restrictions, the Grantee
may institute a suit to enjoin such violation and, if necessary, to require the
restoration of the Easement Area to its prior condition at the expense of the
Grantors.
B. No failure on the pan of Grantee to enforce any covenant or provision hereof shall
discharge or invalidate such covenant or any other covenant, condition or
provision hereof or affect the right of Grantee to enforce the same in the event of
a subsequent breach or default.
TV.
MISCELLANEOUS
A. This instrument sets forth the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the
Conservation Easement and supersedes all prior discussions, negotiations,
understandings or agreements relating to the Conservation Easement. If any
provision is found to be invalid, the remainder of the provisions of the
Conservation Easement, and the application of such provision to persons or
circumstances other than those as to which it is found to be invalid, shall not be
affected thereby.
B. Any notices shall be sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested,
to the parties at their addresses shown above or to other address(es) as either party
establishes in writing upon notification to the other.
C. Grantors shall notify Grantee in writing of the name and address and any party to
whom the Property or any part thereof is to be transferred at or prior to the time
said transfer is made. Grantors further agrce to make any subsequent lease, deed
or other legal instrument by which any interest in the Propcrty is conveyed subject
to the Conservation Easement herein created.
4
0CT-16-2003 10:40 SLHELL bfKHl H war. HOLD ??U
BK0460PG0258
V.
QUIET ENJOYMENT
Grantors reserve all rights accruing from ownership of the Property, including the right to
engage in or permit or invite others to engage in only those uses of the Easement Area that are
expressly reserved herein, not prohibited or restricted herein, and are not inconsistent with the
purposes of this Conservation Easement- Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the
Grantors expressly reserve to the Grantors, and the Grantors' invitees and licensees, the right of
access to the Easement Area, and the right of quiet enjoyment of the Easement Area.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said rights and easements perpetually unto Grantee, its
successors and assigns, for the aforesaid purposes.
AND Grantors covenant that Grantors are seized of said premises in fee and have the
right to convey the permanent easement herein granted; that the same are free from
encumbrances and that Grantors will warrant and defend title to the same against the claims of
all persons whomsoever.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Grantors has hereunto set their hands and seals, the
day and year first above written.
(SEAL)
;a)cao b M. Lackey
..<.C 4 (SEAL)
Haze . Lackey
CL °7: (SEAL)
DArcola L. Lutz
t (SEAL)
Helen L Hunter
44, DJAA-I,. ( EAL)
WilliaWac r .
?p? ,,??? (SEAL)
Becky L. Hi
4& (SEAL)
Ken $. Hite
Ul' I -Ib-LUL)J IU- ?4u .??.nGLL ur.n n I - _ "0"-
STATE OF NORTH CAORLrNA
COUNTY OF- R( e r
B?ot,6OPG0259
I, fi-6 , a Notary Public, do hereby certify that JACOB M.
LACKEY and spous , HAZEL B. LACKEY, personally appeared before me this day and
acknowledged the due execution of the foregoing instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal this the 1 day of J ,
My commission expires:

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF 00Mt&1--7bCZ--
v- st.,4+I?.-., ,r
Notary Public
` ?0 ??.8 tA
z W. "
?o•• .`:.. yti
1, , (YT-ltcA.Yl , a Notary Public, do hereby certify that ARCOLA L.
LUTZ personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged the due execution of the
foregoing instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal this the )(&AJA_ day of ?eaf?1 , 2003.
S MCI tary
My commission expires: = `' >;pTARY `
U G'1 `ZPJOS? PUBLIC '
i C)
r
,,?,rBA C 0UN `I

Public
NORTH CAROLINA ALEXANDER COLWW
The oregoin9 or annexed certificate of
G
r
Notary Publiec of
County, . I s certified to be correct,
This day of 42- A &L / 200
JAMIN W. MINES. REGISTER OF DEEDS
als 9epuiy/Register o Deeds
6
Ul l -to-??1k1 1u ? 40 5l Hr-LL Ornri r r i war. "L)LC?
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA 8K 0, 4 6 0 PG 0 2 6 0
COUNTY OF
1, , a Notary Public, do hereby certify that HELEN L.
HUNTER personall appeared before me this day and acknowledged the due execution of the
foregoing instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal this the day of S 2003.
My commission expires:

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Notary P tc vv tn'••ti'?"??1
•?
i o n
COUNTY Ok
I, a Notary Public, do hereby certify that WILLIAM
LACKEY, JR. personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged the due execution of
the foregoing instmment_
WITNESS my hand and official seal this the day of St`o4mS.*/- 2003.
Notary Pub
My commission expires:
p u e L1??a ??
NORTH CAROLINA ALEXANDER COUNTY
The foregoing or annexed certificate of
Notary Public($) of J="4^" VA _ _
County N.C. Is certified to be correct.
This /sr,_day of Bete-6a/ 2po_3
EWAMIN W. WNES, REGISTER OF DEEDS
U?.I-Ib-LUU? IU-40 0I-MLLI- DICnI ni-i.. ---
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF lAJO ,k!c_.
BK014E0pG0261
I, c>>t ?PQ A Notary Public, do hereby certify that BECKY L.
RITE and spouses CEN 6. HITE, pe, , naily appeared before me this day and acknowledged the
due execution of the foregoing instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal this the 1 day of (V;I?bet- , 2003.
v :' 0TA '? cr
My commission expires: = ?? p`
t
,? - fi -DCo iO&a t? b1
%
coviv,
N"fill 1111101\,
NORTH CAROLINA ALEXANDER OW"
The foregoing or onnexed cerllflcate of
Notary Public of •^??? ??.
County, X. IS stifled to be co 3rect.
This L?'day or 200
B NJAMIN W. HINES, REGISTER Of DEEDS
ie /Regkter Deeds
`ot Public
Ul..l-lb-GUU? IU•-41 D?_ncLL. DfIl"I naL.- "---
E)MBIT"A" E40L450PG0262
Attached to and made a part of that certain Deed of Easement dated September 15
2003, by and between Jacob M. Lackey and spouse, Hazel B_ Lackey; Arcola L. Lutz
(Widow); Helen L. Hunter (Widow); William Lackey, Jr. (Unmarried) and Becky L. Hite
and spouse, Ken H. Hite ("Grantors") and Restoration Systems, LLC ("Grantee').
Lying and being in Millers Township, Alexander County, North Carolina and being more
particularly described as follows:
BEGINNING at an Iron Pipe Set in the northern margin of Old Concord Church Road
(N.C.S.R. 1663), said Iron Pipe Set being located the following 18 calls and distances
along the centerline of Old Concord Church Road from a NfNS, in the intersection of the
centerline of Old Concord Church Road and the centerline of Mt. Wesley Church Road
(N_C.S.R. 1630): North 47° 01' 54" East 20.85 feet to a MNS; North 57° 47' 20" East
23.12 feet to a MNS; North 670 20' 28" East 56.89 feet to a MNS; North 70° 33' 31"
East 103.73 feet to a MNS; North 741 52' 03" East 111.37 feet to a MNS; North 82° 36'
59" East 108.73 feet to a MNS; South 89° 30' 16" East 109.82 feet to a MNS; South 81 °
48' 59" East 109.29 feet to a MNS; South 77° 33' 53" East 110.22 feet to a MNS; South
76° 12' 42" East 104.75 feet to a MNS; South 75° 42' 31" East 832.14 feet to a MNS;
South 75° 05' 57" East 99.97 feet to a MNS; South 74° 29' 11" East 100.00 feet to a
1 L S; South 72' 59' 12" East 99.99 feet to a MNS; South 72° 28' 26" East 537.49 feet to
a MNS; South 73° 12' 01" East 156.44 feet to a MNS; South 73° 46' 52" East 114.60
feet to a MNS; North 28° 05' 05" East 30,66 feet to an Iron Pipe Set; thence, proceeding
from said Beginning point, North 28° 05' 05" East 66.24 feet to an Iron Pipe Set; thence
North 09° 28' 35" West 195.47 feet to an Iron Pipe Set; thence North 28° 34' 10" West
157.12 feet to an Iron Pipe Set; thence North 45° 52' 21" West 176.09 feet to an Iron
Pipe Set; thence North 20° 35' 46" West 379.62 feet to an Iron Pipe Set; thence North
05 ° 12' 06" East 301.14 feet to an Iron Pipe Set; thence. crossing Elk Shoals Creek,
North 25° 15' 00" East 251.21 feet to an Iron Pipe Set; thence North 07° 43' 45" West
80.90 feet to an Iron Pipe Set; thence North 32° 18' 32" West 265.64 feet to an Iron Pipe
Set; thence, crossing Elk Shoals Creek, North 251 52' 37" West 834.37 feet to an Iron
Pipe Set; thence North 36' 57" 00" West 279.27 feet to an Iron Pipe Set; thence, crossing
Elk Shoals Creek, North 53° 03' 00" East 125.00 feet to an Iron Pipe Set; thence South
36° 57' 00" East 183.47 feet to an Iron Pipe Set; thence North 26° 06' 52" East 106.51
feet to an Iron Pipe Set; thence North 73° 13' 12" East 275.98 feet to an Iron Pipe Set;
thence, crossing Elk Shoals Creek, South 16146' 48" East 125.00 feet to an Iron Pipe
Set; thence South 73° 13' 12" West 221.49 feet to an Iron Pipe Set; thence South 26° 06'
52" West 123.40 feet to an Iron Pipe Set; thence South 25° 52' 37" East 802.92 feet to an
Iron Pipe Set; thence South 32° 18' 32" East 285.85 feet to an Iron Pipe Set; thence
South 07° 43' 45" East 145.13 feet to an Iron Pipe Set; thence South 25' 15' 00" West
266.12 feet to an Iron Pipe Set in Elk Shoals Creek; thence South 05° 12' 06" West
250.42 feet to an Iron Pipe Set; thence South 20° 35' 46" East 322.97 feet to an Iron Pipe
Set in Elk Shoals Creek; thence South 86' 13' 09" East 92.19 feet to an Iron Pipe Set;
thence North 33° 10' 27" East 229.52 feet to an Iron Pipe Set; thence, crossing Elk
Ul I-lb-2UUu 10. 41 z)'rr-LL Dmtli r+iwar. "Dr-L '
BK?4;OPG0263
Shoals Creek, South 56° 49' 33" East 125.00 feet to an Iron Pipe Set; thence South 33°
10' 27" West 328.71 feet to an Iron Pipe Set; thence South 28° 34' 10" East 150.29 feet
to an Iron Pipe Set; thence South 09° 28' 35" East 259.00 feet to an Iron Pipe Set; thence
South 28° 05' 05" West 81.87 feet to an Iron Pipe Set in the northern margin of Old
Concord Church Road (N.C.S.R. 1663); thence, with said northern margin, North 74° 42'
09" West 25.60 feet to an Iron Pipe Set; thence, passing a concrete head wall, North 73°
53' 38" West 97.35 feet to an Iron Pipe Set; thence North 73° 46' 52" West 4.90 feet to
an Iron Pipe Set in the northern margin of Old Concord Church Road (N.C.S.R. 1663),
the point and place of BEGINNING, and containing approximately 10.71 acres as shown
on a survey entitled "Conservation Easement for Restoration Systems, LLC (Elk Shoals
Creek)" by John A. Rudolph dated May 15, 2003, drawing number RSS384MR03.
OCT-16-200.i 10:41 bI-hLLL bKH i H i l,UI-r, MDLL -
FILED
03 OCT 15 P,7 2: 52 -
REGI57ER OF DEEDS
ALExAMIR MUNTY. NC
Prepared by and return to: William P. Aycock II, Esquire
Schell Bray Aycock Abel A Livingston P.L.L.C.
P. O. Box 21847
Greensboro, North Carolina 27420
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF ALEXANDER
ENDL60PG0264
ASSIGNMENT
THIS DEED OF ASSIGNMENT, made this 13+1 day of °br r , 20 0 *3, by
and between RESTORATION SYSTEMS, LLC, a North Carolina limited liability company,
whose mailing address is 1101 Haynes Street, Suite 203, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604, ("RS's
and NORTH CAROLINA WILDLIFE HABITAT FOUNDATION, a North Carolina non-
profit corporation, whose mailing address is P. 0. Box 29187, Greensboro, North Carolina
27429-9187, ("NCWHF").
WITNESSETH:
THAT WHEREAS, Jacob M. Lackey and spouse, Hazel B. Lackey, Arcola L. Lutz
(Widow), Helen L. Hunter (Widow), William Lackey, Jr. (Unmarried) and Becky L. Hite and
spouse, Ken B. Hite, heretofore executed and delivered to RS a Conservation Easement upon
certain lands therein described, dated September 15, 2003, and recorded in Book 4/60 . Page
Oda , in the office of the Register of Deeds of Alexander County, North Carolina, and
WHEREAS, RS has agreed to transfer and assign said Conservation Easement to
NCWHF.
NOW, THEREFORE, RS, as aforesaid, in consideration of One Dollar ($1.00), has
assigned, bargained and sold and does hereby assign, bargain, sell and convey unto NCWHF, its
successors and assigns, all right, title and interest of RS in and to said Conservation Easement
and in and to the lands therein described and conveyed, together with all rights and powers
13 l 953_1.DOC(10/13/03)
^U1.1-10-LuuU W-141
JLr1CLL U1%111 n--l' n-
BK046OPG02G5
therein given to RS.
out herein in full.
Said Conservation Easement is incorporated herein by reference as if set
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same to it, NCWHF, its successors and assigns, in the
same manner and to the same extent as RS now holds the same.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, RS has caused this instrument to be executed on its behalf
by its Manager, who has hereunto set his hand and seal the day and year first above written.
RESTORATION SYSTEMS, LLC,
a North Carolina limited liability company
By.
-= vrAL
(S )
?
Name: e o L
Title: Manager
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF W a--f-
1, a.jxi cie ? Qn a a Notary Public, do hereby certify that
a Manager of RESTORATION SYSTEMS, LLC, a
North Clrolina limited liability company, personally appeared before me this day and
acknowledged the due execution and sealing of the foregoing instrument as Manager on behalf
of and as the act of the company referred to in this acknowledgmenL
WITNESS my hand and official seal this the 13 day of Ck4*b4&r , 20_03
,`??irr?rrrrrgri
NotAU?
Public

Aires:
? •os
'
% ?i?` •• + ,•'• ?.?' NORTH CAROLINA ALEXANDER COI INTY
The foregoing or annexed certificate of

Jary Pubti)cA<of?

correct.
This day of is certified to be ? ?
BENJAMIN W. HINE
S,, REGISTER OF DEEDS
/
D?*upr/Re0lster of eeds
2
TOTAL P.13
2
,_ tM t_?tEPi
April 22, 2004 WETLANDS 1401 GROUP
Mr. John Dorney MA`;" (; 3 ?004
NC DENR/Division of Water Quality - Wetlands Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 WATER (QUALITY SECTION
Subject: Application for 401 Certification for the Elk Shoals Creek Stream Restoration Project in
Alexander County
Dear Mr. Dorney:
Restoration Systems, LLC respectfully requests that a 401 Certification be issued for the subject
project. Attached are seven copies of the restoration plan, a completed Preconstruction Notification form
(PCN), and a check for $475.00. This project is being implemented by Restoration Systems under a
contract with the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program.
The project is located in Alexander County near the town of Stony Point in the Piedmont
physiographic province of North Carolina. It is located in the US Geologic Survey Cataloging Unit
03050101 and the North Carolina Division of Water Quality Sun-basin 03-08-32 of the Catawba River
Basin. The project encompasses a mixture of Priority 1 and Priority 2 restoration of approximately 5,200
feet of Elk Shoals Creek and two of its unnamed tributaries within the site. There are no jurisdictional
wetlands within the project boundaries.
The following information pertinent to the project may be found in the attached Restoration Plan:
• Vicinity Map - Figures 1.1 and 1.2
• Site Plan - Appendix 4, Figures l through 9
• Protected Species Report - Pages 3-1 through 3-4
• Cultural Resources - Page 3-4. We are awaiting a letter from the State Historic Preservation
Office providing their comments on Cultural Resources issues of the project and will transmit
it to you upon its receipt.
• Transaction Screen Report - Pages 3-4 and 3-5 and Appendix 2
• Recorded Conservation Easement - Separate item
Please feel free to contact me at 336-272-7190 if you have any questions or need additional
information.
Sincerely, Q?
p" f4 A C-v
Joseph P. Carroll
Authorized Agent
Attachments
cc: Mr. Will Harman, Buck Engineering
Pilot Mill • 1101 Haynes St., Suite 107 • Raleigh, NC 27604 • www.restorationsystems.com • Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
WETLANDS 1401 GROUP
MAY 0 % 1UU4
Sink Property -
Elk Shoals Creek
Restoration Plan
WATER QUALITY SECTION
Alexander County, NC
Prepared For:
Restoration Systems, LLC
March 2004
Report Prepared By Buck Engineering PC
Will Harman, PG
Principal In-Charge
Staci Ricks
Hydraulic Engineer
Steve Glickauf
Biologist
Melissa Carey
CADD Analyst
C. Heath Wadsworth, PE
Project Manager
John Hutton
Environmental Scientist
Jessica Rohrbach
Biologist
A
Table ES-1. Summary of Restoration Activities
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan
Existing Restored
Reach Length (ft) Length (ft) Restoration Approach
Approximately 700 ft of

'
enhancement at the most ,upstream
Elk Shoals Creek 3,342 3,877k section; the remainder is.Rosgen
:. Priorit -1 Restoration,
Approxiriiately 100' ft of Rosgen, '
Unnamed
c
412
603 Pnority 2 Restoration at the most
'
'

Tributary #1 . ,
„
mamder
&
tfe' section; the re
up
" os' eri?'Priority=1 Restoration '
7
Approximately 200 ft of Rosgen .
Unnamed nonty 2'Restoration at,the rriost ->

Tributary- #2 ' 493 688
upstream section,'.the remainder is
Ros 'en Priorit' `1 Restoration ;
Total :.4,247 5;168 ?. 921. ft of additional stream length '-

Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan Iii Buck Engineering
Introduction
1.1 Project Description
The Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek restoration site is located west of US 64 near Stony
Point in Alexander County, North Carolina (Figure I -1). The site is located within the
Catawba River Basin (HU 03050101) in the Piedmont physiographic region of North
Carolina. The project watershed size, calculated at the point where Elk Shoals Creek
crosses Old Concord Church Road, is 4.6 square miles (Figure 1-2). Two unnamed
tributaries flow into Elk Shoals Creek within the project limits. The watershed areas for
Unnamed Tributary #1 (UT1) and Unnamed Tributary #2 (UT2) are 0.38 square miles
and 0.5 square miles, respectively.
The site has been degraded by past land management practices including land clearing,
straightening and ditching of streams, row crop production (corn and soybeans), and
livestock production. Portions of the remaining floodplain are currently in row crop
production.
The project site is located in the Elk Shoals Creek floodplain. Local relief within the
project site is approximately 30 feet, with the highest points located along the outer limits
of the Elk Shoals floodplain, and the lowest point located where Elk Shoals Creek crosses
Old Concord Church Road.
Restoration Systems, LLC proposes to restore stream dimension, pattern, and profile to
the site for the purpose of fulfilling stream restoration requirements for the North
Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP).
1.2 Project Objectives
The design goal for the Sink Property project is to enhance water quality in Elk Shoals
Creek and restore wildlife habitat. This will be accomplished by restoring dimension,
pattern, and profile along Elk Shoals Creek; creating bedform diversity; planting a natural
vegetation buffer; and reconnecting Elk Shoals Creek and its tributaries to the floodplain.
The proposed restoration practices will result in the restoration of 3,877 feet of Elk
Shoals Creek and 1,291 feet of its unnamed tributaries.
Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 1-1 Buck Engineering
1.3 Watershed Characterization
The Sink Property Site is located in the Piedmont physiographic province of North
Carolina within US Geology Survey (USGS) hydrologic unit 03050101 and North
Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) sub-basin 03-08-32 of the Catawba River
Basin. The Catawba River basin, along with the Broad River basin, forms the headwaters
of the Santee-Cooper River system. This river system begins in the North Carolina Blue
Ridge Mountains, flows south-southeast through the state to Charlotte, and continues
through South Carolina to the Atlantic Ocean.
The project reach of Elk Shoal Creek is identified as NCDWQ index number 11-73-(0.5).
The NCDWQ designated Elk Shoal Creek as a Water Supply IV (WS-IV) waterbody and
has assessed the reach as fully supporting its uses. Class WS-IV waters are used as
sources of water supply for drinking, culinary, or food processing purposes in areas
where the more restrictive WS-I, WS-11, and WS-III classifications are not feasible. WS-
IV waters are generally located within moderately to highly developed watersheds.
Restrictions associated with the designation include development density rules
throughout the watershed and agricultural best management practice requirements in
critical areas (adjacent to the water supply intake). Elk Shoal Creek is also protected for
secondary recreation, fishing, wildlife, fish and aquatic life propagation and survival, and
agriculture uses.
Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 1-3 Buck Engineering
-.? ? L\y? ` .?.? .mil .A•,`? \? \`->11
_ -? ??\\ ? ? ? ,•? ? ! l ? `?4_ ?' 1 \t,?? ?? ` ? v ?. ?- 1 ?-'? ? ?? r,,; 1,
51
r fi;al Y' (?/ + ? l:. -y?• ?• ? -:? I ?'•? / I\ `? •Ir ? 9 ? `1? 1 ``L ?
w ear 1 _, pax ?,ti/1 tn? i L?•V ?`` \\\ 1 I ) / 1 14 , . Lo l (/ en: ?(
It * e ,
8.4 w4 ..? ? ,mil I ? ? ?? ? ? •?.??? I A•. ` ?,r/ ?'r r V? ?
,e
.?,•?--- ae .1' (. r? j1( ??'?jj, { j?\ l"?i /, ( too r_.` 1? ' 1` (• .• \, / ?i ?` ,e•.
?? ?' CCCYV? ) " Watershed = 4.6 mi
? ? ?? ? I?', R -i ' ? lei, ??? ? 1 /j I \ ? ? ,I •??
Project Area
' -A l ? I r ? A +cn
{ O
'/ ?,? lair., ? ? ?? ? ,i ?• .?., ? 1?,•r, / ? ? I ?`
^•' Jy, r ///?I/11??i?)1 °SyM? I?'/ r? \? \ 1 ?T f _ ?` ?' j? ( ? '; _
Figure 1.2. Project Watershed Map
® Restoration Systems, LLC
1101 Haynes St. Suite 203
Raleigh, NC 27604
2,000 0 2,000 4,000
FM TTTSiiiiiiiii Feet
Q Y +f
I
3 Constraints
3.1 Federally Protected Species
Plants and animals with a federal classification of Endangered (E), Threatened (T),
Proposed Endangered (PE), and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under the
provisions of Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973.
3.1.1 Endangered/Threatened Species
Species that the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program lists under federal protection
for Alexander County as of February 4, 2004, are listed in Table 3-1. A brief description
of the characteristics and habitat requirements of these species follows, along with a
conclusion regarding potential project impact.
Table 3-1 Species Under Federal Protection in Alexander County
ivotes:
• "T - Threatened" denotes a species likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future
throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
• "S/A" denotes the species is a species that is threatened due to similarity of appearance with other
rare species and is listed for its protection.
• "PD" denotes the species is proposed for delisting.
Haliaeetus leucocephalus (Bald Eagle)
Federal Status: Threatened
Animal Family: Accipitridae
Federally Listed: March 11, 1967
The bald eagle is found throughout much of North America. In 1999, it was proposed for
delisting (PD) in the lower 48 states.
Adult Bald Eagles have dark bodies with a white head and tail. Juveniles are completely
brown and do not develop white markings on their head and tail until they are 5-6 years
Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 3-1 Buck Engineering
field data, this project is anticipated to have no effect on the Dwarf-flowered heartleaf,
and no further surveys are considered necessary.
3.1.2 Federal Species of Concern and Associated State Status
Federal Species of Concern (FSC) are not legally protected under the Endangered Species
Act and are not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until they are
formally proposed or listed as Threatened or Endangered. Table 3-2 includes FSC
species listed for Alexander County. Organisms that are listed as Endangered (E),
Threatened (T), or Special Concern (SC) on the NHP list of Rare Plant and Animal
Species are afforded state protection under the State Endangered Species Act and the
North Carolina Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979. However, the level of
protection given to state-listed species does not apply to NCDOT activities.
Table 3-2 Federal Species of Concern for Alexander County.
Notes:
"T" denotes a threatened species likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future throughout
all or a significant portion of its range.
"E" denotes an endangered species whose continued existence as a viable component of the state's
flora or fauna is determined to be in jeopardy.
"SR-T" denotes a significantly rare species throughout its range. SR species are not listed as "E,"
"T," or "SC" (Special Concern), but exist in the state in small numbers and have been determined
to need monitoring.
3.2 Cultural Resources
In a letter dated February 18, 2004, Buck Engineering requested that the North Carolina
Department of Cultural Resources (NCDCR) review the project and comment on any
possible impact to cultural resources within the project area. NCDCR has not yet
reviewed the project. Their determination will be presented in an addendum to this report
as soon as it is available.
3.3 Transaction Screen Map Report
Buck Engineering obtained an Environmental Data Resources (EDR) Transaction Screen
Map Report that identifies and maps real or potential hazardous environmental sites
within the distance required by The American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM)
Transaction Screen Process (E 1528). The overall environmental risk for this site was
determined to be low due to the absence of any risk sites within the following tolerances:
Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 3-4 Buck Engineering
m r run ? W"..
a
o
M
N N
to
O cn
T
m o o
x

0
jO N C/1
to
tJi
O O O
a
y
S S

.bb
v
C)
y
C
11
b
O
y ?
x
m R
? - "C
$ om p z m
;u
a y ??
0
OU)
h
m
v N
W
a
°x
?n
Q
V)_
x
v
in
?x y
?r

0173,

C7 °
n
Z ? E -, ?
O
O O
O ,0
a
w
n
O n
O
O-I A W N- -•?
•?ao D•
00 °'
C)
ti;SCOrv-r-r mvm 9 O
?Ocp ?z z m T
n0Z-5z?cna9ooOmc?mmoo cn
{c?'o?n?om m
o z0,20 ?Ozo -1 N
v?rffz zmzmw
? nrNyc
Z COD>m 80m>wo
j mwpm ?O°zz
zm-nczi z DOG)
'z za- om
0z;o
m
m

n
0
z
Ri\01Q3R\Do gIgn\PIa-\0173_RS_peh_ I A.dgn
o S
r Z o
Z
m
DD
Z r-
° -
i
r-
D
Ooz
v
Vc ?
? m ?mz
O ? 4X
0X
?m cn n
0 z ODN
<D ? O z ?Do
z
r
D
K
m?
vC/) O
Z ?
?
T°
m -I
m IoW
cn
R F O 'D -4 m

m z O M0
cn o 0
v D T<

r
A O m
i
c W ? m 0
z m
r. m
I Zm

D C oZ
m
m
0 C m
00
C m
X 0
C OK
o
z
0
m
m T
DQ?
z z
T z
0O?m
-i >
m 0 K
?ZX
O
0 =
-n mr,
Z ? cf)
m
y
? m
00 0
z O
N D
m
A
O
=m
m0
?I
O N
- co
n
O
O
z
z
D
m
cn
0
m
z
T_
n
z
D
m
? T E 22 ? 0
2 L
M
? m r

D
D ? oo Z x ? o
? 0
Z Cl) :
M
r
p c

0 (?
A
O
D

2
a a
c? O
o ?i
, c?
a o?
m A
c ?
?
rr, 2
C `i
? O n~j
? O z
0 ? vci
O
5 ? O ? =

a a a
r

z
0
M
cf) r
?C/)
a
a
zN
71 cn
n
w
0?
1M
=m
mZ
mD
of
Tm
mA
m
z0
O
m ON
--I w
m m
O?
TD
DT
zM
O
z
O
m
n
O
9
z X
z m
0
m 0
C7
z
D
O m
z x
m N
C) p
z C
m
m 0
v C/)
0 m
m co
mcci)
D
n
O
O
z
z
D
m
r_
m
U) cn
n D
m
z
z
m O
0
z
D
m
O .'i
mWmcn
0
d
n
'TJ
r-?
n
I--1
z
C?
z
z
00 00
?C JL) ( O o
-,r p V
Z7X(7 T 00;0 -1 T --I .'S7 L L r ;0 r r
O m O v A O O O O
° C., N v_?O ca O O z m D
Z En Z A D O D m
m O GE) O Z' O v m m °
m m U) m < < Cl) D
;0 z m m
m
n
A
O
'n
® 0
p
T
A p p n F O 0
z o z cn m T 6 m
m 5. < z m 0 9
T ;0 z << z? m z m ,n- z
--I T =1 0 c n
00 m <v ?zt m J v
r rtt D rtj n
z m m n
D m p
O i
T z
r?+
Cb?7 0
cz
x
°z
r r
tv
C7?
r
z
O

C ?
r
o'? ? z o

, F1
r iS W

W W
. -n
7 a CA N N
3' ? -0 v
v; m M rt
O < n
.
Q_ CL GG
m 0
.
p m o Q ='
fD
v ?° Q ? o, Q
3
a r 7o
Q • W

m
c Q
7.
0 O
7
lD :5
aU3 Q d

H Q ,?
to 1

W O 07
< Q S `
` O 7 ; f
G
O
0 C Q N
tD ; h

S MJ
N
?C
-? 0 o o o
0 0
m m m N o o c c o 0
3 3 O > 7 ID s
rt s
"'• c
s
?' 7q n
o
C t
O
C n Q_
0 CC
G
C Q
7' 7 r
7 "
n
7 ` O
`G 7 Q
`G Q
`
0
0
(D 0
O
(A
N N 7 >
0 7
0 7
O . Kj
ly
m
CA m
° , r Q
O
Q 0
3 m
a O CD S (? S Q ?2q
3 Q
0 Q ?
3
N
O
0 m
r r (D ? •
O N r : ? h'C

1-01 I
I y ( I I ! ? I
N C "'I '?i --1 '-I N N 'O -1 r n m O W Q `G Q N 0 x X X X
CD -0
U3 0' z (D
O a W N O? N C to O <D rt m c m 0 M tD m
3 p '1 S O T '? + 7 '9 •? T 0- G -{
r o o Q ?. r 3 p 3 o n Q o o 0 o g co co p o 0
O O 7 ?. N Q Q CD N O O W 0 S 7 W 0 Q -i CD O
7 Q/D ID D 0 r) ? -Op O •Op '0 ? ? W
n 7 O 7 0 N ? 7 <D ? in -? Q 'C S c C
p
H N O N3 C •'? o ? on, : Q -1 O O •O CO O O L S: C) ?' - 0 D (A (A 0 0 -0
C r 7o n` C) cND W C D O O H W W m N cD
-?• N Q. 7 S vQi Q 3 S N 7 S .c.. W O = Q n 'N" O
W p 1 ?D Q Q O
p n O Do 0' T 7 ? fD = O.. Q' fD M M
Q -4
3? o X 7 cQ - O : j cD
O W m m Q_ 0 2
-V 0
o
3 o
(D -4
v _
2

v
S Q,

Co
o
O 0
o
Op.
tQ
CD

C
< Q
Q.
Q°

d Z

X
^
^
C
C H G
Q

y

. . . . , . . . • I Y 1f n
i? i II 3
90m000C7® pp}?Bee(9 0©0304 F O f 0-
®O® Q
I I II
A
rO = m T Q a ..p .9 'O 7o n
R1 RI 'O
O p
XX•? ? X, lD ? ? •? ? ? -? t9 0 0
cc cc o C cD m cD m m 0 m c T r
m A C 3 A 1- Z o cD
Q ID
Q_ C 7
Q_ Q_ W 7 fD 0 OC
m O
? c °- o
W 3 ca (D'
c O to Q C Q H;
a c co' a
Q
lD' fD'
/9 N
CA
II IIII?X ? ?????
I 1
m m m x?
II II I II?
?I?IIII? 1111
I
r g' ? ° o ° 0 aa 0
CA
fi LA n (n n M LA n
a . a O Q .
7 o
a
o -I n. 7 a c :3 Q. 7 a n o. ..
> o ° o ° ° fa 9 ° ° N a a c.
>
o
m
a.

_

B- .

-n

a

a

Q-

Q_

m

Q_

O
CL

o
0
CL
ry m c m
m o 7' C ?^ 0 ?
n
n 0 W F7:
-«
W m
<
tD O g
to
r Q
rt =+
Q N
fn 0 O ' _.
O' N S
S " r r N O '+ r
7 d H N -i 7
CO m ?' O n m D p M
N
N
D
m
rt x.
O
O !? N c
?
O ?' O N Or
N
C
(
D
N

u
o
M v T
c N o
a
in

O
m v

m

a l
a i 1
Z 1
? 1 1
? I I
i I 1
? ? 1
? ? ? I}

?
?
e
CD1
I
I ?
I
I
?
1
I
I f

? ? ? I

o
i
"
l
Z
l
Z
l

l
?
?
?
l
'"
? l
}
l
'
?

( > , T
I

S

N
fp
G
y
Q
0
p
Q_

Q

m
D
O_
O
T
O
o
CL
r 2
0

fD
5' N
cQ
fD
S
7
2
a N
O
cQ
t0

Q r

O
c

(D -4
Q
c
T
O 0

0
T O
O

=
CL to n
c

;

; m
., w
X
n
C
fD w
c.
to
M m
<
a

Q
_ 0
C
c.
?
0 n
cn

0.,

A

cr n

Q- n
Q

m

7
A
O
Q
v) 2
n
a
N r
0

N
c
a

O N

3
3.
to

O

-a rn -p gn n -a -a -a -a -o -a n mm
o
CD
0 -0
R.
CD
3 C) n
S W n
- N

O N

O O
3 C/I C CQ
O D
a- =
• O -0 0 O
A a d6`C D
" O
- m
Q S O 0 g
W

O
0
Q
" F
Q S
-n
_
C
N
Q
N
Q 3

-
0
CD O
C (D
n m -n -n
-p j n 7 = c
O O N

I' 1 I I I ?
1 I I
N ?. v? p n

0 N n G1 Gl oC°
c
3
3 ?- 0 n m fl n
c
D
0 o s C O Q ?.
3 c O

O

n
O
Z
m
Z
O
Z
D
r
N
3
?o
O
r
to
C
rr?
vJ

I?
tt I ? ? x EO No
? o ICI p Q .. 1 0
C
h
Elm
c
T
II
N
C
N
c
n
m
m
c
r_
m
z
C)
Z
m
m
;o
Ul)
c?
®®
00
I?.1.1 t..i.l
x
P?
C? I-t
Q
Air AW"-- AW"'--'1W' "'M loft soft Una
1
a 499&\Do.tgn\PIan,\0173_RS_Psh_2.dgn

rco
f
T
r
m
? T
D T
1
>
w ? N b
E rMK
N
H?mCeeRr ?_ T
uum ? Z
o e b
Fn -F
L py( A
u (n N N P o `f J T
T
m
0 k:
m
z
oa?:G ? c
z F
T W
? r CT
m x
D
z
v
D
Z
n
n
C

rn
?+ N
'D
0
D
r
-o
z
S
D
z
v
0
T
F
m
0
T
r
m

A
0
u,
N
mm
0
O
Z
z
I?
5

v >
0
T
C5
G

m
m
'O
0
0
r
N

?
oo ? JJ
ypyp
f All
o

n
D
N \
\ ®
® f/I
X
c
I m

g HAR m
oy
cc
m
o0 0
o 0 00
0
c

M
TYPICAL POSL SECTION

a? ? poo
® °8 0°o w
o0
o ?
t:
tl
?
o
Ball

11
z
C<

V
89
N4
z
W
P
6
.-?-., _.?r_ r rr .. ..??.. .`ICI. ..., r... ? ....?
Ri\01Q3R\Des?gn\P1ons\0173-RS-psh-2A.dgn
z
HS,211, ?
?08?? N
0
otn????aR

Io1 1
Iggg
n
0
N
N
N
m
0
O
z
s

0
y
m
0
s
O
O
v
Cl)
0
cn
z
N
P .`LPN! V N'
HIP
11 411,11 1154

z
I?
5
G

S
f o ?
D >
v
m
4 i +
D Tr 1
? a
C
?d cn
b? ? N
N
p ,n 0
z
.' N
a z
i
i
1
I
iJ
1 ?
I
5 r s

?R=

O
N
cn
zm g m ?
6
m
'F

0

r
A
o
R. 9
F
5
4
H1
101
z
T
m
D
N
m
O
z
C)
h
n
FLOW z
N

FNS' ??

d
z

?
o

?
g

v
0
C
r
m
v
;o
O
v
0
cn
N
D
z
m
0
0
z
ti
c
m
m
v
LO
T
-n
m
8
!=f
N
uzi a
AM AM m m
I
R:\0173R\Dasign\PIans\0173
,
T
m ,
4-
" - 6
§ IN ? om°
A>
MH
4M
gin
- I
?R
mq_
1-91
v ?
s
Z
5 T
0
O
D
Z
m
P '•P ?nr N-
° S H
Z BANKFULL lTAOE
HIM
Ing
O
gQN ?g
HIM ?1
fi
? g
0 ;u
--1 A J 0
O rI- F
z rl m
a '+ 5
D

O
n
D
Z
m
9
N p
Ilia q?
[[nQ Qjy
N ? L
V
0
m
5
?R 8
P H N-
N?
qj- R ?
sip €Wlg
°
>
s????€mHmii
s ? ?N
6410A
?p
A
FLOW
r
RIO$
z q a-
. IS
1
p?

p
m
n ` L
S ?
?
C
D -'4
D

0?

?
0

SNP
.
g
2
O
O
D
Z
m
1?1
z
?W
r
V1 C
Aff-
R;\0173R\Des,gn\PIons\0173_RS_psh
co m
G)?
z co
00
=
ZD
U) Cl)
CD
40
o+
Z°n
i
m M In . ift in bin IN 'im UI rr? rlrr. vrn? wry..
tl /.
11 //
?II !
ll? I /
'Il lu i/
jk j
1 •?`1
1 \
tr
0
N
0
N O
m
o a
0
0
?r
C> p
7_i
-•tmtn
(X)
7 ...
-J
G1 (7 h
6, T
nr.1 'P
Imo.. ....-.\\,?.....

fie. ^ `ti _ aH

v
(\ M Z/
y>
z
M n xr _'
7 V 7?1
VC)k -TJ >C
t
0 r M m
f,o,,m ,71
.?, rTl i x, .--
r" <<' rn ?.;
\

\q v? f?? f v 3 a
z Z 1 ?t \\) It Av t'' ?/?
/ t ! k
cnD I yx ?N. \; 1 I
o oo m t ! 11, f?i tl , Ij. / tt u,h\
cn >
- I --I t r j ?? 1 ?? v v
X X r ! I ! ?,
C?? t 7 ?t 1 t
0--j p?D ?'' I 1 lsr I I
Z ++ I 1 I c? 1 t
1
cn
II \\ \ \ rl I 1 ?:•! \
In a} fI< ?,e \
\ t„ i i w? X00 - m > ';?„ •^:? r ,. 0 m ,
Nk kip
? t
1 IG i / o,
1 1 vt' 1 ? ? - I
\\\ll?f?? 1'I ?i? /f \I tf? ..t1
y Cy \
li? '4p
I lg i y ?,
F y zj \ \
k ti ?`?? I
Mq TCHC'N 1 ir; \
A 23+00 00 a ` \
C
Z
Z
D
m
CO
C
D
X
cn
D
0
O
0
0
%f
Q?
b

zX
o a
w
0 x

gN Zz
fA a
8
.__ ... r? \ r -roan roro? u.n.
1
R \0193R\0e9 ign\PIans\0173_PS_Psh_05.dgn
c7VC
rn??
ca ra ;`
'C Y7 2
G7 G) G
.ac>
tt1 m
>
CJ C:) C7 -i ;A
N "n -0 m
u; •.i cx? -rt ? ?
,-j tt`rm r
U
O
N
U
N O
mm
U
O
0
0
C)
C)
z
co?
KI

1
J
5 ??
0
?
1
t
y
CJ
1

l
1
i
\
S

1 t

\ 5
1 \
\ 1

il??

Z ?

8?;$
_ N
8
AW
A 0197R\Do91gn\Plern\0l
\
\\? ?'~ WC
r mz
C) z
1 m
00
y 1 Sff/ r c
;0 co
a 1 /
y ? rl rll,l -SID
1 t? r 1 1
0
\ \
O
C
x O
61 ?•" ?? 4 r S / ? 'I I I I I
i.
qk? ?, I i I j + I
+100 4 : I
\ \ \ 1 ' \ I , I!
\v \ ?\ r owe`
A V A •? 1 GAY., ? ? /? f I 1 I t i I ?
?\ \ \ 1 `I? / t I 1 I 1 `• I o
\ ?\ \ yca, i 1' t' t ? I I ? I
V A\ \ ?\? ,,,>A A t' ??? ? I? I ?I I I
Ri I ?h I
7
b
\ \ \ t ? \ C ???,, ? r IN 1 ,
`\ \\ \\ \ I 1 S ' \? f I I t ' , I jl, I 'I
? I
f mmC \ , I
` \\ \\ t t lZ r- Z , \ 1 t I I ii
s„
v v s cn D v ?<? v V ' v I f
?' f 1 D O \G, w 1 '\ \
\ 1 i fA
cf)
\ 1 X1 X 1 ?tl / s ` 1 I \1 \ ?? ?? I I I
vv v ? ttl II tf ;f, ?, 0 > ? f ?? f?? ? ? ? v <v ? 1v v I I I
` I
f 1
l t t >\
4 f ? ?' 1 I ;1? W N ? / ,??, 4 ?, /? ? \\ r u, A\ \?': 1 ?• I
?5„ t t n f t \ U fN fit' / fj,? r y\ 1 1
t 4 1 1 + \ \ \\ ? \ \ t 1\ 1 S 1 t In "? / Wa
1 ? 1 \ , 1 L' \ f 1 \I/// \ \ ? T?t
\ R:s \ \ OD
O9 I I \ \ \ \ 4e.\ \ m
/
C?p
:1.
}y ~~ ....
m m
RrW ... i r Z r-
OP CQ N
Up c!1 X
C: Cn r' X
C) rn
D
( p o0D <s a,
Z+ yr
r ? r
y m ,1J
fi m 7i
M
i

r,

V1 O Z

o ?
s
?
g y
o SIR
R
? +8
i\QIY'1IA\Design\PIons \0173_RS.pf1.07.dgn
t g# CO a s (0 g CO
N co "(D
O?ON ?WO N (O N t O t i ' O kO _ 0..._ ..
0 9 0 O
c Q
1 ,
C) ;
O
O PI-38+24 67 I O I
EL-816.35" I l
PI.22+50. CO
EL 927 13
PI.38?88,01 - I -
EL-Q 18.75 ... 'I ... -
71
+
.
O ` PI=37,11.73 O C !
° EL-91813 d i . . .. ..1.. ........
°
4 ? t k r t 1 ? { `? r [ I 7 1 ? ?,
r
i
PI 37+63 0'
.
E -918,17
O } -I I 1 t?
0 C:)
PI 38+1807 O a }
O r r r EL-917 93'
t r 136.43,30. Y i s
, t
'.
EL-917,7_9
1
PI-24+70 Bt ? t
EL-021 93" M -28+06 1 1 (A1 ,? ..F-.? _ I
t
?.
+ EL-19
.., ., ... _. ..! .? ( ,1
'PI-J9,10 59 68 ?tl1.- - ° - I f
k L t
PI-25+1991^ O i I f
° EL 9tS b7 k .y >; ? f ? E I EL D219J x
:
a W
PI-zs.eoe0?
r i k i C.
t `r IL-9176V
'. N
Pi-25 94 B7- t
i i. Id 1 . .A
,- 1 + -?EL.81 D 8D r .... .: 'f
° O i 00
994 _.. .,. ?. '. __ 1 _i. I ..11...-w.._ .. ,.
1. 0?2B 47- P1-20-2
7 <
PIELraa91Z.44 1
EL -g21 81 1
! r
I I
PI 40.70 4e
EL-916 45', } N 1 P1-26+0,0 43 r
y?! ¢ EL-921 ez PI-15+010 00 ?-
I .., _
.,..t 7 ... ,-w + + EL-922 81
,; 3t PIW1+1246 1 1 O
Q I r EL-91744'.. k. I 1 1 ° 9 } 1
1 i _ .-»-. .7 t... ..-t i t : •- PI1-27 29 40
k 1 ?' 1 t EL=919 .78 ? . s 0
A _ a-917.24' ,.. P1 27r48e 97 ? : I 1
PI-41174.2'2 ..... .. .? ? . v ? >, - ..»,.... , EL=g21b2'- . ... .. ... .. 1 .... .
,.. ,. .._..,1r, ...e .1....qn. x
EL?<914OOy 4 t €- .. 1 t N t? , a r a?
1
N . • y PI.4,.9,.9Q I d OD - I 8:03 80 ? ... - .. + _. 1 C
Y
+ +
O i } O E?-92t6z ! ?i
Ir k I? t d O i r t. i i 4 ! t i
O
I x ? 1
r
j
9-a2,e1.5oi C 7 t L-91952 ! EL steer:: r a a ?.??3
I
Y
x
?PI-42+9176
VJ
_, O1 4 +
w EL-916.20' [ ._. + + -14
. Z EL 921 52 1 0
0 C)
° 1 D
° t ?'r .. ,.. El l•918 67 `.. _ r . _ y?Pl-2933 32 , J
EL-921 42'
f
PI D6
. 29x82
A 7
' - S EC-919 28 , e ,?
I [ - } {
_I 43 B4 3- 6' PI-2 B 77
EL-91651 : w ¢ a F C 80 , i d
O ; EL 2T 00
CD t rg ??
O r w ?
O'1`' 3 0
1 ." L
r
r i 1 1 I E L3-921 09 # 1_ 1 „3.A.
PI 4143 87
_?_ .. .., :,_??I... ,.. ..;. ..,: ..,.. .. +.r•?? -j- f .
EL-91431'
> I
j S
. i , 96
3 p
fa 4 b
T y
i
s EL+91081 ,. -. ° i ??1-31+1347 a 0 ! i.
0 O
c
.
a
pp
` 45444 38
¢ k 1 - k F k l PI.31 50 00 !. , ?,.+ 1
EL-920.68
74 Al
EL=816.65 `?. < ..
A I. N t. I O
0) p + .. o 146+0A46 + EL•92DJ6,!. 'f' I -t
C EL 916 37' - O e
C)
t l
1 P1-4$441 61
1 I i EL-B1B 821 F? r 1 ?. 1
i I
. i
t
. ? .. 3 i PI.3 +71 95
,EL-914275. N 1
v p d {? j. E....«_ _-._
I
i _ PIW7+1362 0 EL-!91g U a) g
00 PI"7+1500 ?. O
EL?91527- t EL-916.15 - ,
_ . , _.
1 1 +40 00
. ' _ 1 I
- PI-a7+41 00 PIm7
EL=91479' C f' rfj
1 { s ! l PL33.6501
. PI m7 6800 .. ?? P1-47+6700. r 1.?.
EL-g1B 28
..EL-91351..:......{...
.A C.:.?. is f! 1 - W PI:3+907 p? , * NCI ij? {{
PIW7+94.00 _,. 4
PI x17+95.00 EL-916 B3 • ` N
+ -.EL-07263'._..- EL-813.51'. o}....?_z. + +
Q .. r 1 ! O 1' E PI-34 1850 i 1
PiwB no0 , 9 ° { e i O
O IWB 22A 8
_ e
y8 B
...Efr911 75
P1'84900 y I .. C ,EL 1
7, €
EL'-81156 i %. PIW8MB 00 fff ? - -
... , ap7_„ .
+00 1 EL 91175 1 f'" P131!9244 i X"
PhIB 50
• EL•91184 0?
;.?' pI.3 9g 1 ?' _ _ s to
v
E1.817 Og ? `
I
3
_ .. ?.,
e
5+35 89
! C ' , a
9P d I
_ f i ? I t '? :. fi ?
EL-918.70'
s
, g
• .. € t . :?
t
?. ! . .- ,.. .. _ _..?. >.. _ ?.. ,.. PIs75+1.34
.
1 ? 1 ?€ EL=91B 50
.
F" ? e
(0 • (0 ? (0 O (0 ? S : N 1 e w I O N 8 g; ?' N
0 O 0 0 O 0 0 0
l8
A. r MW Mm- ,
I ?
A\Deeign\Plans\0173-RS_pfl_08.dgn
4 # V i u E f i
co (D
7
I s > @ G I 1 O W
7
I
? t
,. I
r
j
o e2?eH
821.7D
+
1 O PI.10+1479? , p J
O EL-9217D 2e
EL 920 A0
ELW21 7D'
? EL-e2e 49
pt 0;71,7
E921 87 PI 10*D4 5 5o z PI.11.17 37 p EL-921.57 Pl=1172 1 J P1.11.90,30
71
EL°92042 iS2 1 d7
C)
?, p0 ? < ? O a -•aze
o '
1 i e.. L. 1 EL 021 07 J ._ ?;.I -?-
.
'P -13 40,
., ?_
w -:
- k
I ' ! Y 1 £L 82087 ? ! PI.12+7837 _
Q
` ? . S y .., i' .. t ? '...? ?`? ... ? ....;. PI=t2 H6.70 i I?I F .. I ? ..? ` 1. I
} b ? d E W EL 919 77 I G P 1 1 t W i Q ??
Ott ..y » ». -d ' I. i < a ?i.^---,. ?i- + ..A.i.il. _..;_. - 41.13 b7 70 • _ k .. _ i . y_. t ?. _ , l <_I">..,..:. , ? 4 ?....e...
t I t ( 6 O EL=927 SD
i r j. t I SSS EL 92067 ... O _ }
# _i , i f 1 PI-?13+435e Q r f! ' ,.,A 1
EL-92o4a
_ ? u-r re
?? 1 ? ? T• ?? I} ?? I ;d ', ? i '? x: ?' EL'91T33
r a ( 'PIw1o+ 11 ._ I-
EC-s,9 549
24' $ Q i
s = 1 .A. ? ? ? I ? PI-13?BB 131 W } ? ? ? EL-92881 ?
- + EL 0 p o
1 1
Q i O .?i f r I I _?;( 1 _[ O
{ j t ... e xa
,
Pill 4 G . 11? e
-37 ol
1
1e 7 Q?} f i
a t i i r , I , E?-e ! I
iI E:. } PI.4+9711 w ?. 1., 1I,
F ? 1
•+ 2
?
._ ?. I 1 A
w t
Y"
1 ..1 - 903 r-EL-920 20'
8 t ( ` +
U7 .. :.. 19. 1+96 41
EE g
T, co:) 4 0
Lt-
-...rte.„
i .? ..?.
1 #«149H .... , j PI 4215
Pi 6
a '1 F 4
EL•819 3T ELP-925
• •, PI=151 • 6+6864 1*:PI 16+661 C
t 1 +7511 PI.15+r7.44. .EL-92554 - P*5+77.D0 EL?9 6_46' M
EL-91A 47 - EL=92462 PIy15+86 4 EL 02554 7'PI-1 5486 DO F
PI=19+05 56 Z -?
P I E1;92370' EL,11 Z._
6+1050
EL-919 iA
N EL*916 ,23 - PEL?.1-5+9229578- 04
79 ' EL 023 7D
.. - , -»... .....,... ?.. ..r _
Y }? , . 8 •?. .y._ 1 PI-1H-1000 o 't922 1-
PI-1B+2350 EL•919 t6 t o #
f s O ? 1
61'
EL9I9 i I
' ? 1 G Q ?1
EL-9 - 0,39'+ 8W00
r < t I EL;91 7 31I
4 i EL-91839 C 1 } k '?.^- ...
{ e T 7 '.? t 1
d ELF
S t y .. ,-W
I ..
-:1 f
4f ?.
a
1
Q
,: N # Cb
r_ ?I
,
' l
w ? t ? I T o ? # Y }'.,? G ? ? ?,.,. ?;? ?-_,.. 1 ? ' ? f i. ?? ? .:.. r i •„,?.l« ?
,.?
. ll j?{` VL qp ##
.
g t t t 1 j_.
+-,.,- ..-...-.I . ...+.,. 1 17
J7,
4 I , # I d;. R i.. ..ICI I{
j
j i ? i 1 .. E: # 3' j f rG
' 1 1 .. t : F "' e? ..C..w..?.....i j?. f ? ^-?....:.+.. . A_»..w. f} h _ ? _ •1?>. .. ? _ 1 # I _ _.1.. .:.? ?«..' i I .....1...:.
4
17
y.1 i 1 4.t. i 1'
« w p t , ¢
I ? { I } I.j? 1 Q.. I I 1 ?• ? ? } _ ? .._. _i .._ Q _ ' t? ? ( 1;1..
ni ..'•-?.?..... {i ?-? .?°' ?rabnwV^?. Nr+?.l.¢ ryr.. I I ? t ? ?? 1
w
x ?? C I I I
i l = ....
.t ? • I
{ 1 Me... ?.< + .. ?? •?' .?:_w. ' urn w $. ..n ?r?
7 LT:
.
t f
- - 41
i
e
e
r
66 ?
r ? s r
(D fD ? SGI a 8 ffi ,X
N) CA
O i0
3
Ri\0173R\Do*ign\P1.n*\0173_

v W 0
C- A O
z m czn
m
Gi o
00 <
O
C m ?rz?rtt
Dm Y
Cf)
m
K
m
z
1
W N g
Dr z vm ?vim r"Z
OC -m OX
co 1
D v(n ?z
0
Zr
< m O
M Co
m am
F
w mZ Fm
U) mi -40 l co -
rD mZ
n NF ?z
m
v
?O -Zj>
C/) z 0 mm
_ ?v
m n lmu
Z DNI OD
O ?N
mD
m cn zW WO
0 z a
;0 ? v
? o co G
_-I m Z O
x Om
z 2 2
z D m cDn
n ZZ
n v
X cn cn
m
m .4v
?m
?T
C? D
W 2 ?
C ZO
N mN
r

l°
mD
c
O?
-i
m0
m o0
wrn
n
O? Z
bl
N
yv
m?

C
D
N
P')
I? I-
L ?
4

22
W
D
r!, I 17

,woo
m
r
x
D
r
Cl)

Z
Z

o
0
C

b
?? 8p0
w

m
°
o
if-if
8 g-?

It
?t
?d
•t,
IIII,I I''
ra''r'
?I, 5V55
Lr LO i
8r9?
I 1! I,
\ u
V I I ? b
i I a I, I Ir
S
I I r
i I I ! t .
i9'P8£li r
t ;
I I i ! / 1' tI'
1
1 I y!? / 1' 6
,
1 . 1eg
'`? a 18? Se
E
I V 5*?
1ii1
Z9'?r?
IF
l
b
\
\
¦ Z
I
1
?ti5? 5
r. O
\ '`I Cl
.5
,\ nV
wY?" ''f 1 /"1oi11
1 ! l1r/!i/1
I'

WETLA `vv 14C, GROUP
MAY
n 3 X004
Sink Property - yyq?RQU,aLiTYSECTION
Elk Shoals Creek
Restoration Plap,;
Alexander County, NC
Prepared For:
Restoration Systems, LLC
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 203
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
i?
Prepared By:
BUCK 8000 Regency Parkway
Suite 200
Cary, North Carolina 27511
Phona: 919.463.5488
1 N C i I N I 1 P I N Fax: [phone]
www.buckenginearing.com
March 2004
r

Sink Property -
Elk Shoals Creek
Restoration Plan
Alexander County, NC
Prepared For:
Restoration Systems, LLC
March 2004
Report Prepared By Buck Engineering PC
Will Harman, PG
Principal In-Charge
Staci Ricks
Hydraulic Engineer
Steve Glickauf
Biologist
Melissa Carey
CADD Analyst
C. Heath Wadsworth, PE
Project Manager
John Hutton
Environmental Scientist
Jessica Rohrbach
Biologist

Executive Summary
The Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek mitigation site is located near the town of Stony
Point in Alexander County within the Piedmont physiographic province of North
Carolina. The site lies in US Geology Survey (USGS) hydrologic unit 03050101 and
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) sub-basin 03-08-32 of the Catawba
' River Basin. Restoration Systems, LLC proposes to restore 5,168 linear feet of Elk
Shoals Creek and two unnamed tributaries within the project site.
' The site has been degraded by past land management practices including land clearing,
straightening and ditching of streams, row crop production, and livestock production.
Portions of the remaining floodplain are currently in row crow production. Plant
' communities identified on the project site were disturbed/maintained land, stream-side
margin, and bottomland hardwood forest. Elk Shoals Creek and the two unnamed
' tributaries on the site are straight, unstable channels that do not have access to their
floodplains during bankfull flow events.
' The design goal for the Sink Property project is to enhance water quality in Elk Shoals
Creek and restore wildlife habitat. This will be accomplished by restoring dimension,
pattern, and profile along Elk Shoals Creek and its tributaries; creating bedform diversity;
' planting a natural vegetation buffer; and reconnecting Elk Shoals Creek and its tributaries
to the floodplain. The proposed restoration practices will result in the restoration of
3,877 feet of Elk Shoals Creek and 1,291 feet of its unnamed tributaries.
' A summary of existing and design stream reach lengths, along with proposed restoration
design approaches, are provided in Table ES-1 below.
1

Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan ii Buck Engineering

Table ES-1. Summary of Restoration Activities
Sink Property -Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan
Existing Restored
Reach Length (ft) Length (ft) Restoration Approach
Approximately 700 ft of
enhancement at the most upstream
Elk" Shoals Creek' 3,342 3,877 section; the remainder is Rosgen
Priority-1 Restoration ;
Approximately 100`ft of Rosgen
Unnamed Priority 2 Restoration at the most
Tributary #1 412; 60 ? upsfre " r =section, the remain evis'
9
Ros eri?Prionf -1 Restoration:
Approxanately200 ft`ofRosgen '
Unnamed Priority 2` Restoratio6af the root
?;?_
Tributary#2 493 688,,.
x
upstreani,sectiori,.the re?mairide i
Rbs `eriPr1 - -i 1 Rest' t qra,ion,'
Total' 4
247 5;168 921 ftkof?additional stri length"
,
1 Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan iii Buck Engineering

Table of Contents
1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 1-1
1.1 Project Description ......................................................................................... ..1-1
1.2 Project Objectives .......................................................................................... ..1-1
1.3 Watershed Characterization ........................................................................... .. 1-3
2 Existing Stream Conditions ................................................................................... .. 2-1
2.1 Channel Stability Assessment ........................................................................ .. 2-1
2.2 Elk Shoals Creek Existing Conditions ........................................................... ..2-3
3 Constraints ............................................................................................................. .. 3-1
3.1 Federally Protected Species ........................................................................... ..3-1
3.2 Cultural Resources ......................................................................................... .. 3-4
3.3 Transaction Screen Map Report ..................................................................... .. 3-4
4 Bankfull Stage Verification ................................................................................... ..4-1
4.1 Bankfull Stage and Discharge ........................................................................ ..4-1
4.2 Bankfull Hydraulic Geometry Relationships (Regional Curves) .................. ..4-1
4.3 Bankf ill Verification in the Project Watershed ............................................. ..4-2
5 Stream Restoration Design Criteria Selection ....................................................... .. 5-1
5.1 Upstream Reference Reaches ........................................................................ ..5-1
5.2 Reference Reach Databases ........................................................................... .. 5-5
5.3 Regime Equations .......................................................................................... .. 5-5
5.4 Comparison to Past Projects .......................................................................... .. 5-5
5.5 Design Criteria Selection for Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek ................... .. 5-6
6 Natural Channel Design ......................................................................................... ..6-1
6.1 Design Summary ............................................................................................ ..6-1
6.2 Natural Channel Design ...................................................................................6-1
6.3 Planting Design ................................................................................................ 6-5
7 Sediment Transport Analysis ...................................................................................7-1
7.1 Background ...................................................................................................... 7-1
7.2 Unnamed Tributary Competency Analysis ......................................................7-1
7.3 Capacity Analysis ............................................................................................. 7-6
8 Flooding Analyses ................................................................................................... 8-1
9 Monitoring and Evaluation ...................................................................................... 9-1
9.1 Vegetation Monitoring .....................................................................................9-1
9.2 Stream Monitoring ........................................................................................... 9-1
9.3 Success Criteria ................................................................................................9-2
9.4 Monitoring Report ........................................................................................... 9-3
10 References .......................................................................................................... 10-1
Appendix 1 Existing Condition Data
Appendix 2 EDR Report
Appendix 3 Reference Reach Data
Appendix 4 Construction Plans (60%)
Appendix 5 HEC-RAS Data
1 Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan iv Buck Engineering
List of Figures
r.

Figure 1-1 Project Vicinity Map ................................................................................ 1-2
Figure 1-2 Project Watershed Map ............................................................................ 1-4
Figure 4-1 NC Rural Piedmont Regional Curve with Surveyed Bankfull Cross-
Section al Areas for Elk Shoals Reaches and Reference Reaches. (Project data po ints
were not used in determining the regression line.) .................................................. 4-3
Figure 4-2 Reference Reach Vicinity Map ................................................................ 4-4
Figure 5-1 Design Criteria Selection Flow Chart ...................................................... 5-1
Figure 5-2 Morphological Measurements and Ratios (Dimension) .......................... 5-2
Figure 5-3 Morphological Measurements and Ratios (Pattern) ................................ 5-3
Figure 5-4 Morphological Measurements and Ratios (Profile) ................................. 5-4
Figure 6-1 Bankfull Pool Depth: Rootwads Versus Vanes ....................................... 6-3
Figure 7-1 Modified Shield's Curve for Grain Diameter of Transported ................. 7-5
Figure 7-2 Stage vs. Stream Power for Elk Shoals Existing Channel ....................... 7-8
Figure 7-3 Stage vs. Stream Power for Elk Shoals Design and Relic Channels....... 7-8
List of Tables
Table 2-1 Conversion of Bank Height Ratio (Degree of Incision) to Adjective
Rankings of Stability (Rosgen, 2001) ......................................................................2-1
Table 2-2 Conversion of Width/Depth Ratios to Adjective Ranking of Stability from
Stability Conditions (Rosgen, 2001) ........................................................................ 2-2
Table 2-3 Existing Condition Parameters for Elk Shoals Creek and Unnamed
Tributaries ................................................................................................................ 2-4
Table 3-1 Species Under Federal Protection in Alexander County . ........................ 3-1
Table 4-1 NC Rural Piedmont Curve Equations ...................................................... 4-2
Table 6-1 Natural Channel Design Parameters for Elk Shoals Creek and Unnamed
Tributaries ................................................................................................................ 6-4
Table 7-1 Boundary Shear Stresses and Stream Power for Existing, Relic, and Design
Conditions in Elk Shoals Creek ............................................................................... 7-7
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan vi Buck Engineering
1 Introduction
1.1 Project Description
The Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek restoration site is located west of US 64 near Stony
Point in Alexander County, North Carolina (Figure 1-1). The site is located within the
' Catawba River Basin (HU 03050101) in the Piedmont physiographic region of North
Carolina. The project watershed size, calculated at the point where Elk Shoals Creek
crosses Old Concord Church Road, is 4.6 square miles (Figure 1-2). Two unnamed
' tributaries flow into Elk Shoals Creek within the project limits. The watershed areas for
Unnamed Tributary #1 (UT 1) and Unnamed Tributary #2 (UT2) are 0.38 square miles
and 0.5 square miles, respectively.
The site has been degraded by past land management practices including land clearing,
straightening and ditching of streams, row crop production (corn and soybeans), and
livestock production. Portions of the remaining floodplain are currently in row crop
production.
' The project site is located in the Elk Shoals Creek floodplain. Local relief within the
project site is approximately 30 feet, with the highest points located along the outer limits
of the Elk Shoals floodplain, and the lowest point located where Elk Shoals Creek crosses
' Old Concord Church Road.
Restoration Systems, LLC proposes to restore stream dimension, pattern, and profile to
' the site for the purpose of fulfilling stream restoration requirements for the North
Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP).
' 1.2 Project Objectives
' The design goal for the Sink Property project is to enhance water quality in Elk Shoals
Creek and restore wildlife habitat. This will be accomplished by restoring dimension,
pattern, and profile along Elk Shoals Creek; creating bedform diversity; planting a natural
' vegetation buffer; and reconnecting Elk Shoals Creek and its tributaries to the floodplain.
The proposed restoration practices will result in the restoration of 3,877 feet of Elk
Shoals Creek and 1,291 feet of its unnamed tributaries.
r
1 Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 1-1 Buck Engineering
t

\110 Mfg R6 N
bej
190
O
Payne Rd ?
Cl
ti
° Mc Clain d
Homy Rry ?
rcn a Gs9
Liberty Ghu
011 O
KR

a ,
''G?
G 9
Yo?
aC ° v O
?armLn °

c o ec? ' ,90 ?

?a
0 ?? ay Rd

M therso°
a as
a
r
P a?
am` c?O?? ?
ge
c
°
? Hunge,
90

Taylors
c Project Area a
cn
4?' GS
m a
r? ?
S dv
a?e?? Ofd
Oh co?aG Mar YLn
Mid ? -
Rd
>\6
Q-- A
w
^o N?
? o
m
Bob Brown
eP
ah
24
o ckyo4Se ?6
La c°?'
Figure 1.1. Project Vicinity Map
® Restoration Systems, LLC
1101 Haynes St. Suite 203
Raleigh, NC 27604
3,000 0 3,000 6,000
Feet
a
Ray Rd acleFF
a ai ?fndsejFa?m Ra
n Rd Caleb ?
G°JC F a 0/
-0
Pres Garr>e11V
?? rd?
N
f1
Westward Rd
\°den Rd
v
Bolick R
a
rr ? II 4 ? ?;

1.3 Watershed Characterization
' The Sink Property Site is located in the Piedmont physiographic province of North
Carolina within US Geology Survey (USGS) hydrologic unit 03050101 and North
Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) sub-basin 03-08-32 of the Catawba River
Basin. The Catawba River basin, along with the Broad River basin, forms the headwaters
of the Santee-Cooper River system. This river system begins in the North Carolina Blue
Ridge Mountains, flows south-southeast through the state to Charlotte, and continues
' through South Carolina to the Atlantic Ocean.
The project reach of Elk Shoal Creek is identified as NCDWQ index number 11-73-(0.5).
The NCDWQ designated Elk Shoal Creek as a Water Supply IV (WS-IV) waterbody and
' has assessed the reach as fully supporting its uses. Class WS-IV waters are used as
sources of water supply for drinking, culinary, or food processing purposes in areas
where the more restrictive WS-I, WS-11, and WS-III classifications are not feasible. WS-
' IV waters are generally located within moderately to highly developed watersheds.
Restrictions associated with the designation include development density rules
throughout the watershed and agricultural best management practice requirements in
' critical areas (adjacent to the water supply intake). Elk Shoal Creek is also protected for
secondary recreation, fishing, wildlife, fish and aquatic life propagation and survival, and
' agriculture uses.

Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 1-3 Buck Engineering
I I

\
( i n
q p??
P-L
Watershed =4 6 m"
?_1 w by n _ Mx
xtiw ?f Ch
r _ J[WY ?: J f?i
1 J .
? 11`? ??f ? _ ter.' \? /1 /i ? l,?n: ` •,S
't I,,, rr! \ l ?
7 > ?' ?J `? ?? v ?.•, Project Area

1
l V
, ?
r (.
?0

1

a?
'0 ?l
Figure 1.2. Project Watershed Map
Restoration Systems, LLC
1101 Haynes St. Suite 203
Raleigh, NC 27604
2,000 0 2,000 4,000
Feet
r?

2 Existing Stream Conditions
f
The primary purposes of the existing condition survey are to determine the stability o
the
project stream reach and its potential for restoration. This is accomplished through a
' quantitative and qualitative investigation of the stream corridor, including channel
dimension, pattern, and profile. This analysis provides information that is used to assess
the potential for restoration. Data collected during the existing condition survey are used
' to determine if the stream is moving towards stability or instability and if the cause of
instability is localized or system-wide. Examples of localized instability include removal
of riparian vegetation and/or trampling of the stream banks by livestock or humans.
' System-wide instability is often caused by channel incision, which causes head-ward
erosion until stopped by a knick point.
C
hannel Stability Assessment
2.1
' Buck Engineering used a modified stream channel stability assessment methodology
developed by Rosgen (2001). The Rosgen method is a field assessment of the following
variables:

1. Stream Channel Condition,
2. Vertical Stability,
' 3. Lateral Stability,
4. Channel Pattern,
5. River Profile and Bed Features,
' 6. Channel Dimension Relations,
7. Stream Channel Scour/Deposition Potential (Sediment Competence), and
8. Channel Evolution.
'
This field exercise is followed by the evaluation of various channel dimension
relationships (ratios).
' '
Evaluation of the above categories and ratios leads to a determination of a channel
s
current state, potential for restoration, and appropriate restoration activities. A
' description of each category is provided in the following sections.
2.1.1 Stream Channel Condition Observations
' Seven categories are included in this analysis and include: a) riparian vegetation, b)
sediment depositional patterns, c) debris occurrence, d) meander patterns, e) stream
' size/stream order, f) flow regime, and g) altered states due to direct disturbance. These
condition categories are determined from field inspection and measurement of stream
channel condition characteristics.
' Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 2-1 Buck Engineering

u

2.1.2 Vertical Stability - Degradation/Aggradation
The bank height and entrenchment ratios are measured in the field to determine vertical
stability. The bank height ratio is measured as the ratio of the lowest bank height divided
by a maximum bankfull depth. Table 2-1 shows the relationship between bank height
ratio and vertical stability developed by Rosgen (2001).
Table 2-1 Conversion of Bank Height Ratio (Degree of Incision) to Adjective
Rankings of Stabilitv (Rosgen, 2001).
Adjective Stability Rating Bank Height Ratio
Stable low risk of degradation) 1.0-1.05
Moderately unstable 1.06-1.3
Unstable (hi risk of degradation) 1.3-1.5
Highly unstable > 1.5
The entrenchment ratio (ER) is calculated by dividing the flood-prone width (width
measured at twice the maximum bankfull depth) by the bankfull width. If the
entrenchment ratio is less than 1.4 (+/- 0.2), the stream is considered entrenched (Rosgen,
1996).
2.1.3 Lateral Stability
' The degree of lateral containment (confinement) and potential lateral accretion are
determined in the field by measuring the meander width ratio and Bank Erosion Hazard
Index (BEHI). The meander width ratio is the meander belt width divided by the
bankfull channel width, and provides insight into channel adjustment processes
depending on stream type and degree of confinement. BEHI ratings can be used to
estimate the annual, lateral streambank erosion rate.
' 2.1.4 Channel Pattern
' Channel pattern is assessed in the field by measuring the meander width ratio (described
above), ratio of radius of curvature to bankf ill width, sinuosity, and meander wavelength
ratio (meander wavelength divided by bankfull width). These dimensionless ratios are
' compared to reference reach data for the same valley and stream type to determine where
channel adjustment has occurred due to instability.
' 2.1.5 River Profile and Bed Features
A longitudinal profile is created by measuring elevations of the bed, water surface,
bankfull, and low bank height along the reach. This profile can be used to determine
changes in river slope compared to valley slope, which are sensitive to sediment
transport, competence, and the balance of energy. For example, the removal of large
' woody debris may increase the step/pool spacing and result in excess energy and
subsequent channel degradation.
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 2-1 Buck Engineering
2.1.6 Channel Dimension Relations
The bankfull width/depth ratio (bankfull width divided by mean bankfull depth) provides
an indication of departure from reference reach conditions and relates to channel
instability. A greater width/depth ratio compared to reference conditions may indicate
accelerated stream bank erosion, excessive sediment deposition, stream flow changes,
and alteration of channel shape (e.g., from channelization). A smaller width/depth ratio
compared to reference conditions may indicate channel incision and down-cutting. Both
increases and decreases in width/depth ratio can indicate evolutionary shifts in stream
type (i.e., transition of one stream type to another). Table 2-2 shows the relationship
between the degree of width/depth ratio increase and channel stability developed by
Rosgen (2001).
Table 2-2 Conversion of Width/Depth Ratios to Adjective Ranking of Stability
from Stability Conditions Ros en, 2001).
Stability Rating Ratio of Project to Reference
Width/De th
Very stable 1.0
Stable 1.0-1.2
Moderately unstable 1.21-1.4
Unstable > 1.4
' While an increase in width/depth ratio is associated with channel widening, a decrease in
width/depth ratio is associated with channel incision. Hence, for incised channels, the
ratio of channel width/depth ratio to reference reach width/depth ratio will be less than
' 1.0. The reduction in width/depth ratio indicates excess shear stress and an adjustment of
the channel toward an unstable condition.
' 2.1.7 Stream Channel Scour/Deposition Potential (Sediment Competence)
This methodology is discussed in detail in Section 7 of this report.
' 2.1.8 Channel Evolution
I A common sequence of physical adjustments has been observed in many streams
following disturbance. This adjustment process is often referred to as channel evolution.
Disturbance can result from channelization, increase in runoff due to build-out in the
' watershed, and removal of streamside vegetation, as well as other changes that negatively
affect stream stability. Several models have been used to describe this process of
physical adjustment for a stream. Simon's channel evolution model (1989) characterizes
' evolution in six steps, including 1) sinuous, pre-modified, 2) channelized, 3) degradation,
4) degradation and widening, 5) aggradation and widening, and 6) quasi-equilibrium.
The channel evolution process is initiated once a stable, well-vegetated stream that has
access to its floodplain is disturbed. Disturbance commonly results in an increase in
stream power, which causes degradation, often referred to as channel incision. Incision
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 2-2 Buck Engineering

i

r

eventually leads to increased heights and slopes of stream banks, and when critical bank
heights are exceeded, the banks begin to fail and mass wasting of soil and rock leads to
channel widening. Incision and widening continue migrating upstream, a process
commonly referred to as a head-cut. Eventually the mass wasting slows and the stream
begins to aggrade with a new low-flow channel forming in the sediment deposits. By the
end of the evolutionary process, a stable stream with dimension, pattern, and profile
similar to those of undisturbed channels forms in the deposited alluvium but with a much
narrower floodplain. The new channel is at a lower elevation than its original form with
a new floodplain constructed of alluvial material. The old floodplain remains a dry
terrace (FISRWG, 1998). The time required to reach a state of quasi-equilibrium is
highly variable, but generally is on the order of decades.
2.2 Elk Shoals Creek Existing Conditions
Buck Engineering calculated the project watershed size at the point where Elk Shoals
Creek crosses Old Concord Church Road as 4.6 square miles. Two unnamed tributaries
flow into Elk Shoals Creek within the project limits. The watershed areas for UT1 and
UT2 are 0.38 square miles and 0.5 square miles, respectively.
Within the project site, all of the reaches have been straightened and impacted by
agricultural practices. The straightening of Elk Shoals Creek has led to incision, which
has resulted in instability and degradation. The two unnamed tributaries are also unstable
and experiencing high amounts of bank erosion because they have downcut to the
entrenched bed elevation of Elk Shoals Creek. This downcutting has resulted in high
bank height ratios and overly steep slopes. Elk Shoals Creek and its tributaries are in the
beginning stages of pattern development; however, based on the existing conditions, the
reaches will continue eroding and depositing sediment for some time before stability is
achieved. A stable stream pattern and floodplain should be restored in order to minimize
the amount of sediment being deposited into the receiving waters.
An abandoned historic reach of Elk Shoals Creek was located to the east of the existing
channel near the confluence with UT 1. The historic reach was abandoned when the creek
was channelized and diverted to its existing channel, which flows down the western edge
of the floodplain. The historic section of channel is approximately 1,200 feet in length
and appears to represent a stable cross section and pattern of Elk Shoals Creek.
Existing condition parameters in Table 2-3 reflect conditions in Elk Shoals Creek and
' UT1 within the project site; the parameters shown for UT2 were measured immediately
upstream of the project reach.

Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 2-3 Buck Engineering
1
i
i
Table 2-3 Existing Condition Parameters for Elk Shoals Creek and Unnamed
Tributaries.

Parameter
Elk Shoalst
Creek Unnamed
Tributary #1
UT1
Unnamed
Tributary #2 UT2
Rosgen Stream Type E4/G4 E4/G4 G4
Drainage Area (sq mi) 4.6 0.38 0.5
Bankfull Width (ft) 18.4-21.7 10.1 10.7
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 2.5-2.9 0.9 1.0
Width/Depth Ratio 6.4-8.9 10.9 11.2
Bankfull Area (sq ft) 52.8-53.3 9.4 10.2
Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 3.1-3.6 1.5 1.6
o Width of Floodprone Area (ft) 29.5-67 22 14
Entrenchment Ratio 1.4-3.6 2.2 1.3
Pool Bankfull Area (sq ft) 54.1 11.9 12
o Max Pool Depth (ft) 3.7 2.3 2.3
Ratio of Max Pool Depth to
Bankfull Depth 1.3-1.5 2.6 2.3
Pool Width (ft) 23.5 8.1 8.7
Ratio of Pool Width to Bankfull
Width 1.1-1.3 0.8 .8
Bank Height Ratio 1.5-2.0 1.8 2.4
Pool to Pool Spacing (ft) N/A* N/A* N/A*
Ratio of Pool to Pool Spacing to
Bankfull Width N/A* N/A* N/A*
Meander Length (ft) N/A* N/A* N/A*
Meander Length Ratio N/A* N/A* N/A*
cu Radius of Curvature (ft) 30 15-30 30
Radius of Curvature Ratio 1.5 1.5-3.0 2.8
Meander Belt Width (ft) 30-90 25 N/A*
Meander Width Ratio 1.5-4.5 2.5 N/A*
Sinuosity 1.08 1.06 1.01
a?
0 alley Slope (ft/ft) 0.0033 0.0055 0.007
d S Slope (ft/ft) 0.003 0.0052 0.0069
* Limited pattern data are presented for Elk Shoals Creek and the Unnamed
Tributaries because natural pattern geometry does not exist within the project site.
2.2.1 Stability Assessment
2.2.1.1 Elk Shoals Creek
Elk Shoals Creek is an unstable to highly unstable Rosgen E4/G4 stream type. Results
from the existing condition survey are shown in Appendix 1 and include cross sections
and a bed surface material distribution. Pebble counts using the modified Wolman
procedure (Wolman, 1954; Rosgen, 1996) indicate the median particle size in the riffles
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 2_4
Buck Engineering

is 16.0 mm and the median particle size in the pools is 0.11 mm. The cumulative D50
particle size is 2.7 mm. These particle sizes are representative of a gravel bed stream.
Bank height ratios (top of low bank height divided by bankfull height) for Elk Shoals
Creek ranged from 1.5 to 2.0 for the surveyed riffle cross sections. Rosgen (2001)
converted bank height ratios to stability ratings. Bank height ratios of 1.0 are ideal
because they indicate the stream can dissipate energy through its floodplain during
bankfull flow events. Streams with bank height ratios between 1.3 and 1.5 were given an
"unstable" stability rating. Bank height ratios greater than 1.6 were rated as "highly
unstable" (Rosgen, 2001). Instability within Elk Shoals Creek is mainly due to high bank
height ratios. Apparent efforts to straighten the channel in the past, along with
agricultural practices adjacent to Elk Shoals Creek, have resulted in an incised channel.
The sediment transport analysis (see Section 7) indicates that the channel is no longer
actively incising; however, the channel is laterally confined and unstable. A visual
indication of lateral instability observed within the survey reach consisted of alternating
point bars beginning to develop within the channel. These point bars will likely further
develop, eventually forming a floodplain.
The meander width ratios for Elk Shoals Creek range from 1.5 to 4.5. Buck Engineering
reviewed available reference reach data and determined that an E4 stream type typically
has a meander width ratio of four to 10. Elk Shoals Creek is functioning in the low end
of, or in some cases well below, this range, which indicates that the channel is laterally
confined.
The channel appears to have been straightened previously due to past management
activities. Within the confined banks of the channel, sediment is being deposited in the
form of alternating point bars, and bank erosion is occurring on the outside of meander
bends. Although channel pattern is beginning to develop through the alternating point
' bars and bank erosion, further channel adjustment will continue to occur in the form of
erosion and point bar deposition until stability is reached.
' Overall, Elk Shoals Creek had an unstable pattern with a sinuosity of 1.1. Reference
reach conditions show a sinuosity range between 1.2 and 1.5 for stable streams (Rinaldi
and Johnson, 1997). Stable streams typically have gentle meanders and a stable
' dimension with regular access to a floodplain. The characteristics of this particular reach
are most likely the result of anthropogenic changes to the stream channel. The stream
will likely continue to seek equilibrium by eroding streambanks to create a more stable
pattern.
' The bankfull width to depth ratio in the surveyed reach ranges from 6.4 to 8.9. Buck
Engineering reviewed available reference reach data and determined that an E4 streams
typically have a width to depth ratio of five to 10. Based on the width to depth ratio,
' sediment deposition patterns, and the sediment transport analysis, the channel appears to
have incised and is now beginning to widen to form a new floodplain. Following the
widening of the channel, the top of the existing banks will become an abandoned terrace.
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 2.5 Buck Engineering

J

I

This system is at a Simon evolution stage IV, which is the stage at which the stream has
incised and is beginning to widen to form a new floodplain at a lower elevation (Simon,
1989).
2.2.1.2 Unnamed Tributary #1 (UT1)
UT I -is a highly unstable Rosgen E4/G4 stream type. Results from the existing condition
survey are shown in Appendix 1 and include cross sections and a bed surface material
distribution. Pebble counts using the modified Wolman procedure (Wolman, 1954;
Rosgen, 1996) indicate the median particle size in the riffles is 8.43 mm and the median
particle size in the pools is 1.0 mm. The cumulative D50 particle size is 2.8 mm. These
particle sizes are representative of a gravel bed stream.
Bank height ratio for UT1 was 1.8 for the surveyed riffle cross section, which is not
optimal because the stream does not have access to its floodplain during moderate to
large flood events. The lack of access to the floodplain prevents the stream from
dissipating the energy associated with high flows. Excess stress occurs at bank height
ratios greater than 1.2 to 1.3 and can be seen in the form of moderate bank erosion or
scour along the toe of the streambank, causing bank sloughing. Bank height ratios
greater than 1.6 are considered "highly unstable" (Rosgen, 2001). Instability within UT I
is mainly due to the high bank height ratios. Apparent efforts to straighten the channel in
the past, along with agricultural practices adjacent to Elk Shoals Creek, have resulted in
an incised channel.
The sediment transport analysis (Section 7) indicates the channel is no longer actively
incising; however, the channel is laterally confined and unstable. A visual indication of
lateral instability observed within the survey reach consisted of alternating point bars
beginning to develop within the channel. These point bars will likely develop further,
eventually forming a floodplain.
Looking upstream from the top of the banks of UT1, channel pattern along the banks is
not apparent, and the stream appears to have been straightened due to past management
activities. Within the confined banks of the channel, sediment is being deposited in the
form of alternating point bars, and bank erosion is occurring on the outside of meander
bends. Although channel pattern is beginning to develop through alternating point bars
and bank erosion, further channel adjustment will continue to occur in the form of
erosion and point bar deposition until stability is reached.
The bankfull width to depth ratio in the surveyed reach was 10.9. This value falls within
the observed range of width to depth ratios for stable E4 stream types indicating that the
stream is not actively incising nor is it overly wide. This system is at a Simon evolution
stage IV, which is the stage at which the stream has incised and is beginning to widen to
form a new floodplain at a lower elevation (Simon, 1989). It appears however that as
erosion occurs around the outside of meander bends, deposition is occurring to the inside,
thus maintaining a stable width to depth ratio while increasing pattern and forming an
active floodplain.
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 2_6 Buck Engineering

C?

u
u

0
2.2.1.3 UT2
UT2 is a highly unstable Rosgen G4 stream type. Results from the existing condition
survey are shown in Appendix 1 and include cross sections and a bed surface material
distribution. Pebble counts using the modified Wolman procedure (Wolman, 1954;
Rosgen, 1996) indicate the median particle size in the riffles is 15.58 mm and the median
particle size in the pools is 0.24 mm. The cumulative D50 particle size is 7.2 mm. These
particle sizes are representative of a gravel bed stream.
Bank height ratio for UT2 was 2.4 for the surveyed riffle cross section. Bank height
ratios greater than 1.6 are considered "highly unstable" (Rosgen, 2001). Instability
within UT2 is mainly due to the high bank height ratios. Apparent efforts to straighten
the channel in the past, along with agricultural practices adjacent to Elk Shoals Creek,
have resulted in an incised channel.
The sediment transport analysis (Section 7) indicates that the channel is no longer
actively incising; however, the channel is laterally confined and unstable. A visual
indication of lateral instability observed within the survey reach consisted of alternating
point bars beginning to develop within the channel. These point bars should further
develop, eventually forming a floodplain.
Looking upstream from the top of the banks of UT2, channel pattern along the banks is
not apparent, and the stream appears to have been straightened due to past management
activities. Within the confined banks of the channel, sediment is being deposited in the
form of alternating point bars, and bank erosion is occurring on the outside of meander
bends. Although channel pattern is beginning to develop through alternating point bars,
and bank erosion, further channel adjustment will continue to occur in the form of
erosion and point bar deposition until stability is reached.
This value falls within the observed range of width to depth ratios for stable E4 stream
types indicating that the stream is not actively incising nor is it overly wide. This system
is at a Simon evolution stage IV, which is the stage at which the stream has incised and is
beginning to widen to form a new floodplain at a lower elevation (Simon, 1989). It
appears however that as erosion occurs around the outside of meander bends, deposition
is occurring to the inside, thus maintaining a stable width to depth ratio while increasing
pattern and forming an active floodplain.
2.2.2 Vegetation Assessment
The existing plant communities were previously identified and described by EcoScience
Corporation, in conjunction with Restoration Systems, LLC. Three plant communities
were identified on the project site. The three communities were disturbed/maintained
land, stream-side margin, and bottomland hardwood forest.
Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 2-7 Buck Engineering
' Disturbed/maintained land includes fallow agricultural fields, active pasture, and row
crops. This plant community accounts for over 60 percent of the on-site floodplain area.
' Invasive species within this community include Johnson grass (Sorghum halepense),
purple top (Triodia flava), low hop clover (Trifolium campestre), red clover (T. pratense),
blackberry (Rubus sp.), ox-eye daisy (Chrysanthemum leucanthemum), vetch (Vicia sp.),
' and bachelor's buttons (Centaurea cyanus). This community is also dominated by
grasses such as fescue (Festuca sp.), crabgrass (Digitaria sanguinalis), rye (Lolium sp.),
and Johnson grass. Scattered herbs include chickweed (Stellaria sp.), red clover, white
' clover (Trifolium repens), vetch, dandelion (Taraxacum officinale), Japanese
honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), bedstraw, dog fennel (Eupatorium capillifolium),
English plantain (Plantago lanceolata), and pokeberry (Phytolacca americana). Woody
' stems occur infrequently within this community due to browsing by livestock; however,
opportunistic species such as shortleaf pine (Pinus echinata) and eastern red cedar
(Juniperus virginiana) were identified during field visits.
Stream-side margin plant community occupies approximately 20 percent of the site. The
community occurs in narrow bands adjacent to Elk Shoals Creek, the central unnamed
tributary, and Unnamed Tributary #2. This community occupies stream banks and
adjacent low-lying floodplain eroded by the channel and is dominated by a narrow fringe
of young, disturbance-adapted, early successional forest. The stream-side community is
characterized by American sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), black willow (Salix nigra),
and river birch (Betula nigra), with green briar (Smilax rotundifolia), blackberries, and
poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans) in the understory.
Bottomland hardwood forest occurs on the floodplain not yet converted to pasture or row
crops. This community occupies roughly 20 percent of the site and is composed of
American elm (Ulmus americana), willow oak (Quercus phellos), persimmon (Diospyros
virginiana), American sycamore, tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), and sweetgum
(Liquidambar styraciua), with American holly (Ilex opaca), flowering dogwood
(Cornus florida), and poison ivy present in the understory.
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 2-8 Buck Engineering

3 Constraints

3.1 Federally Protected Species
' Plants and animals with a federal classification of Endangered (E), Threatened (T),
Proposed Endangered (PE), and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under the
provisions of Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973.
' 3.1.1 Endangered/Threatened Species

0

Species that the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program lists under federal protection
for Alexander County as of February 4, 2004, are listed in Table 3-1. A brief description
of the characteristics and habitat requirements of these species follows, along with a
conclusion regarding potential project impact.
Table 3-1 Species Under Federal Protection in Alexander County.
Notes:
• "T - Threatened" denotes a species likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future
throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
• "S/A" denotes the species is a species that is threatened due to similarity of appearance with other
rare species and is listed for its protection.
• "PD" denotes the species is proposed for delisting.
Haliaeetus leucocephalus (Bald Eagle)
Federal Status: Threatened
Animal Family: Accipitridae
Federally Listed: March 11, 1967
The bald eagle is found throughout much of North America. In 1999, it was proposed for
delisting (PD) in the lower 48 states.
Adult Bald Eagles have dark bodies with a white head and tail. Juveniles are completely
brown and do not develop white markings on their head and tail until they are 5-6 years
Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 3-1 Buck Engineering

1

F1

7

old. Bald eagles are 3 feet long with a 7 foot wingspan. They feed mostly on fish, water
birds, and turtles. Bald eagles are found around coastal areas, rivers, or lakeshores. They
frequently build their nests in transition zones between forest and marsh or open water.
Nests are large and cone shaped (6-8 feet tall and 6 or more feet wide), and are usually
built in dominant live pines or cypress trees less than 2 miles from open water. Winter
roosts are similar to nesting areas but may be farther from water.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION:
NO EFFECT
Potential habitat for the bald eagle does not exist in the proposed project area. The site
lies primarily within open fields and water onsite exists only in streams too small to
provide foraging habitat for the eagle. In addition, a search of the NHP database on
December 29, 2003, found no known occurrence within the vicinity of the proposed
project. Therefore, the proposed project is not anticipated to have an effect on this
species.
Clemmys muhlenbergii (Bog turtle)
Federal Status: Threatened Due to Similar Appearance
Animal Family: Emydidae
Federally Listed: November 4, 1997
Bog turtles are small (3 to 4.5 inches) turtles with a weakly keeled carapace (upper shell)
that ranges from light brown to ebony in color. The species is readily distinguished from
other turtles by a large, conspicuous bright orange to yellow blotch on each side of its
head. Bog turtles are semi-aquatic and are only infrequently active above their muddy
habitats during specific times of year and temperature ranges. They can be found during
the mating season from June to July and at other times from April to October when the
humidity is high, such as after a rain event, and temperatures are in the seventies. Bog
turtle habitat consists of bogs, swamps, marshy meadows, and other wet environments,
specifically those that have soft muddy bottoms. The southern populations of bog turtles
(Virginia, Tennessee, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia) are listed as
threatened due to similar appearance to northern bog turtles that are listed as threatened.
The southern bog turtle population is not fully protected under the ESA, but may not be
possessed, sold, traded, or collected. In the northern states (Connecticut, Delaware,
Massachusetts, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania), bog turtles are
fully protected under the ESA (USFWS, 2002).
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Potential habitat for the Bog Turtle does not exist in the proposed project area. In
addition, a search of the NHP database on December 29, 2003, found no known
occurrence within the vicinity of the proposed project. Therefore, the proposed project is
not anticipated to have an effect on this species.
Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 3-2 Buck Engineering

J

Hexastylis naniflora (Dwarf-flowered heartleaf)
Federal Status: Threatened
Plant Family: Aristolochiaceae
Federally Listed: April 14, 1989
Dwarf-flowered heartleaf is a low-growing, spicy-smelling, evergreen perennial herb.
Leaves are heart-shaped, alternate, leathery, untoothed, and 1.6 to 2.4 inches wide. Each
leaf is supported by a long, thin stalk, which rises directly from the subsurface rhizome.
This species has the smallest flowers of any North American plant in the genus
Hexastylis. The solitary flowers are fleshy, firm, grow at the end of the short stalks, and
often are found under forest litter and leaves near the base of the leafstalks. Every year,
each rhizome section produces one leaf, one flower, and a leaf scale. The flowers are
jug-shaped, less than 0.4 inches long, and have a narrow sepal tube, ranging in color from
brown to greenish or purple. Flowering occurs from mid-March to early June; fruiting
begins in late May (Russo, 2000).
This plant grows along bluffs and north-facing slopes, boggy areas along streams, and
adjacent hillsides and ravines in rich deciduous forests. It is usually associated with
mountain laurel or pawpaw and requires acidic, sandy loam soils. The species needs
Pacolet, Madison gravelly sandy loam, or Musella fine sandy loam soils to grow and
' survive. Provided the soil type is right, the plant can survive in either dry or moderately
moist habitat. For maximum flowering, the plant needs sunlight in early spring. Creek
heads where shrubs are rare and bluffs with light gaps are the habitat types most
' conducive to flowering and high seed production. Seed output is lowest in bluff
populations with a lot of shade (USFWS, 2002b).

F1

Found in the upper Piedmont regions of South Carolina and North Carolina, this species
has 24 known populations in an eight-county area. North Carolina has one population in
Catawba County, two in Lincoln County, and three populations each in Rutherford,
Cleveland, and Burke Counties. Both of the Lincoln County sites are threatened. One
site may be lost, and the other has only 160 healthy plants. A third known Lincoln
County site was destroyed. Rutherford County also supported another site, but it was
eliminated by road construction. In addition to its known range, the plant may occur in
isolated areas in northwestern Gaston County, western Iredell County, and Yadkin
County, all in North Carolina (USFWS, 2002).
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION:
NO EFFECT
A search of the NHP database of rare species and unique habitats, conducted on
December 29, 2003, shows no occurrences of this species in the project area.
Additionally, no potential habitat exists in the project area for the dwarf-flowered
heartleaf. No suitable bluffs, north facing slopes, bogs, or rich deciduous forests were
identified within on the project site. The riparian species that were identified within the
project area were primarily sweetgum, river birch, yellow poplar, Chinese privet, and
multiflora rose. No mountain laurel was identified within the project area. Based on
Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 3-3 Buck Engineering

i field data, this project is anticipated to have no effect on the Dwarf-flowered heartleaf,
and no further surveys are considered necessary.
3.1.2 Federal Species of Concern and Associated State Status
Federal Species of Concern (FSC) are not legally protected under the Endangered Species
Act and are not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until they are
formally proposed or listed as Threatened or Endangered. Table 3-2 includes FSC
' species listed for Alexander County. Organisms that are listed as Endangered (E),
Threatened (T), or Special Concern (SC) on the NHP list of Rare Plant and Animal
Species are afforded state protection under the State Endangered Species Act and the
' North Carolina Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979. However, the level of
protection given to state-listed species does not apply to NCDOT activities.
1 Table 3-2 Federal Species of Concern for Alexander County.

' Notes:
• "T" denotes a threatened species likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future throughout
all or a significant portion of its range.
' • "E" denotes an endangered species whose continued existence as a viable component of the state's
flora or fauna is determined to be in jeopardy.
• "SR-T" denotes a significantly rare species throughout its range. SR species are not listed as "E,"
"T," or "SC" (Special Concern), but exist in the state in small numbers and have been determined
to need monitoring.

3.2 Cultural Resources
In a letter dated February 18, 2004, Buck Engineering requested that the North Carolina
Department of Cultural Resources (NCDCR) review the project and comment on any
possible impact to cultural resources within the project area. NCDCR has not yet
reviewed the project. Their determination will be presented in an addendum to this report
as soon as it is available.
3.3 Transaction Screen Map Report
Buck Engineering obtained an Environmental Data Resources (EDR) Transaction Screen
Map Report that identifies and maps real or potential hazardous environmental sites
within the distance required by The American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM)
Transaction Screen Process (E 1528). The overall environmental risk for this site was
determined to be low due to the absence of any risk sites within the following tolerances:
Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 3-4 Buck Engineering
4 Bankfull Stage Verification
4.1 Bankfull Stage and Discharge
Bankfull stage and its corresponding discharge are the primary variables used to develop
a natural channel design. However, the correct identification of the bankfull stage in the
field can be difficult and subjective (Williams, 1978; Knighton, 1984; and Johnson and
Heil, 1996). Numerous definitions exist of bankfull stage and methods for its
identification in the field (Wolman and Leopold, 1957; Nixon, 1959; Schumm, 1960;
Kilpatrick and Barnes, 1964; and Williams, 1978). The identification of bankf ill stage in
the humid Southeast is especially difficult because of dense understory vegetation and a
long history of channel modification and subsequent adjustment in channel morphology.
It is generally accepted that bankf ill stage corresponds with the discharge that fills a
channel to the elevation of the active floodplain. The bankfull discharge, known as the
channel forming discharge or the effective discharge, is thought to be the flow that moves
the most sediment over time. Field indicators include the back of point bars, significant
breaks in slope, changes in vegetation, the highest scour line, or the top of the bank
(Leopold, 1994). The most consistent bankfull indicators for streams in the Piedmont of
North Carolina are the highest scour line or the back of the point bar. The indicator is
rarely the top of the bank or the lowest scour or bench.
4.2 Bankfull Hydraulic Geometry Relationships (Regional Curves)
Hydraulic geometry relationships are often used to predict channel morphology features
and their corresponding dimensions. The stream channel hydraulic geometry theory
developed by Leopold and Maddock (1953) describes the interrelations between
dependent variables such as width, depth, and area as functions of independent variables
such as watershed area or discharge. These relationships can be developed at a single
cross-section or across many stations along a reach (Merigliano, 1997). Hydraulic
geometry relationships are empirically derived and can be developed for a specific river
or extrapolated to a watershed in the same physiographic region with similar
rainfall/runoff relationships (FISRWG, 1998).
Regional curves were first developed by Dunne and Leopold (1978) and relate bankfull
channel dimensions to drainage area. A primary purpose for developing regional curves
is to aid in identifying bankfull stage and dimension in un-gaged watersheds and to help
estimate the bankfull dimension and discharge for natural channel designs (Rosgen,
1994). Gage station analyses throughout the United States have shown that the bankfull
discharge has an average return interval of 1.5 years or 66.7% annual exceedence
probability on the maximum annual series (Dunne and Leopold, 1978; Leopold, 1994).
Regional curve equations developed from the North Carolina rural Piedmont study are
provided by Harman et al. (1999) and are shown in Table 4-1.
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 4-1 Buck Engineering

Table 4-1 NC Rural Piedmont Curve Equations.
North Carolina Piedmont Rural Regional Curve Equations
Harman et al., 1999
Qbkf = 89.039 AW ' R2=0.95
Abkf = 21.43 AW R2=0.91
Wbkf = 11.89 AW 0.41 R =0.92
Dbkf = 1.5 AW R2=0.88
4.3 Bankfull Verification in the Project Watershed
The preferred method of verifying hydraulic geometry relationships within a project
watershed is to survey a nearby gage site and compare the results to the appropriate
regional curve. Buck Engineering consulted the United States Geological Survey
(USGS) website to locate gages within the Catawba River Basin (HUC 03050101). The
gage at Norwood Creek near Troutman, within this HUC, was used in the development of
the North Carolina rural Piedmont regional curve (Harman et al., 1999). Buck
Engineering visited the site to assess its continuing stability. The dimension, pattern, and
profile appeared stable and the stream had access to its floodplain during bankfull events.
The proximity of this site provides confidence that the application of the regional curve to
the project reaches is appropriate.
The bankfull stage of the main channel of Elk Shoals Creek, as well as the tributary
channels, was identified in the field; the indicators were a break in slope on flat
depositional features and the back of point bars. The relationship of bankfull cross
sectional area versus drainage area was then compared to regional curve to determine
whether the relationships are similar. Bankfull data for the project reaches are compared
with the North Carolina rural Piedmont regional curve in Figure 4-1. The cross-sectional
areas consistently plot within the 95% confidence interval. This provides evidence that
bankfull was correctly identified in the field.
The abandoned historic reach of Elk Shoals Creek provided additional confidence of the
application of the regional curve. The historic section appears to represent a stable cross
section of Elk Shoals Creek and plots within the acceptable limits of the regional curve
(Figure 4-1).
Two additional reference reaches located in the same physiographic region as the project
site were used to further corroborate the results: West Branch to Tibbs Run and an
unnamed tributary to Cane Creek (Figure 4-2). These sites were selected based on the
confidence with which bankfull features were identified, the apparent cross-section
stability, the natural state of the stream, and the stability of stream pattern. Both of these
sites had clear bankfull indicators located at, or near, the top of banks. One
representative riffle cross section was surveyed at the each site. The drainage areas were
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 4-2 Buck Engineering

0

determined based on watershed delineation from USGS topographic quadrangles. These
points were plotted on the Piedmont regional curve, along with the data from Elk Shoals
Creek (Figure 4-1). The data plotted within acceptable limits and thus verify that the
relationships in this basin are similar to those of the Piedmont region. It is concluded that
because the surveyed cross-sectional areas of the stream reaches correlate well with
regional curve data, bankfull was correctly identified on the stream reaches.
NC Rural Piedmont Regional Curve
1000

100 ---- Lower 95%
r
----Upper 95%
u X?? / ' • Regional Curve Data
a? ,r
?
Elk Shoals -Historic
0?? ¦ UT #1

10
i
?: iL
? UT #2
i
?r • Trib. to Cane Creek
r? ? West Branch of Tibbs Run
• Elk Shoals - Existing
Power (Regional Curve Data)

1
0.1 1 10 1 00 1000
y = 21.43)e"' Watershed Area (Sq. Mi.)
R2 = 0.95
Figure 4-1 NC Rural Piedmont Regional Curve with Surveyed Bankfull Cross-
Sectional Areas for Elk Shoals Reaches and Reference Reaches. (Project data
points were not used in determining the regression line.)
Reference reach data for all project reference reaches is included in Appendix 3.
Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 4-3
Buck Engineering
i
N
ROC
YADKIN
GUI
ER
I Elk Shoals site I
TAWBA
UT to Cane Creek
West Branch of Tibbs Run
ERY
Figure 4.2. Reference Reach Vicinity Map
Restoration Systems, LLC
1101 Haynes St. Suite 203
Raleigh, NC 27604
10 0 10 20
Miles

5 Stream Restoration Design Criteria Selection
' Buck Engineering uses a combination of approaches to develop design criteria. The
design criteria utilize both dimensionless ratios and regime equations to design channel
' dimension, pattern, and profile. A flow chart for selecting design criteria is shown in
Figure 5-1.
5.1 Upstream Reference Reaches
The best option for developing design criteria is to locate a reference reach upstream of
' the project site. A reference reach is a channel segment that is stable (i.e., neither
aggrading nor degrading) and is of the same morphological "type" as the channel under
consideration for restoration. Figures 5-2 through 5-4 show how the dimension, pattern,
' and profile dimensionless ratios are developed from the reference reach survey. The
reference reach should also have a similar valley slope as the project reach. The
reference reach is then used as the "blueprint" for the channel design (Rosgen, 1998).
' Data on channel characteristics (dimension, pattern, and profile), in the form of
dimensionless ratios, are developed for the reference reach. If the reach upstream of the
project does not have sufficient pattern, but does have a stable riffle cross-section,
' dimension ratios are developed. It is ideal to measure a reference bankfull dimension that
was formed under the same influences as the project reach.

Design Criteria Selection
' Is there a reference reach
upstream %,ith a stable
riffle & same %alley slope"

Yes No
'
Reference Reach Reference Reach Reference Reach Regime' Literature Nast Project
Surrey Database Rc%ietc Search res lets equations L:V al tia t l oil
t
R Ratios Raferenre Itearh Regime Lq uations Res retr of
elR
Reach sun-ec if possible numito ine data
atio
Rs as
design criteria
' Ratios ReEtme Equations
Itat1175

Select Design Ratios
and Vquatinns

Figure 5-1 Design Criteria Selection Flow Chart.

Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 5-1 Buck Engineering
0
N ?
UJN PW
m °rnY
?C
o m w
m=1. 1.
C7
CL < LL
U W=
Ym G
C) O z
m V?
n
o mi
Z m
? ZW W
xewd O
J ?- LL a a a
Z = U
Y Jw W?
z
w
2 Q LL CD Z p
m ?a? m w w ?
z< n. Q
w a V) m
0 :3 -J LL a4 m a4 0 4a ?? v~ i v~ i
Q Z
W O
J Z
Q
_U o
C?
O
J
O
O
xew d(] ? Q
a
o Z ^
Op Z
W O
LL w
J 00- Y JW ??
z Z)
m Z9
Z co
LL m
< LL
W
Q
?
W
Z
O
?

Z
J
?
Q
J ? ? p ? ? m Z
?
U x
n
~. ?. ?

v Q
m
Q o ? .. o w ? o =
? im
c?

U
?
a
Q` w ?
?
a
W
x
F-
a

Z
w
?
a J
? _
?
u-
?
w o ?

w
C?
O ?
Z x ¢ ? J ? w j Q
(f?
Z ? Q
? Z
u? ?

?- Z
? LL i
? J
u- LL
of Z =
v
?
? J

W ? x

C7 ? Z ? Z
?
?
? i

w F-
w
F- ?
w
w
? x \

W o
o
?

?
O
m ?
? ?

?
°

?
n, ?
w a

~i
v w

c~n
w

Z
ZQ
J
J
Y

XX F-

?
J

LL
?

Z
W

? ?

>
0 >

>
0
W O O ¢? E ? E
0 0 0 0 E O o 0? 0 0 0
2w
(A
Z

W
W

W

O

Z
C
L ? ? Y

0 E
0 E
0 o
=
E
o

Z a w o a
w
Z ? x `? ? ? I- ? W ?
J J W W

U a J J CC' Z J J W (D
X
a
p
p X
X
Q Q
W
ti
ti X
¢ X
Q

m?
A Is.
Y O ? sue(
m?
?r .
o d ?
mZ cO
It
o u

1
V) U)
Z
_
L) t
O O
F
- J 3 z
/ 4
J E
_
J Z
J `
?
Q -J
m
Q I Q s
S
LL
C)
P
i
Q `
\ Z
N w LL
w
U) J
I- \
\ W
r W
0 ° Z
Z
W \ Q UWgaa
J
C
c
(3j911A) \ a LL
U

W

H101M 1138 w co
z
D 1 Q ?
?
?
U)
= o(D
g°z0
Q > U J?j
W G ??G F-
J Z W
W
_
a
/ E
.. ?

Z
0 U)
Z
1
=
a
\ o w

\ z
U)
O °° w

L6 m \

\ W

J
p
1 J z ? _
C)
V Q ¢ Z J V 2
LL
/ Z
Q W °
0 (n
/
U z
H
/ m

m?

x?
;eve

m Z o
z?`a
o U

?
CO °m

C O C O]
05 2
?I
?
da 100d w
O

? w

o

LL < L)
D m
d31S w
U) Z) n

z

Q H C
w J W
100d

Z xew
d31S ? U)

I
0 a- a.
G
W ?
I
dQ 100d
a
ri.
w wi Ivnu Z

c
a
J MAW J
??
U I
1 Z
5

1
I
O Z 34119 O
OI 0
o L)
O LL
1? w 0

I
100d c7
v
F
O J
m i
o
CL
z o
?-
ml rvnu J
O
LL-
I xew
31ddRi

L6 I

I ?
w o

o
U) (D
L) 0
1, .1 0 n
LL ? z
t-w.

LLj 2

W
Z
? a.
? w
p d
O
(L
_ w
c
.> w ?'
w w a
¢

Q U)
W of
U ? w ? LL
Q

O 02 ? ? U' J W U
!Q? W W ¢
? ¢ Q j a
?
J
_
W a W o
Z ?
?
O
?
W
O
Q J J U) W J J

U ? a ? t? a. a
0 0 0 0 0 0
z
0 0 m

-
Z
W
W

?
aQ

W

0 w
0
w
?
Z
Z
a ?
? ?
? vai
w ?
0 a
m 2
? ?
w ? ?

U o
J Q
? ca
J ?
J o
J w
J o
Cl) ?
U)
w w

a W
w
a

¢ w
LL
?
a
?
?
i
?
> w n
. a c
n

0

u

5.2 Reference Reach Databases
If a reference reach cannot be located upstream of the project reach, a review of the NC
Department of Transportation (DOT) reference reach database is performed. A database
search is conducted to locate reference reaches within close proximity to the project site.
The search includes streams with the same valley and stream type as the project reach. If
references are found meeting these criteria, the reference reach is field surveyed for
validation and comparison with the database. If no reference reaches are located through
the database, a reference reach search is conducted within close proximity to the project
site. If an appropriate reach is located, the reach is surveyed, added to the database, and
the information is used in the process of design criteria selection.
' If a reference reach is not found in close proximity to the project site through the database
or through a search process, summary ratios are acquired for all streams with the same
valley and stream type within the project's physiographic region. These ratios are then
' compared to literature values and regime equations along with ratios developed through
the evaluation of successful projects.
n

u

0

5.3 Regime Equations
Buck Engineering uses a variety of published journals, books, and design manuals to
cross reference NC database values with peer reviewed regime equations. Examples
include Fluvial Forms and Processes by Knighton (1984), Mountain Rivers by Wohl
(2000), and the Hydraulic Design Manual for Stream Restoration Projects by the US
Army Corps of Engineers (Copeland et al., 2001). The most common regime equations
used in our designs are for pattern. For example, most reference reach surveys in the
eastern US show ratios of radius of curvature to bankfull width much less than 1.5.
However, the corps manual recommends a ratio greater than 2.0 to maintain stability in
free-forming systems. Since most stream restoration projects are constructed on
floodplains denude of woody vegetation they are closer to free forming streams.
Therefore, we often use the corps recommended value rather than reference reach data for
radius of curvature. For similar reasons, meander wavelength and pool-to-pool spacing
ratios from the corps manual.
5.4 Comparison to Past Projects
All of the above techniques for developing ratios and/or regime equations are compared
to past projects built with similar conditions. Ultimately, these sites will provide the best
pattern and profile ratios because they better reflect. site conditions after construction.
Again, most reference reaches are in mature forests whereas restoration sites are in
floodplains without woody vegetation. This severely alters floodplain processes. If past
ratios did not provide adequate stability or bedform diversity, they are not used.
Conversely, if past project ratios create stable channels with optimal bedform diversity,
they will be incorporated into the design. Ultimately, the design criteria are selections of
ratios and equations made upon a thorough evaluation of the above tasks. Combinations
Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 5-5 Buck Engineering
I
' of approaches may be used to optimize the design. The final selection of design criteria
is discussed in the design chapter.
5.5 Design Criteria Selection for Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek

I
I

I
I
Buck Engineering evaluated the historic abandoned channel of Elk Shoals Creek as a
potential reference reach. The reach appears to exhibit a stable cross-section and pattern,
and plots within the 95% confidence interval of the North Carolina Piedmont rural
regional curve (see Section 4.3). Therefore, it is included as part of the design criteria
(Table 5-1). Due to its proximity to the project reach, the historic channel was selected as
the primary source of reference reach information.
Buck Engineering included data from two additional reference reaches in the North
Carolina Department of Transportation Reference Reach Database. Data from West
Branch to Tibbs Run and an unnamed tributary to Cane Creek appear in Table 5-1.
These reaches were determined to be appropriate references for this project because their
valley type, slope, and bed material compare to the project reaches and they are located in
the same physiographic region.
The Hydraulic Design Manual for Stream Restoration Projects by the US Army Corps of
Engineers (Copeland et al., 2001) was also consulted as a reference. Recommended
values for meander length and radius of curvature ratios are presented in Table 5-1. Buck
Engineering typically consults the USACE manual for pattern criteria. This is due to the
fact that most reference reach surveys in the eastern United States show radius of
curvature divided by bankfull width ratios much less than 1.5. However, the USACE
manual recommends a ratio greater than 2.0 to maintain stability in free-forming systems.
Since most stream restoration projects are constructed on floodplains denude of woody
vegetation, Buck Engineering often uses the corps recommended value rather than
reference reach data.
I Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 5-6 Buck Engineering

Table 5-1 Natural Channel Reference Parameters

Parameter Remnant West Branch to Tributary to ACOE Manual
Channel Tibbs Run Cane Creek Min Max
Drainage Area, DA (sq mi) 4.6 1.1 1.5
Stream Type (Rosgen) E5 E5 E4/5
Bankf ill Discharge, Qbkf (cfs) 270 88 119
Bankfull Riffle XSEC Area, 53.2 21 20
5
Abkf (s ft .
Bankfull Mean Velocity, Vbkf 5.1 4
3 5
8
ft/s . .
Width to Depth Ratio, W/D 9.7 4
6 5
1
ft/ft) . .
Entrenchment Ratio, Wfpu/Wbkf 12.1 28
1 23
5
ft/ft . .
Riffle Max Depth Ratio, 1.5 1.1 1
3
Dmax/Dbkf .
Bank Height Ratio, Dtob/Dmax 1.2 1.5 1
2
ft/ft .
Meander Length Ratio, 9.9-11.0 7.6 2
7 11
3 12
5
Ltn/Wbkf . . .
Radius of Curvature, Re, Ratio, 1.8-2.2 4.3 2
5 1
5 4
5
Rc/Wbkf . . .
Meander Width Ratio, 4.04.4 7
3 8
5
Wblt/Wbkf . .
Sinuosity, K 1.2 1.20 1.80 1.20 5.30
Valley Slope, Sval (ft/ft) 0.0046 0.0043 0.0025
Channel Slope, Schan (ft/ft) 0.0039 0.0037 0.0014
Riffle Slope Ratio, Srif/Schan -- 2.0 1.4
Run Slope Ratio, Srun/Srif -- 1.9 --
Glide Slope Ratio, Sglide/Schan -- 1.1 --
Pool Slope Ratio, Spool/Schan -- 0.1 0.3
Pool Max Depth Ratio,
1.3
1.2
1
5
Dmax ool/Dbkf .
Pool Width Ratio, Wpool/Wbkf 1.2 1.2 1.1
Pool-Pool Spacing Ratio, 4.0-7.6 4
4 5
3
L s/Wbkf . .
D16 (mm) -- 0.136 --
D35 (mm) -- 0.240 --
D50 (mm) - 0.700 --
D84 (mm) -- 12.000 --
D95 (mm) -- 22.000 --
Sink Property -Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 5.7 Buck Engineering

6 Natural Channel Design
6.1 Design Summary
The proposed natural channel design for Elk Shoals Creek and its unnamed tributaries on
the Sink property is the highest level of restoration feasible given the valley and stream
types. For the incised reaches, selection of restoration type follows Rosgen's priority
restoration approach for incised streams (Rosgen, 1997), which has an overriding
objective of re-establishing contact between the channel and a floodplain. For the
purposes of this discussion the four Rosgen restoration approaches have been defined
below in order of decreasing restoration benefit:
• Priority I - Re-establish the channel on a previous floodplain (e.g., raise channel
elevation); meander new channel to achieve dimension, pattern, and profile
characteristic of a stable stream for the particular valley type; fill or isolate
existing incised channel.
• Priority II - Establish a new floodplain for the existing bankfull elevation (e.g.,
excavate a new floodplain); meander channel to achieve dimension, pattern, and
profile characteristic of a stable stream for the particular valley type; fill or isolate
existing incised channel.
• Priori!,- Converts a straight channel to a different stream type while leaving
the existing channel in place by excavating bankfull "benches" at the existing
bankfull elevation. Effectively, the valley for the stream is made more bowl-
shaped. In-stream structures are used to dissipate energy through a step/pool
channel type.
• Priority IV - Stabilize the channel in place using in-stream structures and
bioengineering to decrease streambed and streambank erosion.
' 6.2 Natural Channel Design
' See construction plans in Appendix 4 for detailed design information.
Elk Shoals Creek and its two unnamed tributaries are currently highly incised,
' channelized systems. The proposed natural channel design will improve the existing
condition by providing numerous water quality and habitat benefits such as:
• Improved overbank flooding and nutrient retention;
' • Decreased in channel shear stress;
• Improved bedform diversity;
t • Improved vegetative cover and lower water temperatures; and
• Improved sediment transport capacity.
' 6.2.1 Elk Shoals Creek and Unnamed Tributaries
The design goal for the three project reaches is to establish stable pattern and reconnect
' with the existing floodplain. By reconnecting the project reaches with the existing
floodplain, bankfull flows will be allowed to overtop the banks and dissipate energy on
1 Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 6-1 Buck Engineering
' the floodplain. As a result, in-channel shear stresses will be decreased during high flow
events. The design parameters used in the design of the pattern, profile, and channel
' dimension are shown in Table 6-1.
Approximately 800 feet of Elk Shoals Creek at the upstream end of the project site will
' be stabilized with structures and minor channel shaping; the channel pattern will not
change. The channel bed will be raised in this section so that the channel invert can be
reconnected to the floodplain further downstream. This is accomplished by installing
' structures that will hold a higher bed elevation in place. Natural bed materials will
collect behind the structures to raise the bed elevation.
I Elk Shoals Creek will eventually be diverted from its existing alignment and the flow will
be routed into its abandoned historic channel. Priority I restoration will begin at the point
were the creek is diverted into the historic channel and continue for approximately 2,800
' feet downstream. The channel will be "stepped down" at the downstream end of the
reach using constructed riffle structures so that it can be reconnected to the existing box
culvert invert. The existing pattern of the historic channel will be used for the first 600 to
' 700 feet of the Priority I restoration section. The remainder of the new channel will be
built with an appropriate dimension, pattern, and profile based on reference reach ratios
and best professional judgment (see Section 5).
The most upstream 100 feet of UT1 requires a Priority II approach in order to raise the
bed elevation so a Priority I restoration can begin. This is accomplished by reducing the
water surface slope of the new channel as it is meandered away from the existing
channel. Over a short length, the elevation difference between the bed elevation and top
of bank is greater than the bankfull maximum depth and a new floodplain must be
excavated out of the stream bank. At the point where this elevation difference becomes
equal to the bankfull maximum depth, a Priority I restoration can be implemented and the
design slope of the new channel can be implemented. As the bed elevation of UT1 is
raised, it will be reconnected with the surrounding floodplain. At the downstream end of
the reach, a step-pool structure will be installed so that the channel invert can be "stepped
down" to reconnect with the Elk Shoals Creek channel.
The most upstream section of UT2 will be "stepped up" to achieve Priority I restoration.
This rising of the channel invert with the installation of an in-stream structure will create
a small section of backwater in the upstream section of the tributary. At the downstream
end of the reach a step-pool structure will be used so that the channel invert can be
"stepped down" in order to reconnect with the Elk Shoals Creek channel.
In-stream structures such as root wads and rock vanes will be used to stabilize the newly
constructed stream bends and some existing bends. Root wads are preferable to rock
vanes for meander bend stabilization. When properly installed, they provide superior
bank protection and allow for better and more natural pool formation. Figure 6-1
presents project monitoring survey data on one sand bed and one gravel bed stream. The
data show that pools are deeper in meander bends constructed with root wads than rock
vanes. Grade control will be provided throughout all the project reaches by using
constructed riffles and rock cross vanes. Constructed riffles will be used more than rock
cross vanes based on monitoring data from past projects. The type of constructed riffle
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 6-2 Buck Engineering
proposed for this project creates less convergence and therefore less scour downstream.
This structure is less prone to failure and provides grade control without causing
localized sediment transport problems. Transplants and other bioengineering techniques
will be used to stabilize the banks, particularly around the outside of meander bends.
Bankfull Pool Depth:
Rootwads Versus Vanes
6
5
4
3
LL
2
1
0
¦ Root Wads
¦ Vanes
RWn=14
Vane n = 9
Figure 6-1 Bankfull Pool Depth: Rootwads Versus Vanes (Buck Engineering
internal data)
Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 6-3 Buck Engineering
Min Depth Max Depth AVG Depth

' Table 6-1 Natural Channel Design Parameters for Elk Shoals Creek and
Unnamed Tributaries
Sink Pronerty - Desion Parameters

Elk Shoals Creek Unnamed Trib. #1 Unnamed Trib. #2
Design Stream
Values Design Stream
Values Design Stream
Values Rationale
Parameter MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX
Drainage Area, DA (sq mi) 4.6 0.38 0.5 i
Stream Type (Rosgen) C4 C4 C4 Note 1;
Bankfull Discharge, Qbkf (cfs) 270 44 54 Note 2
Bankfull Riffle XSEC Area, Abkf (sq ft) 53.0 1110 13.0 Note 2
Bankfull Mean Velocity, Vbkf (ft/s) 5.1 4.0 4.2 V=Q/A
Bankfull Riffle Width, Wbkf(ft) 23.0 25.2 10.5 11.5 11.4 12.5 Note 3
Bankfull Riffle Mean Depth, Dbkf (ft) 2.1 2.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 d=A/W
Width to Depth Ratio, W/D (ft/ft) 10.0 12.0 10.0 12.0 10.0 120 Note4
Width Floodprone Area, Wfpa (ft) 230 275 230 273 230' 275,
Entrenchment Ratio, Wfpa/Wbkf (ft/ft) 9.1 10.9 21.9 23.9 20.2 22.0 Note 5
Riffle Max Depth @ bkf, Dmax (11) 2.5 2.9 1.1 1.5 1.2 1.6
Riffle Max Depth Ratio, Dmax/Dbkf 1.2 1.4 12 1.4 1.2 1.4 Note 6 ,
Max Depth @ tob, Dmaxtob (ft) 2.5 2.9 1.1 1.5 1.2 1.6
Bank Height Ratio, Dtob/Dmax (ft/ft) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0? Note 7 `
Meander Length, Lm (ft) 161 277 73 126 80 137
Meander Length Ratio, Lm/Wbkf * 7.0 11.0 1.0 1110 7.0 11.0 Note 8 `
Radius of Curvature, Re (ft) 46 88 21 40 23 44
Re Ratio, Rc/Wbkf * 2.0 3.5 2.0 3.5 2.0 3.3 Note 8
Belt Width, Wblt (ft) 81 126 31 57 34 62
Meander Width Ratio, Wblt/Wbkf * 3.5 5.0 X0 5.0 3.0 3.0 Nbte8
Sinuosity, K 1.23 1.23 1.50 1.50 1.40 1.40 Tw lett./Val. l
Valley Slope, Sval (ft/ft) 0.0033 0.0033 0.&
SS
0.6053
0.0070 -
0: 16
Channel Slope, Schan (tuft) 0.0027 0.0027 0.0037 0.0037 0.0050 0.0050 Sval / K
Slope Riffle, Srif (ft/ft) 0.0035 0.0043 0.0048 0.0059 0.0065 0.0080
Riffle Slope Ratio, Srif/Schan 1.3 1.6 1.3 1.6 1.3 1:6 N6te9
Slope Run, Srun (fUft) 0.0013 0.0021 0.0018 0.0029 0.0025 0.0040
Run Slope Ratio, Srun/Schan 0.5 0.8 6.5 ` 08 0.5
4 8
Nt e9
Slope Glide, Sglide, (ft/ft) 0.0008 0.0013 0.0011 0.0018 0.0015 0.0025
Glide Slope Ratio, Sglide/Schan 0.3 03 04 0.5 0.3 0,5 Noto
Slope Pool, Spool (ft/ft) 0.0005 0.0005 0.0007 0.0007 0.0010 0.0010
Pool Slope Ratio, Spool/Schan 0.20 0.20 0.20 i 6.20 010 0.10 Note 9
Pool Max Depth, Dmaxpool (ft) 4.2 6.3 1.9 3.1 2.1 3.4
Pool Max Depth Ratio, Dmaxpool/Dbkf 2.0 3.0 2,0 10 2.0 3:b Noti:8
Pool Width, Wpool (ft) 29.9 42.9 13.6 19.5 14.8 21.2
Pool Width Ratio, Wpool/Wbkf 1.3 1.7 1.3 1.7 0 1.7 140te10 t
Pool-Pool Spacing, Lps (ft) 115.1 176.5 52.4 80.4 57.0 87.4
Pool-Pool Spacing Ratio, Lps/Wbkf 5.0 7.0 S.0' 7.0 $.0 7.0 Now l l
d 16 (mm) 0.06 0.06
d35 (mm) 0.27 0.27
d50 (mm) 2.6 2.6
d84 (mm) 27 27
d95 (mm) 40 40
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 6-4 Buck Engineering
Notes:
Note 1: A C4 stream type is appropriate for a wide alluvial valley with a gravel streambed. A C4 was used
rather than and E4 to prevent vertical streambanks, provide a more conservative design, and to allow the
stream to evolve over time.
Note 2: Bankfull indicators and the NC Rural Regional Curve were the most reliable sources for obtaining
bankfull discharge and dimension information.
Note 3: Abkf -*W / D
Note 4: A final W/D ratio was selected based on relationships of W/D ratio to slope in the rural Piedmont
region combined with the dimension in "Note 1" shown above.
Note 5: Required for stream classification.
Note 6: This ratio was based on a combination of past project experiences and the reference parameters
shown in Table 5-1.
Note 7: A bank height ratio of 1.0 ensures that all flows greater than bankfull will spread onto a
floodplain. This minimizes shear stress in the channel and maximizes floodplain functionality resulting in
lower risk of channel instability.
Note 8: Values were chosen based on past project experience and the reference parameters shown in Table
5-1.
Note 9: Profile slope ratios were taken from a combination of past project experience and the reference
parameters.
Note 10: The Rosgen ratio of pool width was used because the reference data showed only a minor
increase in pool width. It is more conservative to design a pool wider than the riffle. Overtime, the pool
width may narrow, which is a positive evolution. Past project experience was also factored into the final
ratios.
Note 11: The pool to pool spacing range is widely accepted in the literature.
6.3 Planting Design
Species used in the restoration area were selected to mimic the undisturbed bottomland
hardwood forest observed on site. The stream margins of the restoration site will be
planted with the following live stakes: silky willow (Salix sericea) and buttonbush
(Cephalanthus occidentalis).
The riparian area of the stream restoration site will be planted with the following bare
root seedlings: sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), willow oak (Quercus phellos),
bitternut hickory (Carya cordiformis), river birch (Betula nigra), white basswood (Tilia
heterophylla), persimmon (Diospyros virginiana), Pawpaw (Asimina triloba), and witch-
hazel (Hamamelis virginiana).
A riparian seed mix will also be applied to the site utilizing the following species:
fringed sedge (Carex crinata), soft rush (Juncus effusus), woolgrass (Scirpus cyperinus),
joe pye weed (Eupatorium fistulosum), cardinal flower (Lobelia cardinalis), and river
oats (Uniola latifolia).
See the planting plan in Appendix 4 for more information on the planting design.
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 6-5 Buck Engineering

1 7 Sediment Transport Analysis
' 7.1 Background
A stable stream has the ability to move its sediment load without aggrading or degrading
' over long periods of time. The total volume of sediment transported through a cross
section consists of bedload and suspended load fractions. Suspended load is normally
composed of fine sand, silt, and clay particles transported in the water column. Bedload
is generally composed of larger particles, such as course sand, gravels, and cobbles,
transported by rolling, sliding, or hopping (saltating) along the bed.

The ability of the stream to transport its total sediment load is quantified through two
measures: sediment transport competency and sediment transport capacity. Competency
is a stream's ability to move particles of a given size and is a measurement of force, often
expressed as units of lbs/ft2. Sediment transport capacity is a stream's ability to move a
quantity of sediment and is a measurement of stream power, often expressed as units of
lbs/ (ft-sec). Sediment transport capacity is also calculated as a sediment transport rating
curve, which provides an estimate of the quantity of total sediment load transported
through a cross section per unit time. The curve is provided as a sediment transport rate
in lbs/sec versus discharge or stream power.
Elk Shoals Creek and the two unnamed tributaries all have median particle sizes that
result in their classification as gravel bed streams; the mainstem has a D50 of 2.6 mm,
UT 1 a D50 of 2.8 mm, and UT2 a D50 of 7.2 mm. However, more fine material was
observed in the mainstem than the tributaries during field visits. In the riffles of the
tributaries, coarse material appeared to control grade and subsequently sediment
transport. The mainstem, with its much larger drainage area, receives significant
quantities of fine materials from both bank erosion and contributions from upstream
catchments outside the project area. While restoration of the channel will reduce
localized bank erosion, the system will still need to be able to transport the fine materials
from upstream sources. Due to the need to transport this material, sediment transport
capacity in Elk Shoals Creek is considered more important than competency, and shear
stress (lbs/ft2) and stream power (w/m2) were analyzed. Both tributaries to Elk Shoals
Creek were analyzed for sediment transport competency.
7.2 Unnamed Tributary Competency Analysis
Median substrate size has an important influence on the mobility of particles in
streambeds. Critical dimensionless shear stress (ti*ci) is the measure of force required to
initiate general movement of particles in a bed of a given composition. At shear stresses
exceeding this critical value, essentially all grain sizes are transported at rates in
proportion to their presence in the bed (Wohl, 2000). ti*,i can be calculated for gravel-
bed stream reaches using surface and subsurface particle samples from a stable,
representative riffle in the reach (Andrews, 1983). Critical dimensionless shear stress is
calculated as follows (Jessup, pers. comm., 2002):
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 7-1 Buck Engineering

n

0

0

1. Using the following equations, determine the critical dimensionless shear
stress required to mobilize and transport the largest particle from the bar
sample (or subpavement sample).
a) Calculate the ratio Dso/D^5o
Where: D50 = median diameter of the riffle bed (from 100 count
in the'riffle or pavement sample)
D^50 = median diameter of the bar sample (or subpavement)
If the ratio D50/D^50 is between the values of 3.0 and 7.0, then calculate
the critical dimensionless shear stress using Equation 1.
ti*,i = 0.0834 (D5o/D^50)-0'872 (Equation 1)
b) If the ratio D50/DA50 is not between the values of 3.0 and 7.0, then
calculate the ratio of D;/D50
Where: Di = Largest particle from the bar sample (or subpavement)
D50 = median diameter of the riffle bed (from 100 count in the
riffle or the pavement sample)
If the ratio Di/D50 is between the values of 1.3 and 3.0, then calculate the
critical dimensionless shear stress using Equation 2.
*ci = 0.0384 (Di/D50)-0887 (Equation 2)
The critical dimensionless shear stresses for both tributaries to Elk Shoals Creek was
calculated using bed material samples from stable riffles. The critical dimensionless
shear stress equations are based solely on the sediment size distribution and not on
channel dimensions. Because the design stream will have the same sediment supply as
the existing conditions, the values calculated for critical dimensionless shear stress apply
to both the existing and design conditions. The cumulative frequency curves of the
samples are shown in Appendix 1.
Data presented in Appendix 1 were used to determine particle sizes for the various
calculations. The D50/DA50 ratio for UT1 was 4.9, so Equation 1 was used to calculate
critical dimensionless shear stress. Critical dimensionless shear stress was calculated as
ti*ci = 0.021.
The D50/D"50 ratio for UT2 was 2.3, so Equation 1 is considered invalid. The Di/D50 ratio
was 1.6, which falls within the range considered appropriate for using Equation 2 to
calculate critical dimensionless shear stress. Critical dimensionless shear stress was
calculated using Equation 2 as*,i = 0.025. These values of dimensionless shear stress
are used in the aggradation analysis presented below.
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 7.2 Buck Engineering

7.2.1 Auradation Analysis Through Critical Depth and Slope Calculation
An aggradation analysis was performed to predict whether the channel depth and slope
proposed in the design will cause the stream to aggrade. The aggradation analysis is
based on calculations of the required depth and slope needed to transport large sediment
particles, in this case defined as the D 100 particle size of the subpavement sample.
Required depth can be compared with the design mean riffle depth and required slope can
be compared to the design slope to verify that the stream has sufficient competency to
' move large particles and thus prevent thalweg aggradation. The required depth and slope
are calculated by:

dr = 1.65ti*C1D;
Se
(Equation 3)

L

sr=1.65'1*A
de
(Equation 4)
Where: dr (ft) = Required bankfull mean depth
de (ft)= Design bankfull mean depth
1.65 = Sediment density (submerged specific weight)
= density of sediment (2.65) - density of water (1.0)
ti}ri = Critical dimensionless shear stress
D100 (ft) = D100 from bar sample (or subpavement)
Sr (ft/ft) = Required bankfull water surface slope
se (ft/ft) - Design bankf ill water surface slope
Using an existing slope of 0.0053 ft/ft and the subpavement D100particle diameter size of
43 mm, Equation 3 indicates a required depth of 0.9 feet for UT I, which matches exactly
the calculated mean bankfull depth. Using the existing bankfull depth, Equation 4
indicates a required slope of 0.0054, which is equal to the existing slope. Using an
existing slope of 0.0065 ft/ft and the subpavement D1ooparticle diameter size of 45 mm,
Equation 3 indicates a required depth of 1.0 feet for UT2, which is approximately equal
to the calculated mean bankfull depth. Using the existing bankfull depth, Equation 4
indicates a required slope of 0.0062, which is approximately equal to the existing slope.
The agreement between calculated and existing depth and slope indicates that neither
stream is actively downcutting. However, the bank height ratio in UT1 riffle cross
section is 1.8 and 2.4 for UT2. The excess energy this creates in the channel during flows
greater than bankf ill is currently causing lateral instability and bank erosion in both
systems.
The proposed design for both tributaries involves creating a new channel with increased
sinuosity and decreased slope. Using the UT1 design slope of 0.0037 ft/ft and the
existing subpavement Dioo particle diameter size, Equation 3 indicates a required depth of
' 1.3 feet for the design conditions of UT1. This value is very close to the design mean
depth of 1.0 feet, indicating that the design stream will have sufficient depth to transport
the larger materials and prevent aggradation. Using the design depth, Equation 4
1
' Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 7-3 Buck Engineering

t
C

indicates a required slope of 0.0048, which is slightly higher but very close to the design
slope. The UT2 design slope is 0.0050 ft/ft and the existing subpavement Djoo particle
diameter size is 45 mm. Equation 3 indicates a required depth of 1.2 feet for the design
conditions. This value is approximately equal to the design mean depth of 1.1 feet,
indicating that the design stream will have sufficient depth to transport the larger
materials and prevent aggradation. Using the design depth, Equation 4 indicates a
required slope of 0.0056, which is slightly higher but very close to the design slope.
7.2.2 Competency Analysis Through Boundary Shear Stress and Shield's Curve
Comparison
As a compliment to the required depth and slope calculations, we calculated boundary
shear stresses for design riffle cross sections and compared these with a modified
Shield's Curve to predict sediment transport competency. The shear stress placed on the
sediment particles is the force that entrains and moves the particles, given by:
i = yRs (Equation 5)
Where, = shear stress (lb/ftz)
y = specific gravity of water (62.41b/ft)
R = hydraulic radius (ft)
s = average channel slope (ft/ft)
The boundary shear stress estimated for the UT1 design cross-section is 0.19 lb/ft2. The
measured D100 of the subpavement was 43 mm. As shown on the Modified Shield's
Curve (Figure7-1), this value of shear stress and the D 100 value are within the range of
values used to calculate the regression equation. The boundary shear stress estimated for
the UT2 design cross-section is 0.28 lb/ft2. The measured Dioo of the subpavement was
45 mm. Also shown on the Modified Shield's Curve (Figure 7-1), this value of shear
stress and the D1oo value are within the range of values used to calculate the regression
equation. The Shield's Curve analysis supports the critical depth based conclusion that
the design-cross sections can move sediment competently and prevent aggradation.
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 7-4 Buck Engineering

r

100(
500
200
100
50

G7
? 10
h 5
A 2
1
0.5
0.2
0.1
0.001 0.002 0.005 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.1 02 0.5 1.0
T, critical shear stress, lbsfsq ft
/

I
/ •
•
I
yo •
N
/ * •

I /
•
/ % 0 UT1 Design
i UT2 Design

/ - Leopold, et al.
Z
j - - Rosgen & Harman

2 5 10
Pate Worn: Leopold Woftnan, and Wfler 7964; Rosgen, personal coax un.; and
Harman, personal common.)
Figure 7-1 Modified Shield's Curve for Grain Diameter of Transported
Particle in Relation to Critical Shear Stress.
7.2.3 Degradation Analysis
Degradation analysis was performed in order to assess whether the design cross sections
would result in scour and bed downcutting. We evaluated the potential for degradation
by examining the upper competency limits for design cross sections and by reviewing
existing and design grade control at the site.
The calculated shear stress discussed in Section 7.2.2 can be used to describe the upper
competency limits for the design channel. The estimated boundary shear stress for UT1
was 0.19 lbs/ft2. Based on the Modified Shield's Curve (Figure 7-1), shear stress in this
range will move particles up to about 45 mm in size, which is equal to the measured
subpavement D(oo particle size. The estimated boundary shear stress for UT2 was 0.28
lbs/ft2. Based on the Modified Shield's Curve (Figure 7-1), shear stress in this range will
move particles up to about 60 mm in size, which is very close to the measured
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 7-5
Buck Engineering

subpavement Dloo particle size, which was in the range of 45-64 mm. Reach wide
confidence in vertical stability of the streambed comes from a review of grade control at
' the project site. The existing culvert at the downstream end of the project site will
prevent reach wide degradation. In stream structures throughout the project will help
control grade locally.
7.3 Capacity Analysis
' Sediment transport capacity, measured as unit stream power (Watts/m2), was compared
for the existing stream channel, relic stream channel, and design conditions. Table 7-1
shows bankf ill boundary shear stress and stream power values for existing, relic, and
design conditions. Stream power values for the existing, relic, and design conditions all
compare well to values for similar streams and valley types described in Nanson and
Croke, 1992. According to their classification system, Elk Shoals Creek is classified as a
133 valley type (gravel bed streams in wide alluvial valleys). The range of stream powers
for this valley type in their study is 10 to 60 W/M2. Figure 7-2 shows sediment transport
rate which is related to stream power as a function of stage for the existing channel
conditions. Figure 7-3 shows sediment transport rate as a function of stage for the design
and relic channel conditions. Sediment transport rate is significantly higher at higher
stages for the existing conditions channel due to the higher bank height ratios. Flows
higher than bankfull are trapped in the existing incised channel resulting in excess in
channel power. The design channel will allow flows greater than bankfull to spread out
on the floodplain thus dissipating this excess energy.

t

Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 7-6 Buck Engineering

Table 7-1 Boundary Shear Stresses and Stream Power for Existing, Relic, and
Design Conditions in Elk Shoals Creek

I

7

Parameter Existing
Channel Relic Channel Design
Channel
Bankfull Q (cfs) 270 270 270
Bankfull Area (sq ft) 53.3 53.2 53.4
Bankfull Width, W (ft) 21.7 22.7 25
Bankfull Mean Depth, D (ft) 2.5 2.3 2.14
Width to Depth Ratio, W/D
(ft/ft) 8.9 9.7 11.7
Wetted Perimeter 24.8 24.3 26.2
Hydraulic Radius, R (ft) 2.15 2.19 2.04
Slope (ft/ft) 0.003 0.004 0.004
Boundary Shear Stress, ti 0.4 0.54 0.34
Stream Power (W/m2) 29.5 39.9 25.0

I Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 7-7 Buck Engineering
i
Stage vs. Stream Power
14
a?
12
0 10

C.
N 8

!a to
t= 6
m 4
' E
=c 2
a?
CO 0
0 2 4 6 8
Stage (ft)
?- Existing X-Sec 2 ?- Existing X-Sec 1
Figure 7-2 Stage vs. Stream Power for Elk Shoals Existing Channel.
Stage vs. Stream Power
4
as
3.5
3
0
2.5
U)
L 2
1.5
1
0.5
4)
0
0 1 2 3 4 5
Stage (ft)
-}Design --m- Relic X-Sec 1 Relic X-Sec 2
Figure 7-3 Stage vs. Stream Power for Elk Shoals Design and Relic Channels.
Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 7-8 Buck Engineering

8 Flooding Analyses
The project site has been located on the Federal Emergency Management Agency's
(FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps. The Elk Shoals Creek floodplain is designated
' Zone A, which means base flood elevations were not determined and the site is not a
detailed study area. Existing and proposed HEC-RAS models were developed from
survey data in order to determine flooding impacts. Discharges were estimated for the 5,
10, 25, 50, and 100 year flood using the USGS Rural Regression Equations for the Blue
Ridge-Piedmont Region. The bankfull discharge was estimated using the Rural Piedmont
Regional Curve. One of the purposes of the proposed restoration is to allow Elk Shoals
Creek to reconnect to its floodplain. Raising the bed elevation of the existing incised
channel will impact the water surface elevations, specifically the bankfull water surface
elevation. For further analysis see Appendix 5.
t Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 8-1 Buck Engineering
9 Monitoring and Evaluation
Environmental components monitored in this project will be those that allow an
evaluation of channel stability and survivability of riparian vegetation. Post-restoration
monitoring report and success criteria are shown below.
9.1 Vegetation Monitoring
Successful restoration of the vegetation is dependent upon hydrologic restoration, active
planting of preferred canopy species, and volunteer regeneration of the native plant
community. In order to determine if the criteria are achieved, Buck Engineering will
install vegetation-monitoring stations. The location of three individual monitoring plots
will be determined during the as-built survey. Vegetation monitoring will occur in
spring/summer. Individual plot data for woody species will be provided. Plot data will
not be averaged over the entire site to obtain a single figure for stem density. The
enumeration of the density of planted species will equal the number of remaining stems
in the plot divided by the plot size in acres. Individual seedlings will be marked such that
they can be found in succeeding monitoring years. Mortality will be determined from the
difference between the previous year's living planted seedlings and the current year's
living planted seedlings. In years 3 and 5, the species composition, density, and survival
will be evaluated.
9.2 Stream Monitoring
Monitoring of restored stream reaches will be conducted for a five year monitoring
period to evaluate the effectiveness of the restoration practices. The effectiveness will be
determined by monitoring the stream's bankfull events, specific cross sections,
longitudinal profile, and through the use of photo referencing. The methods used are
described below for each parameter.
9.2.1 Cross-sections
Two permanent cross-sections will be installed per 2,000 linear feet of stream restoration
work, with one located at a riffle cross-section and one located at a pool cross-section.
The cross sections will be surveyed for the as-built and years three and five. Each cross
section will be marked on both banks with permanent pins to establish the exact transect
used. A common benchmark will be used for cross-sections and consistently used to
facilitate easy comparison of data.
9.2.2 Bankfull Event
The occurrence of bankfull events within the monitoring period will be documented by
the use of a crest gauge and photographs. The crest gauge will record the highest
Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 9-1 Buck Engineering

watermark between site visits, and the gauge will be checked each time there is a site
visit to determine if a bankfull event has occurred. Photographs will be used to document
' the occurrence of debris lines and sediment deposition on the floodplain during
monitoring site visits.
' 9.2.3 Longitudinal Profile
A longitudinal profile will be completed for the as-built and years three and five of the
' monitoring period. The profile will be conducted for a length of restored channel at least
1,000 feet in length (500 ft near the beginning of the project and the last 500 feet).
Measurements will include thalweg, water surface, bankfull, and top of low bank. Each
of these measurements will be taken at the head of each feature (e.g., riffle, pool, and the
max pool depth. The survey will be tied to a permanent benchmark.
9.2.4 Photo Reference Sites
Photographs will be used to visually document restoration success. Reference stations
will be photographed before construction and continued for at least 5 years following
construction. Reference photos will be taken once a year. After construction has taken
place, reference stations will be marked.
Lateral reference photos. Reference photo transects will be taken at each permanent
cross section. Photographs will be taken of both banks at each cross section. The survey
' tape will be centered in the photographs of the bank. The water line will be located in the
lower edge of the frame and as much of the bank as possible included in each photo.
Photographers should make an effort to consistently maintain the same area in each photo
i over time.
¦ Structure photos. Photographs will be taken at each grade control structure along the
' restored stream. Photographers should make every effort to consistently maintain the
same area in each photo over time.
' 9.3 Success Criteria
1 Two bankfull flow events must be documented within the 5-year monitoring period. The
two bankfull events must occur in separate years.
' 9.3.1 Cross Section Success Criteria
If changes in the cross section take place they should be evaluated to determine if they
represent a movement toward a more unstable condition (e.g., down-cutting or erosion)
or are minor changes that represent an increase in stability (e.g.; settling, vegetative
changes, deposition along the banks, or decrease in width/depth ratio). Cross-sections
' shall be classified using the Rosgen stream classification method and all monitored cross-
sections should fall within the quantitative parameters defined for channels of the design
stream type.
1
Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 9-2 Buck Engineering

9.3.2 Longitudinal Profile Success Criteria
The longitudinal profiles should show that the bedform features are remaining stable, i.e.,
they match reference reach ratios. The pools should remain deep with flat water surface
' slopes and the riffles should remain steeper and shallower than the pools. Bedforms
'
Photographs will be used to subjectively evaluate channel aggradation or degradation,
bank erosion, success of riparian vegetation and effectiveness of erosion control
measures. Longitudinal photos should indicate the absences of developing bars within the
channel or an excessive increase in channel depth. Lateral photos should not indicate
' excessive erosion or continuing degradation of the banks over time. A series of photos

observed 9.3.3 Photo should be Reference consistent Station with those Success Criteria observed ia for channels of the design stream type.
over time should indicate successional maturation of riparian vegetation.
9.4 Monitoring Report
Monitoring reports will be prepared in the fall for the as-built and years 3 and 5 of
monitoring and submitted to Restoration Systems. The monitoring reports will include:
1. A narrative summarizing the condition of the restored site and all regular
maintenance activities;
2. As-built topographic map showing location of sampling plots, permanent photo
points, location of transects, etc.;
3. Cross sections and profiles;
4. Photographs showing views of the restored site taken from fixed-point stations
from a height of approximately five to six feet. Permanent markers shall be
established to ensure that the same locations (and view directions) on the site are
monitored in each monitoring period;
5. Vegetation success;
6. Identification of any invasion by undesirable plant species, including
quantification of the extent of invasion of undesirable plants by either stem
counts, percent cover, or area, whichever is appropriate;
7. A description of any damage done by animals.
Sink Property -Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 9-3
Buck Engineering

10 References
Andrews, E. D. 1983. Entrainment of gravel from naturally sorted river bed material,
' Geological Society of America Bulletin, 94, 1225-1231.
Copeland, R.R, D.N. McComas, C.R. Thorne, P.J. Soar, M.M. Jones, and J.B. Fripp.
2001. United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE). Hydraulic Design of
Stream Restoration Projects. Washington, DC.
Dunne, T. and L. B. Leopold, 1978. Water in Environmental Planning. New York: W. H.
Freeman and Company.
Federal Interagency Stream Restoration Working Group (FISRWG). 1998. Stream
Corridor Restoration: Principles, Processes and Practices. National Technical
Information Service, Springfield, VA.
Harman, W.A., G.D. Jennings, J.M. Patterson, D.R. Clinton, L.O. Slate, A.G. Jessup, J.R.
Everhart, and R.E. Smith, 1999. Bankfull Hydraulic Geometry Relationships for
' North Carolina Streams. Wildland Hydrology. AWRA Symposium Proceedings.
Edited by: D.S. Olsen and J.P. Potyondy. American Water Resources Association.
June 30-July 2, 1999. Bozeman, MT.
' Johnson, P.A., and T.M. Heil, 1996. Uncertainty in Estimating Bankfull Conditions.
Water Resources Bulletin. Journal of the American Water Resources Association
32(6):1283-1292.
Kilpatrick, F.A., and H.H. Barnes Jr. 1964. Channel Geometry of Piedmont Streams as
Related to Frequency of Floods. Professional Paper 422-E. US Geological Survey,
Washington, DC.
Knighton, David. 1984. Fluvial Forms and Processes. Rutledge, Chapman, and Hall,
Inc. New York, NY.
Merigliano, M.F. 1997. Hydraulic Geometry and Stream Channel Behavior: An
Uncertain Link. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 33(6):1327-
1336.
Nanson, G.C. and J.C. Croke, 1992. A Genetic Classification of Floodplains.
Geomorphology 4(1992); 459-486.
Nixon, M., 1959. A Study of Bankfull Discharges of Rivers in England and Wales. In
Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, vol. 12, pp. 157-175.
Rinaldi, M. and P.A. Johnson, 1997. Stream Meander Restoration. Journal of the
American Water Resources Association 33:855-866.
Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 10-1 Buck Engineering

Rosgen, D. L. 1994. A classification of natural rivers. Catena 22:169-199.
Rosgen, D.L., 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology Books, Pagosa
Springs, Colo.
Rosgen, D.L., 1997. A geomorphological approach to restoration of incised rivers. In:
Wang, S.S.Y, E.J. Langendoen, and F.D. Shields, Jr. (Eds.). Proceedings of the
Conference on Management of Landscapes Disturbed by Channel Incision. pp. 12-
22.
Rosgen, D.L., 1998. The Reference Reach - a Blueprint for Natural Channel Design.
Draft Presented at ASCE Conference on River Restoration in Denver Colorado -
March, 1998. ASCE. Reston, VA.

Rosgen, D.L. 2001. A stream channel stability assessment methodology. Proceedings of
the Federal Interagency Sediment Conference, Reno, NV, March, 2001.
Russo, M. 2000. Threatened and Endangered Species in Forests of North Carolina: A
Guide to Assist with Forestry Activities. International Paper Company.
Schumm, S.A., 1960. The Shape of Alluvial Channels in Relation to Sediment Type. U.S.
Geological Survey Professional Paper 352-B. U.S. Geological Survey, Washigton,
DC.
Simon, A. 1989. A model of channel response in disturbed alluvial channels. Earth
Surface Processes and Landforms 14(1):11-26.
US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2002. Threatened and Endangered Species in
North Carolina. http://southeast.fws.gov/es/county%20lists.htm.
Williams, G.P., 1978. Bankfull Discharge of Rivers. Water Resources Research
14(6):1141-1154.
Wohl, E.E. 2000. Mountain rivers. Am. Geophys. Union Press, 320 pp.
Wolman, M.G., 1954. A Method of Sampling Course River-Bed Material. Transactions
of American Geophysical Union 35: 951-956.
Wolman, M.G. and L.B. Leopold., 1957. River Floodplains: Some Observations on their
Formation. USGS Professional Paper 282-C. U.S. Geological Survey, Washington,
DC.
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 10-2 Buck Engineering
t
1
1
1
1

101
100
99
98
0 97
> 96
v
w 95
94
93
92
0
Riffle Sink Site - Existing Channel
Riffle
Sink Site - Existing Channel
4 0.76 99.24
7 0.58 99.42
9 0.55 99.45
11 0.97 99.03
13 1.41 98.59
14 1.69 98.31
15 2.48 97.52
16 3.87 96.13
17 4.47 95.53
18 5.45 94.55
19 6.86 93.14
20 6.98 93.02
21 7.13 92.87
22 7.06 92.94
23 7.14 92.86
24 7.25 92.75
25 7.2 92.8
26 7.18 92.82
27 7.2 92.8
28 7.13 92.87
93.02
92.99
92.97
f 92.95
93.02
92.66
92.5
92.48
93.02
93.46
93.58
93.8
96.7
97.38
98.7
98.88

95.59
98.7 NEW
??55
M7: ? ?.;.?r,?.?t'?:t b?k X?v;L?l i ?J •Y+.r1 S 1' `?..1,.`.??id
53.3 ;(-; Ction area 2.5 d mean
21.7 width 24.8 wet P
3.1 d max 2.2 h' d radi
6.2 bank ht 8.9 wr'd ratio r
29.5 Mflood prone area 1.4 ent ratio, -

0.0 velocity (fl/sec)
0.0 dI char e rate, Q.(cfs)
0.00 shear stress Ibs/ft s q)
0.00 shear velocity 'ft/sec)
0.000 unit,stream power (lbs/tUsec)
0.00 F`.oudd number
0.0 frCtion factor u/u`
" threshold rain size fntn
pl,?;
27 rrlea5ured D84 (mm
28.2 relative 'rou hriess 11.1 fric. factor
0.000 Mannin 'ss'n from channel material
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Width from River Left to Right (ft)

Riffle Sink Site - Existing Channel
103
101
99
x
C
0 97
a?
w 95
93
91
0
Riffle
Sink Site - Existing Channel
I
98.35 4.65 "8 i
98.42 95.35 98.42
97.98
97.49
96.83 52.8 x'section`area' " 2.9 cl-m'( nn
96.09 18.4 width 21.7 wet P
95.16 3.6 d max` 2.4 h 2d radi
94.24 6.7 b?nk ht 6.4 kd?rati0
93.05 67.0 W.•flood rove area-. 3.6 ant.ratio,
92.8
92.08 u. ..
91.82 0.0 veioci ° ft/sec x ?
,
91.76 0.0 _
discharge rate, Q (cfss) "
91.94 0.00 shear stress Ibs/ft s
92.08 0.00 shear velocity ft/sec)
92.15 0.000 unif'stream older lbs/ft/sec)
92.13 0.00 Froude number
92.16 0.0 friction factor uV
9208 . 0.0 threshold rain size mm);. ,.
91.96
91.87 8 ,t4i rt1 .. 5i it %> ' i ?1'.
91.85 27 measured b84: mm ,
92.08 33.0 relative `rou hriess 11 5 fric: factor
93.07 0.000 Mannino's n from channel material' .
93.85
97.58
97.74
98.41
98.56
98.86
99.07
5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Width from River Left to Right (ft)

n

n
n
L

C) °)
- o
°
C9 0 o
---- ----- ----

J 40
a
°
o0
_ -.- ---- ---- ---: 0 0
.D
0

?f 75
p
a
a
-0
o
0
.27' 0
- _'
- -
------
----

i
o
>
o
- °o U m

E

a)
O
N

C ?

co
7
r
I -
O a)
a
>
U

V
I
N ---
W
O C)

77

E 04
E o N
T
c
w
N
N ? u
i o
o
cn i i
j-- N

o co n
Z a) a) (D r?
l N U) 0
CL

0
0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0
0 0 O
O
O O
O O O O O O O
W f? M O It M O
N O O
ue
JaUI ua 0Ja L tc)

yl
J
;
d u

C LO LO r-- mN OO - pct O cl 0 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
W a N (n -q - r4 m - ?v (O?C6 ?.-O 6000 0 0 0 0 0

N
O m LO
N LO
N
V
(D
00
(O
N
N
U-)
V'
O
N
W
Lo
(ND
N
N
00
v
(D
a) j j
O O
E
if o 0 0 O N M v M 01 r N M to O N V U
U
a a)
_U
a)
C t ?
m (D
M 0 co N .- N V' (D 00 O N M V ? m N 000 LO (ND N O O
cc) fa
f- N D O 0 0 (
D N M ?.., N O

r-
'
p 5E
'c 'c "c 'c c
N N c
>>> > > > > > N
(0 (O (9 (D f
O (
N f
N N N N
n 1]
-0
y
2 `
4) d 'C (0 y N `
`
N
4
rn rn rn`v?rn rn rn rn o .
O
o Q 7 7 7 7
O o p O O 2
n
d
d
C C u?
f0

• a? a? u?
c c 7 `1 a
'._. 4= -
a) a)
a) a) a) E E w a) N a)
) (/
(/
) `
w =J
- a) a)
(D a)
e ? d ? .o
E N a) 0
-0
(? `? ? a
gu
? `
`
7
w w
o
8o
°
m co f0
P 2)
E
p ma
? a
i
a) U
a
i
U U
8 ))
(D
(n (A
• a) E E
L,
>
4 E CD
Z
E
> a
) a)
> > > a)
>

F

0 a) U
0
o
O O
__

75 0

O
O

4 0
CL
.0 o

o

. CL 8
m

m m
L

- -7 0 co

70 -' - -_'-- o

a)
E
p
v

1 (?
c - 1 --I U N
c4 E M
U •

n t

1
O
{

O

to

to

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O
O
O O
O O
) c O
o f-- O O O
w to V' O
M Co O (D
N
co

Q

u8 4i'9uid;u8 OJa d

it If 4t IF
it *k 4 4 4 4t Twu
c
p
N
N
N
Cl)
N
h
O)
r
U

O
0
C'4

ci1)

V

O

O

?

O

N

M

V

w

m
00

N
0

M
(D

N
CN

M
04

'q'
O

00
O
(D

O c

U
E
p 0 0
tn
N
E
a)
m
m
ix
C cli
) ?
N
o
r
N
'7
(O
w
7
O
M
?
m 00
, 0 CO N
W
,
N' 4,t
0 W d
f0
p 0 O O N V (
O e- N M tn ,-. O
N
N H
?

'O _0 'c _0 'C
N N N N N a) N N N
> > > > > > > > >
N N N N
0 n n
N N N N N Y
7 N N N I mo c4 I9 m f` N N N (2 N .
?
?
?
? O
C a
I c0 a) () a) a) 0) 0) O rn o) rn 0) O
all pp
QQ
pp
pp
U U U U >_=
0 0 0 0 0
U .
-.
c4 a ?
w c c c E E m N
0 E a) m
_ co (D 014
? E2
`'=' t?nvmcacacc E•??m `°`°E(Da)
Ec?c ? (Dw888c0 ?'m-- WU)i?m
>
i?l
> E E
E

E
>
? a
i m
> > >
a )
el
91 -- L- -L J LJI

I

?I
i

F

CIS

_ O U
O
_ p
O
a o
O
.
- U

-
Cl. N
O

'
! O >
.. C )
I _ T ?
E N
o
p
-- U o
:. .:. __ .. ....
1T
N
E2
cn

.13
? 5
- a m p
Y 40 V1 V
C .
_.
_
U)
?

C O

- --40
o
N

(D

a
1

-

-

LO

p

N

c

o a) E co
N
N - m
a d
- i
; -
-
ui
0

c C) N L o
00

o
Z
--
i - N Q Z

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O
00 - O (D Q
O O r
- (D LX ) ? C O N m
UB U JGUi d;Ua 3Ja d

0 M r W N Cl O O N O
Cl)
(N
p Cl)
- N - N V' cc) 00 c" (O N N ? d• O N a00
LO
10 N N ? U
E
p O O O N M t (D rn r• r.
CN
V)
e- O
N O
V-
E

0) N
(0
O (ND
p co ?
N
N
?
(D
00
r
N
M
V
`t
a CO Cl O
to N
(D N 04 O
'T a
N ? O C) F F - (
b ) ? N M tn r N Z

°c ?-a _0 -?
> > > > > > > > »
2 2 A N NN N N .y
(?

7
C
>
ow N N coo W
N N N m N N m (` N
O 1] M 1] aaaa a

__>>>
o
a
p o 0 0 D o
c
2 e e
t rn rnrnrnrnrnrnrn
°D
N
c c c E E o 8 8 8
? E a? a? o 0 0 0 0
an n? a 0
?
o `? .
r-
Z m?? v`
i
m
`'_trl 2
E2 m ??? 10?0E0
D > E p
p
N N U U U D N-- E E V N N

-
0 L"
L E E
> a,
E o
E
51 > (D W
j j > >
0

N
U
m
Ic
7
3 (n
C ?
0 C Q
L
.
m
C3) LL
M
rn
ICI
x

M
N 00
O N
Cl)
I?
W
u') Oa
N
w_
Q
0
ca
rn
r ?
w
a
H
0
to
- 11 0
o M aD co
M M N N N N
(13) UOIJUAOIH

chi C14
kn
N
000
It
O
- In
N
V ! N '.0 00 -+ r)
u
z PP..a a 0 a ? a a ?
3 x
a P?-I x ?4 0 a
o o a o m o o
? r
no d a -

w

Oll
It 00
00 N
In 00
C ? N
t- ?0
00 ?O
O? N
O ?O
M N
O
vi 10 Io r r 00 06 00 (7N 1.0 110
r.. - ?n Uj C

V

II II II II II
?r. bb
Cl
CQ 5
PO
r tl-
In Wl
all C?
ONi (71

M M 01 01
r 00 00
00 00
N N N N
N N t
N - C, ll?
N

If)
II
x
U
N
7
'D :
C
7 C Q
co
0) m LLL
0
0
a
H
4
0
C`7

LO
N
?I
wx
oa
0
N
w

o

c?

0
Ln

a I
a
U
C
^? M Vl Vl N
C
oo N to
W
?? II ?? II II ?
caste
??QQa
b
a
O M M t` 0 LO
M M N N N N N
(;j) UOIjenaj3
M

N W?o
) as
10 It
00 011 ?o
O a,
vl 00
O

O l?
N O?
-+ r
0 01 00
0 Vl
0
0

z o ° 0 go 0 0 3 o o o
H W
? O
4
a F [- H H r c
n °i c
Z 1Q,

l

i

m

p
o
o
?
am
Q:: ,4n c
, ?

(7, N r ? "I. - n C. rn ONO v ID ?o
M
u -It kn I i o; Qi O 00 00 t-- r t- ?0

V
r r
??
rn_ rn
o, a,
00 00 ?6 ?6
ON rn rn rn
[? N O

PEBBLE COUNT DATA SHEET

7

SITE OR PROJECT: Elk Shoals
REACH/LOCATION: UT #1
DATE COLLECTED: 2/20/2004
FIELD COLLECTION BY: Hutton, Wadsworth, Glickauf
DATA ENTERED BY: Glickauf
SEDIMENT ANALYSIS DATA SHEET
P ARTICLE CLA SS Reach Summary Riffle Summary Pool S ummary
MATERIAL PARTICLE SIZE (mm) Riffle Pool Total Class % % Cum Class % %Cum Class % %Cum SIZE (mm)
Silt/Clay <.063 ' - 9,0 - 2 6.0 , 15.00 15.00 15.00 15.00 15.00 15.00 15.00 0.063
is Ytt?tt1.t
t'L t'Yti ti t'L'
? Very Fine .063-.125
8.0
1.0
9.00
9.00
24.00
13.33
28.33
2.50
17.50
0.125
,
ct •s1'ttst Fine .125-25 6.0 6.0 12.00 12.00 36.00 10.00 38.33 15.00 32.50 0.25
S A N D Medium 25-50 2.0 2.0 4.00 4.00 40.00 3.33 41.67 5.00 37.50 0.50
1 L
t t t t t t yy ff,, L'
t'L'tLtttit L'
'
'
"
'
Coarse
.50-1.0
1.0
5.0
8.00
6.00
46.00
1.87
43.33
12.50
50.00
1.0
t•L>
i
titit
lLtii
....... t ti t t; Very Coarse 1.0-2.0 3.0 3.00 3.00 49.00 43.33 7.50 57.50 2.0

O Very Fine 2.0-2.8 1,0 1.00 1.00 50.00 43.33 2.50 60.00 2.8
HO Very Fine 2.8-4.0 1.0 1.00 1.00 51.00 43.33 2.50 62.50 4.0
Fine 4.0-5.6 9,0 9.00 9.00 60.00 43.33 22.50 85.00 5.6
Fine 5.6-8.0 3,0 3.00 3.00 63.00 5.00 48.33 85.00 8.0

GRAVEL Medium 8.0-11.0 TO 1.0 8.00 8.00 71.00 11.67 60.00 2.50 87.50 11.0
Medium 11.0-16.0 9,0: 3.0 12.00 12.00 8100 15.00 75.00 7.50 95.00 16.0
Coarse 16 - 22.8 7.0 1.0 8.00 8.00 91.00 11.67 86.67 2.50 97.50 22.6

( Coarse 22.6 - 32 4.0 1.0 5.00 5.00 96.00 6.67 93.33 2.50 100.00 32

4 Very Coarse 32 - 45 4. Q 4.00 4.00 100.00 5.87 100.00 100.00 45
QW
? nI Very Coarse 45 - 84 100,00 100.00 100.00 64
Small 64 - 90 100.00 100.00 100.00 90
Small 90 - 128 100.00 100.00 100.00 128
COBBLE t Large 128 - 180 100.00 100.00 100.00 180
O Large 180 - 256 100.00 100.00 100.00 256
Small 256 - 362 100.00 100.00 100.00 362
BOULDER Small 362 - 512 100.00 100.00 100.00 512
Medium 512-1024 100.00 100.00 100.00 1024
Large-Very Large 1024-2048 100.00 100.00 100.00 2040
BEDROCK Bedrock' > 2048 100.00 100.0 100.00
> 2048
60.00 40.00 100.00 100 100 100 100
Channel materials
d16 #WA
d35 0.24 mm
d50 2.80mm
d84 16.83mm
d95 23.43mm

i
i
aaui=l ;uaoJad ani;eInwno
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 o O O o
?- O m r- O M V CO N - O
c
a?

c ?
U >
a_ N
E
m
U U
1

it
i

(O IT N O 00 (D N O
;uaaed sselO
- ?1S
1Sp
C?
o! 0(
C',
9
?O` O
9
9s,?
O? "k-
00 `00
?9
SA E
S? E
C0 N
9 ?
`'9 m
9g, Cc,
c'm
09 `9!
Ott 02! a
O(o O?
`9.1 `9S
O•
O's !S
oc,`0c1
O•
p` !
O
S
S?•
c" `n9
90•`o.

1

Pavement/Subpavement Analysis
SITE OR PROJECT: Elk Shoals UT 1
REACH/LOCATION: X-2
DATE COLLECTED: 20-Feb-04
FIELD COLLECTION BY: Heath, John H., Steve G.
LAB ANALYSIS BY: Mike R.
LARGEST SUBPAVEMENT: 43 mm
SEDIMENT ANALYSIS DATA SHEET
Pavement Subpavement
MATERIAL PARTICLE SIZE(mm) 100 ct Bucket (g) Bucket(g)
Silt / Clay < .062 ?.0
•;Ct'CUtt't Y+
s'r>•t'i'ltYl'+ Very Fine .062-.125 22.0
itt>>?ttt+
t t•'YYYi t•'t'1'+
s s t{s ;r.;rtir:
Fine
125-25
120.5
SAND Medium .25- 50 488:0'.
Yt t•'t t'•'i'L Yt
i t Yt.'t'L'i

,st t l't't;lrr+
Coarse
.50-1.0

415,0
t t.•....... 1i;-It. Very Coarse 1.0-2.0
'
529.0

O Very Fine 2.0-2.8
479,0
n
't?
Very Fine
2.6.4.0
241,0
Fine 4.0-5.6 7.0 264.0
Fine 5.6.8.0 13.5 266.0

GRAVEL Medium 8.0-11.0 50.5 342,0
Medium 11.0-16.0 95.5 340.0
00 Coarse 16.0.22.6 113.0 429.5
? Coarse 22.6-32 405.0 489.0 -
0
'4 Very Coarse 32-45 121.0 503.0
06N
c Very Coarse 45 - 64 48.0
Small 84 - 90
COBBLE Small 90 - 128
Large 128 - 180
O Large 180 - 256
Small 256 - 362
BOULDER Small 362-512
Medium 512-1024
Large - Very Large 1024 - 2048
BEDROCK Bedrock >2048
Totals: 0.00 805.50 4983
Paveme nt - bucket Subpav ement
Class % /C.. Class % %Cum SIZE (mm)
0.00 0.1 0.14 0.063
0.00 0.4 0.58 0.125
0.00 2.4 3.00 0.25
0.00 9.8 12.79 0.50
0.00 8.3 21.12 1.0
0.00 10,6 31.74 2.0
0.00 9.6 41.35 2.8
0.00 4.8 46.19 4.0
0.87 0.87 5.3 51.49 5.6
1.68 2.55 5.3 56.82 8.0
6.27 8.81 6,9 63.69 11.0
11.86 20.137 6,8 70.51 16
14.03 34.70 8.6 79.13 22.6
5018 84.98 9.8 88.94 32
15.02 100.00 10.1 99.04 45
100.00 1.0 100.00 64
100.00 0,0 100.00 90
100.00 0.0 100.00 128
100.00 0.0 100.00 18o
100.00 0.0 100.00 256
100.00 0.0 100.00 362
100.00 0.0 100.00 512
100.00 0.0 100.00 1024
100.00 0,0 100.00 2048
100.00 0,0 100.00 >2048
100 100 100 100
Channel materials Channel m aterials
D,e =
D35 =
D. =
De, =
Ds5 = 14.03mm
22.66mm
25.46mm
31.82mm
40.67mm D„ =
D3s =
D5a =
Ds, =
Ds5 = 0.69mm
2.27mm
515mm
27.27mm
39.80mm

i
i
i
i
i
i
0
0

o
-D

Q
Cn d

r =
dC
G
Y >
V V ?
N cn
.C =
Y_ E
W >
m
a
W Iu83JGd OAIILInwno
0
0
0
0
0
r
O
O
r
E
E
C
is
t
F-
d
C
CD
m
v
R
a
0

N
O
M
rn
n
x
U
7
U 7 i
C
3 C >? Q
C0 > LL
w
w
x
N
H
O
O
N
O
O
cn
O
700
0
ODhCOt()?MN?
N N N N N N N N
O? 0 0 0 0 0 0
(13) UOI;BAOI'1
O O ? O ? ONi N '? M vii
O p ,_, ? N -- O p "" O
Y
p 0
a. 0
(a O
{a O
o. m
0 0
a.
rv? 0
a
v
? O
a
3
v
?
3 O
a O
a, O
rs. W
o O
a O
a O
w
z 0 0 0 0 a 0 a 0
1
1
4
o
o
?
0
?
0
0
0
lr
9
00 1v?
? ' (4f
O'S. 1%?
?,1 KF
['?'
11? frj
ti iY?
60 00
'7' ?)
%1
tom'..
rr ? rNr y?v " L cVI) S

v7

'^ N

v; N

to

^ 01
N
c? V)
N
ao N
O
0; M
N
o N
M
Q1 M
c*
0, N

o;
N
° I-
?O
OG OO
N
00 N
00
I- ?

I-- Q\
^-?
Vl "t
kn
Vl m

Vl ,D
N
v;

M ?
?--? N
wx
w
CH
N l? O N
II II II II II
6e
w
ON CN
? o
N N O0 OO
N N N N
rn rn rn rn
Vl N M N
ON O C,, O
N
O
M
rn

m
U

-0 p
c
7 >(D Q
" ca CL
0) M > LL
1
O

0 1, I

5;
- q
C) O
r+

1
O
c.
C)
I- CO U) `T CO N
N N N N N N N
0) 0) CD CD 0) 0) 0)
(13) UOIJUAala
N
00
t
00 N
r-
In
N
M

00
O
M
N
O
0 ?D
0 vl
? I?
-+
N ?O
N
'? ?
O M
O
O

o
a
o 114
?
v
3
a
a
v
a
`xl`
a
o
a
z o a M o 3 ,? H o o 0 p 0 ? 0

N r? '? tcy N
c N N
tr C`t
t i?
O ? W ... ?` ? t i

L c k.
N
7 ?O
M
- 00
V1
0 ?D
N
i ?o
IT 'D
O
; 00
00
0 N
00
00 N
'D
0
00 N ?O 00
r 0 O ON C 0 0

, ?# x tr ?? i b r cfa' ',
t-
7 N
N
II rII?
W x
W

O (? N 7 M
00 N .-.
II II II II II
W
00 00
O O
?6 \6
kr??
00 N
? ?
M M N N
rn rn ON
M 00 M O
O wi

n

n
H
1

PEBBLE COUNT DATA SHEET
SITE OR PROJECT: Elk Shoals
REACH/LOCATION: UT #2
DATE COLLECTED: 2/2012004
FIELD COLLECTION BY: Hutton, Wadsworth, Glickauf
DATA ENTERED BY: Glickauf
SEDIMENT ANALYSIS DATA SHEET
P ARTICLE CLA SS Reach Summary Riffle Summary Pool S ummary
MATERIAL PARTICLE SIZE (mm) Riffle Pool Total Class % Cum Class % % Cum Class % % Cum SIZE (mm)
Silt I Clay <.063 2,0, 1.0 3.00 2.73 2.73 2.86 2.86 2.50 2.50 0.063
Yt t t; ' • 'i't
i'tt't;t L'Y} Y
'
' Very Fine 063-125 213 2.86 2.50 0.125
i;Lltt y
C
t
ttttittti'
itttitti't
Fine
.125-.25
13.0
20.0.
33.00
30.00
32.73
18.57
21.43
50.00
52.50
0.25
S AND Medium 25-50 3.0 4.0 7.00 6.36 39.09 4.29 25.71 10.00 62.50 0.50
,
„t
Coarse
.50 - 1.0
1.0
2,0.
3.00
2.73
41.82
1.43
27.14
5.00
67.50
1.0
Very Coarse 1.0 - 2.0 41.82 27.14 67.50 2.0

O Very Fine 2.0-2.8 2.0 2.00 1.82 43.84 27.14 5.00 72.50 2.8
n
'b
Very Fine
2.8-4.0
1.0
1.0
2.00
1.82
45.45
1.43
28.57
2.50
75.00
4.0
Fine 4.0-5.6 3.0. 3.00 2.73 48.18 28.57 7.50 82.50 5.8
Q Fine 5.6-8.0 1'0 2.0 3.00 2.73 50.91 1.43 30.00 5.00 87.50 8.0
Medium 8.0-11.0 3
0 1
0 4.00 3.64 54.55 4.29 34.29 2.50 90.00 11.0
GRAVEL O Medium 11.0-16.0 ,
12,0 .
2,0 14.00 12.73 67.27 17.14 51.43 5.00 95.00 16.0
D Coarse 16 - 22.6 18.0 1.0 19.00 17.27 84.55 25.71 77.14 2.50 97.50 22.6
R Coarse 22.6 - 32 9.0 1.0 10.00 9.09 93.84 12.86 90.00 2.50 100.00 32

4 Very Coarse 32 - 45 10 3.00 2.73 98.38 4.29 94.29 100.00 45

000
?(n0
'
Very coarse
45-64
4.0 I
4.00
3.64
-
100.00
-
5.71
100.00
100.00
I
64
Small 64 - 90 100.00 100.00 100.00 90
Small 90 - 128 100.00 100.00 100.00 128
COBBLE f Large 128-180 100.00 100.00 100.00 180
O Large 180 - 256 100.00 100.00 100.00 256
Small 256 - 362 100.00 100.00 100.00 362
Small 362 - 512 100.00 100.00 100.00 512
BOULDER
Medium
512 - 1024
100.00
100.00
100.00
1024
Large-Very Large 1024 - 2048 100.00 100.00 100.00 2048
BEDROCK Bedrock' -2048 100.00 100.00 100.00 > 2048
70.00 40.00 110.00 100 100 100 100
Channel materials
d16 0.18mm
d35 0.34mm
d50 7.20mm
d84 22.39mm
d95 38.39mm

aauid;uaoaad ani;eInwno
0
C) 0 0 o 0 o 0 0 0 0 0
C

C Q„
U ?
n. m
E
co
U U
1

CO N o 00 (O N
;uaoaad SSBIO
d.6
OC,
19OC"
B X
c'O! F'0!
`alp ,c'!S
C '9
' ?
IQO ` ?'
,9 'k,
sue,
O? O(9
!
OG `00
?'9
?'9 `
o
C
P, U
9' 0
Cc' N
c'O• '9! m
o
m
o? o?! a
t
'9.1``95
O•
O? ?
0. O?
off,
•
0` O!
0
S•
.0
`x'90 90.
o ?

Pavement/Subpavement Analysis
SITE OR PROJECT: Elk Shoals UT 2
REACH/LOCATION: X-1
DATE COLLECTED: 20-Feb-04
FIELD COLLECTION BY: Heath, John H., Steve G.
LAB ANALYSIS BY: Mike
LARGEST SUBPAVEMENT: 45 mm
SEDIMENT ANALYSIS DATA SHEET
u

C

Pavement Subpavement
MATERIAL PARTICLE SIZE (mm) 100 ct Bucket (g) Bucket (g)
Silt / Clay <.062 - 4.5
t ' •'L ti L'ti
;LLi Lt't't'L"
t,L Lit't'i'it
YC1fYt'i L'yt
Ltitt'i ttiit Very Fine

Fine .062-.125

.125-.25 - 20.5

90.0
SAND Medium 25-50 390,0
'titit'Utili't+
Yi t'L'Stit.''+
Coarse
.50-1.0
621.0
rLltuuv, +
i LL,it
Very Coarse
1.0-2.0
552,0
CIO I
O Very Fine 2.0-2.8 220,0
n
'b
Very Fine
2.8-4.0
219,0
Fine 4.0-5.6 183.0
0 Fine 5.6-8.0 1.0 280.0

GRAVEL Medium 8.0-11.0 3.5 344.0
Medium 11.0-18.0 26.0 867-0
..
QQ Coarse 16.0-22.6 233.0 995.0
o Coarse 22.6-32 3035.0 907.0:
Very Coarse 32-45 845.0 583.0
n O Q? Very Coarse 45 - 64 128.0
Small 64 - 90
COBBLE Small 90- 128
Large 128 - 180
O Large 180 - 256
Small 256-362
BOULDER Small 362 - 512
Medium 512 - 1024
Large - Very Large 1024 - 2048
BEDROCK Bedrock >2048
Totals: 0.00 4143.50 6294
Pavement - bucket
Class % % Cum
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.02 0.02
0.08 0.11
0.63 0.74
5.62 5.36
73.25 79.61
20.39 100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100 100
Channel materials
Dta = 23.84mm
D3e = 26.28mm
Ds, = 28.20mm
Ds, = 34.80mm
D,,= 41.81 mm

N
d
F- E
:3 of
Y >
d
L L M
V 0
N Q N
O
L
cn E
Y_ E
W >
ca
a
a?
Y
U
.? 7
C ?
E C
a)
co E
CL N
>
7 (0
(n a
It
0
0
0
0
T
0
O
0
T
O
O
T
E
E
C
L
d
C
O LL
d
N_
d
v
m
a
T
T
0
r
W IuGDJGd ani;einwno
The EDR-Transaction Screen TM
Map Report
With Toxicheck/® Analysis
Elk Shoals
Old Concord Church Road
Stony Point, NC 28678
Inquiry Number: 01131407.1r
February 18, 2004
°; Environmental
Data
Resources, Inc.
The Standard in
Environmental Risk
Management Information
440 Wheelers Farms Road
Milford, Connecticut 06460
Nationwide Customer Service
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Internet: www.edrnet.com
FORM N L

TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION
PAGE
Toxicheck(Optional) ----------------------------------------------------- TKA
Executive Summary ------------------------------ ----------- ------- ES1
' Overview Map--------------------------------------------------- ------- 3
Map Summary -All Sites------------------------------------------- ------- 4
Map Findings--------------------------------------------------- -------. 6
Orphan Summary ------------------------------------------------ ------- 7
' APPENDICES
' Government Records Searched / Data Currency Tracking Addendum- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - GR-1
n

Thank you for your business.
Please contact EDR at 1-800-352-0050
with any questions or comments.
Disclaimer
Copyright and Trademark Notice
This report contains information obtained from a variety of public and other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED,
IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES INC. SPECIFICALLY
DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OFANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS
FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL EDR BE LIABLE TO
ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE, ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY
LOSS OR DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES.
Entire contents copyright 2003 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole
or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission.
EDR and the edr logos are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein are the
property of their respective owners.
TC01131407.1 r Pagel

TOXICHECK
Subject Property: ELK SHOALS
OLD CONCORD CHURCH ROAD
STONY POINT, NC 28678
Environmental Risk Code: LOW
This code results from the subject property not being listed in those databases as indicated in the Report
and not located within : 1/2 mile of a reported Superfund Site (NPL) ; 1/2 mile of a reported Hazardous
Waste Treatment, Storage or Disposal Facility (RCRIS-TSDF); 1/4 mile of a reported known or suspect
CERCLIS hazardous waste site ; 1/4 mile of a reported known or suspect State Hazardous Waste site
' (SHWS); 1/2 mile of a reported Solid Waste Facility or Landfill (SWF/LF); or 1/8 mile of a site with a
reported Leaking Underground Storage Tank incident (LUST).
This code is based solely on the results of searches of databases comprised of certain governmental records
as made available to EDR and reflected in the attached report. Without further confirmation by completing
the ASTM Standard E-1528 Transaction Screen and/or a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, the
conditions affecting the property are unknown. Further investigation by an environmental professional may
' be appropriate. This Report is not a substitute for a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment conducted
by an environmental professional . Nothing in this Report should be construed to mean that any
environmental remediation is or is not necessary with respect to the subject property.
' If this information is being used for a commercial property transaction, the government records searched
complies with the requirements of the ASTM Standard E-1528 Transaction Screen. However, the ASTM
Standard's requirements are not fulfilled until the Applicant Questionnaire and Site Visit (including an
investigation of the property's historical use) are completed and reviewed. If this information is being used
' for an industrial property transaction, the ASTM Standard requires that a Phase I Environmental Site
Assessment be performed by an environmental professional.

Disclaimer
Copyright and Trademark Notice
This report contains information obtained from a variety of public and other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED,
IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES INC. SPECIFICALLY
DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS
FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL EDR BE LIABLE TO
ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE, ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY
LOSS OR DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES.
Entire contents copyright 2001 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole
or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission.
EDR and the edr logos are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein are the
property of their respective owners.
TC01131407.1r PageTK- I

C

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The EDR-Transaction Screen Map Report is a screening tool which maps sites with potential liability
or existing environmental liabilities. Specified government databases are searched in accordance with
ASTM Standard E 1528-00.
The ASTM E 1528-00 Transaction Screen property due diligence standard consists of four major
components: a government records check, an historical inquiry, an owner/occupant questionnaire, and a
site survey. This report contains the results of the government records search on the target property
and surrounding area in accordance with the government records search requirements of the ASTM E
1528-00 standard.
The results of the government records search in accordance with QUESTIONS 21 and 22 (page 15, E 1528-00)
of the standard indicated the following:
QUESTION 21
Do any of the following Federal government record systems list the property or any property within the
circumference of the area noted below:
National Priorities List (NPL) ? on the property ? Within 1 Mile
CERCLIS List ? on the property ? Within 1/2 Mile
CERCLIS NFRAP List ? on the property ? Within 1/4 Mile
RCRA-CORRACTS Facilities ? on the property ? Within 1 Mile
RCRA-TSD Non-CORRACTS Facilities ? on the property ? Within 1/2 Mile
RCRA LQG Facilities ? on the property ? Within 1/4 Mile
RCRA SQG Facilities ? on the property ? Within 1/4 Mile
ERNS ? on the property
QUESTION 22
Do any of the following state government record systems list the property or any property within the
circumference of the area noted below.
State equivalent to NPL ? on the property ? Within 1 Mile
State equivalent to CERCLIS ? on the property ? Within 1/2 Mile
Solid Waste/Landfill Facilities (SWF/LS) ? on the property ? Within 1/2 Mile
Leaking Underground Storage Tank List (LUST) ? on the property ? Within 1/2 Mile
Underground Storage Tank List (UST) ? on the property ? Within 1/4 Mile
In accordance with Section 5.6 (page 10, E 1528) if the answer is (yes) or unknown, then the user
will have to decide what further action, if any, is appropriate. Answers should be evaluated in light of
' the other information obtained in the transaction screen process. If the user decides no further inquiry is
warranted, the rationale must be documented. If the user decides that further inquiry is warranted, it may
be necessary to contact an environmental professional.
' Additional Research - ASTM Supplemental Government Databases
To provide additional information which may assist in the assessment of other components of the ASTM
E 1528-00 Transaction Screen, EDR also searches government databases not included in Questions 21
and 22 of ASTM E 1528-00. This information may be useful in completing the owner/occupant
questionnaire.
The results of the search of these additional government records indicated affirmative (yes) responses on
' the target property for the following government databases:
No affirmative responses found in the non-ASTM E 1528-00 government databases.

TC01131407.1r EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1

Vvr_mvlCVV IYIAll- V I IJ I1+Uif.IF - ouGR V-1191 I1=1111
VG
/ rr
\90
/ 1\f
i
1

* Target Property
t A Sites at elevations higher than
or equal to the target property
Sites at elevations lower than
the target property
L Coal Gasification Sites
' El National Priority List Sites
E] Landfill Sites
' Dept. Defense Sites
' TARGET PROPERTY: Elk Shoals CUSTOMER: Buck Engineering
ADDRESS: Old Concord Church Road CONTACT: Jessica Rohrach
CITY/STATE/ZIP: Stony Point NC 28678 INQUIRY #: 01131407.1 r
LAT/LONG: 35.8482 / 81.0817 DATE: February 18, 2004 4:13 pm
' - Copyright <U 203 ED R, Inc. ro 2003 GDT, Inc. Re 1. 07/2003. All Rights Reserved.
0 1/4 1/2 1 Mlles
Oil & Gas pipelines Hazardous Substance
Federal Wetlands Disposal Sites

MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
Target Distance Total
Database Property (Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted
FEDERAL ASTM STANDARD
NPL 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
Proposed NPL 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
CERCLIS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
CERC-NFRAP 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
CORRACTS 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
RCRIS-TSD 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
RCRIS Lg. Quan. Gen. 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
RCRIS Sm. Quan. Gen. 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
ERNS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
STATE ASTM STANDARD
State Haz. Waste 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
State Landfill 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
LUST 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
UST 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
OLI 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
INDIAN UST 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
VCP 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
FEDERAL ASTM SUPPLEMENTAL
Delisted NPL 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
FINDS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
HMIRS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
MILTS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
MINES TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
NPL Liens TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
PADS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
US BROWNFIELDS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
DOD 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
RAATS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
TRIS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
TSCA TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
SSTS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
FTTS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
STATE OR LOCAL ASTM SUPPLEMENTAL
NC HSDS 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
AST TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
LUST TRUST 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
DRYCLEANERS 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
IMD TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
EDR PROPRIETARY HISTORICAL DATABASES
Coal Gas 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
TC01131407.1 r Page 4

J

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
To maintain currency of the following federal and state databases, EDR contacts the appropriate governmental agency
on a monthly or quarterly basis, as required.
Elapsed ASTM days: Provides confirmation that this EDR report meets or exceeds the 90-day updating requirement
of the ASTM standard.
FEDERAL ASTM STANDARD RECORDS
NPL: National Priority List
Source: EPA
Telephone: N/A
National Priorities List (Superfund). The NPL is a subset of CERCLIS and identifies over 1,200 sites for priority
cleanup under the Superfund Program. NPL sites may encompass relatively large areas. As such, EDR provides polygon
coverage for over 1,000 NPL site boundaries produced by EPA's Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center
(EPIC) and regional EPA offices.
Date of Government Version: 10/21/03
Date Made Active at EDR: 12/08/03
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 11/03/03
Elapsed ASTM days: 35
Date of Last EDR Contact: 11/03/03
NPL Site Boundaries
Sources:
EPA's Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC)
Telephone: [phone]
EPA Region 1
Telephone [phone]
EPA Region 3
Telephone [phone]
EPA Region 4
Telephone [phone]
Proposed NPL: Proposed National Priority List Sites
Source: EPA
Telephone: N/A
Date of Government Version: 10/14/03
Date Made Active at EDR: 12/08/03
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
EPA Region 6
Telephone: [phone]
EPA Region 8
Telephone: [phone]
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 12/01/03
Elapsed ASTM days: 7
Date of Last EDR Contact: 11/03/03
CERCLIS: Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
CERCLIS contains data on potentially hazardous waste sites that have been reported to the USEPA by states, municipalities,
private companies and private persons, pursuant to Section 103 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation,
and Liability Act (CERCLA). CERCLIS contains sites which are either proposed to or on the National Priorities
List (NPL) and sites which are in the screening and assessment phase for possible inclusion on the NPL.
Date of Government Version: 11/17/03
Date Made Active at EDR: 02/02/04
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 12/22/03
Elapsed ASTM days: 42
Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/22/03
CERCLIS-NFRAP: CERCLIS No Further Remedial Action Planned
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
As of February 1995, CERCLIS sites designated "No Further Remedial Action Planned" (NFRAP) have been removed
from CERCLIS. NFRAP sites may be sites where, following an initial investigation, no contamination was found,
contamination was removed quickly without the need for the site to be placed on the NPL, or the contamination
was not serious enough to require Federal Superfund action or NPL consideration. EPA has removed approximately
25,000 NFRAP sites to lift the unintended barriers to the redevelopment of these properties and has archived them
' as historical records so EPA does not needlessly repeat the investigations in the future. This policy change is
part of the EPA's Brownfields Redevelopment Program to help cities, states, private investors and affected citizens
to promote economic redevelopment of unproductive urban sites.

TC01131407.1r Page GR-1

fl
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: 11/17/03
Date Made Active at EDR: 02/02/04
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 12/22/03
Elapsed ASTM days: 42
Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/22/03
' CORRACTS: Corrective Action Report
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
CORRACTS identifies hazardous waste handlers with RCRA corrective action activity.
n
Date of Government Version: 12/18/03
Date Made Active at EDR: 02/02/04
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 12/26/03
Elapsed ASTM days: 38
Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/08/03

RCRIS: Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System. RCRIS includes selective information on sites which generate,
transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA). Conditionally exempt small quantity generators (CESQGs): generate less than 100 kg of hazardous
waste, or less than 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste per month. Small quantity generators (SQGs): generate between
100 kg and 1,000 kg of hazardous waste per month. Large quantity generators (LQGs): generate over 1,000 kilograms
(kg) of hazardous waste, or over 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste per month. Transporters are individuals or
entities that move hazardous waste from the generator off-site to a facility that can recycle, treat, store, or
dispose of the waste. TSDFs treat, store, or dispose of the waste.
Date of Government Version: 01/12/04 Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 01/19/04
Date Made Active at EDR: 02/10/04 Elapsed ASTM days: 22
Database Release Frequency: Varies Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/19/04
ERNS: Emergency Response Notification System
Source: National Response Center, United States Coast Guard
Telephone: [phone]
Emergency Response Notification System. ERNS records and stores information on reported releases of oil and hazardous
substances.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/02 Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 01/27/03
Date Made Active at EDR: 02/03/03 Elapsed ASTM days: 7
Database Release Frequency: Annually Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/26/04
FEDERAL ASTM SUPPLEMENTAL RECORDS
BRS: Biennial Reporting System
Source: EPA/NTIS
Telephone: [phone]
The Biennial Reporting System is a national system administered by the EPA that collects data on the generation
and management of hazardous waste. BRS captures detailed data from two groups: Large Quantity Generators (LQG)
and Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities.
Date of Government Version: 12/01/01
Database Release Frequency: Biennially
Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/16/03
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/15/04
DELISTED NPL: National Priority List Deletions
Source: EPA
Telephone: N/A
The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) establishes the criteria that the
EPA uses to delete sites from the NPL. In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425.(e), sites may be deleted from the
NPL where no further response is appropriate.
TC01131407.1r Page GR-2
1

n
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: 10/21/03
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact: 11/03/03
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/02/04
FINDS: Facility Index System/Facility Identification Initiative Program Summary Report
Source: EPA
' Telephone: N/A
Facility Index System. FINDS contains both facility information and 'pointers' to other sources that contain more
detail. EDR includes the following FINDS databases in this report: PCS (Permit Compliance System), AIRS (Aerometric
Information Retrieval System), DOCKET (Enforcement Docket used to manage and track information on civil judicial
' enforcement cases for all environmental statutes), FURS (Federal Underground Injection Control), C-DOCKET (Criminal
Docket System used to track criminal enforcement actions for all environmental statutes), FFIS (Federal Facilities
Information System), STATE (State Environmental Laws and Statutes), and PADS (PCB Activity Data System).

Date of Government Version: 10/23/03
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/06/04
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/05/04
L

HMIRS: Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System
Source: U.S. Department of Transportation
Telephone: [phone]
Hazardous Materials Incident Report System. HMIRS contains hazardous material spill incidents reported to DOT.
Date of Government Version: 12/18/03
Database Release Frequency: Annually
MLTS: Material Licensing Tracking System
Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Telephone: [phone]
MLTS is maintained by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and contains a list of approximately 8,100 sites which
possess or use radioactive materials and which are subject to NRC licensing requirements. To maintain currency,
EDR contacts the Agency on a quarterly basis.
Date of Government Version: 10/16/03
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
MINES: Mines Master Index File
Source: Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration
Telephone: [phone]
Date of Government Version: 11 /25/03
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/19/04
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/19/04
Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/06/04
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/05/04
Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/29/03
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/29/04
NPL LIENS: Federal Superfund Liens
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Federal Superfund Liens. Under the authority granted the USEPA by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation
' and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, the USEPA has the authority to file liens against real property in order
to recover remedial action expenditures or when the property owner receives notification of potential liability.
USEPA compiles a listing of filed notices of Superfund Liens.

Date of Government Version: 10/15/91
Database Release Frequency: No Update Planned
Date of Last EDR Contact: 11/21/03
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/23/04

n

PADS: PCB Activity Database System
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
PCB Activity Database. PADS Identifies generators, transporters, commercial storers and/or brokers and disposers
of PCB's who are required to notify the EPA of such activities.
Date of Government Version: 09/30/03
Database Release Frequency: Annually
Date of Last EDR Contact: 11/12/03
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/09/04
TC01131407.1r Page GR-3

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
DOD: Department of Defense Sites
Source: USGS
Telephone: [phone]
This data set consists of federally owned or administered lands, administered by the Department of Defense, that
have any area equal to or greater than 640 acres of the United States, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
Date of Government Version: 10/01/03
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
Date of Last EDR Contact: 11/12/03
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/09/04
' STORMWATER: Storm Water General Permits
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
A listing of all facilities with Storm Water General Permits.
Date of Government Version: N/A Date of Last EDR Contact: N/A
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
US BROWNFIELDS: A Listing of Brownfields Sites
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
' Telephone: [phone]
Included in the listing are brownfields properties addresses by Cooperative Agreement Recipients and brownfields
properties addressed by Targeted Brownfields Assessments. Targeted Brownfields Assessments-EPA's Targeted Brownfields
Assessments (TBA) program is designed to help states, tribes, and municipalities--especially those without EPA
Brownfields Assessment Demonstration Pilots--minimize the uncertainties of contamination often associated with
' brownfields. Under the TBA program, EPA provides funding and/or technical assistance for environmental assessments
at brownfields sites throughout the country. Targeted Brownfields Assessments supplement and work with other efforts
under EPA's Brownfields Initiative to promote cleanup and redevelopment of Brownfields. Cooperative Agreement
Recipients-States, political subdivisions, territories, and Indian tribes become BCRLF cooperative agreement recipients
when they enter into BCRLF cooperative agreements with the U.S. EPA. EPA selects BCRLF cooperative agreement recipients
based on a proposal and application process. BCRLF cooperative agreement recipients must use EPA funds provided
through BCRLF cooperative agreement for specified brownfields-related cleanup activities.
Date of Government Version: 07/15/03 Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/17/03
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/15/04
RMP: Risk Management Plans
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
When Congress passed the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, it required EPA to publish regulations and guidance
for chemical accident prevention at facilities using extremely hazardous substances. The Risk Management Program
Rule (RMP Rule) was written to implement Section 112(r) of these amendments. The rule, which built upon existing
industry codes and standards, requires companies of all sizes that use certain flammable and toxic substances
to develop a Risk Management Program, which includes a(n): Hazard assessment that details the potential effects
of an accidental release, an accident history of the last five years, and an evaluation of worst-case and alternative
accidental releases; Prevention program that includes safety precautions and maintenance, monitoring, and employee
training measures; and Emergency response program that spells out emergency health care, employee training measures
' and procedures for informing the public and response agencies (e.g the fire department) should an accident occur.

Date of Government Version: N/A
Database Release Frequency: N/A
Date of Last EDR Contact: N/A
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
RAATS: RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
RCRA Administration Action Tracking System. RAATS contains records based on enforcement actions issued under RCRA
pertaining to major violators and includes administrative and civil actions brought by the EPA. For administration
actions after September 30, 1995, data entry in the RAATS database was discontinued. EPA will retain a copy of
the database for historical records. It was necessary to terminate RAATS because a decrease in agency resources
made it impossible to continue to update the information contained in the database.
TC01131407.1r Page GR-4
1

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED l DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: 04/17/95
Database Release Frequency: No Update Planned
Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/08/03
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/08104
TRIS: Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System
Source: EPA
' Telephone: [phone]
Toxic Release Inventory System. TRIS identifies facilities which release toxic chemicals to the air, water and
land in reportable quantities under SARA Title III Section 313.

Date of Government Version: 12/31/01
Database Release Frequency: Annually
Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/22/03
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/22/04

G
TSCA: Toxic Substances Control Act
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Toxic Substances Control Act. TSCA identifies manufacturers and importers of chemical substances included on the
TSCA Chemical Substance Inventory list. It includes data on the production volume of these substances by plant
site.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/02
Database Release Frequency: Every 4 Years
Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/08/03
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/08/04
FTTS INSP: FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act)
' Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]

1

Date of Government Version: 10/16/03 Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/22/03
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/22/04
SSTS: Section 7 Tracking Systems
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Section 7 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, as amended (92 Stat. 829) requires all
registered pesticide-producing establishments to submit a report to the Environmental Protection Agency by March
1st each year. Each establishment must report the types and amounts of pesticides, active ingredients and devices
being produced, and those having been produced and sold or distributed in the past year.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/01 Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/19/04
Database Release Frequency: Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/19/04
FTTS: FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act)
Source: EPA/Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances
Telephone: [phone]
FTTS tracks administrative cases and pesticide enforcement actions and compliance activities related to FIFRA,
TSCA and EPCRA (Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act). To maintain currency, EDR contacts the
Agency on a quarterly basis.
Date of Government Version: 10/16/03 Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/22/03
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/22/04
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ASTM STANDARD RECORDS
SHWS: Inactive Hazardous Sites Inventory
Source: Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
State Hazardous Waste Sites. State hazardous waste site records are the states' equivalent to CERCLIS. These sites
may or may not already be listed on the federal CERCLIS list. Priority sites planned for cleanup using state funds
(state equivalent of Superfund) are identified along with sites where cleanup will be paid for by potentially
responsible parties. Available information varies by state.
TC01131407.1 r Page GR-5
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: 11/04/03
Date Made Active at EDR: 12/10/03
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 11/04/03
Elapsed ASTM days: 36
Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/16/04
' SWF/LF: List of Solid Waste Facilities
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Solid Waste Facilities/Landfill Sites. SWF/LF type records typically contain an inventory of solid waste disposal
facilities or landfills in a particular state. Depending on the state, these may be active or inactive facilities
' or open dumps that failed to meet RCRA Subtitle D Section 4004 criteria for solid waste landfills or disposal
sites.
Date of Government Version: 10/27/03
Date Made Active at EDR: 11/14/03
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 10/27/03
Elapsed ASTM days: 18
Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/26/04
LUST: Incidents Management Database
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Leaking Underground Storage Tank Incident Reports. LUST records contain an inventory of reported leaking underground
storage tank incidents. Not all states maintain these records, and the information stored varies by state.
Date of Government Version: 12/05/03
Date Made Active at EDR: 12/30/03
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 12/08/03
Elapsed ASTM days: 22
Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/08/03
UST: Petroleum Underground Storage Tank Database
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Registered Underground Storage Tanks. UST's are regulated under Subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) and must be registered with the state department responsible for administering the UST program. Available
information varies by state program.
Date of Government Version: 07/18/03
Date Made Active at EDR: 09/19/03
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
OLI: Old Landfill Inventory
Source: Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Date of Government Version: 11/04/03
Date Made Active at EDR: 11/26/03
Database Release Frequency: Varies
VCP: Responsible Party Voluntary Action Sites
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Date of Government Version: 01/21/04
Date Made Active at EDR: 02/11/04
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
INDIAN UST: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
Source: EPA Region 4
Telephone: [phone]
Date of Government Version: 10/22/03
Date Made Active at EDR: 01/09/04
Database Release Frequency: Varies
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 09/08/03
Elapsed ASTM days: 11
Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/24/03
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 11/04/03
Elapsed ASTM days: 22
Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/26/04
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 01/21/04
Elapsed ASTM days: 21
Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/13/04
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 12/19/03
Elapsed ASTM days: 21
Date of Last EDR Contact: 11/24/03
TC01131407.1r Page GR-6

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ASTM SUPPLEMENTAL RECORDS
HSDS: Hazardous Substance Disposal Site
Source: North Carolina Center for Geographic Information and Analysis
Telephone: [phone]
Locations of uncontrolled and unregulated hazardous waste sites. The file includes sites on the National Priority
List as well as those on the state priority list.
Date of Government Version: 06/21/95
Database Release Frequency: Biennially
Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/01/03
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/01/04
AST: AST Database
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Facilities with aboveground storage tanks that have a capacity greater than 21,000 gallons.
Date of Government Version: 01/09/04
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/19/04
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/19/04
LUST TRUST: State Trust Fund Database
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
This database contains information about claims against the State Trust Funds for reimbursements for expenses
incurred while remediating Leaking USTs.
Date of Government Version: 11/07/03
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
Date of Last EDR Contact: 11/12/03
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/09/04
' DRYCLEANERS: Drycleaning Sites
Source: Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Potential and known drycleaning sites, active and abandoned, that the Drycleaning Solvent Cleanup Program has
knowledge of and entered into this database.

Date of Government Version: 01/22/04
Database Release Frequency: Varies
Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/22/04
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/19/04
IMD: Incident Management Database
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Groundwater and/or soil contamination incidents
Date of Government Version: 01/23/04
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/26/04
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/26/04
EDR PROPRIETARY HISTORICAL DATABASES

Former Manufactured Gas (Coal Gas) Sites: The existence and location of Coal Gas sites is provided exclusively to
EDR by Real Property Scan, Inc. ©Copyright 1993 Real Property Scan, Inc. For a technical description of the types
of hazards which may be found at such sites, contact your EDR customer service representative.
Disclaimer Provided by Real Property Scan, Inc.
The information contained in this report has predominantly been obtained from publicly available sources produced by entities
other than Real Property Scan. While reasonable steps have been taken to insure the accuracy of this report, Real Property
Scan does not guarantee the accuracy of this report. Any liability on the part of Real Property Scan is strictly limited to a refund
of the amount paid. No claim is made for the actual existence of toxins at any site. This report does not constitute a legal
opinion.
TC01131407.1 r Page GR-7
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
BROWNFIELDS DATABASES
' Brownfields: Brownfields Projects Inventory
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
A brownfield site is an abandoned, idled, or underused property where the threat of environmental contamination
' has hindered its redevelopment. All of the sites in the inventory are working toward a brownfield agreement for
cleanup and liabitliy control.
Date of Government Version: 09/30/03
Database Release Frequency: Varies
VCP: Responsible Party Voluntary Action Sites
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Date of Government Version: 01/21/04
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
INST CONTROL: No Further Action Sites With Land Use Restrictions Monitoring
Source: Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Date of Government Version: 10/17/03
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact: 11/07/03
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/02/04
Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/13/04
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/24/04
Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/16/04
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/12/04
US BROWNFIELDS: A Listing of Brownfields Sites
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Included in the listing are brownfields properties addresses by Cooperative Agreement Recipients and brownfields
properties addressed by Targeted Brownfields Assessments. Targeted Brownfields Assessments-EPA's Targeted Brownfields
Assessments (TBA) program is designed to help states, tribes, and municipalities-especially those without EPA
Brownfields Assessment Demonstration Pilots--minimize the uncertainties of contamination often associated with
brownfields. Under the TBA program, EPA provides funding and/or technical assistance for environmental assessments
at brownfields sites throughout the country. Targeted Brownfields Assessments supplement and work with other efforts
under EPA's Brownfields Initiative to promote cleanup and redevelopment of brownfields. Cooperative Agreement
Recipients-States, political subdivisions, territories, and Indian tribes become BCRLF cooperative agreement recipients
when they enter into BCRLF cooperative agreements with the U.S. EPA. EPA selects BCRLF cooperative agreement recipients
based on a proposal and application process. BCRLF cooperative agreement recipients must use EPA funds provided
through BCRLF cooperative agreement for specified brownfields-related cleanup activities.
Date of Government Version: N/A Date of Last EDR Contact: N/A
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
OTHER DATABASE(S
Depending on the geographic area covered by this report, the data provided in these specialty databases may or may not be
complete. For example, the existence of wetlands information data in a specific report does not mean that all wetlands in the
area covered by the report are included. Moreover, the absence of any reported wetlands information does not necessarily
mean that wetlands do not exist in the area covered by the report.
Flood Zone Data: This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR in 1999 from the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Data depicts 100-year and 500-year flood zones as defined by FEMA.
NWI: National Wetlands Inventory. This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR
in 2002 from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
TC01131407.1 r Page GR-8

Riffle Sink Site - Historic Channel
101
100
99
98
x
0 97
> 96
m
W 95
94
93
92
0
Riffle
Sink Site - Historic Channel

1 2.73
4 2.89
97.27
97.11 no-IV, M-1 10-04- W-00"NO(M
3.47 2.89 275.0
96.53 9771
7 3.22 96.78
9 3
94 96
06
.
11 4.44 .
95.56 53.2 -section area 2.3 d mean
13 5.16 94.84 22.7 idth. 24.4 wet P
14 5.48 94.52 3.5 d max` : 2.2 h d'radi
15 6.05 93.95 4.1 bank ht 9.7 w/d ratio
16 6.31 93.69 275.0 WIflood prone area 12.1 ent ratio
17 6.6 93.4
18 6
7 3
93
.
19 6.9 .
93.1 0.0 veftit' ftlsec
20 6.92 93.08 0.0 discharge rate, Q cfs)
21 6.97 93.03 0.00 $har stress Ibs/ft s
22 6.94 93.06 0.00 ?h ar velocit '' fUsec
23 7 93 0.000 unit stream power (11b8/ft/sqc)
24 6.9 93.1 0.00 Frcude number
93.1
93.35 0.0 friction factor u/u".
06 thF?shold: rainsi?e•. mm.
• 93.71

r 94.28
94.99
27 measured D84'(mm),.
:
96.28 27.0 relative roughness =. 11.0 fric, factor
96.96 0.000 Mannin 's n from channel material
. 97.33
97.39
5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Width from River Left to Right (ft)

3
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
Riffle Sink Site - Historic Channel
Riffle
Sink Site - Historic Channel
r
1.88 . elevation '
98.12 I-..babefull, t.
2.07 97.93 97.78 9
2.19 97.81
2.32 97.68
2.4 97.6
2.88 97.12
3.51 96.49
4 96
5.14 94.86
5.63 94.37
s..
rpea.. >: cr`n : I MB
(CIO f ?. n":? :'i

52.8 r: ?
area, ?. K =,4r
2.4 d mean
21.7 width 24.2 wet P
3.9 d'max 2.2 h yd radi
3.8 b" k ht 8.9 Wld ratio
230.0 l vvAbcd prone area _ 10.6 OnLi atio, ,:
ft
5.84 94.16
5.93 94.07
6.05 93.95
6.04 93.96
6.02 93.98
5.87 94.13
6.05 93.95
6.15 93.85
6.09 93.91
0.0 VOloci fvsec ._'
0.0 tlfischiar b rate, Q cfs
0.00 6-6 stress ((lb's/ft s
0.00 shear velocity fVsec
0.000 unit stream power (lb§/f1Jsec)
0.00 F-roude number`'
0.0 friction factor u/u*
8 A threshold rain size 'mm
5.76 94.24
4.84 95.16 pri
4 96.26 27 r ieosured D84 mm
97.15 27.9 releti? e rou hness or
.27 97.73 0.000 Mannin 's n from channel material
98.02
i 98.24
98.46
98.51
1
98.5
of NGYIH t:q,Y
Reference Reach Database
U-we,
Stream ID 54
Stream Name West Branch of Tibbs Run
Contact Grant Ginn
Organization
Email [e-mail]
Date Surveyed 2/13/2001;
-------------
Location
River Basin !Cape Fear
8-digit HUC !03030003
Location West of Coleridge, NC

Reach Just upstream (West) of Tommy Cox
Description !Rd (SR 2655)

State ;NC
Latitude (decimal degrees)
Longitude (decimal degrees)
County Randolph
Physio. Region ,Piedmont (coast, Piedmont, mtns)
Ecoregion
Public/Private jV
Right of Entry ? (check for yes)
USGS Quad 'Ramseur/Erec'
LeiLani Paugh, NCDOT
[phone]
[e-mail]
Hydraulics
Bankfull Discharge 88.0 (cfs)
Bankfull Velocity 4.3 (ft/ s)
Manning's n
Method of Calculating
Manning's n
Channel Materials
Percent Silt/Clay 13%
Percent Sand 47%
Percent Gravel 37%
Percent Cobble 1%!
Percent Boulder 0W
Percent Bedrock 2%
D16 0.136' (mm)
D35 _0.24; (mm)
D50 0.7: (mm)
D84 12'; (mm)
D95 221i (mm)
Note: 2,049 mm corresponds to BEDROCK
Data Standards
No survey data provided ? No material analysis provided ?
No pattern data provided ? Data do not align with regional curve ?
No profile data provided ? No location information provided ?
No hydraulics data provided ?
Description
Rosgen Stream Type ES Soils Type
Reach Length 240 (ft) BEHI Score
Watershed Drainage Area 1.08 (sq. mi) Avg Water Surface Slope 0.0037'.
Watershed % Impervious Valley Slope 0.0043
Valley Type - (C- colluvial or A- alluvial) Valley Length - 205 (ft)
--
R
Land Use
(U- urban or R- rural)
Sinuosity
1.20
------ _
-- - - - -- DWQ Index No. 17-Z2-8
Site Description
DWQ Reference Reach
? (check for yes)
DWQ Benthic Monitoring ? (check for yes)
Description of any
Associated Wetlands
Description of
Vegetative Communities
Watershed Description

f
04 NGYIH C_I
4 9•,?
y4** Reference Reach Database
*Rhrw YRlµcv
Stream ID 54
Stream Name West Branch of Tibbs Run
LeiLani Paugh, NCDOT
[phone]
[e-mail]
Dimension Ratios Mean Minimum Maximum
Bankfull Width: Depth Ratio 4.57 4.57 4.57
Entrenchment Ratio 28.13 28.13 28.13
Bank Height Ratio 1.52' 1.52 1.52
Pool width: Bankfull width* 1.17' 1.17 1.17
Max pool depth: Bankfull depth 1.19 1.19 ' _ 1 19'
Mean pool depth: Bankfull depth* 0.90 ` 0.90i 0 .90,
Pool area: Riffle area* 1.00; 1.00 1.00'.
* Ratio denominators are the riffle mean bankfull value.
Pattern Ratios Mean Minimum Maximum
Pool to pool Spacing: Bkfl width 6.091 4.38, 7.81i
Meander length ratio 7.60 7.601 7.60;
Radius of curvature ratio 4.27' 4.27 4.27

Meander width ratio - - - -
7.29
_ 7_.29!
7.291
.
Profile Ratios Mean
Pool slope: Avg WS slope - 0 11'
Riffle slope: Avg WS slope
Glide slope: Avg WS slope 1.11
Run slope: Avg WS slope 1.92,
Minimum
--2.03
- - 1 11
1.92
Maximum
- O AL
2.03'.
1.11'
1.92'

Location
River Basin (Yadkin-Pee Dee
8-digit HUC !03040103
Location 'Southeast of Salisbury, NC
Reach --- - -- --
Description
State INC
Latitude J; (decimal degrees)
Longitude (decimal degrees)
County Rowan
Physio. Region lPiedmont (coast, Piedmont, mtns)
Ecoregion
Public/Private V
Right of Entry El (check for yes)
USGS Quad Southmont
Channel Materials
Percent Silt/Clay
- -
Percent Sand -- -
Percent Gravel

Percent Cobble ---
Percent Boulder
Percent Bedrock
D16 --- -----' (mm)
D35 - --., (mm)
D50 (mm)
D84 -- --- (mm)
D95 (mm)
Note: 2,049 mm corresponds to BEDROCK
Of NGY II, C,?A
LeiLani Paugh, NCDOT
Reference Reach Database [phone]
[e-mail]
?PHrw 7Rlµc?
Data Standards
No survey data provided 0 No material analysis provided
No pattern data provided ? Data do not align with regional curve ?
No profile data provided ? No location information provided
No hydraulics data provided ?
Description
Rosgen Stream Type E4/5 Soils Type
Reach Length (ft) BEHI Score
Watershed Drainage Area 1.50 (sq. mi) Avg Water Surface Slope 0.0014
Watershed % Impervious Valley Slope - 0.0025
Valley Type (C- colluvial or A- alluvial)
Valley Length (ft)
. ---------------
Land Use (U- urban or R- rural) Sinuosity 1.80
- - ---- - -
Site Description DWQ Index No.
-- - --- -
DWQ Reference Reach ? (check for yes)
DWQ Benthic Monitoring ? (check for yes)
Description of any
Associated Wetlands
Description of - -- --- -
Vegetative Communities
Watershed Description
t
?nf NGYfN C,+?'
Y
Reference Reach Database
y o
Y4 AST
Stream ID
Stream Name Tributary to Cane Creek
LeiLani Paugh, NCDOT
[phone]
I pa ug [e-mail]. us
Dimension Ratios Mean Minimum Maximum
Bankfull Width: Depth Ratio 5.05 5.05 5.05
Entrenchment Ratio 23.47 23.47 23.47
Bank Height Ratio 1.20, 1.20
- - 1.20
Pool width: Bankfull width* 1.10' 1.10' 1AG
Max pool depth: Bankfull depth* 1.45 1.45 1.45:
Mean pool depth: Bankfull depth* -
Pool area: Riffle area*
* Ratio denominators are the riffle mean bankfull value.
Pattern Ratios Mean Minimum Maximum

Pool to pool Spacing: Bkfl width r - -

5.25

5.25

5.25j
------
Meander length ratio -- - 7.23 7.23 - - - 7.231
Radius of curvature ratio ` - _2.50 2.50 - 2.50'
Meander width ratio 8.52' `-- - 8.52 8.52!
Profile Ratios Mean Minimum Maximum
Pool slope: Avg WS slope 0.2Y 0.29 0 29',
Riffle slope: Avg WS slope 1.36, 1.361 1.36 Glide slope: Avg WS slope -
Run slope: Avg WS slope

t
t

t

COMPARISON TABLE - Elk Shoals Site
STREAM: Elk Shoals Creek
2/24/2004
Existing Conditions
Model Proposed Conditions Model

River Station
Profile Discharge
cfs WSEL
ft. WSEL
ft. (Prop.WSEL-
Ext. WSEL
3029.44 10 1000 925.77 926.55 0.78
3029.44 50 1700 926.58 927.13 0.55
3029.44 100 2100 926.87 927.38 0.51
3029.44 Bankfull 270 924.02 925.24 1.22

2914.01 10 1000 925.58 926.21 0.63
2914.01 50 1700 926.22 926.77 0.55
2914.01 100 2100 926.45 927.03 0.58
2914.01 Bankfull 270 924.03 924.74 0.71

2844.6 10 1000 925.55 925.72 0.17
2844.6 50 1700 926.22 926.31 0.09
2844.6 100 2100 926.46 926.56 0.10
2844.6 Bankfull 270 923.97 924.34 0.37

2697.57 10 1000 925.02 925.39 0.37
2697.57 50 1700 925.77 925.88 0.11
2697.57 100 2100 925.95 926.07 0.12
2697.57 Bankfull 270 922.92 924.16 1.24

2606.48 10 1000 924.16 924.75 0.59
2606.48 50 1700 924.78 925.28 0.50
2606.48 100 2100 925.12 925.56 0.44
2606.48 Bankfull 270 921.72 923.59 1.87

2484.28 10 1000 924.07 924.30 0.23
2484.28 50 1700 924.59 924.85 0.26
2484.28 100 2100 924.83 925.10 0.27
2484.28 Bankfull 270 920.96 923.36 2.40

2314.28 10 1000 923.33 923.93 0.60
2314.28 50 1700 923.88 924.47 0.59
2314.28 100 2100 924.31 924.73 0.42
2314.28 Bankfull 270 918.97 923.10 4.13

2228.23 10 1000 921.91 923.55 1.64
2228.23 50 1700 923.20 924.16 0.96
2228.23 100 2100 923.37 924.45 1.08
2228.23 Bankfull 270 919.02 922.56 3.54

2115.12 10 1000 922.11 923.32 1.21
2115.12 50 1700 923.16 923.84 0.68
2115.12 100 2100 923.50 924.11 0.61
2115.12 Bankfull 270 919.06 922.40 3.34

u

COMPARISON TABLE - Elk Shoals Site
STREAM: Elk Shoals Creek
2/24/2004
Existing Conditions
Model Proposed Conditions Model

River Station
Profile Discharge
cfs WSEL
ft. WSEL
ft. (Prop.WSEL-
Ext. WSEL
1945.29 10 1000 921.66 922.86 1.20
1945.29 50 1700 922.90 923.49 0.59
1945.29 100 2100 923.28 923.78 0.50
1945.29 Bankfull 270 918.84 921.04 2.20

1793.79 10 1000 920.74 922.64 1.90
1793.79 50 1700 922.21 923.17 0.96
1793.79 100 2100 923.00 923.44 0.44
1793.79 Bankfull 270 917.65 921.30 3.65

1680.24 10 1000 920.47 922.54 2.07
1680.24 50 1700 922.03 923.03 1.00
1680.24 100 2100 922.84 923.29 0.45
1680.24 Bankfull 270 916.56 921.11 4.55

1537.42 10 1000 920.57 921.90 1.33
1537.42 50 1700 921.99 922.34 0.35
1537.42 100 2100 922.81 922.79 -0.02
1537.42 Bankfull 270 916.63 920.07 3.44

1388.64 10 1000 920.24 921.69 1.45
1388.64 50 1700 921.91 922.29 0.38
1388.64 100 2100 922.74 922.67 -0.07
1388.64 Bankfull 270 916.37 920.4 4.03

1320.96 10 1000 920.05 921.33 1.28
1320.96 50 1700 921.71 921.96 0.25
1320.96 100 2100 922.6 922.4 -0.20
1320.96 Bankfull 270 916.26 919.97 3.71

1195.5 10 1000 918.97 921.17 2.20
1195.5 50 1700 921.3 921.62 0.32
1195.5 100 2100 922.48 922.1 -0.38
1195.5 Bankfull 270 915.75 920.1 4.35

1109.34 10 1000 918.59 920.21 1.62
1109.34 50 1700 921.28 920.74 -0.54
1109.34 100 2100 922.45 921.95 -0.50
1109.34 Bankfull 270 915.46 917.13 1.67

1056.5 10 1000 918.37 917.85 -0.52
1056.5 50 1700 921.31 920.83 -0.48
1056.5 100 2100 922.45 921.95 -0.50
1056.5 Bankfull 270 915.1 915.1 0.00

e e e e? e e e ae e e e e e e i e e e ¦?
P
Ul
0 Dt
0

o L
Ln
T
r
o o

O
Z
A N
N
0
Q o

D
?
o s
0 0

n
y
C

x
°x
k
Y

b
y ?
m
pD y
2
mm Z cm"
c O
O
w c)
A a =m
o n ym n
0
?c O
a m C?
N
vO
O
A W
n
2
2
D
v
W
O
x
v
Fn
'o
az
P
?r
z ,
z
a
b
0
ir
w w
Q
rig
lie c?
"c
'S O
??7
y

017
V
[\? 0M
00
4m
i8
z
?
z
N
O
O
y
co? N"
w
O
0 n
n
D-4 -A WN-
-i oo D
w m p
. N
nxcpm?mvmO
SON ?Z?gomZ?r m
nm?z?v??aomc?mwm
cn
??-<y-ir0 OV?
_
DmZ-??cnrD- o0
) p ?C O? So rOm m
-XI ??zO-<-mI m
o p ?
zmm
?OX>Kcn nm. cnc
v°Ap o°C-) z> ;ON
mo-<c --I=IVDm
v 0m-Z z o0
Zvpo DZ
s DCIr pm
OZD LO
=i 2 p
m9
a
b
n
0
z
r?
?v
® C?r9
C?
cn
pF?-I
^z
I'1
i?
3
1?

R:\03R\Design\Pl-\0173_RS_psh_ IA. dgn
00 00
? ? ? r r r
Z o m m m m O m O S 2 o 0 O O
x o? 0K O v 0 O O G7 O 0<
O O O 0 $
cn z? A y 0 z
71 m vI m
cn cn cn y
m m m
3 n C?
n ?
m T ® T OO F/
Fri I I r? .C?
® (?
z ?-0?
p m p D D O O
0 'n
z ?- Cf) m T ° r F?
'D m Z m D z m n X
o z a m z lI' z Cn Z
C)
m C/' p m 0 z m o
r v < m m r
m m cn ? r- Co
m ? -mi n Cf)
Cl) z
mm -u z
m
< C8j
o 0
z z D o
Z m w
O m
nD --IID ?rn0 W Z O c
Z ? r 0 z O
M O co o
m (n ° D? ci°°D
? ;U M K m z z X z
OW KO O I -i? O Z m
D ;p v>
m CCr/r)I 0 Z 5>N
?> U)Or- D EX> m 0 o
m 0 U) -i -n o -I m
Z n
° U) m m ?n 03
0 D (7
x O -0 -A m 0
m z 0 mo
Cl) °-n m m D
D
Z
p X m
? Fn
N cn w cn m D N
(n a o m ° T m
?, rn 1 z 0 o
?0 m ?D D <
m
m z r m
57<
m m
o m L7
C Z C
D (f) A -i v y
0m m -a
0K --I my m-i? Z
C x N m C) G) °O --1 03 9
0--I 09 MmU) C 0 '"
D
= z rC
m 00
cn E Z C?
X M C C7
Ocn Z
m D;v m ?m00u) -n ? 0 zM zz ® ?a
imA ?0?m D XD m Z
WX> ZDDm?CO 0 0F
yo- r-{SDU) Cn Z D Co
-1z°oz ncnr?rcn =m Z =m
o 7; z
N m O M U) 0 D C/) o r-
o m m m
m ? cA? <
or I m
?zX o ,? cn
G) a cn
0=D r` X mZ ?Z m D
mIF OZCnC? cn -? zCD Z
°0 ?C z T-`
Zmm mO?An?m C7 C ?? Z
7C?m r??ICCX m ON
?D -TI oo ac gm
m D Q) c) C7 m °Om y m s zt
X ?Cz -n s
oN o m m o 9,p a?
ow -ZI c ?o? v
m ? aw m 0?
m m C/) wY.3 zz
v' n z
0
? m tA
? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? m r y
m ? 0

? -? C) D m
T`
? O

= ? O ?I C> oo rJ ?
i

? a
y
o m
m
o
z
?
?

Z

a a
r
:z X
I
I

W -0 o s `^ -o on m A 3 N _ q, v qn -o ?n C7 ' _"o c ° ?C' [l v" v ° C a
CL O O p ?. 0 O O O O p O O y,• rn rn < c O rt? O O O O O O .?
p ca <Q ?^ N 3 3 -p -1 p 3 m m p 'D S 'O 'O 'D 'O 'C 'C S N
CD 0 La ° 7O o 0 3' ° m D o 3 m (e o o a U° c°e CD c c T o s o 0 0 ?' -a -a
m c i 'a o ° 0 B. o 3 3 m? m o'° T T n n -" 3 °° «, m °? ° o O
0 CD
?° fn to 07 O C CD O
U3 0 3 O S p °_ O S C? r 3 N (D I?VVI
< Q S ?' .?' p o " -On G -i G `Oi, O O C °. ` 3 ` 7r 7r (D
:s Qn
p a O ° m -Oi, p• 3• rt 3 [D1 D 3 `G 7 `G `< y Q m .n m umi
p = : fQ (p 7G m ^ _« _r r r Q 0. M J (D` p -n N 'n T f? ?y
m CD
CD x [) p 0 m m y rn m 3' 3 3 "' G 'O 7 ^ 7 - C.
(D m
m 1 ^
p n O T M O r 3 S n m
p •? S - t-, (A 0 90 CD
C
m CD
3 771" O O N ?C+
CD M -0 x
7 703. O O
(D m r c`"D o v C7
°- : °-
,I
F II
Oll
?n T;;4Y1 I? ? 1 J ? II,I
4011
I I l i y I I I I I I
I I ? I I I
(n c --c m -( C -I N N -0 -o = r C7 Q O L o = f7 m " -0 -moo ' -0 o m m
to = CD S O p` ° ° (D Q O o 0 I (O p v.' a car 4 7 O I^' O r^' O I^' ?' < 0 0 p z
:3 CD (D -n 7 7 (p In N (o S rt N rt m _ m 'O ?• 'O rt 'O rt -+ (D
3• p_ 0
Q 0" s Q 3
° 7 < o ?? rt < -v o s = o s ` _{ -o -o -o °' p c C7
n Q
r 'O 0 ON O (yD ° rt r 3 O 3 O Q m rt O (D O O o. m O o O a C go
N 3 (p 3 Q M N Q (3D (<D S (D• m m 7 m 3 0 N 0 (CD (1 'm0 M - rt-, .O N N m n W O m
n° ° CD m 3 ?° : s s 3 M Q v s c C s s" - s O :I p_
L, CD " ° m o o 0 o ( N T °o (D O° s o co (0- M a o 0 3 3 0 0; O m;
c;
CD CD CD CD
Q p p -? F CD N O
3 (3p p_ (D 3 S ?v°i O Q 3 N 3 (D Q n
rt Q - N O o C
°° -( o m O o s o o Q c m co
CD CD CL
x : _
(D o n. :
<
o ; t2i ;
3 O p_
• i Y if n
0®m0®Oo®I p©}"®Ge(9tt??s©®O®13 0 o- IEl I II
®is0 O
A
• I i II
I ? ll
?T1 m -o r3:_ -n am -o m N T D 7o D 7o C O 7v p 7o N p 7o p N p
x• X, 0 O X, N Q 0 0 -? 1 0 fD O O •+ 3 S (OD o (D m 3 (D (D OC OM (D (D p m (D (D (D p m m
O m t0 r, 3 -+ O O O O O In p p. p v. u n rn n LA n LA n 0 ^ 0 ^ v ^ 7 In ^
o p d S= n ^ ?^+ D N > m (rtp 3 rt ?. O ?. O (a O ?. O ?. O 3 ?. O c0 O rt (p O
7 3 O C 3 N (? m N fD m m r to ?•. °- 7 d 7 d O 7 p_ 3 O_ 3 " 7 °. 3 d Q 3 p_
1 1 Q m p (D ? p m p o p m p m p m? p (D
to IM, JD °- a 3 a m z `G 14 _ `G O (3D • 3 r ? CD •O?^•?• p C Q- 0 CL 3 °- it d - CL - d d N - °.
T m
Z n r r 3 N Qy CL (D
m o 3 0 0 3. 3 3 m _ _n 0 m --I c CL CL -+ C m -o f O N (D
CL CL c 0 3 `*C QC o 3 > > `° `° r- 'm c n m ( co (°e - co coo o o ° c ' (D o 0
(p (p p O.. : W 3 a CD `G N = O W (D (D N. (p T ((D u, r 3 p rt
m N 3 m -+ (D 3 O y •, ^ O ? N O r r 3 O 0
CL - p_ p_ 3 ` 3 O 3• OS V 3 C O?• OCA 0 (A = ' 3 C Q D O (D r N N O Z N r N
0 m
D OW Q 3 (D !,n p 3 n m 'a OS (D n N CD
Q 3 M Co W a C^"1 a C1 (? 0 3 n° N 0
O p_ O ° p p (D ° S N C (D 0 N
3+ 3 p C
W c3 Q ? r pn O' S N (D S Con O
m T T C
p 3 (D' S C
0
o 0 °- O °- C} Cr W N n O m m O n m
:3 0 (D
(D ?n
o n : m
(D' H v N 7'
'b m
.I ; i ,I ,I ; y i I! I I i I II I II I I ? I
Z Z i R i 1 O r C1 N N }
r C I I ¦x I I I I I I y o
31 I low III ; aeoI I I I I I A
I. IIIII I
N

s 7o

°

o

0 N
Q

°

°-

c <
3

_ O
-?

Q ::E

y-

7 =
(D

m N
j'

o

3- (n
0•

o

fD
fD M
(p

p

to
(D --(
p

o m
o

a

(D n
C

a, "(•I
((D W
p

c

(D
?• W
•3.

m m
a

CL

° 0
C

CL

o
N
rt at!
(Q

°?

0

A n
C n
S

CO

_

M

0
a- =
p

N c

D r

0
0
m
(n
c
°

o
O°_ N ;

a
CI
b o , /
? _
? I I
?? I
I o

Q
J
I
4
?? 14
I

N
C
m
II
(In
C
W
N
C
A
D
mm
c
m
z
G)
z
m
m
Z
m ??-
Z
can
O
Z Z-j
r
O
r
to
O C
3 N° m o n s o o 71 c
3 c 3 X, o m o a O..
3 0 o s 3 c0 ° CO
C
CD
o
o
O ; ; ? : cony
N
y
V 110 [no `Ll
_,

R;\0173R\De,-q.\PI0-\01/3_MS_pnh_e.dgn

?\
\
/
I A
F
m

N
8gp ? ?

\
?
/

/ 0

FLOw? 0Cv
O
v
o ?
n H
?
o9s
F
z

R¢
9i AI
8 $`
°5G; Ir
q- Z w
?° vT
o m
D
D

s

°

9
m

D avjl c
Y

m
D
/ o z
r
D

o <

m
cn
D
p
Ro
Niam ti g?r z

C v
.Z1
O
T
m m>- F c

fR W
Z . w N
m?4m o -
8 m
A 0 d A?i _ C U

m
T
0O1 ? v ?i r? O r
a ~
,
r W
Z
n
Q? ???fl
n?
?+
_
?
R
Z Z
y 0 [ m mM
3 _ ff
ON?B?
LQ
? I m
5?? ..F
° A
M m?
~ =I r
` J

f
N
Fig M
y
0AS
p ?
M m gym`

?
€19 N

BANKFULL

r INNER BERM A
` \
5
m 'r?
224 ? \\ \\
C
G

/
\
\\/
\ INNER BERM
BANKFIILL

N \ \
D
co
?
j\
?
\\,\\/\\ \
0 9

m
_
_ ? ?I

€ p
Z,
m I
®
g
®
m
v
j F
10
E A
A
?
? m
u
N
G: ?
$
??
- / ® 7
m
n

0

OA

01 mg

M.
o0

00 t
Z
//
o

o H

Ao 'D

O
m 0 O 00
OP

0
n
// m
m p p r 0
O o

rt1 ® _ _ TYPICAL POOL SECTION
I
® ,F

D.6' MA% P) ri
Q yy
A
:
a
Ap ® o°$
$ ?
o°° w
an to
zr
?
r

° 0 0
°p
0
U
00 :
0? S
w~

z
2
m
0
z

rwz
gm?? Z
rA ^

a

3/1/2004

y
m0 O 1Y
rL iT?i Mz
F
? ,

p
n $i ° D
f/I Ym m ^'r L
? ?` 8 $ --'I
FC
(yc
S5- oo
L
Z
'o ?
?1
it
I
' Aq
°
N
Cl) 4 CC
(
B
?S
AG
L
$p Z

5 I g ??

?` 8g? I

I Ir ?a

+`
0 € p ?
,-
?
gSQ6 NO;

8m
°
?
(n ln .213 OF
BANKFULL STA
GE
.
i
p QZ(?1y ?n (
$OyZ Vrp Di
; f .. t.'
,..1, \ H
1 Ll
Z i1" Z ?yy Z?
4Z1? 0
C
rtl
SI 0 HYn
O
p
A
? 0 A
2,222%g
n
O
o S my
ODO-1??
ZZZ
m
??i
s C
D
o
m
4 a
m m
g 0 0
3 D S
_0
Ft.

O
°
m
€
G
Z S
>n'

0
Cl)
u
M

-0
?

°
mAm ° O
o
o 4 y
z 1' 0
1 0
m P
" T
?

y 0,
20

F TV

m
2

<py p%, °
gyyg (,7 m
v G1'am
-1
g
o
go??

m ?

0
?o V)

M

II o

I egg
Z
s III F

mC ? h Z

U) a'
m
-4

FLOW

Z
?IT11 '. $yo

F O [

Z
Y 7q Z

Q1
p
+ 1> mC
<
> N W

?z
m

n Z_O
z
C)
0
z
U)

C
n
M
m

0o
°. i

; pow
m
m T
71
m

z°Tm°°ms

I
I Z

5

U!
p

3
o i ttp M M< m
L ?x
?
h M, P:
m g. Z
n a M
Fi o
° D

v BI
m mpoNO cn z
°m 'o
U-l o

z9
M €
e
D F
s
9
0 = C v
g o

>
1
<
an
?
z
m a? Z
r d8
A x"S ?
Z
I mps
w orb„
0
z =
Vl " z
O

z/i/'n A
R:\0173R\Uemgn WLons Vol /a_h5_psn_ar.agn
P `?>P> P y? V papa FyyF'
B?l?
y ?j >> mm

H t Z
CN MA 3° A
y@ @r, L
?
?
?}?R
Q
? ?
?

O

CM
?? BANKFULL STAGE

v ?
Z
L
j??
Tg
rJl Q4 ?v?bPA ?8?2i?m
y
p n-i
+
? N

n
qq @ y?
?
{
f ? a

\?
\ 2 p yy (qqqq?^?
4?ykC?i
N 0
O o
rl ??
O
\ O;
L ?
g
?xy Fs
ro
S ? ? ?m?o
?? Rg om
mn

\ o $ °UV? T`o
m
S
F,'
?x 08

ao
` P
o
PG? ?
y /
/
/
/
W
r-
v

P
/
r
FLO
Y/
T?`
Z m
Z

o ?o?
?
?
° I
?
NN z0
HI g t
v o

gsf^=?

o m s

o
0 o

m
D
?a z
°
omm
a°
0 o0 s
I
x
m
?g? ? m 8
s p
R
R
o s ? A
x

n
F
O 1R -1q BANKFULL STAGE

I

I rr
D ss ZZ 0
bo ?S
???

-04
2 N ?? ?p m
> Z

z

V /
8
o
S
Z
T
? z ga Z ?

a

0 0 Iz?
m
m

5 B
m „
g
?
? ?
y
yp
j0 m
8 I ZZ
mo'm D
°D o-9 C
O
m D
g m
>
a
R
m s
i TT- ?T+
m
mw w
D H -?-r
af
i3F
ftt
n?
T
t
;fig>m???€
o?Fmevy<?:°?> £

i g

P8m R
mm: o°cp?rfn $z
l
s Aw
_
i
H9
a
A ° o
?? ZI 1 8r
og?;?aap??
7v v oXR
z o
m

m >
R ? ?g
pP?g Z

g??_
, y 0
8

C01 "A\Das,gn\Plens\0173_RS_psh_04.dgn
co m
G)7,
zN
0 _
O
Zr
U) C/)
rj)
CD
O+
z

? rt>
/ x
! a t i
it
t
"!1 :c r
! p 1 03
;
} }1, ' l I ? -(7
? ff3
?
T
5 r wl [? ? I .
f11` t 40 r?
i1 6) U? 1 C7

a ? ?'00,?, ?
? a

t,
1
+i3
r
\
J JFyS ?t? ?tly
F ? y
d r.,
r
1 ?t rn 00 rv

l? \
z Tr Z
Z \
1 I4,H P V'\
\' t
1 t 9? ?
\

.
/,
,
C7 , t
\
\ t
t rt
/ ,,
2
zo
m ?? J

'
Cam{ W ?
/,+- t ?
.
t t } •..
'
D -cl 1 f
`j'
fir; t j
17

OD
D -
z o
v
1
C Cf)
r?
\ \ \` - 1

O
6.
w \ t r'
11
V ?, i

Bad 1.,r? ,_ 1 ? r• ,1e- '" ``-?,"? ? 1

E
y r

? tit \ n ?? J', ! w ! h6
h"R

.s 1? Jtt/?, ? ? ? v

1 l i

MA
T CH??NE
7'5
,3
rA

-
23
o
f-
o 00
co (Z
0 z
Z K
nm
Op
z?
cc
0 --q
? >
Ou
z?
U)
D
O
O
0
0
0
a
w
i
COfflA\D-s gn\PI ns\0l 73_RS_ p sh_05.dgn
?;?'t E1 ?. MAT????NESyEF
?1 v
1
1 T4
STA 23+00 0
t
?-? ( 1 t t l r S
7I I { { \
?? I 1 II ?..a P
l l
f1 i ,
!S7 t7
10
I i€
I

}
4
1
S
{
,t
4
?t
a
w
4
1
4
,El
S}
?; 'tt 'i5l t
13 t
O
\\ fit! .?'g,.n k0o 00
6 S? P39
MPG
I
COI A\D-gn\PI-\0173_RS_psh_06.dgn

co C:
v O z
?
M
i
I
! 00
c
f)
?
! f ' i
N C C
7
,? ?
_

z,
t t
1
?
O

?? s
1 g t Z N
C-1

??
t a \
1
i
O

9

47.Po k\1
`, \ c
5
j I i
,
I
7 y
ti 1 I
I
I
A SI,
F
I
° }

t
ti. \ \ 1 F p I?
???
t?
\
??
\ ?J?Cr i 1

\
`1 1 a 1 5 ?} t i i
v
?

\ \ ti i 1 m m c
FZ?z
?(
,'1 I t r
? E
.•

\ \ ?? ? k cf) y
? 2 ?
1
?
• 3 i #?
I
v ZOm

4 C 00

4 4 t I O?D t ;
iA
5 4 { y I
4 { { Z +' ?
? ?v i ? ,
1?
? e
.,1
?
!
`?» N
W
;
s? :
{
1
4
?
1 1 } (
h I
'
f
` v\ 1
'
,
'
4 { i
11 11 F
\ \ 1 M1 A5 { . t
?:?
y \. 1k j I f
..',}
.? r, .,.24

o
Qtvv
?
i

u
y`
^hh'r ... P

^' 1 m, GA f V

r l
r?
1
r
i i
?I

,

m m
z
o ,
C) U
O=
z0
cn D
Ar

C

nD I
-I
O 00
Z +

rn
C?
Z
O
w

;n22nn4
:M -U-gm

W "
(D N W N
O O O ,
O O O O O O
0) N 0
+ I ( t
O
O I O
O I
PI=38+24.61 j
EL=81635' I
I
PI-22+50 00
I
I
,, - EL-922 13 I
' PI=36+8801 I
EL=81835 ?I I
N ?
IL
O F=3711173 O

O
EL=91e.13
O I i O
PI=37+63.90 I 'I . I I
EL=918.17
W N I
00
A

1 N
}
0
-
O
0 PI
38+16,07
'
O

O
EL=917 93
? I I ?
P1=38+43 30 I
:
I
EL-917.79'
,.
I I
l
PI-24+7091
' EL-121.93
N I
II P-24+95 1 ` W
EL-11B 93` \
- t
0 PI=39+10.69 O : O
O EL-915.57' O PI=25*19 91 O

PI=25+6O b0
EL=921.81
PIn39+78 OB

O 0 PI 25+94.87 ,A
EL=919.80' +
O
O
O I O O
PI-4D+28,47 PI-20+29 14 I
I
EL-917.44 EL=D2L81
- .
,
I I i
.1 I
PI=40+70 4B
EL-916 45 I
I PI=26+10.43
'

LL-921 62 O

PI 15+00 0
0
1 t EL-922B1
O
O p1=4
+12 48
EL=J17.44 0
O
PmI +
272940
EL=918:78' I :
.PI=41+5354 I

' I EL017,24'

PI-27+66 37
{
1
PI=41+74 22 : EL=927.82
EL=81430 1
?
N PI-4
+94.90 i 0
+ EL-917.14 t - Im28+03. +

O
I
D O 821.62

?- O
O

.
? _?
I :

?
1?7?1 PI-28+5252
62'
EL=919
I
m 1?,
y
m
PI-42+81.50
' I I
I .
I r
I Z
r
EL 816,92 P- r

PI-42+9176
II
I
N
EL`915 2Q I (O =29x01.4 O I r-
? O O O
O -
-- '
PI=43+2202
'
D O I' O
(yy EL=916.82 PI=29+33.32
I EL=92142
?
??^? : ??
^^

1 : PI 29162.05
EL=B 19 28'
-43+84.76 W PI.29+90.77
EL-918.67' 0 : EL=921
22'
;

O O

1 O
... . PI.30+30149
EL-921.00' ,
PI?4+43.67 I 1 I
EL=914.31' I I

88
PI-30+71 /I
.
E0910 06' .. /
J
1 I
1 I
+ _ PI-45+02.86 + I +
O EL-9166f O PI-31+13.47 O
O O ' EL=920.80' I
1
I
PI=45+44
36 I I
.
EL=918.47' 50600
I EL-92
PI=45+74.41 I I.. 1

A CL`91s 55
N I N /
+
-0
O O

?
+ I
O EL 816 37' O i
EL-9
2
U I
O
O I O O
28.
?I P1332+36
PI 46141 61 ELW 9 82
_ EL=91625`. I -,
I
I PI=32+71 05
PI=-06+77 61
EL-917 22
I=914 27
I
+ I t PI=33+07.63 +
O PI=47+15 00 PI-47+13.62 C)
E1=919 52" W 0
0 EL 915 27 EL=111,11 ' 0 D
I
PJy 7+41 DO PI?7+40.00
EL 914 39 : EL=915.27' TI
'
PI-7+68 00 / PI-47+67.00 PI=33+85.01 I
.I
E1 913 51' EL-914.39'... EL-919.26' r
W PIP33+90.78 N
1
P
D PI=47+94,00 A EL=910
83' I

+ EL=P1
83
'. EL-913.61'
+ .
I :.
+ ..
0 0 O
O PI=48122.00 PI=48e21.00 O
: PI.34+16.50
E1.-91898' O
.
EL`9'. 1.75'. EL=912.83' .
PI?B+49.OD -
E4=911,55':. PI?8+4B:00
EL=911 75'
1'I-8+50 00 PI=3462 A4 L7
EL-91164 1 EL=918.80'
_- -y

A)

I 0

z
C

ro
A
o
PI-34+9917 I A 8
+
D EL-R17 00' I 8
O U _ S v ti?
PI=35+35
B9 w m
- .
EL=918
70 - Z
.

n 8 .?

..
9m
p Z

Z
m

W PI=35+81 34

'
EL-916 50 : x zm

° a ro 'm
m ?t
S
' a x y
(D (D (D O (O W (D (D z
N
O
C)
O
0
O O
O
O

+8
7 i
5
m
In-n4

R:\017 38\Uemgn\I'lens\IOl/J_hb-P1t_no.ogn
t
co
co
N
?W
;. ? W €

O
A
O
O rO "O O p0 ''
O 921.7D O
+ 92B,68
" +
O - Pt=10+14 79 O PI=10+12 13
O EL=92170' O EL"92B 6 4 PI'10+2426
PI'10+90.47 EL-928.60
' EL-920.80' I
Pj?lQ?48 14
' r EL•921.7D PI`10+5588:
EL=928.49'
PI=10+7173
EL-921,53'
P 5
I PI=10+9464
+ EL•92083
I
+
EL=92769
O 7
O PI•t1+173 0 I

: EL=921,53. /

=11+3
P1
I : 29'
EL 192
. g 29'

PI-11+507
2 =11
+4
.84
PI
'
_. EL?B2132 ?. EL=928.21

PI=11+82,74 I PI.11+8030 Iu/
-E EL=920.42'

L
N EL=92741
+
O ?.,
PI-12+14 78 o
PI=12+12 67..
O O EL=920 C6'
EL-921 DT D I

: EL=92T89'
.
:.
PI=12+5
.87
EL=920,67 PI=12+73.37

EL=926.72'. II
PI=12+86 79
(A EL-919,77' CJ

++
07
70:
PL
3 + PI=13+03.35
+
.
1
' EL=927.59
p EL=920.67 O

:.PI^13+43.58
EL92D.44' =1 +51.90
EL=02733
PI-13+71 19 II I D
EL•91954' I z
PI=13+87 26
' I
PI=13+90 81 EL=926 81 I -n
EL=920 24 : I
:..
CD O PI=14+22.62 r
I EL=927:18'.
PI-14+57,81
I
EL-91993 '

... PI=14+55 05
, ( EL=82700
PI=14+6711 . : /

EL?91B 03
-1
I
PI=14,77.27
EL-926,20
(3'1 P1114+96 41 : Ul PI.14+99.49 -
+ - EL-91988 + E4=926.70'
O I O " PI'-15+16.15
O EL=926.51
PI 16+44 88 PI-15+42 15
- EL-8193T
- EL=92595 1
" C Pl-15+6864 PI=15+5814 C
PI=15175 11 _.z 01-15+77.44 EL=925.54 PI=16+77.00.; EL=925.96'. z
EL •918 41
z EL=924.62' PI?15+66 24 - EL-ItM 54 PI=15+56 00
PI'16+i0,50
PI=15+05 56
EL•91B 180'
=

D
0)
pl•15+95.04
EL 923 7D
-? PI=1 +94 5D EL=924 62
Z

+ E?-91B 23' '
,}, + EL•922.76
- EL=B23 70 J?
PI-16410 00 922 79
O pl-16+2350
' ,I EL•Q19 15 PI-:18l2300 O
EL817.31 r EG91823'
C
PI=16+3850. PI-18+3800, Q
EL=91839' EL=91731 PIm1544900 ?
. -i
PI=18{4950
,. EL-915 39 .
EL=915 50,

?r C C
- 81550
D b

N --a
z
Q
9
?
Z
?p
o

an ?~ ?
z
Z .?

A a Z
0
@ r
?Ji z
: d z z
q
q
q?11

Y s
?p
SLt
$mNs z
I
Z
N W 0

t d O O O S

R:\0173R\D..?qn\Plens\0173_RS_psh_-g09.dgn 2/26/03
l0-11
/
N/ I l l l?r
?// III-III III c
I-1.1,I-J, { I-III-
I W=LE1 1=
I=?,;, 711- -III= =1 ? I_
'V co 0
z m °z -II I'- I ITILI I
I El Fl,
. -i IJ-
o X 1=1 I I, r s?? I E
_ l 1
co i o II I I I II 1???,,
om z 1=1?1- '1'(-? ???
I I I=1 I rte.,
c m III „ =I I I_
m
z I I-_ 8
fry
II I I
" ? 1 rr
>o IIIII;
m D - -"=
,u > NO
m?
M m={ V, ;1 I I ?f
A l
W N z
-; 0< a v
° Do
z om A? O I=?.L
i m In m z
C, n ?W m-? r ?.
0 ?m 6> cnx ?I s1
OW %
z? mO ?I11
i
o D F -?,I lY?
M w C/) --A
_
co m z r m C
I I-I
n? W? III m
I
-? rD m? G)
r i` 1
m z0 D°- III ', D
W z0
?z °v 1111=111 i' o ?
M n vD D Z
m C') co -II cn '
z o? =D IIIII
r
m Z? ?? =1 '°'?° Z
r
O z
x o Co E F fj G)
° m z o _F- r i`I
°I 11= =1 1= r,.
z x ?a I r? z
z D mcn
Z> l? I I III 1:7
A
m ?i=1 11= - __
mo
D 1I 11=11I 9 .
c D oI 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 11 ??? t
z U)
N m I I I I I 1?? ?'
r III f?
t
1? Pf
IF'
I-III -'
-1 ?- III=sir
-I
f
c
I
j- CF.1
IIl m
\ aagl?
e"z3 °t
`?lla ?z
LAJ
WETLANDS 1401 GROUP
? ? MAY 0 3 2004
WATER DUALITY SECTION
Sink Property -
Elk Shoals Creek
Restoration Plan
Alexander County, NC
Prepared For:
Restoration Systems, LLC
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 203
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Prepared By:
ry Regency Parkway
8000
Suite 200
Cary, North Carolina 27511
BUCK C
Phona: 919.463.5488
1 N c I N I I R I P: < Fax: [phone]
www.buckengineering.com
March 2004
Sink Property -
Elk Shoals Creek
Restoration Plan
Alexander County, NC
Prepared For:
Restoration Systems, LLC
March 2004
Report Prepared By Buck Engineering PC
Will Harman, PG
Principal In-Charge
Staci Ricks
Hydraulic Engineer
Steve Glickauf
Biologist
C. Heath Wadsworth, PE
Project Manager
John Hutton
Environmental Scientist
Jessica Rohrbach
Biologist
Melissa Carey
CADD Analyst
Executive Summary
The Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek mitigation site is located near the town of Stony
' Point in Alexander County within the Piedmont physiographic province of North
Carolina. The site lies in US Geology Survey (USGS) hydrologic unit 03050101 and
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) sub-basin 03-08-32 of the Catawba
' River Basin. Restoration Systems, LLC proposes to restore 5,168 linear feet of Elk
Shoals Creek and two unnamed tributaries within the project site.
' The site has been degraded by past land management practices including land clearing,
straightening and ditching of streams, row crop production, and livestock production.
Portions of the remaining floodplain are currently in row crow production. Plant
communities identified on the project site were disturbed/maintained land, stream-side
margin, and bottomland hardwood forest. Elk Shoals Creek and the two unnamed
' tributaries on the site are straight, unstable channels that do not have access to their
floodplains during bankfull flow events.
' The design goal for the Sink Property project is to enhance water quality in Elk Shoals
Creek and restore wildlife habitat. This will be accomplished by restoring dimension,
pattern, and profile along Elk Shoals Creek and its tributaries; creating bedform diversity;
planting a natural vegetation buffer; and reconnecting Elk Shoals Creek and its tributaries
' to the floodplain. The proposed restoration practices will result in the restoration of
3,877 feet of Elk Shoals Creek and 1,291 feet of its unnamed tributaries.
' A summary of existing and design stream reach lengths, along with proposed restoration
design approaches, are provided in Table ES-1 below.
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan ii Buck Engineering
I
Table ES-1. Summary of Restoration Activities
Sink Property -Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan
Existing Restored
Reach Length (ft) Length (ft) Restoration Approach
Approximately 700 ft;of
Elk Shoals Creek 3;342 3,877 enhancement at the most upstream
section; the remainder is Rosgen
Priority- I ` Restoration
Approximately 100 ft of Rosgen
Unnamed
412
603 .,Priority -2 Restoration at the most

Tributary _ ,
,.
^ups rea r"Sectiori, tHe.'remaih,d" -is'
Ros' en Priori =1 Restoration,
Ap
roxun4tel
200"ftof Ros
ert
Unnamed
493
688 p
y
g
Triortty 2" Restorationthe most'.
t ,
r
Tributary #2 .
1 ,., a
upsfream'sectiotk the i6 Ifideiis
;,?,. ' :1Zos er`i'Prtor ? 1 Restorat'ion' -
Total ,4;247 5,168 ` 1 ft ofadditional strearii length'
2
>
t 2
? N,
Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan iii Buck Engineering
Table of Contents
1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 1-1
1.1 Project Description ......................................................................................... .. 1-1
1.2 Project Objectives .......................................................................................... .. 1-1
1.3 Watershed Characterization ........................................................................... ..1-3
2 Existing Stream Conditions ................................................................................... ..2-1
2.1 Channel Stability Assessment ........................................................................ ..2-1
2.2 Elk Shoals Creek Existing Conditions ........................................................... .. 2-3
3 Constraints ............................................................................................................. .. 3-1
3.1 Federally Protected Species ........................................................................... ..3-1
3.2 Cultural Resources ......................................................................................... .. 3-4
3.3 Transaction Screen Map Report ..................................................................... .. 3-4
4 Bankfull Stage Verification ................................................................................... .. 4-1
4.1 Bankfull Stage and Discharge ........................................................................ ..4-1
4.2 Bankfull Hydraulic Geometry Relationships (Regional Curves) .................. ..4-1
4.3 Bankfull Verification in the Project Watershed ............................................. ..4-2
5 Stream Restoration Design Criteria Selection ....................................................... .. 5-1
5.1 Upstream Reference Reaches ........................................................................ ..5-1
5.2 Reference Reach Databases ........................................................................... .. 5-5
5.3 Regime Equations .......................................................................................... .. 5-5
5.4 Comparison to Past Projects .......................................................................... .. 5-5
5.5 Design Criteria Selection for Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek ................... .. 5-6
6 Natural Channel Design ......................................................................................... ..6-1
6.1 Design Summary ............................................................................................ ..6-1
6.2 Natural Channel Design ...................................................................................6-1
6.3 Planting Design ................................................................................................ 6-5
7 Sediment Transport Analysis ...................................................................................7-1
7.1 Background ...................................................................................................... 7-1
7.2 Unnamed Tributary Competency Analysis .....................................
7.3 Capacity Analysis ............................................................................................. 7-6
8 Flooding Analyses ................................................................................................... 8-1
9 Monitoring and Evaluation ...................................................................................... 9-1
9.1 Vegetation Monitoring .....................................................................................9-1
9.2 Stream Monitoring ...........................................................................................9-1
9.3 Success Criteria ................................................................................................9-2
9.4 Monitoring Report ........................................................................................... 9-3
10 References .......................................................................................................... 10-1
Appendix 1 Existing Condition Data
Appendix 2 EDR Report
Appendix 3 Reference Reach Data
Appendix 4 Construction Plans (60%)
Appendix 5 HEC-RAS Data
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan iv Buck Engineering

I

List of Figures
Figure 1-1 Project Vicinity Map ................................................................................ 1-2
Figure 1-2 Project Watershed Map ............................................................................ 1-4
Figure 4-1 NC Rural Piedmont Regional Curve with Surveyed Bankfull Cross-
Sectional Areas for Elk Shoals Reaches and Reference Reaches. (Project data po ints
were not used in determining the regression line.) .................................................. 4-3
Figure 4-2 Reference Reach Vicinity Map ................................................................ 4-4
Figure 5-1 Design Criteria Selection Flow Chart ...................................................... 5-1
Figure 5-2 Morphological Measurements and Ratios (Dimension) .......................... 5-2
Figure 5-3 Morphological Measurements and Ratios (Pattern) ................................ 5-3
Figure 5-4 Morphological Measurements and Ratios (Profile) ................................. 5-4
Figure 6-1 Bankfull Pool Depth: Rootwads Versus Vanes ....................................... 6-3
Figure 7-1 Modified Shield's Curve for Grain Diameter of Transported ................. 7-5
Figure 7-2 Stage vs. Stream Power for Elk Shoals Existing Channel ....................... 7-8
Figure 7-3 Stage vs. Stream Power for Elk Shoals Design and Relic Channels....... 7-8
List of Tables
Table 2-1 Conversion of Bank Height Ratio (Degree of Incision) to Adjective
Rankings of Stability (Rosgen, 2001) ......................................................................2-1
Table 2-2 Conversion of Width/Depth Ratios to Adjective Ranking of Stability from
Stability Conditions (Rosgen, 2001) ........................................................................ 2-2
Table 2-3 Existing Condition Parameters for Elk Shoals Creek and Unnamed
Tributaries ................................................................................................................ 2-4
Table 3-1 Species Under Federal Protection in Alexander County ......................... 3-1
Table 4-1 NC Rural Piedmont Curve Equations ......................................................4-2
Table 6-1 Natural Channel Design Parameters for Elk Shoals Creek and Unnamed
Tributaries ................................................................................................................ 6-4
Table 7-1 Boundary Shear Stresses and Stream Power for Existing, Relic, and Design
Conditions in Elk Shoals Creek ............................................................................... 7-7
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan A Buck Engineering
I Introduction
1.1 Project Description
The Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek restoration site is located west of US 64 near Stony
Point in Alexander County, North Carolina (Figure 1-1). The site is located within the
Catawba River Basin (HU 03050101) in the Piedmont physiographic region of North
Carolina. The project watershed size, calculated at the point where Elk Shoals Creek
crosses Old Concord Church Road, is 4.6 square miles (Figure 1-2). Two unnamed
tributaries flow into Elk Shoals Creek within the project limits. The watershed areas for
Unnamed Tributary #1 (UT1) and Unnamed Tributary #2 (UT2) are 0.38 square miles
and 0.5 square miles, respectively.
The site has been degraded by past land management practices including land clearing,
straightening and ditching of streams, row crop production (corn and soybeans), and
livestock production. Portions of the remaining floodplain are currently in row crop
production.
The project site is located in the Elk Shoals Creek floodplain. Local relief within the
project site is approximately 30 feet, with the highest points located along the outer limits
of the Elk Shoals floodplain, and the lowest point located where Elk Shoals Creek crosses
Old Concord Church Road.
Restoration Systems, LLC proposes to restore stream dimension, pattern, and profile to
the site for the purpose of fulfilling stream restoration requirements for the North
Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP).
1.2 Project Objectives
The design goal for the Sink Property project is to enhance water quality in Elk Shoals
Creek and restore wildlife habitat. This will be accomplished by restoring dimension,
pattern, and profile along Elk Shoals Creek; creating bedform diversity; planting a natural
vegetation buffer; and reconnecting Elk Shoals Creek and its tributaries to the floodplain.
The proposed restoration practices will result in the restoration of 3,877 feet of Elk
Shoals Creek and 1,291 feet of its unnamed tributaries.
Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 1-1 Buck Engineering

? JN
\o`y'Me Mfg Rd c9D
01, Payne Rd n c Cl
O ?d
Mc Cl
o?
o Ne??y Rry a d
Liberty Chufch R
011, Sri
c ?
d ? ?a
` so a ?annLn
G O
nt\ YF1Prso??d
O`
x Rd
^(622
N
r`
Qo
CL P
?a
Middle
A
C
v
?P
0
a
G\
O
Gs
Hu
Project Area
rya
C)h O/d cotdG Mary Ln
to"d
Bob erOWn
BP
ah
o c/' 24
yor'se
Figure 1.1. Project Vicinity Map
® Restoration Systems, LLC
1101 Haynes St. Suite 203
Raleigh, NC 27604
3,000 0 3,000 6,000
Feet
?a
d
m
?a ay Rd
?a
90 Taylors
rP
a
F
Ray Rd acleFa`
n ai Rd \`ndseyFa?m Ra
? a
Caleb
?c
G°JC F d o/ado
Pres 1y Gtr Carnell?o
? a
N
a
Westward Rd
v\den Rd -41
Bolick R
?41A
Rd
1 0
o`
`°0 0
C)
GS6p
„mod ?'
1.3 Watershed Characterization
The Sink Property Site is located in the Piedmont physiographic province of North
Carolina within US Geology Survey (USGS) hydrologic unit 03050101 and North
Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) sub-basin 03-08-32 of the Catawba River
' Basin. The Catawba River basin, along with the Broad River basin, forms the headwaters
of the Santee-Cooper River system. This river system begins in the North Carolina Blue
Ridge Mountains, flows south-southeast through the state to Charlotte, and continues
' through South Carolina to the Atlantic Ocean.
The project reach of Elk Shoal Creek is identified as NCDWQ index number 11-73-(0.5).
' The NCDWQ designated Elk Shoal Creek as a Water Supply IV (WS-IV) waterbody and
has assessed the reach as fully supporting its uses. Class WS-IV waters are used as
sources of water supply for drinking, culinary, or food processing purposes in areas
' where the more restrictive WS-I, WS-11, and WS-111 classifications are not feasible. WS-
IV waters are generally located within moderately to highly developed watersheds.
Restrictions associated with the designation include development density rules
throughout the watershed and agricultural best management practice requirements in
critical areas (adjacent to the water supply intake). Elk Shoal Creek is also protected for
secondary recreation, fishing, wildlife, fish and aquatic life propagation and survival, and
agriculture uses.
Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 1-3 Buck Engineering

u

n

t

ti ?r rV
id]
?/w ar
00
2 ,
Watershed - 4.6 mi
too
t II ?. ? t ? i j I, ''3
Project Area h.;??,?? i
q,?II 5 ;
? ??? ? ?--J ? , ? •?? inn` / ? ?? ? ° 1 ` ?,a ?? r ?" - _)
Figure 1.2. Project Watershed Map
Restoration Systems, LLC
1101 Haynes St. Suite 203
Raleigh, NC 27604
2,000 0 2,000 4,000
Feet
iT
2 Existing Stream Conditions
The primary purposes of the existing condition survey are to determine the stability of the
project stream reach and its potential for restoration. This is accomplished through a
quantitative and qualitative investigation of the stream corridor, including channel
dimension, pattern, and profile. This analysis provides information that is used to assess
the potential for restoration. Data collected during the existing condition survey are used
to determine if the stream is moving towards stability or instability and if the cause of
instability is localized or system-wide. Examples of localized instability include removal
of riparian vegetation and/or trampling of the stream banks by livestock or humans.
System-wide instability is often caused by channel incision, which causes head-ward
erosion until stopped by a knick point.
¦ 2.1 Channel Stability Assessment
' Buck Engineering used a modified stream channel stability assessment methodology
developed by Rosgen (2001). The Rosgen method is a field assessment of the following
variables:
1. Stream Channel Condition,
2. Vertical Stability,
' 3. Lateral Stability,
4. Channel Pattern,
5. River Profile and Bed Features,
' 6. Channel Dimension Relations,
7. Stream Channel Scour/Deposition Potential (Sediment Competence), and
8. Channel Evolution.
This field exercise is followed by the evaluation of various channel dimension
relationships (ratios).
Evaluation of the above categories and ratios leads to a determination of a channel's
current state, potential for restoration, and appropriate restoration activities. A
description of each category is provided in the following sections.
2.1.1 Stream Channel Condition Observations
Seven categories are included in this analysis and include: a) riparian vegetation, b)
sediment depositional patterns, c) debris occurrence, d) meander patterns, e) stream
size/stream order, f) flow regime, and g) altered states due to direct disturbance. These
condition categories are determined from field inspection and measurement of stream
channel condition characteristics.
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 2-1 Buck Engineering
I 2.1.2 Vertical Stability - Degradation/Ae2radation
The bank height and entrenchment ratios are measured in the field to determine vertical
stability. The bank height ratio is measured as the ratio of the lowest bank height divided
by a maximum bankfull depth. Table 2-1 shows the relationship between bank height
ratio and vertical stability developed by Rosgen (2001).
Table 2-1 Conversion of Bank Height Ratio (Degree of Incision) to Adjective
Rankings of Stability (Ros en, 2001).
Adjective Stability Rating Bank Height Ratio
Stable (low risk of degradation) 1.0-1.05
Moderately unstable 1.06-1.3
Unstable (hi risk of degradation) 1.3-1.5
Highly unstable > 1.5
The entrenchment ratio (ER) is calculated by dividing the flood-prone width (width
measured at twice the maximum bankf ill depth) by the bankfull width. If the
entrenchment ratio is less than 1.4 (+/- 0.2), the stream is considered entrenched (Rosgen,
1996).
2.1.3 Lateral Stabili
The degree of lateral containment (confinement) and potential lateral accretion are
determined in the field by measuring the meander width ratio and Bank Erosion Hazard
Index (BEHI). The meander width ratio is the meander belt width divided by the
bankfull channel width, and provides insight into channel adjustment processes
depending on stream type and degree of confinement. BEHI ratings can be used to
estimate the annual, lateral streambank erosion rate.
i 2.1.4 Channel Pattern
' Channel pattern is assessed in the field by measuring the meander width ratio (described
above), ratio of radius of curvature to bankfull width, sinuosity, and meander wavelength
ratio (meander wavelength divided by bankf ill width). These dimensionless ratios are
' compared to reference reach data for the same valley and stream type to determine where
channel adjustment has occurred due to instability.
2.1.5 River Profile and Bed Features
A longitudinal profile is created by measuring elevations of the bed, water surface,
I bankfull, and low bank height along the reach. This profile can be used to determine
changes in river slope compared to valley slope, which are sensitive to sediment
transport, competence, and the balance of energy. For example, the removal of large
I woody debris may increase the step/pool spacing and result in excess energy and
subsequent channel degradation.
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 2-1 Buck Engineering

2.1.6 Channel Dimension Relations
The bankfull width/depth ratio (bankfull width divided by mean bankfull depth) provides
an indication of departure from reference reach conditions and relates to channel
instability. A greater width/depth ratio compared to reference conditions may indicate
accelerated stream bank erosion, excessive sediment deposition, stream flow changes,
and alteration of channel shape (e.g., from channelization). A smaller width/depth ratio
compared to reference conditions may indicate channel incision and down-cutting. Both
increases and decreases in width/depth ratio can indicate evolutionary shifts in stream
type (i.e., transition of one stream type to another). Table 2-2 shows the relationship
between the degree of width/depth ratio increase and channel stability developed by
Rosgen (2001).
Table 2-2 Conversion of Width/Depth Ratios to Adjective Ranking of Stability
from Stability Conditions (Rosgen, 2001).
Stability Rating Ratio of Project to Reference
Width/De th
Very stable 1.0
Stable 1.0 - 1.2
Moderately unstable 1.21-1.4
Unstable > 1.4
' While an increase in width/depth ratio is associated with channel widening, a decrease in
width/depth ratio is associated with channel incision. Hence, for incised channels, the
ratio of channel width/depth ratio to reference reach width/depth ratio will be less than
1.0. The reduction in width/depth ratio indicates excess shear stress and an adjustment of
the channel toward an unstable condition.
' 2.1.7 Stream Channel Scour/Deposition Potential (Sediment Competence)
This methodology is discussed in detail in Section 7 of this report.
2.1.8 Channel Evolution
' A common sequence of physical adjustments has been observed in many streams
following disturbance. This adjustment process is often referred to as channel evolution.
Disturbance can result from channelization, increase in runoff due to build-out in the
' watershed, and removal of streamside vegetation, as well as other changes that negatively
affect stream stability. Several models have been used to describe this process of
physical adjustment for a stream. Simon's channel evolution model (1989) characterizes
' evolution in six steps, including 1) sinuous, pre-modified, 2) channelized, 3) degradation,
4) degradation and widening, 5) aggradation and widening, and 6) quasi-equilibrium.
The channel evolution process is initiated once a stable, well-vegetated stream that has
access to its floodplain is disturbed. Disturbance commonly results in an increase in
stream power, which causes degradation, often referred to as channel incision. Incision
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 2-2 Buck Engineering
u
'
eventually leads to increased heights and slopes of stream banks, and when critical bank
heights are exceeded, the banks begin to fail and mass wasting of soil and rock leads to
' channel widening. Incision and widening continue migrating upstream, a process
commonly referred to as a head-cut. Eventually the mass wasting slows and the stream
begins to aggrade with a new low-flow channel forming in the sediment deposits. By the
' end of the evolutionary process, a stable stream with dimension, pattern, and profile
similar to those of undisturbed channels forms in the deposited alluvium but with a much
narrower floodplain. The new channel is at a lower elevation than its original form with
' a new floodplain constructed of alluvial material. The old floodplain remains a dry
terrace (FISRWG, 1998). The time required to reach a state of quasi-equilibrium is
highly variable, but generally is on the order of decades.

2.2 Elk Shoals Creek Existing Conditions
' Buck Engineering calculated the project watershed size at the point where Elk Shoals
Creek crosses Old Concord Church Road as 4.6 square miles. Two unnamed tributaries
' flow into Elk Shoals Creek within the project limits. The watershed areas for UT1 and
UT2 are 0.38 square miles and 0.5 square miles, respectively.

1

1

i
Within the project site, all of the reaches have been straightened and impacted by
agricultural practices. The straightening of Elk Shoals Creek has led to incision, which
has resulted in instability and degradation. The two unnamed tributaries are also unstable
and experiencing high amounts of bank erosion because they have downcut to the
entrenched bed elevation of Elk Shoals Creek. This downcutting has resulted in high
bank height ratios and overly steep slopes. Elk Shoals Creek and its tributaries are in the
beginning stages of pattern development; however, based on the existing conditions, the
reaches will continue eroding and depositing sediment for some time before stability is
achieved. A stable stream pattern and floodplain should be restored in order to minimize
the amount of sediment being deposited into the receiving waters.
An abandoned historic reach of Elk Shoals Creek was located to the east of the existing
channel near the confluence with UT 1. The historic reach was abandoned when the creek
was channelized and diverted to its existing channel, which flows down the western edge
of the floodplain. The historic section of channel is approximately 1,200 feet in length
and appears to represent a stable cross section and pattern of Elk Shoals Creek.
Existing condition parameters in Table 2-3 reflect conditions in Elk Shoals Creek and
UT1 within the project site; the parameters shown for UT2 were measured immediately
upstream of the project reach.
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 2-3 Buck Engineering

Table 2-3 Existing Condition Parameters for Elk Shoals Creek and Unnamed
Tributaries.
Unnamed
Elk Shoals Tributary #1 Unnamed
Parameter Creek UT1 Tributa #2 UT2
Rosgen Stream Type E4/G4 E4/G4 G4
Drainage Area (sq mi) 4.6 0.38 0.5
Bankfull Width (ft) 18.4-21.7 10.1 10.7
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 2.5-2.9 0.9 1.0
Width/Depth Ratio 6.4-8.9 10.9 11.2
Bankfull Area (sq ft) 52.8-53.3 9.4 10.2
Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 3.1-3.6 1.5 1.6
o Width of Floodprone Area (ft) 29.5-67 22 14
Entrenchment Ratio 1.4-3.6 2.2 1.3
Pool Bankfull Area (sq ft) 54.1 11.9 12
o Max Pool Depth (ft) 3.7 2.3 2.3
Ratio of Max Pool Depth to 1
3-1
5 2
6 2
3
Bankfull Depth .
. . .
Pool Width (ft) 23.5 8.1 8.7
Ratio of Pool Width to Bankfull 1.1-1.3 0.8 .8
Width
Bank Height Ratio 1.5-2.0 1.8 2.4
Pool to Pool Spacing (ft) N/A* N/A* N/A*
Ratio of Pool to Pool Spacing to N/A* N/A* N/A*
Bankfull Width
Meander Length (ft) N/A* N/A* N/A*
Meander Length Ratio N/A* N/A* N/A*
m Radius of Curvature (ft) 30 15-30 30
Radius of Curvature Ratio 1.5 1.5-3.0 2.8
Meander Belt Width (ft) 30-90 25 N/A*
Meander Width Ratio 1.5-4.5 2.5 N/A*
Sinuosity 1.08 1.06 1.01
Valley Slope (ft/ft) 0.0033 0.0055 0.007
0

d S Slope (ft/ft) 0.003 0.0052 0.0069
* Limited pattern data are presented for Elk Shoals Creek and the Unnamed
Tributaries because natural pattern geometry does not exist within the project site.
2.2.1 Stabilitv Assessment
2.2.1.1 Elk Shoals Creek
Elk Shoals Creek is an unstable to highly unstable Rosgen E4/G4 stream type. Results
from the existing condition survey are shown in Appendix 1 and include cross sections
and a bed surface material distribution. Pebble counts using the modified Wolman
procedure (Wolman, 1954; Rosgen, 1996) indicate the median particle size in the riffles
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 2-4
Buck Engineering

I

I

I
J
7
is 16.0 mm and the median particle size in the pools is 0.11 mm. The cumulative D50
particle size is 2.7 mm. These particle sizes are representative of a gravel bed stream.
Bank height ratios (top of low bank height divided by bankfull height) for Elk Shoals
Creek ranged from 1.5 to 2.0 for the surveyed riffle cross sections. Rosgen (2001)
converted bank height ratios to stability ratings. Bank height ratios of 1.0 are ideal
because they indicate the stream can dissipate energy through its floodplain during
bankfull flow events. Streams with bank height ratios between 1.3 and 1.5 were given an
"unstable" stability rating. Bank height ratios greater than 1.6 were rated as "highly
unstable" (Rosgen, 2001). Instability within Elk Shoals Creek is mainly due to high bank
height ratios. Apparent efforts to straighten the channel in the past, along with
agricultural practices adjacent to Elk Shoals Creek, have resulted in an incised channel.
The sediment transport analysis (see Section 7) indicates that the channel is no longer
actively incising; however, the channel is laterally confined and unstable. A visual
indication of lateral instability observed within the survey reach consisted of alternating
point bars beginning to develop within the channel. These point bars will likely further
develop, eventually forming a floodplain.
The meander width ratios for Elk Shoals Creek range from 1.5 to 4.5. Buck Engineering
reviewed available reference reach data and determined that an E4 stream type typically
has a meander width ratio of four to 10. Elk Shoals Creek is functioning in the low end
of, or in some cases well below, this range, which indicates that the channel is laterally
confined.
The channel appears to have been straightened previously due to past management
' activities. Within the confined banks of the channel, sediment is being deposited in the
form of alternating point bars, and bank erosion is occurring on the outside of meander
bends. Although channel pattern is beginning to develop through the alternating point
' bars and bank erosion, further channel adjustment will continue to occur in the form of
erosion and point bar deposition until stability is reached.
' Overall, Elk Shoals Creek had an unstable pattern with a sinuosity of 1.1. Reference
reach conditions show a sinuosity range between 1.2 and 1.5 for stable streams (Rinaldi
' and Johnson, 1997). Stable streams typically have gentle meanders and a stable
dimension with regular access to a floodplain. The characteristics of this particular reach
are most likely the result of anthropogenic changes to the stream channel. The stream
' will likely continue to seek equilibrium by eroding streambanks to create a more stable
pattern.
' The bankfull width to depth ratio in the surveyed reach ranges from 6.4 to 8.9. Buck
Engineering reviewed available reference reach data and determined that an E4 streams
typically have a width to depth ratio of five to 10. Based on the width to depth ratio,
' sediment deposition patterns, and the sediment transport analysis, the channel appears to
have incised and is now beginning to widen to form a new floodplain. Following the
widening of the channel, the top of the existing banks will become an abandoned terrace.
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 2.5 Buck Engineering
This system is at a Simon evolution stage IV, which is the stage at which the stream has
incised and is beginning to widen to form a new floodplain at a lower elevation (Simon,
1989).
2.2.1.2 Unnamed Tributary #1 (UT1)
UT1 is a highly unstable Rosgen E4/G4 stream type. Results from the existing condition
survey are shown in Appendix 1 and include cross sections and a bed surface material
' distribution. Pebble counts using the modified Wolman procedure (Wolman, 1954;
Rosgen, 1996) indicate the median particle size in the riffles is 8.43 mm and the median
particle size in the pools is 1.0 mm. The cumulative D50 particle size is 2.8 mm. These
' particle sizes are representative of a gravel bed stream.
Bank height ratio for UT 1 was 1.8 for the surveyed riffle cross section, which is not
' optimal because the stream does not have access to its floodplain during moderate to
large flood events. The lack of access to the floodplain prevents the stream from
dissipating the energy associated with high flows. Excess stress occurs at bank height
' ratios greater than 1.2 to 1.3 and can be seen in the form of moderate bank erosion or
scour along the toe of the streambank, causing bank sloughing. Bank height ratios
greater than 1.6 are considered "highly unstable" (Rosgen, 2001). Instability within UTl
' is mainly due to the high bank height ratios. Apparent efforts to straighten the channel in
the past, along with agricultural practices adjacent to Elk Shoals Creek, have resulted in
an incised channel.
' The sediment transport analysis (Section 7) indicates the channel is no longer actively
incising; however, the channel is laterally confined and unstable. A visual indication of
' lateral instability observed within the survey reach consisted of alternating point bars
beginning to develop within the channel. These point bars will likely develop further,
eventually forming a floodplain.
' Looking upstream from the top of the banks of UT1, channel pattern along the banks is
not apparent, and the stream appears to have been straightened due to past management
I activities. Within the confined banks of the channel, sediment is being deposited in the
form of alternating point bars, and bank erosion is occurring on the outside of meander
' bends. Although channel pattern is beginning to develop through alternating point bars
and bank erosion, further channel adjustment will continue to occur in the form of
erosion and point bar deposition until stability is reached.
' The bankfull width to depth ratio in the surveyed reach was 10.9. This value falls within
the observed range of width to depth ratios for stable E4 stream types indicating that the
' stream is not actively incising nor is it overly wide. This system is at a Simon evolution
stage IV, which is the stage at which the stream has incised and is beginning to widen to
form a new floodplam at a lower elevation (Simon, 1989). It appears however that as
' erosion occurs around the outside of meander bends, deposition is occurring to the inside,
thus maintaining a stable width to depth ratio while increasing pattern and forming an
active floodplain.
I Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 2-6 Buck Engineering

2.2.1.3 UT2
UT2 is a highly unstable Rosgen G4 stream type. Results from the existing condition
survey are shown in Appendix 1 and include cross sections and a bed surface material
distribution. Pebble counts using the modified Wolman procedure (Wolman, 1954;
Rosgen, 1996) indicate the median particle size in the riffles is 15.58 mm and the median
particle size in the pools is 0.24 mm. The cumulative D50 particle size is 7.2 mm. These
particle sizes are representative of a gravel bed stream.
Bank height ratio for UT2 was 2.4 for the surveyed riffle cross section. Bank height
ratios greater than 1.6 are considered "highly unstable" (Rosgen, 2001). Instability
within UT2 is mainly due to the high bank height ratios. Apparent efforts to straighten
the channel in the past, along with agricultural practices adjacent to Elk Shoals Creek,
have resulted in an incised channel.
The sediment transport analysis (Section 7) indicates that the channel is no longer
actively incising; however, the channel is laterally confined and unstable. A visual
indication of lateral instability observed within the survey reach consisted of alternating
point bars beginning to develop within the channel. These point bars should further
develop, eventually forming a floodplain.
Looking upstream from the top of the banks of UT2, channel pattern along the banks is
not apparent, and the stream appears to have been straightened due to past management
activities. Within the confined banks of the channel, sediment is being deposited in the
form of alternating point bars, and bank erosion is occurring on the outside of meander
bends. Although channel pattern is beginning to develop through alternating point bars,
and bank erosion, further channel adjustment will continue to occur in the form of
erosion and point bar deposition until stability is reached.
This value falls within the observed range of width to depth ratios for stable E4 stream
types indicating that the stream is not actively incising nor is it overly wide. This system
is at a Simon evolution stage IV, which is the stage at which the stream has incised and is
beginning to widen to form a new floodplain at a lower elevation (Simon, 1989). It
appears however that as erosion occurs around the outside of meander bends, deposition
is occurring to the inside, thus maintaining a stable width to depth ratio while increasing
pattern and forming an active floodplain.
2.2.2 Vegetation Assessment
The existing plant communities were previously identified and described by EcoScience
Corporation, in conjunction with Restoration Systems, LLC. Three plant communities
were identified on the project site. The three communities were disturbed/maintained
land, stream-side margin, and bottomland hardwood forest.
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 2-7 Buck Engineering

H

L

1

Disturbed/maintained land includes fallow agricultural fields, active pasture, and row
crops. This plant community accounts for over 60 percent of the on-site floodplain area.
Invasive species within this community include Johnson grass (Sorghum halepense),
purple top (Triodia (lava), low hop clover (Trifolium campestre), red clover (T. pratense),
blackberry (Rubus sp.), ox-eye daisy (Chrysanthemum leucanthemum), vetch (Vicia sp.),
and bachelor's buttons (Centaurea cyanus). This community is also dominated by
grasses such as fescue (Festuca sp.), crabgrass (Digitaria sanguinalis), rye (Lolium sp.),
and Johnson grass. Scattered herbs include chickweed (Stellaria sp.), red clover, white
clover (Trifolium repens), vetch, dandelion (Taraxacum officinale), Japanese
honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), bedstraw, dog fennel (Eupatorium capillifolium),
English plantain (Plantago lanceolata), and pokeberry (Phytolacca americana). Woody
stems occur infrequently within this community due to browsing by livestock; however,
opportunistic species such as shortleaf pine (Pinus echinata) and eastern red cedar
(Juniperus virginiana) were identified during field visits.
Stream-side margin plant community occupies approximately 20 percent of the site. The
community occurs in narrow bands adjacent to Elk Shoals Creek, the central unnamed
tributary, and Unnamed Tributary #2. This community occupies stream banks and
adjacent low-lying floodplain eroded by the channel and is dominated by a narrow fringe
of young, disturbance-adapted, early successional forest. The stream-side community is
characterized by American sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), black willow (Salix nigra),
and river birch (Betula nigra), with green briar (Smilax rotundifolia), blackberries, and
poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans) in the understory.
Bottomland hardwood forest occurs on the floodplain not yet converted to pasture or row
crops. This community occupies roughly 20 percent of the site and is composed of
American elm (Ulmus americana), willow oak (Quercus phellos), persimmon (Diospyros
virginiana), American sycamore, tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), and sweetgum
(Liquidambar styraciflua), with American holly (Ilex opaca), flowering dogwood
(Corpus florida), and poison ivy present in the understory.
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 2-8 Buck Engineering

3 Constraints
' 3.1 Federally Protected Species
' Plants and animals with a federal classification of Endangered (E), Threatened (T),
Proposed Endangered (PE), and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under the
provisions of Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973.
' 3.1.1 Endangered/Threatened Species

1

Species that the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program lists under federal protection
for Alexander County as of February 4, 2004, are listed in Table 3-1. A brief description
of the characteristics and habitat requirements of these species follows, along with a
conclusion regarding potential project impact.
Table 3-1 Species Under Federal Protection in Alexander County.
Notes:
• "T - Threatened" denotes a species likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future
throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
• "S/A" denotes the species is a species that is threatened due to similarity of appearance with other
rare species and is listed for its protection.
• "PD" denotes the species is proposed for delisting.
Haliaeetus leucocephalus (Bald Eagle)
Federal Status: Threatened
Animal Family: Accipitridae
Federally Listed: March 11, 1967
The bald eagle is found throughout much of North America. In 1999, it was proposed for
delisting (PD) in the lower 48 states.
Adult Bald Eagles have dark bodies with a white head and tail. Juveniles are completely
brown and do not develop white markings on their head and tail until they are 5-6 years
Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 3-1
Buck Engineering

0

n

0

n

old. Bald eagles are 3 feet long with a 7 foot wingspan. They feed mostly on fish, water
birds, and turtles. Bald eagles are found around coastal areas, rivers, or lakeshores. They
frequently build their nests in transition zones between forest and marsh or open water.
Nests are large and cone shaped (6-8 feet tall and 6 or more feet wide), and are usually
built in dominant live pines or cypress trees less than 2 miles from open water. Winter
roosts are similar to nesting areas but may be farther from water.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION:
NO EFFECT
Potential habitat for the bald eagle does not exist in the proposed project area. The site
lies primarily within open fields and water onsite exists only in streams too small to
provide foraging habitat for the eagle. In addition, a search of the NHP database on
December 29, 2003, found no known occurrence within the vicinity of the proposed
project. Therefore, the proposed project is not anticipated to have an effect on this
species.
Clemmys muhlenbergii (Bog turtle)
Federal Status: Threatened Due to Similar Appearance
Animal Family: Emydidae
Federally Listed: November 4, 1997
Bog turtles are small (3 to 4.5 inches) turtles with a weakly keeled carapace (upper shell)
that ranges from light brown to ebony in color. The species is readily distinguished from
other turtles by a large, conspicuous bright'orange to yellow blotch on each side of its
head. Bog turtles are semi-aquatic and are only infrequently active above their muddy
habitats during specific times of year and temperature ranges. They can be found during
the mating season from June to July and at other times from April to October when the
humidity is high, such as after a rain event, and temperatures are in the seventies. Bog
turtle habitat consists of bogs, swamps, marshy meadows, and other wet environments,
specifically those that have soft muddy bottoms. The southern populations of bog turtles
(Virginia, Tennessee, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia) are listed as
threatened due to similar appearance to northern bog turtles that are listed as threatened.
The southern bog turtle population is not fully protected under the ESA, but may not be
possessed, sold, traded, or collected. In the northern states (Connecticut, Delaware,
Massachusetts, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania), bog turtles are
fully protected under the ESA (USFWS, 2002).
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Potential habitat for the Bog Turtle does not exist in the proposed project area. In
addition, a search of the NHP database on December 29, 2003, found no known
occurrence within the vicinity of the proposed project. Therefore, the proposed project is
not anticipated to have an effect on this species.
Sink Property -Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 3-2 Buck Engineering
I
I
Hexastylis naniflora (Dwarf-flowered heartleaf)
Federal Status: Threatened
Plant Family: Aristolochiaceae
Federally Listed: April 14, 1989
Dwarf-flowered heartleaf is a low-growing, spicy-smelling, evergreen perennial herb.
Leaves are heart-shaped, alternate, leathery, untoothed, and 1.6 to 2.4 inches wide. Each
leaf is supported by a long, thin stalk, which rises directly from the subsurface rhizome.
This species has the smallest flowers of any North American plant in the genus
Hexastylis. The solitary flowers are fleshy, firm, grow at the end of the short stalks, and
often are found under forest litter and leaves near the base of the leafstalks. Every year,
each rhizome section produces one leaf, one flower, and a leaf scale. The flowers are
jug-shaped, less than 0.4 inches long, and have a narrow sepal tube, ranging in color from
brown to greenish or purple. Flowering occurs from mid-March to early June; fruiting
begins in late May (Russo, 2000).
This plant grows along bluffs and north-facing slopes, boggy areas along streams, and
' adjacent hillsides and ravines in rich deciduous forests. It is usually associated with
mountain laurel or pawpaw and requires acidic, sandy loam soils. The species needs
Pacolet, Madison gravelly sandy loam, or Musella fine sandy loam soils to grow and
' survive. Provided the soil type is right, the plant can survive in either dry or moderately
moist habitat. For maximum flowering, the plant needs sunlight in early spring. Creek
heads where shrubs are rare and bluffs with light gaps are the habitat types most
' conducive to flowering and high seed production. Seed output is lowest in bluff
populations with a lot of shade (USFWS, 2002b).
Found in the upper Piedmont regions of South Carolina and North Carolina, this species
has 24 known populations in an eight-county area. North Carolina has one population in
Catawba County, two in Lincoln County, and three populations each in Rutherford,
Cleveland, and Burke Counties. Both of the Lincoln County sites are threatened. One
site may be lost, and the other has only 160 healthy plants. A third known Lincoln
County site was destroyed. Rutherford County also supported another site, but it was
eliminated by road construction. In addition to its known range, the plant may occur in
isolated areas in northwestern Gaston County, western Iredell County, and Yadkin
County, all in North Carolina (USFWS, 2002).
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION:
NO EFFECT
A search of the NHP database of rare species and unique habitats, conducted on
December 29, 2003, shows no occurrences of this species in the project area.
Additionally, no potential habitat exists in the project area for the dwarf-flowered
heartleaf. No suitable bluffs, north facing slopes, bogs, or rich deciduous forests were
identified within on the project site. The riparian species that were identified within the
project area were primarily sweetgum, river birch, yellow poplar, Chinese privet, and
multiflora rose. No mountain laurel was identified within the project area. Based on
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 3-3
Buck Engineering
I I
' field data, this project is anticipated to have no effect on the Dwarf-flowered heartleaf,
and no further surveys are considered necessary.
3.1.2 Federal Species of Concern and Associated State Status
' Federal Species of Concern (FSC) are not legally protected under the Endangered Species
Act and are not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until they are
formally proposed or listed as Threatened or Endangered. Table 3-2 includes FSC
' species listed for Alexander County. Organisms that are listed as Endangered (E),
Threatened (T), or Special Concern (SC) on the NHP list of Rare Plant and Animal
Species are afforded state protection under the State Endangered Species Act and the
' North Carolina Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979. However, the level of
protection given to state-listed species does not apply to NCDOT activities.
Table 3-2 Federal Species of Concern for Alexander County.

Notes:
• "T" denotes a threatened species likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future throughout
all or a significant portion of its range.
' • "E" denotes an endangered species whose continued existence as a viable component of the state's
flora or fauna is determined to be in jeopardy.
• "SR-T" denotes a significantly rare species throughout its range. SR species are not listed as "E,"
"T," or "SC" (Special Concern), but exist in the state in small numbers and have been determined
' to need monitoring.

3.2 Cultural Resources
In a letter dated February 18, 2004, Buck Engineering requested that the North Carolina
Department of Cultural Resources (NCDCR) review the project and comment on any
possible impact to cultural resources within the project area. NCDCR has not yet
reviewed the project. Their determination will be presented in an addendum to this report
as soon as it is available.
3.3 Transaction Screen Map Report
Buck Engineering obtained an Environmental Data Resources (EDR) Transaction Screen
Map Report that identifies and maps real or potential hazardous environmental sites
within the distance required by The American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM)
Transaction Screen Process (E 1528). The overall environmental risk for this site was
determined to be low due to the absence of any risk sites within the following tolerances:
Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 3-4
Buck Engineering
4 Bankfull Stage Verification
4.1 Bankfull Stage and Discharge
¦ Bankfull stage and its corresponding discharge are the primary variables used to develop
a natural channel design. However, the correct identification of the bankfull stage in the
' field can be difficult and subjective (Williams, 1978; Knighton, 1984; and Johnson and
Heil, 1996). Numerous definitions exist of bankfull stage and methods for its
identification in the field (Wolman and Leopold, 1957; Nixon, 1959; Schumm, 1960;
' Kilpatrick and Barnes, 1964; and Williams, 1978). The identification of bankfull stage in
the humid Southeast is especially difficult because of dense understory vegetation and a
long history of channel modification and subsequent adjustment in channel morphology.
' It is generally accepted that bankfull stage corresponds with the discharge that fills a
channel to the elevation of the active floodplain. The bankfull discharge, known as the
channel forming discharge or the effective discharge, is thought to be the flow that moves
' the most sediment over time. Field indicators include the back of point bars, significant
breaks in slope, changes in vegetation, the highest scour line, or the top of the bank
(Leopold, 1994). The most consistent bankfull indicators for streams in the Piedmont of
' North Carolina are the highest scour line or the back of the point bar. The indicator is
rarely the top of the bank or the lowest scour or bench.
4.2 Bankfull Hydraulic Geometry Relationships (Regional Curves)
' Hydraulic geometry relationships are often used to predict channel morphology features
and their corresponding dimensions. The stream channel hydraulic geometry theory
developed by Leopold and Maddock (1953) describes the interrelations between
' dependent variables such as width, depth, and area as functions of independent variables
such as watershed area or discharge. These relationships can be developed at a single
cross-section or across many stations along a reach (Merigliano, 1997). Hydraulic
' geometry relationships are empirically derived and can be developed for a specific river
or extrapolated to a watershed in the same physiographic region with similar
rainfall/runoff relationships (FISRWG, 1998).
I Regional curves were first developed by Dunne and Leopold (1978) and relate Bankfull
channel dimensions to drainage area. A primary purpose for developing regional curves
' is to aid in identifying bankfull stage and dimension in un-gaged watersheds and to help
estimate the bankfull dimension and discharge for natural channel designs (Rosgen,
1994). Gage station analyses throughout the United States have shown that the bankfull
' discharge has an average return interval of 1.5 years or 66.7% annual exceedence
probability on the maximum annual series (Dunne and Leopold, 1978; Leopold, 1994).
' Regional curve equations developed from the North Carolina rural Piedmont study are
provided by Harman et al. (1999) and are shown in Table 4-1.
Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 4.1 Buck Engineering
fl

Table 4-1 NC Rural Piedmont Curve Equations.
North Carolina Piedmont Rural Regional Curve Equations
Harman et al., 1999
Qbkf = 89.039 AW U. /Z R'=0.95
Abkf = 21.43 AW 0=0.91
Wbkf = 11.89 AW 0*43 R'=0.92
Dbkf = 1.5 AW " R2=0.88
4.3 Bankfull Verification in the Project Watershed
The preferred method of verifying hydraulic geometry relationships within a project
watershed is to survey a nearby gage site and compare the results to the appropriate
regional curve. Buck Engineering consulted the United States Geological Survey
(USGS) website to locate gages within the Catawba River Basin (HUC 03050101). The
gage at Norwood Creek near Troutman, within this HUC, was used in the development of
the North Carolina rural Piedmont regional curve (Harman et al., 1999). Buck
Engineering visited the site to assess its continuing stability. The dimension, pattern, and
profile appeared stable and the stream had access to its floodplain during bankfull events.
The proximity of this site provides confidence that the application of the regional curve to
the project reaches is appropriate.
The bankfull stage of the main channel of Elk Shoals Creek, as well as the tributary
channels, was identified in the field; the indicators were a break in slope on flat
depositional features and the back of point bars. The relationship of bankfull cross

' sectional area versus drainage area was then compared to regional curve to determine
whether the relationships are similar. Bankfull data for the project reaches are compared
with the North Carolina rural Piedmont regional curve in Figure 4-1. The cross-sectional

' areas consistently plot within the 95% confidence interval. This provides evidence that
bankfull was correctly identified in the field
.
The abandoned historic reach of Elk Shoals Creek provided additional confidence of the
application of the regional curve. The historic section appears to represent a stable cross
section of Elk Shoals Creek and plots within the acceptable limits of the regional curve
(Figure 4-1).
Two additional reference reaches located in the same physiographic region as the project
' site were used to further corroborate the results: West Branch to Tibbs Run and an
unnamed tributary to Cane Creek (Figure 4-2). These sites were selected based on the
confidence with which bankfull features were identified, the apparent cross-section
stability, the natural state of the stream, and the stability of stream pattern. Both of these
' sites had clear bankfull indicators located at, or near, the top of banks. One
representative riffle cross section was surveyed at the each site. The drainage areas were

Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 4-2 Buck Engineering
,. N
A GHANY!
*f, 1 RY ' STOK
s ROCK
'I
I ,
I
WIL ES
1
I '
' Y DKIN S
.--?? R Y l
GUIL
ALEXANDER
Elk Shoals site VIE
D I
a
.` N
CATAWBA
UT to Cane Creek
OLN
' West Branch of Tibbs Run
ORE
M GOMERY
STON S L
G
`a.
Figure 4.2. Reference Reach Vicinity Map
Restoration Systems, LLC N RI HMOND
1101 Haynes St. Suite 203
Raleigh, NC 27604
r
10 0 10 20 r +
mood Miles S T

L
C

r

D

determined based on watershed delineation from USGS topographic quadrangles. These
points were plotted on the Piedmont regional curve, along with the data from Elk Shoals
Creek (Figure 4-1). The data plotted within acceptable limits and thus verify that the
relationships in this basin are similar to those of the Piedmont region. It is concluded that
because the surveyed cross-sectional areas of the stream reaches correlate well with
regional curve data, bankfull was correctly identified on the stream reaches.
NC Rural Piedmont Regional Curve
1000
j
.... ....
wry
/
- Lower 95 %
100 - - - - Upper 95%
Q ?! j
_ /. /t • Regional Curve Data
to w / / / A Elk Shoals - Historic
UT #1
p .. / UT #2
w /
• Trib. to Cane Creek
7 / ? West Branch of Tibbs Run
/ • ElkShoals- Existing
Power (Regional Curve Data)
0.1 1 10 100 1000
y = 21.43x0fi8 Watershed Area (Sq. Mi.)
R2 = 0.95
Figure 4-1 NC Rural Piedmont Regional Curve with Surveyed Bankfull Cross-
Sectional Areas for Elk Shoals Reaches and Reference Reaches. (Project data
points were not used in determining the regression line.)
Reference reach data for all project reference reaches is included in Appendix 3.
Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 4-3 Buck Engineering
u
1
5 Stream Restoration Design Criteria Selection
' Buck Engineering uses a combination of approaches to develop design criteria. The
design criteria utilize both dimensionless ratios and regime equations to design channel
dimension, pattern, and profile. A flow chart for selecting design criteria is shown in
Figure 5-1.
5.1 Upstream Reference Reaches
The best option for developing design criteria is to locate a reference reach upstream of
' the project site. A reference reach is a channel segment that is stable (i.e., neither
aggrading nor degrading) and is of the same morphological "type" as the channel under
consideration for restoration. Figures 5-2 through 5-4 show how the dimension, pattern,
' and profile dimensionless ratios are developed from the reference reach survey. The
reference reach should also have a similar valley slope as the project reach. The
reference reach is then used as the "blueprint" for the channel design (Rosgen, 1998).
' Data on channel characteristics (dimension, pattern, and profile), in the form of
dimensionless ratios, are developed for the reference reach. If the reach upstream of the
project does not have sufficient pattern, but does have a stable riffle cross-section,
' dimension ratios are developed. It is ideal to measure a reference bankfull dimension that
was formed under the same influences as the project reach.
t
Design Criteria Selection
' Is there a reference reach
upstream with a stable
rift'le R same Salley slope"

Yes Nn
'
Reference Reach Reference Reach Reference Reach Regime' Literature Past project
Sunes Database Re less Search resiess equations liNalualloo
Reference Reach R Res te%% of
Reterrncc Reach Ratios surrey if possible ccune Equations 1DO onng data
Ratios as
design criteria
Ratios Regime Equations
' x Ratios
' Select Desien Ratios
and I'quatmns
Figure 5-1 Design Criteria Selection Flow Chart.
t
Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 5-1 Buck Engineering

N N V N
o Q M
aW ? ? rn
W ?t
Y,

U) mz°O?
o ?
oV
U
w=

?
O Zm x
?
m LL w w
z

m
Q
Z U
m
Q
xewa zw w - Z Of O
O -j C) Z °
°

J
_
w
w
F- LL a LL a
= C)
o

z
LU Y ?w w.. _j LLj F- P: F-
OJ
c ¢ Y ¢
m CO W
G 2
¢
LU m

U) l
Q Z
w O

J Z
Q 2
U_ o
0
O

O
2

OC
O
Z> xew d(]

N M Q
w

l1') ^
Z J
OO
LU F- O

? L J
Dw wa
?
' z
m Y
¢
V F
-
Z?
m

w
¢

Z
Y
? U
?-
O ? W J
g ? 3: a ? o m z
0

J
W
a
w LLI
?
w
3
E
o )
" Co

Z ? ? ?

a ? ? LL o a

w w

0 0
?
Z ¢ w
? X ? ?
L 0
LL W j ¢
° Z ?
F- Z
? L .
?
?- `?.
? Z
u? U
tn

?
F=- J
? W
i ?
=
w
? Z O

?
o F-
z
ff)
Z p

a

? of
?
? p
?
a
w
w
o
w
w
Z Z J ¢
J a?
Y „
?LJ -?
of X J C) W >
a Q
w O O XX
O $ E ?? ? ? p 0 0
U 0 0 0 Q
0 E O o 0? 0 0 -1
0 U.

o
?
O
?

z

w
w

Z
O

z
w
C
G ?
Y

? E
o E
o o
=
E
o
Z 7: F- IL
W
?
Q
s
Z W
o = " Q p
? F- ? a
w o
Q
= J
p

o o

s ?
w J

? V-
u
-
w D

;? a.

¢ U

Z
D W

o
J
U a J ¢
J W Z W
J W
J
W
o
0 0 ? ?

°o
f n N p p ? ? b M
?
U
m
a
c ow
1
I
Z
K?aLL
a U
m

1
z
U) u
O O? Z m
f'- H 1 w
E ' z

AL
W J
/ V ,J ° a
o < LL
U w J ~
Q w LL
w
ZI
U)
?/? \ W j F-
W
Z \ r
r j
O Z

W Z
a- LL
j x
C
c
(jjgW \ _
U
J w f=- u
w HlaIM 1139 w =) z
Z o "
D J co
o
U) Q
1
o z
o

< C) 91
(
n
w F-
J Z
P W
Q
g G? w
v v

O z
w
U) ? M
C) U)
Z

O _
1
oo§e
o w w
2
= Q Z)
\ w
LLJ w

\ z D
U)
O co w

z
'6 m
` W
E
NW _
1
a ¢ J Z D
w W L)
O Z w o 0
Z w
LL 0 U)
Q
/ Z
? J
/ U m

m?
a
r??N
Y ow^
dV?m
m Z < x
K raLL
oU
I I)
U) m
v? 2 ?
I dd 100d
1 0 CL 0
z
O w -
j U)

I w

O
?1w
LL

Q F=-
? Y
w of <

d31S
CO
D of
CO
:D
?
O
_j
'

Z F-

Q CO HS a.
w ?
w
100d

U)
w
LL
uj
Z x2W d31S w
w

, o
w I
I -j -j
-1 -1
d(] 100d = LL 0
w O ? ? O O

a a. CL a-
'^
vJ n
W I
w Nna z

_I I
C7 31?d1b CL
J

U -?
0
LL. I 3an? o w
!n
V -I O
W F- U
w
O C
7 LL
a ?I w O D
co
100d O w
O l
= D o
O
z ?-
mi Nm J

0 LL D

xew 31dd12i

L6 ?I
W I O O a
I O

7 m

wQ
z
0 a.
IL I
z F- Z >>? aw a 2NN?
r w
U
I
w ? J J J J ? w a a

?
w D. C
s ?

U W N W
a
J
Q

LL
U

W
s
S

Q W Q'
U)
?
?-
J
U ¢ tW w ? = ?
W
? ? Q
? Q ?
-
O c? g J w U
W LL Q
? Q Q Q ? N
a
W °- W a ?'
z ? ? o
? W o
Q W Co ? W

0 0 0 0 0 0

Z
W
W

w

W
J
w

O
d
? w

S
Z
? cn
w

p
=
cn
Q OJ w a0 a a 0 a 0 C=
7 O
U } a cn ? o w o N _
w w
J w LL
O
a
O
a
O
a
Z
O
C
W
W
~
? Ix 9 c v
i
5.2 Reference Reach Databases
If a reference reach cannot be located upstream of the project reach, a review of the NC
Department of Transportation (DOT) reference reach database is performed. A database
search is conducted to locate reference reaches within close proximity to the project site..
The search includes streams with the same valley and stream type as the project reach. If
references are found meeting these criteria, the reference reach is field surveyed for
validation and comparison with the database. If no reference reaches are located through
the database, a reference reach search is conducted within close proximity to the project
site. If an appropriate reach is located, the reach is surveyed, added to the database, and
the information is used in the process of design criteria selection.
' If a reference reach is not found in close proximity to the project site through the database
or through a search process, summary ratios are acquired for all streams with the same
valley and stream type within the project's physiographic region. These ratios are then
compared to literature values and regime equations along with ratios developed through
the evaluation of successful projects.
5.3 Regime Equations
Buck Engineering uses a variety of published journals, books, and design manuals to
cross reference NC database values with peer reviewed regime equations. Examples
include Fluvial Forms and Processes by Knighton (1984), Mountain Rivers by Wohl
(2000), and the Hydraulic Design Manual for Stream Restoration Projects by the US
Army Corps of Engineers (Copeland et al., 2001). The most common regime equations
used in our designs are for pattern. For example, most reference reach surveys in the
eastern US show ratios of radius of curvature to bankfull width much less than 1.5.
However, the corps manual recommends a ratio greater than 2.0 to maintain stability in
free-forming systems. Since most stream restoration projects are constructed on
floodplains denude of woody vegetation they are closer to free forming streams.
Therefore, we often use the corps recommended value rather than reference reach data for
radius of curvature. For similar reasons, meander wavelength and pool-to-pool spacing
ratios from the corps manual.
5.4 Comparison to Past Projects
All of the above techniques for developing ratios and/or regime equations are compared
to past projects built with similar conditions. Ultimately, these sites will provide the best
pattern and profile ratios because they better reflect site conditions after construction.
Again, most reference reaches are in mature forests whereas restoration sites are in
floodplains without woody vegetation. This severely alters floodplain processes. If past
ratios did not provide adequate stability or bedform diversity, they are not used.
Conversely, if past project ratios create stable channels with optimal bedform diversity,
they will be incorporated into the design. Ultimately, the design criteria are selections of
ratios and equations made upon a thorough evaluation of the above tasks. Combinations
Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 5-5 Buck Engineering

' of approaches may be used to optimize the design. The final selection of design criteria
is discussed in the design chapter.
5.5 Design Criteria Selection for Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek

Buck Engineering evaluated the historic abandoned channel of Elk Shoals Creek as a
potential reference reach. The reach appears to exhibit a stable cross-section and pattern,
and plots within the 95% confidence interval of the North Carolina Piedmont rural
regional curve (see Section 4.3). Therefore, it is included as part of the design criteria
(Table 5-1). Due to its proximity to the project reach, the historic channel was selected as
the primary source of reference reach information.
Buck Engineering included data from two additional reference reaches in the North
Carolina Department of Transportation Reference Reach Database. Data from West
Branch to Tibbs Run and an unnamed tributary to Cane Creek appear in Table 5-1.
These reaches were determined to be appropriate references for this project because their
valley type, slope, and bed material compare to the project reaches and they are located in
the same physiographic region.
The Hydraulic Design Manual for Stream Restoration Projects by the US Army Corps of
Engineers (Copeland et al., 2001) was also consulted as a reference. Recommended
values for meander length and radius of curvature ratios are presented in Table 5-1. Buck
Engineering typically consults the USACE manual for pattern criteria. This is due to- the
fact that most reference reach surveys in the eastern United States show radius of
curvature divided by bankfull width ratios much less than 1.5. However, the USACE
manual recommends a ratio greater than 2.0 to maintain stability in free-forming systems.
Since most stream restoration projects are constructed on floodplains denude of woody
vegetation, Buck Engineering often uses the corps recommended value rather than
reference reach data.
Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 5-6 Buck Engineering
1 Table 5-1 Natural Channel Reference Parameters
Parameter Remnant West Branch to Tributary to ACOE Manual
Channel Tibbs Run Cane Creek Min Max
Drainage Area, DA (sq mi) 4.6 1.1 1.5
Stream Type (Rosgen) E5 E5 E4/5
Bankfull Discharge, Qbkf (cfs) 270 88 119
Bankfull Riffle XSEC Area, 53.2 21 20
5
Abkf (s ft .
Bankfull Mean Velocity, Vbkf 5.1 4
3 5
8
ft/s . .
Width to Depth Ratio, W/D 7 4
6 5
1
(ft/ft) . .
Entrenchment Ratio, Wfpa/Wbkf 12.1 28
1 23
5
ft/ft . .
Riffle Max Depth Ratio,
Dmax/Dbkf 1.5 1.1 ] .3
Bank Height Ratio, Dtob/Dmax 1.2 1
5 1
2
ft/ft) . .
Meander Length Ratio, 9.9-11.0 7.6 2
7 11
3 12
5
Lm/Wbkf . . .
Radius of Curvature, Rc, Ratio, 1.8-2.2 4.3 2
5 1
5 4
5
Rc/Wbkf . . .
Meander Width Ratio, 4.04.4 7.3 8
5
Wblt/Wbkf .
Sinuosity, K 1.2 1.20 1.80 1.20 5.30
Valley Slope, Sval (ft/ft) 0.0046 0.0043 0.0025
Channel Slope, Schan (ft/ft) 0.0039 0.0037 0.0014
Riffle Slope Ratio, Srif/Schan -- 2.0 1.4
Run Slope Ratio, Srun/Srif -- 1.9 --
Glide Slope Ratio, Sglide/Schan -- 1.1 --
Pool Slope Ratio, Spool/Schan -- 0.1 0.3
Pool Max Depth Ratio, 1.3 1.2 1
5
Dmax ool/Dbkf .
Pool Width Ratio, Wpool/Wbkf 1.2 1.2 1.1
Pool-Pool Spacing Ratio, 4
0-7.6 4
4 5
3
L s/Wbkf . . .
D16 (mm) -- 0.136 --
D35 (mm) - 0.240 -
D50 (mm) -- 0.700 --
D84 (mm) -- 12.000 --
D95 (mm) -- 22.000 --
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 5.7 Buck Engineering

6 Natural Channel Design
6.1 Design Summary
The proposed natural channel design for Elk Shoals Creek and its unnamed tributaries on
the Sink property is the highest level of restoration feasible given the valley and stream
types. For the incised reaches, selection of restoration type follows Rosgen's priority
restoration approach for incised streams (Rosgen, 1997), which has an overriding
objective of re-establishing contact between the channel and a floodplain. For the
purposes of this discussion the four Rosgen restoration approaches have been defined
below in order of decreasing restoration benefit:
• Priority I - Re-establish the channel on a previous floodplain (e.g., raise channel
elevation); meander new channel to achieve dimension, pattern, and profile
characteristic of a stable stream for the particular valley type; fill or isolate
existing incised channel.
• Priority 11- Establish a new floodplain for the existing bankfull elevation (e.g.,
excavate a new floodplain); meander channel to achieve dimension, pattern, and
profile characteristic of a stable stream for the particular valley type; fill or isolate
existing incised channel.
• Priority III - Converts a straight channel to a different stream type while leaving
the existing channel in place by excavating bankfull "benches" at the existing
bankfull elevation. Effectively, the valley for the stream is made more bowl-
shaped. In-stream structures are used to dissipate energy through a step/pool
channel type.
• Priority - Stabilize the channel in place using in-stream structures and
bioengineering to decrease streambed and streambank erosion.
' 6.2 Natural Channel Design
' See construction plans in Appendix 4 for detailed design information.
Elk Shoals Creek and its two unnamed tributaries are currently highly incised,
' channelized systems. The proposed natural channel design will improve the existing
condition by providing numerous water quality and habitat benefits such as:
• Improved overbank flooding and nutrient retention;
' • Decreased in channel shear stress;
• Improved bedform diversity;
' • Improved vegetative cover and lower water temperatures; and
• Improved sediment transport capacity.
' 6.2.1 Elk Shoals Creek and Unnamed Tributaries
The design goal for the three project reaches is to establish stable pattern and reconnect
' with the existing floodplain. By reconnecting the project reaches with the existing
floodplain, bankfull flows will be allowed to overtop the banks and dissipate energy on
' Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 6-1 Buck Engineering
I
' the floodplain. As a result, in-channel shear stresses will be decreased during high flow
events. The design parameters used in the design of the pattern, profile, and channel
' dimension are shown in Table 6-1.
Approximately 800 feet of Elk Shoals Creek at the upstream end of the project site will
' be stabilized with structures and minor channel shaping; the channel pattern will not
change. The channel bed will be raised in this section so that the channel invert can be
reconnected to the floodplain further downstream. This is accomplished by installing
' structures that will hold a higher bed elevation in place. Natural bed materials will
collect behind the structures to raise the bed elevation.
i

I
Elk Shoals Creek will eventually be diverted from its existing alignment and the flow will
be routed into its abandoned historic channel. Priority I restoration will begin at the point
were the creek is diverted into the historic channel and continue for approximately 2,800
feet downstream. The channel will be "stepped down" at the downstream end of the
reach using constructed riffle structures so that it can be reconnected to the existing box
culvert invert. The existing pattern of the historic channel will be used for the first 600 to
700 feet of the Priority I restoration section. The remainder of the new channel will be
built with an appropriate dimension, pattern, and profile based on reference reach ratios
and best professional judgment (see Section 5).
The most upstream 100 feet of UTI requires a Priority II approach in order to raise the
bed elevation so a Priority I restoration can begin. This is accomplished by reducing the
water surface slope of the new channel as it is meandered away from the existing
channel. Over a short length, the elevation difference between the bed elevation and top
of bank is greater than the bankfull maximum depth and a new floodplain must be
excavated out of the stream bank. At the point where this elevation difference becomes
equal to the bankf ill maximum depth, a Priority I restoration can be implemented and the
design slope of the new channel can be implemented. As the bed elevation of UT1 is
raised, it will be reconnected with the surrounding floodplain. At the downstream end of
the reach, a step-pool structure will be installed so that the channel invert can be "stepped
down" to reconnect with the Elk Shoals Creek channel.
The most upstream section of UT2 will be "stepped up" to achieve Priority I restoration.
This rising of the channel invert with the installation of an in-stream structure will create
a small section of backwater in the upstream section of the tributary. At the downstream
end of the reach a step-pool structure will be used so that the channel invert can be
"stepped down" in order to reconnect with the Elk Shoals Creek channel.
In-stream structures such as root wads and rock vanes will be used to stabilize the newly
constructed stream bends and some existing bends. Root wads are preferable to rock
vanes for meander bend stabilization. When properly installed, they provide superior
bank protection and allow for better and more natural pool formation. Figure 6-1
presents project monitoring survey data on one sand bed and one gravel bed stream. The
data show that pools are deeper in meander bends constructed with root wads than rock
vanes. Grade control will be provided throughout all the project reaches by using
constructed riffles and rock cross vanes. Constructed riffles will be used more than rock
cross vanes based on monitoring data from past projects. The type of constructed riffle
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 6-2
Buck Engineering
14
proposed for this project creates less convergence and therefore less scour downstream.
This structure is less prone to failure and provides grade control without causing
localized sediment transport problems. Transplants and other bioengineering techniques
will be used to stabilize the banks, particularly around the outside of meander bends.
Bankfull Pool Depth:
Rootwads Versus Vanes
I
6
5
4
d 3
LL
2
1
0
® Root Wads
¦ Vanes
Min Depth
Figure 6-1 Bankfull Pool
internal data)
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek
Depth A
Rootwads Ve
VG
rsus
l1
Plan 6-3
n=14
an=9

t Table 6-1 Natural Channel Design Parameters for Elk Shoals Creek and
Unnamed Tributaries
Sink Prouerty - Desien Parameters

i

Elk Shoals Creek Unnamed Trib. #1 Unnamed Trib. #2
Design Stream
Values Design Stream
Values Design Stream
Values Rationale
Parameter MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX
Drainage Area, DA (sq mi) 4.6 0.38 0.5
Stream Type (Rosgen) C4 C4 C4 Note I
Bankfull Discharge, Qbkf (cfs) 270 44 54 Note 2
Bankfull Riffle XSEC Area, Abkf (sq ft) 53.0 11.0 13.0 Note 2
Bankfull Mean Velocity, Vbkf(ft/s) 5.1 4.0 4.2 V=Q/A
Bankfull Riffle Width, Wbkf (ft) 23.0 25.2 10.5 11.5 11.4 12.5 Note 3
Bankfull Riffle Mean Depth, Dbkf(ft) 2.1 2.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 d=A/W
Width to Depth Ratio, W/D (ft/ft) 10.0 12.0 10.0 12.0 10.0 12:0 Noted
Width Floodprone Area, Wfpa (ft) 230 275 230 275 230 - 275
Entrenchment Ratio, Wfpa/Wbkf (tuft) 9.1 10.9 21.9 23.9 20.2 22.0 Note 5
Riffle Max Depth @ bkf, Dmax (ft) 2.5 2.9 1.1 1.5 1.2 1.6
Riffle Max Depth Ratio, Dmax/Dbkf 1.2 1.4 1.2 1.4 1.2 1.4 Now 6
Max Depth @ tob, Dmaxtob (ft) 2.5 2.9 1.1 1.5 1.2 1.6
Bank Height Ratio, Dtob/Dmax (f /ft) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.6 Note 7
Meander Length, Lm (ft) 161 277 73 126 80 137
Meander Length Ratio, Lm/Wbkf • 7.0 1110 7,0 11.0 7.0 11.0 Note8
Radius of Curvature, Rc (ft) 46 88 21 40 23 44
Re Ratio, Rc/Wbkf • 2.0 3.5 2.0 33 2.0 35 Note 8
Belt Width, Whit (ft) 81 126 31 57 34 62
Meander Width Ratio, Wblt/Wbkf * 35 5.0 3,0 5.0 3.0 50 Note 8
Sinuosity, K 1.23 1.23 1.50 1.50 1.40 1.40 TW Ien.(Val. I
Valley Slope, Sval (ft/ft) `0033 0.0033 _ 01053 O'.OOSS 0070 ` 0.0670
Channel Slope, Schan (ft/ft) 0.0027 0.0027 0.0037 0.0037 0.0050 0.0050 Sval / K
Slope Riffle, Srif (ft/ft) 0.0035 0.0043 0.0048 0.0059 0.0065 0.0080
Riffle Slope Ratio, Srit%Schan 1.3 1.6 1.3 1.6 1.3 116 Note 9
Slope Run, Srun (tuft) 0.0013 0.0021 0.0018 0.0029 0.0025 0.0040
Run Slope Ratio, Srun/Schan 6.5 0.8 0.5 0.8 0.5 018 Note 9
Slope Glide, Sglide, (tu11) 0.0008 0.0013 0.0011 0.0018 0.0015 0.0025
Glide Slope Ratio, Sglide/Schan A3 0.5 03' 6.5 0.3 0.5 Note9
Slope Pool, Spool (tuft) 0.0005 0.0005 0.0007 0.0007 0.0010 0.0010
Pool Slope Ratio, Spool/Schan '0.20 6.20 '0.20 0,20 6.20 - 0.10 Note 9
Pool Max Depth, Dmaxpool (ft) 4.2 6.3 1.9 3.1 2.1 3.4
Pool Max Depth Ratio, Dmaxpool/Dbkf 2.0 '3.0 it ' 10 2.0 3.0 NOW 8
Pool Width, Wpool (ft) 29.9 42.9 13.6 19.5 14.8 21.2
Pool Width Ratio, Wpool/Wbkf 1.3 1.7 1.3 i..7 1.3 1.7 Note 10 s
Pool-Pool Spacing, Lps (ft) 115.1 176.5 52.4 80.4 57.0 87.4
Pool-Pool Spacing Ratio, Lps/Wbkf 5.0 7.0 5.0 7.0 5.0 70 Note 11
d 16 (mm) 0.06 0.06
d35 (mm) 0.27 0.27
d50 (mm) 2.6 2.6
d84 (mm) 27 27
d95 (mm) 40 40
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 6-4 Buck Engineering

Notes:
Note 1: A C4 stream type is appropriate for a wide alluvial valley with a gravel streambed. A C4 was used
rather than and E4 to prevent vertical streambanks, provide a more conservative design, and to allow the
stream to evolve over time.
Note 2: Bankfull indicators and the NC Rural Regional Curve were the most reliable sources for obtaining
bankfull discharge and dimension information.
Note 3: Abkf • W / D
Note 4: A final W/D ratio was selected based on relationships of W/D ratio to slope in the rural Piedmont
region combined with the dimension in "Note 1" shown above.
Note 5: Required for stream classification.
Note 6: This ratio was based on a combination of past project experiences and the reference parameters
shown in Table 5-1.
Note 7: A bank height ratio of 1.0 ensures that all flows greater than bankfull will spread onto a
floodplain. This minimizes shear stress in the channel and maximizes floodplain functionality resulting in
lower risk of channel instability.
Note 8: Values were chosen based on past project experience and the reference parameters shown in Table
5-1.
Note 9: Profile slope ratios were taken from a combination of past project experience and the reference
parameters.
Note 10: The Rosgen ratio of pool width was used because the reference data showed only a minor
increase in pool width. It is more conservative to design a pool wider than the riffle. Overtime, the pool
width may narrow, which is a positive evolution. Past project experience was also factored into the final
ratios.
Note 11: The pool to pool spacing range is widely accepted in the literature.
' 6.3 Planting Design
Species used in the restoration area were selected to mimic the undisturbed bottomland
' hardwood forest observed on site. The stream margins of the restoration site will be
planted with the following live stakes: silky willow (Salix sericea) and buttonbush
(Cephalanthus occidentalis).

The riparian area of the stream restoration site will be planted with the following bare
root seedlings: sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), willow oak (Quercus phellos),
bitternut hickory (Carya cordiformis), river birch (Betula nigra), white basswood (Tilia
heterophylla), persimmon (Diospyros virginiana), Pawpaw (Asimina triloba), and witch-
hazel (Hamamelis virginiana).
A riparian seed mix will also be applied to the site utilizing the following species:
fringed sedge (Carex crinata), soft rush (Juncus effusus), woolgrass (Scirpus cyperinus),
joe pye weed (Eupatorium fistulosum), cardinal flower (Lobelia cardinalis), and river
oats (Uniola latifolia).
See the planting plan in Appendix 4 for more information on the planting design.
Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 6-5 Buck Engineering

7 Sediment Transport Analysis
' 7.1 Background
A stable stream has the ability to move its sediment load without aggrading or degrading
' over long periods of time. The total volume of sediment transported through a cross
section consists of bedload and suspended load fractions. Suspended load is normally
composed of fine sand, silt, and clay particles transported in the water column. Bedload
is generally composed of larger particles, such as course sand, gravels, and cobbles,
transported by rolling, sliding, or hopping (saltating) along the bed.
' The ability of the stream to transport its total sediment load is quantified through two
measures: sediment transport competency and sediment transport capacity. Competency
is a stream's ability to move particles of a given size and is a measurement of force, often
expressed as units of lbs/ft2. Sediment transport capacity is a stream's ability to move a
quantity of sediment and is a measurement of stream power, often expressed as units of
lbs/ (ft-sec). Sediment transport capacity is also calculated as a sediment transport rating
curve, which provides an estimate of the quantity of total sediment load transported
through a cross section per unit time. The curve is provided as a sediment transport rate
' in lbs/sec versus discharge or stream power.
Elk Shoals Creek and the two unnamed tributaries all have median particle sizes that
result in their classification as gravel bed streams; the mainstem has a D50 of 2.6 mm,
UT 1 a D50 of 2.8 mm, and UT2 a D50 of 7.2 mm. However, more fine material was
observed in the mainstem than the tributaries during field visits. In the riffles of the
' tributaries, coarse material appeared to control grade and subsequently sediment
transport. The mainstem, with its much larger drainage area, receives significant
quantities of fine materials from both bank erosion and contributions from upstream
' catchments outside the project area. While restoration of the channel will reduce
localized bank erosion, the system will still need to be able to transport the fine materials
from upstream sources. Due to the need to transport this material, sediment transport
capacity in Elk Shoals Creek is considered more important than competency, and shear
' stress (lbs/ft2) and stream power (w/m2) were analyzed. Both tributaries to Elk Shoals
Creek were analyzed for sediment transport competency.
'
7.2 Unnamed Tributary Competency Analysis
' Median substrate size has an important influence on the mobility of particles in
streambeds. Critical dimensionless shear stress (ti*ci) is the measure of force required to
' initiate general movement of particles in a bed of a given composition. At shear stresses
exceeding this critical value, essentially all grain sizes are transported at rates in
proportion to their presence in the bed (Wohl, 2000). ti*ci can be calculated for gravel-
bed stream reaches using surface and subsurface particle samples from a stable,
representative riffle in the reach (Andrews, 1983). Critical dimensionless shear stress is
calculated as follows (Jessup, pers. comm., 2002):
1
' Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 7-1 Buck Engineering

7

1. Using the following equations, determine the critical dimensionless shear
stress required to mobilize and transport the largest particle from the bar
sample (or subpavement sample).
a) Calculate the ratio D50/D^50
Where: D50 = median diameter of the riffle bed (from 100 count
in the riffle or pavement sample)
D^50 = median diameter of the bar sample (or subpavement)
If the ratio D50/D^50 is between the values of 3.0 and 7.0, then calculate
the critical dimensionless shear stress using Equation 1.
ti*,i = 0.0834 (D50/D^50)-0.872 (Equation 1)
b) If the ratio D50/D^50 is not between the values of 3.0 and 7.0, then
calculate the ratio of D;/D50
Where: Di = Largest particle from the bar sample (or subpavement)
D50 = median diameter of the riffle bed (from 100 count in the
riffle or the pavement sample)
If the ratio Di/D50 is between the values of 1.3 and 3.0, then calculate the
critical dimensionless shear stress using Equation 2.
i#Ci = 0.0384 (Di/D50)-0887 (Equation 2)
The critical dimensionless shear stresses for both tributaries to Elk Shoals Creek was
calculated using bed material samples from stable riffles. The critical dimensionless
shear stress equations are based solely on the sediment size distribution and not on
channel dimensions. Because the design stream will have the same sediment supply as
the existing conditions, the values calculated for critical dimensionless shear stress apply
to both the existing and design conditions. The cumulative frequency curves of the
samples are shown in Appendix 1.
Data presented in Appendix 1 were used to determine particle sizes for the various
calculations. The D50/D^50 ratio for UT1 was 4.9, so Equation 1 was used to calculate
critical dimensionless shear stress. Critical dimensionless shear stress was calculated as
?kci = 0.021.
The D50/D^50 ratio for UT2 was 2.3, so Equation 1 is considered invalid. The Di/D50 ratio
was 1.6, which falls within the range considered appropriate for using Equation 2 to
calculate critical dimensionless shear stress. Critical dimensionless shear stress was
calculated using Equation 2 as r*ci = 0.025. These values of dimensionless shear stress
are used in the aggradation analysis presented below.
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 7-2 Buck Engineering
I
7.2.1 Aimradation Analysis Through Critical Depth and Slope Calculation
' An aggradation analysis was performed to predict whether the channel depth and slope
proposed in the design will cause the stream to aggrade. The aggradation analysis is
based on calculations of the required depth and slope needed to transport large sediment
' particles, in this case defined as the D 100 particle size of the subpavement sample.
Required depth can be compared with the design mean riffle depth and required slope can
be compared to the design slope to verify that the stream has sufficient competency to
' move large particles and thus prevent thalweg aggradation. The required depth and slope
are calculated by:
dr = 1.65ti*,jD;
Se

F

sr = 1.65i*?;D.
de
(Equation 3)
(Equation 4)
Where: dr (ft) = Required bankfull mean depth
de (ft)= Design bankf ill mean depth
1.65 = Sediment density (submerged specific weight)
= density of sediment (2.65) - density of water (1.0)
#,i = Critical dimensionless shear stress
D 100 (ft) = D 100 from bar sample (or subpavement)
Sr (ft/ft) = Required bankfull water surface slope
se (ft/ft) = Design bankf ill water surface slope
Using an existing slope of 0.0053 ft/ft and the subpavement D100particle diameter size of
43 mm, Equation 3 indicates a required depth of 0.9 feet for UT I, which matches exactly
the calculated mean bankf ill depth. Using the existing bankfull depth, Equation 4
indicates a required slope of 0.0054, which is equal to the existing slope. Using an
existing slope of 0.0065 ft/ft and the subpavement D 100 particle diameter size of 45 mm,
Equation 3 indicates a required depth of 1.0 feet for UT2, which is approximately equal
to the calculated mean bankf ill depth. Using the existing bankfull depth, Equation 4
indicates a required slope of 0.0062, which is approximately equal to the existing slope.
The agreement between calculated and existing depth and slope indicates that neither
stream is actively downcutting. However, the bank height ratio in UT1 riffle cross
section is 1.8 and 2.4 for UT2. The excess energy this creates in the channel during flows
greater than bankfull is currently causing lateral instability and bank erosion in both
systems.
' The proposed design for both tributaries involves creating a new channel with increased
sinuosity and decreased slope. Using the UT1 design slope of 0.0037 ft/ft and the
existing subpavement Dioo particle diameter size, Equation 3 indicates a required depth of
' 1.3 feet for the design conditions of UT I. This value is very close to the design mean
depth of 1.0 feet, indicating that the design stream will have sufficient depth to transport
the larger materials and prevent aggradation. Using the design depth, Equation 4
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 7-3 Buck Engineering

11

indicates a required slope of 0.0048, which is slightly higher but very close to the design
slope. The UT2 design slope is 0.0050 ft/ft and the existing subpavement Dloo particle
diameter size is 45 mm. Equation 3 indicates a required depth of 1.2 feet for the design
conditions. This value is approximately equal to the design mean depth of 1.1 feet,
indicating that the design stream will have sufficient depth to transport the larger
materials and prevent aggradation. Using the design depth, Equation 4 indicates a
required slope of 0.0056, which is slightly higher but very close to the design slope.
7.2.2 Competency Analysis Through Boundary Shear Stress and Shield's Curve
Comparison
As a compliment to the required depth and slope calculations, we calculated boundary
shear stresses for design riffle cross sections and compared these with a modified
Shield's Curve to predict sediment transport competency. The shear stress placed on the
sediment particles is the force that entrains and moves the particles, given by:
ti = yRs (Equation 5)
Where, ti = shear stress (lb/ft)
y = specific gravity of water (62.4 lb/ft)
R = hydraulic radius (ft)
s = average channel slope (ft/ft)
The boundary shear stress estimated for the UT1 design cross-section is 0. 19 lb/ft'. The
measured D1oo of the subpavement was 43 mm. As shown on the Modified Shield's
Curve (Figure7-1), this value of shear stress and the D 100 value are within the range of
values used to calculate the regression equation. The boundary shear stress estimated for
the UT2 design cross-section is 0.28 lb/ft2. The measured D100 of the subpavement was
45 mm. Also shown on the Modified Shield's Curve (Figure 7-1), this value of shear
stress and the D1oo value are within the range of values used to calculate the regression
equation. The Shield's Curve analysis supports the critical depth based conclusion that
the design-cross sections can move sediment competently and prevent aggradation.
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 7-4 Buck Engineering

1001
500
200
100
50
44
20
d
y 10
a
y 5
A 2
1
0.5
0.2
0.1
0.001 0.002 0.005 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.1 02 0.5 1.0
T, critical shear stress, lbsfsq ft

% i UT1 Design
0 UT2 Design

' -Leopold, et al.

,?'
• t - - Rosgen & Harman

2 5 10
(Data from. Leopold, Woknan, and fffler 1964; Rosgen, personal comnam.; and
Jarman, personal cornmu n.)
Figure 7-1 Modified Shield's Curve for Grain Diameter of Transported
Particle in Relation to Critical Shear Stress.
7.2.3 Degradation Analysis
Degradation analysis was performed in order to assess whether the design cross sections
would result in scour and bed downcutting. We evaluated the potential for degradation
by examining the upper competency limits for design cross sections and by reviewing
existing and design grade control at the site.
The calculated shear stress discussed in Section 7.2.2 can be used to describe the upper
competency limits for the design channel. The estimated boundary shear stress for UT1
was 0.19 lbs/ft2. Based on the Modified Shield's Curve (Figure 7-1), shear stress in this
range will move particles up to about 45 mm in size, which is equal to the measured
subpavement Dloo particle size. The estimated boundary shear stress for UT2 was 0.28
lbs/ft2. Based on the Modified Shield's Curve (Figure 7-1), shear stress in this range will
move particles up to about 60 mm in size, which is very close to the measured
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 7-5
Buck Engineering

' subpavement Dloo particle size, which was in the range of 45-64 mm. Reach wide
confidence in vertical stability of the streambed comes from a review of grade control at
' the project site. The existing culvert at the downstream end of the project site will
prevent reach wide degradation. In stream structures throughout the project will help
control grade locally.
7.3 Capacity Analysis
Sediment transport capacity, measured as unit stream power (Watts/m2), was compared
for the existing stream channel, relic stream channel, and design conditions. Table 7-1
' shows bankfull boundary shear stress and stream power values for existing, relic, and
design conditions. Stream power values for the existing, relic, and design conditions all
compare well to values for similar streams and valley types described in Nanson and
Croke, 1992. According to their classification system, Elk Shoals Creek is classified as a
133 valley type (gravel bed streams in wide alluvial valleys). The range of stream powers
for this valley type in their study is 10 to 60 W/M2. Figure 7-2 shows sediment transport
rate which is related to stream power as a function of stage for the existing channel
' conditions. Figure 7-3 shows sediment transport rate as a function of stage for the design
and relic channel conditions. Sediment transport rate is significantly higher at higher
stages for the existing conditions channel due to the higher bank height ratios. Flows
' higher than bankfull are trapped in the existing incised channel resulting in excess in
channel power. The design channel will allow flows greater than bankfull to spread out
' on the floodplain thus dissipating this excess energy.

Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 7-6 Buck Engineering
I Table 7-1 Boundary Shear Stresses and Stream Power for Existing, Relic, and
Design Conditions in Elk Shoals Creek
Parameter Existing
Channel Relic Channel Design
Channel
Bankfull Q (cfs) 270 270 270
Bankfull Area (sq ft) 53.3 53.2 53.4
Bankfull Width, W (ft) 21.7 22.7 25
Bankfull Mean Depth, D (ft) 2.5 2.3 2.14
Width to Depth Ratio, W/D
(ft/ft) 8.9 9.7 11.7
Wetted Perimeter 24.8 24.3 26.2
Hydraulic Radius, R (ft) 2.15 2.19 2.04
Slope (ft/ft) 0.003 0.004 0.004
Boundary Shear Stress, ti 0.4 0.54 0.34
Stream Power (W/mz) 29.5 39.9 25.0

Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 7-7 Buck Engineering

Stage vs. Stream Power
14 - - -- - -- - - --- -- - -- - - -
12
0 10
- -
CL --
= H 8
ev tR --
0 2 4 6 8
Stage (ft)
L--*- Existing X-Sec 2 -a Existing X-Sec 1
Figure 7-2 Stage vs. Stream Power for Elk Shoals Existing Channel.
Stage vs. Stream Power
4
d
3.5
r- 3
0
CL
N 2.5
-,
2
1.5
Ic
E 1
d 0.5
IN 0
i
Figure 7-3
Property -
vs. Stream Power for Elk Shoals Design and Relic Channels.
Stage (ft)
--*---Design f Relic X-Sec 1 Relic X-Sec 2
Buck ngineen
8 Flooding Analyses
The project site has been located on the Federal Emergency Management Agency's
(FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps. The Elk Shoals Creek floodplain is designated
Zone A, which means base flood elevations were not determined and the site is not a
detailed study area. Existing and proposed HEC-RAS models were developed from
survey data in order to determine flooding impacts. Discharges were estimated for the 5,
' 10, 25, 50, and 100 year flood using the USGS Rural Regression Equations for the Blue
Ridge-Piedmont Region. The bankfull discharge was estimated using the Rural Piedmont
Regional Curve. One of the purposes of the proposed restoration is to allow Elk Shoals
' Creek to reconnect to its floodplain. Raising the bed elevation of the existing incised
channel will impact the water surface elevations, specifically the bankfull water surface
elevation. For further analysis see Appendix 5.
I
Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 8-1 Buck Engineering
9 Monitoring and Evaluation
Environmental components monitored in this project will be those that allow an
evaluation of channel stability and survivability of riparian vegetation. Post-restoration
monitoring report and success criteria are shown below.
9.1 Vegetation Monitoring
Successful restoration of the vegetation is dependent upon hydrologic restoration, active
planting of preferred canopy species, and volunteer regeneration of the native plant
community. In order to determine if the criteria are achieved, Buck Engineering will
install vegetation-monitoring stations. The location of three individual monitoring plots
will be determined during the as-built survey. Vegetation monitoring will occur in
spring/summer. Individual plot data for woody species will be provided. Plot data will
not be averaged over the entire site to obtain a single figure for stem density. The
enumeration of the density of planted species will equal the number of remaining stems
in the plot divided by the plot size in acres. Individual seedlings will be marked such that
they can be found in succeeding monitoring years. Mortality will be determined from the
difference between the previous year's living planted seedlings and the current year's
living planted seedlings. In years 3 and 5, the species composition, density, and survival
will be evaluated.
9.2 Stream Monitoring
Monitoring of restored stream reaches will be conducted for a five year monitoring
period to evaluate the effectiveness of the restoration practices. The effectiveness will be
determined by monitoring the stream's bankfull events, specific cross sections,
longitudinal profile, and through the use of photo referencing. The methods used are
described below for each parameter.
9.2.1 Cross-sections
Two permanent cross-sections will be installed per 2,000 linear feet of stream restoration
work, with one located at a riffle cross-section and one located at a pool cross-section.
The cross sections will be surveyed for the as-built and years three and five. Each cross
section will be marked on both banks with permanent pins to establish the exact transect
used. A common benchmark will be used for cross-sections and consistently used to
facilitate easy comparison of data.
9.2.2 Bankfull Event
The occurrence of bankfull events within the monitoring period will be documented by
the use of a crest gauge and photographs. The crest gauge will record the highest
Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 9-1 Buck Engineering
0
' watermark between site visits, and the gauge will be checked each time there is a site
visit to determine if a bankfull event has occurred. Photographs will be used to document
' the occurrence of debris lines and sediment deposition on the floodplain during
monitoring site visits.
' 9.2.3 Longitudinal Profile
A longitudinal profile will be completed for the as-built and years three and five of the
' monitoring period. The profile will be conducted for a length of restored channel at least
1,000 feet in length (500 ft near the beginning of the project and the last 500 feet).
Measurements will include thalweg, water surface, bankfull, and top of low bank. Each
' of these measurements will be taken at the head of each feature (e.g., riffle, pool, and the
max pool depth. The survey will be tied to a permanent benchmark.
9.2.4 Photo Reference Sites
Photographs will be used to visually document restoration success. Reference stations
will be photographed before construction and continued for at least 5 years following
construction. Reference photos will be taken once a year. After construction has taken
place, reference stations will be marked.

Lateral reference photos. Reference photo transects will be taken at each permanent
cross section. Photographs will be taken of both banks at each cross section. The survey
tape will be centered in the photographs of the bank. The water line will be located in the
lower edge of the frame and as much of the bank as possible included in each photo.
Photographers should make an effort to consistently maintain the same area in each photo
' over time.

' Structure photos. Photographs will be taken at each grade control structure along the
restored stream. Photographers should make every effort to consistently maintain the
same area in each photo over time.

9.3 Success Criteria
Two bankfull flow events must be documented within the 5-year monitoring period. The
two bankfull events must occur in separate years.
' 9.3.1 Cross Section Success Criteria
If changes in the cross section take place they should be evaluated to determine if they
represent a movement toward a more unstable condition (e.g., down-cutting or erosion)
or are minor changes that represent an increase in stability (e.g., settling, vegetative
changes, deposition along the banks, or decrease in width/depth ratio). Cross-sections
' shall be classified using the Rosgen stream classification method and all monitored cross-
sections should fall within the quantitative parameters defined for channels of the design
stream type.
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 9-2 Buck Engineering

9.3.2 Longitudinal Profile Success Criteria
' The longitudinal profiles should show that the bedform features are remaining stable, i.e.,
they match reference reach ratios. The pools should remain deep with flat water surface
' slopes and the riffles should remain steeper and shallower than the pools. Bedforms
'
Photographs will be used to subjectively evaluate channel aggradation or degradation,
' bank erosion, success of riparian vegetation and effectiveness of erosion control
measures. Longitudinal photos should indicate the absences of developing bars within the
channel or an excessive increase in channel depth. Lateral photos should not indicate
I excessive erosion or continuing degradation of the banks over time. A series of photos

1

observed 9.3.3 shPhotoould be consReferenceistent wStationith those Success observed Criteria for channels of the design stream type.
over time should indicate successional maturation of riparian vegetation.
9.4 Monitoring Report
Monitoring reports will be prepared in the fall for the as-built and years 3 and 5 of
monitoring and submitted to Restoration Systems. The monitoring reports will include:
A narrative summarizing the condition of the restored site and all regular
maintenance activities;
2. As-built topographic map showing location of sampling plots, permanent photo
points, location of transects, etc.;
3. Cross sections and profiles;
4. Photographs showing views of the restored site taken from fixed-point stations
from a height of approximately five to six feet. Permanent markers shall be
established to ensure that the same locations (and view directions) on the site are
monitored in each monitoring period;
5. Vegetation success;
6. Identification of any invasion by undesirable plant species, including
quantification of the extent of invasion of undesirable plants by either stem
counts, percent cover, or area, whichever is appropriate;
7. A description of any damage done by animals.
Sink Property -Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 9-3 Buck Engineering
J

10 References

Andrews, E. D. 1983. Entrainment of gravel from naturally sorted river bed material,
Geological Society of America Bulletin, 94, 1225-1231.
Copeland, R.R, D.N. McComas, C.R. Thorne, P.J. Soar, M.M. Jones, and J.B. Fripp.
2001. United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE). Hydraulic Design of
Stream Restoration Projects. Washington, DC.
Dunne, T. and L. B. Leopold, 1978. Water in Environmental Planning. New York: W. H.
Freeman and Company.
Federal Interagency Stream Restoration Working Group (FISRWG). 1998. Stream
Corridor Restoration: Principles, Processes and Practices. National Technical
Information Service, Springfield, VA.
' H
W
A
G
D
arman,
.
.,
.
. Jennings, J.M. Patterson, D.R. Clinton, L.O. Slate, A.G. Jessup, J.R.
Everhart, and R.E. Smith, 1999. Bankfull Hydraulic Geometry Relationships for
North Carolina Streams. Wildland Hydrology. AWRA Symposium Proceedings.
Edited by: D.S. Olsen and J.P. Potyondy. American Water Resources Association.
June 30-July 2, 1999. Bozeman, MT.
h
Jo
nson, P.A., and T.M. Heil, 1996. Uncertainty in Estimating Bankfull Conditions.
Water Resources Bulletin. Journal of the American Water Resources Association
' 32(6):1283-1292.
Kilpatrick, F.A., and H.H. Barnes Jr. 1964. Channel Geometry of Piedmont Streams as
' Related to Frequency of Floods. Professional Paper 422-E. US Geological Survey,
Washington, DC.
Knighton, David. 1984. Fluvial Forms and Processes. Rutledge, Chapman, and Hall,
Inc. New York, NY.
Merigliano, M.F. 1997. Hydraulic Geometry and Stream Channel Behavior: An
Uncertain Link. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 33(6):1327-
1336.
'
Nanson, G.C. and J.C. Croke, 1992. A Genetic Classification of Floodplains.
Geomorphology 4(1992); 459-486.
'
Nixon, M., 1959. A Study of Bankfull Discharges of Rivers in England and Wales. In
Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, vol. 12, pp. 157-175.
Rinaldi, M. and P.A. Johnson, 1997. Stream Meander Restoration. Journal of the
' American Water Resources Association 33:855-866.
Sink Property- Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 10-1 Buck Engineering

Rosgen, D. L. 1994. A classification of natural rivers. Catena 22:169-199.
Rosgen, D.L., 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology Books, Pagosa
Springs, Colo.
Rosgen, D.L., 1997. A geomorphological approach to restoration of incised rivers. In:
Wang, S.S.Y, E.J. Langendoen, and F.D. Shields, Jr. (Eds.). Proceedings of the
Conference on Management of Landscapes Disturbed by Channel Incision. pp. 12-
22.
' Rosgen, D.L., 1998. The Reference Reach - a Blueprint for Natural Channel Design.
Draft Presented at ASCE Conference on River Restoration in Denver Colorado -
March, 1998. ASCE. Reston, VA.

Rosgen, D.L. 2001. A stream channel stability assessment methodology. Proceedings of
the Federal Interagency Sediment Conference, Reno, NV, March, 2001.
Russo, M. 2000. Threatened and Endangered Species in Forests of North Carolina: A
Guide to Assist with Forestry Activities. International Paper Company.
Schumm, S.A., 1960. The Shape of Alluvial Channels in Relation to Sediment Type. U.S.
Geological Survey Professional Paper 352-B. U.S. Geological Survey, Washigton,
DC.
Simon, A. 1989. A model of channel response in disturbed alluvial channels. Earth
Surface Processes and Landforms 14(1):11-26.
US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2002. Threatened and Endangered Species in
North Carolina. http://southeast.fws.gov/es/county%201ists.htm.
Williams, G.P., 1978. Bankfull Discharge of Rivers. Water Resources Research
14(6):1141-1154.
Wohl, E.E. 2000. Mountain rivers. Am. Geophys. Union Press, 320 pp.
Wolman, M.G., 1954. A Method of Sampling Course River-Bed Material. Transactions
of American Geophysical Union 35: 951-956.
Wolman, M.G. and L.B. Leopold., 1957. River Floodplains: Some Observations on their
Formation. USGS Professional Paper 282-C. U.S. Geological Survey, Washington,
DC.
Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek Mitigation Plan 10-2 Buck Engineering

101
100
99
98
x
0 97
> 96
w
w 95
94
93
92
0
1
4
7
9
11
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Riffle Sink Site - Existing Channel
Riffle
Sink Site - Existing Channel
0.85 99.15
0.76 99.24 95.59 983
0.58 99.42
0.55 99.45
0.97 99.03
1.41 98.59
1.69 98.31
2.48 97.52
3.87 96.13
53.3 x4ectlWarea? 2.5 d mean ,?
21.7 width 24.8 wet P:
3.1 d max > 2.2 h" d rein
6.2 bank h - 8.9 W/d ratio
29.5 Wtft60# Cone area 1.4 eht ratio
4.47 95.53
5.45 94.55
6.86 93.14
6.98 93.02
7.13 92.87
7.06 92.94
7.14 92.86
7.25 92.75
7.2 92.8
7.18 92.82
ti
0.0
V°elocit`s ft/sec .
0.0 dl'scha' g e rate Q ? cfs
0.00 ShearMress Ibs/ft s r
0.00 shear velocity (I`Usec)'
0.000 unit stream' power Ibs/ft/sec
0.00 Froude number
0.0 frfCtf6fiJactor u/u'l
L 00 tblas old rain Size mml
7.2 92.8
7.13 92.87 chdCk r4M,i'
93.02 2 measdre&D84. mm)
92.99 28.2 relativ'r6U hness; 11.1 f , factor,
92.97 0.000 Mantlln 'Si'rtRom, Channel rtiaterlai ? -
92.95
93.02
92.66
92.5
92.48
93.02
93.46
93.58
93.8
96.7
97.38
98.7
OA AA
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Width from River Left to Right (ft)

Riffle Sink Site - Existing Channel
103
101
99
c
°- 97
m
U' 95
93
91
0
KI111e
Sink Site - Existing Channel
J V.JJ
98.42
97.98
97.49
96.83
96.09
95.16
94.24
91.82
91.76
91.94
92.08
92.15
92.13
92.16
9208
.91.96
91.87
91.85
92.08
93.07
93.85
97.58
97.74
98.41
98.56
98.86
99.07
52. a
18.4 width 21.7 wet P
3.6 d rrlbz 2.4 h yd radi
6.7 bank ht 6.4 w/d ratiO
67.0 W flood- rone,area 3.6
0.0 veloclt' f'Jsec)-
0.0 dischar e rate, Q cfs
0.00 shear stress Ibs/ft s
0.00 shear velocl x'ft/sec
0.000 unit stream owes Ibs/ft/sec)
0.00 Froudefiumber
0.0 frlctidmfactoru/u"
A 9 threshold rain size mm,
K-from c an e rrfq
27
r measured D$4 mm
3.0
33 refatfVb,'rbu 111125x1 15 fric factor,,
000
. ManF(h ''s n from'channel materials
35 98.42
8 x«seCtidh ar6'a - 2.9 d' me° n
n
entratio? .
5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Width from River Left to Right (ft)

1

u

O U
o
C3 -0 C)

_?__ _. _. _ . .. .... . .... .... . _.. ..._ .___ .__. . O)
o

O
O

° n o

a?
w

> o

--- ----- ----
E

1 a ° N

? a >

c .
. ... -
.- N

CL N
>
0
?r
- T m
E
_

E 00
C)
C14
? m
o w

m
n

05 -
°
aa)
L
O
.n Y f -- -- N
COL
ff'
f
a
o I - U N Q

I
U) O

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O
O
O O
m O
00 O
h
( O O O O
O (n at co O
N O O
(p
Q
O O
o
ueyljawd ;ua aad

c t It
?p LO LO r MNmO?e-V O MLO s'- .--0 0000 O O O O O 00
0 0
?
0
N N (f)c} ?1? V M?? V (0
00
?0 O O O O 0 0 0 0 0
IL
C\l
O ? ? to N V w 00 O N N LO mo m CO
N C)
cO (0 04 ?
0 co
0 (D
0 >>

O O O m V (
o N Cl) X
'-
N
V U U
E N
U
01 0 N

ti
M C
W
O N
Op
c)
NLr)
O
O
N
V
(D
00
?
(D
N
M
LO
T
c,
"00
OOO
?tO7
N
O
O >N d
> N
O O " N M O
N N
C (n ?
p 4j 'OD 'OD C

co
10
10
10 N N O) N O) N O) 0) 0)
> > > > > > > > > N N N N
-0 .0 -D .0 N N a) N O)

0

H
a .m T o
N
cn (n
N [2 1! E2 E2 O m m m E2
0) Of0) 0) 0) 0) mm .? m a
8
°
88 =3
6:3o
a
?
? am ro E NN

C: c ?,?
m m

,v
m,
EEum?um
3
? (
0
- ??'m C' ???

E m m m

a.
2- cL) ?
?
-
.
co as a; as
E ?
2) 21
"a iL E es 0 a) us (n
> E E
t
>
N N
>
N
3 U

0
E U
2
o
- 0
O a) O
C

-
_. a
_
-o
o
.. .. ..._ , ... --- ---- - :3 c=)
. - -
O
O C

d
C
a) -0
o

12

E ? m
> o
o
CO
CD

1 ,- 1 _ Qc7

? a) c
05 ' D_ N f0
Y
U) .
O

o
U
?
1
"
?
m
y

a)
CL
J
E
E
LO
p

v
? - ,
- - a)
r ?
K1 ?
c4
=3
U m E p m
C:
a) m

m a)
-
a - -- o m (D O
7: 0

a;
o

Z + a)

CIL
N

M

N

0 00 0 0 00 0 000
O 00) 00 0 r- (OD ? I tt M N - 0 (D Q
E li
ue U Jaw =1 aua OJa d

c
p
A
N
N
?
N
M
N
r
?-
v
le
t-
M
U
N
co

0 M
- O
C,

W

N

'

D

0

?

w

?

m 00

N O

O w

0 N

10 N "T

04 CO

O O

0) O

0
E 0 O O N M ?' D
C N CO O O O U
E O N a)

0) ?
om

m
c

O
N
p
co

N

OO

N

V

V7

O

?

0

N

M

V

?
00
N
O
a0
(D
O
N
w
N
?
?
co
O n.
N p 0 O N CO 0 e-- N ~O

> > > > > > > > > a) d m m a)
C
7 l9 c c c c c
m m m m m f0 (` m N N N N N N ? ? a o
d 1] 'O •O "? 'O
7 p

°
m m
(A (4 V) N
c c E
c cm 0)
?
? O O
(g u (? 8 7 7 7 7

00000 -O

0
) m N w
??
`° i a
a
i m
12
i2 `
w wv
m 3 2 a)
m m E
a o
()`? m
m
v
m m E =
__
°
t° rn
E
`
E
> E ? ma)8888 )
a m
u
iv
iBm
> E E
a) E 2? a)
E
y > a
) m
> > > >

Y

L

r

C
CI

-_ O a O

_
_ N

-- C
- ---- d O

O
O >

j
N N
.
a
u L o

m

w
'
o w N v
o

I co
U)
V

c - o
N

- `r

0 N

N
I
a
7 _ E Q N
U + m

-
1-
=
a c
m
a ?, Y
a ?, + y
p
- o m (
n 7
l - - - r? - Q O

-
CD
Z - --E s
.
- 4) M
Q Q
Z
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O
O M M S? W IA V M O O O (p Q
Q
ueyl Jaui d;ua paa d

c
to
?'
M
?-
t0
N
r
O
O
O
N
O
?-
r
M

CV
Zo

0 m
Lo

r

N

v

p

M

?

?

N

M

?

V

0

W
N

CD
°

(0
LI

N
)
0

N
1 IT

0 00

0 (0

O :3

C
E
p 0 0 0 f
0 p
j
r
N
v u
E

m

p N

O LO

N

c--

N

V

(O

e

.

rn

N

M

U7

(0 v 00

?
d
(0
N 0 0 0 0 I l V cb ? N co ?... O
N O
H
c c c c c >>>>>>>>> N N
N N N Y
?
7
C
(p
N 0 to w 10 rn N
m m N N N N (` N 2 .Q
-0 -0 -0 -0 V
-0 -a
-5 -5 '0 75 -5 0
V
o m u N m E w N rn rnrnrnrnrnrnrn 8 8 8 8 0 000 0 ?° N
(0 (C (
0
_ C C C 7 7 N N N E tz --

y -
v, .
.
m (0
o
N
c w w
m (
v (
a (
o
tz
E .? N N
0 m B rn
9,
E
> E
V p
p
p
p
N N N U U U U N N
(0 f0
(
A 0)

L E E
E N
E
> > > ' >
0

L U LJ L
a?
U
(0
C
7
C>' Q
C;) M > LL
In
Vl
II
x
to
M
N 00

Cl)
ICI I I
W x
LO
N
N
w
A
0
cv
n
d
w
a
H
0
LO
f-11 1- 0
o M M r- 0
rn rn rn rn rn rn
(al) UOIJUAOIH llzr W) o kn N 000 O ?-. N
O = ? V
l N
O 00 . r
O
15 0.
O 00.. O a
C x a
c a0..a ?
3 x
U
H 0..a U 0
z o a m 0 o
04

F

o

V.??} RC
4
l

u ?O
v; 1O
13,
wn V
?o o0
1*
\6 N
In
t- o0
17,
t- N
1:
oo VD
V-
oo 00
oo C,
oo
oo N
ai ?i
\0 N
?o

i? r .:r ? N N N N

v -n rn
a, o 0 0
II II II II II
W
CA
N N
C? a,
?00
M M O> O'
• - . 00 00
00 00 ?o ?o
N N N N
C, a1 rn rn
N N r
,' N cr? N

In
1.0
II
x
i ?
U)
c
Q
ca
o, c CO LL
O
O
a
F

0
M
r ?
N '-
LO
N
II
W x
Oa
O
N
w
Lr) C
r. O

O
r
Lf)

U
O?
?-^ M V1 Vl N
?
06 N t„
W
II II II II II ct?
co3 b
3 M
Q b
m

"I"', CD
o M W r` 0 LO
M M N N N N N
m m m m m m m
(13) uOIjenal2[
y en
N V1 ?D OHO O Vl O

O r G\
- l
0 01
- W
0 vl
Cl --?
0
0 0 3 0 0 0 ? °
H a t•-? a a ?-• E~ t~ H H c4

??]]

ONi
v N
n r
v
o
° ,--.
°` n
OO N
°O Ori ONO ? M

r r a v t
• f n r_ x
h r
Vl W)
rn C,
00
N
Z, O
00 00 ?6 O
ON rn rn rn
.-. N O

PEBBLE COUNT DATA SHEET

L

F

SITE OR PROJECT: Elk Shoals
REACH/LOCATION: UT #1
DATE COLLECTED: 2120/2004
FIELD COLLECTION BY: Hutton, Wadsworth, Glickauf
DATA ENTERED BY: Glickauf
SEDIMENT ANALYSIS DATA SHEET
P ARTICLE CLA SS Reach Summary Riffle Summary Pool S ummary
MATERIAL PARTICLE SIZE (mm) Riffle Pool Total Cl... % %Cum Class % %Cum Class % % Cum SIZE (mm)
Silt / Clay c .063 - 9.0 6.0 15.00 15.00 15.00 15.00 15.00 15.00 15.00 0.063
s Ct't't't't t'Y
t'Yt't 1'ts?' L '3 t'ti t't't't' Very Fine 063-125 8,0 1,0 9.00 9.00 24.00 13.33 2833 2.50 17.50 0.125
L i i tt.'L i l i i Fine 125-25 6.0 6.0 12.00 12.00 36.00 10.00 38.33 15.00 32.50 0.25
5 A N D ' Medium 25-50 2.0 2.0 4.00 4.00 40.00 3.33 41.67 5.00 37.50 0.50
1 sit ,tts
t,tttis,? t ,t
L,t ?i t•tt ;t
'
Coarse
.50-1.0
1.0
5.0
8.00
6.00
48.00
1.87
43.33
12.50
50.00
1.0
tt'
tti
g,i.;. t
s ;t ;i

Very Coarse

1.0-2.0

3,0

3.00

3.00

49.00

43.33

7.50

57.50

2.0
O
0 Very Fine 2.0-2.8 1.0 1.00 1.00 50.00 43.33 2.50 60.00 2.8
^
l"T
Very Fine
2.8-4.0
1.0
1.00
1.00
51.00
43.33
2.50
62.50
4.0
Fine 4.0-5.6 9.0 9.00 9.00 60.00 43.33 22.50 85.00 5.6
0 Fine 5.6-8.0 3,0 3.00 3.00 63.00 5.00 48.33 85.00 8.0

GRAVEL Medium 8.0-11.0 7.0 1.0 8.00 8.00 71.00 11.67 60.00 2.50 87.50 11.0
Medium 11.0-16.0 9.0 3.0 12.00 12.00 83.00 15.00 75.00 7.50 95.00 16.0
Coarse 16 - 22.6 7.0. 1.0. ,.' 8.00 8.00 91.00 11.87 86.67 2.50 97.50 22.8
Q O Coarse 22.6 - 32 4.0 1.0 5.00 5.00 96.00 6.67 93.33 2.50 100.00 32

0 Very Coarse 32.45 '4,Q 4.00 4.00 100.00 6.67 100.00 100.00 45
0OO
Vary Coarse
45 - 84
100.00
100.00
100.00
84
Small 64 - 90 100.00 100.00 100.00 90
Small 90-128 100.00 100.00 100.00 128
COBBLE t Large 128 - 180 100.00 100.00 100.00 180
O Large 180 - 256 100.00 100.00 100.00 256
Small 258 -362 100.00 100.00 100.00 362

BOULDER Small 362 - 512 100.00 100.00 100.00 512
Medium 512 - 1024 100.00 100.00 100.00 1024
Large-Very Large 1024-2048 100.00 100.00 100.00 2048
BEDROCK Bedrocks > 2048 100.00 100.00 100.00 > 2048
60.00 40.00 100.00 100 100 100 100
Channel materials
d16 #N/A
d35 0.24mm
d50 2.80mm
d84 16.83mm
d95 23.43mm

aaui:l IUGOJGd ani;elnwno
0
C) m co C) 0 o CD Lo v o N 0 0
i
c
a>
_

c d
U j
a (o
0) :
W E
m
U U

(O V N o oO CD N
C)
;uaoJad sselD
c
O
- A
O C"
A A
O! 0!
c'
191-
Q-,
O,
O
00` 6'
A9
g9
C'
0 U
,'9 m
0.
C? N
d
9
09 ! v
c4
0. oa
!
0, o?
19s, 19s
O'
o?
Off, 0?1
o?
O2 !
0 `0s.
s.o
0`9O . '90.
J

n
CI
1

u

Pavement/Subpavement Analysis
SITE OR PROJECT: Elk Shoals UT 1
REACH/LOCATION: X-2
DATE COLLECTED: 20-Feb-04
FIELD COLLECTION BY: Heath, John H., Steve G.
LAB ANALYSIS BY: Mike R.
LARGEST SUSPAVEMENT: 43 mm
SEDIMENT ANALYSIS DATA SHEET
Pavement Subpavement
MATERIAL PARTICLE SIZE (mm) 100 d Bucket (g) Bucket (g)
Sill / Clay c .062 - 7.0
s t'Yitiit'i +

tit t;iiiitt
is t:,is iitt
tttst ittt'+
tiff tii iiitt Very Fine

ine .052-125

125-.25
22.0

120.5
SAND Medium .25-.50 488.0
...,.? i ,
it't 'i'Mi t t
itt?
t;iii+
Coarse
.50-1.0
415.0
{
ittt tint
t? ;;Litt ,,
Very Coarse
1.0-2.0
529.0.

O Very Fine 2.0-2.8 479.0
n
00 Z?
Very Fine
2.8-4.0
241.0
Fine 4.0-5.6 7.0 264.0
Fine 5.6-8.0 13.5 266.0
GRAVEL Medium 8.0-11.0 50.5 342,0
Medium 11.0-16.0 95.5 340.0
00 Coarse 16.0-22.6 113.0 429.5
0 0 Coarse 22.6-32 405.0 489.
Very Coarse 32.45 121.0 503.0
n 00(X1 Very Coarse 45 - 84 48.0
Small 84 - 90
COBBLE Small 90 - 128
(JU Large 128 - 180
O Large 180 - 256
Small 256 - 362
BOULDER Small 362 - 512
Medium 512 - 1024
Large - Very Large 1024 - 2048
BEDROCK Bedrock >2048
Totals: 0.00 805.50 4983
Paveme nt - bucket Subpav ement
Class Cum Class % % Cum SIZE (mm)
0.00 0.1 0.14 0.063
0.00 0.4 0.58 0.125
0.00 2.4 3.00 0.25
0.00 9.8 12.79 0.50
0.00 8.3 21.12 1.0
0.00 10,6 31.74 2.0
0.00 9.6 41.35 2.8
0.00 4.8 46.19 4.0
0.87 0.87 5.3 51.49 5.6
1.68 2.55 5.3 56.82 8.0
6.27 8.81 6.9 63.69 11.0
11.86 20.67 6,8 70.51 16
14.03 34.70 8.6 79.13 22.6
50.28 84.98 9.8 86.94 32
15.02 100.00 10.1 99.04 45
100.00 1.0 100.00 64
100.00 0, 0 100.00 90
100.00 0.0 100.00 128
100.00 0.0 100.00 180
100.00 0.0 100.00 256
100.00 0.0 100.00 362
100.00 0.0 100.00 512
100.00 0.0 100.00 1024
100.00 0.0 100.00 2048
100.00 0.0 100.00 >2048
100 100 100 100
Channel materials Channel m aterials
D,, =
D,s =
Ds =
D14 =
D. = 14.03mm
22.66mm
25.46mm
31.82mm
40.67mm D„ =
Ds =
D,u =
Ds, =
N, = 0.69mm
2.27mm
5.15mm
27.27mm
39.80mm

t
r O
O
I- E
? O
Y >
d
L Z .Q
V
N O Cl)
O
s =
CO O
Y E
W >
m
a

- Y
U
C ?
i
N
-- cn E
fl- N
- N
U) a
(??o);uGOJBd GAIJBinwno
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
E
E
c
t
H
d
O C
LL
m
G1
v
a
17
0
0
O
U
PC
7
U)
-p 7 `
C
7
Cr co > LL
N
O
M
rn
w
w
?i
N
F
O
O
N
O
LO
w
O O
ee
O
M 7
^- N
11 II
W x
W
N h -O N
O O ?
II II II II II
??taQe
W ?
x
o?

,It I'll
CN ON
d. 00
(31 CD
N N 00 00
M M
N N N N
U ON 0\ rn
I I
0
a0 L? (p Ln ? M N ?
N N N N N N N N
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
()3) UOIJUA31 r[

0
o 0
a 0
a 0
a 0
a W
0 0
a ? 0
a.

3 O

?

v

?
3 0

a 0

a 0
a 4

0 0

a. 0

a. 0

a.
z 0 0 0 0 a 0 ? 0 ,? 0 ? 0 0 ? 0 ? 0 0 0
_
V
R,'
y M N M p
p!,
t`
j? "? +
V^
t ?n
y
{ ?
y ?
y (
.? t
`
J C
V

k' ?n
N
'^ N
n
vi N

v'i O
N vi
N
00 N
O
01 M
N
ON N
M
Oi M
It
Oi N
7
C;
N [?
?O
00 oo
N
00 N
00
L-- O
7
L-
^-
Vi V
vl
Vl m
I:r
V1
N
vi
?
Syr cr1 +?
-
G?'?
t
? 2V N
6 KY
G7 tW
Q G7
? N7 47 rT
?C T x E Y ` ,

W) N M N
(:N O F O
U
(Q
7
U)
C
7 c: >? Q
" cu
0) m > LL
O

d' N

O wx
M W
w
O G
N
ca
O
O
a
N
F
D
O
r
O
I- CO U') It M N T-
" N N N N N N
O O O O O O O
(13) uOIJUA31H
r]
M
rn
u
x
CIS

? ?D ?D DD

i 00

? N h
N 00

5 M

en
N
P
?
j O
0 ?D
0 v
i
,-- --? 'ct
(V ?O
C4 M
'-' ?O
0 M
0 0
o a 0 a4
? a ?
3 v ? a a x
? ?
3 a x
a a 0 a
z o a a o ,, H O O o ? 0 ? 0

F`

W? 7 M r 00 N <Y O W ONO

I'D 00 N

r

i
-It r o0 0, o, o, o0 00 00 v
c

O
O r` N 7 M
00 N
?Q
00 00
O O
? ?
Wi ..
00 N
00 00 ?t
M M N N
rn rn rn ?
M 00 M O
? O
PEBBLE COUNT DATA SHEET
SITE OR PROJECT: Elk Shoals
REACH/LOCATION: LIT #2
DATE COLLECTED: 2/202004
FIELD COLLECTION BY: Hutton, Wadsworth, Glickauf
DATA ENTERED BY: Glickauf
SEDIMENT ANALYSIS DATA SHEET
P ARTICLE CLA SS Reach Riffle Summary Pool Su mmary
MATERIAL PARTICLE SIZE (mm) Riffle Pool Total Class % A Class % %Cum Class % %Cum SIZE (mm)
Sill I Clay <.063 - .2.0 1.0. 3.00 2.73 2.73 2.86 2.86 2.50 2.50 0.063
tttY'sita Very Fine .063-.125 2.73 2.86 2.50 0.125
t L'L'L t'L'CL'2' Fine .125-25 13.0 20.0 33.00 30.00 32.73 18.57 21.43 50.00 52.50 0.25
S A N D Medium 25-50 3.0 4.0 7.00 6.36 39.09 4.29 25.71 10.00 62.50 0.50
tl;tsttt Y
tt;L tt tit
ttittttt'
Coarse
.50-1.0
1,0
2,0
3.00
2.73
41.82
1.43
27.14
5.00
87.50
1.0
Lt'titititittiti
tl LLLLitY
Very Coarse
1.0-2.0
41.82
27.14
87.50
2.0
OWQ) O
O Very Fine 2.0-2.8 2.0 2.00 1.82 43.64 27.14 5.00 72.50 2.8
n
't7
Very Fine
2.8-4.0
1.0
1.0
2.00
1.62
45.45
1.43
28.57
2.50
75.00
4.0
0 Fine 4.0.5.8 3.0. 3.00 2.73 48.18 28.57 7.50 82.50 5.6
Fine 5.6 - 8.0 1'0 2.0 ; 3.00 2.73 50.91 1.43 30.00 5.00 87.50 8.0
Medium 8.0-11.0 3
0 1
0 4.00 3.64 54.55 4.29 34.29 2.50 90.00 11.0
GRAVEL
Medium
11.0-16.0 .
110 .
2.0
14.00
12.73
87.27
17.14
51.43
5.00
95.00
18.0
FO Coarse 16 - 22.6 18.0 1.0 19.00 17.27 84.55 25.71 77.14 2.50 97.50 22.6
0 Coarse 22.6 - 32 9.0 1.0 10.00 9.09 93.64 12.86 90.00 2.50 100.00 32
Very Coarse 32 - 45 3.0 - 3.00 2.73 96.36 4.29 94.29 100.00 45
000 Very Coarse 45-64 4,0 4.00 3.84 100.00 5.71 100.00 100.00 64
Small 64 - 90 100.00 100.00 100.00 90
Small 90- 128 100.00 100.00 100.00 128
COBBLE Large 128 - 180 100.00 100.00 100.00 180
O Large 180-256 100.00 100.00 100.00 256
Small 256.362 100.00 100.00 100.00 362
Small 362 - 512 100.00 100.00 100.00 512
BOULDER
Medium
512 - 1024
100.00
100.00
100.00
1024
F7 Large-Very Large 1024 - 2048 100.00 100.00 100.00 2048
BEDROCK Bedrock' > 2048 100.00 100.00 100.00 > 2048
70.00 40.00 110.00 106 100 100 100
Channel materials
d16 0.18mm
d35 0.34mm
d50 7.20mm
d84 22.39mm
d95 38.39mm
aauli IUOOaad ani;eInwno
0
O 0) 00 o CD O IT O N O O
c

c a
U j
Q)

N :
u) E

U U

cD N O w CD '7 N
T T T T
;uaoaad SSBIO
19 c
?O
Z
ls?, mac'
OL Oz
C!"LSBLS'
?9
E'
-
9
95?
19 0191
19Z
19c `19?L
oL
G °s
`A9
?
9
S,s E
S? E
`ae A
d'V
9• d
9C, mac' co
c' % 0 9 d
1 V
91 'C
O?
0°?L a
L
-,
o?
9•
9S ` S,
OO•
? , s
cl%
O? o?,
•
O` OL
O `OS.
S•
SQL S'c,1.
,19
`"9° 90.
o ?
Pavement/Subpavement Analysis
SITE OR PROJECT: Elk Shoals UT 2
REACH/LOCATION: X-1
DATE COLLECTED: 20-Feb-04
FIELD COLLECTION BY: Heath, John H., Steve G.
LAB ANALYSIS BY: Mike
LARGEST SUBPAVEMENT: 45 mm
I SEDIMENT ANALYSIS DATA SHEET
Pavement Subpavement
MATERIAL PARTICLE SIZE (mm) 100 ct Bucket (g) Bucket (g)
Silt / Clay -.062 - 4.5
tit ' '} L' 'i'7
Ct't.'t.'t i 'Y7
t't.'i't t ;1't•'i'
L'i'i'i t•'tt '1
;Li LL„ 1t Very Fine

Fine 062-125

.125-25 20.5

90';0
SAND Medium .25-.50 380.0
P1t.??t'i't.'t.'i'i':
i't ti 1•'L'i'L"t i
}} Coarse .50-1.0 621.0
ti i't•'L ' ?i
'L'?
rt{t; } ts,:
very coarse
1.0-2.0
5510
O Very Fine 2.0-2.8 220.0
Very Fine 2.8-4.0 2) 9.0
r1
(1-h0 Fine 4.0-5.6 183.0
Fine 5.6-8.0 1,0 280;0

GRAVEL Medium 8.0-11.0 3;5 344.0

'21 Medium 11.0 160 26.0 867.0
g"
N Coarse 16.0.22.6 233.0 995.0
o
onu
coarse
22.6-32
3035.0
807.0
60 Very Coarse 32-45 845.0 5830
0
n00, Very Coarse 45-84 128.0
Small 64 - 90
COBBLE Small 90 - 128
Large 128 - 180
O Large 180 - 256
Small 256 - 362
BOULDER Small 362 - 512
Medium 512 - 1024
Large - Very Large 1024 - 2048
BEDROCK Bedrock >2048
Totals: 0.00 4143.50 6294

r
N =
H E
Y >
L. t .0
U 0 7
N M N
O
t =
cn E
Y_ E
W >
m
a

C ?

--
- N
cu E
--

- a
3 co

CO a_ - -- -

- -

-

W IUGDaad ani;elnwno
0
0
0
0
r-
CD
0
0
0
0
E
E
C
t
H
d
m
V
IL
0
0
0
EEF ':Environmental
:Data
Resources, Inc.
The EDR-Transaction Screen TM
Map Report
With Toxicheck/® Analysis
Elk Shoals
Old Concord Church Road
Stony Point, NC 28678
Inquiry Number: 01131407.1r
February 18, 2004
The Standard in
Environmental Risk
Management Information
440 Wheelers Farms Road
Milford, Connecticut 06460
Nationwide Customer Service
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Internet: www.edrnet.com

TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION
PAGE
' Toxicheck (Optional)----------------------------------------------------- TK-1
Executive Summary ------------------------------------------------------ ES1
t Overview Map------------------------- --------------------------- 3
Map Summary -All Sites-------------------------------------------------- 4
' Map Findings----------------------------------------------------------. 6
Orphan Summary ------------------------------------------------------- 7

ADP1=NinIrFC
Government Records Searched / Data Currency Tracking Addendum- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - GR-1
Thank you for your business.
Please contact EDR at 1-800-352-0050
with any questions or comments.
Disclaimer
Copyright and Trademark Notice
This report contains information obtained from a variety of public and other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED,
IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES INC. SPECIFICALLY
DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS
FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL EDR BE LIABLE TO
ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE, ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY
LOSS OR DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES.
Entire contents copyright 2003 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole
or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission.
EDR and the edr logos are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein are the
property of their respective owners.
TC01131407.lr Pagel

m
TOXICHECK
' Subject Property: ELK SHOALS
OLD CONCORD CHURCH ROAD
STONY POINT, NC 28678
' Environmental Risk Code: LOW
' This code results from the subject property not being listed in those databases as indicated in the Report
and not located within : 1/2 mile of a reported Superf ind Site (NPL) ; 1/2 mile of a reported Hazardous
Waste Treatment, Storage or Disposal Facility (RCRIS-TSDF); 1/4 mile of a reported known or suspect
CERCLIS hazardous waste site ; 1/4 mile of a reported known or suspect State Hazardous Waste site
I (SHWS); 1/2 mile of a reported Solid Waste Facility or Landfill (SWF/LF); or 1/8 mile of a site with a
reported Leaking Underground Storage Tank incident (LUST).
This code is based solely on the results of searches of databases comprised of certain governmental records
as made available to EDR and reflected in the attached report. Without further confirmation by completing
the ASTM Standard E-1528 Transaction Screen and/or a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, the
conditions affecting the property are unknown. Further investigation by an environmental professional may
' be appropriate. This Report is not a substitute for a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment conducted
by an environmental professional . Nothing in this Report should be construed to mean that any
environmental remediation is or is not necessary with respect to the subject property.
' If this information is being used for a commercial property transaction, the government records searched
complies with the requirements of the ASTM Standard E-1528 Transaction Screen. However, the ASTM
Standard's requirements are not fulfilled until the Applicant Questionnaire and Site Visit (including an
' investigation of the property's historical use) are completed and reviewed. If this information is being used
for an industrial property transaction, the ASTM Standard requires that a Phase I Environmental Site
Assessment be performed by an environmental professional.
Disclaimer
Copyright and Trademark Notice
This report contains information obtained from a variety of public and other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED,
IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES INC. SPECIFICALLY
DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS
FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL EDR BE LIABLE TO
ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE, ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY
LOSS OR DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES.
Entire contents copyright 2001 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole
or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission.
EDR and the edr logos are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein are the
property of their respective owners.
TC01131407.lr PageTK-1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The EDR-Transaction Screen Map Report is a screening tool which maps sites with potential liability
or existing environmental liabilities. Specified government databases are searched in accordance with
ASTM Standard E 1528-00.
The ASTM E 1528-00 Transaction Screen property due diligence standard consists of four major
components: a government records check, an historical inquiry, an owner/occupant questionnaire, and a
site survey. This report contains the results of the government records search on the target property
and surrounding area in accordance with the government records search requirements of the ASTM E
1528-00 standard.
The results of the government records search in accordance with QUESTIONS 21 and 22 (page 15, E 1528-00)
' of the standard indicated the following:
QUESTION 21
Do any of the following Federal government record systems list the property or any property within the
circumference of the area noted below:
' National Priorities List (NPL) ? on the property ? Within 1 Mile
CERCLIS List ? on the property ? Within 1/2 Mile
CERCLIS NFRAP List ? on the property ? Within 1/4 Mile
' RCRA-CORRACTS Facilities ? on the property ? Within 1 Mile
RCRA-TSD Non-CORRACTS Facilities ? on the property ? Within 1/2 Mile
RCRA LQG Facilities ? on the property ? Within 1/4 Mile
RCRA SQG Facilities ? on the property ? Within 1/4 Mile
' ERNS ? on the property
QUESTION 22
Do any of the following state government record systems list the property or any property within the
' circumference of the area noted below.
State equivalent to NPL ? on the property ? Within 1 Mile
State equivalent to CERCLIS ? on the property ? Within 1/2 Mile
Solid Waste/Landfill Facilities (SWF/LS) ? on the property ? Within 1/2 Mile
' Leaking Underground Storage Tank List (LUST) ? on the property ? Within 1/2 Mile
Underground Storage Tank List (UST) ? on the property ? Within 1/4 Mile
In accordance with Section 5.6 (page 10, E 1528) if the answer is (yes) or unknown, then the user
' will have to decide what further action, if any, is appropriate. Answers should be evaluated in light of
the other information obtained in the transaction screen process. If the user decides no further inquiry is
warranted, the rationale must be documented. If the user decides that further inquiry is warranted, it may
be necessary to contact an environmental professional.
' Additional Research - ASTM Supplemental Government Databases
To provide additional information which may assist in the assessment of other components of the ASTM
' E 1528-00 Transaction Screen, EDR also searches government databases not included in Questions 21
and 22 of ASTM E 1528-00. This information may be useful in completing the owner/occupant
questionnaire.
The results of the search of these additional government records indicated affirmative (yes) responses on
the target property for the following government databases:
No affirmative responses found in the non-ASTM E 1528-00 government databases
TC01131407.1r EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
1 OVERVIEW MAP - 01131407.1 r - Buck Engineering
1
1
* Target Property
A Sites at elevations higher than
' or equal to the target property
• Sites at elevations lower than
the target property
A. Coal Gasification Sites
' National Priority List Sites
E3 Landfill Sites
Dept. Defense Sites

g 1/4 1/2 1 Mlles
` Oil & Gas pipelines Hazardous Substance
Federal Wetlands Disposal Sites
TARGET PROPERTY: Elk Shoals CUSTOMER: Buck Engineering
ADDRESS: Old Concord Church Road CONTACT: Jessica Rohrach
CITY/STATE/ZIP: Stony Point NC 28678 INQUIRY #: 01131407.1 r
LAT/LONG: 35.8482 / 81.0817 DATE: February 18, 2004 4:13 pm
Copyright eP 2003 EDR. Inc. k, 2003 GDT. Inc. Rel. 07/2D03. All Rights Reserved.

MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
Target Distance Total
Database Property (Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted
FEDERAL ASTM STANDARD
NPL 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
Proposed NPL 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
CERCLIS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
CERC-NFRAP 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
CORRACTS 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
RCRIS-TSD 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
RCRIS Lg. Quan. Gen. 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
RCRIS Sm. Quan. Gen. 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
ERNS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
STATE ASTM STANDARD
State Haz. Waste 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
State Landfill 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
LUST 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
UST 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
OLI 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
INDIAN UST 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
VCP 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
FEDERAL ASTM SUPPLEMENTAL
Delisted NPL 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
FINDS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
HMIRS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
MLTS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
MINES TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
NPL Liens TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
PADS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
US BROWNFIELDS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
DOD 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
RAATS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
TRIS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
TSCA TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
SSTS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
FTTS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
STATE OR LOCAL ASTM SUPPLEMENTAL
NC HSDS 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
AST TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
LUST TRUST 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
DRYCLEANERS 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
IMD TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
EDR PROPRIETARY HISTORICAL DATABASES
Coal Gas
1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
TC01131407.1r Page4

E

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
To maintain currency of the following federal and state databases, EDR contacts the appropriate governmental agency
on a monthly or quarterly basis, as required.
Elapsed ASTM days: Provides confirmation that this EDR report meets or exceeds the 90-day updating requirement
of the ASTM standard.
FEDERAL ASTM STANDARD RECORDS
NPL: National Priority List
Source: EPA
Telephone: N/A
National Priorities List (Superfund). The NPL is a subset of CERCLIS and identifies over 1,200 sites for priority
cleanup under the Superfund Program. NPL sites may encompass relatively large areas. As such, EDR provides polygon
coverage for over 1,000 NPL site boundaries produced by EPA's Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center
(EPIC) and regional EPA offices.
Date of Government Version: 10/21/03
Date Made Active at EDR: 12/08/03
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 11/03/03
Elapsed ASTM days: 35
Date of Last EDR Contact: 11/03/03
NPL Site Boundaries
Sources:
EPA's Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC)
Telephone: [phone]
EPA Region 1
Telephone [phone]
EPA Region 3
Telephone [phone]
EPA Region 4
Telephone [phone]
Proposed NPL: Proposed National Priority List Sites
Source: EPA
Telephone: N/A
Date of Government Version: 10/14/03
Date Made Active at EDR: 12/08/03
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
EPA Region 6
Telephone: [phone]
EPA Region 8
Telephone: [phone]
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 12/01/03
Elapsed ASTM days: 7
Date of Last EDR Contact: 11/03/03
CERCLIS: Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
CERCLIS contains data on potentially hazardous waste sites that have been reported to the USEPA by states, municipalities,
private companies and private persons, pursuant to Section 103 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation,
and Liability Act (CERCLA). CERCLIS contains sites which are either proposed to or on the National Priorities
List (NPL) and sites which are in the screening and assessment phase for possible inclusion on the NPL.
Date of Government Version: 11/17/03 Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 12/22/03
Date Made Active at EDR: 02/02/04 Elapsed ASTM days: 42
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/22/03
CERCLIS-NFRAP: CERCLIS No Further Remedial Action Planned
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
As of February 1995, CERCLIS sites designated "No Further Remedial Action Planned" (NFRAP) have been removed
from CERCLIS. NFRAP sites may be sites where, following an initial investigation, no contamination was found,
contamination was removed quickly without the need for the site to be placed on the NPL, or the contamination
was not serious enough to require Federal Superfund action or NPL consideration. EPA has removed approximately
25,000 NFRAP sites to lift the unintended barriers to the redevelopment of these properties and has archived them
as historical records so EPA does not needlessly repeat the investigations in the future. This policy change is
part of the EPA's Brownfields Redevelopment Program to help cities, states, private investors and affected citizens
' to promote economic redevelopment of unproductive urban sites.

TC01131407.1r Page GR-1
7

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: 11/17/03
Date Made Active at EDR: 02/02/04
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 12/22/03
Elapsed ASTM days: 42
Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/22/03
CORRACTS: Corrective Action Report
' Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
CORRACTS identifies hazardous waste handlers with RCRA corrective action activity.

Date of Government Version: 12/18/03
Date Made Active at EDR: 02/02/04
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 12/26/03
Elapsed ASTM days: 38
Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/08/03

RCRIS: Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System. RCRIS includes selective information on sites which generate,
transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA). Conditionally exempt small quantity generators (CESQGs): generate less than 100 kg of hazardous
waste, or less than 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste per month. Small quantity generators (SQGs): generate between
100 kg and 1,000 kg of hazardous waste per month. Large quantity generators (LQGs): generate over 1,000 kilograms
(kg) of hazardous waste, or over 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste per month. Transporters are individuals or
entities that move hazardous waste from the generator off-site to a facility that can recycle, treat, store, or
dispose of the waste. TSDFs treat, store, or dispose of the waste.
Date of Government Version: 01/12/04 Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 01/19/04
Date Made Active at EDR: 02110/04 Elapsed ASTM days: 22
Database Release Frequency: Varies Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/19/04
ERNS: Emergency Response Notification System
Source: National Response Center, United States Coast Guard
Telephone: [phone]
Emergency Response Notification System. ERNS records and stores information on reported releases of oil and hazardous
substances.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/02 Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 01/27/03
Date Made Active at EDR: 02/03/03 Elapsed ASTM days: 7
Database Release Frequency: Annually Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/26/04
FEDERAL ASTM SUPPLEMENTAL RECORDS
BRS: Biennial Reporting System
Source: EPA/NTIS
Telephone: [phone]
The Biennial Reporting System is a national system administered by the EPA that collects data on the generation
and management of hazardous waste. BRS captures detailed data from two groups: Large Quantity Generators (LQG)
and Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities.
Date of Government Version: 12/01/01
Database Release Frequency: Biennially
Date of Last EDR Contact: 12116/03
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/15/04
DELISTED NPL: National Priority List Deletions
Source: EPA
Telephone: N/A
The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) establishes the criteria that the
EPA uses to delete sites from the NPL. In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425.(e), sites may be deleted from the
NPL where no further response is appropriate.
TC01131407.1r Page GR-2
1
r

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: 10121/03
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact: 11/03/03
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/02/04
FINDS: Facility Index System/Facility Identification Initiative Program Summary Report
Source: EPA
' Telephone: N/A
Facility Index System. FINDS contains both facility information and 'pointers' to other sources that contain more
detail. EDR includes the following FINDS databases in this report: PCS (Permit Compliance System), AIRS (Aerometric
Information Retrieval System), DOCKET (Enforcement Docket used to manage and track information on civil judicial
' enforcement cases for all environmental statutes), FURS (Federal Underground Injection Control), C-DOCKET (Criminal
Docket System used to track criminal enforcement actions for all environmental statutes), FFIS (Federal Facilities
Information System), STATE (State Environmental Laws and Statutes), and PADS (PCB Activity Data System).

Date of Government Version: 10/23/03
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/06/04
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/05/04

HMIRS: Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System
Source: U.S. Department of Transportation
Telephone: [phone]
Hazardous Materials Incident Report System. HMIRS contains hazardous material spill incidents reported to DOT.
Date of Government Version: 12/18/03
Database Release Frequency: Annually
MLTS: Material Licensing Tracking System
Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Telephone: [phone]
MLTS is maintained by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and contains a list of approximately 8,100 sites which
possess or use radioactive materials and which are subject to NRC licensing requirements. To maintain currency,
EDR contacts the Agency on a quarterly basis.
Date of Government Version: 10/16/03
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
MINES: Mines Master Index File
Source: Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration
Telephone: [phone]
Date of Government Version: 11/25/03
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/19/04
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/19/04
Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/06/04
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/05/04
Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/29/03
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/29/04
' NPL LIENS: Federal Superfund Liens
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Federal Superfund Liens. Under the authority granted the USEPA by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation
and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, the USEPA has the authority to file liens against real property in order
to recover remedial action expenditures or when the property owner receives notification of potential liability.
USEPA compiles a listing of filed notices of Superfund Liens.

Date of Government Version: 10115/91
Database Release Frequency: No Update Planned
Date of Last EDR Contact: 11/21/03
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/23/04

H
u

PADS: PCB Activity Database System
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
PCB Activity Database. PADS Identifies generators, transporters, commercial storers and/or brokers and disposers
of PCB's who are required to notify the EPA of such activities.
Date of Government Version: 09/30/03
Database Release Frequency: Annually
Date of Last EDR Contact: 11/12/03
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/09/04
TC01131407.1 r Page GR-3

I I
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCYTRAC KING
DOD: Department of Defense Sites
Source: USGS
Telephone: [phone]
This data set consists of federally owned or administered lands, administered by the Department of Defense, that
have any area equal to or greater than 640 acres of the United States, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
' Date of Government Version: 10/01/03 Date of Last EDR Contact: 11/12/03
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/09/04
STORMWATER: Storm Water General Permits
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
' Telephone: [phone]
A listing of all facilities with Storm Water General Permits.
' Date of Government Version: N/A Date of Last EDR Contact: N/A
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
US BROWNFIELDS: A Listing of Brownfields Sites
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
' Included in the listing are brownfields properties addresses by Cooperative Agreement Recipients and brownfields
properties addressed by Targeted Brownfields Assessments. Targeted Brownfields Assessments-EPA's Targeted Brownfields
Assessments (TBA) program is designed to help states, tribes, and municipalities--especially those without EPA
Brownfields Assessment Demonstration Pilots--minimize the uncertainties of contamination often associated with
brownfields. Under the TBA program, EPA provides funding and/or technical assistance for environmental assessments
at brownfields sites throughout the country. Targeted Brownfields Assessments supplement and work with other efforts
under EPA's Brownfields Initiative to promote cleanup and redevelopment of brownfields. Cooperative Agreement
Recipients-States, political subdivisions, territories, and Indian tribes become BCRLF cooperative agreement recipients
when they enter into BCRLF cooperative agreements with the U.S. EPA. EPA selects BCRLF cooperative agreement recipients
based on a proposal and application process. BCRLF cooperative agreement recipients must use EPA funds provided
through BCRLF cooperative agreement for specified brownfields-related cleanup activities.
Date of Government Version: 07/15103 Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/17/03
' Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/15/04

1

RMP: Risk Management Plans
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
When Congress passed the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, it required EPA to publish regulations and guidance
for chemical accident prevention at facilities using extremely hazardous substances. The Risk Management Program
Rule (RMP Rule) was written to implement Section 112(r) of these amendments. The rule, which built upon existing
industry codes and standards, requires companies of all sizes that use certain flammable and toxic substances
to develop a Risk Management Program, which includes a(n): Hazard assessment that details the potential effects
of an accidental release, an accident history of the last five years, and an evaluation of worst-case and alternative
accidental releases; Prevention program that includes safety precautions and maintenance, monitoring, and employee
training measures; and Emergency response program that spells out emergency health care, employee training measures
and procedures for informing the public and response agencies (e.g the fire department) should an accident occur.
Date of Government Version: N/A
Database Release Frequency: N/A
Date of Last EDR Contact: N/A
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
RAATS: RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
RCRA Administration Action Tracking System. RAATS contains records based on enforcement actions issued under RCRA
pertaining to major violators and includes administrative and civil actions brought by the EPA. For administration
actions after September 30, 1995, data entry in the RAATS database was discontinued. EPA will retain a copy of
the database for historical records. It was necessary to terminate RAATS because a decrease in agency resources
made it impossible to continue to update the information contained in the database.
TC01131407.1 r Page GR-4

J

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Dale of Government Version: 04/17/95
Database Release Frequency: No Update Planned
Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/08/03
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/08/04
TRIS: Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Toxic Release Inventory System. TRIS identifies facilities which release toxic chemicals to the air, water and
land in reportable quantities under SARA Title III Section 313.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/01
Database Release Frequency: Annually
Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/22/03
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/22/04
TSCA: Toxic Substances Control Act
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Toxic Substances Control Act. TSCA identifies manufacturers and importers of chemical substances included on the
TSCA Chemical Substance Inventory list. It includes data on the production volume of these substances by plant
site.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/02
Database Release Frequency: Every 4 Years
Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/08/03
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/08/04
FTTS INSP: FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act)
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Date of Government Version: 10/16/03
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/22/03
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/22/04
SSTS: Section 7 Tracking Systems
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Section 7 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, as amended (92 Stat. 829) requires all
registered pesticide-producing establishments to submit a report to the Environmental Protection Agency by March
1st each year. Each establishment must report the types and amounts of pesticides, active ingredients and devices
being produced, and those having been produced and sold or distributed in the past year.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/01
Database Release Frequency: Annually
Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/19/04
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/19/04
FTTS: FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act)
Source: EPA/Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances
Telephone: [phone]
FTTS tracks administrative cases and pesticide enforcement actions and compliance activities related to FIFRA,
TSCA and EPCRA (Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act). To maintain currency, EDR contacts the
Agency on a quarterly basis.
Date of Government Version: 10/16/03 Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/22/03
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/22/04
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ASTM STANDARD RECORDS
SHWS: Inactive Hazardous Sites Inventory
Source: Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
State Hazardous Waste Sites. State hazardous waste site records are the states' equivalent to CERCLIS. These sites
may or may not already be listed on the federal CERCLIS list. Priority sites planned for cleanup using state funds
(state equivalent of Superfund) are identified along with sites where cleanup will be paid for by potentially
responsible parties. Available information varies by state.
TC01131407.1r Page GR-5

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: 11/04/03
Date Made Active at EDR: 12/10/03
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 11/04/03
Elapsed ASTM days: 36
Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/16/04
SWF/LF: List of Solid Waste Facilities
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Solid Waste Facilities/Landfill Sites. SWF/LF type records typically contain an inventory of solid waste disposal
facilities or landfills in a particular state. Depending on the state, these may be active or inactive facilities
or open dumps that failed to meet RCRA Subtitle D Section 4004 criteria for solid waste landfills or disposal
sites.
Date of Government Version: 10/27/03
Date Made Active at EDR: 11/14/03
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 10/27/03
Elapsed ASTM days: 18
Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/26/04
LUST: Incidents Management Database
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Leaking Underground Storage Tank Incident Reports. LUST records contain an inventory of reported leaking underground
storage tank incidents. Not all states maintain these records, and the information stored varies by stale.
Date of Government Version: 12/05/03
Date Made Active at EDR: 12/30/03
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 12/08/03
Elapsed ASTM days: 22
Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/08/03
UST: Petroleum Underground Storage Tank Database
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Registered Underground Storage Tanks. UST's are regulated under Subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) and must be registered with the state department responsible for administering the UST program. Available
information varies by state program.
Date of Government Version: 07/18/03
Date Made Active at EDR: 09/19/03
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 09/08/03
Elapsed ASTM days: 11
Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/24/03
OLL Old Landfill Inventory
Source: Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Date of Government Version: 11/04/03
Date Made Active at EDR: 11/26103
Database Release Frequency: Varies
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 11/04/03
Elapsed ASTM days: 22
Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/26/04
VCP: Responsible Party Voluntary Action Sites
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Date of Government Version: 01/21104
Date Made Active at EDR: 02/11/04
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 01/21/04
Elapsed ASTM days: 21
Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/13/04
INDIAN UST: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
Source: EPA Region 4
Telephone: [phone]
Date of Government Version: 10/22/03
Date Made Active at EDR: 01/09/04
Database Release Frequency: Varies
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 12/19/03
Elapsed ASTM days: 21
Date of Last EDR Contact: 11/24/03
TC01131407.1r Page GR-6

GOVERNMENT°RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ASTM SUPPLEMENTAL RECORDS

HSDS: Hazardous Substance Disposal Site
Source: North Carolina Center for Geographic Information and Analysis
Telephone: [phone]
Locations of uncontrolled and unregulated hazardous waste sites. The file includes sites on the National Priority
List as well as those on the state priority list.
Date of Government Version: 06/21/95
Database Release Frequency: Biennially
' AST: AST Database
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Facilities with aboveground storage tanks that have a capacity greater than 21,000 gallons.
' Date of Government Version: 01/09/04
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
Date of Government Version: 01/22/04
Database Release Frequency: Varies
LUST TRUST: State Trust Fund Database
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
This database contains information about claims against the State Trust Funds for reimbursements for expenses
incurred while remediating Leaking USTs.
' Date of Government Version: 11107/03
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/01/03
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/01/04
Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/19/04
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/19/04
Date of Last EDR Contact: 11/12/03
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02109/04
DRYCLEANERS: Drycleaning Sites
1 Source: Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Potential and known drycleaning sites, active and abandoned, that the Drycleaning Solvent Cleanup Program has
knowledge of and entered into this database.

Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/22/04
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/19/04
IMD: Incident Management Database
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Groundwater and/or soil contamination incidents
Date of Government Version: 01/23/04
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/26/04
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/26/04
EDR PROPRIETARY HISTORICAL DATABASES
Former Manufactured Gas (Coal Gas) Sites: The existence and location of Coal Gas sites is provided exclusively to
EDR by Real Property Scan, Inc. ©Copyright 1993 Real Property Scan, Inc. For a technical description of the types
of hazards which may be found at such sites, contact your EDR customer service representative.
Disclaimer Provided by Real Property Scan, Inc.
The information contained in this report has predominantly been obtained from publicly available sources produced by entities
other than Real Property Scan. While reasonable steps have been taken to insure the accuracy of this report, Real Property
Scan does not guarantee the accuracy of this report. Any liability on the part of Real Property Scan is strictly limited to a refund
of the amount paid. No claim is made for the actual existence of toxins at any site. This report does not constitute a legal
opinion.
TC01131407.1r Page GR-7

F
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED] DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
BROWNFIELDS DATABASES

Brownfields: Brownfields Projects Inventory
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
A brownfield site is an abandoned, idled, or underused property where the threat of environmental contamination
has hindered its redevelopment. All of the sites in the inventory are working toward a brownfield agreement for
cleanup and liabitliy control.
Date of Government Version: 09/30/03
Database Release Frequency: Varies
VCP: Responsible Party Voluntary Action Sites
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Date of Government Version: 01/21/04
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
INST CONTROL: No Further Action Sites With Land Use Restrictions Monitoring
Source: Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Date of Government Version: 10/17/03
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact: 11/07/03
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/02/04
Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/13/04
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/24/04
Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/16/04
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/12/04
US BROWNFIELDS: A Listing of Brownfields Sites
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Included in the listing are brownfields properties addresses by Cooperative Agreement Recipients and brownfields
properties addressed by Targeted Brownfields Assessments. Targeted Brownfields Assessments-EPA's Targeted Brownfields
Assessments (TBA) program is designed to help states, tribes, and municipalities--especially those without EPA
Brownfields Assessment Demonstration Pilots--minimize the uncertainties of contamination often associated with
brownfields. Under the TBA program, EPA provides funding and/or technical assistance for environmental assessments
at brownfields sites throughout the country. Targeted Brownfields Assessments supplement and work with other efforts
under EPA's Brownfields Initiative to promote cleanup and redevelopment of brownfields. Cooperative Agreement
Recipients-States, political subdivisions, territories, and Indian tribes become BCRLF cooperative agreement recipients
when they enter into BCRLF cooperative agreements with the U.S. EPA. EPA selects BCRLF cooperative agreement recipients
based on a proposal and application process. BCRLF cooperative agreement recipients must use EPA funds provided
through BCRLF cooperative agreement for specified brownfields-related cleanup activities.
Date of Government Version: N/A Date of Last EDR Contact: N/A
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
OTHER DATABASES
Depending on the geographic area covered by this report, the data provided in these specialty databases may or may not be
complete. For example, the existence of wetlands information data in a specific report does not mean that all wetlands in the
area covered by the report are included. Moreover, the absence of any reported wetlands information does not necessarily
mean that wetlands do not exist in the area covered by the report.
Flood Zone Data: This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR in 1999 from the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Data depicts 100-year and 500-year flood zones as defined by FEMA.
NWI: National Wetlands Inventory. This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR
in 2002 from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
TC01131407.1 r Page GR-8

Riffle Sink Site - Historic Channel
101
100
99
98
0 97
> 96
a?
w 95
94
93
92
0
Riffle
Sink Site - Historic Channel
1
4
7
9
11
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2.73 97.27
2.89 97.11 96.53
3
22 96
78 .
.
3.94 96.06
4.44 95.56
5.16 94.84
5.48 94.52
6.05 93.95
6.31 93.69
97.11

53.2 x-section area. 2.3 d mean
22.7 width 24.4 wet 'P
3.5 d't ax 2.2 h `djadl
4.1 bark ht 9.7 Md'ratio
275.0 Wtlot?d.roits=area 12.1 eht,ratio
6.6 93.4
6.7 93.3
6.9 93.1
6.92 93.08
6.97 93.03
6.94 93.06
7 93
6.9 93.1
93.1
93.35
,`
0.0
Jel&it" ft/sec)
0.0 discharge rate, Q cfs).
0.00 shear stress' Ibs/ft s'
0.00 she`arvelocity ft/sec;
0.000 unit stream ov?er? Ibs/ft/sec)
0.00 Fronde number
0.0 frictionJactorOu-
9:9 9 thrOshold.O Mh sizee mmw_ :. x. ;
94.28 check,, orr
94.99 27 meesOred'D84 mm'
96.28 27.0 relative;rou hness 11.0 1r! factor
96.96 0.000 M,4pning'6 n from channel material

97.33
97.39
5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Width from River Left to Right (ft)

Riffle Sink Site - Historic Channel
103
101
99
x
c
0 97
m
w 95
93
91
0
Marne
Sink Site - Historic Channel
1 1.88
3 2.07 98.12
97.93
5 2.19 97.81
7 2.32 97.68
8 2.4 97.6
9 2.88 97.12
10 3.51 96.49
11 4 96
12 5.14 94.86
13 5.63 94.37
14 5.84 94.16
15 5.93 94.07
16 6.05 93.95
17 6.04 93.96
18 6.02 93.98
19 5.87 94.13
20 6.05 93.95
21 6.15 93.85
22 6.09 93.91
23 5.76 94.24
24 4.84 95.16
25 3.74 96.26
26 2.85 97.15
27 2.27 97.73
2.22 2.4 0.0
97.78 97.6

52.8 X-4' Marea, 2.4 d frean,
21.7 widttl 24.2 wet P
3.9 d rnax 2.2 h yd radi
3.8 bank ht 8.9 w/Tratio
230.0 W,flQod. rope area 10.6 ent,fatio .>

0.0 velo?i ? Wk

0.0 _
disc "ar"`e rate; 4 (cfs)
0.00 shVt, stress Ibs/ft s
0.00 shear velocity ft/sec
0.000 unit stream power (Ibs/ sec)
0.00 Froude number
0.0 friction f4ct6f a/u`
99 threshold ealm$ize-'mm
7 to
27
n l6asUred D84' mm
27.9 relative roughness i i.1 fric, factor
0.000 Manhin `'s n,froM"channel material
98.02
98.24
98.46
98.51
98.57
5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Width from River Left to Right (ft)

F

1

} NGYIH ,T ? Y
Reference Reach Database
?FNf w IR1\
Stream ID 54
Stream Name :West Branch of Tibbs Run
Contact Grant Ginn
Organization HSMM
Email ?[e-mail]
Date Surveyed 2/13/2001
Location
River Basin !Cape Fear
8-digit HUC 03030003
Location West of Coleridge, NC
Reach ;Just upstream (West) of Tommy Cox
Description !Rd (SR 2655)
f

State ;NC
Latitude - - (decimal degrees)
Longitude (decimal degrees)
County Randolph
Physio. Region Piedmont (coast, Piedmont, mtns)
Ecoregion _
- -J
Public/Private V -
Right of Entry (check for yes)
USGS Quad 'Ramseur/Erec'
LeiLani Paugh, NCDOT
[phone]
[e-mail]
Hydraulics
Bankfull Discharge 88.0 (cfs)
Bankfull Velocity - 4_3(ft/s)
Manning's n
Method of Calculating
Manning's n
Channel Materials
Percent Silt/Clay 13%
Percent Sand -
47%
Percent Gravel 37%
Percent Cobble
Percent Boulder 0%
Percent Bedrock - -
2%',
D16 0.1361 (mm)
D35 _ 0.24; (mm)
D50 0.71 (mm)
D84 - _12', (mm)
D95 22! (mm)
Note: 2,049 mm corresponds to BEDROCK

Data Standards
No survey data provided 0 No material analysis provided u
No pattern data provided El Data do not align with regional curve
No profile data provided ? No location information provided F
No hydraulics data provided El
Description
Rosgen Stream Type E5 Soils Type
Reach Length 240 (ft) BEHI Score
Watershed Drainage Area 1.08 (sq• mi) Avg Water Surface Slope 0.0037
-------------
-- _
Watershed % Impervious - --- -
Valley Slope '.
0.0043
Valley Type (C- colluvial or A- alluvial) Valley Length 205_ (ft)

R
Land Use
(U- urban or R- rural) Sinuosity 1.20

--------
DWQ Index No. 17-22-8----
Site Description 9- R h El (check for yes)
Description of any
Associated Wetlands
Description of
Vegetative Communities
Watershed Description
DWQ Rerence eac
DWQ Benthic Monitoring ? (check for yes)
?nf NGVrN X11
* Reference Reach Database
*fHfW 7R Aµc4`LeiLani Paugh, NCDOT
<" O
9* A`;
[phone]
[e-mail]
Stream ID 54
------- ---
Stream Name West Branch of Tibbs Run
I
I
I

Dimension Ratios Mean Minimum Maximum
Bankfull Width: Depth Ratio
- 4.57
- --- 4.57 4.57
Entrenchment Ratio 28.13 28.13 28.13
Bank Height Ratio 1.52 1.52 1.52
Pool width: Bankfull width* 1.17 1.17 1.17
Max pool depth: Bankfull depth* 1.19 1.19. 1.19
Mean pool depth: Bankfull depth*' _ 0.90 - 0.90' 0,90'
Pool area: Riffle area* 1.00 1.00 1.00
* Ratio denominators are the riffle mean bankfull value.
Pattern Ratios Mean Minimum Maximum
pool to pool Spacing: SO width -6.09 4.38, _ -7.81
Meander length ratio 7.60' 7.601
7.60'.
Radius of curvature ratio 4.27 4.27: _ 4.27
Meander width ratio 7.29 7.29 _ 7.29
Profile Ratios Mean
Pool slope: Avg WS slope
Riffle slope: Avg WS slope 2.03
Glide slope: Avg WS slope 1.11.
Run slope: Avg WS slope 1.92
Minimum
------ 0.11'
- -- --2.03
1.92
Maximum
` - 0.11!
2.03
- -- 1.92

04 ?GYt1/(-,I yy

b o
94 ti?
RH' Pf 1R1.µ- .

Stream ID
Stream Name
Contact
Organization
' Email
d
Date Surveye

11

Reference Reach Database
Location
River Basin Yadkin-Pee Dee
8-digit HUC ;03mim y
Location :Southeast of Salisbury, NC

Reach
Description
I

State NC
Latitude L (decimal degrees)

Longitude (decimal degrees)
County :Rowan
Physio. Region FPiedmont_-_-! (coast, Piedmont, mtns)
Ecoregion
Public/Private IV
Right of Entry F-I (check for yes)
USGS Quad Southnm
LeiLani Paugh, NCDOT
[phone]
[e-mail]
Channel Materials
Percent Silt/Clay
Percent Sand
Percent Gravel
Percent Cobble
Percent Boulder
Percent Bedrock _ j
D16 - `- (mm)
D35 (mm)
D50 ! (mm)
D84 - (mm)
D95 (mm)
Note: 2,049 mm corresponds to BEDROCK
0
Data Standards
No survey data provided E./I No material analysis provided
No pattern data provided ? Data do not align with regional curve ?
No profile data provided ? No location information provided
No hydraulics data provided ?
Description
Rosgen Stream Type E4/5 Soils Type
Reach Length (ft) BEHI Score
Watershed Drainage Area 1.50 (sq. mi) Avg Water Surface Slope 0.0014
Watershed % Impervious Valley Slope 0.0025
Valley Type (C- colluvial or A- alluvial) Valley Length (ft)
ty -
Land Use (U- urban or R- rural) Sinuosity 1.8Q
Site Description DWQ Index No.
--
Description of any
Associated Wetlands
Description of
Vegetative Communities
Watershed Description
DWQ Reference Reach ? (check for yes)
DWQ Benthic Monitoring ? (check for yes)
OS NGYtN?,+ 1q
?Y
c C,
yFH' ? tR1?µc4"Reference Reach Database

Stream ID 48
Stream Name Tributary to Cane Creek
LeiLani Paugh, NCDOT
[phone]
Ipa [e-mail]
Dimension Ratios Mean Minimum Maximum
Bankfull Width: Depth Ratio 5.05 5.05' 5.05
Entrenchment Ratio 23.47 23.47 23.47
Bank Height Ratio 1.20 1.20 1.20
Pool width: Bankfull width* 1.10 1.10' 1.10'

Max pool depth: Bankfull depth* -
1.45
1.45
1.45'
Mean pool depth: Bankfull depth* _
Pool area: Riffle area*
* Ratio denominators are the riffle mean bankfull value.
Pattern Ratios Mean Minimum Maximum
Pool to pool Spacing: Bkfl width 5.25 `-_ 5.25 5.25
Meander length ratio - 7.23 --7.23; 7.23:
Radius of curvature ratio 2.50 2.501 2.50
Meander width ratio 8.52 8.52 8.52
Profile Ratios Mean
Pool slope: Avg WS slope 0 29
Riffle slope: Avg WS slope 1 36..
Glide slope: Avg WS slope -
Run slope: Avg WS slope
Minimum
0.29
-------- --- ----
1.36
Maximum
0.29!
1.36!

COMPARISON TABLE - Elk Shoals Site
STREAM: Elk Shoals Creek
2/24/2004
Existing Conditions
Model Proposed Conditions Model

River Station
Profile Discharge
cfs WSEL
ft. WSEL
ft. (Prop.WSEL-
Ext. WSEL
4284.33 10 1000 930.32 930.38 0.06
4284.33 50 1700 931.76 931.71 -0.05
4284.33 100 2100 932.00 932.02 0.02
4284.33 Bankfull 270 928.17 928.34 0.17

4117.55 10 1000 930.04 930.05 0.01
4117.55 50 1700 930.63 930.68 0.05
4117.55 100 2100 930.91 930.96 0.05
4117.55 Bankfull 270 927.79 928.05 0.26

3955.84 10 1000 929.23 929.33 0.10
3955.84 50 1700 929.98 930.04 0.06
3955.84 100 2100 930.29 930.35 0.06
3955.84 Bankfull 270 927.27 927.65 0.38

3775.99 10 1000 928.76 928.84 0.08
3775.99 50 1700 929.46 929.53 0.07
3775.99 100 2100 929.77 929.85 0.08
3775.99 Bankfull 270 926.48 926.91 0.43

3640.76 10 1000 928.59 928.45 -0.14
3640.76 50 1700 929.20 929.08 -0.12
3640.76 100 2100 929.48 929.38 -0.10
3640.76 Bankfull 270 926.23 926.60 0.37

3531.41 10 1000 927.95 927.86 -0.09
3531.41 50 1700 928.38 928.57 0.19
3531.41 100 2100 928.60 928.87 0.27
3531.41 Bankfull 270 924.91 926.36 1.45

3384.68 10 1000 926.55 927.26 0.71
3384.68 50 1700 927.34 928.01 0.67
3384.68 100 2100 927.72 928.35 0.63
3384.68 Bankfull 270 924.59 925.89 1.30

3264.19 -10 1000 926.27 927.08 0.81
3264.19 50 1700 927.12 927.78 0.66
3264.19 100 2100 927.46 928.09 0.63
3264.19 Bankfull 270 924.43 925.64 1.21

3143.62 10 1000 926.00 926.68 0.68
3143.62 50 1700 926.75 927.28 0.53
3143.62 100 2100 927.04 927.53 0.49
3143.62 Bankfull 270 924.30 925.40 1.10

COMPARISON TABLE - Elk Shoals Site
STREAM: Elk Shoals Creek
2/24/2004
River Station I Profile
3029.44 10
3029.44 50
3029.44 100
3029.44 Bankfull

2914.01 10
2914.01 50
2914.01 100
2914.01 Bankfull

2844.6 10
2844.6 50
2844.6 100
2844.6 Bankfull

2697.57 10
2697.57 50
2697.57 100
2697.57 Bankfull
2606.48 10
2606.48 50
2606.48 100
2606.48 Bankfull

2484.28 10
2484.28 50
2484.28 100
2484.28 Bankfull
2314.28 10
2314.28 50
2314.28 100
2314.28 Bankfull

2228.23 10
2228.23 50
2228.23 100
2115.12 10
2115.12 50
2115.12 10(
2115.12 Bank
Existing Con
Model
Discharge
cfs WSEL
ft.
1000 925.77
1700 926.58
2100 926.87
270 924.02
1700 926.22
2100 926.45
270 924.03

1000 925.55
1700 926.22
2100 926.46
270 923.97
1700 925.77
2100 925.95
270 922.92

1000 924.16
1700 924.78
2100 925.12
270 921.72

1000 924.07
1700 924.59
2100 924.83
1000 923.33
1700 923.88
2100 924.31
270 918.97
1000 921.91
1700 923.20
2100 923.37
270 919.02

1000 922.11
1700 923.16
2100 923.50
270 919.06
ditions Proposed Conditions Model
WSEL
(ft.)
926.55
927.13
927.38
925.24
926.21
926.77
927.03
924.74
(Prop.WSEL-
Ext. WSEL)
0.78
0.55
0.51
1.22
0.63
925.72
926.31
926.56
924.34
925.88
926.07
924.16
924.75
924.30
924.85
925.10
923.36
923.93
924.47
924.73
923.10
923.55
924.16
924.45
922.56
923.32
923.84
924.11
922.40
0.17
0.09
0.10
0.37
0.37
0.11
0.12
1.24
0.59
0.50
0.44
1.87
0.23
0.26
0.60
0.59
0.42
4.13
1.64
0.96
1.08
3.54
1.21
0.68
0.61
3.34
COMPARISON TABLE - Elk Shoals Site
STREAM: Elk Shoals Creek
2/24/2004
Existing Conditions
Model Proposed Conditions Model

River Station
Profile Discharge
cfs WSEL
ft. WSEL
ft. (Prop.WSEL-
Ext. WSEL
1945.29 10 1000 921.66 922.86 1.20
1945.29 50 1700 922.90 923.49 0.59
1945.29 100 2100 923.28 923.78 0.50
1945.29 Bankfull 270 918.84 921.04 2.20

1793.79 10 1000 920.74 922.64 1.90
1793.79 50 1700 922.21 923.17 0.96
1793.79 100 2100 923.00 923.44 0.44
1793.79 Bankfull 270 917.65 921.30 3.65

1680.24 10 1000 920.47 922.54 2.07
1680.24 50 1700 922.03 923.03 1.00
1680.24 100 2100 922.84 923.29 0.45
1680.24 Bankfull 270 916.56 921.11 4.55

1537.42 10 1000 920.57 921.90 1.33
1537.42 50 1700 921.99 922.34 0.35
1537.42 100 2100 922.81 922.79 -0.02
1537.42 Bankfull 270 916.63 920.07 3.44

1388.64 10 1000 920.24 921.69 1.45
1388.64 50 1700 921.91 922.29 0.38
1388.64 100 2100 922.74 922.67 -0.07
1388.64 Bankfull 270 916.37 920.4 4.03

1320.96 10 1000 920.05 921.33 1.28
1320.96 50 1700 921.71 921.96 0.25
1320.96 100 2100 922.6 922.4 -0.20
1320.96 Bankfull 270 916.26 919.97 3.71

1195.5 10 1000 918.97 921.17 2.20
1195.5 50 1700 921.3 921.62 0.32
1195.5 100 2100 922.48 922.1 -0.38
1195.5 Bankfull 270 915.75 920.1 4.35

1109.34 10 1000 918.59 920.21 1.62
1109.34 50 1700 921.28 920.74 -0.54
1109.34 100 2100 922.45 921.95 -0.50
1109.34 Bankfull 270 915.46 917.13 1.67

1056.5 10 1000 918.37 917.85 -0.52
1056.5 50 1700 921.31 920.83 -0.48
1056.5 100 2100 922.45 921.95 -0.50
1056.5 Bankfull 270 915.1 915.1 0.00
COMPARISON TABLE - Elk Shoals Site
STREAM: Elk Shoals Creek
2/24/2004
Existing Conditions
Model Proposed Conditions Model

River Station
Profile Discharge
cfs WSEL
ft. WSEL
ft. (Prop.WSEL-
Ext. WSEL
4284.33 10 1000 930.32 930.38 0.06
4284.33 50 1700 931.76 931.71 -0.05
4284.33 100 2100 932.00 932.02 0.02
4284.33 Bankfull 270 928.17 928.34 0.17

4117.55 10 1000 930.04 930.05 0.01
4117.55 50 1700 930.63 930.68 0.05
4117.55 100 2100 930.91 930.96 0.05
4117.55 Bankfull 270 927.79 928.05 0.26

3955.84 10 1000 929.23 929.33 0.10
3955.84 50 1700 929.98 930.04 0.06
3955.84 100 2100 930.29 930.35 0.06
3955.84 Bankfull 270 927.27 927.65 0.38

3775.99 10 1000 928.76 928.84 0.08
3775.99 50 1700 929.46 929.53 0.07
3775.99 100 2100 929.77 929.85 0.08
3775.99 Bankfull 270 926.48 926.91 0.43

3640.76 10 1000 928.59 928.45 -0.14
3640.76 50 1700 929.20 929.08 -0.12
3640.76 100 2100 929.48 929.38 -0.10
3640.76 Bankfull 270 926.23 926.60 0.37

3531.41 10 1000 927.95 927.86 -0.09
3531.41 50 1700 928.38 928.57 0.19
3531.41 100 2100 928.60 928.87 0.27
3531.41 Bankfull 270 924.91 926.36 1.45

3384.68 10 1000 926.55 927.26 0.71
3384.68 50 1700 927.34 928.01 0.67
3384.68 100 2100 927.72 928.35 0.63
3384.68 Bankfuli 270 924.59 925.89 1.30

3264.19 10 1000 926.27 927.08 0.81
3264.19 50 1700 927.12 927.78 0.66
3264.19 100 ,
2100 927.46 928.09 0.63
3264.19 Bankfuli 270 924.43 925.64 1.21

3143.62 10 1000 926.00 926.68 0.68
3143.62 50 1700 926.75 927.28 0.53
3143.62 100 2100 927.04 927.53 0.49
3143.62 Bankfull 270 924.30 925.40 1.10

aECT10ttt
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission ?l
Charles R. FL111 food, LXeCUtiVe Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: John R. Dornev. Division of Water Quality
Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources
FROM: Ron Linville. Regional Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: Max, 14. 2004
SUBJECT: Rcview of 401 Certification Application. Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek
Restoration Plan. DWQ No. 040722. Alexander Countx,
Buck Engineering is requesting 401 Water Quality Certification from the North Carolina
Division of Water Quality. The NCWRC has reviewed information provided by the applicant,
and field biologists on our staff arc familiar with habitat values of the project area. These
comments arc provided in accordance Na ith provisions of the Clean Water Act of 1977 (33 U.S.C.
466 et. seq.) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401. as amended: 16 U.S.C.
661-667d).
The project will provide mitigation by restoring 5,168 linear feet of Elk Shoals Creek
(3.877 linear feet) and two unnamed tributaries ( 1,29 1 linear feet). The site was previously
degraded by agricultural practices. The bioengineering (natural channel design) project will
enhance water quality and restore wildlife habitat by restoring dimension. pattern and profile to
the streams and by reconnecting the streams to their floodplains. Wildlife habitats will be
improved as vegetated buffers will be used to stabilize the restored channels. This stream is a
main headwater of Lookout Shoals Lake and probably provides warm water aquatic habitat
values and gamefish spawning. Providing the stream is not severely fragmented downstream. the
proposed project should enhance these values considerably. Accordingly, we will not object to
the project as proposed by Buck Engineering providing standard 404 Permit and 401 Certification
practices are used during construction.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this project. If you have anx,_
questions regarding these comments. please contact me at 336/769-9453.
Cc: Amanda Jones. COE
Alan Johnson, DWQ-MRO
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries • 1721 Mail Service (;enter • KalelL;h, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] ext. 281 Fax: [phone]
¦r r? r r r? rw rr rr rr ?r r? r r i¦r r? ?¦ .?. . .¦.
,J
I _
eP , _
V9 i.. - A

??11 I i
99•V8££ \-
Zg•£rI£
4?'bZ0£
L5 Lo.
gti 9?
8Z'r
ZV V I£Z
r'
2228.23
x r?
2115.17 !
1945
1
bL•£bLl ? ? ?
ZI?•LESI i
} r`
a I y i,
c
V9•?8£It t' r r °???I
r O ,2.
? I t t ! 1`+ tJ? c,2a m ?
lbtOZQI
rtiJl? ,po
s N
FTI
I 3
t ?

` f O
1 (
n
v !
I

=?- FTI

1
,7
t;
?,qS h'i/i l! J! ;'
1 f 1 !
(i J
i r
1 r
( I r ' i
?Jill
`; `f J(J
r'°L
fj `tir}
r ,
1 t 1 t`t
j ?
r? ; F
/
.
r ? J{ t9
a , it`s ? y
W SE
Illilli,?;;.
t t ; t'? Ild ?
STV'SCE
d,{
brV9Z£ It
rtt?
Z9'£VI£I
'I I
.. 1
V V. ec
Ly ??
8V9 z
aZ'?
Z?`r
2228.23 .'
3> t '
? I
VZ'?g9? /
t
? t
r
I ? 1 fi
i I 1 !
1
` ?biOZ£l r ? '' (O
J ! c I fp lye ?b?
j le r
r
f
lKA\ C
i
? o41 '
I
F"rl
I
t ?
1, •, x
??$ffif ')+ )}}J v
7 T /t t I
rr, f
? JJJ t
t
f
( I f ! !
t f:
tllir,l /!f!
ICI I
r !

1ens\0173_RS_psh_
17
-0D 0
O
zm z
Z A m
00 D
03 1
-1
0
C mz?nf1
D m
D
Cl)
-< m
K
m
z
--I
W N -• go
z z
Oc ?m O?
z mc, ,m
y Oczn
ZD O
< m o
F
mm ?
? O- ?mI
m mloi ?m
? rrD, mZ
D 0r ?z
rn zo ?n
0 00 OC mz mm
= nm C°
M n? v>
z Dw
1 Oy
z o? =m go
z
m
wo
m -10
m A
O (J) ?Z
O t7
IM z ?
O O
o Om C,) n
z = --1 D
z D mi
G? ' z z
O ?O
M ?,n
m ,m
m XMm
? n
n
nD
C DO
Z
N Z co
r
[4111
`? 11111 ?'
`? I I
rr
m>1
?o
OD
OA
?O
corn
u
?z
rn?
N
n O
m=
?1J1 I I I I?;
TI I ? it I ?I
-?-III _ -
?I I II I I=1I I= ? r1J
?I I I I?I ? II I IJ ???`
a1-1 I I 1 ?? ? ?
j?llllll ? ? 1
r, J
J
fr,
III=?i ?
_(lr r..._. W
N
,.gr I
F
111=
II1? I

1O%11
I
II_ E
-III--I?? 41
I1-III' =1II-
-1`-1'11-III-
=111-111-
-
I- =III-- 1=111-
I . J1-
I i.i 1=1 11=
-? %00 111 ?I - I
-1 I
III-
III -?'
?? I I I ? ? ; t 'AII
111 ??II
f I I-?i'/f l?
25x00
IM
Cf)
x
n
r
A?
Z
°0 0
a
o
eF1
° Z?
a
° $a
O
m
m
m
D
--I

Z
ep
ro o
M
?r
?x o
?'
z
z `4
3Gro
z y z
O
?w ?w ?w w ¦w w w w? w? w w w w ¦w w i w •¦r ??
3n7,>nn4
H:\0l/ JH\Uesign V'len5 %U17 3-nn-PT LPlo.agn
to CD (D

p O O O O z0 O
1
' 926
68
0 .
.921.70 ?.. .
O : PI=10+14 79 O PI=10+12. 13
O EL•92170 O EL=9286 4 PI=10+24.25
PI=10+3047 EL=928.60'
EL-VZMU I
PI=1 6.14 I
EL+92170' PI=10+55.88
EL-928.49
PI-10*71.7
3

EL=921.63' '
I
PI=10+84
55 PI 10+94.64
.
EL-920.63 I + EL=827,68
O CD
O PI=11+17 37 I

EL=92153 /

PI=11+3343
I I EL=928 29
PI=11+4'!.94
' PI=11 a50.72 EL-926.21'
r EL=821.32 I,

PI-11+82,74 I
PI-11+80 30 u

EL =924
42' EL=927.41
N . N
C) PI=12+14.76 O P1=12+12.67
O 07' W
EL-921 O EL-928.06'
- - .
/ z
PI-12+4340
EL=927.00'

PI=12+63.87
EL=B2D.6T r PI=12+73.37

r -
EL-926 72' II
Pk12+86.79
W EL?1B.7T W I

PI=13+07
70
+ PI-13+03.35
O . O
.'
EL=92750
O EL=920T O
I
PI=13+43,58
EL=20.44' P1=13+
5
1
.9
0

i £L=8
7
.3
3
'
PI-13+7119
. I ? D
.
EL-919 54' I z
PI=13+6126
'
PI=13-96.81 .A EL=926.81 I
TI
... + ELt820.24' + C
O O
p O +
4
P
f=
1
z
z
s
z
I : 2
7
:1
8
'
E
L
=
9 r
PI=14+37.81
EL 91993',
P1=14+55 05
EL=827 00'
PI
14+6711 '
: 1.'915 D3 i
I ' PI=14+77.27'. I
. EL=926 20
(J7 PI`14+96 41 U1 PI-14+99 49
+ EL=91988 + EL`926 70
O I
O
P1715,15 15 '
O O EL=926 61
PI=16+44 68 _. PI-15+42 15
EL-919 37' EL=925 95 II
C PI -15+6864 PI=15+68.14 C
PI.15+75.11 Z Ph15+77.44 EL=925.54'! -A I 1=16+77.00 EL=026.46' Z
-- EL=91847
Z
' EL=924,62' PI=15rB624 11 EL=825.64' PI=15+88.00
Z
-? PI=16+10 50 PI=18+0558
EL-91916' PW5+8504 FL=92370' I=15+9450 EL=924.22
D
EL=918 23 + EL-B22.78' EL=923 70
- O : PI=16+1000 O 922 79
O PI=1B+23 50
' EL=91B 15 PI=18123.00
rn O
m
,.EL 817.31
.
PN 1536.50 EL=918.23'
PI=16+3600
Q
t
EL 916.38' : EL=917 31'..... PI=16+48.00 ? ? -i
PI=16+49•,50 EL-918.39' TI T
N
EL-A1550.'

I G C
915 50 ?
D D

z
0

? i
o? .? o
? ? z
,
Z
ni2T m

°
°m
o

ra
O
z N

gm z
y
O N W o

O O O o

8 O; O O O O O O. a Os?

0 ?a

4 Md N;

,
r

7

O
1

O

;
0)
O
O O
O
0
z
e
0
+
do SG_ co i
CC

Z C"i ?' 6 ?` AL8L8=13
Z m B9SC+9£=Id
0
O
na 2 V r I ,60 LtOal 0
G $ Y I L L 86+4C.Id In

z .09 M.l'3 I X49 i 16-13
Y b4 Z4?4E=1d
SL LLB=13 !_ 00 os"R =1d

00 04+9'-Id
,. ,£9A6=13 &Gl1B=l3
96RL9=13
.
O
00-L7+90=1d
00ZZ+84=1d
O
O 91 + 4E=Id
GS
O
O
O
+ I + .L5'ELB•l9 3 E9 Z16=13 +
C9 916 l3 M 00 4B+L4 Id 1 00 S6+L?Id ?
N 9L 06+££.Id
6£ 4(6_13 :. 45 CLO-73
9261.6=13
' 00 L9+Lb Id ?/ 0089?L7' Id
t0
S9.fE=1d `
I1
.L Z'9L6-13 : ,6£ 4L6=13
00.0b+L?-Id 00 Lb+Lb=d
I
I ,s l'9L8=73 ,LZ SL613
0
O m ZS 610x13 Q Z9'CL+L4=Id OO Sl+L4=1d

(V C'7
? dLZ 4lf,=13
,ZZ u6=13 ' t9 LL+9n-ld
I I I 56 LL+Zfad I
9Z'3t6.13
,Z88L8'l3 l3"LW9b Id
' 9Z"9E+ZE=1d
I I?

O

??
O

O

ICE-9l6 l3l O

O
I O
+ I. B L:'OZB.l3 + s4 vo+ =I +
: O OO OO+ZC Id N ?
N I M 999th 73
/ I I I w 4[+s4_Id
I Lb'BLB•l3
00'09+L6-Id
I
Q 99'OZO-13
I O O
I Q L4£L+LC=Id O ,L99 LB-13
+ I + 56'ZO>O-Id. +
LO
r k'

,BO 8 L6al.J.

LL+OC=Id
96 c
)
I if 418713
I l L9 Eb+44-Id
/ I 90 1Z6•13 I
64 OE+OC.Id
? ?-,
O ? O
O
O
O O

+
+ /
+
00 ZLZ8=73 O L99L6-13
? (LOB+fi Z-Id

I 9Z 6?6? 11
so z9+6z=Id
I
J
I
J Zz4 Lze l3 1 J '

Q
Q £CC+6Z=Id Q ZR'0 (6.
13
Q 'I O O ZOZU£4-Id ??. O
J O Z9 tz6=l3 O
+
Z
'
b L +BZ=I . 9L6 13
.OZ

Z I ( ? ~ J
I ?
I J I ' --I
J Ze'ele l3
W Q I W , eL6=13
iz9 W 09 L9+z4 Id
m
1 sZS+HZaId LL
I :.
.? Z
I
p .Z91Z8:19 O [p O
+ OR EO+BZ•I + 4l LL6•13 +
I CO 06'46+Lb=Id
N
I oe b16=13
- Z9LZ8=l3 ? Z4L+14=Id
LE 99+LZ=Id bzZ 6-13 I f
49 £S+t"Id

Q Q ,44'(16=73 Q

O
0 B4Zt+Lgild O
39ZZ8=13
' { +
0000+91=1d LO Z9LZ6•l3
(406+9Z=Id I N
I I k 9Y BL8.l3
I I ? ? Bb OL*04-Id
t9 tM 11 b4'L (6`13
I I 4L'6L+9Z.ld b BZ+Ob:ld
O O I O
O O O
I + .096(6=13 + +
I V' 4ero6+97.=1d
N O
?
I esGLea?

IHL8=73
0909+SId
E6'LZ6.13 I
Q 186(+52=Id O L9 M-1?4

Q
O 0E+6C=Id
89 O

+ ` e9 eiB?13 + +

1
(4'96+4Z.1d
N
I O
M
I I
I .Ea Lze-13
LBOC+42=Id
]
I I I ,eL'LLBa'13 1
I : Of E4+9E=Id
I I EB LL6=13 O
O I O (0 94+GC.ld O
I

't 00
I r ? N M

I I I 06 £9+4E=Id
I ' 1 0 EL RlB=3 O
O I O EG Ll.) Eyld
+ I
P7

?-
N C
SE'91 B=13
1099+90=1d

Ek ZZ6.73 II
00 OS+ZZ Id
I I
9E9L6 73
L9 4Z+BE?Id O
O I
I
O
I O
f

'

o

On
O

O N

N

O O
O M
O O O ,
' ff` (N
M Nr r ?
?> O rn. O 01 r,
O O rn
q
u6P L0 IJd Ul0\cuald\u ma0\b00%V
8
Z, Is
a

Z

od
5?ag
z?
g x
?_
56
Mg
a
Vr
W01
rj m
C3:
Ce)
00
cC?
Z cf: c:i •,
+ Z
00 O
I- ?
U
Q N F£)
O Z
i =
O
J Z
W W
Y W?
i
S _.
Oj3
i
z ......
00
S r` C \ i 1? 1 l\
t l r 1 1 5 r (? CO 1 t S }
t \ \ ?, ?r: ? ? ? S 4 S 5
\\ J A\? ti ?? a+ Z E f 4 t 1
E I I i I `S 1 \ ?,? ?? ?^ /?? ? ,? t m (/)'tom (?I 5 S A 3
i 1 ? A ? III l ? 1 cr,
A \ W O
\ f ye., 4 \ Z?[ zd" y l d 1
} I>
1»x t ZJ t
' I E 1 \1 1? k? l p W Wt1
I?
i1 00 V \ \
10, _" \+ 1
i I.
WOO A
17 =x t ON" i+ ~
oe,
r E ? S ?; ti, 1
O
t
0=0 ?' t IN
i 1
r t t
00
? U ?Y 't t
Z (D?
Z_ W?

O
0
o LL
Q
o
tn
N
0
r
SH-EL10\-1 c"B '0\yE6 R

Ai\0173R\O..I9n\PIana\O 173_PS_ Peh_05.dgn
MATCH?
I
? S
yEET

4 . , ?
4
r ? STA

i 2
3+00
00

rxx Cf> }} t? ?J ? j 4? p ?; V ?;
Al i ? ?
? x, r+t 1 iV? 4
r7? 1

i
r

S r i

?f1 \\ f t?lti

i,.1 ggr
i,
• t•, d'
i
? 1

11
~
r 1 {

;J
X

1 \

5

1
i r
1
t
4
I
?

f

P
,'3
AA
'

,f 1 t
4 Jt?
F
4i

fr

z
tik ,
R
ory
i
r
s
j j ! qq.
1 A ? ?1
a1 i1 J
l?
1% t
t ?
8 ?1 ;sJ r f

O

41
O
CA

CO)
m I
Ln
O

O
O
f
f i t
i'' I i 1 E>
r V
V t' i
`P 3C
.,,. \t, ??NE sNE?? 6 s
MP-?sN
C7
W
i r

? t

E
{ S '

C
A
A C
M"
o? g?

? A
d? 8k
?n
9 ?
9
9 r
3
w o
x
&a.
Wt z
V1
?8
m m m m
Re\0173R\Design\Plens\0173_RS_psh_04.dgn
co m
G)A
cn
_
00
Zr-
U) Cl)
Cl)
C
:j o
O+
Zo

rrl ? .• n ca >•
!m a wi!
t ?i !,T C3
ihll ? tz? ? t?
t1i t) i _
cJiC? A
All
ilik u!? ,
l1 yys?lJJ ! ........... ..........
{! d7 ......... ...... ._. \
cif
t ??1 cif" `-
_,.
bo O z
1111 Z D
!4 9
\ nm
flli t ti r>'
O
cn
;u co
\ nip/ 1 a r a CC
zmz
C;1? Z
Cf)
\ b \
0 2
0 D
Z O m
NDO i ???g[
T VJ •
C Cn W ;? 1 f O
O
C) C=
cn
Z +
co
-< ! ! v I
Ct)
G> r i
can
1 a;,
{ 1 { { i' \ • .„...,? ?\ \\ ? - 'gyp 1 ...
V{YI{? ?, ! 1 y? t \
{4t1 ft1; ?? '?
a k' T n t i ,? Z
o "f<
t ° 1 ?. w 8 to
\ p' a F1 x r'
n ° M { ` ° o
z
_ PC
NC?NF S > I
m
yFE
T
SST ? i? ,?1 t, n 8 g ?C Z
o A 23+00 0 `61
c., 0 "?or
a ?,
rwa: x
o smi2` H
o
,8
1/17004 I oi?aiav
N:\0I/JN\UesLg mYlans w?1is_ no_psn_co.agn
p?MmmZ?AN4>l>??lJ

? 6
?z'^
BANKFULLB
DE
?
~?mZ???OO??B
y
Z
c Q

q
' /
,, f
n
O Ir(t > tl y
?
?y
mm A
z?
?

a o
n
/?/ ?\
t L
y?
j
A
L
Fym?inF§ ? RAN
SSit11p?O
? A ?? ?z
?
D

:O C
? F
N
j Gl < 0 +?

m

\ A

y?
?N?
?
t y € O sop=
s
?j?j fl z
=
>
> Z
5 , x m pS
?-m,?
FFII C
C
m
R
?

8

\
\ ?
$
`. ?
B? "????o
$ 4 HH
mm Hoo q
?
z mg
VrZ Np
/
/ R O
5 /
z FLDW U, H O

> £? m
?fi F v
? y
?? o

D
! o
g r
i Fp [
o >
wN z
BI o
m i
o v

NON
D
? m
R]
2
a

Dq?
?
? gg
?R 8
pp
zm0 oo
p ? ? ji

R
?

F in - L] BANKFU L BTADE
O

?

8m€ y
y
o
n
o
A
:ol
p
A.
om R
o

O
m
l

8mli A
mss D
>
m
0
y
c
S
s
O
z
n
?
=?Stz >

?sz
y o
m6
w
a?°gs
o

iogg yy
F;
F
? b
R
V
0
z3
k
'
m
F??gfi
^'
m
€yR Ss
m c$$ ? p?
A
z
N 06.9 Rx
a m
g?
:PT
i
m ? A17 O
?
F
'p F c?a D25 ? Z

R ? z
p
.=$ gg
sl
r.;? z
y z
g s
? o
8
8
z hQ
Cz
z
w z
a

Z G
I

w

Zq

z o
0°
o
0,0 0

2b
S
e1.
z

?

o a

a u r

M o Y
W Z °
g
00
°°°
p
a

o?
Q P

d XM A'0
\
y
h N°I103s 100d IVWdA
- -
-

XWNIK

0 0
to

o
0 0°
0

J
0
O S

SS

S i
000 0
00 0o
LL ar
Go
o z
F

W
U 00
?ozw

z? Ow
°j???

w W

C
O

U
=
Of E
Si

/
®

®
1
m 8 g
0

J
®
\
a NO
0
0o
yy \1\
U iindXNVe
`
\ \` WN38 N3NNI
\

?°m°rc
i
;Po ? a? y?

r
-i' WU39 M3NN1

iindXNVs
gz o
U
v ?

Q
???
5 555
r;

N

a

I
N
Q -
2
o
u'i
W
o 0
W I? Sff?<Yg z
o <
LL F
1- J
0 z
w 71
?{
4
=

J

LL
°
0
J u LL
a

, ti J
r
o
z
Q
a
o z
m ti

< $
y
JoaN .<N
W q
= Q
> J
O
n
/

J
U
o

-
W
LL
LL /
a

°
l?
O
ti

FF? ?
J
V

S
`qq?
i
o
H

I
w_

z F

F
C?j Q
W
J
JI F
"?o
Wa

a ? 3
T 8
g
zo
E
o
a ?b LL g
`??5?
w
?¢
,
a a
8
J°o
r?MOid
\? .
0?8
? ? N

••F?•?-••_ - - suo UB-0E /9Z/Z

\0:
SH Clio\ Id, Vbb /?V
a
MI M
ix 0
?1J I I I a
I__.I
a (1 I J ? I?
.
° o c
Er rn a
o o
~ o ° a N o s °
H > u .- ,C t a N N C?
O In a w a
0 0)
rrAvQv c -°a O CL u o y : _ E a cm ° -o a U m s` `i = rn rn 0 t >' -°
N su.
v c o a° E E c o E 0 In -C -0 u
? ° L s o -a _
m L° Q C7 C? U N a V N a E N N 3 J °o a s a rn a o c o a o o rn c c a c °? 3
= V U DC CD d m m W U LL F- J in = O N N
?I I I I I ?I I II I {??ii imilll??
N N yN' I I I I r V L L Y W I I I X 1L m i i i m ? d
I T I I _ I I I CD e I I I I I I ?Ci fll t0 e g g? °" w I
i i N N I I I I u d I I o o ' 1
Y 1 I I? ? I ? ? Is
I ? ? i ? l l
7 1? I ?? I I I F I I 1 I 1 I h ? ? l ? ? ? ? i?
W
=j 0
Lu -0
=j : Lan) rs -0
v * O N : p
LL 4) -0 0 -0 0 -a c
N a N ° N O o a U O W m O C •E p
b (Oj ° 3 vi ° U c s° U U
°' : "- c m Q a
a 3 a U a °° W U O
C N N -? a C X a O a W O CO d
c ?` a c c c s a) vi o' H a O s
?v c c °m
-o
r® ??/? J m Z' o c ° a o 'y > O v> p a rn cm C (D a)
o J o 3 30 CL?(oi ~ 151) N d LL ?' m ° aD c N N a"o° 03'03T- c c
0 3 3 0 N p 0 N O d -(D F- ? F- s o Q E O c c c o- `o a s d C'! c c
0 c c E a C W a v w
3 a N -p 0 3 d -p F- -p -p v u- `N 2 -a .J U Z
C a a o J c 3 ? p
N 0 (D
a o a o a a a o a o a a 3 N 0 0 0° y o ,? s c_ o rnCl E O' y c °'
J rn -° rn ° m E _° _° rn _° rn °c n o> °7 ~ c ° a c c '' 0 n. aa- n. CL a u t -°-a a c
u 'C °u w u u Lm . u w u .y u 'w u In to CS, a 3 Z_ tn O O O O O C Q1 `a 3 O w( fin(
Q c Q N GC O ae N GG ce w D ce D CG O W J Q W N U I- U OC a CL O- CL C- G. a W = < J C' W W
®® Z 1( i I
?? 0 II I ..° o +?o®o®a10 0008 ©aI®oooom®oC? ®o®
1-
?> Z
W
O .I F-E
0 ID
ti
N
O a
= C ; N a In m O C -C
a D) C= ~ N c s O J ° in O U°
U - O O a a a a a ; a p C t ° C
M_ CL n -C E
4) 0)
c C a a c _a o -p' O 2 o Q 0 r-
a 0 Q o
m a o? ° O a? a? J U
.a XO d d ° ° In ° a-0 U s> c t m a -C O F- a 3 a O N O
C 't m t ?.. ?.. s s D s d a a r C d m a ?n
W N ru- a 3 3 C a M U 3 0 41 a a F? O N C s > ra- C O N N L C
01 C O O. G
-o cm o O o 0 a d 'o 'o o N o v o o a E _, = o a o F- Z' 3 O .y d
eke U C a d d F- F- , -? s F- a d a_ 3 L. L I L p 3> .C 13 L. u` •> o
Z O -o
c a o. •: a} o. m o a? a 3 :3 a s U- 3 a w ?a°i 3 'E € c a o a a= C
O N y vl N In r- In
a O O o > O ?( O O °
a ?. p a 0 a N ° a) 0 0° a s a a a +- .?
? a°. Lb Lu CL- LLI c`_ Lb o`L Fa- U N Lb N CL FT U ? -+ ZIL d 0 ? F- COL N N F- F- LL F- ? N
2 c 0
LL.
• ? n
ce
W
Z
V
Z
rW
F-
W
U
LQL.
N
m
D
N
11
W
vi
r
I i I I
I I
I I
I ul ? I
I I
I I I I
:

C?III ,l. pup spy
U ? ? . a ?.1 IU?1 W W G 6

a
a
c c a 3

u
u
U- a
LL
L
a
C Y 0 L
0 :
(/)
a
°
°
3 Y
c 3 ?_
°
0 >

J LL_ .a E
N N N
c U 0
5
E a
oc
o a a i
a c a
' a .
o. CL > p a ,... p a N
O
O
O
s p
s O>
>
o : i i 3 U m 3 u C7 C9 _ E
rn a a a a a a? ri a a
O O O O O O 3 N
` O D
o
, >
Lu U o`_ d` a` a n`_ x
n
_ U LL o`. L
u d
0 a ; -? G1 a

L O
a
O 0
a C C C

'
? 0
O
? O
a s ?
o E
a C
a
c
a
U L a a N
W a

Ir 0 3
a ,g 3
a ? c
J c
?'
O o
W
W
T a
c
J c c
a

2 a
°1 a
o)

yy CL 3 ?. ?.
p ?
Q ?
Q
? °
C g

'
?i °
0
3 3
? 3
c?
0
0
r

o

?

o
s
0

U c o o L-
0
0
0
o
a

E

a

c

c s
rn s
oaC1 s
° rn a c
O c
o
U a

° E

D E E

c
U W F --

m° L? Ul at ? n`_ U Ll l a LL a M. o`_
O l
o
U ?

O o te U
°
3

a ; a
a r
,
U
a X =

m

A o

`

a

=
=

-
l -1
` `-
O
0
m -C
y
a
a1
3 .c
°
a° c rn -a
c c c
°
E°

m a
CL
a
- a •C o
E 0
C J
°? m a c
O
rn
a

>
0
o c
-r D
a3s

o p
0)
c

N
LL
N N N L
L d Co
m
I
=I o m
d

z
<0
aE x
y?mx
Z ?z
w xe as p
??

dg
a ??
m:
z
WI
z
W
c?
z
W
W
z
0
I?1
W
W
0
F-
LU
O J
CL
z
Y
W
J
W
Q
z
U_
LL
H
z
w
U
m
W
Q
z
z
O
O
U
0
w z
`°
to O
a
w
z
U
LL
H
z
w
U
U
w
Q
z
O
O
U
C6?
W
Z
0 w p
w w w z
Ln C7 w
w u? > 0 0
0 fn w z w
F 0 w cn O cn
z -j F- CL F-
® W W w w
Z - w w IL (1) a.
Wd ? F W LL Z Z 0 (n
U
CL z
J
zw o m ow
WW
U
?
0 o o N ® ~
? oo
U
W
Y
C®] _
LLI
z F > O
U) LU U) C/) co
U z U) J
> K
(n w W Q N z 0 Q( W0 O LL
?l ZZQ -
> 5 w O O Y d m aw gN Y 0
O
O O O 0 O w O w w w W 0 0 22S
J J K w F- U- F- U a 0 (r 7
kr (?o Io ? 1)(1r][( I
00 00 J L
CPS
U
U
W
24
z
w/
w
z
z
0
¢
Y
az
am
aw
O
LL a
L
L
MO
F-
N FF-
J O
O z
z m
q?w
w U-
O F-
0
?0
Z W
-W
W
w
J 0
ww
Cl) Z
wQ
Y M
H ?
Lm
J (A
F-
0
z

W ? Z ? 2 2

U O
= dQ Z m
d a d ? Cz (Q

Q y
? d oO U F- O Q =
00
O

Y
2 Y
0
= 0
w

W
w
Q
0
U
0?
F-
O (n
(/)
Q z
0
m

? w
tto?
Q
O
?
U
o
J M
?
w z
Q
w m
wU
~ _

U
?
w Q l-

J LL
20
Oow
Z
W
W
w?
QO
-1
w
o
z0
mz
1m
zF
o co
Qw
F-
CL
00
?w
w?
m0
vi
w
O LLF
z F g
j
z
N Q
w'w'
z
? 00
o°
0 Of
w
0
z
w
Q
z
U
P
z
w
U
Cl)
w
Q
z
z
O
O
U
z
d
R
u6p•tll-

On
(n w Q
LU CO Q wO
W
mw
w
0
W
?a
?w
00
as
FW-
0
z
w
Q
z
z
O
O
U
m 0
J
?O
F-
0 LL
? w
H
0
?0
<
Y
0mm
w a
U) z
LL, m U) m
QJ W O
NF-
xz 0
F-
w
ww¢F-
ww0
N
Z o Z
d ?R m
aww
ix a?
FF--
0
Z
10"'Otd"B saa1W V

Y
C ?w
x
_
t- I-
w ?ZO Z 8
Q z
°
w
m
w= 44
U MZ
zz O WONT Cog +
0 Z
0 h
U ss
WI Z00 awmo za
0 F v W 5

(Y) 0
?N Q JO WMW2 z
mWZwz Z?M- gfl-? ?

Q w ..

y rn O

W s

r C
qqqqq
vi
P H O O O n w w m z
?> O-z> ?w0P z0
wU z?ob U w OU O
=
7- z t
0 ro
0
+
p
6
a
W
x-JUQU
?
F c
o
J
C
i J(/) w
Zw
?0?L -0?HQO
m
E

',••\ z Q

WW
U) cp

w
W
Mi
o z-
WmwUwmQw
ww
?2zwCDMt-z?4-?OC9O
WOD
Ww?
W
~ N C, l(?
My
v s
X J
mw>-
>-
HMnc9cn>cnoUMnau?M>W `.., r
\ +z x
s
K U D
z
o ?
co QF

" ° S o

v
< !
o ? ? .. W sum U)

U +
o
i,
w
OZ
U?
o

o
• m W Q mO Q ?'¢om Fx- 0.
N !-
O co ao `'
Q a Mn
04 it++ Z

Z yc

J Z
w w

: a
$ °

uJ
x
o
.-? ?NM V r,rn W
Q
FM m ?
U
? t
•
H
..
? ? i?I i i V C
W itlf t
,.•f
?'
S
I i?i Y
?

Z •i ti
,CT
V !
.a .If It
'Y
lu ,
' {?
i
«Q71i ??
Y
?.
z_ , !
I O

F-
/ w o
,-` w v

w
r';
O ?i V w o
® w ? ? ?

c? U 4' z v o a

4
A L6
A
? ,6
Z `
? f
t i
Y I
v

®

co

44 --- ----------
=

iY t
---- "' --Iw
0
x
(D U)
!! I
0 `
( 1 H
M
???11
FBI
O
I ?/ . \\ \ i
?'' o+ Z
Q ? 0

C/) mU) 0
WOZ

D Z) gm O
Fm-U it Z) wW
O z \r Con
U
z (D
o

ti
Z
Dm - o Z
00
o O

41, _..% F

a U
z
Q O
' 0
(.)
`•

a
o
a ?a?
Sa? ? ?Z
Y 0
w m
+*

-tlI
.?
1 O
O o
8
3 gl
a
z coo :51
Z

=Q'
Q
w
Fa o O
U n F=
a a y z
g w
0 w
z
J

V ., p
A °I UI N d
0 N
S7 LQH x7a MEL 10 OIZ 9, old

m ®i m
m
?- R
a c
u pj
Z
L ? 'vf
N
O O
a M ?
C n L
J C, O
A
-A 0.9
V/
^
m
41
V
U
W
L
.
i
I
I?
In
Ln'
. 0
i O
u
'C
m
x No',
?, d
?? E
lT ? Y ffl

a a E E
C 4= a

Z? + `
rt ? uE?', Vf ?
,w

x M ' ?-
Y
G ;

m ,

,a
J

O _
L t\
w N
'a
a
U.
z
:v

L M In
v N N
I y
,
! a ,

.
I v O' N.

?a
1
I w i
?
j Y

j 1
N', i i
i

1
j C I
f9 i
? Cd
i ? i I
n
tO i i N

i
G
m i
CD
d
I r0i ? j
R
^
G .
? 1
O
I

u

u

1 X ;X X

V
d

O
U

Q1 '.

m
CL
N V)

O u o

O c
N p
a

m _
a
a M a -

. rl
v a v
j y
I3

CL)

f0 w v i

3

? w

N 3
U

o i c

IN CU
'
''
S . U i

fu d
t
C
- ' C
y m
cu I

tea, E
? z
z o
3 E E E
Z m m

??
d
d ?
?,`
Fr " a
! ? uE?' t
n to
VI
?- 7
p C
2
v "
t ? N
•i
amv
M @j
C R 01
J ? 7
J v a
(C
0
s
u
N
w
U
^_'
W
L
ai
4-
w
M . M N .
O ! N

off ,
' d
- a
y o
V)
o d
V) 'p
U (,7
m d
a
o
m Cl
y
- =
J
'?' o
'
f0 , {n
3 >
d o v
7
c ; w
' c > i'
a n

CL

V)
0
p
iIX
C
V
0
c
tD
CD
Lo

a' ? E
Vr _ Ri Y 0 R
x ? ?y Z
a E E cu

i
0
m
m
i
E

,r
Z; O
f? * nE??? can V) a
a
i p
? I
c?
I ?
i ?
i of
'c
0
m
U
d
'x
:
o!
o
O
0
0
o;
o:
o?
i
i
ioi
? O
i
i
OF HG?rH ?,,
0
`4?f„?''?WjIRAµ`P?TT
Reference Reach Database
Stream ID 54
Stream Name -West Branch of Tibbs Run
LeiLani Paugh, NCDOT
[phone]
[e-mail]
Dimension Ratios Mean Minimum Maximum
Bankfull Width: Depth Ratio 4.57 4.57 4.57
Entrenchment Ratio 28.13 28.13 28.13.
Bank Height Ratio 1.52 1.52 1.52
Pool width: Bankfull width* 1.17 1.17 1.17
Max pool depth: Bankfull depth* - 1.19 1.19 1.19
Mean pool depth: Bankfull depth*' 0.90 0.90' 0.90'
Pool area: Riffle area* 1.00 1.00' 1.00
* Ratio denominators are the riffle mean bankfull value.
Pattern Ratios Mean Minimum Maximum
Pool to pool Spacing: Bkfl width 6.09 4.38 7.81.
Meander length ratio 7.60 7 601 7.60;
Radius of curvature ratio r - 4.27 4.271 4.27;
Meander width ratio 7.29 i 7.29: 7.29'
Profile Ratios Mean
Pool slope: Avg WS slope 0.11'
Riffle slope: Avg WS slope 2.03;
Glide slope: Avg WS slope 1.11;
Run slope: Avg WS slope 1.92.
Minimum
0.11;
2.03:
1.11:
1.92
Maximum
0.11
X2.033
IAA
1.92'

J
Location
River Basin !Yadkin-Pee Dee
8-digit HUC 103040103
Location ;Southeast of Salisbury, NC
j

Reach I
Description

State ;NC
Latitude , (decimal degrees)
Longitude -! (decimal degrees)
County Rowan
Physio. Region ;Piedmont (coast, Piedmont, mtns)

Ecoregion 77-11

Public/Private r?
'V
Right of Entry El (check for yes)
USGS Quad ,Southmont
Channel Materials
Percent Silt/Clay ! !
Percent Sand
Percent Gravel
Percent Cobble I
Percent Boulder i
Percent Bedrock
D16 i (mm).
D35 (mm)
D50 I (mm)
D84 (mm)
D95 (mm)
Note: 2,049 mm corresponds to BEDROCK
LeiLani Paugh, NCDOT
(919) 733-
paugh@dotdot.94
Reference Reach Database I
paugstate.nc.us
J
4
;f H' Gr IR?µ?

Data Standards
No survey data provided R No material analysis provided
No pattern data provided ? Data do not align with regional curve ?
No profile data provided ? No location information provided
No hydraulics data provided ?
Description
Rosgen Stream Type E4/5 Soils Type
Reach Length (ft) BEHI Score
Watershed Drainage Area 1.50 (sq. mi) Avg Water Surface Slope 0.0014'.
Watershed % Impervious:. Valley Slope 0.0025
Valley Type (C- colluvial or A- alluvial) Valley Length (ft)
Land Use (U- urban or R- rural) Sinuosity 1.80.
Site Description DWQ Index No.
DWQ Reference Reach ? (check for yes)
DWQ Benthic Monitoring ? (check for yes)
Description of any
Associated Wetlands
Description of
Vegetative Communities
Watershed Description
i
w

_ M
Y
C
' R
CI

O
J
n
w N
v
:a

a
LL.
r
v '

v N N
t
a
d

N ?
LL.
O u Y
0? m
a
U _
c N N i w N
7 ~ p
f v
'
ro
n v L
C ? L ? Q
n tm
? ?
1
w
C

i CO
a+ N
v
W L

fa

it 0
7
? Y
1

a
m

? I v

4l ' w

C

i Co

Yj i v
v ' 1' ?
Yip o? U' R rte'
O
d
1 O

o
-I: r4
?
i u P; E
Gl
E !.
E'
K NO
' ?? i X V) In
,eJ
?r y L

z a E E
m
?`'' o0 ?`+ n n u

?. M
v ?
Q1 i
i C
•U

a
N ?

o c : Oo 0
a
u
z v r+ o

rn a
CL
f+f @j

_j CL y

3

N ! CO

Vf c ' v
VI C
.? a
f
M

v N
L
s ?

LL ? ?

3

rM• '

v

c _

ce, ?
i N
C
f0

lx?
E
a

u •
' z
C
?
°
o E cu
,
z
q
= a a
a
L
+ 4J d
??f -K o???~ of a

F- a•
.-? Ln
r4 o
O U O'.
' - O
D C O
. . O
U O : :. O
01 a+
?•+« C
a
M @j
c O
_
J v n' U (,7
n

o L
N V) i U
a CI;

i ?.
v c
a
o Cl
o!
W R
3 fC J Vf
I d O
> o
tm
Q cm
Q

d ! o
'
*
C)
O
V a

CL

V c

L ,Y

c
?i.
9 O
cO L y
i ++ j

U
ci

x NO,
??
v

' ?ti Z
C? O E E
??
C i7 d C
at t+
?! x vfT'F v? Vf GL.
Reference Reach Database
.R
*' c4"
f?' :N 7Rl.H.
Stream ID 48
Stream Name Tributary to Cane Creek
LeiLani Paugh, NCDOT
[phone]
[e-mail]
Dimension Ratios Mean Minimum Maximum
Bankfull Width: Depth Ratio 5.05 5.05 5.05
Entrenchment Ratio 23.47 23.47 23.47
Bank Height Ratio 1.20 1.20 1.20
Pool width: Bankfull width* 1.10 1.10; 1.10
Max pool depth: Bankfull depth* 1.45 1.45 1.45.
Mean pool depth: Bankfull depth*'
Pool area: Riffle area*
* Ratio denominators are the riffle mean bankfull value.
Pattern Ratios Mean Minimum Maximum
Pool to pool Spacing: Bkfl width 5.25, 5.25' 5.25!
Meander length ratio 7.23; 7.231 7.23,
Radius of curvature ratio 2.50 2.50 2.50
Meander width ratio 8.52: 8.521 8.52
Profile Ratios Mean Minimum Maximum
Pool slope: Avg WS slope 0.29; 0.29! 0.29,
Riffle slope: Avg WS slope 1.36 1.36; 1.36
Glide slope: Avg WS slope
Run slope: Avg WS slope -
Appendix 4 Construction Plans (60%)

C
COMPARISON TABLE - Elk Shoals Site
STREAM: Elk Shoals Creek
2/24/2004
Existing Conditions
Model Proposed Conditions Model

River Station
Profile Discharge
efs WSEL
ft. WSEL
ft. (Prop.WSEL-
Ext. WSEL
4284.33 10 1000 930.32 930.38 0.06
4284.33 50 1700 931.76 931.71 -0.05
4284.33 100 2100 932.00 932.02 0.02
4284.33 Bankfull 270 928.17 928.34 0.17

4117.55 10 1000 930.04 930.05 0.01
4117.55 50 1700 930.63 930.68 0.05
4117.55 100 2100 930.91 930.96 0.05
4117.55 Bankfull 270 927.79 928.05 0.26

3955.84 10 1000 929.23 929.33 0.10
3955.84 50 1700 929.98 930.04 0.06
3955.84 ,
100 2100 930.29 930.35 0.06
3955.84 Bankfull 270 927.27 927.65 0.38

3775.99 10 1000 928.76 928.84 0.08
3775.99 50 1700 929.46 929.53 0.07
3775.99 100 2100 929.77 929.85 0.08
3775.99 Bankfull 270 926.48 926.91 0.43

3640.76 10 1000 928.59 928.45 -0.14
3640.76 50 1700 929.20 929.08 -0.12
3640.76 100 2100 929.48 929.38 -0.10
3640.76 Bankfull 270 926.23 926.60 0.37

3531.41 10 1000 927.95 927.86 -0.09
3531.41 50 1700 928.38 928.57 0.19
3531.41 100 2100 928.60 928.87 0.27
3531.41 Bankfull 270 924.91 926.36 1.45

3384.68 10 1000 926.55 927.26 0.71
3384.68 50 1700 927.34 928.01 0.67
3384.68 100 2100 927.72 928.35 0.63
3384.68 Bankfull 270 924.59 925.89 1.30

3264.19 10 1000 926.27 927.08 0.81
3264.19 50, 1700 927.12 927.78 0.66
3264.19 100 2100 927.46 928.09 0.63
3264.19 Bankfull 270 924.43 925.64 1.21

3143.62 10 1000 926.00 926.68 0.68
3143.62 50 1700 926.75 927.28 0.53
3143.62 100 2100 927.04 927.53 0.49
3143.62 Bankfull 270 924.30 925.40 1.10

J

M
Appendix 5 HEC-RAS Data
L

0
0
0
COMPARISON TABLE - Elk Shoals Site
STREAM: Elk Shoals Creek
2/24/2004
Existing Conditions
Model Proposed Conditions Model

River Station
Profile Discharge
cfs WSEL
ft. WSEL
ft. (Prop.WSEL-
Ext. WSEL
3029.44 10 1000 925.77 926.55 0.78
3029.44 50 1700 926.58 927.13 0.55
3029.44 100 2100 926.87 927.38 0.51
3029.44 Bankfull 270 924.02 925.24 1.22

2914.01 10 1000 925.58 926.21 0.63
2914.01 50 1700 926.22 926.77 0.55
2914.01 100 2100 926.45 927.03 0.58
2914.01 Bankfull 270 924.03 924.74 0.71

2844.6 10 1000 925.55 925.72 0.17
2844.6 50 1700 926.22 926.31 0.09
2844.6 100 2100 926.46 926.56 0.10
2844.6 Bankfull 270 923.97 924.34 0.37

2697.57 10 1000 925.02 925.39 0.37
2697.57 50 1700 925.77 925.88 0.11
2697.57 100 2100 925.95 926.07 0.12
2697.57 Bankfull 270 922.92 924.16 1.24

2606.48 10 1000 924.16 924.75 0.59
2606.48 50 1700 924.78 925.28 0.50
2606.48 100 2100 925.12 925.56 0.44
2606.48 Bankfull 270 921.72 923.59 1.87

2484.28 10 1000 924.07 924.30 0.23
2484.28 50 1700 924.59 924.85 0.26
2484.28 100 2100 924.83 925.10 0.27
2484.28 Bankfull 270 920.96 923.36 2.40

2314.28 10 1000 923.33 923.93 0.60
2314.28 50 1700 923.88 924.47 0.59
2314.28 100 2100 924.31 924.73 0.42
2314.28 Bankfull 270 918.97 923.10 4.13

2228.23 10 1000 921.91 923.55 1.64
2228.23 50 1700 923.20 924.16 0.96
2228.23 100 2100 923.37 924.45 1.08
2228.23 Bankfull 270 919.02 922.56 3.54

2115.12 10 1000 922.11 923.32 1.21
2115.12 50 1700 923.16 923.84 0.68
2115.12 100 2100 923.50 924.11 0.61
2115.12 Bank full 270 919.06 922.40 3.34

0
i

COMPARISON TABLE - Elk Shoals Site
STREAM: Elk Shoals Creek
2/24/2004
Existing Conditions
Model Proposed Conditions Model

River Station
Profile Discharge
cfs WSEL
ft. WSEL
ft. (Prop.WSEL-
Ext. WSEL
1945.29 10 1000 921.66 922.86 1.20
1945.29 50 1700 922.90 923.49 0.59
1945.29 100 2100 923.28 923.78 0.50
1945.29 Bankfull 270 918.84 921.04 2.20

1793.79 10 1000 920.74 922.64 1.90
1793.79 50 1700 922.21 923.17 0.96
1793.79 100 2100 923.00 923.44 0.44
1793.79 Bankfull 270 917.65 921.30 3.65

1680.24 10 1000 920.47 922.54 2.07
1680.24 50 1700 922.03 923.03 1.00
1680.24 100 2100 922.84 923.29 0.45
1680.24 Bankfull 270 916.56 921.11 4.55

1537.42 10 1000 920.57 921.90 1.33
1537.42 50 1700 921.99 922.34 0.35
1537.42 100 2100 922.81 922.79 -0.02
1537.42 Bankfull 270 916.63 920.07 3.44

1388.64 10 1000 920.24 921.69 1.45
1388.64 50 1700 921.91 922.29 0.38
1388.64 100 2100 922.74 922.67 -0.07
1388.64 Bankfull 270 916.37 920.4 4.03

1320.96 10 1000 920.05 921.33 1.28
1320.96 50 1700 921.71 921.96 0.25
1320.96 100 2100 922.6 922.4 -0.20
1320.96 Bankfull 270 916.26 919.97 3.71

1195.5 10 1000 918.97 921.17 2.20
1195.5 50 1700 921.3 921.62 0.32
1195.5 100 2100 922.48 922.1 -0.38
1195.5 Bankfull 270 915.75 920.1 4.35

1109.34 10 1000 918.59 920.21 1.62
1109.34 50 1700 921.28 920.74 -0.54
1109.34 100 2100 922.45 921.95 -0.50
1109.34 Bankfull 270 915.46 917.13 1.67

1056.5 10 1000 918.37 917.85 -0.52
1056.5 50 1700 921.31 920.83 -0.48
1056.5 100 2100 922.45 921.95 -0.50
1056.5 Bankfull 270 915.1 915.1 0.00
c
C

-
x N
o
o

c CL
`

c
?
d
J Y
C w
C O
?
?
0]
m

d'
O
O
N o
o
o
?
O cq
N
N
'O
N
O
CL
O

N w ?
c
? v
c
d m
O
O o
CD
N N ?
C
(D
N
? c
t

ai
N
U

c
'
w m
O) ?
C -

O
r
o
0
o

?
o ?n o ?n o
rn rn o
rn rn
rn
(y) U04eA013
n
C
c
n
n
ni
0
L
c
M,
0
7

a

c
0 m
-
N
x
?
O
o N
o
n
o
a

o

c

2
O
0
0
V

O
O
N C)
C)

N
N
.O
a)
O
0-
0

N w
C
cD
m
?
?
O
_ CD
O
o
a)
N
? c
v
fd
(O
N Z
L
c
¢
N a
w o
x
C
C
U)
X
N
r
0
0
0
0
o
Cl) n o ?n o
m m
rn rn
(y) uogLIADO
2
11

COMPARISON TABLE - Elk Shoals Site
STREAM: Elk Shoals Creek
2/24/2004
Existing Conditions
Model Proposed Conditions Model

River Station
Profile Discharge
cfs WSEL
ft. WSEL
ft. (Prop.WSEL-
Ext. WSEL
4284.33 10 1000 930.32 930.38 0.06
4284.33 50 1700 931.76 931.71 -0.05
4284.33 100 2100 932.00 932.02 0.02
4284.33 Bankfull 270 928.17 928.34 0.17

4117.55 10 1000 930.04 930.05 0.01
4117.55 50 1700 930.63 930.68 0.05
4117.55 100 2100 930.91 930.96 0.05
4117.55 Bankfull 270 927.79 928.05 0.26

3955.84 10 1000 929.23 929.33 0.10
3955.84 50 1700 929.98 930.04 0.06
3955.84 100 2100 930.29 930.35 0.06
3955.84 Bankfull 270 927.27 927.65 0.38

3775.99 10 1000 928.76 928.84 0.08
3775.99 50 1700 929.46 929.53 0.07
3775.99 100 2100 929.77 929.85 0.08
3775.99 Bankfull 270 926.48 926.91 0.43

3640.76 10 1000 928.59 928.45 -0.14
3640.76 50 1700 929.20 929.08 -0.12
3640.76 100 2100 929.48 929.38 -0.10
3640.76 Bankfull 270 926.23 926.60 0.37

3531.41 10 1000 927.95 927.86 -0.09
3531.41 50 1700 928.38 928.57 0.19
3531.41 100 2100 928.60 928.87 0.27
3531.41 Bankfull 270 924.91 926.36 1.45

3384.68 10 1000 926.55 927.26 0.71
3384.68 50 1700 927.34 928.01 0.67
3384.68 100 2100 927.72 928.35 0.63
3384.68 Bankfull 270 924.59 925.89 1.30

3264.19 '10 1000 926.27 927.08 0.81
3264.19 50 1700 927.12 927.78 0.66
3264.19 100 2100 927.46 928.09 0.63
3264.19 Bankfull 270 924.43 925.64 1.21

3143.62 10 1000 926.00 926.68 0.68
3143.62 50 1700 926.75 927.28 0.53
3143.62 100 2100 927.04 927.53 0.49
3143.62 Bankfull 270 924.30 925.40 1.10

0
0
Appendix 5 HEGRAS Data
0
L
\i

ECTI()t4
9 North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission 9
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
,%9ENIORANDUNl
TO: John R. Dorncy, Division of Water Quality
Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources
FROM: Ron Linville, Regional Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program e__X
DATE: Nlav 14, 2004
SUBJECT: Review of 401 Certification Application, Sink Property - Elk Shoals Creek
Restoration Plan, DWQ No. 040722, Alexander County
Buck Engineering is requesting 401 Water Quality Certification from the North Carolina
Division of Water Quality. The NCWRC has reviewed information provided by the applicant,
and field biologists on our staff are familiar with habitat values of the project area. These
continents are provided in accordance Nvith provisions of the Clean Water Act of 1977 (33 U.S.C.
466 et. seq.) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (43 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C.
661-667d).
The project will provide mitigation by restoring 5,163 linear feet of Elk Shoals Creek
(3,377 linear feet) and two unnamed tributaries (1,291 linear feet). The site was previously
degraded by agricultural practices. The bioengineering (natural channel design) project will
enhance water quality and restore wildlife habitat by restoring dimension, pattern and profile to
the streams and by reconnecting the streams to their floodplains. Wildlife habitats will be
improved as vegetated buffers will be used to stabilize the restored channels. This stream is a
main headwater of Lookout Shoals Lake and probably provides warn water aquatic habitat
values and gamcfish spawning. Providing the stream is not severely fragmented downstream, the
proposed project should enhance these values considerably. Accordingly, we will not object to
the project as proposed by Buck Engineering providing standard 404 Permit and 401 Certification
practices are used during construction.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this project. If you have any
questions regarding these comments, please contact me at 336/769-943.
Cc: Amanda Jones, COE
Alan Johnson, DWQ-MRO
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] cxt. 281 • Fax: [phone]