20061103 Ver 1 - Northgate Park_272_COReport_2017 - 4/7/2017

NORTHGATE PARK (ELLERBE CREEK) STREAM RESTORATION SITE
DMS ID 272
USACE ACTION ID #200620453
DWQ 401# NA
CLOSEOUT REPORT: STREAM & BUFFER RESTORATION
Proiect Setting & Classifications
[Meeting XY Coordinates: 36.021938, -78.895180
County
Durham
General Location
City of Durham
River Basin:
Neuse
Physiographic Region:
Piedmont
Ecoregion:
Dec 2008
USGS Hydro Unit:
03020201050010
NCDWQ Sub -basin:
03-04-01
Wetland Classification
NA
Thermal Regime:
Warm
Trout Water:
N
Project Performers
Mar 2014
Source Agency:
DMS
Designer:
URS Corp.
Monitoring Firm
KCI Associates of NC
Construction Contractor
Environmental Quality
Resources, LLC
Planting Contractor/Invasives
HARP
Repair Design
KCI Associates of NC
Repair Contractor
Carolina Environmental
Contracting, Inc.
Approved for transfer to
Stewardship
Y
Stewards
DEQ Stewardship
Proiect Activities and Timeline
Milestone
Month -Year
Project Instituted
Apr 2005
Permitted
Nov 2006
Earthwork Completed
Dec 2008
As -built Survey -Grading
Jan 2009
Planting Completed
Nov 2009
Baseline/Monitoring Year -1
Nov 2009 -Jan
2010
Monitoring Year -2
Dec 2010
Invasive Plant Treatment
2013-2015
Stream Repair
Mar 2014
Monitoring Year 3
Dec 2014
Monitoring Year 4
Dec 2015
Supplemental Planting
Jan 2016
Beaver Management
May 2016 -
present
Monitoring Year 5
Nov 2016
Closeout Submission
Feb 2017

DMS Planning Context:
The Northgate Park stream restoration project is located in HUC 03020201050010, the Ellerbe Creek watershed, which is
listed as a Targeted Local Watershed (TLW) in the 2010 Neuse River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP) plan as well as
the 2015 Neuse 01 CU Update. The project is also located in Ellerbe Creek Local Watershed Plan (LWP). Currently,
DMS has a total of three projects in this TLW/LWP (Ellerbe Creek, Goose Creek and Northgate Park).
Northgate Park project drains to Ellerbe Creek which is designated as a Nutrient Sensitive Water Supply Water by the NC
Division of Water Resources (NCDWR). Additionally, Northgate Park project drain to a portion of Ellerbe Creek that is
also identified on the NCDWR 2014 303d Impaired Waters list. This reach has been listed since 1998 for rating as Poor
for fish community sampling. Ellerbe Creek drains to Falls Lake.
The 2015 Neuse 01 CU Update indicates that impacts from impervious surfaces and disturbed buffer are of concern in this
watershed particularly since this is a water supply watershed. The Ellerbe Creek LWP indicates that major stressors in this
watershed include stream bank erosion, lack of buffer, stream channelization, impervious cover and nutrient inputs. Goals
of this LWP include: (1) improve aquatic life in Ellerbe Creek; (2) reduce destructive flooding in the watershed; (3) create
recreational opportunities; (4) educate the local community about the creek; and (5) protect the Falls Lake drinking water
supply.
The goals of the Northgate Park project are consistent with DMS watershed planning goals. The project reduces flooding
through improved floodplain connection, improves aquatic habitat through streambed diversity and riffle -pool sequences,
restores riparian buffer aiding in filtration/pollutant removal and improved habitat, reduces erosion by constructing a
stabilized and efficient stream system and reduces nutrient inputs through three stormwater wetland BMPs.
Proiect Setting and Background Summary
In 2008, the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) restored and enhanced a reach of Ellerbe Creek, an
Unnamed Tributary to Ellerbe Creek (UT 3), and stream buffer within Northgate Park in Durham County, NC. The project
also included the creation of two stormwater wetlands with outfalls to the project streams. The drainage area for the site is
urban residential land. The State has a permanent conservation easement of 7.5 acres and the project is located entirely
within Northgate Park, which is a City of Durham public park. The project stream begins at the pedestrian bridge near the
baseball diamond and flows 2,284 linear feet to the culvert under Acadia Street. The project goals and objectives are listed
below.
Construction was completed at the site in December 2008. In March 2009, live stakes were planted along the stream and
the stormwater wetlands were planted. The planting of the riparian buffer was delayed until November 2009, when the
rest of the site was planted with tublings and containerized plants. After planting, six vegetation plots were installed
following the CVS-EEP vegetation monitoring procedure, five in buffer restoration areas and one in the planted stream
riparian zone.
After construction, the downstream portion of the project experienced significant erosion along the stream banks, the in -
stream structures failed or were compromised, and the channel lost many of the features that were designed to provide
morphological functional lift. Repairs were conducted at the site beginning in late 2013 and ending in March 2014. The
repairs focused on correcting these deficiencies and returning the intended function to the restored stream. These repairs
included vegetated live soil lifts to repair bank erosion, removal of individual single arm vanes, repair of cross vanes, and
the installation of two constructed riffles where the bed had degraded. In addition to these structural repairs, inside
streambanks were graded back to stable angles and new live stakes were installed. Once repair work was completed the
newly repaired banks were planted with live stakes and disturbed construction areas were planted with native transplants.
Since these repairs the site has experienced multiple bankfull events and the repair areas are stable and functioning. See
the Remediation Map for location of the referenced repairs
The site also received a site -wide supplemental planting in early 2016. DMS staff planted 400 total stems in areas of low
stem density (100 each of tulip poplar, sycamore, swamp Chestnut oak, and river birch). Based on the six monitoring
plots, the fifth -year monitoring counted an average of 175 planted stems/acre across the site. Plots 1, 3, 4 and 5 have a
planted stem density less than the year five success criteria of 260 stems/acre for stream restoration areas and 320
stems/acre for buffer restoration areas. It is our opinion that there are more planted stems in the plots and across the site

than were identified in the most recent vegetation data. In the 4 years between MY2 and MY3, all of the flagging marking
trees and plots was lost so the monitoring firm had to piece things together as best they could, it is possible that there are
planted stems that were marked as volunteers. In addition, the supplemental planting effort in early 2016 only had one
planting area that included a vegetation plot (#5). Even with a low number of planted species, these plots are well
vegetated and many of the volunteer stems are desirable natives that have thrived and are growing vigorously. The site's
average stem density including volunteers is 4,843 stems/acre, with all plots averaging over 2,000 stems/acre. Overall the
site is well vegetated and all areas are growing well. See Remediation Map for planting locations and number of stems
planted in each.
Goals and Objectives:
The goal of the restoration project is to improve the water quality and biological habitat of the site's streams and
wetlands and enhance flood attenuation through the following objectives:
• Restoring the Project Reach to a stable urban stream channel that will retain its dimension, pattern, and profile over
time, and that is capable of transporting watershed flows and sediment load efficiently.
• Using Priority II restoration to change Ellerbe Creek from a G5c type stream channel to an E type channel.
• Enhancing the capacity of the site to mitigate flood flows by improving the connection of the stream to its floodplain.
• Improving aquatic habitat by establishing a heterogeneous bed morphology with riffle -pool sequences supported
by in -stream structures.
• Restoring the riparian buffer from park grasses and herbaceous vegetation to Piedmont Bottomland Forest to
provide filtration of nutrients and organic matter inputs into the stream, to improve wildlife habitat, and to provide
shade for the stream channel.
• Reducing sediment inputs from localized streambank erosion by re-establishing stream geometry and by stabilizing
and revegetating the stream banks.
• Installing three stormwater wetland best management practices (BMPs) to reduce stormwater pollutants (namely
nitrogen and phosphorus) and improve water quality prior to discharging into the stream.
Success Criteria
Success Criteria
Measured Parameter
Criteria Met
Streams
Yes — Areas of severe stream bank erosion
• stable stream system based on
5 permanent cross-sections (4 riffle and
reported during the project have been repaired.
measurements of dimension,
1 pool); longitudinal profile
Cross-section survey data indicates that the
pattern, profile and visual
channel geometry has remained stable since the
assessments
repairs.
Vegetation
Yes — Although Plots 1, 3, 4 and 5 have a
• Minimum of 260 stems/acre in
6 vegetation plots measured using the
Planted stem density less than the year five
year 5 streamside area
CVS Level II protocol
success criterion of 260 stems/acre for stream &
320 stems/acre for buffer restoration, all plots
• Minimum of 320 stems/acre in
exceed vegetative success when considering
year 5 riparian buffer
volunteer species.
restoration area
Hydrology
USGS gauge and photo documentation
Yes — Success criteria were met throughout the
• documentation of two bankfull
of bankfull events
monitoring period with a total of 15 documented
channel events
bankfull events.

Asset Table:
Project Assets
Northgate Park (Ellerbe Creek) Stream Respotration site
Project Streams
Non -
riparian
Wetland
(ac)
Credited
Buffer (sf)
Riverine Non-Riverine
Project Exiting Restoration
Segment (if) Level
Approach
As -Built
(lf/sf) Stationing
Mitigation
Ratio
Mitigation
Units
(SMU/RBMU)
Reach 1 1,520 EI
PII
1,247 10+00 - 25+20
1.5:1
831
Reach2 646 R
PII
750 25+20 - 32+70
1:1
750
UT3 104 R
PII
117 100+00 - 101+17
1:1
117
TOTAL
2,114
1,698
Project Buffer
Buffer
R
145,084.01
1:
145,084.01
Buffer
E
10,000.40
3:1
31333.47
TOTAL
155,084.41
148,417.48
Length and Area Summations by Mitigation Category
Northgate Park (Ellerbe Creek) Stream Respotration site
Stream
Restoration Level Of) Riparian Wetland (ac)
Non -
riparian
Wetland
(ac)
Credited
Buffer (sf)
Riverine Non-Riverine
Restoration 867
145,084.01
Enhancement
10,000.40
Enhancement 1 1,247
Enhancement 11
Creation
Preservation
High Quality Preservation
Total 2,114
155,084.41
Overall Asset Summary
Northgate Park (Ellerbe Creek) Stream Respotration site
Asset Category Overall Credits
Stream 1,698
Riparian Wetland
Non -riparian Wetland
Buffer 148,417.48

03020201030040
i
03020201030050
1
i
f
\ I
i
i
03020201050010'
,. 0303000206011
sl
2,000 1,000 0 2,000
Figure 2. Project Site Watershed Map Project Easeent Project Watershed 5.81 s mi.
Northgate Park (Ellerbe Creek) Stream Restoration 0 q WE Feet
K C I Durham County NC 14 -Digit HUC Boundary Map createdNovemberMTMBase
, s Source: USGS TNM Topo Base Map

V-
A
*+� Relevant Soil Series
w Cc - Cartecay and Chewacla Soils, 0 to 2% Slopes, Frequently Flooded "
Ch - Chewacla and Wehadkee Soils, 0 to 2% Slopes, Frequently Flooded
MfE - Mayodan Sandy Loam, 15 to 25% Slopes
MrC - Mayodan-Urban Land Complex, 0 to 10% Slopes
WwC White Store -Urban Land Complex, 0 to 10% Slopes
H
A.
r
I
#'�.. � ' •/ it 1. f. _
S . 6
y
41i V
✓L-. ��,jy�,.}� ,q�y�y � btu � • V•
",
T w .
dw
AIL
Ellerbe Creek ' pk wA �• � � F
Northgate Park Project Site
Non Hydric y ,
Hydric A
Hydric B
N 170 85 0 170
Figure 3. Project Site NRCS Soil Survey Map Feet
Northgate Park (Ellerbe Creek) Stream Restoration w� e
Durham County, NC Map November
K C A S Image Source: NC Statewide
Orthoimagery, 2013

Stream Morphology Data: Cross sections, Longitudinal Profiles, and Morphology Table
Neuse River Basin, Ellerbe Creek, MY05, XS - 1, Reach 1, Riffle
303
303
301
301
------- -------------------------------------------
------
m
299
____________----------------------- ------- - - - ---
- Bankfull
297
Flood Prone Area
297
_____________________ ____-_______ __________ ___
d
w
MY01, 1/15/10
W 295
W02,9/14/10
MY03, 1/7/15
295
_ _
Bankful]
--�'.-"-
MY04, 7/20/15
MYOI, 1/15/10
— MY05, 5/31/16
MY02, 9/14/10
293
0 10 20 30 40
50
Station (feet)
Neuse River Basin, Ellerbe Creek, MY05, XS - 2, Reach 1, Pool
303
301
299
____________----------------------- ------- - - - ---
297
d
W 295
_ _
Bankful]
MYOI, 1/15/10
293
MY02, 9/14/10
MY03, V7/15
MY04, 7/20/15
291 i
10 20 30 40
50 MY05, 5/31/160
Station (feet)
Neuse RiverBasin, Ellerhe Creek, MY05, XS - 3, Reach 1, Riffle
302
300
-- - - - ------ -- -- --
—--
298
5
�
°
_ _
296
a
Bankfull
w
294
Flood Prone Asea
MY01, V15110
MY02, 9/14/10
292
MY03t 1/21/15
MY04, 7/21/15
290
--05,13 1/1 6
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
70
Station (feet)

Neuse River Basin, Ellerbe Creek, MY05, XS - 4, Reach 2, Riffle
302
300
X298
x296
W294
292
290
0 10 20
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - " -' - - - - - -
30 40 50 60
Station (feet)
Bankfull
— — — Flood Prone Area
MY01, 1/15/10
MY02, 9/15/10
MY03*, l/21/15
MY04, 7/21/15
MY05, 61/16
70
Neuse River Basin, Ellerbe Creek, MY05, XS - 5, Reach2, Riffle
301
------------------------------------------------------------
299
5
297
o
- ------------ ------------------
— . - Bankfull
m�-
-
w295
Flood Prone Area
MY01, 1/15/10
MY02, 9/15/10
293
MY03*% 1/21/15
MY04, 7/22/15
— MY05, 61/2016
291
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Station (feet)

Longitudinal Profile: Ellerbe Creek
3�
DMSProject Number 272 - MY05 - Stations 10+00 - 20+00
294 y=6E-05x + 299AI
■
298 ■
297 IdReach 1 Reach 2 0
296
C1 ----------------- _ y=0_t10CY2x+29551
294 dx
Yj
293
292
291
2904
1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1540 16DD 1700 18M 1900 2000
STATION
As -Built 1.109 —MY -01.1.43.40 MY -02,9114/10 MY -03; 1•21!1554.11-U4 7,21x15 tMY-05,5,31!16 — — —Water Surface ■ BankfUl 6 In -Stream Structures
"Y
299
297
296
295
F 294
293
0 292
E- 291
_ 294
2,89
G4 299
287
296
295
Longitudinal Profile: Ellerbe Creek
DMSProject Number 272 - MY05 - Stations 20+00 - 33+00
2600 2100 22,00 2390 2400 2504 2600 2700 2800 2904 3460 3100 3200 3364
SI_TIO I
—Ar, -Built, 1,x09 MY -01, 145/10 MY -02, 9,15114 MY -03, 1,21115 MY -04, 7,21115 T .]-05; 531 16 — —Fater Surface ■ Ban full d In -Stream StructLses

Table 4. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
Northgate Park (Ellerbe Creek) Stream Restoration Site
Segment Reach: Reach 1 (1,520 ft.) and Reach 2 (750 ft.)
Parameter
Cross -Section 1
Cross -Section 2
Cross -Section 3
Riffle -
Reach 1
Pool -
Reach 1
Riffle -
Reach 1
Dimension MYO
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MYO MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MYO MYl
MY2
MY3*
MY4
MY5
Record Elevation (datum) used
296.9
296.9
296.9
296.9
296.9
mi 297.8
297.8
297.8
297.8
297.8
296.1
296.1
296.1
296.1
296.1
Bankfull Width (ft)
24.0
23.8
22.8
22.5
23.0 1
28.5
29.2
24.7
24.7
24.0 1
25.0
23.8
28.7
25.1
25.2
Floodprone Width (ft)
42.0
42.0
42.7
42.5
41.8
-
-
-
-
-
62.0
62.0
74.6
71.7
65.1
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area (ft 2)
45.0
43.1
51.4
52.6
51.0
82.4
77.3
89.1 1
87.9
85.0
53.4
63.4
98.5
77.4
76.5
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1 1.9
1.8
2.3
2.3
2.2
2.9
2.6
3.6
3.6
3.5
1 2.1
2.7
1 3.4
3.1 1
3.0
Bankfull Maximum Depth (ft)
2.8
2.8
3.0
3.1
2.9
5.8
4.3
5.3
5.1
4.7
3.4
3.8
4.4
4.4
4.1
Width/Depth Ratio
12.8
13.1
10.1
9.7
10.4
-
-
-
-
-
11.7
8.9
8.4
8.1
8.3
Entrenchment Ratio
1.8
1.8
1.9
1.9
1.8
-
-
-
2.5
2.6
2.6
2.9
2.6
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
-
-
-
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Cross -Sectional Area Between End Pins (ft 2) M
-
188.5
178.6
280.8
186.8
-
250.3
262.5
268.7
242.2
-
327.4
326.1
322.6
329.4
d50 (mm)
1.2
0.35
24
6.90
2.20
0.08
0.33
43
0.96
0.46
0.06
0.39
0.38
0.62
0.67
Parameter
Cross -Section 4
Cross -Section 5
Riffle -
Reach 2
Riffle -
Reach 2
Dimension MYO
MYl
MY2
MY3*
MY4
MY5
MYO MYl
MY2
MY3*
MY4
MY5
Record Elevation (datum) used296.4
296.4
296.4
296.4
296.4
296.3
296.3
296.3
296.3
296.3
Bankfull Width (ft)
25.2
28.4
28.7
28.9
29.4
36.1
26.9
33.5
31.3
32.0
Floodprone Width (ft)
>75
>75
>75
>75
>75
>90
>90
>90
62.2
58.3
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area (ft)
80.2
84.9
98.5
101.9
100.2
82.0
1 81.2
87.4
87.6
85.7
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
3.2
3.0
3.4
3.5
3.4
2.3
3.0
2.6
2.8
2.7
Bankfull Maximum Depth (ft)
4.5
4.4
4.6
4.6
4.4
4.0
4.4
3.5
3.5
3.2
Width/Depth Ratio
7.9
9.5
8.4
8.2
8.7
15.9
8.9
12.8
11.2
12.0
Entrenchment Ratio
>3.0
>3.0
>3.0
2.8
2.7
>2.5
>2.5
>2.5
2.0
1.8
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Cross -Sectional Area Between End Pins (ft 2)
326.9
330.7
369.7
330.7
-
151.8
124.7
160.8
163.8
d50 (mm) M
1 0.06
0.06
0.28
0.35
0.67
0.06
0.06
71.00 1
27.00
70.00
Note: Since monitored bankfull elevations were established at the ton of bank durine baseline monitoring. there have been no sienificant chanees in bank heieht or indications that the bankfull
elevation of the channel has changed. There have been small depositional features of sand and fine sediment that have formed along some parts of the floodplain, but these are considered transient and
not permanent changes to the bank heights. Therefore, the bank height ratio has remained at 1.0 throughout the course of monitoring.
*=Cross-sections 3, 4, and 5 reset in October 2014, before MY3 survey

Hydrology Data: Verification of Bankfull Events Table, Historic Vs. Average Rainfall Graph, Wetland
Gauge Data
Table 5. Hydrological (Bankfull) Verifications
North ate Park (Ellerbe Creek) Stream Restoration Site
Date of Data
Collection
Date of Occurrence
Method
Photo Number
Site visit to evaluate indicators of stage
6/14/2009
6/11/2009
N/A
after storm event
Site visit to evaluate indicators of stage
11/11/2009
11/11/2009
N/A
after storm event
12/25/2009
12/25/2009
Eye -witness account
N/A
Site visit to evaluate indicators of stage
1/25/2010
1/25/2010
after storm event
N/A
Site visit to evaluate indicators of stage
5/17/2010
5/17/2010
after storm event
N/A
Site visit to evaluate indicators of stage
9/30/2010
9/30/2010
after storm event
N/A
Site visit to evaluate indicators of stage
6/30/2013
6/30/2013
after storm event
1-2
Site visit to evaluate indicators of stage
9/24/2014
9/24/2014
after storm event
3-4
Site visit to evaluate indicators of stage
12/23/2015
12/23/2015
after storm event
5-6
USGS Gage located just downstream of the
2/16/2016
2/16/2016
project
7
USGS Gage located just downstream of the
3/14/2016
3/14/2016
project
7
USGS Gage located just downstream of the
7/15/2016
7/15/2016
project
7
USGS Gage located just downstream of the
7/31/2016
7/31/2016
project
7
USGS Gage located just downstream of the
9/18/2016
9/18/2016
project
7
USGS Gage located just downstream of the
10/8/2016
10/8/2016
project
7
Photo 1. Bankfull event 6/30/2013
Photo 3. Bankfull event 9/24/2014
Photo 2. Bankfull event 6/30/2013
Photo 4. Bankfull event 9/24/2014

Photo 5. Bankfull event 12/23/2015
2000.00
1000.00
Photo 6. Bankfull event 12/23/2015
USGS 0208675010 BLLERBL CREEK AT CLUB BOULEVARD AT BURKA", FIC
0.05 "
Jan 01
2016
Mair 01 May 01 Jul 81 Sep 01 Nov 81 Jan 0
26:.6 2016 2016 2016 2016 2017
---- Provisional data Subject to Revision ----
6rraph court4�&J of the U.S. Geological Suw+r¢b

Vegetation Data:
Table 6. Vegetation History (stems/acre)
North ate Park I Ellerbe Creek Stream Restoration Site
E272 -A-0001
Common Name Species Type Pnol-SIP-all T
E272 -A-0002
PnoLS P -all T
E272 -A-0003
Pnol-S P -all T
E272 -A-0004
PnoLS P -all T
E272 -A-0005
Pnol-S P -all T
Plot Number
MY -01 MY -02
Planted Total Planted Total
MY -03
Planted Total
MY -04
Planted Total
MY -05
Planted Total
1
769 769
607
4,168
162
5,625
121
5,342
162
5,787
2
567 567
486
1,295
283
3764
283
3,197
283
3,885
3
769 769
364
1,781
0
6,192
0
5,099
1 0
6,151
4
607 607
81
6,475
81
2469
40
3,116
40
3,197
5
486 486
445
445
243
1,255
243
1,578
243
7,649
6
405 405
324
445
324
2550
324
2,469
324
2,388
EEP Project Code 272. Project Name: Ellerbe Creek
Current Plot Data (MY52016)
Scientific Name
E272 -A-0001
Common Name Species Type Pnol-SIP-all T
E272 -A-0002
PnoLS P -all T
E272 -A-0003
Pnol-S P -all T
E272 -A-0004
PnoLS P -all T
E272 -A-0005
Pnol-S P -all T
E272 -A-0006
PnoLS P -all T
Acer
maple Tree
Acerfloridanum
Southern Sugar Mapl Tree
1
Acernegundo
boxelder Tree
1
1
1
1
Acer rubrum
red maple Tree
2
5
Acersaccharinum
silver maple Tree
1
Acersaccharum
sugar maple Tree
1
3 3
3
Alnus incana ssp. rugosa speckled alder
1
3
17
Alnusserrulata
hazel alder Shrub
Aronia arbutifolia
Red Chokeberry Shrub
Baccharis
baccharis Shrub
Baccharis halimifolia
eastern baccharis Shrub
Betula nigra
river birch Tree
31
1
Celtis laevigata
sugarberry Tree
6
6
1 1 1
Cercis canadensis
eastern redbud Tree
1
1
2 2
2
Cornus
dogwood Shrub or Tree
Cornus amomum
silky dogwood Shrub
1
3
Diospyrosvirginiana
common persimmon Tree
3 3
3
5
1
4 4
8
1
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash Tree
32
7
9
1
3
Ilex cornuta
Chinese holly Exotic
Juglans nigra
black walnut Tree
2
21
1
21
1
Juniperus virginiana
eastern redcedar Tree
1 1
2
23
3
1
2 2
4
Li q u i d a m b a r styra ci fl u a
sweetgum Tree
62
72
38
169
11
Liriodendrontulipifera
tuliptree Tree
16
2
6
6
2 2
3
Morus rubra
red mulberry Tree
Oxydendrum arboreum
sourwood Tree
Physocarpus
ninebark Shrub
Pi nustae da
loblolly pine Tree
8
20
36
1 5
19
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore Tree
61
2
7
2
Prunus serotina var. serol black cherry Tree
P ru n u s vi rgi n i a n a
chokecherry Shrub
Quercus
oak Tree
Quercus coccinea
scarlet oak Tree
1 1
6
4
Quercus lyrata
overcup oak Tree
1 1
1
Quercus michauxii
swamp chestnut oak Tree
2 2
2
3 3
4
Quercus pagoda
cherrybark oak Tree
Quercus palustris
pin oak Tree
1 1
1
1
Quercus phellos
willow oak ITree
2
Quercus rubra
northern red oak Tree
1
1
Salix nigra
black willow Tree
1 1 1
5
Sambucus canadensis
Common Elderberry Shrub
Sambucus nigra
European black eldei Shrub
4
Spiraea
spirea Shrub
Symphoricarpos orbiculal coralberry Shrub
2
Taxodium distichum
bald cypress Tree
2
Ulmus
Jelm Tree
Ulmus americana
Americanelm Tree
1
Ulmus parvifolia
IChinese elm
Unknown
I Shrub or Tree
Stem count
Size (ares)
Size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE161.9
41 41
1
0.02
3 3
143 71 71 96
1
0.02
14 3 3 12
5787 283.31 283.31 3985
0 01 1521
1 1
0.02 1
OF 01 151
01 6151
11 11 79 61 61
1 1
0.02 0.02
1 1 12 2 2
40.471 31971
189 8 8 59
1
0.02
9 4 4 13
323.7 323.7 2388

EEP Project Code 272. Project Name: Ellerbe Creek
Annual Means
Scientific Name
Common Name
MY5 (2016)
Species Type Pnol-S P -all T
MY4 (2015)
Pnol-S P -all T
MY3 (2014)
PnoLS P -all T
MY2 (2010)
PnoLS P -all T
MY1(2009)
PnoLS P -all T
Acer
maple
Tree
5
5
5
Ace rfloridanum
Southern Sugar Mapl
Tree
1
Acernegundo
boxelder
Tree
4
2
1
Acer rubrum
red maple
Tree
7
3
6
1
Ace rsaccharinum
silver maple
Tree
1
Acer saccharum
sugar maple
Tree
3
3
3
3
3
6
3
3
6
4
4
5
Alnus incana ssp. rugosa
speckled alder
21
Alnusserrulata
hazel alder
Shrub
16
1
1
15
54
3
3
3
Aronia arbutifolia
Red Chokeberry
Shrub
1
1
1
1
1
1
Baccharis
baccharis
Shrub
1
Baccharis halimifolia
eastern baccharis
Shrub
I
1
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
4
3
6
15
Celtis laevigata
sugarberry
Tree
13
4
5
8
8
8
9
9
9
Cercis canadensis
eastern redbud
Tree
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Cornus
dogwood
Shrub or Tree
3
3
3
Cornusamomum
siIkydogwood
Shrub
4
2
2
4
4
61
2
3
3
Diospyros virginiana
common persimmon Tree
71
7
18
71
7
131
71
7
121
10
10
10
2
2
2
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
52
28
33
1
1
30
1
1
1
Ilex cornuta
Chinese holly
Exotic
1
1
Juglans nigra
black walnut
Tree
27
11
8
Juniperusvirginiana
eastern redcedar
Tree
3
3
33
3
3
27
3
3
31
5
5
6
5
5
5
Liquidambarsty raciflua
sweetgum
Tree
352
239
189
1
144
Liriodendron tulipifera
tuliptree
Tree
2
21
33
21
21
30
21
21
36
4
41
9
5
5
5
Morus rubra
red mulberry
Tree
6
Oxydendrum arboreum
sourwood
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
Physocarpus
ninebark
Shrub
1
1
Pinus taeda
loblollypine
Tree
88
81
126
4
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
17
171
181
1
1
30
1
1
1
Prunus serotina var. serol black cherry
Tree
1
1
2
Prunus virginiana
chokecherry
Shrub
1
Quercus
oak
Tree
4
Quercus coccinea
scarlet oak
Tree
1
1
10
1
1
10
1
1
9
1
1
1
41
4
4
Quercus lyrata
overcup oak
Tree
1
1
1
1
11
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Quercus michauxii
swamp chestnut oak
Tree
5
5
6
5
5
5
6
6
6
9
9
9
12
12
12
Quercus pagoda
cherrybark oak
Tree
I
1
1
1
11
11
1
Quercus palustris
pin oak
Tree
1
1
2
Quercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
2
2
3
3
3
4
3
3
3
Quercus rubra
northern red oak
Tree
2
2
Salix nigra
blackwillow
Tree
1
1
6
11
11
9
1
1
5
2
2
2
Sambucus canadensis
Common Elderberry
Shrub
3
2
1
1
11
1
1
1
Sambucus nigra
European black elde Shrub
4
Spiraea
spirea
Shrub
11
11
11
Symphoricarpos orbiculat coralberry
Shrub
1
2
11
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Taxodium distichum
bald cypress
Tree
2
2
2
Ulmus
elm
Tree
1
Ulmus americana
American elm
Tree
1
4
3
Ulmus parvifolia
Chinese elm
1
1
2
1
Unknown
I
Shrub or Tree
2
2
2
141
141
14
Stem count 261 261 718 251 251 539 271 271 540 571 571 361 851 891 89
Size (ares) 6 6 6 6 6
Size (ACRES) 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15
Species count 101 10 291 91 91 101 101 31 17 17 26 20 22 22
Stems per ACRE 175.41 175.4 494-31168.61 168.61 36351182.11 182.11 3642 384.51 384.5 2435 573.3 600.31 600.3

DMS Recommendation and Conclusion
The Northgate Park Stream Restoration Site has developed into a stable, well vegetated, urban stream restoration project.
There were no areas of active erosion noted during the MY -05 end of year site walk, and as indicated by the cross-
sections, the banks are remaining stable including the areas repaired in March of 2014. Given the site constraints of being
in a public park and having a flashy urban/suburban flow regime, combined with a heavy sand bed load, the site
demonstrates significant functional uplift from the pre -restoration condition.
Based on the six monitoring plots, the fifth -year monitoring counted an average of 175 planted stems/acre across the site.
While plots 1, 3, 4 and 5 have a planted stem density less than the year five success criteria of 260 stems/acre for riparian
stream restoration areas and 320 stems/acre for buffer restoration areas, these plots are well vegetated and many of the
volunteer stems are desirable natives that have thrived and are growing vigorously. The site's average stem density
including volunteers is 4,843 stems/acre, with all plots averaging over 2,000 stems/acre. Overall the site is well vegetated.
Overall the indicators of stream stability and the site's vegetation condition indicate that it is on a path to success. DMS
recommends that the Northgate Park stream restoration site be closed out to provide 1,698 SMU and 148,417.48 RBMU
as requested.
Contingencies
None

1
_.
End of Reach I

Post -Construction Photos MY -05
Reach 1 looking upstream from Lavender Street
Beginning of Reach 1
Reach 1 looking downstream from Lavender Street
End of Reach 1
Beginning of Reach 2
End of Reach 2
UT I's confluence with Reach 1
UT3

Appendix A: Property Ownership Information & Verification of Protection Mechanism
The site protection instrument for this mitigation project includes the following document(s), available at the specified
County Register of Deeds office, and is linked to the property portfolio at:
http://ncdenr.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-
public/Mitigation%20Services/Document%20Management%20Libra ry/Property/Property%20Portfolio/272 NorthgateP
ark(Ellerbe) PD 2008.pdf
Total project conservation acres 7.54
Project Name
County Grantor Name Deed
Property Rights
Northgate Park (Ellerbe) (G)
Durham Cindy M. Wardle DB 5912, P 622 Conservation Easement
Northgate Park (Ellerbe) (G)
Durham City of Durham JDB 5919 P 113 lConservation Easement)
Long-term stewardship of this property is managed by the NC DEQ Stewardship Program.

r -V-
-d;j
Aas stem
m emcht
PROGRAM
MEMORANDUM
To: Paul Wiebke, Assistant Stormwater Manager
City of Durham Engineering & Stormwater Division
From: Bill Gilmore, EEP Director
Marc Recktenwald, EEP WPPI Director
Ce: Stephanie Horton, EEP Property Protection Supervisor
Perry Sugg, EEP Project Manager
Subject: Conservation Easement Vegetation Planting Revisions
EEP Stream Restoration #272
Ellerbe Creek Northgate Park — Durham, NC
Date: November 16, 2009
This memo is in response to the City of Durham's letter to Mr. Bill Gilmore dated October 28, 2009
concerning the referenced stream restoration project. In this letter, the City requested specific planting
plan revisions for the riparian buffer within the conservation easement. The City of Durham had granted
the conservation easement to the State in March 2008 for the stream restoration project. As you are aware,
the construction was completed and accepted in May 2009 and buffer planting had been delayed until this
fall. These requested revisions arose out of concern recently expressed to the City by local citizens in the
neighborhood.
The City has requested that the buffer plantings be designed to minimize obstruction of sight lines in the
park across the planted buffer area (Concern #1) and also to keep certain areas cleared for open play areas
(Concern #2). In order to responsibly respond to the request, EEP staff evaluated potential impacts to the
State's investment, requirements of regulatory agencies, and the mitigation credits generated, all within the
context of maintaining a reasonable balance with community needs. The planting contractor had pre -
ordered the plants and worked with EEP to find substitutions based on plant availability and without
incurring excess costs. After careful consideration of the City's proposed revisions and our evaluation, EEP
has agreed to make revisions to the buffer consistent with those proposed in the City's letter, but with
minor modifications to preserve the integrity and investment of the stream restoration for the State.
Concern #1 — Sight Lines
Changes to the planting plan were made where possible and consistent with the outlined requests in
paragraph A of the letter. Specific revisions are described below:
Streamside: Live stakes were installed along the stream per the plan in April 2009. Species included a mix
of silky dogwood, silky willow, elderberry, and ninebark. At ESP's request, the planting contractor had
substituted a mix of these species in lieu of black willows, which were specified in the original plan. The
construction contractor did install a few black willows around two specific structures that required some
reworking during construction and after the initial live stake installation.
K"t7oru,L ... ... Protectr r Our fta to d EN 1
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service (enter, Raleigh, N( 21699-1652 / '919-115-0416 / www.nceep.net

Inner Floodplain (Bench): EEP reduced the quantities by half for both buttonbush (50) and Ilex decidua (61)
planted in this zone and relocated the majority of those planted in the area upstream of Lavender Avenue.
Additionally, some of the Buttonbush were added to the wetlands to replace lost plants in this area. EEP
replaced these shrubs with a combination of steeplebush (40), Ilex verticillata (60), red chokeberry and
canopy tree species (sycamore, hornbeam, willow oak).
Outer Floodplain (Park Terrace): EEP removed Spicebush from this zone and reduced overall quantities
(50). Spicebush was planted upstream of Lavender Avenue with a minor component on the floodplain
bench. Flowering dogwood was not planted (nursery was out of stock). Downstream of Lavender Avenue,
EEP substituted coral berry (111), steeplebush (100), red chokeberry and some redbud (+/-35).
Concern #2 — Open Areas
EEP will make the changes listed below to allow specific areas within the defined easement boundaries to be
managed as open parkland (i.e., mowed at the discretion of the City) with no planted trees or shrubs. EEP
will be marking the easement boundary and these areas with posted signs within the next few months. EEP
will not be revising the easement boundaries or requesting a swap of land area to make up for the lost
vegetated buffer areas. The attached map shows the managed open areas, which are consistent with the
City's request. At the discretion of the City, the open areas defined herein can be managed as grassed lawn
with regular mowing.
Open Play Area: EEP will allow the outer 15 feet of the easement in this area to be kept as open parkland
with active mowing. This distance is the most we can give in order to maintain a manageable forested buffer
without impacting stream/buffer credits.
Pedestrian Bridge Entrance: Where the maintained trail enters the easement area, site triangles can be
maintained as open parkland on either side of the trail entrance as marked on the attached map.
Club Blvd Trail Entrance: Where the maintained trail enters the park from the street, a site triangle as
shown on map can be kept as open or landscaped parkland.
Trails along Easement Boundary: Areas where maintained park trails are adjacent to the easement line, a
clearance zone of 12 feet between the maintained trail and the planted buffer can be maintained as open
area (i.e., mowed) to prevent encroachment of vegetation into the trail.
The riparian forest zone is designed to provide a functional natural riparian forest community along both
sides of the stream. This zone, planted with a variety of native plants (trees, shrubs, and native grasses) will
eventually culminate as a mature riparian forest along the stream. EEP will be monitoring and managing
the vegetation over the next five years for both growth success and for the presence of aggressive invasive
plant species.
We trust the City finds these revisions enacted by EEP to be an acceptable balance suitable to the City and
the local citizenry. We look forward to furthering our cooperative relationship on the many restoration
projects, current and future, in and around the City of Durham. For further questions or comments, please
feel free to contact Perry Sugg at [phone] or Stephanie Horton at [phone] to discuss this at
your convenience.
wps
K"t7oru,�q— F .. Protectr r Our fta to �� 2
NC ENR
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 / 919-715-0476 / www.nceep.net

REVISED
Conservation Easement
' Managed Vegetation Areas
12,
r i..
r
} ;` i ♦ \
1 -y _
a f
t t �
Open Ploy
Area, a
„0�\
R..
LegendX
Edge of Terrace �1
Top_of_Bank a
QManaged Lawn CE
Managed Lawn - Bridge Entrance
Conservation Easement
Park Trail -Approximate
Pedestrian Bridge
Entrance
NOTE: A 12 -foot clearance zone is allowed between
maintained park trails and the outer planted buffer.
r_�l 0 62.5 125 250
E�F� tem Feet
Ii 11el
Club Blvd
Trail Entrance
11 Ellerbe Creek - Northgate Park
Durham NC
EEP #272
wpsugg - nov2009

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action ID: 2006-20453 County: Durham USGS Quad: NC -Northwest Durham
GENERAL PERMIT (REGIONAL AND NATIONWIDE) VERIFICATION
Property Owner / Authorized Agent: Lin Xu; NCEEP
Address: 217 West Jones Street, Suite 3000A
Raleigh, NC 27603
Telephone No.: 919-707-8319
Size and location of property (water body, road name/number, town, etc.): The stream
restoration/repair project site is located on Ellerbe Creek (Northgate Park), north of I85 and Club
Blvd between Glendale Avenue and Acadia St.; North of Durham NC Coordinates are: 36 022127
N, -78.895274 W.
Description of projects area and activity: The project consists of repairing approximately 990 linear
feet of stream channel on a previously authorized restoration project associated with the generation
of credits for use in the Statle ILF mitigation program (NCEEP)
Applicable Law: ® Section 404 (Clean Water Act, 33 USC 1344)
❑ Section 10 (Rivers and Harbors Act, 33 USC 403)
Authorization: Regional General Permit Number:
Nationwide Permit Number: 3
Sum ary of Authorized Im acts and Required Miti ation
Impact ID # NWP / Open Water (ac)
GP # Temporary Permanent
Wetland (ac) Stream (10
Temporary Permanent Temporary Permanent
S1 Stabilization 3
990
Impact Totals
Total Loss of Waters of the U.S. (ac)
Total Loss of Waters of the U.S. (If)
Required Wetland
Mitigation (ac)
Required Stream Mitigation (If)
Additional Remarks and/or Special Permit Conditions:
Your work is authorized by the above referenced permit provided it is accomplished in strict accordance with the
attached conditions and your repair plans titled "Northgate Park (Ellerbe) Stream Repair Project" submitted on 22
April, 2013. Any violation of the attached conditions or deviation from your submitted plans may subject the
permittee to a stop work order, a restoration order and/or appropriate legal action.
This verification will remain valid until the expiration date identified below unless the nationwide authorization
is modified, suspended or revoked. If, prior to the expiration date identified below, the nationwide permit
authorization is reissued and/or modified, this verification will remain valid until the expiration date identified
below, provided it complies with all requirements of the modified nationwide permit. If the nationwide permit
authorization expires or is suspended, revoked, or is modified, such that the activity would no longer comply with
the terms and conditions of the nationwide permit, activities which have commenced (i.e., are under construction) or
are under contract to commence in reliance upon the nationwide permit, will remain authorized provided the activity

is completed within twelve months of the date of the nationwide permit's expiration, modification or revocation,
unless discretionary authority has been exercised on a case-by-case basis to modify, suspend or revoke the
authorization.
Activities subject to Section 404 (as indicated above) may also require an individual Section 401 Water Quality
Certification. You should contact the NC Division of Water Quality (telephone [phone]) to determine
Section 401 requirements.
For activities occurring within the twenty coastal counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area
Management Act (CAMA), prior to beginning work you must contact the N.C. Division of Coastal Management.
This Department of the Army verification does not relieve the permittee of the responsibility to obtain any other
required Federal, State or local approvals/permits.
If there are any questions regarding this verification, any of the conditions of the Permit, or the Corps of
Engineers regulatory program, please contact Tyler Crumbley at 919-846-2564.
Corps Regulatory Official Tyler Crumbley Date: 10May, 2013
Expiration Date of Verification: 18 March, 2017

Determination of Jurisdiction:
A. ❑ Based on preliminary information, there appear to be waters of the US including wetlands within the above
described project area. This preliminary determination is not an appealable action under the Regulatory
Program Administrative Appeal Process ( Reference 33 CFR Part 331).
B. ❑ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described project area subject to the
permit requirements of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.
Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a
period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
C. ® There are waters of the US and/or wetlands within the above described project area subject to the permit
requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the
law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years
from the date of this notification.
D. ❑ The jurisdictional areas within the above described project area have been identified under a previous action.
Please reference jurisdictional determination issued _. Action ID
Basis of Jurisdictional Determination: The site contains stream channels that exhibit indicators of ordinary high
water marks. The stream channel on the property is Elllerbe Creek. Ellerbe Creek flows into the Neuse River,
which is Section 10 Navigable at the Hwy 42 Bridge in Clayton, NC.
Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for
the particular site identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland
conservation provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or
anticipate participation in USDA programs, you should request a certified wetland determination from the local
office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
Appeals Information: (This information does not apply to preliminary determinations as indicated by paragraph A.
above).
Attached to this verification is an approved jurisdictional determination. If you are not in agreement with that
approved jurisdictional determination, you can make an administrative appeal under 33 CFR 331. Enclosed you will
find a Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and request for appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal
this determination you must submit a completed RFA form to the following address:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Program
Attn: Tyler Crumbley, Project Manager
11405 Falls of Neuse Road
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the
criteria for appeal under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of
the date of the NAP. Should you decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address within 60
days from the Issue Date below.
**It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this
correspondence.

Corps Regulatory Official: _filer CrumbleX
Issue Date: 10May, 2013 Expiration Date: Five years from Issue Date
SURVEY PLATS, FIELD SKETCH, WETLAND DELINEATION FORMS, PROJECT PLANS, ETC.,
MUST BE ATTACHED TO THE FILE COPY OF THIS FORM, IF REQUIRED OR AVAILABLE.
Electronic Copy Furnished:
CESAW-RG-R/Alsmeyer;
Tim Morris, KCI Associates of NC;

Permit Number: 2006-20453
Permit Type: NW 3
Name of County: Durham
Name of Permittee: Lin Xu
Date of Issuance: l OMay, 2013
Project Manager: Tyler Crumbley
Upon completion of the activity authorized by this permit and any mitigation required by the
permit, sign this certification and return it to the following address:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Attention: CESAW-RG
11405 Falls of Neuse Road
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
Please note that your permitted activity is subject to a compliance inspection by an U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers representative. If you fail to comply with this permit you are subject to
permit suspension, modification, or revocation.
I hereby certify that the work authorized by the above referenced permit has been completed in
accordance with the terms and conditions of the said permit, and required mitigation was
completed in accordance with the permit conditions.
Signature of Permittee Date

NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: Lin Xu File Number: 2006-20453 Date: l Way, 2013
Attached is: See Section below
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission) A
PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter ofpermission) B
PERMIT DENIAL C
X APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION D
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION E
SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above
decision. Additional information may be found at http://www.usace.army.mil/CECW/Pages/reg_jnaterials.aspx or
Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331.
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature on the
Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the permit,
including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request that the permit
be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district engineer. Your objections must be
received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will forfeit your right to appeal the permit in the future.
Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your objections and may: (a) modify the permit to address all of your
concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your objections, or (c) not modify the permit having determined that the permit should
be issued as previously written. After evaluating your objections, the district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your
reconsideration, as indicated in Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit
ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature on the
Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the permit,
including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may
appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending
the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by
completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer
within 60 days of the date of this notice.
D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or provide
new information.
ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the date of this
notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal
Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division
engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.

E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps regarding
the preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved JD (which
may be appealed), by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may provide new information
for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD.
SECTION II - REQUEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an initial
proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons or
objections are addressed in the administrative record.)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum for the record of
the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to clarify the
administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record. However, you may provide
additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative record.
POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION:
If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the appeal process
If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may
you may contact:
also contact:
Tyler Crumbley, Mitigation Specialist
Mr. Jason Steele, Administrative Appeal Review Officer
USACE, Regulatory Division
CESAD-PDO
11405 Falls of Neuse Road
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
Wake Forest, NC 27587
60 Forsyth Street, Room 10M15
919-846-2564
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government consultants, to
conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15 day notice of any site
investigation, and will have the opportunity to participate in all site investigations.
Date:
Telephone number:
Signature of appellant or agent.
For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits send this form to:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, Attn: Tyler Crumbley, 69 Darlington Avenue,
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403
For Permit denials, Proffered Permits and approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this form to:
Division Engineer, Commander, U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic, Attn: Mr. Jason Steele,
Administrative Appeal Officer, CESAD-PDO, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 1OM15, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-
8801
Phone: [phone]

Appendix C: Debit Ledger
Mitigation Project
Northgate (Ellerbe) (G)
DMS ID
272
River Basin
NEUSE
Cataloging Unit
03020201
Applied Credit Ratios: 1:1 1.5:1 2.5:1 5:1 1:1 3:1 2:1 5:1 1:1 3:1 2:1 5:1 1:1 3:1 2:1 5:1 1:1 3:1 10:1
Information from DMS Debit Ledger dated 03/21/2017
w
c°
c
c
o
c
0
c°-
c
o
E
°
-
p
E
O
O
C
m
C
R
O
dN
U
U
U
c
a
w
O.
2'
=
W
a
cc
LU
W
a`
c
c
`m
w
a
c
c
g
C
'"
M
W
a
m
r
m
m
>
m
E
£
g
m
am
`C
m
g
m
>
m
N
y
N
y
O.
&
C
O
2
Z
O
CO
A
O
U
N
d
N
d
2
Z
U
U
V
N
to
Beginning Balance (feet and acres)
867.00
1,247.00
248,292.00
10,000.40
Beginning Balance (mitigation credits)
867.00
831.33
248,292.00
NCDOT Pre -DMS Debits (feet and acres): Not Applicable
DMS Debits (feet and acres):
DWR Permit No
USACE Action IDs
Impact Project Name
Stonewalls Subdivision,
2002-1634
2002-21496
Phase 2 & 3
74.00
2002-20862 / 2003
20805 / 2003-
2003-0141
20806
Tryon Road Widening
512.00
2005-20179 / 2005
Edwards Mill Road
2004-0092
20178
Extension
219.00
2005-21042 / 2006
Regency Parkway
2005-1131
20114
Extension
115.00
170.00
2002-21320 / 2002
21322 / 2002-
Chastain II (Second
2002-1049
21321
Invoice)
430.50
2005-1701
2005-20292
Brighton Forest
166.00
259.50
2006-1617
2006-20100-292
Wendell Falls
168.00
Riparian Buffer ILF Credit Purchase
145,084.01
10,000.40
Remaining Balance (feet and acres)
1
0
1 0.001
0.001
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 103,207.99
Remaining Balance (mitigation credits)
I
1 0.0010.001
1
1 0.0001
0.000
0.00
Information from DMS Debit Ledger dated 03/21/2017

Appendix C: Debit Ledger
Mitigation Project Name Northgate (Ellerbe) (G) (Purchase)
IMS ID # 272
River Basin NEUSE
Cataloging Unit 03020201
Comment: This ledger shows the debits for the amount of mitigation that the Riparian Buffer ILF Program purchased from the Statewide ILF Program.
The beginning balance represents the amount purchased and not the total mitigation credits available on the site
Applied Credit Ratios: 1:1 3:1
19.163 297.541
c
�
c
m
m
`o
G
Z
N
G,
r
c
W
O _A
1n c
O
OI
0
O
t
N
�
w
O
2
t
>
;
w
O
o
E
m
o o
Z
z
E
E
y
m
Beginning Balance (square feet) 145,084.01
10,000.40
Beginning Balance (mitigation credits) 145,084.01
3,333.47
DMS Debits (credits):
DWR Permits Impact Project Name
DOT - Widening of 1-85, Ellerbee &
2000-1040 South Ellerbe 144,525.72
10,000.40
2001-1506 Ninth Street Sewer Improvements 558.29
Remaining Balance (square feet) 0.00
0.00
Remaining Balance (mitigation credits) 0.00
0.00
Information from DMS Debit Ledger dated 03/21/2017