19950123 All Versions_Complete File_20040729

AiT?
wi X?
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
July 29, 2004
Craven County
DWQ No. 950123
Mr. Philip S. Harris, III, P.E., Manager
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development & Environmental Analysis
Office of Natural Environment
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
RE: Lengyel Mitigation Site, Craven County, TIP No: B-2531WM*(B-2531), DWQ No. 950123
Dear Mr. Harris:
This correspondence is in reference to your letter dated July 7, 2004, regarding the Lengyel Mitigation site located
in Craven County, North Carolina. This site is being utilized by the North Carolina Department of Transportation as
compensatory mitigation for the replacement of Bridge No. 28 on US 17/NC55 (TIP B-2531).
By copy of this letter, we are notifying you that no further monitoring of the site will be required since the
construction and success criteria for the mitigation site has been met.
Thank you for your time and cooperation. If you have any questions, please contact Nicole Thomson at
919-715-3415.
Sincere ,
an W. Klimek, P.E.
L
JEH/njt
cc: Wilmington District, US Army Corps of Engineers
Mr. Mike Bell, US Army Corps of Engineers, Washington Field Office
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Chris Militscher, USEPA
Mr. Travis Wilson, WRC
Mr. Mike Thomas, NCDWQ Washington Regional Office
Mr. C.E. Lassiter, P.E., Division 2 Engineer, PO Box 1587, Greenville, NC 27835
Mr. Jay B. Johnson, Division 2 Environmental Officer, PO Box 1587, Greenville, NC 27835
Central Files
File Copy
Transportation Permitting Unit
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] / FAX [phone] / Internet: http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/100/6 Post Consumer Paper
NorthCarohna
Natimallff

?SwEo-
N
@ Ww •rd?
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F: EASLEY
GOVERNOR
July 7, 2004
Mr. Bill Arrington
Coastal Area Management (CAMA)
151-B Highway 24
Morehead City, NC 28557
PI(k
i
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
Re: Lengyel Mitigation Site, Craven County, State Project No. 8.1170806, TIP No. B-
2531 WM (B-2531), Action ID No. 199401568, CAMA Permit No. 81-95, DWQ Project
No. 95CI (Certification No. 2997)
Mr. Bill Arrington:
As you are aware, the Department has monitored the Lengyel Mitigation Site since its
construction in mid 1999. Located in Craven County, this site provides approximately 11.9 acres
of brackish marsh restoration/preservation project located in Craven County, North Carolina.
This site is located east of the intersection of US 70 and US 17 Business and provides
compensatory mitigation for impacts associated with the construction of the Neuse River Bridge
(TIP No. B-2531). Hydrologic monitoring gauges were installed in March 1999 and phase II of
planting completed April 1999. NCDOT proposed to monitor the Lengyel site for five years or
until success criteria were met; both hydrologic and vegetation monitoring were conducted each
year. After each growing season, annual monitoring reports were submitted to the appropriate
regulatory agencies.
The hydrologic success criteria for the Lengyel Mitigation Site stipulated that the site be
inundated or saturated within 12 inches of the ground surface for 25 percent of the growing
season. Should the restoration fail to meet the criteria, statistical comparison between the
reference marsh area and the restoration area should be used to determine if hydrology is
significantly different.
The growing season for Craven County is 240 days. A combination of wave action, wind-driven
tides, rainfall, and high water is expected to keep the marsh consistently inundated; therefore
surface gauges were installed to record the surface water levels. Because of these conditions, the
site has four surface gauges and two groundwater gauges. The 2003 Annual Monitoring Report
provides a summary of the hydrologic data (the percentage of the growing season that saturation
was indicated) at each groundwater gauge location for the past five years of monitoring.
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1598 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1598
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEesiTE: WWWWWOT.ORG
LOCATION:
PARKER LINCOLN BUILDING
2728 CAPITAL BOULEVARD
RALEIGH NC

As the summary table in the 2003 Annual Monitoring Report, the site has been consistently
inundated or saturated for each growing season since the site was constructed. The region has
experienced anywhere from average to below average rainfall. A more detailed analysis of site
hydrologic conditions is provided within each individual annual monitoring report.
At year five, the average of all plots should have a scale value of five (75% vegetative cover)
consisting of wetland herbaceous species, not including any invasive species. The planted area is
well within the 75% vegetative cover requirement, revealing a scale value of 4.23. Individual
yearly monitoring data is provided within the annual monitoring reports submitted between 1999
and 2003.
The fifth year of vegetation monitoring revealed that the percent frequency of target species
(27.8%) did not meet the specific success criterion. However, the site appears to have converted
to a marsh system with a combined percent frequency of 81% for Spartina cynsuroides, Juncus
sp. (51.5%), and Scirpus sp. (44.3%). The coverscale value is 4.9 (just under the required scale
of 5).
During the annual monitoring report meeting on April 29, 2004, NCDOT and resource agencies
agreed that the Lengyel Mitigation Site could be closed and that monitoring could be
discontinued. NCDOT requests that the appropriate resource agencies provide documentation
stating that no further monitoring is required and that the site is closed. If you have any questions
about this project, please contact Mr. Randy Griffin at [phone].
Sincerely,
Philip S. Harris, III, P.E., Manager
PDEA- Office of Natural Environment
cc: Mr. John Hennessy, NCDWQ
Mr. Mike Bell, NCACOE
Mr. Chris Militscher, EPA
Mr. Travis Wilson, WRC
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Neil Lassiter, PE, Division Engineer

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality ;WW-J'rAF-- maw
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary Kerr T. Stevens, Director NCDEWR
June 1, 2001
Mr. Bill Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina, 27699-1548
Re: Addendum to the Compensatory Wetland Mitigation Plan for the Sawmill Site Dated January 2001 in
Craven County.
DCDOT Project No. 8-1170801, TIP No. B-2531WM
Dear Mr. Gilmore:
The Division of Water Quality has reviewed the addendum to the Compensatory Wetland Mitigatiori Plan
for the Sawmill Site Dated January 2001 in Craven County. Review of the document reveals that the
proposed addendum does not adequately address the original DWQ comments presented in a letter sent to
the NCDOT dated March 12, 2001. The areas of concern are as follows:
• On page 2, Section 3.2.3, the NCDOT identifies that a planting list will not have to be presented to the
DWQ for approval prior to planting the site. Unfortunately, this is not acceptable. The DWQ's letter
on March 12, 2001 was very clear that a planting list would have to be submitted to the DWQ for
approval prior to planting. Should DOT fail to gain approval of the planting list prior to planting the
site, then mitigation credits from the site may not be available.
• On page 4, Section 4, the NCDOT attempts to set a time limit for approval by the NCDWQ for
cessation of monitoring. Until approval is received from the NCDWQ to cease monitoring, the site will
not be considered to be successful. NCDOT has no authority to stipulate time limits for DWQ
approvals on mitigation sites. Upon receipt of the 5d' year monitoring information, the NCDWQ will
meet with NCDOT to review the information. Should the site prove to be successful, the NCDWQ will
approve cessation of monitoring in writing.
• On page 4, Section, 4.1.2, the NCDOT proposes a hydrologic success criteria that stipulates a
minimum hydroperiod of 25 percent of the growing season. In the March 12, 20001 letter, the
NCDWQ clearly stated that the hydrologic success criteria shall be developed through a statistical
comparison with the proposed reference sites. Additionally, it was stated that should the comparison
demonstrate a statistical significance between the reference site and the constructed site, the DWQ
would review the hydrologic data relative to the 25 percent hydroperiod, and consider for approval.
Wetlands/401 Unit 1621 Mail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/10% post consumer paper
. r
Unfortunately, the proposed addendum (as presently drafted) does not allow us to agree to approve the site
for purposes of compensatory mitigation. Hopefully, we can work together to reach an agreement for use of
the proposed site. We believe the site has a high likelihood for success, provided we can resolve the few
remaining issues. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact John
Hennessy at 919-733-5694.
Sincerely,
John R. Dorney
Water Quality Certification Program
cc: Mike Bell, USACE Washington Field Office
David Cox, NC Wildlife Resources Commission
Tom McCartney, US Fish & Wildlife Service
John Hennessy, NC Division of Water Quality
File Copy
C:\ncdot\B-2531 VWcorrespondencelsawmill denial.doc
e??4
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
April 25, 2001
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
Post Office Box 1000
Washington, North Carolina 27889-1000
ATTN: Michael Bell
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Mr. Bell:
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
SUBJECT: Addendum to the Compensatory Wetland Mitigation Plan for the Sawmill
Site (January 2001), Craven County, State Project Number 8.1170806,
TIP Project B-25 3 1 WM
Attached for your approval is a copy of the Addendum to the Compensatory Wetland
Mitigation Plan for the subject proposed wetland mitigation site. The addendum addresses
comments and concerns raised by the regulatory and resource agencies at the March 9, 2001
meeting in Raleigh regarding the Final Compensatory Wetland Mitigation Plan for the subject
site.
. A signature page is attached. Please return a signed copy to Mr. Ed Lewis. This will
allow NCDOT to proceed with the implementation of the subject mitigation site.
Thank you for your assistance with this project. If you have any questions please contact
Ed Lewis, Project Manager, at [phone], Extension 281.
Sincerely,
RWilfiaiD. Gilmore, P. E., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
WDG/plr
Attachments
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - FAX: [phone] TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WEBSITE. WWW.DOH.DOT.STATE.NC.US RALEIGH NC
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
I

Mr. Michael Bell
Page 2
April 26, 2001
cc: Mr. David Franklin, USACE, Wilmington
Ms. Kathy Matthews, USEPA, Atlanta
Mr. Nicholas Graf, FHWA
Mr. John Hennessy, Division of Water Quality
Mr. Ron Ferrell, NCDWQ - WRP
Mr. David Cox, NCWRC
Mr. Tom McCartney, USFWS
Mr. Ron Sechler, NMFS
Mr. Michael Street, NCDMF
Ms. Debbie Barbour, P. E., Highway Design
Mr. David Henderson, P. E., Hydraulics
Mr. Don Lee, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Bill Moore, P. E., Geotechnical Unit
Mr. C. E. Lassiter, P. E., Division 2 Engineer
.y

SIGNATURE PAGE
Addendum to the
Wetland Mitigation Plan
Sawmill Site
Craven County, North Carolina
T.I.P. No. B-2531 WM
As an effort to improve internal NCDOT documentation, we are requesting your signature on the
addendum to this mitigation plan dated April 2001.
By way of your signature, you are accepting this addendum, restoration plan, credit ratios,
success criteria, and monitoring plan as documented in the Addendum to the Wetland Mitigation
Plan, Sawmill Site.
Mike Bell Date
United States Army Corps of Engineers
John Hennessy Date
NC Division of Water Quality
Tom McCartney
US Fish and Wildlife
Date
David Cox Date
NC Wildlife Resource Commission
Cathy Brittingham Date
NC Division of Coastal Management
ADDENDUM TO THE COMPENSATORY
WETLAND MITIGATION PLAN FOR THE
SAWMILL SITE, DATED JANUARY 2001
(B-2531 -WM)
CRAVEN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NCDOT Project No. 8-1170801
The North Carolina Department of Transportation
Raleigh, North Carolina
NORTH Cq?
y
OF TR

April 2001
Purpose of Addendum
The purpose of this Addendum to the Compensatory Mitigation Plan for the Sawmill Site is to
respond to specific comments and clarify some details questioned by the regulatory agencies in
written form and at the Section 404/CAMA Interagency meeting held on March 9, 2001.
Specifically, this addendum addresses comments by the North Carolina Division of Water
Quality (DWQ), the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (DCM), and the US Army
Corps of Engineers (COE).
Specific sections of the Compensatory Mitigation Plan for the Sawmill Site dated January 2001
will be revised pursuant to the updated information described in this addendum.
Mitigation Plan Revisions and Clarification
Specific sections from the previously submitted mitigation plan are listed below and are followed
by comments and questions from the regulatory agencies in italics. Responses and clarification to
the agency's comments are in plain text.
Section 2.6 Vegetation
DWQ and COE comments suggest that portions of the proposed site intended for wetland
restoration may, in fact, be considered wetland enhancement due to the presence of existing
jurisdictional wetlands.
Portions of the tidal marsh mitigation and tidal cypress-gum swamp mitigation will be
characterized as wetland enhancement as opposed to wetland restoration based upon the current
jurisdictional status of some of these areas. A recent wetland delineation and Global Positioning
System (GPS) mapping effort supports this addendum to the Compensatory Wetland Mitigation
Plan for the Sawmill Site. Approximately 0.65 ac of jurisdictional wetlands will be enhanced by
this proposed mitigation plan (Figure A-1). Table 1 shows the existing vegetative communities
occurring on-site and the proposed mitigation after the proposed plan is implemented.
Table 1. Existing vegetative community acreage and proposed mitigation acreage at the Sawmill
Site.
Existing Vegetation Communities Proposed Mitigation
Brackish Tidal Marsh 0.35 ac Brackish Tidal Marsh Preservation 0.35 ac
Shrub Assemblage 3.09 ac Brackish Tidal Marsh Enhancement 0. 18 ac
Maintained Land 0.63 ac Brackish Tidal Marsh Creation 0.33 ac
Total 4.07 ac Cypress-Gum Swamp Creation 1.93 ac
Cypress-Gum Swamp Enhancement 0.47 ac
Upland Buffer 0.81 ac
Total 4.07 ac
Section 3.1.3 Tidal Marsh Vegetation Restoration
and
Section 3.2.3 Tidal Cypress-Gum Swamp Vegetation Restoration
DWQ and DCM indicate that there is no list of species to be planted in the proposed cypress-gum
swamp. DWQ also understands that there is concern on the part of NCDOT about the
availability of certain species at the optimum time of planting. DWQ originally requested a final
planting plan for the tidal cypress-gum swamp prior to planting the site. DCM has a concern
about the salinity tolerances of Nvssa aquatica and Nvssa svlvatica var. bi ora.
Pursuant to comments by DWQ and DCM, a planting list will not have to be submitted prior to
plan approval. A plant list will be provided in the as-built report. The planting list will contain
species typically found in brackish tidal marsh and tidal cypress-gum swamp systems in North
Carolina. The tidal cypress-gum swamp proposed for the Sawmill Site will be influenced
primarily by wind-driven tides, and will likely incorporate planting of Nvssa svlvatica var.
biflora. Schafale and Weakley (1990) note in Classification of the Natural Communities of North
Carolina that both NN ssa aquatic and Nyssa svlvatica var. biflora occur in tidal cypress-gum
swamps that have hydrology driven predominantly by lunar or wind-driven tides.
The Reference Marsh Ecosystem (RME) and Reference Forest Ecosystem (RFE) were surveyed
and the dominant species identified in each area are provided in Table 2. Leaf-out had not
occurred at the time of the RFE survey and the RFE may actually contain both Nvssa svlvatica
var. biflora and Nvssa aquatica. Nvssa a uatica typically grows closer to the shoreline and Nvssa
svlvatica var. biflora is often found farther away from the shoreline (Schafale and Weakley
1990).
2
Table 2. Dominant species identified in the RME and RFE for the Sawmill Mitigation Site.
Existing Species Within The RME
Herbaceous Layer
Juncuseffusus
Eleocharis M
C erus sp.
Typha latifolia
S artina cvnosuroides
Shrub Layer
Salix nigra
Ligustrum sinense (exotic)*
Baccharis halimifolia
Existing Species Within The RIFE
Canopy Species
Acer rubrum*
Liquidambar styraciflua
Taxodium distichum
Nyssa sylvatica var. biflora
uercus niM (transitional edge)
Pinustaeda
uercus michauxii (transitional edge)
Sub-canopy Species
Persea borbonia
Myrica cerifera
Alnus serrulata
Baccharis halimifolia
Li ustrum sinense (exotic)*
Herbaceous Layer
Arundinaria i antea
Woodwardia vir ginica
Osmunda regalis
Polypodium polypodioides
* These species shall not be planted.
Schafale and Weakley (1990) indicate that little or no salinity is present in these systems; it is
usually 0.5 parts per thousand (ppt) or less. DWQ monitors salinity of the Neuse River from the
US 17/Neuse River bridge, which is located between New Bern and Bridgeton spproximately 1.3
miles away. During the six-year period from December 1990 to October 1996, surface readings
from this site ranged from 0.0 to 0.5 ppt (fresh water) to a 21.0 ppt (polyhaline). This data shows
a mode salinity of 0.0 ppt (fresh) and a median salinity of 1.5 ppt (oligohaline). Higher salinity
readings are likely a result of storm events, specifically "northeasters", and periods of extended
drought. Drought conditions will decrease the amount of freshwater inflow from the Trent and
Neuse Rivers and will allow the "salt wedge" to extend further inland, thus raising salinity. The
Sawmill Site, which is located inland of the DWQ monitoring station, is expected to experience
low salinity conditions (<0.5 ppt) except during irregular storm events, which may increase the
salinity for short periods of time.
3
Section 4.0 Monitoring Plan
The regulatory agencies request that monitoring be discontinued only if the site successfully
demonstrates the proposed criteria after five years, and written approval is received from DWQ,
DCM, and COE. The agencies agree with the proposed five year minimum for site monitoring.
After five years, monitoring may cease only if success criteria have been met and the regulatory
agencies (DWQ, DCM, COE) agree in writing that the site is demonstrating success. These
written agreements should be provided to NCDOT within 30 days of the final NCDOT/Agency
review meeting following the fifth year of monitoring. The established success criteria are
outlined in the Compensatory Wetland Mitigation Plan for the Sawmill Site dated January 2001
and this addendum.
Section 4.1.2 Hydrology Success Criteria
DWQ and COE have concerns about the hydrology success criteria. It has been requested that
the success criteria for the tidal cypress-gum swamp be consistent with the success criteria for
the tidal marsh.
The hydrology success criteria for the tidal cypress-gum swamp and the tidal marsh will be met if
after five years the hydrology data demonstrate inundation or saturation within 12 inches of the
ground surface for at least 25 percent of the growing season. If this criterion is not met, a
comparative analysis to the hydrology data from the reference ecosystem will be performed to
determine whether there are statistical differences.
Conclusion
This Addendum to the Compensatory Wetland Mitigation Plan for the Sawmill Site dated April
2001 is intended to revise and modify the Compensatory Wetland Mitigation Plan for the Sawmill
Site dated January 2001 as described in the aforementioned discussions. All other information and
criteria put forth in the Compensatory Wetland Mitigation Plan for the Sawmill Site remain
unchanged.
References
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North
Carolina. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. 325 pp.
4

ER96021.28/Planting_plan.dgn

6
o
- -Do
D
w r
m
sR 7
60,?h' w

C0
1
I
I
-LLIJ
++ I
++
++ I
? -+ m 9:
z c?
z
? -c c' o
M m v_> \
-?
r mM'
c? N z
C G7 0 0 \
N O
Z \
N op 0
D :E O - ;U \
D m < +
N }++
0 + + + +
a
M m +++++
M z ocn o ++++++
D = m m J ++++++
-+ Z A< ° \ +++++++
z m

m m +++++++
\

z
O cn
.
co { ....
zr
t11 \ + + +
U1
°
n +++
\
0 O A
++++
+++
O x
+++
J J
O \
+++
++
a] n
0 +++
+
+

? +
+ +
I
FN

iD +++
++++
3
\

++++ +
\ ++++++

\ ++++
+++t
+++++
\
++++++
+++++++ C

z ++++++++++ m

}}++t++}++t++++}

Z --i +++++++++++++
(D o 0 0 }}+++t+++

-b +
N r
3 2 D D \
x
(-D
°?. o a: T
n M
3 s o m = \
O D D
..fnO M
0-0 3 'i7 O M
m? ° Z K
° N m o
v, m ° o
3
S O ° W
6 ° O
O
m C 0
O
CO WP O O
\
a W
o s 0
N J
S
°
]Environmental
services, Inc.
Z
? ? ? ooh ONd
?cd
0
d
Od
J
Z
Planting Plan
Sawmill Site Mitigation Plan
Craven County, North Carolina
B-2531-WM
Drawn By: PJS Figure: A-1
Checked By: RGH Project:ER96021.28
Scale: As Shown Date: April 2001
0 '
--
T
R P
ADDENDUM TO THE COMPENSATORY
WETLAND MITIGATION PLAN FOR THE
SAWMILL SITE, DATED JANUARY 2001
(B-2531 -WM)
CRAVEN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NCDOT Project No. 8-1170801
The North Carolina Department of Transportation
Raleigh, North Carolina
/NO RTH C,y'P
0'
'I wqw OZ
??P
O
OF TRANSe
d
1
April 2001

Purpose of Addendum
The purpose of this Addendum to the Compensatory Mitigation Plan for the Sawmill Site is to
respond to specific comments and clarify some details questioned by the regulatory agencies in
written form and at the Section 404/CAMA Interagency meeting held on March 9, 2001.
Specifically, this addendum addresses comments by the North Carolina Division of Water
Quality (DWQ), the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (DCM), and the US Army
Corps of Engineers (COE).
Specific sections of the Compensatory Mitigation Plan for the Sawmill Site dated January 2001
will be revised pursuant to the updated information described in this addendum.
Mitigation Plan Revisions and Clarification
Specific sections from the previously submitted mitigation plan are listed below and are followed
by comments and questions from the regulatory agencies in italics. Responses and clarification to
the agency's comments are in plain text.
Section 2.6 Vegetation
DWQ and COE comments suggest that portions of the proposed site intended for wetland
restoration may, in fact, be considered wetland enhancement due to the presence of existing
jurisdictional wetlands.
Portions of the tidal marsh mitigation and tidal cypress-gum swamp mitigation will be
characterized as wetland enhancement as opposed to wetland restoration based upon the current
jurisdictional status of some of these areas. A recent wetland. delineation and Global Positioning
System (GPS) mapping effort supports this addendum to the Compensatory Wetland Mitigation
Plan for the Sawmill Site. Approximately 0.65 ac of jurisdictional wetlands will be enhanced by
this proposed mitigation plan (Figure A-1). Table 1 shows the existing vegetative communities
occurring on-site and the proposed mitigation after the proposed plan is implemented.

Table 1. Existing vegetative community acreage and proposed mitigation acreage at the Sawmill
Site.
Existing Vegetation Communities
Brackish Tidal Marsh 0.35 ac
Shrub Assemblage 3.09 ac
Maintained Land 0.63 ac
Total 4.07 ac
Proposed Mitigation
Brackish Tidal Marsh Preservation 0.35 ac
Brackish Tidal Marsh Enhancement 0.18 ac
Brackish Tidal Marsh Creation 0.33 ac
Cypress-Gum Swamp Creation 1.93 ac
Cypress-Gum Swamp Enhancement 0.47 ac
Upland Buffer 0.81 ac
Total 4.07 ac
Section 3.1.3 Tidal Marsh Vegetation Restoration
and
Section 3.2.3 Tidal Cypress-Gum Swamp Vegetation Restoration
DWQ and DCM indicate that there is no list of species to be planted in the proposed cypress-gum
swamp. DWQ also understands that there is concern on the part of NCDOT about the
availability of certain species at the optimum time of planting. DWQ originally requested a final
planting plan for the tidal cypress-gum swamp prior to planting the site. DCM has a concern
about the salinity tolerances of Nvssa aquatica and Nvssa svlvatica var. bi ora.
Pursuant to comments by DWQ and DCM, a planting list will not have to be submitted prior to
plan approval. A plant list will be provided in the as-built report. The planting list will contain
species typically found in brackish tidal marsh and tidal cypress-gum swamp systems in North
Carolina. The tidal cypress-gum swamp proposed for the Sawmill Site will be influenced
primarily by wind-driven tides, and will likely incorporate planting of NNyssa svlvatica var.
biflora. Schafale and Weakley (1990) note in Classification of the Natural Communities of North
Carolina that both NNyssa aquatic a and Nyssa svlvatica var. biflora occur in tidal cypress-gum.
swamps that have hydrology driven predominantly by lunar or wind-driven tides.
The Reference Marsh Ecosystem (RME) and Reference Forest Ecosystem (RFE) were surveyed
and the dominant species identified in each area are provided in Table 2. Leaf-out had not
occurred at the time of the RFE survey and the RFE may actually contain both Nvssa s lvatica
var. biflora and Nvssa aquatic a. Nvssa a uatica typically grows closer to the shoreline and NNssa
s,, lvatica_ var. biflora is often found farther away from the shoreline (Schafale and Weakley
1990).
2
Table 2. Dominant species identified in the RME and RFE for the Sawmill Mitigation Site.
Existing Species Within The RME
Herbaceous Layer
Juncuseffusus
Eleocharis V.
C erus sp.
Typha latifolia
S artina cvnosuroides
Shrub Layer
Salix n-igra
Ligustrum sinense (exotic)*
Baccharis halimifolia
Existing Species Within The RFE
Canopy Species
Acer rubrum*
Liquidambar styraciflua
Taxodium distichum
Nvssa sylvatica var. biflora
uercus niM (transitional edge)
Pinustaeda
uercus michauxii (transitional edge)
Sub-canopy Species
Persea borbonia
M rica cerifera
Alnus serrulata
Baccharis halimifolia
Ligustrum sinense (exotic)*
Herbaceous Layer
Arundinaria i antea
Woodwardia virginica
Osmunda re alis
Polypodium polypodioides
* These species shall not be planted.
Schafale and Weakley (1990) indicate that little or no salinity is present in these systems; it is
usually 0.5 parts per thousand (ppt) or less. DWQ monitors salinity of the Neuse River from the
US 17/Neuse River bridge, which is located between New Bern and Bridgeton approximately 1.3
miles away. During the six-year period from December 1990 to October 1996, surface readings
from this site ranged from 0.0 to 0.5 ppt (fresh water) to a 21.0 ppt (polyhaline). This data shows
a mode salinity of 0.0 ppt (fresh) and a median salinity of 1.5 ppt (oligohaline). Higher salinity
readings are likely a result of storm events, specifically "northeasters", and periods of extended
drought. Drought conditions will decrease the amount of freshwater inflow from the Trent and
Neuse Rivers and will allow the "salt wedge" to extend further inland, thus raising salinity. The
Sawmill Site, which is located inland of the DWQ monitoring station, is expected to experience
low salinity conditions (<0.5 ppt) except during irregular storm events, which may increase the
salinity for short periods of time.
Section 4.0 Monitoring Plan
The regulatory agencies request that monitoring be discontinued only if the site successfully
demonstrates the proposed criteria after five years, and written approval is received from DWQ,
DCM, and COE. The agencies agree with the proposed five year minimum for site monitoring.
After five years, monitoring may cease only if success criteria have been met and the regulatory
agencies (DWQ, DCM, COE) agree in writing that the site is demonstrating success. These
written agreements should be provided to NCDOT within 30 days of the final NCDOT/Agency
review meeting following the fifth year of monitoring. The established success criteria are
outlined in the Compensatory Wetland Mitigation Plan for the Sawmill Site dated January 2001
and this addendum.
Section 4.1.2 Hydrology Success Criteria
DWQ and COE have concerns about the hydrology success criteria. It has been requested that
the success criteria for the tidal cypress-gum swamp be consistent with the success criteria for
the tidal marsh.
The hydrology success criteria for the tidal cypress-gum swamp and the tidal marsh will be met if
after five years the hydrology data demonstrate inundation or saturation within 12 inches of the
ground surface for at least 25 percent of the growing season. If this criterion is not met, a
comparative analysis to the hydrology data from the reference ecosystem will be performed to
determine whether there are statistical differences.
Conclusion
This Addendum to the Compensatory Wetland Mitigation Plan for the Sawmill Site dated April
2001 is intended to revise and modify the Compensatory Wetland Mitigation Plan for the Sawmill
Site dated January 2001 as described in the aforementioned discussions. All other information and
criteria put forth in the Compensatory Wetland Mitigation Plan for the Sawmill Site remain
unchanged.
References
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North
Carolina. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. 325 pp.
4
ER96021.28/Planting_plan.dgn

sR 7
76 /3
60,
0
R N
M
T
?C0
1
I
I
0q
++
++ I
--q -+ m
0 o x =i
? C) 2 G7
C1 () Z -Di
o
N N M N \
N N D m
0 o m \
C
K C:
? N OC
? Z \
N o
N o
D ZE o (J)
\
m }
a T { ++++
A m am ? +++++
m z ° N o ++++++
° \ +++++++
g Z ;0;<u
p n K< 0 ......
z MI) mm +++++++
m o' o +++++++
cn +++++
L4 to \ +++
° +++
° p \ ++++
o +++
00 ° _ ++
W n +++
° p +++
\ +++}
\ ++++
+ } + } +
++++}++ C
++++}+++++++ .Z7
++++++++++}++++ Ld
++++}}}+++}+++}}
+++++++++++}}+++ d?
? Z ++++}}}++++}+ o0Z (l?Y
O O \ N
o o +++}+++++ J
3 Z D D +++++
Z >;U > \
G
-z N N
.1D OM a: 2:
;U z
dN? 0?
:3 3 C D D \
0-p X o rn ?\va
Q Z ?d 0?
a? o m
+m o z
N N ° 00 --4
w
3 w
O- o 0 0 ° 11 O
n m P 1, co
m c C4 o °
LO (r \
rm?
z
ao3o
° ° o
s
°
Environmental
Services, Inc.
Planting Plan
Sawmill Site Mitigation Plan
Craven County, North Carolina
B-2531-WM
Drawn By: PJS Figure: A-1
Checked By: RGH Project: ER96021.28
Scale: As Shown Date: April 2001

ADDENDUM TO THE COMPENSATORY
WETLAND MITIGATION PLAN FOR THE
SAWMILL SITE, DATED JANUARY 2001
(B-2531-WM)
CRAVEN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NCDOT Project No. 8-1170801
The North Carolina Department of Transportation
Raleigh, North Carolina
OF NO RTH CAR
O 2
rOF TRANSR0 ?Q
April 2001
Purpose of Addendum
The purpose of this Addendum to the Compensatory Mitigation Plan for the Sawmill Site is to
respond to specific comments and clarify some details questioned by the regulatory agencies in
written form and at the Section 404/CAMA Interagency meeting held on March 9, 2001.
Specifically, this addendum addresses comments by the North Carolina Division of Water
Quality (DWQ), the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (DCM), and the US Army
Corps of Engineers (COE).
Specific sections of the Compensatory Mitigation Plan for the Sawmill Site dated January 2001
will be revised pursuant to the updated information described in this addendum.
Mitigation Plan Revisions and Clarification
Specific sections from the previously submitted mitigation plan are listed below and are followed
by comments and questions from the regulatory agencies in italics. Responses and clarification to
the agency's comments are in plain text.
Section 2.6 Vegetation
DWQ and COE comments suggest that portions of the proposed site intended for wetland
restoration may, in fact, he considered wetland enhancement due to the presence of existing
jurisdictional wetlands.
Portions of the tidal marsh mitigation and tidal cypress-gum swamp mitigation will be
characterized as wetland enhancement as opposed to wetland restoration based upon the current
jurisdictional status of some of these areas. A recent wetland delineation and Global Positioning
System (GPS) mapping effort supports this addendum to the Compensatory Wetland Mitigation
Plan for the Sawmill Site. Approximately 0.65 ac of jurisdictional wetlands will be enhanced by
this proposed mitigation plan (Figure A-1). Table 1 shows the existing vegetative communities
occurring on-site and the proposed mitigation after the proposed plan is implemented.
Table 1. Existing vegetative community acreage and proposed mitigation acreage at the Sawmill
Site.
Existing Vegetation Communities
Brackish Tidal Marsh 0.35 ac
Shrub Assemblage 3.09 ac
Maintained Land 0.63 ac
Total 4.07 ac
Proposed Mitigation
Brackish Tidal Marsh Preservation 0.35 ac
Brackish Tidal Marsh Enhancement 0. 18 ac
Brackish Tidal Marsh Creation 0.33 ac
Cypress-Gum Swamp Creation 1.93 ac
Cypress-Gum Swamp Enhancement 0.47 ac
Upland Buffer 0.81 ac
Total 4.07 ac
Section 3.1.3 Tidal Marsh Vegetation Restoration
and
Section 3.2.3 Tidal Cypress-Gum Swamp Vegetation Restoration
DWQ and DCM indicate that there is no list of species to be planted in the proposed cypress-gum
swamp. DWQ also understands that there is concern on the part of NCDOT about the
availability of certain species at the optimum time of planting. DWQ originally requested a final
planting plan for the tidal cypress-gum swamp prior to planting the site. DCM has a concern
about the salinity tolerances of Nvssa aquatic and Nvssa svlvatica var. bi ora.
Pursuant to comments by DWQ and DCM, a planting list will not have to be submitted prior to
plan approval. A plant list will be provided in the as-built report. The planting list will contain
species typically found in brackish tidal marsh and tidal cypress-gum swamp systems in North
Carolina. The tidal cypress-gum swamp proposed for the Sawmill Site will be influenced
primarily by wind-driven tides, and will likely incorporate planting of Nyssa svlvatica var.
biflora. Schafale and Weakley (1990) note in Classification of the Natural Communities of North
Carolina that both Nvssa a ua atica and Nvssa sylvatica var. biflora occur in tidal cypress-gum
swamps that have hydrology driven predominantly by lunar or wind-driven tides.
The Reference Marsh Ecosystem (RME) and Reference Forest Ecosystem (RFE) were surveyed
and the dominant species identified in each area are provided in Table 2. Leaf-out had not
occurred at the time of the RFE survey and the RFE may actually contain both N ssa s lvatica
var. biflora and Nvssa aquatica. Nvssa a uatica typically grows closer to the shoreline and Nvssa
svlvatica var. biflora is often found farther away from the shoreline (Schafale and Weakley
1990).
2
Table 2. Dominant species identified in the RME and RIFE for the Sawmill Mitigation Site.
Existing Species Within The RME
Herbaceous Layer
Juncus effiisus
Eleocharis V.
C erus V.
TLha latifolia
S artina cvnosuroides
Shrub Layer
j2i Rim
Li ustrum sinense (exotic)*
Baccharis halimifolia
Existing Species Within The RIFE
Canopy Species
Acer rubrum*
Liquidambar styraciflua
Taxodium distichum
Nyssa s lvatica var. biflora
uercus ni ra (transitional edge)
Pinus taeda
uercus michauxii (transitional edge)
Sub-canopy Species
Persea borbonia
M rica cerifera
Alnus serrulata
Baccharis halimifolia
Ligustrum sinense (exotic)*
Herbaceous Layer
Arundinaria i antea
Woodwardia virginica
Osmunda regalis
Polypodium polypodioides
* These species shall not be planted.
Schafale and Weakley (1990) indicate that little or no salinity is present in these systems; it is
usually 0.5 parts per thousand (ppt) or less. DWQ monitors salinity of the Neuse River from the
US 17/Neuse River bridge, which is located between New Bern and Bridgeton spproximately 1.3
miles away. During the six-year period from December 1990 to October 1996, surface readings
from this site ranged from 0.0 to 0.5 ppt (fresh water) to a 21.0 ppt (polyhaline). This data shows
a mode salinity of 0.0 ppt (fresh) and a median salinity of 1.5 ppt (oligohaline). Higher salinity
readings are likely a result of storm events, specifically "northeasters", and periods of extended
drought. Drought conditions will decrease the amount of freshwater inflow from the Trent and
Neuse Rivers and will allow the "salt wedge" to extend further inland, thus raising salinity. The
Sawmill Site, which is located inland of the DWQ monitoring station, is expected to experience
low salinity conditions (<0.5 ppt) except during irregular storm events, which may increase the
salinity for short periods of time.
Section 4.0 Monitoring Plan
The regulatory agencies request that monitoring be discontinued only if the site successfully
demonstrates the proposed criteria after five years, and written approval is received from DWQ,
DCM, and COE. The agencies agree with the proposed five year minimum for site monitoring.
After five years, monitoring may cease only if success criteria have been met and the regulatory
agencies (DWQ, DCM, COE) agree in writing that the site is demonstrating success. These
written agreements should be provided to NCDOT within 30 days of the final NCDOT/Agency
review meeting following the fifth year of monitoring. The established success criteria are
outlined in the Compensatory Wetland Mitigation Plan for the Sawmill Site dated January 2001
and this addendum.
Section 4.1.2 Hydrology Success Criteria
DWQ and COE have concerns about the hydrology success criteria. It has been requested that
the success criteria for the tidal cypress-gum swamp be consistent with the success criteria for
the tidal marsh.
The hydrology success criteria for the tidal cypress-gum swamp and the tidal marsh will be met if
after five years the hydrology data demonstrate inundation or saturation within 12 inches of the
ground surface for at least 25 percent of the growing season. If this criterion is not met, a
comparative analysis to the hydrology data from the reference ecosystem will be performed to
determine whether there are statistical differences.
Conclusion
This Addendum to the Compensatory Wetland Mitigation Plan for the Sawmill Site dated April
2001 is intended to revise and modify the Compensatory Wetland Mitigation Plan for the Sawmill
Site dated January 2001 as described in the aforementioned discussions. All other information and
criteria put forth in the Compensatory Wetland Mitigation Plan for the Sawmill Site remain
unchanged.
References
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North
Carolina. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. 325 pp.
4
ER96021.28/Plantina_plan.dan

sR 1
60,?y
o?
_n
M
M
\?G 1
T
c?
?1>
I
I
I
oqo?
Raw
++
++
++
++
++
++
++ I
++
-i m 9:
0 o x ?
rD
n n z
C 0 O
M 71
c\n c\n z m \
c c? 0 07
z \
N N gO 0
D \
U >
D 0M +
(") aZ7 as +++++
M m +++++
M z oL o ++++++
D = Nm J ++++++
-{ Z A A \ +++++++
p n ?< n +++++++
z m mm +++++++
cn +++++
is ? o -? ++++
W S ?n \ + + +
U1 ° +++
0 p A \ ++++
O J +++
o ++
A +++
ca +++
S \ + + + +
° + + + + + }
......
+++++
+ + + + +
+ + + + + +
+ + + + +
\ + + + +
+ + + + + +
+ } + + + + + C
z \ ......... } ?
O + + + + } + + + + + +
Ell +++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++ d?yd
+++}++++++++++++ N
? D D +++++
D D D \ oryd
cd
N N
D ;0
° o vi O _ = J
o -9 D 2 dN?1
° m s m 5
0 O d ?1?d
6 z m Q
CD u) ° m O
a? o z
v ° 2? w
C B 7 o c,,
? \ o 0
m o 10, w
fTl c (A O °
vN w
a o 3 0 z
o
? J
3
°
Environmental
Services, Inc.
Planting Plan
Sawmill Site Mitigation Plan
Craven County, North Carolina
B-2531-WM
Drawn By: PJS Figure: A-1
Checked By: RGH Project: ER96021.28
Scale: As Shown Date: April 2001
ADDENDUM TO THE COMPENSATORY
WETLAND MITIGATION PLAN FOR THE
SAWMILL SITE, DATED JANAUARY 2001
(B-2531 WM)
CRAVEN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NCDOT Project No. 8.1170801
The North Carolina Department of Transportation
Raleigh, North Carolina
June 2001
Purpose of Addendum
The purpose of this Addendum to the Compensatory Mitigation Plan for the Sawmill Site is to
respond to specific comments and clarify some details questioned by the regulatory agencies in
written form and at the Section 404/CAMA Interagency meeting held on March 9, 2001 and at
the Inter-Agency Coordination Meeting held on June 21, 2001. Specifically, this addendum
addresses comments by the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ), the North Carolina
Division of Coastal Management (DCM), and the US Army Corps of Engineers (COE).
Specific sections of the Compensatory Mitigation Plan for the Sawmill. Site dated January 2001
will be revised pursuant to the updated information described in this addendum.
Mitigation Plan Revisions and Clarification
Specific sections from the previously submitted mitigation plan are listed below and are followed
by comments and questions from the regulatory agencies in italics. Responses and clarification to
the agency's comments are in plain text.
Section 2.6 Vegetation
DWQ and COE comments suggest that portions of the proposed site intended for wetland
restoration may, in fact, be considered wetland enhancement due to the presence of existing
jurisdictional wetlands.
Portions of the tidal marsh mitigation and tidal cypress-gum swamp mitigation will be
characterized as wetland enhancement as opposed to wetland restoration based upon the current
jurisdictional status of some of these areas. A recent wetland delineation and Global Positioning
System (GPS) mapping effort supports this addendum to the Compensatory Wetland Mitigation
Plan for the Sawmill Site. Approximately 0.65 ac of jurisdictional wetlands will be enhanced by
this proposed mitigation plan (Figure A-1). Table 1 shows the existing vegetative communities
occurring on-site and the proposed mitigation after the proposed plan is implemented.
1
Table 1. Existing vegetative community acreage and proposed mitigation acreage at the Sawmill
Site.
Existing Vegetation Communities
Brackish Tidal Marsh 0.35 ac
Shrub Assemblage
Maintained Land
Total
Proposed Mitigation
Brackish Tidal Marsh Preservation
Brackish Tidal Marsh Enhancement
0.35 ac
0.18 ac
0.33 ac
1.93 ac
0.47 ac
0.81 ac
3.09 ac
0.63 ac Brackish Tidal Marsh Creation
4.07 ac Cypress-Gum Swamp Creation
Cypress-Gum Swamp Enhancement
Upland Buffer
Total
Section 3.1.3 Tidal Marsh Vegetation Restoration
and
Section 3.2.3 Tidal Cypress-Gum Swamp Vegetation Restoration
4.07 ac
DWQ and DCM indicate that there is no list of species to be planted in the proposed cypress-gum
swamp. DWQ also understands that there is concern on the part of NCDOT about the
availability of certain species at the optimum time of planting. DWQ originally requested a final
planting plan for the tidal cypress-gum swamp prior to planting the site. DCM has a concern
about the salinity tolerances of Nyssa aquatic and Nyssa s ly vatica var. bi ors.
Pursuant to comments by DWQ and DCM, a planting list will not have, to be submitted prior to
mitigation plan approval. A planting plan that lists species to be planted will be submitted to the
agencies for their approval prior to planting the site. Also, a plant list will be provided in the as-
built report. The plant list will contain species typically found in brackish tidal marsh and tidal
cypress-gum swamp systems in North Carolina. The tidal cypress-gum swamp proposed for the
Sawmill Site will be influenced primarily by wind-driven tides, and will likely incorporate
planting of Nyssa s ly vatica var. biflora. Schafale and Weakley (1990) note in Classification of
the Natural Communities of North Carolina that both Nyssa aquatics and Nyssa s ly vatica var.
biflora occur in tidal cypress-gum swamps that have hydrology driven predominantly by lunar or
wind-driven tides.
The Reference Marsh Ecosystem (RME) and Reference Forest Ecosystem (RFE) were surveyed
and the dominant species identified in each area are provided in Table 2. Leaf-out had not
occurred at the time of the RFE survey and the RFE may actually contain both Nyssa s ly vatica
var. biflora and Nyssa aquatica. Nyssa aquatics typically grows closer to the shoreline and Nyssa
s ly vatica var. biflora is often found farther away from the shoreline (Schafale and Weakley
1990).
2
Table 2. Dominant species identified in the RME and RFE for the Sawmill Mitigation Site.
Existing Species Within The RME
Herbaceous Layer
Juncus effusus
Eleocharis sp.
Cyperus sp.
Typha latifolia
Spartina cynosuroides
Shrub Layer
Salix nigra
Ligustrum sinense (exotic)*
Baccharis halimifolia
Existing Species Within The RFE
Canopy Species
Acer rubrum*
Liquidambar s raciflua
Taxodium distichum
Nyssa s l? vatica var. biflora
Quercus ni ra (transitional edge)
Pinus taeda
Quercus michauxii (transitional edge)
Sub-canopy Species
Persea borbonia
Myrica cerifera
Alnus serrulata
Baccharis halimifolia
Ligustrum sinense (exotic)*
Herbaceous Layer
Arundinaria ig gantea
Woodwardia vir inica
Osmunda regalis
Polypodium polypodioides
* These species shall not be planted.
Schafale and Weakley (1990) indicate that little or no salinity is present in these systems; it is
usually 0.5 parts per thousand (ppt) or less. DWQ monitors salinity of the Neuse River from the
US 17/Neuse River bridge, which is located between New Bern and Bridgeton spproximately 1.3
miles away. During the six-year period from December 1990 to October 1996, surface readings
from this site ranged from 0.0 to 0.5 ppt (fresh water) to a 21.0 ppt (polyhaline). This data shows
a mode salinity of 0.0 ppi (fresh) and a median salinity of 1.5 opt (oligohaline). Higher salinity
readings are likely a result of storm events, specifically "northeasters", and periods of extended
drought. Drought conditions will decrease the amount of freshwater inflow from the Trent and
Neuse Rivers and will allow the "salt wedge" to extend further inland, thus raising salinity. The
Sawmill Site, which is located inland of the DWQ monitoring station, is expected to experience
low salinity conditions (<0.5 ppt) except during irregular storm events, which may increase the
salinity for short periods of time.
3
Section 4.0 Monitoring Plan
The regulatory agencies request that monitoring be discontinued only if the site successfully
demonstrates the proposed criteria after five years, and written approval is received from DWQ,
DCM, and COE. The agencies agree with the proposed five year minimum for site monitoring.
After five years, monitoring may cease only if success criteria have been met and the regulatory
agencies (DWQ, DCM, COE) agree in writing that the site is demonstrating success. The
established success criteria are outlined in the Compensatory Wetland Mitigation Plan for the
Sawmill Site dated January 2001 and this addendum.
Section 4.1.2 Hydrology Success Criteria
DWQ and COE have concerns about the hydrology success criteria. It has been requested that
the success criteria for the tidal cypress-gum swamp be consistent with the success criteria for
the tidal marsh.
In written comments and in comments made at the June 21, 2001 meeting, there was a request to
relate the hydrologic success of the site to the reference ecosystems. It was also discussed that
the Sawmill Site's hydrology should be within 10% of the reference ecosystems. It was further
discussed that if the hydrology of the Sawmill Site is not within 10% of the hydrology
demonstrated by the reference ecosystems, then the success criteria for hydrology would be
inundation or saturation within 12 inches of the surface for 25% of the growing season.
Therefore, the hydrology success criteria for the tidal cypress-gum swamp and the tidal marsh
will be met if after five years the hydrology data demonstrate inundation or saturation consistent
(within 10%) with the hydrology of the RFE and the RME. A comparative analysis to the
hydrology data from the reference ecosystem will be performed to determine whether there are
statistical differences greater than the 10%. Ifthis criteria is not attained, then the success criteria
will be inundation or saturation within 12 inches of the ground surface for at least 25 percent of
the growing season.
Conclusion
This Addendum to the Compensatory Wetland Mitigation Plan for the Sawmill Site dated June
2001 is intended to revise and modify the Compensatory Wetland Mitigation Plan for the Sawmill
Site dated January 2001 as described in the aforementioned discussions. All other information and
criteria put forth in the Compensatory Wetland Mitigation Plan for the Sawmill Site remain
unchanged.
4
References
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North
Carolina. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. 325 pp.

ER96021.28/Plant ing_pian.dgn
e..+ STAT[ n?
A
,? Cl3
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAN,Ws B. I IUNT JR.
GOVERNOR
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Washington Regulatory Field Office
Post Office Box 1000
Washington, NC 27889-1000
Dear Mr. Bell:
July 19, 2000
a
DAVID MCCOY
SECRETARY

Subject: As-Built Report for Craven County, Lengyel Mitigation Site, State Project No.
8.1170806, TIP Project No. B-2531 WM.
Please find enclosed the As-Built Report for the subject site. The Division 2 Resident
Engineer responsible for this project, Mr. John W. Rouse, PE, has certified that the site was
constructed according to construction plan sheets, with any exceptions noted in this As-Built
Report.
For completeness purposes, the following information has been included as part of the
As-Built Report: 1) Letter of Construction Compliance, 2) As-Built Plan Sheets, 3) Planting Plan
Sheets, and 4) Monitoring Well Locations. Please be advised that two additional wells will be
installed in accordance with permit Action I.D. 199401568 and the revised map showing well
locations will be forwarded to you as soon as possible.
If you should have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate
to contact Mr. Eric Black at [phone]. Thank you once again for your continued support
and cooperation.
Sincerely,
Enclosures
'/ C" ia
V. Charles Bruton, Ph.D.
Assistant Manager, PD & EA Branch
cc: Mr. David Franklin, USACE, Wilmington
Mr. John Hennessy, NCDWQ, Raleigh
MS. Ktiiy WiM&hns )MCDCMJ fza.le?c?h
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone] TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WEBSITE: WWWDOH.DOT.STATE.NC.US RALEIGH NC
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
J ? A7L,4
a4
V
Myna ??
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 DAVID McCOY
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
November 29, 1999
TO: V.C. Bruton, Ph.D, Assistant Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
ATTN: Tanner Holland
Environmental Specialist
FROM: John W. Rouse, Jr., PE
Division 2 Resident Engineer
SUBJECT:, As-Built Plans for Lengyl Mitigation Site, Craven County, State Project
No.: 8.1170806, TIP No.: B-253 I WM
This letter certifies that the construction of the Lengyl Mitigation Site has been
completed in accordance with construction plan sheets and specifications.
Attached are (1) one set of half-size as-built plans and the original and final cross
section information for the site.
At this point, I would ask that field personnel be more involved in the pre-
construction phase of mitigation projects. I believe that many constructability
issues could be addressed at that point rather than during the construction process.
If you have any questions, please let me know.
Sincerely,
io W. Rouse, Jr., PE
Resident Engineer
JWR:jwr
cc: Mr. C. E. Lassiter, Jr., PE, Division Engineer
265 SOUTH GLENBURNIE ROAD, NEW BERN, NORTH CAROLINA 28560
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
ssssassss
._.? ..?_ ... ._..?..?_e _??..?.?...,.,_..,,._..?,...????.,a. .pro, . . ^?:-•a^s?+. ice.
..,
PROJECT:
m1
pwofmxwmm?

i i 7-

?11J ?

t
E
Q

t
9
i
s
1

I I
cs+
Q
Rq
9
f
7 F-
0 CD
< D
CD tO
CD
C7
o
C +
CD
z -+
? o
0
0
o0
0

w
1
Z
Cy
111WANXMEB=
rn x ? it.'
r
rn x ?, yoy?? 0 0 0
Cf) +
oS l 1T . I (? O -4- ci) - ii `• c ?l l?
7
O I rr r ,; ,n ?;`
i r
U
Mp ?L O `i
c.7 ?t
(p s th, .
R `,r z r ,
OPO
i?S
h
o ?, rAROA ? c
o
r'.
rn / FOB
ROpOs
x
2 m
rnx
m x O
V
rn x as
N
a rnx mx `'
rn at
O CD C)
m: m N +
rnx V` vx
rf, 2t
O
mx mx n,x 1 ti ro ( ''`` mx _ O_
rvt at
•? bt'
It
V ? 9 / I
rnx C
mx m:s 3
m x ?.
``'
C-Z
c 7? m x •,.?'Q z ,,,
y O
?rnrn
O
?4-1 m
-l
y s

rn
O 9
`SAO ro ? ?? ?'e° mx 1
2
ZK ?° m
?nrn ?" m
"CtN
? r?rs m
p ?
zx
'S
rvi rd"' I ?
F vi 7.
p
a
v 1
?
\ r'J
Rq M
n
(pROpo
SEQ?
m
0

? o
CD <
CD
CD n
- O
L
CD +
rt O
O
O n
? O
O
I
!n

I )
D

F t: I D
iL :l.
h

10,
O

onll O (f T cs m

0 5
S
Cf)
U1
l'. ( I U'
f)
Q )
rt?
0
ct +
R

641) r"
ni O
A

(pROpOS,?
8
c ?N
a
A
?^n0
8
Ag z
On

?O O
ZN z

Oc +

m
S
n
O
M
T
_

m
70
o r
z O
o

0 ?
0
N
70

m

v
m
D
r
N
U
33
f3
OOx
o0
Z3
3
IJ
?n
N
3
f3
O gU
z3
IT
u
a

Z
Sao

03
r'R 3
n

{? Tngx Z1
T C N
?i3
rn

n

m
n
X

(h
O
?3
Ox
v?
_.._; m O
3 3
Z
0 3
N3 D?
3 C
m3
0
v
M
_ rn_
S Z
3 0
C9 O
r 3 m M
?r
y
7v
n
R'L°!
Sri':J? ?t
'X ?IY1': ;.I??L.?i ` i I • ; . ,
,
t
, 3 1-1

. 17
l

1 F i..

,

1 1 ,: i7_ a T
f • I

r 17

__ ' ' ' / ?' ? ? i f "' F -I '1 , , •I
1 , I r falzr>:. ' ?.,rts_ p`p
,G.SU:..i•. [
9661 _?- ,
:%
_T.?. ? ..?. t
_ ;.. . ,„?, 1.

T ;

.
? - " r'1 r''-• t 1 i?. iF ; ; ; ( I ' ? ' 1 :'? i ? 1
? ` ? 1:1 !
, .... I ;
Ir I r. ! I + r .l} y ' I L. '
t ,l `? I '
1"i' I ' , I , i-' .. ..:. r • -,
-

.I T
?I -
- I
i? t
r? ?? - i1
- F.1
?? i
Ili
..
?
I
,
-;
, ? '
• '
• :
r-
? ??r
t '
.l: r
_t.
' ?:1.
_ .
?
( _

- I

a- -
? ' ' I --1 - I - - ' - -- - I /
:
.
'+ 1 11•
''• I it III
I,. '
1 ... I
I 1 ! .. L..
1, -; ,.

L .
am.
,.._
j-? •? ..
__!
I
I
t'
1
+E ^
-N
t
--

- I ! , .III I : ' ?? '
••-- .?T ?-- • _- , '1 1
.

' * _ •
?? - ! ? ?.. .. ' ;.. ; .1 j !. ...:.. - i I ..1 .. . I i ... ; + L J
i . .
' ' ?.
1
: '
I ;i ; ( _h. _ _ . . ...._., . .
I. , . _

i._. .I !
. ? ..r r
., , ,,t , i. °!
.I?+
.
.
I I it
i I
t I!
'' ri I -?ti-p•
";1...r I
1?... i
.... I
- __-
, 1_I Ii,
. Irl. I?
f?+1
,? ?"
I?.?f
_
.L
I-:.
'
' •-
- -
--- ? -? ? '
' , , +? ! I il i
•
- -i_ - ::
1 ? +_.!' _ ; _j. i. 1
. ` ,
11 - - ? 1 t rr 1 2, .r •- 1-•-?- 1 I '`. -

F ILL I

..I ) I ?•? I - r' ?. -' 11 r• I i ••

''
I
I 1
I
'?
'?
I
i
'•??I ;
I
I ! 1 I
? (' 1 T •f•
'
'• - -
'
? 70
'
_-?..1 -. , .. ,, ? .I .. I I .
.
;. Y ;. .._.: , I i
1. ..
1- 3. 4_ _ .

.-f-j-? -_ - I T?
, , • • r! j.
.. .
.___ . ?:;
_ _ i
- I
'L-- i
-_.. i
_ r. =?
_ ' .I ?-1 _.l
. i . I , ? :.,
I ; 1' _ .; -'.:
I A:
, :"'t:
• 1 I - _
.,.. 1
..
, :f. ; ?
.I . ? m
, 1 h O
1. _ _ , M
j.? ,- - -

1 , } f I ' :
' i ` 1 '
I }' ! I
7rI ;
.. r k r .. ? j , I -• - . I
t . _ t l i _?..
, _ _? "'

• , )I :q d\? L.ol .. a a :' 'i -. is l . t 1' '<I

1 'i •

r.i

1

,
-
77

y

-_

-

I
-
j - lit A 1 i 1 - 77
7 ..

_
.
r ? .. =
.I .., ?, 1 , ' '- I -- ; ? i
fi
. .,_ • _ _+ .- j. ; ..
l
1 , l 1 T.r.

.? ? I . i?,. 11 ? iji •I •
I 1 , , : 1.1 I 1. . 1. . .
,

+
-71 777T

?
1 r t ? ? !
Lr.. 1 ?.. l ?t 1 .. 1 .. .. ... _ .. I t. ?.t i :• t .. ? i

,
1

L
L :

-

,

?_

-

. 77
1
1 •

47

7 .

i

.>'
1 1
1 1
1
,
, ? i
C
Q

.p` yl a w N
? w?? /??7 ^017 N?27 9p+
O S! O
A A 9 C SOD R A d Gm
o t
m fCm
?' 0=4 C W Rom fC A i
,??•w! OtAN - Ow 6,ms 9A dro
O - 7
O C G o
j
C; OR
^' N w 9 6' O- 7 q:
65Ipp O? _6f
'3 - 7 w'p Sw NrS ? y3 R
p S / 7 O 0.O / \ 9 .N tD w
w R /
I ^
''? III I I 1"i ?
_ ?' II I II 4`
r
? y
_ ne
a - I o?~ TE
H
°•° ti I F w 5_I
III-? -I I a °O =1I E -111
?aa -TI eS"? ml -- k= O
? -I
og= ???. = _ = O MV
-11
C ?''?,I? III p C ? -III-I II M"? l-/
C 0p 2 ?0 M Uvx HIM
o n D n e''d F
' i...k,. tOO ?P Oa_po.? m n ? ? o p4 7 ICI /-. 0-1 H
o^. p eTC?? c^?3Q N I II ^
s?TO ?; m cj ^.? z a o any mllO
a ?. I I- I I {7
lit
a
°'S°' v ? RI
I Im 40 1 .11
I II?II? II-IFu- FI1==I
mm
N
con
r °
n b `i' cn
yn b
COD
0? x
d
o N z
C7 O
z y ? ? ? y
O ? O i?l
rn Cxl'1 1? 1
y d n ITJ
o
?r o z
z? o ? ? Qo
'?? O ;alp
? y 4
3 k°'
?s
f ,I:-19?'!"1?1:J1 t1?'41•'I.1.9?l?I
O
V) N
C ?
Ui
7-1
n =
C) n
m
C-
n ?p
C
C) ?.
m
n
0
a
0
Cf)
Cf)
0
0
?l
?a
Ir>
050197
I I 1 I
I I I I I
I I 1 1 1
I I I I I
I I I I
I I I 1 '
I I I
1 I I I
I 1 I I
I 1 1 I
1 I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I 1 I
I I I I
I I I I
I? /I I I
?I I I
I I I
I 1 I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I 1 I I
'I 1 I I
I I I I
I 1 I I
I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I 1 I
I I I I
I I I I
I 1 I I
I 1 I I
I I I I
I I I I
O

Q Q
? I- C
O CD
O O
O
? O O
-° O O

O
- 0
CD O
O

_± O
_ ?Q
Cf) Q O

Qo -° n
O Q

O
O -0

o
???<'Y,ii{2'7bN/lNl X11
O- /e1)! OVI))
O
O
- o
O
co
A n
O
z 1
H
IATI A
G : O
I I
I I
I I
I I ?
I I I
I I
I I I
I 1
O JO
D O
O `m
ZD
Gf
Zf A m
mm m
A N A
47 rn Z
Z S (1
m m
mS
zo
O?
x
m?
HO
avn Z

JAN 3 o tool
FINAL WETLAND MITIGATION PLAN
SAWMILL SITE
(B-2531-WM)
CRAVEN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NCDOT Project No. 8-1170801
The North Carolina Department of Transportation
Raleigh, North Carolina
i
January 2001
I

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Michael F. Easley
GOVERNOR
January 12, 2001
DAVID MCCOY
SECRETARY
Mr. Doug Huggett
N. C. Division of Coastal Management
1638 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699
Dear Mr. Huggett:
SUBJECT: Sawmill Mitigation Plan, Craven County
TIP No. R-2531, Work Order Number 8.1170801
JAN 3 p ?oo,
Attached is a copy of the final Sawmill Mitigation Plan. The final plan has incorporated
those changes required in the April 9, 1998 Department of the Army general permit
No. 198000291. Additionally, the plan has incorporated those changes regarding vegetation and
soil monitoring that was discussed with Mike Bell (USCOE), John Hennessy (NCDWQ), and
Kelly Williams (NCDCM) on August 3, 2000. If you have any questions or need additional
information, please contact Mr. Ed Lewis at [phone].
Sincerely,

Cl William D. Gilmore, P. E., Manager
Jt Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
WDG/plr
cc: Mr. David Franklin, COE, Wilmington
Mr. Mike Bell, COE, Washington
Ms. Kathy Matthews, EPA, Atlanta
Ms. Kelly Williams, CAMA
Mr. John Wadsworth, FHWA
Dr. Garland Pardue, USFWS
Mr. John Dorney, DWQ
Mr. David Cox, WRC
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER _
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEBSITE: WWW DOH. DOT. STATE. NC. US
LOCATION:
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR THE SAWMILL MITIGATION SITE
CRAVEN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NCDOT Project No. 8-1170801
(B-2531-WM)
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to establish a
mitigation site to be known as the Sawmill Mitigation Site as compensation for loss of
marsh habitat due to the construction of the US 17 bridge over the Neuse River, just
south of New Bern, North Carolina. After on-site evaluations and general consultation
with the regulatory agencies, NCDOT determined that the Site offers reasonable
wetlands mitigation potential for inclusion in its wetland mitigation program. The Site will
be located on Scott's Creek, which is near the confluence of the Neuse River and Trent
River in Craven County, North Carolina.
The Site comprises approximately 4.07 acres (1.65 hectares). Currently, the Site is
comprised of three distinct vegetative communities consisting of brackish marsh [0.25 ac
(0.10 ha)], shrub assemblage [3.09 ac (1.25 ha)], and maintained land [0.73 ac (0.30
ha)]. Existing on-site wetlands comprise 0.25 ac (0.10 ha).
The Site was originally proposed to provide approximately 5.20 acres of available
mitigation, however the overall size of the Site decreased due to the following: (1) loss of
land area due to the adjacent railroad right-of-way, (2) utility line easement purchased by
the City of New Bern.
Reference sites in the vicinity of Scott's Creek consisting of an on-site reference marsh
ecosystem (RME) and an off-site reference forest ecosystem (RFE) were utilized to
document desired elevations used for the final grading plan. The on-site RME consists
of a 0.25-acre area of brackish tidal marsh that is proposed for preservation. This
mitigation plan provides for restoration of 0.20 ac (0.08 ha) of brackish tidal marsh,
creation of 0.33 ac (0.13 ha) of brackish tidal marsh, and preservation of 0.25 ac (0.10
ha) of brackish tidal marsh. This mitigation plan also proposes to create 2.40 ac (0.97
ha) of tidal cypress-gum swamp. An upland buffer comprising 0.89 ac (0.36 ha) will be
established around the landward portions of the mitigation site.
Construction of the Sawmill Mitigation Site will comprise land clearing, grading to design
elevations, and planting with wetland vegetation. The final design elevations are based
on data collected from the RME and the RFE.
Monitoring will be conducted in accordance with guidelines and recommendations from
the US Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), the National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS), and the Addendum to the Sawmill Wetland Mitigation Plan dated January 20,
1998. Site hydrology will be evaluated by automatic monitoring gauges that will record
saturation and/or inundation. Vegetation within the brackish tidal marsh creation and
restoration zones will be monitored using randomly placed one-meter plots. The
brackish tidal marsh mitigation will be considered successful if after five years the
hydrology data demonstrate inundation or saturation within 12 inches of the ground
surface for 25 percent of the growing season. NMFS guidelines require that the average
of all plots should have 75 percent vegetative cover consisting of wetland herbaceous
species, not including any invasive species. Additionally, 70 percent of the plots should
contain the target (planted) species. Vegetation within the tidal cypress-gum swamp
creation zone will be monitored via two 0.05-acre sample plots. The tidal cypress-gum
swamp will be considered successful if after five years the hydrology data demonstrate
inundation or saturation within 12 inches of the ground surface for 12.5 percent of the
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - CONTINUED
growing season. ACOE guidelines require that 320 stems per acre must be surviving at
the end of three years, and 260 stems per acre must be surviving at the end of five years
in order for the vegetation success criteria to be met. Data collected from the 0.5-acre
plots will be compared to baseline data collected immediately after planting is
completed. An "as-built" report will be prepared and submitted to the agencies within 90
days after the planting and monitoring gauge installation is complete. Subsequent
monitoring reports will be prepared annually for five years. After success criteria are
fulfilled, NCDOT will continue to manage the Site in perpetuity, or dispense the Site to an
appropriate management entity. Access to the site will be provided by a dirt road that
turns off State Road 1167 (Howell Road).
Implementation of the Sawmill Wetland Mitigation Plan is not expected to adversely
affect any of the six federally-listed species listed by the US Fish and Wildlife Service
(FWS) as potentially occurring in Craven County. Field investigations were performed to
determine if any of these species or habitat that would support these species occurs on-
site. Potential habitat for sensitive jointvetch (Aeschynomene virginica) occurs on-site,
however, a species-specific survey did not reveal any populations of this plant. No
federally listed species were observed on the Sawmill Mitigation Site, and no habitat for
any of the remaining listed species is present.
A request to modify the existing permits (CAMA Major Development Permit No. 81-95,
ACOE Section 404 Permit Action ID No. 199401568, and NC Division of Water Quality
Section 401 Water Quality Certification) was prepared by NCDOT and submitted to
North Carolina Division of Coastal Management on November 17, 2000. NCDOT
formally requested the following: (1) soil monitoring be excluded from the monitoring
requirements, (2) methodology and success criteria outlined in the Addendum to the
Sawmill Wetland Mitigation Plan be incorporated into the final authorizations, and (3) an
extension of the permit expiration date to December 2004. Items (1) and (2) were
verbally agreed to by Mike Bell (ACOE), Kelly Williams (DCM), and John Hennessy
(DWQ) on August 3, 2000. This project is in keeping with the intent and mandate of
state and federal programs to provide for a net gain in wetland functions and values
derived from the proposed actions.
Successful establishment of the Sawmill Mitigation Site will provide NCDOT with 0.20 ac
(0.08 ha) of brackish tidal marsh restoration, 0.33 ac (0.13 ha) of brackish tidal marsh
creation, 0.25 ac (0.10 ha) of brackish tidal marsh preservation, and 2.40 ac (0.97 ha) of
tidal cypress-gum swamp creation. Additionally, 0.89 ac (0.36 ha) of upland buffer will
be provided. The following table provides a comparison between the existing Site
conditions and the proposed Site conditions.
Existing Site Conditions Proposed Site Conditions
Brackish Tidal Marsh 0.25 acre Brackish Tidal Marsh 0.78 acre
Shrub Assemblage 3.09 acres Tidal C ress-Gum Swam 2.40 acres
Maintained Land 0.73 acre Upland Buffer 0.89 acre

Total 4.07 acres Total 4.07 acres
R
TABLE OF CONTENTS
e
r Page
....................................................................................... iii
LIST OF FIGURES ............... "
1.0 INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................1
2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS ....................................................................................2
2.1 Site Description and Physiography ......................................................... ..2
2.2 Site History and Land Use ..................................................................... ..3
2.3 Geology .............................................................................................. ..4
2.4 Water Resources .................................................................................. ..4
2.4.1 Surface Water ............................................................................ ..4
2.4.1.1 Scott's Creek ........................................................ ..5
2.4.1.2 Neuse River ........................................................... ..5
2.4.2 Surface Hydrology ..................................................................... ..6
2.4.3 Ground Water ............................................................................ ..6
2.4.4 Water Quality ............................................................................ ..7
2.5 Soils ................................................................................................... ..7
2.6 Vegetation .......................................................................................... ..8
2.7 Wildlife ............................................................................................... ..9
2.7.1 Terrestrial .................................................................................. ..9
2.7.2 Aquatic ..................................................................................... 10
2.8 Protected Species ................................................................................ 1 1
2.9 Wetlands ............................................................................................ 14
3.0 MITIGATION PLAN .........................................................................................16
3.1 Tidal Marsh .........................................................................................16
3.1.1 Reference Marsh Ecosystem .......................................................17
3.1.2 Hydrology Restoration ................................................................17
3.1.3 Vegetation Restoration ................................................................18
3.2 Tidal Cypress-Gum Swamp ...................................................................18
3.2.1 Reference Forest Ecosystem .......................................................19
3.2.2 Hydrology Restoration ................................................................19
3.2.3 Vegetation Restoration ...............................................................20
4.0 MONITORING PLAN .......................................................................................20
4.1 Hydrology ...........................................................................................20
4.1.1 Monitoring ................................................................................21
4.1.2 Success Criteria ......................................................................... 21

TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
Paqe
4.1.2.1 Tidal Marsh ................................................................ 21
4.1.2.2 Cypress-Gum Swamp .................................................. 22
4.2 Vegetation ..........................................................................................22
4.2.1 Monitoring ................................................................................22
4.2.1.1 Tidal Marsh ................................................................ 22
4.2.1.2 Cypress-Gum Swamp .................................................. 23
4.2.2 Success Criteria .........................................................................23
4.2.2.1 Tidal Marsh ................................................................ 23
4.2.2.2 Cypress-Gum Swamp .................................................. 23
4.3 Report Submittal ..................................................................................24
4.4 Contingency ........................................................................................ 24
5.0 DISPENSATION OF PROPERTY ........................................................................24
6.0 MITIGATION VALUE ......................................................................................25
6.1 Pre-Mitigation Wetland Functions ...........................................................25
6.2 Post-Mitigation Wetland Functions ......................................................... 25
6.2.1 Tidal Marsh ............................................................................... 25
6.2.2 Tidal Cypress-Gum Swamp .........................................................26
6.3 Mitigation Value ...................................................................................26
7.0 PERMITS .......................................................................................................27
8.0 SUMMARY ...................................................................................................27
9.0 REFERENCES .................................................................................................29
FIGURES
APPENDICES
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Site Location
Figure 2. Site Features
Figure 3. 1961 Aerial Photograph
Figure 4. 1970 Aerial Photograph
Figure 5. 1989 Aerial Photograph
Figure 6. 1996 Aerial Photograph
Figure 7. Existing and Proposed Hardened Structures
Figure 8. Soils
Figure 9. Existing Vegetation
Figure 10. Site Wetland Status
Figure 11. Grading Plan
Figure 12. Planting Plan
All figures a re located at the end of the report.

1.0 INTRODUCTION
North Carolina General Assembly House Bill 399, ratified in 1989, provides for the
establishment of the North Carolina Highway Trust Fund. This fund was established to
facilitate the development of free-flowing, safe inter-city travel for motorists, and to support
statewide growth and development objectives. In 1994, the State of North Carolina created
a new transportation plan called Transportation 2001 that emphasizes, among other things,
the acceleration of highway projects associated with key regions of economic development.
As part of this effort, the NC Department of Transportation (NCDOT) is planning and
constructing roadway improvement projects in the eastern portion of the state. Priority
completion corridors in this region include US 64, US 264, and US 17. Some of these projects
involve unavoidable wetland impacts; however, locating suitable on-site compensatory
mitigation sites is sometimes difficult.
NCDOT is endeavoring to establish mitigation as compensation for the projected loss of tidal
brackish marsh due to the construction of the US 17 bridge over the Neuse River just south
of New Bern, Craven County, North Carolina. As part of this effort, NCDOT performed a
preliminary ecological assessment of the Sawmill Site (hereafter the "Site") in the spring of
1996 (ESI 1996). A sawmill was operated at the Site for many years prior to acquisition of the
land by NCDOT. The Site is located in the southern quadrant of the proposed US 17 bridge
crossing, and was initially selected for evaluation because of the on-site, in-kind mitigation
potential for wetland impacts associated with US 17 improvements. After cursory on-site
hydrological evaluations, general confirmation of Natural Resource Conservation Service
(NRCS) soil survey map units (USDA 1989), and evaluation of on-site wetlands and biotic
communities, NCDOT determined that the Site offers reasonable wetlands mitigation potential
for inclusion in its wetland mitigation program.
The purpose of this document is to: (1) describe existing conditions at the Site, including a
summary of wetland component analyses; (2) present a mitigation plan for creating and
restoring irregularly flooded brackish marsh and tidal cypress/gum swamp; and (3) present a
plan for monitoring and measuring success of restoration and creation efforts.
Historical aerial photography (1961, 1970, 1989, and 1996) was utilized to identify recent
alterations affecting the Site and to evaluate land use trends during the past 35 years. US
Geological Survey (USGS) topographic mapping and NRCS soil surveys (USDA 1989) were
utilized to evaluate existing landscape and soil information prior to on-site inspection.
This mitigation plan is anticipated to provide approximately 2.73 ac (1.1 1 ha) of wetland
creation, 0.20 ac (0.08 ha) of wetland restoration, and 0.25 ac (0.10 ha) of wetland
preservation within the Scott's Creek system. The remaining 0.89 ac (0.36 ha) of the Site
1
consists of uplands that will not provide wetland mitigation credit but will provide upland
buffers for the mitigation area.
2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
The Site is located on the north bank of Scott's Creek in James City in the tidewater region
of the outer Coastal Plain physiographic province. The Site includes approximately 4.07 ac
(1.65 ha) immediately west of the railroad crossing of the creek and southwest of the
intersection of US Highway 70 and US Business 70 (Figure 1). The Site is located
approximately 1600 feet (ft) (490 meters [m]) upstream of the confluence of Scott's Creek
and the Neuse River. The east boundary faces the Atlantic and East Carolina Railroad; the
south boundary faces Scott's Creek; the west boundary is defined by a maintained power line
corridor and Howell Road (SR 1167); and the north boundary is determined by maintained land
and roadway structures associated with US 17 improvements. Approximately 0.97 ac (0.29
ha) of the Site has been determined to be jurisdictional wetlands (according to guidelines
established by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers [ACOE]) or State Areas of Environmental
Concern (AECs); (according to the Coastal Area Management Act [CAMA]). The non-
jurisdictional 3.10 ac (1.36 ha) remaining on-site is considered available for mitigation.
The Site was originally proposed to provide approximately 5.20 acres of available mitigation,
however the overall size of the Site decreased due to the following: (1) loss of land area due
to the adjacent railroad right-of-way, (2) utility line easement purchased by the City of New
Bern.
2.1 Site Description and Physiography
The Site is located on a north-pointing peninsula bounded by the Trent River to the west and
the Neuse River to the east (Figure 2). A region of upland development, including Howell
Road, isolates the Site from a surface hydrology connection with the Trent River; however, the
Scott's Creek shoreline of the Site is in direct hydrological connection with the Neuse River.
The Site is lowest along the southern boundary adjacent to Scott's Creek. This region
supports a brackish marsh fringe within an elevational range from mean sea level [MSL] to
approximately 2 ft (0.60 m) above MSL. The landscape slopes from the marsh fringe upward
toward the north. The remainder of the Site supports a coastal shrub assemblage where
vegetation is not maintained. Much of the Site contains piles of saw dust associated with past
lumber mill activities. Elevational highs in the east, central, and west portions of the Site, with
peaks of approximately 10.20 ft (3.10 m) MSL, mark the locations of large saw dust piles.
A man-made drainage ditch bisects the Site for approximately 380 ft (115 m) from north to
south and transports surface runoff and groundwater discharge south into Scott's Creek. The
banks of this ditch are bounded by spoil mounds remaining from ditch construction and
2
scattered piles of debris (saw blades, scrap wood, assorted refuse) characteristic of a saw mill
operation.
2.2 Site History and Land Use
The site of present-day New Bern was inhabited by Tuscarora Indians prior to European
colonization, and was settled in 1710 by Swiss and Germans, who named the town for the
capital of Switzerland. New Bern was North Carolina's leading port from mid-1700 through
the early 1800s when major exports were lumber and agricultural products. The linking of
New Bern to the port of Beaufort and interior portions of the state by the railroad in the 1850s
allowed New Bern to become one of the South's leading lumber producers. During the Civil
War, occupation of New Bern by the Union army made the region a safe haven for free blacks.
The region on the peninsula at the confluence of the Trent and Neuse Rivers, on both banks
of Scott's Creek, became one of the largest settlements of free blacks, and was later named
the Town of James City. Today, the New Bern/James City area remains a major lumber
production center, and also produces boats, apparel, dairy products, fertilizer, and processed
meats. This area is an important transportation center, located at the cross-roads of two
railroad lines and two major highways (US 70, providing an east-west corridor; and US 17,
providing a north-south coastal corridor) ( Powell 1968; Bishir and Southern 1997).
Aerial photography from 1961 (Figure 3) shows that the entire Site was developed as a saw
mill operation, supporting roads, buildings, log and lumber storage yards, parking lots, and
three large saw dust piles. Only fringe areas, primarily adjacent to Scott's Creek, supported
vegetation which appears to have been primarily herbs and grasses with scattered shrubs. The
ditch was open and served to remove excess water from the interior of the mill operation.
Aerial photography from 1970 (Figure 4) shows that the Site remained in use as a saw mill
operation. Areas adjacent to Scott's Creek remained in herb and shrub vegetation. The saw
dust piles had expanded in area, and were supporting invasive herbaceous, grass, and shrub
vegetation. A portion of the upper end of the ditch had been filled to expand the lumber yard,
and banks of the remainder of the ditch supported shrub vegetation and debris piles.
Aerial photography 1989 (Figure 5) shows that the saw mill operation had closed down and
most of the Site was succeeding to shrub-dominated vegetation. Most signs of the saw mill
operation had disappeared with the exception of a couple of buildings, some maintained roads,
and an unvegetated saw dust pile adjacent to the railroad tracks. Approximately 600 ft (183
m) of Scott's Creek was constricted within culverts underneath the intersection of US 70
Bypass and US 70 Business between the Site and the Neuse River. A brackish marsh fringe
is visible on the opposite bank of Scott's Creek just west of the Site. This photograph also
indicates the locations of proposed roadways associated with the US 17 bridge over the
Neuse River.
3
Aerial photography from 1996 (Figure 6) indicates that the non-maintained portion of the Site
supported a dense tangle of shrubs and scattered trees. The drainage ditch is invisible under
the vegetation. The saw dust piles had been largely vegetated with invasive species. Current
maintenance activities were associated with the recently constructed US 17 bridge over the
Neuse River. An earthen ramp extended into the north portion of the Site and to the east of
the earthen ramp were supporting bents for the bridge structure. Roadway structures located
in the vicinity of the Site are indicated by Figure 7.
2.3 Geology
The Coastal Plain is composed of sediments deposited since the Cretaceous Period, 138 million
years before present (m.y.B.P.) by a series of transgressions and regressions of the Atlantic
Ocean. In North Carolina, Coastal Plain sediments generally dip to the east or southeast, and
the sediment thickness increases from west to east (Stuckey 1958). The underlying geologic
unit at the Site is the River Bend Formation which was deposited in the late Oligocene Epoch
of the Tertiary Period (from 38 to 24 m.y.B.P.); (NCGS 1985). The River Bend Formation is
composed of a limestone rock and clay base overlain by and interspersed with fingers of rigid
sands and molluscan fossiliferous limestone. The Site lies in a region of the state known as
the Albemarle Embayment, which has recently (in geological terms) elevated from ocean due
to rising sea-level causing vast acreage of low depressional areas and flooding along the
shoreline of the Pamlico Sound and its tributaries.
2.4 Water Resources
The Site is located within the Neuse River Basin in Hydrologic Unit #03020202 (USGS 1974).
Primary sources of hydrology are overbank flooding from Scott's Creek and local rainfall. Tides
in this region are primarily wind driven (pers. comm., Allen Clark, DWQ). High waters are
typically the result of: (1) rainfall and runoff within the Neuse River Basin, and (2) backup of
the Neuse River and Scott's Creek by wind-driven water from the Pamlico Sound. Local
rainfall either sheet flows or moves laterally through the soil toward streams. Secondary
factors which drive the irregular hydrology of wetlands adjacent to Scott's Creek include the
man-made ditch and site-specific physical characteristics such as sediment properties,
micro/macrotopography, vegetation density or patterns, wrack size, and evapotranspiration.
2.4.1 Surface Water
Scott's Creek is a blackwater stream with headwaters within the Coastal Plain physiographic
province (in contrast to an alluvial or brownwater system, which forms in the Piedmont). Its
primary hydrological influence is discharge from drainage basin precipitation, but groundwater
seepage is also an important influence. These hydrological inputs result in irregular discharge
peaks in response to frontal or local weather events, and discharge may drop to near zero in
4

drought conditions. When blackwater streams are tributaries to alluvial or brownwater
streams, as Scott's Creek is to the Neuse River, an additional, strong hydrological influence
on the blackwater stream may be the "water dam effect". This dam effect occurs when peak
flows in the alluvial stream slow, or even stop the flow from the blackwater system (Wharton
et al. 1982).
2.4.1.1 Scott's Creek
The source of Scott's Creek is located approximately 2.6 miles (4 km) south of the Site near
the community of Granthams. The Scott's Creek drainage basin is approximately 1,300 ac
(526 ha) in size. This low-energy system meanders from south to north, through James City,
before turning east near the Site and emptying into the Neuse River. Historically, Scott's
Creek has been impacted by residential neighborhoods, road and railroad construction, and
light commercial and industrial development in James City. This development has resulted in
increased stream discharges due to the system's reduced ability to store precipitation and
flood waters. The influence of the Neuse River on Scott's Creek is presently moderated by
a constriction formed by fill material and culverts associated with the US 70 crossing near the
mouth of the creek; however, the Neuse River is expected to act as a source for periodic
entry of saline waters into Scott's Creek resulting in a brackish water system. See Section
2.4.1.2 for a discussion of Neuse River salinities.
2.4.1.2 Neuse River
The Neuse River is a brownwater system primarily controlled by two factors: (1) the lunar-
tidally influenced Atlantic Ocean and Pamlico Sound; and (2) the cumulative effect of
precipitation and groundwater seepage within the many tributaries of the drainage basin. The
Neuse River Basin is oriented from northwest to southeast across the central portion of
eastern North Carolina. Basin headwaters are located in Person and Orange Counties. The
Neuse is formed by the conjunction of the Flat and Eno Rivers in upper Falls Lake along the
Granville/Durham County line. The Neuse River empties into Pamlico Sound along the
Pamlico/Carteret County line. The entire basin is approximately 190 miles (304 km) long,
averages approximately 40 miles (64 km) wide through the center, and narrows toward the
extremes. The Neuse River drainage basin encompasses approximately 6,192 square miles
(16,037 square km) in 19 counties, and includes approximately 3,293 miles (5,298 km) of
freshwater streams, 328,700 ac (133,025 ha) of salt water, and thousands of acres of
freshwater impoundments.
The NC Division of Water Quality monitors salinity (from the surface to 11 ft [3.4 m] deep)
from the US 17/Neuse River bridge between New Bern and Bridgeton. This recording station
is approximately 1.3 miles (2.1 km) from the Site. Salinities are recorded on a monthly basis;
readings from December 1990 to October 1996 are included in Appendix A. During this 6-
year period, salinometer readings of Neuse River surface waters ranged from fresh (0.0 to 0.5
5

parts per thousand [ppt]) to a high of 15.5 ppt, and bottom waters ranged from fresh to a high
of 21.0 ppt (seawater is a relatively constant 35 ppt). Estuaries which fluctuate within this
salinity range are considered oligohaline. During and immediately following periods of rain,
freshwater runoff may flush much of the salinity from local portions of the system. During
periods of low flows and light winds, denser salt water will creep upstream while the less
dense freshwater discharge flows over the top of the "salt wedge" resulting in a stratified
system. Dynamic energy imparted to the water surface by strong winds and turbulent currents
may mix saline waters throughout the water column. Fringing emergent marshes lie in a
dynamic transition zone between freshwater and estuarine systems and serve important roles
in water quality as partial filters for river inputs.
Past alterations to the Neuse River that affect its present influence on the Site include: (1)
clearing, ditching, and filling of much of the drainage basin for agricultural and silvicultural
production, and for residential, commercial, and industrial development; (2) the cumulative
effects on the Neuse system due to sedimentation and elevated nutrient inputs; and (3) the
lowering of upper Neuse River tributary stages and adjacent groundwater tables due to the
straightening and channelization of tributary streams. Clearing, ditching, and removal of areas
from basin floodplains have reduced the ability of floodplains to moderate flow velocities and
store flood waters. This has amplified stream discharges through lower portions of the Neuse
River following rainfall events.
2.4.2 Surface Hydrology
The Scott's Creek shoreline is generally characterized by gentle slopes from the water's edge
up to the sawdust and debris piles. The relatively high elevation of these piles moderates
surface water intrusion of the Site from Scott's Creek. These piles may also allow for quick
infiltration of short-term surface runoff due to local precipitation. Elevated creek waters gain
access to the Site in the region of the ditch mouth and along the power line corridor. On-site
wrack lines indicate that periodic storm events result in low energy, high water levels that
penetrate deep into the Site.
2.4.3 Ground Water
Regional groundwater flow in the North Carolina Coastal Plain is generally in a down-dip
direction to the southeast. Rivers in this region of the state generally flow from northwest to
southeast and roughly parallel dip direction. Shallow groundwater generally occurs under
unconfined (water table) conditions within 5 ft 0.5 m) of the surface in the vicinity of
drainages and within inter-stream flats.
The Site margin adjacent to Scott's Creek consists of organic sediments as a result of the
historic presence of brackish marsh. The remainder of the Site consists primarily of deep
organic surface materials (decaying sawdust) overlying sandy sediments. Current ground
6

water hydrology is characterized by the nearly horizontal flow of infiltrated local precipitation
towards Scott's Creek. Groundwater emerges at the edge of the marsh fringe and sheet flows
to the creek or is lost to evapotranspiration.
2.4.4 Water Quality
Both Scott's Creek (DWQ index # 27-102) from its source to the Neuse River, and the
adjacent portion of the Neuse River (DWQ index # 27-[961), have a best usage classification
of C Sw NSW. Class C uses are aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, and
secondary recreation. Secondary recreation refers to activities involving human body contact
with water on an infrequent or incidental basis (DEM 1993). The supplemental classification
Sw refers to "swamp waters", a designation given to streams characterized by low velocities.
The supplemental classification NSW refers to nutrient sensitive waters and requires
management of nutrient inputs due to the tendency for excessive growth of microscopic and
macroscopic vegetation within the waters. The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network
(BMAN) addresses long-term trends in water quality at monitoring sites by sampling for
selected benthic macroinvertebrates. A BMAN station located approximately 15 miles
upstream from the mouth of Scott's Creek at SR 1423 and the Neuse River has a rating of
Fair (DEM 1989, 1991; Lenate, personal communication, Sept . 1999). The BMAN program
has been replaced by the benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring program associated with the
basinwide assessment for the Yadkin River Basin. Downstream from the BMAN station and
upstream of the Site, three industries have permits to discharge greater than 5 million gallons
per day (MGD) of flow: The industries and their permitted discharges are Weyerhauser (37
MGD), Martin Marietta 0 2 MGD), and the New Bern waste water treatment plant (4 MGD).
There are no documented major dischargers upstream from the Site on Scott's Creek. The
DWQ conducted fish sampling in the Neuse River at New Bern for analysis of metals,
pesticides, and organics from 1980 to 1989. All results were within Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) requirements (DEM 1992).
2.5 Soils
NRCS soil map units at the Site include the Conetoe, Seabrook, and Lafitte series (USDA
1989) Figure 8 provides the mapped soil types associated with the Site. The Conetoe and
Seabrook series are nonhydric, upland soils characteristic of upper stream terraces in the area.
The Lafitte series is a very poorly drained hydric soil (USDA 1991) occurring within tidal
marsh and riverine forest fringe areas adjacent to Scott's Creek.
The hydric Lafitte soils occur as a linear strip, approximately 110 ft (34 m) wide, adjacent to
the Scott's Creek shoreline (approximately 804 ft [245 m1 in length), for a coverage of
approximately 0.77 ac (0.31 ha). The mapped Lafitte soil type is buried under sawdust
throughout the area with fill material ranging from 1.0 ft (0.3 m) to more than 10.8 ft (3.3 m)
in depth. The actual maximum depth of sawdust could not be measured as hand-augered soil
7

borings collapsed at depths of 3.0 to 6.0 ft (0.9 to 1.8 m). Substantial layering of sawdust
material was also observed within surface soils in the Scott's Creek channel fringe.
The non-hydric Conetoe and Seabrook map units occur along an upland stream terrace area
throughout the remainder of the Site [approximately 3.3 ac (1.34 ha) in size] immediately
adjacent to the relict floodplain. Sawdust and earthen fill material have been deposited within
these mapped units, covering the native soil surface with 1.0 to 3.0 ft (0.3 to 0.9 m) of fill
material. Because the map units consist primarily of coarse marine sands at lower depths,
these soils should be suitable for excavation and conversion to marsh soils.
2.6 Vegetation
On-site plant communities have experienced periodic natural and anthropogenic disturbances
during the past century. Disturbances include clearing and development as a saw mill
operation, and for roads, a railroad, and a power line corridor. Recent disturbances include
wind and flooding damage caused by the passage of two hurricanes in 1996 (Bertha and Fran),
one in 1998 (Bonnie), and two in 1999 (Dennis and Floyd). All five storms resulted in snapped
and downed trees and raised water levels, which flooded the site. The existing vegetative
cover is a mosaic of shrub, marsh, and maintained areas. Three communities have been
identified at the Site: shrub assemblage, brackish marsh complex, and maintained land (Figure
9). Vascular plant names generally follow nomenclature found in Radford et al. (1968).
Maintained Land
Maintained land includes an equipment storage area adjacent to the railroad track in the
eastern portion of the Site, the power line corridor along the western boundary, and a relict
roadway near the powerline corridor. This designation includes approximately 0.73 ac (0.30
ha). Maintained land is regularly disturbed by mowing, heavy machinery traffic, and/or the
storage of equipment. Portions of maintained land contain decaying piles of sawdust with
sparse to dense vegetation coverage. This community supports scattered small trees and
shrubs including white mulberry (Morus alba), white poplar (Populus alba), Chinese privet
(Ligustrum sinense), and wax myrtle (Myrica cerifera). Herbs within this community include
many opportunistic species such as dewberry (Rubus trivialis), sundrops (Oenothera laciniata),
Carolina geranium (Geranium carolinianum), blue toadflax (Linaria canadensis), cornsalad
(Valerianella radiata), chickweed (Stellaria media), henbit (Lamium amplexicaule), and slender
corydalis (Corydalis micrantha var. australis).
Brackish Marsh Complex
This community includes approximately 0.25 ac (0.10 ha) along the bank of Scott's Creek and
is characterized by scattered vegetation and open mudflats. The vegetation is dominated by
emergent marsh herbs, but includes emergent grasses, shrubs, and trees throughout. The
expanse of this community appears to have been constricted by placement of sawdust piles
8
in the vicinity of the shoreline. Snapped and downed trees found within this community are
apparently the result of storm events. In early spring, common herbs and grasses within the
brackish marsh are shoreline sedge (Carex halinolepis), cattail (Typha sp.), and black
needlerush (Juncus roemerianus). It is expected that this community supports a variety of
herbaceous species during the growing season including American bulrush (Scirpus
americanus), spike-rushes (Eleocharis spp.), arrow-head (Sagittaria spp.), and sedges (Carex
spp.). Scattered tree species include bald cypress (Taxodium distichum) and red maple (Acer
rubrum), and shrubs include swamp rosemallow (Hibiscus moscheutos), groundsel tree
(Baccharis halimifolia), elder (Sambucus canadensis), and wax myrtle. Trumpet vine (Campsis
radicans) and saw greenbrier (Smilax bona-nox) are common woody vines within this
community.
Shrub Assemblage
This community covers approximately 3.09 ac (1.25 ha) of the central and western portions
of the Site. The shrub assemblage consists of a rather dense thicket of shrubs, vines, and
scattered small trees that invaded the area with the cessation of the saw mill operation. Most
of the dominant species are naturalized exotic species and weedy native invasive species.
Common tree species include white mulberry, black cherry (Prunus serotina), and scattered
white poplar. Shrubs include Chinese privet and silverberry (Elaeagnus umbellata). Multiflora
rose (Rosa multiflora), blackberry (Rubus sp.), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), and
greenbriers (Smilax spp.) are common throughout this vegetative community. In more open
areas, dewberry is common, along with perennial herbs such as evening primrose (Oenothera
biennis), pokeweed (Phytolacca americana), aster (Aster sp.), and goldenrods (Solidago spp.).
2.7 Wildlife
2.7.1 Terrestrial
Sawmill Site communities are expected to support wildlife species adapted to disturbed lands
and irregularly-flooded brackish tidal marshes. Although recovering from long-term
maintenance as a saw mill operation and use as a staging area during construction of the new
US 17 bridge, the Site still provides food, protective cover, water, and nesting sites for
wildlife. However, semi-isolation from local terrestrial faunal populations by roads and
commercial and residential development is expected to reduce opportunity of the Site to
provide wildlife benefits.
Mammal sightings or evidence (scat, tracks, burrows) observed on and around the Site include
Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginiana) and the exotic nutria (Myocastor coypus). Other
mammals likely to occur include southeastern shrew (Sorex longirostris), red bat (Lasiurus
borealis), marsh rabbit (Sylvilagus palustris), gray squirrel (Scidrus carolinensis), marsh rice rat
(Oryzomys palustris), cotton mouse (Peromyscus gossypinus), muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus),
9
raccoon (Procyon lotor), mink (Mustela vison), and river otter (Lutra canadensis); (Webster et
al. 1985).
Birds sighted during field investigations include mallard Was platyrhynchos), American coot
(Fulica americana), ring-billed gull (Larus delawarensis), laughing gull (Larus atricilla), killdeer
(Charadrius vociferus), morning dove (Zenaida macroura), belted kingfisher (Ceryle alcyon),
Carolina wren (Thryothorus ludovicianus), swamp sparrow (Melospiza georgiana), red-winged
blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus), northern cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis), fish crow (Corvus
ossifragus), eastern towhee (Pipilo erythrophthalmus), and American robin (Turdus
migra to rius). Other birds likely to occur include northern rough-winged swallow
(Stelgidopteryx serripennis), double-crested cormorant (Phalacrocorax auritus), osprey (Pandion
haliaetus), red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), great blue heron (Ardea herodias), snowy egret
(Egretta thula), great egret (Casmerodius alba), gray catbird (Dumetella carolinensis), northern
mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos), common yellowthroat (Geothlypis trichas), and common
grackle (Quiscalus quiscula); (Potter et al. 1980).
Two reptile species were observed at the Site: yellow bellied slider (Trachemys scripta) and
black racer (Coluber constrictor). However, likely residents of the brackish marsh and upland
habitats of the Site include snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina), eastern mud turtle
(Kinosternon subrubrum), diamondback terrapin (Malaclemys terrapin), five-lined skink
(Eumeces fasciatus), southeastern five-lined skink (Eumeces inexpectatus), six-lined racerunner
(Cnemidophorus sexlineatus), eastern glass lizard (Ophisaurus ventralis), rainbow snake
(Farancia erytrogramma), brown water snake (Nerodia taxispilota), and the eastern ribbon
snake (Thamnophis sauritus); (Palmer and Braswell 1995).
2.7.2 Aquatic
Irregularly-flooded, oligohaline waters and marshes are characterized by periodic fluctuations
in water level, water chemistry (salinity, dissolved oxygen), and temperature. For this reason,
aquatic species that occur in estuaries may migrate with the fluctuations or are adapted to the
dynamic environment. The Scott's Creek outlet to the Neuse River (east and downstream of
the Site) is constricted by a series of large box culverts which extend for a distance of
approximately 600 ft (183 m) under the US 70 Bypass/US 70 Business junction. There is,
however, free-flowing water through the culverts allowing passage of aquatic organisms. The
portion of Scott's Creek upstream of the culverts is a narrow, low-energy system.
Fishes expected in the vicinity of the Site include permanent resident estuarine species,
migratory (anadromous, semianadromous, and catadromous) species, and larval forms of
marine species which utilize estuarine marshes as nurseries. Expected permanent residents
include mosquitofish (Gambusia holbrooki), Atlantic croaker (Micropogon undulatus), and
sheepshead minnow (Cyprinodon variegatus). Anadromous fishes which may be found near
10
the Site include alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus), blueback herring (A. aestivalis), American
shad (A. sapidissima), hickory shad (A. mediocris), shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser
brevirostrum), and striped bass (Morone saxatilis). Semianadromous species which may occur
in the vicinity include white perch (Morone americana), yellow perch (Perca flavescens), and
gizzard shad (Dorosoma cepedianum); while the American eel (Anguilla rostrata) is an expected
catadromous species. Nursery utilizers include striped mullet (Mugil cephalus), pinfish
(Lagodon rhomboides), and spot (Leiostomus xanthurus). During winter months or periods of
high rainfall, Scott's Creek may be primarily freshwater and support redbreast sunfish (Lepomis
auritus), bluegill (L. macrochirus), and chain pickerel (Esox niger); (Fish 1968; Rohde et al.
1994; Stout 1984; and Wiegert and Freeman 1990).
The shoreline marsh and adjacent waters provide suitable benthic habitat for aquatic
invertebrates such as worms, insects, shrimps, and crabs. These organisms serve as prey
items for fish and other wildlife.
2.8 Protected Species
Federal Species
Species with the federal classification of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or officially Proposed
(P) for such designation are protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 (16
USC 1531 et seq.). The following federally-protected species are listed for Craven County as
of the most recent FWS list dated 16 June 2000:
Status
Species Fed. State
Red-cockaded Woodpecker (Picoides borealis) E E
Leatherback Sea Turtle (Dermochelys coriacea) E E
Manatee (Trichechus manatus) E E
American Alligator (Alligator mississippiensis) T(S/A)a T
Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) T T
Sensitive Jointvetch (Aeschynomene virginica) T T
a T (S/A) - Threatened due to similarity of appearance
A brief description of these species follows.
Potential
Habitat
No
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Red-cockaded Woodpecker (RCW) - The RCW is a colonial species found in pine forests of the
southeastern United States. Primary habitat is southern pine forests consisting of long-leaf
(Pinus palustris), slash (P. elliottii), pond (P. serotina), and loblolly (P. taeda) pine species.
11
Traditionally, fire-maintained pine flatwoods or long-leaf pine-dominated savannas have served
as ideal nesting and foraging sites. Habitat for this species is lacking on the Site and in the
- vicinity, and there are no documented RCW colonies on or near the Site. No negative impact
to the RCW is anticipated as a result of this project.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT. Habitat for this species is lacking on the Site and in
the vicinity, and there are no documented RCW colonies on or near the Site.
Leatherback Sea Turtle - The leatherback is a large, heavy turtle with a soft shell and leathery
skin. This species is primarily tropical in nature and occasionally moves into shallow bays,
estuaries, and even river mouths. Its preferred food is jellyfish, although the diet includes
other sea animals and seaweed. The leatherback generally nests on sandy, tropical beaches
(Palmer and Braswell 1996). This species is not expected to occur within the Site, and there
are no documented sightings of this species near the Site. No negative impacts to the
leatherback sea turtle are expected as a result of this project.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT. This species is not expected to occur within the
Site, and there are no documented sightings of this species near the Site.
Manatee - The manatee is a large, aquatic mammal which may wander from Florida to as far
north as coastal Virginia during summer (FWS 1993). This species inhabits warm waters, both
fresh and salt, where the diet consists mostly of aquatic vegetation (Webster et a/. 1985).
Vagrant manatees have been documented in the Trent River near the US 70 bridge during late
summer in recent years (NHP records). Due to isolation from the Neuse River by the under-
road culverts and the lack of suitable aquatic vegetation for foraging, vagrant manatees are
not expected at the Site. No negative impact to the manatee is anticipated as a result of this
project.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT. Due to the lack of suitable aquatic vegetation for
foraging, vagrant manatees are not expected at the Site.
American Alligator - The American alligator is listed as threatened based on the similarity in
appearance to other federal-listed crocodilians; however, there are no other crocodilians within
North Carolina. This species is not biologically endangered or threatened. American alligators
can be found in a variety of freshwater to estuarine habitats including swamp forests,
marshes, large streams and canals, and ponds and lakes. Marginal habitat for American
alligator exists on the Site. However, past land use activities and present disturbance would
probably discourage their use of the Site. No negative impact to the American alligator is
anticipated as a result of this project.
12
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT. Past land use activities and present day disturbances
have discouraged the use of the Site by the American alligator.
Bald Eagle - The bald eagle is a large raptor associated with large bodies of water in North
Carolina. The adult bird is dark brown with a white head and tail, while immature birds are
brown with whitish mottling on their tail, belly, and wing linings. In the Carolinas, nesting
season extends from December through May (Potter et a/. 1980). The nest is typically
constructed in a conspicuous, tall, living tree near water. This eagle forages over large bodies
of water where adjacent trees are available for perching (Hamel 1992), and feeds on a wide
variety of aquatic-dependent organisms including fish, snakes, small mammals, and large water
birds. The primary source of food is carrion and fish taken from ospreys (Potter et a/. 1980).
No eagles are documented from the Site vicinity (NHP records). Nesting habitat is not
available on the Site. Although eagles may forage in the area, no negative impact to the bald
eagle is anticipated as a result of this project.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT. No eagles are documented from the Site vicinity
(NHP records). Nesting habitat is not available on the Site.
Sensitive Jointvetch - The sensitive jointvetch is a robust, bushy-branched, annual legume
approximately 1 m (3 ft) tall with alternate, pinnately compound leaves (Radford et a/. 1968).
Flowers are greenish-yellow with red veins, about 0.5-inch (1.2-centimeter) long (Leonard
1985); and are produced on few-flowered racemes from July to October. In North Carolina,
this species occurs in full sun in moist to wet roadside ditches, moist fields, and tidal marshes.
Sensitive jointvetch has been documented (NHP records) from two locations in the vicinity of
the Site: (1) in a brackish marsh on the east bank of the Trent River immediately north of the
US 70 bridge, approximately 2000 ft (600 m) north and across the James City peninsula from
the Site; and (2) in a roadside ditch adjacent to the east shoulder of Howell Road (SR 1167),
approximately 1.1 miles (1.8 km) south of the Site. Both of these records are older than 10
years. Possible habitat for this species exists on the Site. A species-specific survey utilizing
pedestrian transects was conducted on the Site on September 28, 2000 by Dicky Harmon and
Ed Swabb of ESI, along with Eric Black and Karen Lynch of NCDOT. No populations of this
jointvetch were observed. No negative impact to the sensitive jointvetch is anticipated as a
result of this project.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT. No populations of sensitive jointvetch were
observed during systematic surveys for this species on the Site. No impacts to sensitive
jointvetch will occur as a result of this project.
13
Federal Species of Concern (FSC) listed for Craven County (list date 16 June 2000), their
North Carolina status, and an indication of whether potential habitat for each species exists
on the Site are listed below.
Species State Habitat
Bachman's Sparrow (Aimophila aestivalis) SC No
Southern Hognose Snake (Heterodon simus) SR No
Black Rail (Laterallus jamaicensis) SR No
Croatan Crayfish (Procambarus plumimanus) SR No
Annointed Sallow Moth (Pyreferra ceromatica) * SR No
Carolina Spleenwort (Asplenium heteroresiliens) E No
Chapman's Sedge (Carex chapmanii) * WL No
Venus Flytrap (Dionaea muscipula) C-SC No
White Wicky (Kalmia cuneata)* E-SC No
Pondspice (Litsea aestivalis) C No
Godfrey's Sandwort (Minuartia godfreyi) E P
Loose Watermilfoil (Myriophyllum laxum) T No
Savanna Cowbane (Oxypolis ternata) WL No
Spring-flowering Goldenrod (Solidago verna) E/PT No
Carolina Asphodel (Tofieldia glabra) * C No
- P = Possible
*Historical Record - the species was last observed in the county more than 50 years ago.
E - Endangered T - Threatened FSC - Federal Species of Concern
SC - Special Concern C - Candidate SR - Significantly Rare
WL - Watch List P - Proposed
State Species
Species of mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and plants with the North Carolina status of
Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Special Concern (SC) receive limited protection under the
North Carolina Endangered Species Act (G.S. 113-331 et seq.) and the North Carolina Plant
Protection Act of 1979 (G.S. 106-202.12 et seq.). A review of NHP records on January 3,
2001 indicates that no state-listed species have been found on the Site since the initial review.
2.9 Wetlands
Jurisdictional wetland limits are regulated under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act by ACOE
and under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) by the N.C. Division of Coastal
Management (DCM). As stipulated in the 1987 ACOE wetland delineation manual, the
presence of three defined parameters (hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and evidence of
wetland hydrology) are required for a wetland jurisdictional determination (DOA 1987). CAMA
14
w
coastal wetlands are generally defined as marshes subject to occasional flooding that support
specific vegetation, some of which occur within the Site. The portions of the Site that fall
under the jurisdiction of the ACOE or the DCM are depicted by Figure 10.
Site jurisdictional areas are estuarine as defined by Cowardin et ai. (1979). Estuarine waters
are usually partially surrounded by land yet have an outlet to the open ocean. Estuaries are
regions of mixing of freshwater inland runoff and marine waters; and are characterized by
salinities, measured in parts per thousand (ppt), that range from less than 0.5 ppt (brackish
water) to 35 ppt (sea water) or saltier during dry periods. Local estuarine wetlands are low-
energy systems with water regimes and water chemistry affected by wind-driven tides,
precipitation, freshwater runoff, and evaporation. The Pamlico Sound acts as a buffer between
coastal rivers, such as the Neuse and Pamlico, and the ocean. On-site estuarine areas are of
two types: (1) intertidal, emergent herbaceous/shrub-scrub wetlands; and (2) intertidal,
emergent shrub-scrub/forested wetlands. Site wetlands total approximately 0.97 ac (0.39 ha).
Existing jurisdictional systems are described as follows.
Estuarine, intertidal, emergent herbaceous/shrub-scrub wetland (E2EM/SS)
This designation corresponds to the brackish marsh complex plant community and CAMA
"coastal wetlands". This wetland type accounts for approximately 0.25 ac (0.10 ha). These
wetlands are characterized by a mixture of exposed sediments and patches of vegetation.
This system is dominated by emergent herbs and grasses, but also supports scattered shrubs
and small trees. Dominant emergent herbs include shoreline sedge, cattail, and black
needlerush. Grasses include scattered big cordgrass (Spartina cynosuroides). Shrubs and trees
are scattered throughout the community and include swamp rosemallow, groundsel tree, wax
myrtle, red maple, and bald cypress. Creek flooding, wind tides, and groundwater provide
constant saturation to the surface, or regular surface flooding, within this wetland. Brackish
marshes occur in relatively low-energy systems with irregular, wind-driven tides. Sediments
within these marshes are more organic than salt marsh sediments since brackish marshes have
less mineral input. The brackish marsh substrate is primarily formed of decaying organic
material which is easily broken and disseminated by wave action.
The plant species composition within this community is most likely a result of shoreline vicinity
disturbances; specifically, the deposition and long-term storage of saw dust and the periodic
redistribution of surface materials associated with the saw mill operation and the recently
completed bridge construction project. These disturbances have narrowed the Scott's Creek
marsh fringe and provided access for invasive species. Much of the remainder of Scott's
Creek shoreline has been developed at some point in the past, but isolated stands of relict
marsh indicate that Scott's Creek fringing marshes were historically dominated by emergent
grasses such as big cord grass, sawgrass (Ciadium jamaicense), black needlerush, and cattail.
15
0-
Generally, irregularly-flooded marshes are characterized by minor inputs of inorganic sediments
and major inputs of organic debris, both of which result in the accumulation of a peaty
substrate. A slow but gradual increase in coastal river and creek levels due to sea level rise
results in the breaking up and washing away of the relatively unstable shoreline edge of the
marsh substrate. Rising water levels also allow emergent vegetation to migrate landward. If
climatic conditions and marsh physiography allow the brackish marsh to remain relatively
stable, the increased elevation of the organic substrate will provide conditions amenable for
colonization by shrub and tree species.
Estuarine, intertidal, shrub-scrub/forested wetland (E2SS/FO)
This designation corresponds to the wet portion of the shrub assemblage plant community and
accounts for approximately 0.72 ac (0.29 ha). This wetland type is characterized by dense
thickets of shrubs and small trees. The vegetation structure is a result of succession which
has occurred since cessation of the on-site saw mill operation during the 1970s. Common
shrubs include groundsel tree, wax myrtle, and Chinese privet, and the common trees are bald
cypress and red maple. This wetland type is characterized by temporarily-saturated soils;
surface water occurs only as a result of unusual events such as high winds or heavy rainfall.
Sources of water are Scott's Creek overflow, direct precipitation concentrated by the on-site
ditch, and groundwater seepage.
3.0 MITIGATION PLAN
A primary mitigation goal is to maximize the area of streamside wetlands within the Sawmill
Site. This goal can be accomplished by: (1) the removal of fill material and the reintroduction
of natural aquatic-emergent vegetation for wetlands restoration; and (2) the removal of fill
material and surface soils to appropriate elevations and reintroduction of wetland vegetation
for wetlands creation.
Access to the Site will be provided by a dirt road that is approximately 12 ft (3.68 m) wide.
This road connects to SR 1 167 (Howell Road) and runs along the northern boundary of the
Site near SR 1167.
3.1 Tidal Marsh
The portion of the Site proposed for tidal marsh mitigation presently includes approximately
0.25 ac (0.10 ha) of naturally occurring wetlands (brackish tidal marsh complex) and
approximately 0.53 ac (0.21 ha) of disturbed land that now supports secondary-growth on fill
material (wet shrub assemblage and maintained land). The coastal shrub assemblage wetlands
presently offer little in terms of wetland functions to the local ecosystem. This plan proposes:
(1) preserving the existing brackish tidal marsh complex; (2) replacing the shrub assemblage
wetlands with brackish tidal marsh; (3) restoring the remaining Lafitte soil map unit to brackish
16
11
tidal marsh complex, and (4) creating additional brackish tidal marsh complex from an area of
maintained land. It is expected that some shading over the proposed tidal marsh area will
" occur as a result of the US 70 overpass, and this possibility was accounted for in the overall
mitigation plan. If shading does occur; tidal brackish marsh will survive much better than a
forested system.
3.1.1 Reference Marsh Ecosystem
The 0.25-acre tidal brackish marsh area proposed for wetland preservation on the Sawmill
Mitigation Site will be used as the reference marsh ecosystem (RME). The elevations found
in the proposed wetland preservation area have been used to design the final elevation
contours within the brackish marsh creation/restoration zones. The use of the on-site
preservation area as the RME is preferable because it allows direct correlation between the
creation/restoration zones to an on-site system that is already established. The existing
elevations in the preservation area to be used as the RME range from 0.49 ft to 1.98 feet
(0.15 m to .060 m) with the lowest elevation found at the shoreline of Scott's Creek. The
proposed elevations in the creation/restoration areas will range from 1.18 ft to 1.48 ft (0.36
m to 0.45 m). The hydrology of the Sawmill Site will be influenced by the US 70 bridge due
to the constriction of water flow going under the bridge through box culverts. The constricted
water flow will cause water levels at the Site to rise and fall at much slower rates than areas
outside the zone of influence from the bridge. Monitoring gauges will be established in the
preservation area (RME) to measure groundwater saturation as well as inundation. The data
provided by these monitoring gauges will allow for direct comparison with data collected by
the monitoring gauges placed in the creation/restoration areas. It is believed that by matching
those marsh elevations currently existing on the Site, that the marsh creation/restoration
efforts will have a much higher chance of yielding a viable tidal brackish marsh.
3.1.2 Hydrology Restoration
Portions of the Site have contained fill material for at least the last 36 years. Tidal brackish
marsh hydrology will be restored through the removal of fill material and surface grading to
appropriate contours. The area proposed for tidal marsh restoration will be graded to
elevations determined from the proposed tidal marsh preservation area, which is being used
as the RME. Fill removal and grading will occur on approximately 0.53 ac (0.21 ha). Site
grading should be conducted in a pattern parallel to the Scott's Creek shoreline to reduce the
tendency of erosion channel formation. The Site is designed as a wind-driven tidal system.
Site hydrology will be dominated by Scott's Creek, and to a lesser extent by direct
precipitation, runoff from adjacent uplands, and groundwater seepage.
Fill removal and proposed grading will result in the transformation of approximately 0.26 acres
(0.10 ha) of existing shrub assemblage wetlands and 0.27 ac (0.1 1 ha) of maintained land to
brackish tidal marsh resulting in a total of 0.53 ac (0.21 ha) of brackish tidal marsh
17
" creation/restoration. The wet shrub assemblage occurs on the lower slope of fill material that
was placed in an historic brackish marsh system, and presently offers little in terms of wetland
" functions to the local environment. This system supports low species richness with a high
incidence of exotic nuisance species (Chinese privet, Japanese honeysuckle).
The new US 17 bridge over the Neuse River includes: (1) a stormwater retention basin
adjacent to the earthen ramp at the north boundary, and (2) a spillway extending from the
stormwater basin across the Site to Scott's Creek. At the conclusion of Site restoration
activities, the retention basin will be reduced to the minimum size necessary for estimated
stormwater flows and the spillway will be removed. Stormwater discharge associated with
adjacent roads will be allowed to move across the Site as groundwater or sheet flow. The
restored marsh will thus function as an energy buffer for concentrated roadway surface water
runoff and a water quality enhancement filter.
3.1.3 Vegetation Restoration
Mitigation goals for plant communities include: (1) restoration of wetland communities that
are characteristic of natural systems in similar landscape positions; and (2) restoration of
wetland communities that maximize wetland functions to the local environment. Restoration
of a brackish tidal marsh system will enhance wetland functions provided by the Site, as well
as provide habitat for development and expansion of characteristic wetland plants and animals.
An area of approximately 0.53 ac (0.21 ha) adjacent to Scott's Creek will be cleared and
graded to contours found in the RME (Figure 11). This area will be planted entirely with
seedlings of big cordgrass on 3.0-ft (0.9-m) centers. Planting should occur between 1 April
and 15 June to avoid adverse weather conditions of the late winter and early spring and to
provide the seedlings with an entire growing season for establishment. Approximately 0.25
ac (0.11 ha) of existing tidal brackish marsh will remain undisturbed along the shoreline,
thereby providing a local source for additional species within the mitigation area. This 0.25
ac (0.11 ha) area will be preserved as part of the mitigation plan and will be used as the on-
site RME.
3.2 Tidal Cypress-Gum Swamp
The northwestern portion of the Sawmill Site is presently not in direct hydrologic contact with
Scott's Creek and is underlain by non-hydric Seabrook and Conetoe soil map units. However,
implementation of the proposed tidal marsh mitigation plan will result in the
restoration/creation of brackish marsh adjacent to Scott's Creek and will provide a hydrologic
connection to the area proposed for tidal cypress-gum swamp. This plan will serve to increase
the amount of streamside wetlands adjacent to Scott's Creek. Although the area proposed
for tidal cypress-gum swamp is not believed to have historically been a wetland, the proximity
of this area to the surface water of Scott's Creek and the proposed on-site brackish tidal
18
marsh creation/restoration should allow for the establishment of wetland hydrology when the
area is graded to the proper elevation. Site mapping indicates that approximately 2.4 ac (0.97
ha) is available for grading to integrate the tidal cypress-gum swamp component into the
overall Sawmill Mitigation Site.
The mitigation goal for plant communities includes maximizing the area of wetland
communities characteristic of natural systems in other, similar landscape positions to maximize
wetland functions to the local environment. Tidal cypress-gum swamps are typically found
in areas with regular or irregular tides in freshwater or slightly brackish systems. Tidal
cypress-gum swamp is the most common community association inland or upstream of tidal
brackish marsh. Creation of a tidal cypress-gum swamp community inland of the proposed tidal
marsh will enhance and diversify wetland functions provided by the proposed tidal marsh
specifically, and by the entire Site in general.
3.2.1 Reference Forest Ecosystem
A reference forest ecosystem (RFE) for the forested wetland creation (tidal cypress-gum
swamp) has been located along Scott's Creek just south of the Site (Figure 1). Elevations
within the RFE were surveyd in order to design the final grading plan for the tidal cypress-gum
swamp portion of the Sawmill Mitigation Site. The transect surveyed within the RFE indicates
an average range in elevation from 0.99 ft to 1.82 ft (0.30 m to 0.55 m). The proposed
grading plan within the tidal cypress/gum swamp portion of the Sawmill Mitigation Site will
result in elevation ranges from 1.18 ft to 1.58 ft (0.36 m to 0.48 m). Dominant tree species
of tidal cypress-gum swamps in this region of North Carolina include bald cypress, water
tupelo (Nyssa aquatica), and swamp tupelo (N. biflora). Additional tree species include water
hickory (Carya aquatica), water ash (Fraxinus caroliniana), American elm (Ulmus americana),
red maple (Acer rubrum), red bay (Persea palustris), and sweet bay (Magnolia virginiana). The
dominant species within the RFE include bald cypress, swamp tupelo, and red maple.
3.2.2 Hydrology Restoration
Portions of the Site have contained fill material for at least the last 36 years. Tidal cypress-
gum swamp hydrology will be restored through the removal of fill material, and through
surface grading to appropriate contours. The Site will be graded to elevations based upon the
careful examination of elevations within nearby RFE site. Tidal cypress-gum swamps typically
are influenced by regular or irregular tidal cycles. A lower elevation would result in daily tidal
inundation, and a slightly higher elevation would limit tidal inundation to spring tides (i.e., full
or new moon tides). As with the tidal marsh, the tidal cypress-gum swamp will be designed
as a wind driven tidal system. Site grading should be conducted in a pattern parallel to the
Scott's Creek shoreline to reduce the tendency of erosion channel formation. Grading the Site
surface to RFE elevations will allow restoration of characteristic tidal cypress-gum swamp
19
hydrology. Site hydrology will be dominated by Scott's Creek and to a lesser extent by direct
precipitation, runoff from adjacent uplands, and groundwater seepage.
3.2.3 Vegetation Restoration
Approximately 2.40 ac (0.97 ha) will be planted with wetland vegetation typical of tidal
cypress-gum swamps located in this region. ACOE Compensatory Hardwood Mitigation
Guidelines (dated 8 December 1993) will be utilized in implementing tidal cypress-gum swamp
creation. Implementation will consist of: (1) acquisition of available seedlings, (2)
implementation of proposed surface topography improvements such as soil scarification, and
(3) planting selected species within the Site. Planting of seedlings should occur when the
trees are dormant in winter and early spring. Within the 2.40 ac (0.97 ha) area, seedlings will
be planted with a spacing of 6-10 ft, with an average of 8 ft (this total is approximately 680
stems/ac [1680 stems/ha]). Suggested target species include: bald cypress, water tupelo,
swamp tupelo, overcup oak (Quercus lyrata), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), and willow
oak (Quercus phel%s).
4.0 MONITORING PLAN
Monitoring of wetland restoration efforts will be performed until success criteria are fulfilled.
The monitoring events will document the succession of the mitigation area from a newly
created/restored wetland to a stable and viable ecosystem. Vegetation and hydrology will be
monitored, and all collected data will be summarized in report format. The Department will
monitor the mitigation site for five years or until success criteria are demonstrated, whichever
is longer.
4.1 Hydrology
A hydrology-monitoring network of monitoring gauges will be installed at the conclusion of Site
hydrological modifications. The monitoring gauges will be designed and placed in accordance
with specifications in the COE's Installing Monitoring Wells and Peizometers in Wetlands (WRP
Technical Note HY-IA-3.1, July 2000). The network will utilize continuous monitoring gauges
of various sizes to document inundation and groundwater levels within the mitigation area.
Monitoring gauges are proposed to be "clustered" in no less than three locations throughout
the Site. Each "cluster" will contain one 20-inch monitoring gauge to record groundwater
levels and one 40-inch monitoring gauge to record surface water levels. The monitoring gauge
clusters will provide a wide range of available hydrologic data that will be beneficial in
determining overall hydrologic success. The 20-inch monitoring gauges can continuously
record water levels over a 20-inch vertical gradient, and they will be installed such that they
can record groundwater levels to a depth of 20 inches below the ground surface. The 40-inch
monitoring gauges can record water levels over a 40-inch vertical gradient, and they will be
installed so that they can record surface water levels of nearly 40 inches above the ground
20
surface. Surface water depths of 40 inches will likely only occur during storm events. The
40-inch monitoring gauge may be stabilized with a wooden stake if necessary.
A "cluster" of monitoring gauges will also be placed in the on-site RME. The data provided by
these monitoring gauges will be used as a comparison between the RME and the tidal brackish
marsh creation/restoration.
4.1.1 Monitoring
The continuous monitoring gauges will record water levels at 3-hour intervals and will be in
operation throughout the year. Data will be downloaded at intervals (1) sufficient to insure
proper operation and maintenance of the hardware and (2) necessary to document the
established hydrology success criteria.
4.1.2 Success Criteria
The monitoring gauge clusters are designed to provide a very wide measurable gradient with
regard to surface and groundwater levels anticipated to occur throughout the Site. Should
either of the established wetland communities fail to meet the hydrologic success criteria
outlined in the following sections, a comparative analysis of the hydrologic data from the
restoration and/or creation area and the appropriate reference area will be performed to
determine whether the data are statistically different. Success will be achieved if one of the
following criteria are met and the planted vegetation is successful. If it is determined that
based on the following criteria the site is not successful, NCDOT will consult with the resource
agencies that contributed to the development of this plan before taking any remedial
action.
4.1.2.1 Tidal Marsh
Hydrologic success criteria are based on current NMFS guidelines and the Addendum to the
Sawmill Wetland Mitigation Plan dated January 20, 1998, which was submitted to ACOE in
correspondence from NCDOT dated January 22, 1998 (Appendix B). In the tidal marsh
restoration and creation areas, success will be measured using monitoring gauge data to
determine if the tidal marsh areas are inundated or saturated within 12 inches of the ground
surface for 25 percent of the growing season. The percentage of time is measured through
consecutive days. If this criterion is not met, a comparative analysis of the hydrology data
from the restoration/creation area and the hydrology data from the RME will be performed to
determine whether they are statistically different. Success will be achieved if one of the above
criteria is met and the planted vegetation is successful. Vegetative success for the tidal
brackish marsh is outlined in section 4.2.2.1.
21
4.1.2.2 Cypress-Gum Swamp
In the forested creation area, success will be measured using monitoring gauge data to
determine if inundation or saturation within 12 inches of the ground surface occurs for at least
12.5 percent of the growing season. The percentage of time is measured through consecutive
days. The success criteria is based upon ACOE Compensatory Hardwood Mitigation and
Monitoring Guidelines and the Addendum to the Sawmill Wetland Mitigation Plan dated
January 20, 1998, which was submitted to ACOE in correspondence from NCDOT dated
January 22, 1998 (Appendix B).
4.2 Vegetation
Restoration and monitoring procedures for vegetation are designed in accordance with
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) guidelines enumerated in Mitigation Site Type (MiST)
documentation (EPA 1990) and ACOE Compensatory Hardwood Mitigation and Monitoring
Guidelines. A general discussion of the monitoring methodology is provided.
4.2.1 Monitoring
After planting has been completed, an initial evaluation will be performed to verify planting
methods and to determine initial species composition and density. Permanent photographic
stations will be established at selected vantage points to provide visual documentation of
vegetative development over time.
During the first year, beginning approximately 4 to 6 weeks after planting, the Site will receive
cursory visual evaluations on a periodic basis to ascertain the extent of mortality of planted
individuals. Subsequently, annual quantitative vegetation monitoring will be performed
between August 1 and November 30 at the end of each growing season until vegetation
success criteria are achieved.
4.2.1.1 Tidal Marsh
Quantitative tidal marsh vegetation monitoring will be accomplished in accordance with the
draft guidelines for "Site Monitoring Surveys for Emergent Marsh Vegetation" as established
by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). The monitoring procedure in the tidal marsh
creation/restoration area will utilize randomly distributed, one-meter square plots. NCDOT will
use a random number generator to determine the plot locations. The plots will be located with
GPS, and vegetation coverage will be measured in each plot. Total vegetative coverage will
be expressed as percent coverage. Any natural recruitment into the plots will also be
documented.
22
4.2.1.2 Tidal Cypress-Gum Swamp
Monitoring of the tidal cypress-gum swamp will be in accordance with ACOE Hardwood
Monitoring Protocol and the Addendum to the Sawmill Wetland Mitigation Plan dated January
20, 1998, which was submitted to ACOE in correspondence from NCDOT dated January 22,
1998 (Appendix B). Vegetation monitoring will be conducted by establishing two 0.05-acre
plots in order to assess survival of planted vegetation. These plots will be located with GPS.
Baseline data within the plots will be recorded after planting to determine initial species
composition and density. Additional data collected within these plots may include descriptions
of naturally occurring (i.e. unplanted) wetland species.
4.2.2 Success Criteria
Success criteria have been established in accordance with ACOE Hardwood Monitoring
Protocol, NMFS Guidelines, and the Addendum to the Sawmill Wetland Mitigation Plan dated
January 20, 1998, which was submitted to ACOE in correspondence from NCDOT dated
January 22, 1998 (Appendix B). The success criteria serve to verify that the mitigation areas
support vegetation necessary for a jurisdictional determination. Additional success criteria are
dependent upon the density and growth characteristics of the planted species.
4.2.2.1 Tidal Marsh
The vegetative marsh success will be determined in accordance with the NMFS Guidelines and
the Addendum to the Sawmill Wetland Mitigation Plan dated January 20, 1998, which was
submitted to ACOE in correspondence from NCDOT dated January 22, 1998 (Appendix B).
The Addendum indicates that 80 percent cover is required; however, current NMFS criteria
call for 75 percent cover. Mr. Ron Sechler of NMFS also recommended the following NMFS
Guidelines pertaining monitoring and success criteria be used in the tidal marsh mitigation in
correspondence dated July 18, 2000. The brackish tidal marsh vegetative component of the
mitigation site will be deemed successful if the following criteria are met at the end of the five-
year monitoring period:
• The average of all plots should have a 75 percent vegetative cover consisting of
wetland herbaceous species, not including any invasive or noxious species.
• A minimum of 70 percent of the plots will contain targeted (planted) wetland
species.
4.2.2.2 Tidal Cypress-Gum Swamp
Success criteria within the tidal cypress-gum swamp creation area are in accordance with
ACOE Hardwood Monitoring Protocol and the Addendum to the Sawmill Wetland Mitigation
Plan dated January 20, 1998, which was submitted to ACOE in correspondence from NCDOT
dated January 22, 1998 (Appendix B). Specifically, for the tidal cypress-gum swamp, a
minimum tree density of 320 stems/acre must be surviving three years after initial planting.
23
The required survival criterion will decrease by 10 percent per year after the third year of
vegetation monitoring (i.e. for an expected 290 stems/acre for year 4 and 260 stems/acre for
year 5).
4.3 Report Submittal
An "as built" report will be prepared after completion of planting and will includes a plan view
of the Site, final elevations, photographs, monitoring gauge locations, vegetation monitoring
quadrant locations, and a description of initial plantings by quadrant. A discussion of the
planting design including species planted, species densities, and number of stems planted will
be included. The report will be provided within 90 days of completion of planting and
monitoring gauge installation.
Mitigation status reports will be submitted annually to appropriate permitting agencies
following each monitoring assessment. Submitted reports will include: sample plot data,
monitoring gauge data, and a discussion of site conditions, problems, and proposed solutions.
The duration of wetland hydrology during the growing season will also be calculated at each
monitoring gauge location. Mortality and density of planted stock will be reported.
4.4 Contingency
In the event that vegetation or hydrology success criteria are not fulfilled, a mechanism for
contingency will be implemented. For the vegetation component, additional planting and
extended monitoring periods will be implemented if the success criteria are not successfully
met.
Hydrological contingency will require consultation with the natural resource agencies including,
but not limited to, the Division of Coastal Management, the Corps of Engineers, and the
Division of Water Quality. If hydrologic success criteria are not met during the five-year
monitoring period, remedial actions will be evaluated which may include re-evaluation of the
hydrologic success criteria as they relate to the reference marsh, marsh elevations, and overall
site feasibility. Hydrologic and vegetation data from the reference area will play a role in the
determination of overall success if the required success criteria are not met.
5.0 DISPENSATION OF PROPERTY
NCDOT will maintain ownership of the property until all mitigation activities are completed and
the Site is determined to be successful. Although no plan for dispensation of the Sawmill
Mitigation Site has been developed, NCDOT will deed the property to a resource agency (public
or private) acceptable to the appropriate regulatory agencies. Covenants and/or restrictions
on the deed will be included that will ensure adequate management and protection of the site
in perpetuity.
24
6.0 MITIGATION VALUE
6.1 Pre-Mitigation Wetland Functions
The 4.07 ac 0.65 ha) Site currently contains approximately 0.97 ac (0.39 ha) of jurisdictional
wetlands, 0.72 ac (0.29 ha) of which occurs as secondary growth shrub assemblage on fill
material in an historic brackish marsh setting. The remaining 3.10 ac (1.26 ha) is comprised
of non-jurisdictional shrub assemblage and maintained land. Under existing land use, the
wetlands on fill material perform minimal functions. The shrub wetland occurs on low
elevational portions of compacted fill material. This wetland provides negligible value in terms
of hydrodynamics (dynamic and long-term surface water storage, energy dissipation,
subsurface water storage, and moderation of groundwater flow). The low energy level of the
system reduces opportunity for organic carbon export and limits on-site biogeochemical
cycling.
The floral and faunal assemblages characteristic of the brackish tidal marsh landscape setting
have been replaced on Site with successional, disturbance-adapted, and invasive species. On-
site wetland systems are unavailable to many mobile fauna because of development and the
local roadway system.
6.2 Post-Mitigation Wetland Functions
Wetland mitigation plans have been designed to restore, create, and preserve on-site wetland
features and functions. After implementation, the 4.07 ac (1.65 ha)-Sawmill Site is expected
to support approximately 0.53 ac (0.21 ha) of created/restored brackish tidal marsh wetlands
and 0.25 ac (0.10 ha) of preserved brackish tidal marsh wetlands. Successful implementation
of tidal cypress-gum swamp creation will result in approximately 2.40 ac (0.97 ha) of forested
wetlands. The remaining 0.89 ac (0.36 ha) will consist of non-jurisdictional upland buffer.
Projected performance of wetland functions on the mitigation site is inferred from conditions
expected 5 + years after mitigation activities are completed. This assessment assumes that
restoration plans are implemented and that the wetland is protected from human-induced
disturbances in perpetuity. These assumptions are valid if the site is deeded or donated to a
conservation organization (North Carolina Division of Forest Resources, North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission, or private organization) that will manage the site after wetland
restoration success is achieved.
6.2.1 Tidal Marsh
Proposed alterations are expected to result in near-surface and above-surface hydrodynamics
throughout the brackish tidal marsh creation/restoration areas. The proposed grading plan
depicted in Figure 11 shows the existing elevations within the on-site RME and the proposed
elevations within the creation/restoration areas. The establishment of emergent vegetation
25
along the shoreline will provide for dissipation of local wave energy. The transformation of
coastal shrub assemblage to irregularly-flooded brackish marsh wetlands will increase
biochemical functions such as biological fixing of carbon, export of organic sediments to the
estuary, retention of particulate matter, and nutrient cycling. The restoration of an irregularly-
flooded marsh adjacent to Scott's Creek will increase the capacity of area wetlands to support
characteristic floral and faunal communities, and will enhance and protect water quality. The
location of this marsh adjacent to the open water of Scott's Creek will provide a natural buffer
between upland runoff and the Scott's Creek and Neuse River estuary.
Biotic functions potentially restored and generated in the complex include maintenance of
habitat for certain aquatic and semi-aquatic wildlife guilds, as well as for avian species that
nest in marsh environments. These estuarine-wetland interactions are considerably degraded
within the Site due to the presence of fill material. An increase in area of marsh along this
shoreline due to restoration and creation will provide more opportunities for aquatic nursery
areas than are presently available.
6.2.2 Tidal Cypress-Gum Swamp
Proposed alterations are expected to result in near-surface and above-surface hydrodynamics
throughout the tidal cypress-gum swamp (Figure 11). The transformation of upland, secondary
growth, shrub assemblage to tidal swamp forest will provide the Scott's Creek wetland
corridor with increased species and structural diversity. It will also provide an expanded area
for biogeochemical functions such as biological fixing of carbon, export of organic sediments
to the estuary, retention of particulate matter, removal of elements and compounds, and
nutrient cycling. The location of the tidal cypress-gum swamp adjacent to Howell Road will
provide the opportunity for reception of roadway runoff prior to interception with open waters
of Scott's Creek or the Neuse River, and maximize such wetland functions as
sediment/toxicant retention and floodflow alteration. Biotic functions potentially provided by
the swamp forest include maintenance of habitat for certain aquatic and semi-aquatic wildlife
guilds, as well as for avian species that nest in swamp forest vegetation.
6.3 Mitigation Value
The planned mitigation site has numerous values related to improving wetland importance and
function in the region. The proposed mitigation on-site is justified by the following factors:
(1) the strategic location of proposed wetland mitigation adjacent to open water within the
degraded Neuse River system; (2) on-site, in-kind nature of the wetland mitigation in a
landscape position designed to intercept, moderate, and treat concentrated roadway runoff
prior to its entry into the open water system; (3) the utilization in concert of preservation,
restoration, and creation of wetlands that complement each other and maximize both the land
area available and the probability of success; and (4) the high likelihood of successful marsh
mitigation providing targeted wetland functions within a relatively brief period after
26
implementation. The following is a summary of the proposed mitigation type and relative acres
on-site:
Mitigation Type Acres On-Site
Brackish Tidal Marsh Restoration 0.20 ac
Brackish Tidal Marsh Creation 0.33 ac
Brackish Tidal Marsh Preservation 0.25 ac
Tidal Cypress-Gum Swamp Creation 2.40 ac
A 0.89 ac (0.36 ha) upland buffer will be established around the landward portions of the
mitigation site.
7.0 PERMITS
The restoration and conversion of existing wetlands proposed by this mitigation plan require
ACOE, DCM, and DWQ approval. Existing permits pertaining to this project include the
following: ACOE Section 404 Permit (Action ID No. 199401568 and State 81-95), CAMA
Major Development Permit No. 81-95, and DWQ Section 401 Water Quality Certification. A
request to modify these existing permits was prepared by NCDOT and submitted to DCM on
November 17, 2000. NCDOT formally requested the following: (1) soil monitoring be
excluded from the monitoring requirements, (2) methodology and success criteria outlined in
the Addendum to the Sawmill Wetland Mitigation Plan be incorporated into the final
authorizations and, (3.) an extension of the permit expiration date to December 2004. Items
(1) and (2) shown above were verbally agreed to by Mike Bell (ACOE), Kelly Williams (DCM),
and John Hennessy (DWQ) on August 3, 2000. This project is in keeping with the intent and
mandate of state and federal programs to provide for net gain in functions and benefits derived
from proposed actions.
8.0 SUMMARY
NCDOT proposes to establish the Sawmill Mitigation Site as compensatory wetland mitigation
for the loss of tidal brackish marsh complex due to transportation improvement projects
planned for the vicinity of the Neuse River/Trent River confluence. The approximately 4.07
ac (1.65 ha) Site is located in Craven County, on Scott's Creek, approximately 1.0 mile (1.6
km) south of the city of New Bern. Wetlands mitigation at the Site includes a combination of
restoration, creation, and preservation and will greatly increase the area of fringing tidal
brackish marsh and tidal cypress-gum swamp adjacent to this portion of the south shore of the
Neuse River.
Recommendations for creation/restoration of tidal brackish marsh at the Site include: (1)
removal of fill material, and grading the Site to levels similar to that found in the on-site
27
brackish tidal marsh preservation area (RME) to promote the restoration of wetland hydrology;
and (2) planting of desirable marsh species to maximize marsh wetland functions.
" Recommendations for creation of tidal cypress-gum swamp at the Site include: (1) removal
of fill material and grading the Site to levels similar to that found in adjacent tidal swamp
forests and the RFE to promote the restoration of wetland hydrology; and (2) planting of
desirable tidal swamp tree species to maximize wetland functions.
This mitigation plan provides for restoration of approximately 0.20 ac (0.08 ha) of tidal
brackish marsh, creation of approximately 0.33 ac (0.13 ha) of tidal brackish marsh, and
preservation of approximately 0.25 ac (0.10 ha) of tidal brackish marsh. This mitigation plan
proposes creating approximately 2.40 ac (0.97 ha) of tidal cypress-gum swamp. An upland
buffer comprising 0.89 ac (0.36 ha) will also be incorporated around the landward portions of
the mitigation site.
A monitoring plan with established success criteria is proposed for evaluating the mitigation
in terms of wetland restoration and creation. After success criteria are fulfilled, NCDOT will
continue to manage the Site in perpetuity, or dispense the Site to an appropriate management
entity. Management plans may include monitoring for the general health of the restored
vegetation communities. Garbage dumping and other disturbances will be regulated. The
Sawmill Wetland Mitigation Site will provide for the establishment of much-needed shoreline
wetlands adjacent to Scott's Creek while at the same time compensating for unavoidable
wetland impacts associated with transportation improvement projects near the Neuse
River/Trent River confluence.
28
w
9.0 REFERENCES
Bishir C.W. and M.T. Southern. 1996. A Guide to the Historic Architecture of Eastern North
Carolina. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 483 pp.
Britton, N. L. and H. A. Brown. 1913. An Illustrated Flora of the Northern United States and
Canada. 1970 Dover Reprint. Dover Publications, Inc., NY. 2052 pp.
Broome, S.W., E.D. Seneca, and W.W. Woodhouse, Jr. 1981. Planting Marsh Grasses for
Erosion Control. UNC Sea Grant Publication 81-09. 11 pp.
Broome, S.W. 1990. "Creation and restoration of tidal wetlands of the southeastern United
States", pp. 37-66 In Wetland Creation and Restoration: the Status of the Science,
edited by J.A. Kusler and M.E. Kentula, Island Press, Washington, DC.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and
Deepwater Habitats of the United States. FWS/OBS-79/31. Fish and Wildlife
Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC. 103 pp.
Department of the Army (DOA). 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual.
Technical Report Y-87-1, Waterways Experiment Station, COE, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
92 pp.
Department of the Army (DOA). 1993. Installing Monitoring Wells and Piezometers in
Wetlands Corps of Engineers (COE). WRP Technical Note HY-IA-3.1, August 1993,
Waterways Experiment Station, COE, Vicksburg, Mississippi. 14 pp.
Division of Environmental Management (DEM). 1995. Guidance for Rating the Values of
Wetlands in North Carolina: Fourth Version. North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Water Quality Section. 57 pp.
Division of Environmental Management (DEM). 1993. Classifications and Water Quality
Standards Assigned to The Waters of the Neuse River Basin. North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources.
29
r
Division of Environmental Management (DEM). 1992. Basinwide Assessment Report: Neuse
River Basin. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources,
Water Quality Section.
Division of Environmental Management (DEM). 1991. Biological Assessment of Water Quality
in North Carolina Streams: Benthic Macroinvertebrate Data Base and Long Term
Changes in Water Quality, 1983-1990. North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources.
Division of Environmental Management (DEM). 1989. Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient
Network (BMAN) Water Quality Review 1983-1988. Water Quality Technical Reports.
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1990. Mitigation Site Type Classification (MIST).
A methodology to classify pre-project mitigation sites and develop performance
standards for construction and restoration of forested wetlands. EPA Workshop,
August 13-15, 1989. EPA Region IV and Hardwood Research Cooperative, North
Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC.
Environmental Services, Inc. (ESI). 1996. Tidal Marsh Mitigation Potential, Preliminary
Ecological Assessment and Hazardous Materials Review: Recycling Center Site, Saw
Mill Site, Lengyel Site. Prepared for North Carolina Department of Transportation.
Fish, F.F. 1968. A Catalog of the Inland Fishing Waters in North Carolina. North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission, Division of Inland Fisheries. 312 pp.
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). 1993. West Indian Manatee: Trichechus manatus [Linnaeus].
In: Endangered and Threatened Species of the Southeastern United States (The Red
Book). U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Southeastern Region,
Atlanta, GA. 6 pp.
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). 1991. Ecology of a Nontidal Brackish Marsh in Coastal North
Carolina. M.M. Brinson, ed. U.S. Department of the Interior. National Wetlands
Research Center Open File Report 91-03. 398 pp.
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). 1987. Habitat Management Guidelines for the Bald Eagle in
the Southeast Region. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 8 pp.
Godfrey, R. K. and J. W. Wooten. 1981. Aquatic and Wetland Plants of Southeastern United
States. Dicotyledons. The University of Georgia Press, Athens, GA. 933 pp.

30

Hamel, P.B. 1992. Land Manager's Guide to the Birds of the South. The Nature Conservancy,
Southeastern Region, Chapel Hill, NC. 437 pp.
Hammer. D.A. 1992. Creating Freshwater Wetlands. Lewis Publishers, Inc., Chelsea, MN.
298 pp.
Leonard, S. W. 1985. Status report on Aeschynomene virginica in North Carolina.
Unpublished report to the Nature Conservancy, Boston, MA. 6+ pp.
Martof, B.S., W.M. Palmer, J.R. Bailey, and J.R. Harrison, III. 1980. Amphibians and Reptiles
of the Carolinas and Virginia. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North
Carolina. 264 pp.
Menhinick, E.F. 1991. The Freshwater Fishes of North Carolina. The Delmar Company,
Charlotte, NC for North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, Raleigh, NC.
227 pp.
N.C. Geological Survey (NCGS). 1985. Geologic Map of North Carolina. Department of
Natural Resources and Community Development, Division of Land Resources.
1:500,000-scale.
Palmer W.M. and A.L. Braswell. 1995. Reptiles of North Carolina. University of North
Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 412 pp.
Potter, E.F., J.F. Parnell, and R.P. Teulings. 1980. Birds of the Carolinas. The University of
North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. 408 pp.
Powell, W.S. 1968. The North Carolina Gazetteer: a Dictionary of Tar Heel Places. The
University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 561 pp.
Radford, A. E., Ahles, H. E. and C.R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the Vascular Flora of the
Carolinas. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill N.C. 1168 pp.
Rohde, F.C., R.G. Arndt, D.G. Lindquist, and J.F. Parnell. 1994. Freshwater Fishes of the
Carolinas, Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel
Hill, NC. 222 pp.
31
Stout, J.P. 1984. The Ecology of Irregularly Flooded Salt Marshes of the Northeastern Gulf
of Mexico: a Community Profile. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife
- Service, Biological Report 85(7.1). 98 pp.
Stuckey, J.S. and S.G. Conrad 1958. Explanatory text for Geologic map of North Carolina.
North Carolina Department of Conservation and Development. Bulletin No. 71. Scale
1:500,000.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1989. Soil Survey of Craven County, North Carolina,
USDA Soil Conservation Service. 157 pp.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1991. Hydric Soils of the United States. In
cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils, USDA Soil
Conservation Service.
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 1974. Hydrologic Unit Map, State of North Carolina.
Department of the Interior, in cooperation with the U.S. Water Resources Council.
Webster, W.D., J.F. Parnell, and W.C. Biggs. 1985. Mammals of the Carolinas, Virginia, and
Maryland. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. 255 pp.
Wharton, C.H., W.M. Kitchens, E.C. Pendleton, and T.W. Sipe. 1982. The Ecology of
Bottomland Hardwood Swamps of the Southeast: A Community Profile. FWS/OBS-
81 /37. 133 pp.
Wiegert, R.G. and B.J. Freeman. 1990. Tidal Salt Marshes of the Southeast Atlantic Coast:
a Community Profile. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service,
Biological Report 85(7.29). 70 pp.
32
9
s
r
C
cc
W
Site Location Figure: 1
Environmental Sawmill Site Mitigation Plan
Services, Inc. Craven County, North Carolina Project: ER96021.28
B-2531-WM Date: Nov 2000
c
m
L
7
t
a
W
W
i
m
00
N
*N
O
U7
W
00
N
/ / N N o
O O
O O
I N
W
/ N p
Z
0 6
9 lL 0_ O
(7
3
/ 2?,A a' s
C13
m
3 ? m
__11 4 O U (>)
t
Ft + t'
co Q)
6-6
I4 r, fMOnaF?4, ?O Q 0
C17 MW
41
` d ` ?? ?+ l f w `'` l1 1.80 ?
i `i ? ? (' J!? ? ? i \? .a t C"`.-.-? , y +' ?sl;\,/ 1.50...,,,,,x' ?` .?? ' , •-'"."` ? ?? /` ?--"?"'_."-,._.?` ? ? C
._?_.L .C?. a`I i ( I ii l ( ` 1' ??" --?-.». ti ,\ YJ \?•.... / ! , r .- + .. L
Gam'
r J I? -? 1 1
40 A
SO01tg °? Fr
l - ----' MITIGATION SITE BOUNDARY
P
GRAPHIC SCALE q
(N IETERS) CONTOUR INTERVAL - 0.3 m (1.0 ft)
10 0 1P Ao A10 40 5,0 ---------- SCOTT'S CREEK
i
+
+
J

N
W
'J
7
LU
`G
C O
O
N
O
N
O
O O
? O
m ?
w

Environmental
Services, Inc.
1961 Aerial Photograph
Sawmill Site Mitigation Plan
Craven County, North Carolina
B-2531-WM
Figure: 3
Project: ER96021.28
Date: Nov 2000

(D
N
m
W
O
a
cD

O O
C
N
N
O
W
O O
3 °
m ?
m m
N

Environmental
Services, Inc.
1970 Aerial Photograph
Sawmill Site Mitigation Plan
Craven County, North Carolina
B-2531-WM
Figure: 4
Project: ER96021.28
Date: Nov 2000
C-00
'D
(D
N
(D
O
W
C
c
V
C N
O
O
O
K A
(D O
? O
N T
(D
tD
Q
Environmental
Services, Inc.
1989 Aerial Photograph
Sawmill Site Mitigation Plan
Craven County, North Carolina
B-2531-W M
Figure: 5
Project: ER96021.28
Date: Nov 2000

h4

A
q

Environmental
Services, Inc.
1996 Aerial Photograph
Sawmill Site Mitigation Plan
Craven County, North Carolina
B-2531-W M
Figure: 6
Project: ER9602128
Date: Nov 2000
C-D
N
Existing Roads 4
Railroad m
0 250 500 Feet C/)
U7 50 00 Meters
?CO
W
Ccc:
U cd
O
QU
Bypass
?a
Qo
0
AD`; SY
YVmH
Site
Existing Hardened Structures Figure: 7
Environmental Sawmill Site Mitigation Plan
Services, Inc. Craven County, North Carolina Project: ER96021.28
B-2531-WM
Date: Nov 2000
W

N

SOI IS Figure: 8
Environmental Sawmill Site Mitigation Plan
Services, Inc. Craven County, North Carolina Project: ER96021.28
1* B-2531 WM Date: Nov 2000
t 1
ER96021.28/Existing_vegetation.dgn
$ f
s
SR >>6,
n N ?141,.
w
0
0
r
m
r
D D
U)
D
m n -,
Mom
o;0(A
r, C/) CO
r- > K
? cn W ?
W D
Z = z
r rn
CO
r= m
00
rn O c
r, z
a °
r- X

W W
(0
? s

\ A A
? S?
0o
W
O N O p
o
S s
p
fA

0010- 1
,\ ? ppZ Nd p?L
?,, pfd p
d0
-z
\
\
\
\
?'w \
\
mzt
00
.1o y
-i
C
C);U
mA

r'?
D
n
0
?
? Z
A
W
C

(f)
?n D

s

Environmental
Services, Inc.
Existing Vegetation
Sawmill Site Mitigation Plan
Craven County, North Carolina
8-2531-WM
Drawn By: PJS Figure: 9
Checked By: RGH Project* ER96021.02
Scale; As Shown Date: Nov 2000
0Aoj
ER96021.28/Grading_Plan.dgn

0
;7
0
\ ? g
m
I
r
l
pzm? ?
O-4 n0
n*>'
oz?m
O M0
1 m
<c
D
035
gC0?
-<zoo
r z
m?
cn O O
m;UJU
D
z <
00(n
(A 0
0 z
S
R >>6?
?. ` 601
C ?? p8Y
?'? ayy'fl
600
19
690
1

l e
l
gA
w
\
\ -o
\
o\ o
tJf \
A\
I \
I \
i
-4 ?
'
o =
c?
>
D o
z
rn
g m
CU \
o \
zz

m
m
OLO
o?<
D
00
?.
mN
(D
,. Q
CCD
I
Ri\

M Lsd?
N,?O?d O
d
Od ?

Z
Environmental
Services, Inc.
Grading Plan
Sawmill Site Mitigation Plan
Craven County, North Carolina
B-2531-WM
Drawn By= PJS Figure= 11
Checked By: RGH Project'ER96021.28
Scale= As Shown Date= Nov 2000

ER96021.28/Planting-planAgn
\
\\\\\ SR 17 \\\\ 60,?y6
?eCC\
\ w
0
;1
rn
m
cm

\ -'b
? .

I
I
I
I
I
i

I

+
+++
++++
+++++
+++++
++++++
++++++
+++++++

+++++++

+++

++
+++
++ +++

++ +++

++ +++
++ +

z ++
++
p ++ ?, ++ ++++

.. +++++
z -q -i m
++++
N O O +
++
Z N +

r- C-) K +

A N
yy
Z
-C
D
O ++

++

Q
0 is
*
z
m ;
0 U)
_ +++
y o ++++
C
D to n r m +++++
CD m g +++++
s o 6 rn a) ++++++
+++++
?`
M o rn N c ?
,
++
) z 0 O ,
++
` Q N +
!A A b M O M

CD o co
-
(n am
3
O V --4 0-0
0 R C-) o &D ;a
J
b
C
i,,w Q
C
')
N O

v
rn ? m
o ;0
N =r O z K< n
z mm \
d p .
.
o rn
N Un CTi
to
CA O

O
? S
p
0
0
O
0
O Iv ?
0 O
v O
O

O ?
Environmental
Servicee, Inc.
T
CO
C
n
m
M
\
\
\
\
\
\
1-Nd??d
I?'002 oNd ?`
0
d
pd

Planting Plan
Sawmill Site Mitigation Plan
Craven County, North Carolina
B-2531-WM
Drawn By: PJS Figure: 12
Checked By: RGH Project:ER96021.28
Scale: As Shown Date.' Nov 2000
APPENDIX A
SALINITY READINGS FOR THE NEUSE RIVER AT THE US 17 BRIDGE, NEW BERN
(DECEMBER 1990 - OCTOBER 1996)
Salinity readings for the Neuse River at the US 17 bridge range from fresh water [0.0 parts per
thousand (ppt)] to a high of 21.0 ppt measured at a depth of 9 feet. Higher salinity readings
are going to be found at greater depths in this type of estuarine system (salt-wedge system).
The Sawmill Mitigation Site will be influenced predominantly by top portion of the water
column, and salinities will likely range from 0.0 ppt to 5.0 ppt. Occasionally, the salinity may
be higher than 5.0 ppt during periods of low freshwater inflow from the Neuse River.
i
J8570000 NEU +25A. 02092162 STOREY System
35 06: 42.0 077:01 37:0:: 1.
NEUSE IUVEkA'1'W HW1G I7 ATNEW BERN NC
3049 NORTH CA801INA ' E RAVEN
SOUTHEAST'.' i ...030410.:
NEUSE RIVER BASI1? ::
21NCO-M( 030.20204011'-;0.004.410 ON ITYPA/AMBNT/FISH/ESTURY
IIEATH' 999.
MILES

DATE TIME .DES.' :. > SALINITY
FROM OF
TO DAY N'F.DT : . PPTH
90/12/13 1135 . -9
- 91i04104 1150 .: ; :. 0. 0.0
91/Q4/091.1:50
91104/09 11`50 : . 6 _0.0:

92165/131125` 0 03
91J65113'? 1.12S :.: 3 :. .0.5
. 91/0`511Y-1125' 6: `0.5
91%05/13 125, _
8 - :3.5
91/06/06 1208.
91/06M6.1:208 X0.0
91%06705 `t 208 . . _6 : .105
91/0"61208.` .
9 10.5
91106/0b. 71208 ,.
:;11 is i 0:5
91'/07-116 0935 . 0:. i :: 4.0
9110:7116 0935..., :3 ,. 4.5
91/07116 0935 :'; 6 9:4
91/07116 005' ... 13 ; .:. 1.3..0
91708/0& 1.215 .: 0 :fl

91/08108:1115 6.: 0..0
91/08/08 ills . 12.0
91i091181140 0
91/09.118 1140
91/0911$'1140: :..6
3.5
91110.109 109,1445 -0.0
9I/10%091445 .. 3. .. _ 0..0
9.1110709 1445, ; 6 : " ,, ..4.0
91/101091445: 4 7.0
9'l/11/13 1150 0 .6.0
91/11113-.11S0 3 6.0
...
91/11/13 1150 .:.6 :.:. : .
7.0
91/11113 1150 9 9.0
91/12110.12.14 8.0
91112/10 2210, .. 3. .; $.0
9111.2[10 1210 6: .. :. 10:0
91172)10 12.16 ' 9 : 12.0
92101/09 12'1,4. . 6 .0.0
92101%09121,5 3. 0.0

i
92 01/09 , 121:.5...:a ' . :
..0 11091215
92!0 .
I.2.S
92/02/11 1135
42/02/11 1135 . '3 .1. 2.0
92102/11 11.35 9A
92mh I'1135 :9.0
92103110 1130..,, 0. 0.1
92103/101130
92/03110 1'130. 0.1
92103/10.4130
:: 9: 1 .: 6.0
_
92/04/071145'
92/0407 1145 .' 3 0.0
92/04107 11:45'. : G t}.3
92/04/07:1145. _. 8. 4.0
92!04718 1300.:: 0. i :.._ . 1.0
92/03118 1300..`. 3 1.5
92105118 1300 6 J: .5.0
9.2/05M:1306'.- .. 9..: ::. 7.4
91166110 115 .. 0 _ 'c1.0
.92/06110 1135 .> 3 1:0
02/06110 1135 '.:; :6 ;..?. 1.5
02/06/}0 11,35 5.0
92107!09 1225
9,'07109.1225 > " :3 .::: '.:0,0
92107/0911225,..'.. - :°..: 0:0
0.o
3.0
02/08106 1050 3. 3.0
y2/o$/66 loso . .
s. 1o:ti
92!08/Oc? 1050 8°! ; ...:15.0
92/09110 I jT5 . " 4 j 1.0
92/g9ao 1115 1.0
92/09/10.1115 5 2.0
92/09/101115 75
92/10/12 1.140. ...0 .
:... 0.5
140:
92/ 10/ 12 1 ..
3 . 1.U
.
.92/10112 1140 - 6 ! 7.0
92/10112 1.140: J' = 7.5
:
92/11105 1220-: 4.:- '-4.0
92/11/051220' 3.... 410
9211.1105 12'20 6:j 4.0
92/11!05.1220 6.5
1 d 20:
92/12/09 ' 0.0
.
92/12109 1;120. ...'3 , 0.0
.
92/12/09 .1120.' . 6;:.. 1.0
92/]2109 T120; 9i 5.0
93101114 115.5.. 4 0.0
93101/.14 1;155 ` .:.3i .. 0.0
93101%14 1155 6. 0.0
93101/14 1 i55 y' 0.0
93Yo2/09 `113.5 U 0.0
93/02/091135- . 3 0.0
93/021091135 6 0.0
9310.2109 1135 9 0.0
93/03/09 1125 . G. 0.0
93/03/09 1125 3.: 0.0
93103/091125- 6 0.0
93103/09 1125 0.0
9310411.5 1210 0 0..0
93/04-115 1210 ' 3 .
0.0
r
210.
93/04%15,1 p.0
.
93/04/151210 9 ;. 0.0
93/05/121140 0.
93105/32' 114.0.. 3 , .. .. .:4.Q
93105/1Z..1140^ 0.0
` 93/05/32 1.ri _ 8 't : >: 00
93106143 1140 (1.0
93106108: 1140. 3 0.0
93/06108: 1140 b ::.. : OR
93106/,08 1140 8:: - 0:0
93/07122 0945 .. 4..; T-0
93/07112 0945
93/071.12 0945 :_ 5 8 0
93/0 '112.0945
93/081,17
1230 . 0 4.5
_
93/09ilt ADO 3 _ .. .: 4.5
931(16;17 1230 ..6.:;:: 7.0
9310017 1234 9 . ::' . .. 11.0
93109108 1245 . : 0. ? .; .: 5.0
93I09/a81245 I'T 7:0
93/09108 1'24s i 1:5
93/o9Lo8' 124 . - 9 l la
93f10/18 1200. .: 0.; .. 6.5
8.0
93/10//8. 1200 . '6 :. 10.0
93110118: 1200:° : 9 11.5
93/11/69: 1110. 0 : . _
' 7.0
93111/0' 5110:: .3 i . : 7..0
03111/00'1110 6:: 1 to
9311.1/00. 1i 14 .. 9.
94/02/0:8. 0945 0.0 .
94/02/08 6045.. • 3;: 0;0
94/02708.0945 6' - . - 10.5
94102/08 0945 10.5
94103/151055 01. ' 0.0
94/03115 1Us5' ..3 .
0:0
94/03/151055 G 0:0
9410345 1055 0.0
.0,
94104112 1120.', 0.0
.
94/0.611'2 1-1201:.- 3;: , ... 0.0
94704/.121120 6 0.0
94/04112 1120` -: 8:, 0.0
0'
947051181'125 0.5
.
94105718' 1125' 0.5
94105118:11.25 1.0
94105/18 1.125: "9; 3.0
94/06)081:120:.:.0 " 1.0
94/06/08 124: ..: 1.0
94106/08 1126". 6 1 s
.94106108 1120. : 8 . 2.0
94/01112 1300 .. 0: 4 0
.94/071121300.::.3 _ 6.0
9410742 1300; :: . 14.5.
94/Q7/1'2.1300 9. 15.5
:' 0
94108/101320 8.0
.
94/08/101324 3. 10.0
94/08110 1320` 6. : 20.0
94/OVIG 1320 ` 9 Mo
94/09101 i 7.5
94/09141 1125 9.0
6
504109101 11251 7.0
.
94110/27 1105 . 6 15.5
9411.0127.1105.: 1 15.5
941.1047.1-105 .6
1?.0
94/10/27 1105= 9 21.0 fJ
9411015 1234.... '. 8•U
g4/1.1/15 1230 3 i...: 13:0
94/11115 1234:: 16.0
94/11/15 1230 : 9 is 16.0
94/12/08 1215 .. '0 : i 100
94/12/08 1213, . 3 10.0
94112!08
94112/08.3215...9 13:0
94/12/08 12IS ' _ 12 .; _ 13.5

95101/101210, 0. 1.5

95101/1,0.1210 3•; 60
95/01/1.01210:. 6: 12.5
9510.1/10 12I0 .. 0; : 12.5
95102/20 1130 0,0
95/42120 1.130. .:.3 .:: 0.0
95/02/201130::::6:;;:._ I:S
95/02/20 1130 .. 9 1 : _ 4.0
95/03/13 11S©.<:
95/03/13 1150..: 0:0
95/03113 1150 6, .- . _ ; '..: 0.0
95,16,1113 1150 9 `: 0.0
5. .:0: '
95/04104 10 0.0
2
95!041041025 G.0
95/04/04 1025. d . 0.0
951051031040. 0 0.5
95105/03 1040
95105/03:10,40 ; :6 0.5
05/05/03 1040.

95147/11 1430. 0 0.0
95109/06: 1300. .0 ; 1.5
95/69%06 1300:: 3 ..:. t .5
95/09/06: 1300 .:. 61 7.5
95/091061300- 9 9.5
"
95/i0/11 1310 .:.0, 3.0
951i0111 1310' : 3 3:0
951:10111 1310 6:.: .9-0
95210/11 1310.. 9 10.5
95/10731} 1040. T. 0.0
1200_:.. 0.
95/11113 0.0
,
95/111131200 .9. 1.5
95/12113 1145. 0.2
96101.111 I325
96102/131215 0A
96102/13 1215... 0.0
96/02113.1215:
9610243 121$ :9 6.5
96/07/02 ;0920 b 1.2
1
3
96/07/02'0920 I3 .
96107/02.0920.. 16 2.4
9610710210920 .18 4.8
96/07131 1016 0 0.7
96/07/311016. 3 0.7
9610.7/311016 ,.6 2.9
96/07/31 1016' . 7: 10.1
4
9610812711'12: 03`
96/08127.1112 3: 0 8
96/087271112 d 2•b
96/08/27 1112: 8 . 3.7
96/10129 1:215 0 > - 0.1
p.,}
96/10129 1215 3 0.1
96/10/29 1215 6
96/10329121s 9. 5.d
ErTTER p,%j L CODE,140U STATION', Olt "AL.L"
NEXT STATION-..-* ENTER AG14C3! CODE. ,SAME', OR "END"
SAME j .:> .:.
En ER STA'fIONNIJMBER, :"FWT , OR NEXT'
0209256056.1 `-::..?' i...:.:.
GO'F STATTON 21NC0lWQ 18770000 STORET System
78770000 NE>aJ12SA' 03041.1026 0209:56050
35 04 30.0. 077` 0' ,05.O ' .i;
MU NT R'. ABOVE REEDY BR NR RIMMS
37049 NORTH CAROLINA `CRAVEN
SOUTHEAST : i 030410
NEUSE
21NCO1WQ;03020204015 0002.950 ON ITYPA/AbiBNT/8STURY/SOLIDS
DEP7I
INDEX 4
MILES :.< : .
O S ON SR1214.0.8>vfI.TO
LOCAbON:FROMJC UW-& SR1214,SW OF NEW BERN, C
ICT;WITH-SIt:1213. T-URN W $r TRAVEL 0.5MI TO TRENT R MHB..GO TO REAR OF' PK
LAUNCH BOAT.& GO:TQ..NE SIDE OF ISL. LOCATED ON TRENT R T Q DEFINE QUAL.}T'y
OP:WATER LEAVING; SUB=BASIPI 030411. SAMPLE P. MID DFPTH '6 MIDPOINT BY OWAR
ACTIVATION DATE` 7,34 01:
627 SAMPL:E(5)
$976.O.B:SERVATION(S). .
86 ;P:ARp?METER(S7' '.
PERIOD OF.-RECORD - 73111/?6 THROUGH 96112A7
STOREY System
18770000: ...:`.NEtk128A 030411026 0207256050
35.04. 30.0..077,07 05.0 '1
TRENT R ABOVE. R1:ED-i' BR NR Rl-ff IS
37049 NORTH CAROLINA CRAVI?N
SOUIf,IEAST. - 030410
NLUSE . .: :.
211vC01vVQ. 0:304204015. 0002.960 ON /TYPAlA>\4BNT/I S'IURYlSOLIDS
DEPl* `9.99
INDEX
MILES j.
00480
DATE TIME `DEPTH" SAl.JN1'TY
FROM OF
TO DAY FEB T PPTH
5
91/04/09 1110 ;0 0.0
91/04109 11.10 ;3 OA
1/04/09 1.110; : i.6 0.0
91/04/091 -'
1110*
91/04/09.1110. :9 0.0
91/05/13 1055 !:0 0.0
91/0-5/131.055 `.3 0.0
91/05113 1055 16 0.0
APPENDIX B
ADDENDUM TO THE SAWMILL WETLAND MITIGATION PLAN
STAVE OF NOPTH .&P.QLINA
DE-PARTmEN , of 71*spoRT mN
JAMES B. HUNT )R. PQ BOX 25261. RA E1GH.N.C.27611-5201
GovmNox
January 22, 1998
Mr. MichaoC:Bell
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
P.O'. Box 1000
Washington,-NC 27889-1000
Dear Mr. Bell:
Re, Lengyel and. Saw6i}1 Stu Visit
TIP, 13-253.1, Craven Comity
1 ???rlJ? L
-733.- ?2S
GC I V=0
JAN ? ,3
RE?UCair,4y g?; , _
E. NOMS TOL5oN
SECRFARY
This:letter is to address comments made, at the Pe6embarJ6, 1997 field inspection meeting in
New. Bern. The attached sheets comprise eddende,.to the Fina) I itigattion Plans for the Sawmill and
Lengyel.sites distributed in July 1997. T:he.:addtnft inciude.thp;exeavation of a tidal creek or slough on
the Lengyel.'ske at the request of the natural resource,agericies `as well as measures that will be taken to
reduce the impact ofwave action on the site.
An application for a Nationwide. 27 has bes.A.submitted io.the Corps of Engineers to permit the
.excavation of the 0.9-acre man-made wettand and the:Q '-acres.of. shrub-scrub forest wetlands on the
Ltttgyei property so that marsh wetlands..cp be restored:. Arr aces of marsh 0.017 acres in size will also
be impacted to allow for the construction of the:.tidal, creel`.- Qn.the Sawmill site, 0.8 acres of coastal
shrub wetlands will be graded for the purpose of marsh:restorad.on and creation. Other verbal comments
from the field inspection meeting are also addressed, in the,addenda.
If you have any questions regarding these 'changbs please contact Kelly Beissei or Phil Harris at
(919) 733-3.14I as soon as possible. These change's. 'are..be,ing iii prporated into the plans for site
construction this winter. A revised set of plans will be sent.ta:y6was soon as they have been completed.
Sincerely,
David C. Robinson, Ph.D., P.E.
Assistant.Ivlanager, Environmental Services
?01:
cc: Ms. Cyndi Bell, DWQ, Raleigh
Mr. Doug Huggett, DCM, Wimbeth-Ee zlk- g t
Mr. Mac Haupt, DWQ.WRP, Raleigh
Mr. David Cox, WRC, Creedmoor
Mr. Ron Sechler, NMFS, Beaufoss
Ms. Kathy Matthews, USEPA, Atlanta.
A4s. Wendy Gasteiger, FNWA, Ralci$h
Mr. Kevin Moody, USFWS, Raleigh
Mr. Ed Latham, P.E., NCIDOT, Div. '2
Mr. Dwayne Alligood, P.E., NCDOTi Div. 2
Mr. John Rouse, P.E., NCI70T, Div;-2
Mr. Randy Wise, P.E., NCDOT, Roadside Env.. .
Mr. Bandy Griffin, NCDOT, Roadside Env.
Mr. David Schuler, NCDaT, P&E
Mr. Phil Harris, P.E., NCDOT, P&E.
Ms. Alice Gordon, NODdT, P&E
Ms. Kelly Beissel, NCDOTj , P&E
Mr. Sandy Smith, ESl ;

t
8. 2531 Mitigation
For 0.78 acres of marsh impacts from the coWtuction.of the Meuse River Bridge an area of 1.56 acres of
brackish marsh restoration at the Lengyei siie.. rWi,l be 6sed4is-mitigation.
For impacts to naturalized shrub-scrub .2. ao) aiid.,natuialiied;ditches (0.27 ac), 1.54 acres of brackish
marsh'restoration at the Sawmill site and 2. t -.acres ofcypressgum, forest creation at the Sawmill site will
be used as-mitigation.
Since neither the Lengyei or Sawmill site :pm.v..i&, an.opportt &ty for bay forest mitigation, the
Depatrtment will propose this midiation,be done, at:atiotlier sitaiti the near future. A lvtitigation Ledger
table is aitached which shows the rpmaining.acreage at..eacl: site.
i

Addendum to the Lengyel WcdAnd 1VI'itigation Plan
January 20, 1998
Section 3.2, page 30
Hydrology Restoration
Iii additi6a.to the removal of fill material and;gradiiig.to't6-.: levation of the reference marsh, a small
tidal creek.wiil be excavated through diet site,;: •The deta'ils.af this.crcek are shown in the design plans.
.11w purppse of the "naturalized" emek is to proyj& iacreosesi;sliversity to the site. The creek will be
.excavated to the elevations indicated in.iha design: plans as $dvised by the National Marine Fisheries
Service.
Section 3.4, Page 32
Vegetatioa.Restorntion
The planting plan as described in the Final MitigatiomPlan will -Trot change. A figure with the planting
zones wilt be included in the revised plan. sheets:
In addition; measures will be taken to reduce ik4ifipacts-of W"e,action along the Neuse River shore of
the siteat.request of the.resour e,agencies:'Tha.:ptoseRthese measures will be to dissipate wave
energy from' the Neuse River in an gttempt to prptect. the:-sfte:.1n the early stages of vegetation
establishment. Measures being cor}sidered idcltide the,instalietioa of coir fiber logs and mats along the
Aleuse Ritter shoreline. The Depamtinent is prosenily. rovising,the detailed plan sheets to include these
protective measures. Considerations regarding these activities-have included cost, maintenance,
effectiveness, and installation proc6dures.
It has been,determined that roadway runoff f'Ilift.ftom ire GkYated roadways above the site will drop
through scuppers onto the footing. gfthe bents:., Ii.was wed ilrt•the field that this would eliminate the
concern that runoff; from the elevated loops would cause erosion problems on the site.
Section 4.1., page 33
monitoring Wells
Three moeitoring wells will be instailed in -the. mitigatio' arcs as shown in the design plans. Three wells
will be installed in the reference marsh-as well..
Section 4.1.2, page 33
Hydrologic Success
Success-will be measured using mo',nitorin well dam to demoastme that the restored marsh areas are
in4ndated. or sar.,rated within 12 Inches ofthe ground surface for 25% of the growing season. Should the
marsh restoration area fail to meet this criterion,. a comparative ?alysis of the hydrologic data from the
?resioration area and the reference niarsh,ar"will be perform60,.to, determine whether they are
sta,tistically.different. Success will be ar.)AeYed it one of the above criteria are met and the planted
,Vegetation is successful. If it is determined tli*ttased.otr the above criteria the site is not successful, the
Department will consult with the resource agencies..that -cont;A."d to the development of this plan
before taking any remedial measures.
Section 4.3.2, page 35
vegetQtion Soccess
Vegetation success criteria will be measured using t-m Ater. square plots every 6 meters along 100-foot
transects in the marsh restoration area and rcfeitnce area::: Areal coverage will be measured in each plot.
Successful restoration of marsh vegetation will be achieved tf.vegetation monitoring indicates that areal
coverage in the marsh restoration;area is 8V19. Although-the Department has objected to the use of the
80% areal coverage criterion since it is not based on. the:memured areal coverage in the reference area,
this criterion will be accepted for this.mltigationsite. ;11';:after five years, the areal coverage in the marsh
restoration area has not reached 80%, the.Department proposes a consultation with the agencies and
.comparison of the vegetation data from the testoiation and:reference areas. The Corps has insisted that
vegetation monitoring continue fqr no less than #"tve.ye4s_--.'T'he Department will monitor the vegetation
in the restoration area for five years.
Section 4.5, page 35
Contingency
.Hydrologic contingency will requ?re.consultetian witli.the Otutal resource agencies including, but not
Citnited'*'the Division of Coasta? Managomnt,- theCorps of Engineers, and the Division of Water
Quality..lf hydrologic success cciltcria are,not i*iet:during.the.fi ve year monitoring period in the marsh
.restoration area, remedial actions will be discussed w- hick !nay' include re-evaluation of the hydrologic
success criteria as they re late to the reference ttiarsh; marsh eti evations, and overall site feasibility.
Similarly; if vegetation success his not.been. established will it : the five year monitoring period in the
resoratioti area, the Corps and other Mso?cagencieswill•'be.consutted and remedial measures will be
determined and subsequently camed out. Hydra)ogic and Y40tation data from the reference area will
play a key role in the determinati n 6f success if the above'iii=ess criteria are not mot
Sectioo 52, page 37
Fost-1Vflti91ttion Wetland Fuuct ous
in addition to the functions. statedlin the Mitiga.Wn Plan, the•sdklition of the tidal creek will add diversity
to the site. in the form of a naturalized open water ohaittie[for: interior wildlife access to the marsh.
Although this feature is not a natural feature• of wetlands.in.the area or of the reference area, it is
proposed. to enhance the habitat the site will-provide for th "? fe :of the channel.
Section 6:3, page 38
Mtiga lon Value ;
Because of objections to the use of the.term'".credits" on sites without banking instruments, the Corps has
requested:a revision to the Mitigation?lan:whieh.disciessestie. value of the site in terms of acres rather
than credits. Furthermore, the Corps and other resou•;ce,a'gen?ies have recommended that EPA ratios be
used to evaluate the value of the site. , :There will be 7.Z
.acres.*f brackish marsh restoration and 4.7 acres
of brackish marsh preservation foil a total of 11,9 acres of mitigation.
-- - --- - -- -' v...r - w V •sJ i . VI
Addendum to the Sawmill Wetland Mitigation Plan
January 20, 1998'
Section 3.1.1, page 26
t Marsh Reference Area
The reference marsh ecosystem described iwthe mitigation plan will be used. Although other areas may
appear better suited as reference areas;.th area descri6ecfirr:the mitigation plan is adjacent to the
mitigation site along the same shore of. Scott's-Creek. -Tibia area was used to develop the mitigation plan
and tho.Department feels it is adequate. for the,-purposes 6f g" reference hydrologic and
vegetational data for the Sawmill mitigation site.
Section 3:2, page 29
Forested Reference Area
A reference ecosystem for the forested wetland.creation Oide4 cyprewgum swamp) has been located
along. Scott' s Creek. Elevations of the area witl:be;useti .''.determine the elevation of the forested
wetland creation area on the Sawr9ill site.
Section 4.1.2, page 31
Wdrolope Success
In the marsh restoration and creation areas, success 701
bi measured using monitoring well data to
demonstrate that inundation or saturatiari wit/ in-12 inches ofthe.ground surface has existed for at least
25%o of the growing season. In the forested cxeation'etea„ success will be measured using monitoring
.w.ell data to demonstrate that inundation or saturatioh; with.M.l2.inches of the ground surface has existed
for at least 12.5% of the growing season.. Should either cottimumv fail to meet this criterion, a
comparative analysis of the hydrologic data,. trorn..the.Test6m.tion. and/or creation area and the appropriate
reference area will be performed to determihe.whether'the.dnta are statistically different. Success will be
achieved If one of the above criteria are. met and'the planted vegetation is successful. If it is determined
that based. on the above criteria th? site is not.successful} the Department will consult with the resource
.agencies that contributed to the. deivelopment.of this plaa'bef?retaking any remedial measures.
Section 4.31, page 35
Vegetation Success
Vegetation success criteria will b? measured:iising; l-rimersquare plots every 6 meters along 100-foot
transects in the marsh restoration area and rcferenee :area...Afeal coverage will be measured in each plot.
Successful restoration of marsh vegetation will be achieved if vegetation monitoring indicates that areal
coverage in the marsh restoration area. is Although die. Department has objected to the use of the
80'/o area icoverage criteria since It is notbased oti.thameasuted.areal coverage in the reference area,
this criteria will be accepted for tls Mitigation site.' Ii', afiee;five years, the areal coverage in the marsh
restoration area has not reached 80%, the De pai*nt-pstposOpa consultation with the agencies and
comparison of the vegetation dam; m the restoration.afid referznce areas. Two 0.05-acre plow will be
used in the forested creation area, wherc yegeWion establishm nt. will be considered successful if, after
five years, 260 stems per acre are survivipg. The: Comps ha *'s ??sisted that vegetation monitoring continue
for no lass than five years. The Department will momtvr:Ae. restoration and creation areas for five years.
Section 4.5, page 35
Contingency
Hydrological contingency will require consultation,with'the natural resource agencies including, but not
limited to, the Division of Coastal Manaprnr nt; the Corps:af Engineers, and the Division of Water
Quality. If hydrologic success criteria are.not met durir Wthp five year monitoring period, remedial
actions will be discussed which may include re-evaluadbn.ofthti- hydrologic success criteria as they
relate to one reference marsh, marsh elevations, and overall: site. feasibility. Hydrologic and vegetation
data from, the reference area will play a key role. in the deterp#1nation of success if the above success
criteria are not met.
Section 6.3, page 38
1ti14E ptioa Value
Because of objections to the use of?the term "eredit3" :on sites without a banking Instrument, the Corps
ltas.requested a revision to the Mitt iation.Plan wish discusser the value of the site in terms of acres
rather thancredits. Furthermore, the Corps and othe resoaree`-9gencies have recommended that EPA
ratios be used to evaluate the value, of the site- Mitigation activities areas folle
Brackish Marsb Restoration 2.0 ac . '
Brackish Marsh Creation : 0.8 ac
Brackish Marsh Preservation
Cypress-Qum Swamp Creation .
.
n
?r
... SfAiF
.... a ,,,.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR.
GOVERNOR
November 17, 2000
Mr. Mike Bell
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Washington Regulatory Field Office
P. O. BOX 1000
Washington, North Carolina 27889-1000
DAVID McCoy
SECRETARY
Subject: As-Built Report for Lengyel Mitigation Site, Craven County. Federal Project
No. STPNHS-17(20). State Project No. 8.1170806. TIP Project B-2531 WM
Dear Mr. Bell:
Please find enclosed the revised well location map for the Lengyel Mitigation Site. This is an
amendment to the July 19, 2000 As-Built Report that was previously submitted. If you should
have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact Eric Black
at [phone].
Sincerely,
jQ V. Charles Bruton, Ph.D.
J Assistant Branch Manager
Enclosures
Cc: Mr. David Franklin, USACE
Mr. John Hennessy, NCDWQ/Wetlands
Ms. Kelly Williams, CAMA
B-2531 WM File
MAILING ADDRESS:
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEBSITE. WWWDOH.DOT.STATE.NC.US
LOCATION:
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH, NC
IC }
of
o`
2 3$ 9
3
IZ
REVISED MITIGATION CATIOTr_ AP
Revised 11/14/00
0 m 100 m
LSG-3
I,
LSG-4
' Meal, Pressrvevon
LGW-2

Ramp 'DB'
Ra ` \ "? R? MeN Preawret,on cz
agfl ?.
mP
9
Uele Buffer

d 5oP
L
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EAsLEY LYNDO TIPPETT
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
July 9, 2003
TO: Philip S. Harris, III, P.E., Manager,
PDEA- Office of Natural Environment
ATTN: Randy Griffin
Natural Environment Engineering Supervisor
FROM: Ken Mason
Division 2 Highway M ' tenance Engineer
SUBJECT: As-Built Plans for Sawmill Mitigation Site, TIP Project No. B-2531 WM,
Craven County, State Project No. 8.1170801
This letter certifies that the construction of the above referenced mitigation site has been
completed in accordance with construction plan sheets and specifications. Any deviations
from the original design have been noted in the attached set of half-size as-built plans.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at [phone].
KM/eas
WERODS/a to

WATER QUALITY SECTION
Enclosures
cc: Mr. Neil Lassiter, P.E., Division 2 Engineer
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
COUNTY MAINTENANCE YARD, CRAVEN COUNTY
231 SOUTH GLENBURNIE ROAD
N B , NC 28560
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
LOCATION:
231 SOUTH GLENBURNIE ROAD
NEW BERN, NC
WEBS/TE: WWW.DOT.ORG
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
------------------
•Q9-`?i't?Vw??'T???...s«r??l?o..yv?.n..s.r?u.n.buawp,
ti
\
1 ++ ??
J \ Z
:T 0
cn m mx w L4 I
?00?
r
r-n n
-4 cs Z,
++n1++`+++++ g
CA- (A z
+_?1 +
O p? 1+ ++ r zz v (7
1++++
+ + + {? i rv CO) m (D ° (n
p\ + , 00 O C
(D
o 3. ::0
CD CD na C) Q)
m to
-loo ' z > CC -+ p
0 00 h N r (p Q)
0 -oz z 12 t ? ?
m moa l<
C7 C++++ C n i z _zz ma \ ++?I m 00.
V)
-+ m ? + + + ??+ a °
++z
?0 + ++++ o
mA \ +\+ +?++\+
;0 ZEM + +
n> + + +
o ((A
\ ++ °
CID `'.
d
y ? 8?
n o c?
y r- I ?, 'OD J?
\ ++ + a -- 2M1? pNd
tF3
++++ Od?? .yo?aad
\ d
++ + +++
/ / ++++
ci j/ +++
z
z ?. sn ++ to:
0 0? +
I
00 boom- NC GRID NAD 83
z
v /
a
A

,I
I
I
I
I
I
U

G

o -
•
y
O \
C
N '\

`
CL
O `

CL
N?
o tn= \
c G)o `
s-Q \
0
{
0 (D CD

CD \
Q
•`
0 x'C
: 3 (Q \
`
\
I 1 5++++
I I?tl
++
++
X
-7 0
O 3v'I
(D O 0
m
(D _ - I
? D
i zz
(D (A
p O
m
O ?
(37 m
m
o
C37
0 \ \ \
O
O 1 ?? O
y \
W N „ 3
? m =
7 a
o
r-
O z
0
+ m
o m
z
t)
m
-h W
-F 0
O
O
in
W
i
V
x
f
TTT 1yr T Zr-F T TTT
+?T+ ++4+
+ +? + +
++t+
+++\++
+++.
\ +\++1++1+-+4
+/+
\4- HS + + ?F
O
-D
0
0
0.
C
CD
(o
CD
r)
0
D
0
-I-
Lc)

/ l ? ??a ro \
r-o
rrkA
CIMO
> \\ \\
1 -i
I m
I ?
I I
1
1
1
aad
.yo»
,
4
Od
0a
• Ladd
.?o
O??\4
Od
MO%

T

NC GRID NAD 8,3
A1?
inn
? z
z o
s
m

I
z
w

a
0
K
It
R Rs?P-0
g
.?
C11
M151
i%I to
Ltl!e

AIR
A
E

to
G
lit
lit
•-
?N3N
B ?Q
ki N
'
i
L-
11
r
-
6
•

9 d
19
K: co
?d
W
oa
y
O ?
d
9
z
0
' a
021
o?
log
0
z
N N N N N
O O O O O ?j
d
o
c? c
O
n
O
rrIra rr)
0
z
0
o y
,b G
o
z°
b
Y
9
m
O
z
Pww?
t ?N=N
N
?i'
if
r
w
w

ILI
ff -.1 it, set
4
?-
R
to S i F1 a
IL z
?tl
Gil
N

mG
F. 0
09
Id
IN,
?n
?t
H
by
z
0
0
o y
o ?
?y
A

b
t
V
W o
o xo
n
Gd
O
N
©? M
H
0
H

9

ro
G?
1
1
1
ANNUAL REPORT FOR 1999
Lengyel Mitigation Si
Craver County
STPN H S-17(20)
Project No. 8.1170806
TIP No. B-2531 VW
rho ?
Prepared By.
Natural Systems Unit &
Roadside Environmental Unit
North Carolina Department of Transportation
December 1999

n
I I

C

LJI
C

u

0

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SUMMARY
1.0
2.0
3.0
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project Description
1.2 Purpose
1.3 Project History
HYDROLOGY
2.1 Success Criteria
2.2 Hydrologic Description
2.3 Results of Hydrologic Monitoring
2.3.1 Site Data
2.3.2 Climatic Data
2.4 Conclusions
VEGETATION
3.1 Success Criteria
3.2 Description of Planted Areas
3.3 Results of Vegetation Monitoring
3.4 Conclusions
4.0 OVERALL CONCLUSIONS/ RECOMMENDATIONS

2
2
2
2
4
4
4
4
4
6
6
8
8
10
12
13

1
71
1
1

1

1

1

TABLES
TABLE 1 - VEGETATION PLOTS FOR LENGYEL MITIGATION SITE
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1 - SITE LOCATION MAP
FIGURE 2 - MONITORING WELL LOCATIONS
FIGURE 3 - LENGYEL 30-70 PERCENTILE GRAPH
FIGURE 4 - VEGETATION PLOT MAP
10
3
5
7
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A - SURFACE WATER HYDROLOGY PLOTS
APPENDIX B - SITE PHOTOS
14
19
F
SUMMARY
The following report summarizes the monitoring activities that have occurred in the past
year at the Lengyel Mitigation Site. Site construction began in 1998 and was finished in
' 1999. The year 1999 represents the first year for hydrologic and vegetation monitoring.
The Lengyel Mitigation Site is a brackish marsh restoration/preservation site divided
' into two areas. The first area is a reference marsh ecosystem (preservation) that
contains surface water gauges LSG-3 and LSG-4. The second area is a restoration
' site that contains surface water gauges LSG-1 and LSG-2.
Hydrologic data was not collected for the complete 1999 growing season. Specific
factors precluding data collection include: 1) installation of surface water gauges after
the beginning of the 1999 growing season, 2) malfunction of gauge LSG-1 for the time
periods of April 1 to April 23 and October 1 to October 22, 1999, and 3) washout of
' gauges LSG-3 and LSG-4 during Hurricanes Dennis and Floyd resulting in lost data.
Observed data gaps were from September 4 to September 8,1999 (LSG -4),
September 15 to October 1, 1999 (LSG-4), and September 4 to October 22, 1999
' (LSG-3). Despite the gaps in the data, the success criterion was still met for hydrology.
Vegetation data met one of the two success criteria established for the Lengyel Site.
' The overall plot average did not meet the required 80% coverage criteria. The site did
meet the 75% percentage frequency of the target specie.
' Based on the monitoring results from the 1999 growing season, NCDOT recommends
continued monitoring of the Lengyel Mitigation Site.

J
Ll?
J

' 1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project Description
' The Lengyel Mitigation Site is an 11.86 acre brackish marsh restoration/preservation
project located in Craven County, North Carolina. The site is located east of the
intersection of US Highway 70 and US Business 70 and provides compensatory
mitigation for impacts associated with the construction of the US 17 Neuse River Bridge
(TIP No. B-2531) (Figure 1). Mitigation goals for the site include approximately 6.08
acres of brackish marsh restoration, 4.42 acres of brackish marsh preservation, and
' 1.36 acres of upland buffer.

1

F",

1.2 Purpose.
In order to demonstrate successful mitigation, the Lengyel site is monitored for both
hydrology and vegetation. The year 1999 marks the first year of monitoring for the site.
Monitoring of wetland restoration efforts will be performed until success criteria are
fulfilled. The following report describes the results of both hydrologic and vegetation
monitoring for 1999.
1.3 Project History
April 1998
April 1998
March 1999
April- November 1999
April 1,999
June 1999
October 1999
Site Construction Began
Site planted (Phase 1)
Monitoring Wells Installed
Hydrologic Monitoring
Planting Completed
Site Construction Finished
Vegetation Monitoring (1 yr.)

1

1

1

1

2.0 HYDROLOGY
2.1 Success Criteria
' The hydrologic success criteria established for the Lengyel Mitigation Site include: 1)
site inundation or saturation within 12 inches of the ground surface for 25 percent of the
growing season, or, should the restoration fail to meet this criteria, 2) statistical
' comparison between the reference marsh area and the restoration area to determine if
hydrology is significantly different. The site specific criteria are more stringent than the
' current federal guidelines that require a site to be inundated or saturated (within 12" of
the surface) by surface or ground water for a consecutive 12.5% of the growing season.
Areas inundated or saturated less than 5% of the growing season are classified as non-
wetlands.
The growing season in Craven County begins on March 18 and ends November 14.
These dates correspond to a 50% probability that air temperature will drop to 280 F or
lower after March 18 and before November 14.' Thus the growing season is 240 days;
the established minimum hydrology requires 25% of this season, or 60 days. Local
' climate must represent average conditions for the area.
2.2 Hydrologic Description
' Because th marsh
the is expected to be inundated because of highwater, wave action,
' wind-driven tides, and rainfall, surface gauges were installed to record surface water
levels. Four surface gauges were installed at the site on March 31, 1999 (Figure 2).
Automatic readings are taken at three-hour intervals daily throughout the growing
season.
2.3 Results of Hydrologic Monitoring
' 2.3.1 Site Data
Continuous site inundation was observed for all four gauges excluding periods the
gauges were inoperative. Site inundation exceeded 25 percent of the growing season.
' Appendix A contains a plot of the water depth for each surface gauge. Hydrologic
monitoring began on April 1, 1999; therefore, the data is not complete for the entire
growing season. Additional gaps observed in surface water data include 1) malfunction
of gauge LSG-1 from April 1, 1999 to April 23 and October 1 to October 22, 1999, and
2) washout of gauges LSG-3 and LSG-4 during Hurricanes Dennis and Floyd.
' Observed data gaps were September 4 to September 8,1999 (LSG-4),
Soil Conservation Service, Soil Survey of Craven County, North Carolina, 1989.
4

F

Ll

1

?o

I I

0

' FIGURE 2
WELL LOCATION MAP

u
11

F
n
?I
u

?J

1

D

IF-L'
'

September 15 to October 1, 1999 (LSG-4), and September 4 to October 22. 1999
(LSG-3).
2.3.2 Climatic Data
Figure 3 is a comparison of the 1999 monthly precipitation to the historical precipitation
for New Bern, North Carolina. The two lines depicted represent the 30th and 70th
percentiles for precipitation data collected in New Bern between the years of 1931 and
1998. The blue bars represent 1999 monthly precipitation totals while the red bar
represents 1998 monthly precipitation total for December. Because of data availability,
the 1999 data encompasses only data collected from January 1 to November 30, 1999.
The data was provided by the NC State Climate Office. The annual report for 2000 will
include the precipitation total for December 1999.
The data obtained indicates lower than normal precipitation for four months of 1999,
and above average precipitation for one month of 1999. The sum precipitation
measured from January 1 through November 30, 1999 was 42 inches, which is lower
than the 30 year (1961-1990) average range of 50 to 56 inches per year.
2.4 Conclusions

0

11

The year 1999 represents the first year of hydrologic monitoring for the Lengyel
Mitigation Site. Surface water data indicated continuous site inundation for a period
exceeding 25 percent of the growing season. Furthermore, continuous site inundation
was observed at all times excluding periods of interrupted data. Precipitation data
collected for the New Bern area indicated lower than normal precipitation for the period
of January 1, through November 30, 1999. Despite the lower precipitation for 1999, the
hydrologic success criterion was met for the Lengyel Mitigation Site.

d

7

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
[[f
s
a
'Ln !
V
a m
m
M Z
d
m
d
J
co r- CD U ? M N ? O
(ui) uoi;e;!dl38Jd
U
W
z
U ?
O
a?
L
a
w
I
co
a?
J
Z
O
z
D
Q
a

m
Lu
LL
z
a
FIGURE 3
30-70 PERCENTILE GRAPH

G

H
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3.0 VEGETATION
3.1 Success Criteria
The vegetative success of the wetland site will be determined by evaluation of (60) 1
square meter plots randomly distributed within the site and located by GPS. Monitoring
plots found to be located within the open water channel will not be evaluated, and will
not count to the final count of plots. The vegetation component of the wetland site will
be deemed successful if the following criteria are met.
1. The average of all plots should have an 80% vegetative cover consisting of
wetland herbaceous species, not including any invasive species.
2. A minimum of 75% of the plots shall contain the target (planted) specie.
3.2 Description of Planted Areas
The following plant communities were planted in the Marsh Grass Area:
Marsh planting: (approximately 2.46 hectares)
Spartina cynosurides, Big Cordgrass
s

F

u
H

r

s„

s'

W
? In
J
2 ?
O I
I
Lu

?
W
O ?

1
\ s
? S 96 i
C + c
o
_
N
7 I %
G
U c 0
t c o
?
/S

G •? d
Z '-
Z

\ I
E \ 1
0 H ?? / F/ FS, 1 I
o ` Il

U
o
7F
000"
9 I
1

1 I /
1 66 ?

v I .?
o I
o I I {/

?
v°
c

E N
O O
rn ?
v U

?
I /
?

'
U , ` / j
y m a m CL

c _ O
o o '
0 o O /
f u u 'IT
N d

FIGURE 4
VEGETATION PLOT MAP

F1

7
7
11

1 3.3 Results of Vegetation Monitoring (1 year)
TA3LE 1
LENGYEL MITIGATION SITE VEGETATION PLOTS

F-
L

L

c L
y

'JA

a

C

y
=

J

L

otes L
y
y
v?
L

_

?

=_

J

v
v

otes
1 25% 24 ? cordgrass,scirpus 28 20% 48 ? cordgrass.scirpus
2 50% 36 ? cordgrass,juncus 29 35% ;6 ? juncus.cordgrass
3 50% 30 ? cordgrass,juncus 30 70°,,o 12 ? scirpus,cordgrass
4 90% 48 juncus.scirpus 31 80% ± 2 sedge-, grasses
5 10% 8 sedges 32 60°'o 15 sedges, grasses
6 50% 48 cattails 33 25% 36 ? fennel,willow,juncus,cordarass
7 25% 48 ? cord grass, fenne1 34 35% 24 ? sedges, cordgrass
8 75% 48 ? cordgrass 35 75% = 0 ? cordgrass
9 75% 36 ? cord grass,bermuda 36 80% :0 ? cordgrass,sedges
10 75% 36 scirpus.cordgrass 37 13°!o 3, 6 ? cordgrass,3" water
11 70% 36 ? cordgrass,willow,scirpus 38 75% ;0 ? sedges,s?t-itchgrass.cordgrass
12 30% 36 ? cordgrass,juncus 39 150/'o 12 grasses.scirpus
13 50% 36 ? weeds.cordgrass 40 50°'o 15 ? sedges,cordgrass.switchgrass
14 60% 36 ? juncus.cord grass 41 80% 48 ? cordgrass.cattails
15 75% 24 ? cordgrass,cattails,juncus 42 75% 18 ? cordgrass.
grasses
16 60% 12 ? weeds.juncus.cordgrass 43 50% 24 ? cordgrass
17 100% 6 bermuda 44 80% 24 ? switchgrass,grasses,cordgrass
18 75% 12 scirpus. grasses 45 65% 18 ? switchgrass,cordgrass,cattails
19 75% 12 cattail s.scirpus 46 100,/o 18 ? cord grass, grasses
20 95% 30 scirpus.cattails.luncus 47 6% 24 ? cordgrass
21 75% 36 scirpus 48 600..0 24 ? switchgrass,grasses.cordgrass
22 60% 36 juncus 49 40% 12 switchgrass,scirpus,grasses
23 75% 36 ? cordgrass,cattajls 50 50°/0 12 ? sedges,s%N itchgrass.cordgrass
24 60% 36 ? cordgrass,cattails 51 100% -'.8 ? cord grass.scirpus.juncus
25 50% 36 ? cordgrass 52 900`0 48 ? juncus,cattaiIs,cordgrass
26 75% 48 ? cattails.cordgrass 53 40% 15 ? switchgrass.cordgrass,sedges
27 60% 36 ? cordgrass,juncus 54 8000 =8 ? cordarass.juncus

0

f

H

1
H

TABLE 1 CONTINUED
LENGYEL MITIGATION SITE VEGETATION PLOTS
?J

I I

L

O

p" L
y
o
5D
L

C

'?
y

v

?

otes

O

= L
J

:,t
r
L
=

C

bA

otes
55 50% 48 ? cordgrass
56 50% 48 ? cordgrass,juncus
57 30% 30 ? cordgrass,scirpus
58 35% 48 ? cordgrass
59 80% 30 scirpus, cattails
60 70% 42 ? cordgrass,cattails

Percentage Cover 56%

Percenta ge Frequency of target specie 75%

11

1

Notes from Report: Site establishing well. Majority of site covered with Big Cordgrass.
Scirpus, juncus, and cattails also present.
3.4 Conclusions
Of the 4.8 hectares of this site, approximately 2.46 hectares involved marsh planting.
There were 60 random plots established throughout the planting area and located using
GPS. The vegetation monitoring of the planted area revealed the average percentage
cover to be 56%, which is below the 80% success criterion. The average percentage
frequency is 75%, which meets the success criteria.
12
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4.0 OVERALL CONCLUSIONS/ RECOMMENDATIONS
• Site hydrology met the success criterion established for the mitigation site despite
lower than normal precipitation for 1999. NCDOT should continue annual
monitoring of site hydrology through the growing season.
• Site vegetation did not meet all success criteria established for the mitigation site.
This can be attributed to the first growth season for the mitigation. NCDOT should
continue annual vegetative monitoring.
13

APPENDIX A
' SURFACE WATER HYDROLOGY PLOTS

F

F

' 14

t
F-J,

Fi
J

71

C?
c?
J
d
L
ca
m .a
7

U
o t
E
66•AON-06
66-AON-£0
66-130-SZ
66.130-ZZ
66.100-9 6
66-130-60
66-daS-9Z
66-daS-OZ
66-daS-£ 6
66-daS-10
66-deS-60
66-6nd-SZ
66-Bn`d-6 L
66.6nV-Z6
66.6nb-90
66-Inf-6£
66-inf-bl
0
66-Inf -94
66-Inf -u
66-Inf-SO
66-unf-6Z
66-unf -ZZ
66-unr-n
66-unr-O6
66-unf-£0
66-ABW-SZ
66-AeW-ZZ
66-AeW-S 6
66-AeW-60
66-AeW-ZO
66-jdd-gZ
66-jd`d-OZ
66-idV-£ 6
66-jdV-LO
66-id`d- 60
LO o LO o to o LO CD LO CD
'IT IT co co N N r r
(u!) 4;daa Ja;eM a3elinS
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
N
0
N
J_
d
c?
C?
L
ar
ca
d
v
66-AOWZl
66-AON-90
66-130.0£
66-130-VZ
66-130-9L
66-130- L L
66-130.90
66-daS-6Z
66-daS-£Z
66-deS-9 L
66-deS-O L
66-deS-ti0
66-6nV-6Z
66-6nd-ZZ
66-6nb-9 L
66-6nd-0 L
66-6md-ti0
66-Inf -8Z
66-Inf -ZZ p
66-Inf-9L
66-Inf-u
66-Inf-£0
66-unf-a
66-unmz
66-unf-SL
66-unf-90
66-unf-ZO
66-AeW-LZ
66-AeW-LZ
66-ABW-b L
66-AeW-90
66-ABW-ZO
66-jdd-9Z
66-jdd-6 L
66-jdd-£ L
66-jdV-LO
66-AV-LO
O
LO chi O N O LO O C\j
(uI) yjdad aaleM a3epnS
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
M
t?
J_
d
ea
0
ca
v
ea
m a

m C U U

Q C C Q]

c° ° CD rn
m (KS CZ 73 rn m
L N
7 ` C lfJ >-. N

C? 2 ? 3 m LL

66-noN-66
66-AON-90
66-100-0£
66.3:)0-VZ
66-100-Z6
66-100- 6 6
66-deS-ti0
66-Bnd-6Z
66-Bn`d-ZZ
66-BnV-9 6
66-BnV-0 6
66-Bnd-ti0
66-Inf-8Z
66-Inf-ZZ
66-Inf-n
66-Inf-n
66-Inf-£0
66-unr-LZ
66-unmz
66-unf-s6
66-unf-80
66-unf-ZO
66-AEW-LZ
66-AeW- V
66-AM-14
66-AeW-80
66-AeW-ZO
66-jdb-9Z
66-jdd-6 6
66-jdd-£ L
66-jdv-LO
66-idd-60
LO C) LO U') 0 LO LO 0
IT I M M N N r
(uI) yldad jaleM a3ejjnS

66-AON-O L
66-AON-CO
66-130-8Z
66-130-ZZ
66-PO-9 l
0
m a
L -
66-100.60
3 m 66-130-ZO
? m
O .N m

66-deS-9Z
o _ 66-des-OZ
S c
2 66-des-£ L
66-daS-LO
66-des- Lo
66.6nd-SZ
66-6nd-U
66-6md-Z L

Cl) 66-6nd-90

66-Inf-6£

66-Inf -vz

0 66-Inf-86
66-Inf-n
66-Inf-SO
v 66-unf -6Z
ca
66-unr-ZZ

N
66-unf`9 L
66-unf -0L
66-unf-£0
66-ABW-8Z
66-ABW-ZZ
66-ABW-9 L
66-AeW-60
66-AeW-ZO
66-idd-9Z
66-ady-OZ
66-jdb-£ L
66-jdb-LO
66-AV-60
U') C) LO CD LO CD LO o n o
I M co N N
(uI) yldaa jaleM aoejjnS
m
cl

ril

11

1

APPENDIX B

n

SITE PHOTOS
19

F

7-7
I
I
J

I
F

1`7
77
Photo Point 1
- rt
4.f
Photo Point 3
' 1999
LENGYEL
Photo Point 2
Photo Point 4

i
11
u

C'
11
I
I
I

I

u

LENGYEL
Photo Point 7
1999
Photo Point 5
Photo Point 6
1

1

H

E

1

11

i?

,7

0
1
1

1
1
1
i
i
1
1
ANNUAL REPORT FOR 2000

Co
Lengyel Mitigation Site
Craven County
Project No. 8.1170806
TIP No. B-2531 WM

1
1
l
1
1

Prepared By:
Natural Systems Unit & Roadside Environmental Unit
North Carolina Department of Transportation
December 2000
? w}
?t
1

1
1
s
1
A
r

a
1
1

r
1
i
1
1

t
t
1
l
1
1
ANNUAL REPORT FOR 2000
Lengyel Mitigation Site
Craven County
Project No. 8.1170806
TIP No. B-2531 WM

V ? fL
,? ?,1So
?u g
o

Prepared By:
Natural Systems Unit & Roadside Environmental Unit
North Carolina Department of Transportation
December 2000

r
r
1

f

a
f

1

1
I Table of Contents
SUMMARY .........................................................................................................1
1.0 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 2
1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2
1.2 PURPOSE ................................................................................................... 2
1.3
2.0 PROJECT HISTORY ......................................................................................
HYDROLOGY .............................................................................................. 2
4
2.1 SUCCESS CRITERIA .....................................................................................4
2.2 HYDROLOGIC DISCRIPTION ...........................................................................4
2.3 RESULTS OF HYDROLOGIC MONITORING ........................................................4
2.3.1 Site Data ...........................................................................................4
2.3.2 Climatic Data .....................................................................................6
2.4 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................ 6
3.0 VEGETATION ...............................................................................................8
3.1 'SUCCESS CRITERIA .....................................................................................8
3.2 DESCRIPTION OF PLANTED AREAS ................................................................ 8
3.3 RESULTS OF VEGETATION MONITORING ........................................................ 9
3.4 CONCLUSIONS ..........................................................................................11
11 4.0 OVERALL CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS .................................13
1
1
1
1
1
TABLES
TABLE 1. RESULTS OF VEGETATION MONITORING ................................................ 9
FIGURES
FIGURE 1: LENGYEL SITE LOCATION MAP .............................................................. 2
FIGURE 2: MONITORING GAUGE LOCATIONS ......................................................... 5
FIGURE 3:30-70 PERCENTILE GRAPH ...................................................................... 7
. .............................................................
' FIGURE 4• PHOTO AND PLOT LOCATIONS 13
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: SURFACE AND GROUNDWATER HYDROLOGY PLOTS .................. 14
APPENDIX B: SITE PHOTOS ..................................................................................... 21
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
SUMMARY
The following report summarizes the monitoring activities that have occurred in the
second year of monitoring for hydrology and vegetation at the Lengyel Mitigation Site.
Since the first monitoring report, the success criteria for vegetation sampling have
changed to reflect the most recent guidelines from the National Marine Fisheries
Service. These changes include: 1) the average of all plots should have a 75 percent
vegetative cover consisting of wetland herbaceous species, not including any invasive
species, and 2) a minimum of 70 percent of the plots will contain the target (planted)
wetland species. This was changed in concurrence with NCDWQ, USACE, and CAMA.
Additionally, two groundwater gauges were installed at the site on October 2, 2000.
The Lengyel Mitigation Site is a brackish marsh restoration/preservation site divided
into two areas. The first area is a reference marsh ecosystem (preservation) that
contains surfacewater gauges LSG-3 and LSG-4, and groundwater gauge LSGW-2.
The second area is a restoration site that contains surface water gauges LSG-1 and
LSG-2, and groundwater gauge LSGW-1.
Hydrology data were not collected for the entire 2000 growing season for any of the
surface water or groundwater gauges. These data gaps are attributed to gauge
malfunction (LSG-1 and LSG-4), failure to collect the data (LSG-1, LSG-2, LSG-3, and
LSG-4), and installation of gauges after the growing season began (LSGW-1 and
LSGW-2). Despite the observed data gaps, the success criterion was still met for
hydrology for all four surface water gauges. Additionally, groundwater was observed
within 12 inches of the ground surface continuously for both groundwater gauges.
Monitoring of these two gauges began on October 3, 2000.
Vegetation data met one of the two success criteria established for the Lengyel Site.
The overall plot average did not meet the required 75% (Scale 5) coverage criteria.
The site did, however, meet the 70% percentage frequency of the target specie.
Additional observations include the siting of ospreys on the nesting pole and the
presence of crabs and other aquatic organisms in the constructed tidal swale. Based
on the successful monitoring results from the 2000 growing season, NCDOT
recommends the continued monitoring of the Lengyel Mitigation Site.
1
1.0 INTRODUCTION

i 1

1
r
i

1
1
1

1.1 Project Description
The Lengyel Mitigation Site is a 13.198 acre brackish marsh
restoration/preservation project located in Craven County, North Carolina. The
site is located east of the intersection of US 70 and US 70 Business and
provides compensatory mitigation for impacts associated with the construction of
the US 17 Neuse River Bridge (TIP No. B-2531) (Figure 1). Mitigation goals for
the site include approximately 6.54 acres of brackish marsh restoration, 5.25
acres of brackish marsh preservation, and 0.85 acres of upland buffer..
1.2 Purpose
In order to demonstrate successful mitigation, the Lengyel site is monitored for
hydrology and vegetation. The year 2000 marks the second year of monitoring
for the site. Monitoring of wetland restoration efforts will be performed until
success criteria are fulfilled. The following report describes the results of both
hydrologic and vegetation monitoring for 2000.
1.3 Project History
April 1998
April 1998
March 1999
April 1999
April 1999
June 1999
October 1999
November 1999
March 2000
August 2000
October 2000
November 2000
Site Construction Began
Site planted (Phase 1)
Surface Water Gauges Installed
Hydrologic Monitoring (begin)
Planting Completed
Site Construction Finished
Vegetation Monitoring (1 yr.)
First Year Hydrologic Monitoring (end)
Second Year Hydrologic Monitoring (begin)
Vegetation Monitoring (2 yr.)
Two Groundwater Gauges Installed
Second Year Hydrologic Monitoring (end)
FIGURE 1: LENGYEL SITE LOCATION MAP
2
t
1
r
1
1

1

Ili
J

r
1
t
C-1,
1
2.0 HYDROLOGY
2.1 Success Criteria
The hydrologic success criteria established for the Lengyel Mitigation Site
include: 1) site inundation or saturation within 12 inches of the ground
surface for 25 percent of the growing season, or should the restoration fail
to meet this criteria, 2) statistical comparison between the reference
marsh area and the restoration area to determine if hydrology is
significantly different. The site specific criteria are more stringent than the
current federal guidelines that require a site to be inundated or saturated
(within 12" of the surface) by surface or groundwater for a consecutive 5-
12.5% of the growing season. Areas inundated or saturated less than 5%
of the growing season are classified as non-wetlands.
The growing season in Craven County begins on March 18 and ends
November 14. These dates correspond to a 50% probability that air
temperature will drop to 28° F or lower after March 18 and before
November 14.' Thus the growing season is 240 days; the established
minimum hydrology requires 25% of this season, or 60 days. Local
climate must represent average conditions for the area.
2.2 Hydrologic Description
Because the marsh is expected to be inundated because of highwater,
wave action, wind-driven tides, and rainfall, surface gauges were installed
to record surface water levels. Four surface water gauges were installed
at the site on March 31, 1999 (Figure 2). Automatic readings are taken at
three-hour intervals daily throughout the growing season. Two additional
groundwater gauges were installed on October 2, 2000 to maintain
compliance with the CAMA, USACE, and NCDWQ permit conditions.
Automatic readings are also taken every three hours.
2.3 Results of Hydrologic Monitoring
2.3.1 Site Data
Continuous site inundation or saturation was observed for all six gauges
excluding periods of well malfunction, missed data collection, or absence
of gauge installation. Site inundation exceeded 25 percent of the growing
season.
' Soil Conservation Service, Soil Survey of Craven County. North Carolina, 1989.

FIGURE 2: MONITORING GAUGE LOCATIONS
5

1
1
1

w
Appendix A contains a plot of the water depth for each surface and
groundwater gauge. The hydrology monitoring data starts on March 18,
2000 and ends on November 14, 2000.
Specific Gauge Problems:
Gauge LSG-1: Gauge stopped recording on 9/13/00, battery replaced on
9/23/00; data not downloaded from 9/23/00-10/5/00.
Gauge LSG-2: Gauge data not downloaded from 9/23/00-10/5/00.
Gauge LSG-3: Gauge data not downloaded from 9/23/00-10/5/00.
G u e LSG-4: Gauge was replaced on 2/12/00; stopped recording on
2/2 /00, batteries replaced on 2/26/00; stopped recording on 3/24/00,
batteries replaced on 3/25/00; stop recording on 4/21/00, gauge replaced
on 5Y20/00; stopped recording on 6/23/00,reset on 6/24/0; data not
downloaded from 9/23/00-10/5/00.
Climatic Data
Figure 3 is a comparison of the 2000 monthly precipitation to the historical
precipitation for New Bern, North Carolina. The two lines depicted
represent the 30th and 70th percentiles for precipitation data collected in
New Bern between the years of 1931 and 2000. The blue bars represent
2000 monthly precipitation totals while the red bar represents 1999
monthly precipitation totals. Because of data availability, the 2000 data
encompasses only data collected from January 1 to November 30, 2000.
The data was provided by the NC State Climate Office.
This graph is used to indicate the general precipitation conditions for the
surrounding area. The data obtained indicates lower than normal
precipitation for three months and above average precipitation for three
months of the year 2000. The sum precipitation measured from January
1 through November 30, 2000 was 61.21 inches, which is within the
normal 30 year (1961-1990) average rainfall for the New Bern area.
2.4 Conclusions
The year 2000 represents the second year of hydrologic monitoring for the
Lengyel Mitigation Site. Surface water indicated continuous site
inundation for a period exceeding 25 percent of the growing season.
Hydrology data collected for groundwater gauges showed continuous
saturation for the period monitored. NCDOT will continue to monitor the
site.

? 6
G

1
1

1

t t
Q Q.
c0 cc
I-) ? L
V V
d ?
C C Z
L L C
IL a m
00
0 0 ?
M M Z
M
d ?
L
? J
LL
U
w
O
z
U ?
O c
N
U
L
a
I
w
U
0

CD
c
m
U
L
J a_

Ch

C
0
C
G
z

a
Cc
CL
a
cc:
¢
m
w
LL
c
co
m
rn
m
T
c.
cu
cc
O
O
N
I
Z
¢
It N O Co Co d N O
T T T
(ui) uop,4!di3aad
t

t

1

1
3.0 VEGETATION
3.1 Success Criteria
The vegetative marsh success of the wetland site will be determined in
accordance with NMFS Guidelines. Monitoring plots located within the
open water channel will not be evaluated, and will not count toward the
final count of plots. The vegetation component of the wetland site will be
deemed successful if the following criteria are met.
1. At year five, the average of all plots should have a scale value of 5
(75% vegetative cover) consisting of wetland herbaceous species, not
including any invasive species.
2. A minimum of 70% of the plots shall contain the target (planted)
species.
3.2 Description of Planted Areas
The following plant communities were planted in the Marsh Grass Area:
Marsh Planting: (approximately 2.46 hectares)
Spartina cynosurides, big cordgrass

1
1
1 8
1
I Table 1. Results of Vegetation Monitoring

t

1

z

n0i

?
e
a

s
w
V
?
°

w
Q

o

CK

c

c b

d
a
u
w O

otes
1 4.0 ? ? . Sedge
2 0.0 Oven Water
3 2.0 ? Baccharis
4 4.0 ? ? ? ?
5 4.0 ? ? ?
6 5.0 ? ? ? ?
7 3.0 ? ? ? W alteria Aster 4" Surface Water
8 1.0 ? ? ? Aster Surface Wet
9 2.0 ? ? ? ?
10 5.0 ? ? ? Willow
11 2.0 ? ? ? Marsh Fleabane 10" Surface Water
12 0.5 ? ? Aster, 2" Surface Water
13 0.0 Aster
14 0.5 ? ? W alteria 2" Surface Water
15 5.0 ? ? ? W illow
6 3.0 ? ? ? ? Aster W alteria
17 3.0 ? ? ? Aster 6" Surface Water
18 2.0 ? ? ? Aster. 6" Surface Water
1 3.0 ? ? ? Aster, 3" Surface Water
20 0.0 Open Water
21 2.0 ? ? Aster
22 3.0 ? ? ? Willow
23 0.0 O en W ater
24 4.0 ? ? ? A ster
25 5.0 ? ? ?
26 4.0 ? ? ? ? 2" Surface W ater
27 5.0 ? ? ? Surface Water
28 3.0 ? ? ? ? Baccharis
29 3. ? ? Aster. Walteria
30 4.0 ? ? ? 3" Surface Water
31 2.0 ? ? ? Aster Willow 3" Surface Water
32 2.0 ? ? ? Aster. 6" Surface Water
33 '2.0 ? ? ? Aster. Walteria 2" Surface Water
34 5.0 ? ? Aster Surface Wet
35 4.0 ? ? ? ? Willow, 1" Surface Water
6 3.0 ? ? ? Aster
37 0.0 Open Water
38 4.0 ? ? ?
39 2.0 ? ? ? ?
40 2.0 ? ?
41 2.0 ? Aster
42 2.0 ? ? Aster
43 2.0 ? Aster
44 4.0 ? ? ? ?
45 3.0 ? Sed e

9
1

a
1
1

II
t

t

LLI

z

0

N

y

.

Y

uR

"'

m
?
•Y
N
m a

O

U

y

n

O

' b
U

G
d
d z

w O

tes
46 0.0 Oven water
47 4.0 Aster Umbrella Sed e
48 3.0 ? ? ?
49 CO ? ? ? W alteria 1" Surface Water
50 4.0 ? ? W illow, 5" Surface W ater
51 .0 ? ? ? Aster
52 2.0 ? Aster
53 5.0 ? ? ? ? 1" Surface Water
54 3.0 ? ? ? ? Aster 6" Surface W ater
55 2.0 ? Aster
56 4.0 ? ? ? 4" Surface Water
57 4.0 ? ? ? Walteria Aster
58 3.0 ? ? Aster
5 4.0 ? ? ?
60 0.0 Oven water
61 3.0 ? ? ? Marsh Flea bane Aster
62 4.0 ? ? ? Black Willow
63 0.0 Open water
64 0.0 Open water
65 5.0 ? ? ? ?
66 2.0 ? ? ? 3" Surface Water
67 3.0 ? ? ? Aster, 4" Surface Water
68 540 ? ? ? ? Seashore mallow
6 0.0 Marsh Flea bane Ed e Oven Water
70 3.0 ? ? ? ?
71 4.0 ? ? ? Aster 4" Surface Water
72 2.0 ? ?
73 0.5 ? ? ? Aster Surface Wet
74 3.0 ? ? ? Ragweed
75 4.0 ? ? ? ? Willow
76 3.0 ? ? ? Aster
77 3.0 ? ? ? 3" Surface Water
78 4.0 ? Flea bane
79 3.0 ? ? Bermuda
80 1.0 ?
81 2.0 ? Bermuda
82 0.0 Open water
83 0.0 Oven water
84 2.0 ? ? Aster. UUmbrella sedge. 3" Surface Water
85 0.5 ? ? Aster, 8" Surface Water
86 3.0 ? ? ?
87 5.0 ? ? ? ? 4" Surface Water
88 2.0 ? Aster
89 3.0 ? ? 2" Surface Water
0 5.0 ? ? ? enn wort

Fre uenc Percents a of 80.0% 68.8% 36.3% 80.0%
Plots with Desired Snecie)
-
Sum Scale 241.0
Total Number of Plots 0
Ve etative Cover Scale Value 3.0

10
1

f]

1
1

1

r]
r

1
Site Notes: Site continues to establish well. Majority of site is covered with big
cordgrass (80% frequency) with 68.8 % frequency of scirpus, 36.3 % frequency
of juncus and four plots contain sedges (mostly umbrella sedge). 22 plots
contain cattails. Other species seen on site include: duck potato, bottlebush
along the edge, marsh flea bane, seashore mallow, cardinal flower, a few
cypress, some smartweed, and aster.
3.4 Conclusions
• Percent Frequency of Target Species (big cordgrass) 80%
Frequency of 70% required.
• Vegetative Cover Scale Value 3
Scale Value of 5 required for year 5.
Of the 5.34 hectares (13.198 acres) of this site, approximately 2.46
hectares (6.1 acres) involved marsh planting. The percent frequency of
target specie exceeds the success criteria. The cover scale value is on
target for the second year of monitoring.
No phragmites was observed on site. NCDOT will continue to monitor the
site.

u
1
1
1

1 11

fl

1

r?
1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
N
V
O
J
0
IL
V
C
CO
O
O
a
L
3
Im
LL
0

?
3 ? W S
gs In
?F n 'T
Fb S F?
?'
OS O
6 .s
?
? ? rF 2 2? t 2d b•
O t / G 8
? a
6??)
l F / ? ? S b? o2s6yF
9{ 5?
)
lQ?Va^
"bVl ` _ ??1
r lgl6
FS- Sg S?
T-
hn "aG„
'8.-c
03S .
B9 SS- C6. g6 l ?
S
,
p
dpy% 9p !a Qi
Yb ?
(p'Spdpxd
S ZF Or
'
1
3,
O F
1

U1 F4'b a6 ?S6£ g S % ?gp?Oby'
S6 cTi >?
o O ?

W z? ?

2 gg b rp
r
'3
N r'
Spa
6

C?J o
-i-

W
b E

b s>

N
p ? n
G
vl
Z
J'
_
? a U
T
Q
c ? a
Ix o
o

L e

N

O ?
zre=
P°a a?yS
ff
O /o

N
N

Fl

1

L
1
1
1

4.0 OVERALL CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATION
• Hydrology has met the success criteria for the second year.
• Vegetation is currently meeting one of two success criteria for the second
I year.
• Monitoring should continue for both hydrology and vegetation.
1
1

1

1

1
1
1

1 13

t

C
APPENDIX A
I SURFACE AND GROUND WATER HYDROLOGY PLOTS
1

1

[J

1
1

1 14
F1
t
1

1

1

1

1-1

F

A r 00-noN-E L
00-noN-90
o
00-130-6Z
r n• F
p` 00-100- L Z
*-„rP+ _ yr, r ar?? w
Y
00-130-V L
r
' h 00-100-90
00-deS-90
00-6nV-OE
00-6ny-ZZ
00-6ny-9 L
00-6ny-LO
C'3 J
N 00-Inf -LE
00-Inf -EZ
? a
t Y .? r , y- w ? ti
00-Inf -9l
?R ? t r ? a
I 00-I n f -80
r
00-Inf -l0
d off 00-unf -EZ
V co
00-unf-9l
N 00-unf -80
00-unf-l0
00-AeW-t z
a ' 00-AUN-L L
00-AUN-60
?•'- f 'blL _+' , 00-/\evq-ZO
fy 1` N
r> t ?.. f r } { t
00-add-tZ
I 1 ,} ty> t Z y 4 k 1,.4 A
00-adv-L L
Y 14 w v ?. ;: 00-add-60
' 1 rr Yi w y Yty,.4 ? i 5
ti 00-jdy-ZO
00-aeIN-9Z
' 00-aeW-8 L
M N O O O d N O 00 CQ N O 00 CO ?F N O
M M M N N N N N r ? - r r
(ui) y3daQ aa4eM eospng
19
G
L
0.
N
-a

t
L
1
1
1
1

1
1

n

N
co
J
d
ca
ca
d
ca
L
N
00-noN-LL
00-AON-VO
00-330-8Z
00-130-OZ
00-130-6[
00-330-90
o0-deS-8 l
00-deS- l L
00-daS-60
00-6nV-LZ
00-6nd-OZ
00-6ny-Z L
eaF
00-6nd-90
00-Inf -6Z
00-Inf -LZ
00-Inf -bl
00-I n f -90
00-unf -6Z
00-unf -ZZ
00-unf -vl
00-unf -L0
oo-Aun- L6
oo-AeW-Sz
00-AeW-9 L
00-AeW-80
00-AeW- LO
00-ady-t Z
00-add-9 L
00-jdd-60
00-adV-L0
00-aeW-9z
00-a?W-8 L
CO N O 00 CO d N O 00 0 d' N O w 0't N O
M M N N N N N .- r T T
(ui) 41dea .ia;eM aaepnS
s
a
d co
a)
,t
Cl)

li

1

L?
u

1

M

N
J
ca

ca

v
ca
ce
i
..
3

V

1
1

00-AON- l I
00-AON-tb0
00-100-83
00-100-03
00-100-6 L
00-100-90
c
t
a
d
D }?
cO

t
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
N
J
d
ea
c)
L
-
+•
c0
d
v
ca
i
N
00-noN- L L
00-naN-tb0
00-1o0-8Z
00-130-OZ
00-100-£ L
00-100-90
00-deS-8 L
00-daS- L l
00-daS-£0
00-6nV-LZ
00-6nb-OZ
00-6ny-Z L
00-6nV-90
00-Inf -6Z
00-Inf -LZ
00-Inf -tl
00-Inf -90
00-unf -6Z
00-unr-ZZ
00-unf -til
00-unf -L0
00-Aum i s
00-AeW-£Z
00-1un-8 L
CO N O M 0 Nt N O 00 Cfl N O GO CO N O
Cl) M M N N N N N +- T T T T
(ui) 41dea aa;eM ooelinS
c
Q
a)
o
ca

00
r-1

F?
Fl
I
n

I
1
1

I

[1

1
u
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
T
J
d
J
(-ui) uoi}e}id!OGJd
CC M N N r r O
O O O O O O O O
O
00-noN- L L
00-noN-b
00-100-sZ
00-100- l?,
00-100-ti
00-130-L
00-daS-OE
00-daS-EZ
00-daS-9 L
00-d9S-6
00-daS-Z
00-6ny-9Z
00-6ny-6 G
00-6ny-Z l
00-6ny-g
00-Inf -6Z
00-Inf -ZZ
00-Inf -5l 0
00-Inf -9
00-Inf - L
00-unr-i?Z
00-unf -L l
00-unf -0l
00-unr-g
00-AleW-L2;
00-AuW-OZ
0048N-CL
00-ALA-g
00-ady-6Z
00-ady-2;?,
00-ady-g L
00-ady-9
00-ady-
00-a?W-SZ
00-JLIW-9 L
O
Q
a?
m
cc$
c
0
L
0
0
Q
8
c
0
?V
.Q
U
N
rn
O LO 0 LO N N M co
(-ui) aalempunoa!D of yjdaa
1

1
1

1
1
i
1
1
i
t
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
N

Cl)
J
rn
c
J
qq'
O
(•u) uoile;idioaad
CC7 Ci N N T T O
O O O O O O O
O
00-noN- L L
00-AON-1'
00-130-82
00-130- L Z
00-130-t, L
00-100-L
00-daS-O£
00-daS-£Z
00-daS-9 L
00-daS-6
00-daS-Z
00-6ny-9Z
00-6ny-6 L
00-6ny-Z l
00-6ny-9
00-Inf -6Z
00-Inf -ZZ
00-Inf -5l p
00-Inf -8
00-Inf - l
00-unf -t,2
00-unf -L L
00-u n f -0 l
00-unr-£
00-AeW-LZ
00-Aemoz
00-Aun-£ l
00-AeW-9
00-ad`d-6Z
00-add-ZZ
00-adV-9 L
00-ady-8
00-jdd- L
00-aeW-SZ
00-JUN-9L
-a
N
6
(D
cr
ca
3
.o
c
0
C'3
0
a
m o
N
c
0
c?
a
?U
a_
I
LO O LO TO T N N C07 M
(•u) aalennpunoaE) o} 44daa

1
I

1

n
?!I
r.

1
1

1

?I

APPENDIX B
SITE PHOTOS
21

fl

t

I ;

Photo I
Photo 2

'A rs-k

Photo 3
Photo 4
22
?I
?., ,
F Photo
ly
.t

23
Photo 7: Big Cordgrass