20130577 Ver 1_Asbuilt Report_20140211

FINAL
BASELINE MONITORING DOCUMENT AND
ASBUILT BASELINE REPORT
LITTLE LICK CREEK BUFFER RESTORATION
Durham County, North Carolina
EEP Project No. 92542, Contract No. D13010S
Data Collection - January 2014
NEUSE RIVER BASIN
SUBMITTED TO /PREPARED FOR:
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699 -1652
Y
�Fcs OSarstem
iement
PROGRAM
February 2014

TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVESUMMARY ......................................................................................... ............................... 1
Project Components and Mitigation Units Table ................................................. ............................... 1
1.0 PROJECT GOALS, BACKGROUND, AND ATTRIBUTES ......................... ...............................
1
1.1 Location and Setting .................................................................................... ...............................
1
1.2 Project Goals and Objectives ....................................................................... ...............................
1
1.3 Project Structure, Restoration Type, and Approach ..................................... ............................... 2
1.3.1 Project Structure ................................................................................... ...............................
2
1.3.2 Restoration Type and Approach ........................................................... ...............................
2
2.0 SUCCESS CRITERIA ..................................................................................... ...............................
2
3.0 MONITORING PLAN .................................................................................... ...............................
2
Monitoring Schedule/Requirements Table ........................................................... ...............................
2
4.0 MAINTENANCE AND CONTINGENCY ..................................................... ...............................
3
5.0 SITE PROTECTION INSTRUMENT ............................................................. ...............................
3
Project Land Information Table ........................................................................... ............................... 3
5.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................ ............................... 4
APPENDICES
Appendix A. General Tables and Figures
Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Units
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3. Project Contacts Table
Table 4. Project Attributes Table
Figure 1. Project Location
Figure 2. Project Assets
Figure 3. Monitoring Plan View
Figure 4. Site Protection
Appendix B. Vegetation Data
Table 7. Planted Bare Root Woody Vegetation
Table 8. Total and Planted Stems by Plot and Species
Vegetation Plot Photographs
Appendix C. Preconstruction and Asbuilt Photographs
Appendix D. DWR Memorandum
Final Baseline Monitoring Document and Asbuilt Baseline Report Table of Contents
Little Lick Creek Buffer Restoration

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) has established the Little Lick Creek
Buffer Project (Project) located approximately five miles east of Durham in Durham County, North
Carolina. The Project is located within the Upper Neuse River Basin Hydrologic Unit and Targeted Local
Watershed 03020201050020. This document details riparian buffer and nutrient offset buffer mitigation
activites within an approximately 12.14 -acre easement.
The Little Lick Creek Local Watershed Plan (NCEEP 2006) project atlas includes this Project (called
Butler Road) with identified stressors resulting from anthropogenic activities related to the conversion of
80 percent of the watershed to disturbed land use /land cover with impervious surfaces covering over 14
percent of the watershed. Water quality is influenced due to the watershed slope (6 percent), the presence
of moderately erodible soils, and its location within the Triassic Basin ecoregion. This project was
identified for riparian buffer and nutrient offset restoration opportunities to improve hydrology, water
quality, and habitat. Little Lick Creek is on the NC Section 303(d) list of impaired water bodies, due to
poor aquatic life ratings and low levels of dissolved oxygen.
The goals of the Little Lick Creek Project (Butler Road) address stressors identified in the Project
watershed and include the following.
• Restore riparian buffers associated with Little Lick Creek, a UT to Little Lick Creek, and water
conveyances flowing to jurisdictional waters on site.
The project goals will be addressed by the following objectives:
• Reestablish natural vegetation along stream banks and water by planting existing cleared /disturbed
land and treating invasive species.
Project restoration activities were completed between November 2013 and December 2013 with invasive
species controls ongoing. Activities included 1) removal and treatment of invasive species including rose
(Rosa sp.), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), and Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), 2) mowing
and /or clearing of dense areas of loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) seedlings and blackberry (Rubus argutus), 3)
soil amendments based on recommendations from soil samples analyzed by the NCDA &CS Agronomy
Division, and 4) plant community restoration. The implemented mitigation is as follows.
Project Components and Mitigation Units Table
Mitigation Credits,'
Type
Riparian Buffer
Nutrient Offset
221,429 ftz (5.08 acres) [minimum, see ** below]
Totals
106,331 ft2 (2.44 acres)
Nitrogen: 11,547 lbs Phosphorous: 742 lbs
Projects Components
Project
Restoration/
Restoration
Mitigation
Pounds of Nitrogen
Pounds of
Component/
Restoration
Acreage
Ratio
Treated Over 30
Phosphorus Treated
Comment
Reach ID
Equivalent
Years
Over 30 Years
*Riparian Buffer
Restoration
106,331 ftz
1:1
* *5546 lbs
* *356 lbs
Invasive /nuisance
2.44 acres
species removal and
** *Nutrient Offset
Restoration
221,429 ftz
1:1
11,547 lbs
742 lbs
planting with native
(5.08 acres)
hardwood trees.
^Calculated in accordance with DWR Memorandum (Appendix D).
*These areas are between 0 -100 feet from top of bank and will either be used for Riparian Buffer Mitigation OR Nutrient pound
reduction, not both.
* *Additional nutrient removal potential if used in lieu of Riparian Buffer square footage.
***This area is between 100 -200 feet from top of bank and can ONLY be used for Nutrient Offset pound reduction.
Final Baseline Monitoring Document and Asbuilt Baseline Report Executive Summary
Little Lick Creek Buffer Restoration

1.0 PROJECT GOALS, BACKGROUND, AND ATTRIBUTES
1.1 Location and Setting
The Project is located five miles east of Durham in United States Geological Survey (USGS) Hydrologic
Unit (HU) and Targeted Local Watershed 03020201050020 (North Carolina Division of Water Quality
[NCDWQ] Subbasin 03- 04 -01) of the Upper Neuse River Basin and will service the USGS 8 -digit
Cataloging Unit (CU) 03020201 (Figure 1, Appendix A) (USGS 1974). The project HU encompasses
approximately 21 square miles and is largely characterized by urban land use. The Project drainage area,
nested in the 700 square mile Falls Lake watershed, encompasses approximately 6.0 square miles at the
downstream Project outfall. The Project drainage area is located on the outer edge of Durham with
identified stressors resulting from anthropogenic activities related to the conversion of 80 percent of the
watershed to disturbed land use /land cover and impervious surfaces covering over 14 percent of the
watershed ( NCEEP 2006).
Directions to the Project from Raleigh, North Carolina:
• Take Glenwood Avenue/US -70 West towards Durham
• After approximately 15.5 miles, turn right on S. Mineral Springs Road
• Turn left after 0.2 mile to stay on S. Mineral Springs Road
• The Project is 2.8 miles on the left; the access point is on Butler Road
Latitude 35.9852N, Longitude 78.8208'W (NAD83 /WGS84)
1.2 Project Goals and Objectives
The Little Lick Creek Buffer Restoration Project is located in the Little Lick Creek Local Watershed
planning area, which is nested in the 700 square mile Falls Lake watershed. The Project watershed is
located within 14 -digit Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03020201050020, which was identified as a
Targeted Local Watershed (TLW) in the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program ( NCEEP)
2010 Neuse River Basin Restoration Priority (RBRP) plan and is identified in the 2009 Little Lick Creek
Local Watershed Plan (LWP) Upper Neuse Project Atlas (Butler Road).
NCEEP developed a LWP for the 21- square mile Little Lick Creek watershed area that included land use
analysis, water quality monitoring, and stakeholder input to identify problems with water quality, habitat,
and hydrology. The Little Lick Creek watershed is relatively undeveloped and in an active state of rural
to suburban transition with agriculture, forestry, rural, and undeveloped land comprising over 50 percent
of the land uses. Durham's laws zone this land for more intensive development; therefore, this land is
rapidly being converted to residential and commercial properties. Little Lick Creek is on the NC Section
303(d) list of impaired water bodies, due to poor aquatic life ratings and low levels of dissolved oxygen as
the result of trash dumping, poor maintenance of on -site wastewater treatment systems, small vehicle
maintenance and repair operations, outdoor materials storage, grease storage, and wash water disposal.
The Little Lick Creek LWP project atlas includes this Project (Butler Road) with identified stressors
resulting from anthropogenic activities related to the conversion of 80 percent of the watershed to
disturbed land use /land cover with impervious surfaces covering over 14 percent of the watershed. Water
quality is influenced due to the watershed slope (6 percent), the presence of moderately erodible soils, and
its location with the Triassic Basin ecoregion. This project was identified for riparian buffer and nutrient
offset restoration opportunities to improve hydrology, water quality, and habitat.
Final Detailed Mitigation Plan Ecosystem Enhancement Program page 1
Little Lick Creek (EEP Project No. 92542, Contract No. D13010S)

The goals of the Little Lick Creek Project (Butler Road) address stressors identified in the Project
watershed and include the following.
• Restore riparian buffers associated with Little Lick Creek, a UT to Little Lick Creek, and water
conveyances flowing to jurisdictional waters on site.
The project goals will be addressed by the following objectives:
• Reestablish natural vegetation along stream banks and water by planting existing
cleared /disturbed land and treating invasive species.
1.3 Project Structure, Restoration Type, and Approach
1.3.1 Project Structure
A depiction of the project structure is provided in the Project Assets (Figure 2, Appendix A) and the
Project Components and Mitigation Units Table (Table 1, Appendix A).
1.3.2 Restoration Type and Approach
Project restoration work resulted in 106,331 square feet (2.44 acres) between top of bank and 100 feet
from the top of bank viable for either riparian buffer mitigation or nutrient offset mitigation (providing
5546 pounds of nitrogen and 356 pounds of phosphorus offsets over 30 years). Additionally, work
between 100 feet and 200 feet from the top of bank will result in 221,429 square feet (5.08 acres) of
nutrient offset mitigation (providing 11,547 pounds of nitrogen offsets and 742 pounds of phosphorus
offsets over 30 years).
Completed project activities, reporting history, completion dates, project contacts, and project attributes
are summarized in Tables 1 -4 (Appendix A).
2.0 SUCCESS CRITERIA
An average density of 320 planted hardwood stems per acre must be surviving after five monitoring years
in accordance with North Carolina Division of Water Quality Administrative Code 15A NCAC 02B.0242
(Neuse River Basin, Mitigation Program for Protection and Maintenance of Existing Riparian Buffers)
(NCDWQ 2007).
11�05 LOO
Annual monitoring data will be reported using the EEP monitoring template. The monitoring report shall
provide a project data chronology that will facilitate an understanding of project status and trends,
population of EEP databases for analysis, research purposes, and assist in decision making regarding
project close -out. The following table outlines monitoring requirements for this Project.
Monitoring Schedule/Requirements Table
Parameter
Quantity
Frequency
Notes
8 CVS plots (see Figure 3 in
Monitoring Years
Vegetation will be monitored using the
Vegetation
Appendix A for approximate
1 -5
Carolina Vegetation Survey (CVS)
locations)
protocols
Exotic and nuisance
Semi - annual
Locations of exotic and nuisance
vegetation
vegetation will be mapped
Locations of fence damage, vegetation
Project boundary
Semi - annual
damage, boundary encroachments, etc.
will be mapped
Final Detailed Mitigation Plan Ecosystem Enhancement Program page
Little Lick Creek (EEP Project No. 92542, Contract No. D13010S)

Vegetation Monitoring
After planting was completed, an initial evaluation was performed to verify planting methods were
successful and to determine initial species composition and density. Eight sample vegetation plots (10-
meter by 10- meter) were installed and measured within the Site as per guidelines established in CVS -EEP
Protocol for Recording Vegetation, Version 4.2 (Lee et al. 2008) (Figure 3, Appendix A). Vegetation
plots are permanently monumented with 6 -foot metal T -posts at each corner, and a ten foot tall pvc at the
origin.. In each sample plot, vegetation parameters to be monitored include species composition and
species density. Visual observations of the percent cover of shrub and herbaceous species will be
documented by photograph. Baseline vegetation plot information was collected December 11, 2013 and
can be found in Appendix B. Initial stem count measurements indicate an average of 496 planted stems
per acre across the Project.
4.0 MAINTENANCE AND CONTINGENCY
NCEEP shall monitor the Project on a regular basis and shall conduct a physical inspection of the Project
a minimum of once per year throughout the post - construction monitoring period until performance
standards are met.
Vegetation
If vegetation success criteria are not achieved based on average density calculations from combined plots
over the entire restoration area, supplemental planting may be performed with tree species approved by
regulatory agencies. Supplemental planting will be performed as needed until achievement of vegetation
success criteria.
5.0 SITE PROTECTION INSTRUMENT
The land required for the construction, management, and stewardship of this mitigation project includes
portions of the following parcels. The State of North Carolina holds a conservation easement in
perpetuity on all 12.14 acres of the Project area. The underlying deed is held by the Triangle Greenways
Council (Figure 4, Appendix A).
Project Land Information Table
Final Detailed Mitigation Plan Ecosystem Enhancement Program page
Little Lick Creek (EEP Project No. 92542, Contract No. D13010S)
Deed
Site Protection
Acreage
Parcel
Landowner
PIN
County
Book/Page
Instrument
Number
Protected
1
Triangle Greenways
0851 -03 -33 -3914
Conservation
007156/
1.19
2
0851 -03 -33 -1937
0.79
3
0851 -03 -33 -2686
0.74
4
0851 -03 -33 -1700
0.86
5
0851 -03 -23 -9712
0.91
6
0851 -03 -23 -9513
0.92
7
0851 -03 -23 -9313
0.92
0851 -03 -23 -9112
8
Durham
Easement and
1.00
Council
Right of Access
000758
0851 -03 -33 -0098
9
0.79
0851 -03 -33 -1440
10
2.50
0851 -03 -22 -6975
11
1.22
29
0851 -03 -23 -6160
0.22
TOTAL
12.14
Final Detailed Mitigation Plan Ecosystem Enhancement Program page
Little Lick Creek (EEP Project No. 92542, Contract No. D13010S)

5.0 REFERENCES
Lee, Michael T., R.K. Peet, S.D. Roberts, and T.R. Wentworth. 2008. CVS -EEP Protocol for Recording
Vegetation, Version 4.2. (online). Available: http : / /cvs.bio.unc.edu/methods.htm.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2007. Redbook, Surface Waters and Wetlands
Standards. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water
Quality. Raleigh, North Carolina.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2012. North Carolina Waterbodies Listed by
River Basin (online). Available: http://portal.ncdenr.org /c/ document_ library /get file ?uuid= b9835c93 -f244-
4bc3- 9282- 4a58d98310da &groupld =38364 [January 28, 2013]. North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh, North Carolina.
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP). 2006. Little Lick Creek Local Watershed
Plan (online). Available: http: / /www.nceep. net / services /lwps /little lick/LittleLick LWP.pdf [January 7,
2013]. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh, North
Carolina.
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP). 2010. Neuse River Basin Restoration
Priorities (online). Available: http: / /portal.ncdenr.org /c /document library/ get _file ?uuid= 665be84c- cf93 -477b-
918c- 1993778efllf &groupld =60329 [January 7, 2013]. North Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources, Raleigh, North Carolina.
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP). undated. Little Lick Creek Hydrologic Unit
03020201050020 Upper Neuse Project Atlas (online). Available:
http: / /www.nceep. net / services /lwps /little _ lick /Little Lick Creek chapter final reduced size.pdf [January 7,
2013]. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh, North
Carolina.
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2012. Web Soil Survey (online). Available:
http : / /websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov / [January 18, 2013]. Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources
Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture.
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina:
Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and
Recreation, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. Raleigh,
North Carolina.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2012. National Hydric Soils List by State, North
Carolina (online). Available: ftp:// ftp- fc.sc.egov.usda.gov/NSSC /Hydric Soils /Lists /hydric soils.xlsx
[January 18, 2013]. United State Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation
Service.
United States Geological Survey (USGS). 1974. Hydrologic Unit Map - 1974. State of North Carolina.
Final Detailed Mitigation Plan Ecosystem Enhancement Program page
Little Lick Creek (EEP Project No. 92542, Contract No. D13010S)

Appendix A.
General Tables and Figures
Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3. Project Contacts Table
Table 4. Project Attributes Table
Figure 1. Project Location
Figure 2. Project Assets
Figure 3. Monitoring Plan View
Figure 4. Site Protection
Final Baseline Monitoring Document and Asbuilt Baseline Report Appendices
Little Lick Creek Buffer Restoration

Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Little Lick Creek Buffer Restoration
Mitigation Credits'
Type
Riparian Buffer
Nutrient Offset
--
April 2013
221,429 ft2 (5.08 acres) [minimum, see ** below]
Totals
106,331 ft2 (2.44 acres)
Nitrogen: 11,547 lbs Phosphorous: 742 lbs
Projects Components
Project
Restoration/
Restoration
Mitigation
Pounds of Nitrogen
Pounds of
December 2013
Component/
Restoration
Acreage
Ratio
Treated Over 30
Phosphorus Treated
Comment
Reach ID
Equivalent
Grant Lewis 919 - 215 -1693
Years
Over 30 Years
*Riparian Buffer
Restoration
106,331 ft2
1:1
* *5546 lbs
* *356 lbs
Invasive /nuisance
(2.44 acres)
species removal and
** *Nutrient Offset
Restoration
221,429 ft2
1:1
11,547 lbs
742 lbs
planting with native
(5.08 acres)
hardwood trees.
'Calculated in accordance with DWR Memorandum (Appendix D).
*These areas are between 0 -100 feet from top of bank and will either be used for Riparian Buffer Mitigation OR Nutrient pound
reduction, not both.
* *Additional nutrient removal potential if used in lieu of Riparian Buffer square footage.
***This area is between 100 -200 feet from top of bank and can ONLY be used for Nutrient Offset pound reduction.
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Little Lick Creek Buffer Restoration
Activity or Deliverable
Data Collection
Complete
Completion
or Delivery
Mitigation Plan/Planting Plans
--
April 2013
Pine Removal & Invasive Species Control
Grant Lewis
August 2013
Bushhogging
--
November 2013
Invasive Species Controls
--
November 2013 - present
Planting
--
December 2013
Baseline Monitoring Document (Year 0)
December 2013
February 2014
Table 3. Project Contacts Table
Little Lick Creek Buffer Restoration
Designer
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27603
Grant Lewis
919 - 215 -1693
PlantingNegetation
River Works, Inc.
Maintenance /Invasive Species Control
6105 Chapel Hill Rd.
Contractor
Raleigh, NC 27607
George Morris
919 - 818 -3984
Baseline Data Collection
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27603
Grant Lewis 919 - 215 -1693
Final Baseline Monitoring Document and Asbuilt Baseline Report Appendices
Little Lick Creek Buffer Restoration

Table 4. Project Attribute Table
Little Lick Creek Buffer Restoration
Project Information
Project Name
Little Lick Creek
Project County
Durham
Project Area
12.1434 acres
Project Coordinates
35.9852 °N, 78.8208 °W
Project Watershed
Summary Information
Physiographic Region
Piedmont
Project River Basin
Neuse
USGS 8 -digit HUC
03020201
USGS 14 -digit HUC
03020201050020
NCDWQ Subbasin
03 -04 -01
Project Drainage Area
6.0 square miles
Project Drainage Area Impervious Surface
>14%
Reach Summary Information
Parameters
Little Lick Creek
UT to Little Lick Creek
Length of Reach (linear feet)
1254
510
Drainage Area (square miles)
6.04
0.27
NCDWQ Index Number
27- 9 -(0.5)
27- 9 -(0.5)
NCDWQ Classification
WS -IV, NSW
WS -IV, NSW
Dominant Soil Series
Chewacla and Wehadkee
Drainage Class
Somewhat Poorly to Poorly Drained
Soil Hydric Status
Hydric
Slope
0 -2 percent
FEMA Classification
100 -Year Floodplain
Native Vegetation Community
Piedmont/Low Mountain Alluvial Forest
Percent Composition of Exotic Invasives
5.6
Regulatory
Considerations
Regulation
Applicable
Waters of the U.S. — Sections 404 and 401
No
Endangered Species Act
No
Historic Preservation Act
No
CZMA/CAMA
No
FEMA Floodplain Compliance
No
Essential Fisheries Habitat
No
Final Baseline Monitoring Document and Asbuilt Baseline Report
Little Lick Creek Buffer Restoration
Appendices

1
RE r5
ff
28
1i VYXX/ff�
t The subject project site in an environmental restoration site of the NCDENR J
Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) and is encompassed by a recorded
conservation easement, but is bordered by land under private ownership.
Accessing the site may require traversing areas near or along the easement }
boundary and therefore access by the general public is not permitted. Access
by authorized personnel of state and federal agencies or their
designers /contractors involved in the development, oversight and stewardship of r
the restoration site is permitted within the terms and timeframes of their defined
roles. Any intended site visitation or activity by any person outside of these .
previously sanctioned roles and activities requires prior coordination with EEP.
Gags
\� s
98 J ' `_ �``• �" �— 44 it _. .
Project Location
35.9852, - 78.8208
✓ ; '`,�)
4.. PA
AL
z ,1�
}`
IG
70
Directions from Raleigh:
Take Glenwood Avenue /US -70 West towards Durham. 1
After approximately 15.5 miles, turn right on S. Mineral Springs rd. `
-� Turn left after 0.2 mile to stay on S. Mineral Springs rd. StLi�l ,
The Site is 2.8 miles on the left. r``s x
f The access point is on Butler Road. t�em
PRnc Rnrw
P-
0,
° 0 1 2 J;
A
Miles F)
Axiom Environmental
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27603
(919) 215 -1693
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
PROJECT LOCATION MAP
LITTLE LICK CREEK PROJECT
Durham County, North Carolina
Dwn. by.
KRJ
FIGURE
Date:
January 2013
EEP Project:
92542

N �
pry ^"� i - -:u _�` :�� • •• �` � � `+ •''�, ,
ZV
�- y
A.✓ • i,y s i '.t "4 -* -t' ` i, it `1 1 • r
rx:
_r
(
�.
5
�J .: — - � .n• "'r � Syr rt Sys �,
�`1j0i + ^+yr t �• i� 9*w y � _- •7.' � RjfQ =�' � -�.7�( 7
t 'i5
M 5-
d y
c
i
1.,J.
�� +try' ✓� � �, � 1. �['l Tyl
✓,` / / "t
.�;�' 'm �' . Vii.,, F' `? �. A' , t" ! • �,' 'i
lE� f yep
Legend
I
Easement Boundary = 12.14 acres
{ t y • / ���`e N - I% Streams
/V/ Water Conveyances
_ -- Riparian Buffer Restoration = 2.44 acres
Nutrient Offset Credit Area = 5.08 acres
No Credit Area = 0.19 acres
a �, Existing Mature Vegetation (No Credit) = 4.12 acres
y'
':� . , // ,� ,;� +`�•� A. �� Sewer Easement (No Credit)= 0.50 acres
f , Feet
0 50 100 200 300 400
r - '; �4 Project Components and Mitigation Units Table
Mitigation Credits^
Type Riparian Buffer Nutrient Offset
JI'' -z•° - 221,429 ft2 5.08 acres) minimum, see ** below]
+'j �• ,� - Totals 106,331 ft (2.44 acres) Nitrogen: 11,547 lbs Phosphorous: 742 lbs
Projects Components
Project Restoration/
Restoration Mit Pounds of Nitrogen Pounds of
igation
Component/ Restoration Treated Over 30 Phosphorus Treated Comment
' �. Reach ID Equivalent Acreage Ratio years Over 30 Years
"~ `* 106,331 ft' Invasive /nuisance
*Riparian Buffer Restoration (2.44 acres 1.1 * *5546 lbs **356 lbs species removal and
4
* ** 221,429 ftz planting with native
Nutrient Offset Restoration (5.08 acres) 1:1 11,547 lbs 742 lbs hardwood trees.
�- ^Calculated in accordance with DWR Memorandum (Appendix D).
*These areas are between 0 -100 feet from top of bank and will either be used for Riparian Buffer Mitigation OR Nutrient pound
' reduction, not both.
* *Additional nutrient removal potential if used in lieu of Riparian Buffer square footage.
�� • ** *This area is between 100 -200 feet from top of bank and can ONLY be used for Nutrient Offset pound reduction.
Axiom Environmental PROJECTASSETS
218 Snow Avenue LITTLE LICK CREEK PROJECT
Raleigh, NC 27603
(919) 215 -1693 Durham County, North Carolina
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
Dwn. by.
KRJ /CLF /PHP
FIGURE
Date:
January 2014
2
EEP Project:
92542

•
I]] � I � ' 1. . �► .;•ti
4
IL
l_.gfJ�Y= � .._'1M'�' .. Yri F e`�_P� •e. '�.- I� Air '6
r rNV
• - f ffSS��
Ot
I
.. � : �, �.b 7`r:�!'� � . �/ - i t r `" . ,, - � y`• � �• "� • i 111 `,
.* ri a. a
U!1 1
.6�r�. �'W r s I "r !� v� _.I� 5•_ 6
w JJ
�, � PSI � - #• .,, ���� � ;y�i .t�C
tw y+4 Oj 5j Y C° cY .T ter
,? # 7 f,
YY� �l' + - I ! ' -
f ill' ! !.
0 .�■�y■■.�■�, te
eht
PROGRAM
Legend
C3 Easement Boundary = 12.14 acres
^Jyy � i • /,Y I
Streams
JY k
1
r w l ^n.^- Water Conveyances
CVS Vegetation Plots
' i 7!" `, .c 1 ♦r N.G. i_. /,
G ~ Photo Point
Sewer Easement
[
f. ��� �,�',d:• " ,• ' �y y Excluded Area (No Credit) = 0.19 acres
Existing Mature Vegetation (No Planting) = 4.12 acres
* Y fy 'r .
>.• , ,,;` �.... �'r'.' r r+ir ' 0 100 200
YN
Vk
Feet
Dwn. by.
FIGURE
Axiom Environmental
CURRENT CONDITION PLAN VIEW
KRJ
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27603
LITTLE LICK CREEK SITE
Date:
(919) 215 -1693
Durham County, North Carolina
January 2014
Project:
Axiom Environmental. Inc.
12 -025

VICINITY MAP -
IF. CA_RA WAKE CD1
WILSON, CERTFY THAT THE
RAWN DER MY SUPERVS
SURVEY MADE UNDER MY
PRON RECORDED IN BOOK
THAT THE BOUNDARIES N(
RE CLEARLY IN TED As
IA110N FOUNo IN BOOK_
I'D IS 1:100• p00N
1S AMENDED.
11 A
AT
OT K
I AR CHE
hoar xDT
`EA,Lc Einp Is O1A
mi aAUA�tY1Y- A
OF
FREEMAN RD.
©��B3l�ECF£fC�
LOT 3 DI= EAST SC
H RID D, LARRABEE &
r
A A. LARRABEE
25
23 BAPTIST RD.
DURHAM,
-
A
\
SITE
,
E S
27587
ING.
1'879
(Y F)
-T
P 133.01' —
I
\
TH
LMA A. LARRABEE
MINERAL SPRIN
BUTLER RD.
T.H. uai m
SEE ,F R]
1
1_
I
H 9
rc
WY
98
e • 9'zr w n sqy.
DE
VICINITY MAP -
IF. CA_RA WAKE CD1
WILSON, CERTFY THAT THE
RAWN DER MY SUPERVS
SURVEY MADE UNDER MY
PRON RECORDED IN BOOK
THAT THE BOUNDARIES N(
RE CLEARLY IN TED As
IA110N FOUNo IN BOOK_
I'D IS 1:100• p00N
1S AMENDED.
11 A
AT
OT K
I AR CHE
hoar xDT
`EA,Lc Einp Is O1A
mi aAUA�tY1Y- A
N 8 '38 S
- FIR ,. pR A
3T HAND » I �
PER t2l 7 - C PN ?43 "E
oo.
N -.4
DI urr ga s To INSYS CCx Ix A)
Dx
C..- YH as _
0 R
CERR.IATE
IN 7 PROPER L NG�
PL TU B I OWNER EDYNICEBANES T RDI . L' " k
0 AR BEE ORDERED THE WORK A S YE G AN p PL TO
MA EA.P ALL PU91JC STREETS, A D G
0 OPE SPACES SO DESIGNATED UPON SAI P TAE I REB
CE CA ED OR s USE AND THAr ALL U AN P 1MA EA NTS
PUT ARE HEREBY CRAN ME TP TED.
R
OWNER)
s
WI S TC SIGNATURE
Sl TE
C OF .—A -A
WAKE TTT
A NOTARY PUBUC, CER FY TPA G. t
P SO AL AAPPAEARED BEFORE ME TH19 AY I fR Y TO ME BY
AT F E S NOT A GRANTEE E A T{E
TR M scrvco THE Fg1ECgNC po M r A e mNC vnTNess,
—CODING D. R1CHiND C. LARRABEE W A RA ON THE
PC T PU C
M aMMISSION F<PlRESA#anAJj 1410
IT TE IF NORTH CAROUNA
:0 NT OF DURHAM
VI 0 ICER FOR
IU A _CG NTY N.0 DO HEREBY CERT Y E LA OR M TO
NI IS CUTTFICATIDN IS AFFIXED M TS AL ST TUT w Y
IEQUIRE MEN TS FOR RECOROINO.
DATE
!E EW OFF ER
SCALE: 1" 100,
sD loo xoD <
D REV.
394 3.2.86' /
BIT"
D
/
0�\B5 i 1 3 / xwu
N D.B. i'JU
1 CB
t Do
rt 1
1 4d /
OF
/
1-22 Lot v su.ux.4.0
©��B3l�ECF£fC�
LOT 3 DI= EAST SC
H RID D, LARRABEE &
r
A A. LARRABEE
25
23 BAPTIST RD.
DURHAM,
-
A
\
S I-
27
I
(91 i
,
E S
27587
ING.
1'879
(Y F)
-T
P 133.01' —
I
\
TH
LMA A. LARRABEE
MINERAL SPRIN
>
\
T.H. uai m
SEE ,F R]
1
1_
P.B. 4 0
_-
aD PG T6
I
\
I
e • 9'zr w n sqy.
DE
N 8 '38 S
- FIR ,. pR A
3T HAND » I �
PER t2l 7 - C PN ?43 "E
oo.
N -.4
DI urr ga s To INSYS CCx Ix A)
Dx
C..- YH as _
0 R
CERR.IATE
IN 7 PROPER L NG�
PL TU B I OWNER EDYNICEBANES T RDI . L' " k
0 AR BEE ORDERED THE WORK A S YE G AN p PL TO
MA EA.P ALL PU91JC STREETS, A D G
0 OPE SPACES SO DESIGNATED UPON SAI P TAE I REB
CE CA ED OR s USE AND THAr ALL U AN P 1MA EA NTS
PUT ARE HEREBY CRAN ME TP TED.
R
OWNER)
s
WI S TC SIGNATURE
Sl TE
C OF .—A -A
WAKE TTT
A NOTARY PUBUC, CER FY TPA G. t
P SO AL AAPPAEARED BEFORE ME TH19 AY I fR Y TO ME BY
AT F E S NOT A GRANTEE E A T{E
TR M scrvco THE Fg1ECgNC po M r A e mNC vnTNess,
—CODING D. R1CHiND C. LARRABEE W A RA ON THE
PC T PU C
M aMMISSION F<PlRESA#anAJj 1410
IT TE IF NORTH CAROUNA
:0 NT OF DURHAM
VI 0 ICER FOR
IU A _CG NTY N.0 DO HEREBY CERT Y E LA OR M TO
NI IS CUTTFICATIDN IS AFFIXED M TS AL ST TUT w Y
IEQUIRE MEN TS FOR RECOROINO.
DATE
!E EW OFF ER
SCALE: 1" 100,
sD loo xoD <
D REV.
394 3.2.86' /
BIT"
D
/
0�\B5 i 1 3 / xwu
N D.B. i'JU
1 CB
t Do
rt 1
1 4d /
OF
/
1-22 Lot v su.ux.4.0
©��B3l�ECF£fC�
LOT 3 DI= EAST SC
H RID D, LARRABEE &
r
A A. LARRABEE
25
23 BAPTIST RD.
DURHAM,
-
"•:
,.
S I-
27
I
(91 i
,
E S
27587
ING.
1'879
(Y F)
0lg3FZ���'.vsz:rsTII�
TH
LMA A. LARRABEE
N 8 '38 S
- FIR ,. pR A
3T HAND » I �
PER t2l 7 - C PN ?43 "E
oo.
N -.4
DI urr ga s To INSYS CCx Ix A)
Dx
C..- YH as _
0 R
CERR.IATE
IN 7 PROPER L NG�
PL TU B I OWNER EDYNICEBANES T RDI . L' " k
0 AR BEE ORDERED THE WORK A S YE G AN p PL TO
MA EA.P ALL PU91JC STREETS, A D G
0 OPE SPACES SO DESIGNATED UPON SAI P TAE I REB
CE CA ED OR s USE AND THAr ALL U AN P 1MA EA NTS
PUT ARE HEREBY CRAN ME TP TED.
R
OWNER)
s
WI S TC SIGNATURE
Sl TE
C OF .—A -A
WAKE TTT
A NOTARY PUBUC, CER FY TPA G. t
P SO AL AAPPAEARED BEFORE ME TH19 AY I fR Y TO ME BY
AT F E S NOT A GRANTEE E A T{E
TR M scrvco THE Fg1ECgNC po M r A e mNC vnTNess,
—CODING D. R1CHiND C. LARRABEE W A RA ON THE
PC T PU C
M aMMISSION F<PlRESA#anAJj 1410
IT TE IF NORTH CAROUNA
:0 NT OF DURHAM
VI 0 ICER FOR
IU A _CG NTY N.0 DO HEREBY CERT Y E LA OR M TO
NI IS CUTTFICATIDN IS AFFIXED M TS AL ST TUT w Y
IEQUIRE MEN TS FOR RECOROINO.
DATE
!E EW OFF ER
SCALE: 1" 100,
sD loo xoD <
D REV.
394 3.2.86' /
BIT"
D
/
0�\B5 i 1 3 / xwu
N D.B. i'JU
1 CB
t Do
rt 1
1 4d /
RCS RB- REFERENCE u
OF
/
1-22 Lot v su.ux.4.0
LOTS 1 -11 & 29
LOT 3 DI= EAST SC
H RID D, LARRABEE &
r
A A. LARRABEE
25
23 BAPTIST RD.
DURHAM,
N.C. 27703
BSS,
8
T
F
NIXON & KIE
NSULTING EN31
10 CHAPEL HILL ROAD
LEIGH, NORTH CAROL!
19 HERITAGE TRADE ER
E FOREST, NORTH C
LEPHONE: (919)851-04
: (919 )851 -8988 (Ral.),
S I-
27
I
(91 i
,
E S
27587
ING.
1'879
(Y F)
TH
LMA A. LARRABEE
DE
CR PTI
P
O
_
ftG^ itD
­11-Al
{
EP
RS N
$
P
I.A.
1
e$
�
B
gBgg
3.02
RCS T
$m
188.
8' JD
o
{
Rcs ! lip DO
yi nr
RCS RB- REFERENCE u
OF
/
1-22 Lot v su.ux.4.0
LOTS 1 -11 & 29
LOT 3 DI= EAST SC
H RID D, LARRABEE &
r
A A. LARRABEE
25
23 BAPTIST RD.
DURHAM,
N.C. 27703
BSS,
8
T
F
NIXON & KIE
NSULTING EN31
10 CHAPEL HILL ROAD
LEIGH, NORTH CAROL!
19 HERITAGE TRADE ER
E FOREST, NORTH C
LEPHONE: (919)851-04
: (919 )851 -8988 (Ral.),
S I-
27
I
(91 i
,
E S
27587
ING.
1'879
(Y F)
TH
LMA A. LARRABEE
DE
CR PTI
PM, PEA
i
lEFERENCES
'.B. 186 PG. 47
'.B. 1541`13.193
'.B. 137 PG. 718
'.B. 124 PG. 23
'.B. 82 PG.1
'.B. 40 PG. 78
RREAM BUFFERS
RADINC, EROSION ANT WA I E Ao6RDN.
( DO SECT. ass B, C AND ) A
` ""a
v Ck IRS
NOTE:
1) AREAS BY CO RDI A E CEO ETRY UNLESS SHOWN 0 W1 E ;E-
2) FOUND R SE A ALL CORNERS UNLESS SET" 0 E WISE.
3) ALL DISTANCES ARE HORIZONTAL GROUND DISTANCES.
4) ALL STREETS RE PUBLIC RIC�iHT TS -OF -WAY UNLESS 5 10 TH RWISE.
5) OTHER INSTRU ENTS OF RE(jORO MAY AFFECT THIS R E TY..
6) NO TITLE SEA CH PERFORM D FOR THIS SURVEY.
7) FEMA FLOOD AZ RD AREAS LOCATED ON THIS SITE PER FRM PANEL
H 3720085100 J MTTI E FE TIVE DATE OF MAY 2, 00 ZONE AE
8) THE COORDINATES S 0 04 THIS PLAT WERE DER[ D GY VR 3 (VIRTUAL
REFERENCE TA ION 0 S SING DUAL FREQUENCY RE Eh ER. THIS METHOD
RESULTS IN (NAD 11183 - (DOES 96) POSITIONS AND NA D 88 (MSL)
ELEVATIONS USIHG HE DUNTINUOUSLY OPERATING 3TAnDlIS AAINTAINED BY
NORTH CARD N GIOD:TTC SURVEY.
9) ALL LOTS ARE VA CAP T.
10) PROPERTY IS Z014ED R- 20.
TQ AL AREA =
NAME
OF
OVINER
LOTS 1 -11 & 29
RI
H RID D, LARRABEE &
THEL
A A. LARRABEE
25
23 BAPTIST RD.
DURHAM,
N.C. 27703
NAME
OF
PR
JE is
¢TITLE LICK CREEK
''..
S
N
0 LE
' E
NU1
POI
BE :032
CT NUMBER:
-BA
92542
C
RR NT
0WT
ER: RI�^HAR0
0. LARRABEE
TH
LMA A. LARRABEE
OF NORTH CAROLINA SHEET
ENHANCEMENT PRCK
REEK BUFFER(BUTLE .) )
SPO A 032 -BA
ROPERTY OF
2D D. LARRABEE & OF
VIA A. LARRABEE I I I I I 1
ro
a
m
r
0
It
L

Appendix B.
Vegetation Data
Table 7. Planted Woody Vegetation
Table 8. Total Planted and All Stems by Plot and Species
Vegetation Plot Photographs
Final Baseline Monitoring Document and Asbuilt Baseline Report
Little Lick Creek Buffer Restoration
Appendices

Table 7. Planted Bare Root Woodv Veeetation
Species
Quantity
American sycamore (Platanus occidentalis)
504
Green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica)
466
Hackberry (Celtis laevigata)
56
Red maple (Acer rubrum)
277
River birch (Betula nigra)
458
Swamp chestnut oak (Quercus michauxii)
310
Tulip Poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera)
429
Water oak (Quercus nigra)
300
Willow oak (Quercus phellos)
254
TOTAL
3054
Final Baseline Monitoring Document and Asbuilt Baseline Report
Little Lick Creek Buffer Restoration
Appendices

Table 8. Total and Planted Stems by Plot and Species
EEP Project Code 92542. Project Name: Little Lick Creek
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
Pnol-S = Planted excluding livestakes
P -all = Planting including livestakes
T = All planted and natural recruits including livestakes
T includes natural recruits
Current Plot Data (MYO 2013)
Annual Means
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
92542 -01 -0001
92542 -01 -0002
92542 -01 -0003
92542 -01 -0004
92542 -01 -0005
92542 -01 -0006
92542 -01 -0007
92542 -01 -0008
MYO (2013)
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
Acer rubrum
red maple
Tree
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
1
1
1
7
7
7
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
1
1
1
4
4
4
1
1
1
2
2
2
4
4
4
12
12
12
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
9
9
9
2
2
21
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
4
4
6
6
6
23
23
23
Liriodendron tulipifera
tuliptree
Tree
1
1
1
3
3
31
2
2
2
2
2
2
8
8
8
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
1 2
2
2
1
1
1
4
4
4
1
1
1
11
11
11
Quercus michauxii
swamp chestnut oak
Tree
7
7
7
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
4
4
20
20
20
Quercus nigra
water oak
Tree
3
3
3
1
1
1
2
2
2
4
4
4
1
1
1
11
11
11
Quercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
1
1
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
6
6
7
Ulmus alata
lwinged elm
ITree
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Stem count
size (ares)
size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE
20
20
20
8
71
9
10
10
11
10
171
10
11
11
11
11
111
11
11
11
11
17
17
17
981
98
100
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
8
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.20
4
4
4
6
6
6
5
5
6
4
4
4
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
5
�_51
5
8
8
9
809.4
809.4
809.4
323.7
323.7
364.2
404.7
404.7
445.2
404.7
404.7
404.7
445.2
445.2
445.2
445.2
445.2
445.2
445.2
445.2
445.2
688
688
6881
495.71
495.71
505.9
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
Pnol-S = Planted excluding livestakes
P -all = Planting including livestakes
T = All planted and natural recruits including livestakes
T includes natural recruits

Little Lick Creek (Butler Road)
Baseline Vegetation Monitoring Photographs
Taken December 2013
..........
r
. .........
{I ,
Final Baseline Monitoring Document and Asbuilt Baseline Report Appendices
Little Lick Creek Buffer Restoration

Appendix C.
Preconstruction and
Asbuilt Photographs
Final Baseline Monitoring Document and Asbuilt Baseline Report Appendices
Little Lick Creek Buffer Restoration

Preconstruction Photographs
Taken January 2013
Facing South Looking
Towards Little Lick
Creek
Facing West Looking at
a Water Conveyance
� Draining Project Fields
Final Baseline Monitoring Document and Asbuilt Baseline Report
Little Lick Creek Buffer Restoration
Appendices

Asbuilt Photo Point Photographs
Taken December 2013
Photo Point 4
Final Baseline Monitoring Document and Asbuilt Baseline Report
Little Lick Creek Buffer Restoration
Appendices

Appendix D.
DWR Memorandum
Final Baseline Monitoring Document and Asbuilt Baseline Report Appendices
Little Lick Creek Buffer Restoration

PA
M��.
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Resources
Water Quality Programs
Pat McCrory Thomas A. Reeder John E. Skvarla, III
Governor Director Secretary
August 9, 2013
MEMORANDUM
To: N.C. Ecosystem Enhancement Program
From: Tom Reeder
Subject: DWR responses to the EEP document "Reforms needed immediately in the regulation
of riparian buffer mitigation"
On August 2, 2013, the Division of Water Resources (DWR) received a document from the N.C.
Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) titled "Reforms needed immediately in the regulation of
riparian buffer mitigation ". Below is a short summary of each point raised in the document and
DWR's response to those points.
I. Riparian Buffer Mitigation Widths — the Ironclad 50' Standard
There are two issues raised under this section: (a) provide mitigation credit for buffers wider than
50 feet and (b) provide mitigation credit for buffers narrower than 50 feet.
Response:
(a) DWR will approve mitigation credit for buffer widths in excess of 50 feet on a prorated
basis, up to a maximum of 200 feet, including on pre- existing mitigation sites:
Buffer width (ft)
Percentage of Full Credit
50 -100
100%
101 -200
25% for area > 100 feet
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699 -1617
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] \ FAX: 919 - 807 -6492
Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org
An Equal Opportunity \ Affirmative Action Employer

Example for restoration of a 1,000 linear foot stream segment:
50 '
100
20D '
(b) DWR agrees that mitigation credit should be granted for restored buffer widths less than
50 feet, however this would require a rule change. The draft consolidated buffer
mitigation rule (15A NCAC 02B .0295) already has provisions for narrower buffers in
urban areas and DWR supports expanding this to non -urban areas.
II. Riparian Buffer Jurisdiction — Map Jurisdiction.
There are two issues raised under this section: (a) the ability to conduct restoration or
enhancement on unmapped streams and (b) the ability to conduct restoration or enhancement on
all watercourses, including ditches.
Response for the Neuse, Tar - Pamlico, Catawba and Jordan:
Under the current buffer mitigation rules, applicants may "restore or enhance a non - forested
riparian buffer..." A riparian buffer is defined within each of the buffer rules. Each rule has
an applicability paragraph that defines where the rule shall apply (e.g. in the Neuse "This
Rule shall apply to 50 foot wide riparian buffers directly adjacent to surface waters in the
Neuse River Basin (intermittent streams, perennial streams, lakes, ponds, and estuaries),
excluding wetlands. ") The rule goes on further to clarify that a subject feature must be
depicted on either the USGS topo map or the NRCS soil survey and defines the Zones of the
riparian buffer.
50'minimum
`\
required
50' 100
t
FULL CREDIT FOR
A 1DO ' BUFFER
Area= 100;00.0W
credk - 100,000 Ft-
Stream
FULL CREDIT FOR
q 5D' BUFFER
1,000 LF
Area = SD,DDD Ft�
Credit = 5D,DOD W
25 % FULL CREDIT FOR
ADDITIONAL BUFFER.
BEYOND 10D'
Area = 100;000H2
Credit = 25,000 W
of to scale)
Tot.{ Credit = 125,00DjJ&`
50 '
100
20D '
(b) DWR agrees that mitigation credit should be granted for restored buffer widths less than
50 feet, however this would require a rule change. The draft consolidated buffer
mitigation rule (15A NCAC 02B .0295) already has provisions for narrower buffers in
urban areas and DWR supports expanding this to non -urban areas.
II. Riparian Buffer Jurisdiction — Map Jurisdiction.
There are two issues raised under this section: (a) the ability to conduct restoration or
enhancement on unmapped streams and (b) the ability to conduct restoration or enhancement on
all watercourses, including ditches.
Response for the Neuse, Tar - Pamlico, Catawba and Jordan:
Under the current buffer mitigation rules, applicants may "restore or enhance a non - forested
riparian buffer..." A riparian buffer is defined within each of the buffer rules. Each rule has
an applicability paragraph that defines where the rule shall apply (e.g. in the Neuse "This
Rule shall apply to 50 foot wide riparian buffers directly adjacent to surface waters in the
Neuse River Basin (intermittent streams, perennial streams, lakes, ponds, and estuaries),
excluding wetlands. ") The rule goes on further to clarify that a subject feature must be
depicted on either the USGS topo map or the NRCS soil survey and defines the Zones of the
riparian buffer.

To allow buffer mitigation to occur on non - subject features requires a rule change. DWR
does support buffer mitigation on unmapped streams, and the draft consolidated buffer
mitigation rule (15A NCAC 02B .0295) already has language to allow for this.
Response for Randleman:
Under the current Randleman buffer mitigation rules, applicants may "restore or enhance a
non - forested riparian buffer..." A riparian buffer is defined within the Randleman rules to
include unmapped features, as well as ditches or manmade conveyances that "deliver
untreated stormwater runoff from an adjacent source directly to an intermittent or perennial
stream are subject to the Rule."
DWR will continue to allow buffer mitigation to occur in the Randleman watershed on
unmapped features as well as ditches or manmade conveyances that meet the rule.
Response for Goose Creek:
Under the current Goose Creek buffer mitigation rules, unmapped streams may be used to
provide buffer mitigation, as well as first order ephemeral streams that discharge /outlet into
intermittent or perennial streams.
III. Riparian Buffer Jurisdiction — Stream Calls on Mapped Streams
The issues raised under this section focus on the requirement to have a stream determination
made by DWR staff. More specifically, there is a concern that the stream method is not
appropriate for modified natural streams that may be severely degraded and that these streams
are not eligible for mitigation.
Response:
• DWR will allow all subject streams to be eligible for riparian buffer mitigation.
IV. Restoration Success Criteria — Native Hardwood Trees
The issues raised under this section focus on the requirement to plant a minimum of at least two
native hardwood tree species and the current DWR practice of not allowing Sweet Gum or Red
Maple to be counted towards meeting this requirement.
Response:
• DWR agrees that as written, the use of Sweet Gum and Red Maple counts towards
meeting the minimum requirement of the rule. Mitigation providers will be expected to
meet planting criteria established by the IRT in buffer areas that are part of a stream
mitigation site.

V. Restoration Success Criteria — Planted Stems
The issues raised under this section focus on the requirement to plant 320 trees per acre and the
statement that DWR does not count trees derived from existing seed sources, planted seeds,
stump sprouts or other volunteer species towards meeting that 320 requirement.
Response:
• DWR agrees that using 260 stems per acre at the end of the monitoring period would
provide more consistency with the federal performance standards for stream and wetland
projects; however this would require a rule change. The draft consolidated buffer
mitigation rule (15A NCAC 02B .0295) has already incorporated this change.
DWR staff will continue to consider the presence of woody volunteers during closeout of
buffer sites.
VI. Restoration and Enhancement Criteria — Measuring Density
The issues raised under this section focus on tree density for determining restoration or
enhancement. More specifically, the issues include the inconsistency among rules, the lack of
clarity on how to measure density which has resulted in inconsistent calls among DWR staff, and
the use of a tree's dripline.
Response:
• DWR agrees that the inconsistency among rules has created confusion and inconsistency
in implementation; however this would require a rule change to be consistent among all
six rules. The draft consolidated buffer mitigation rule (15A NCAC 02B .0295) has
definitions for restoration, enhancement and preservation, which were written to provide
clarity and predictability while still allowing DWR staff to use best professional
judgment in evaluating potential mitigation sites based on their many years of experience.
In the Jordan and Randleman watersheds, the rules allow for restoration on sites with
fewer than 100 trees /acre and enhancement on sites with between 100 and 200 trees. In
these two watersheds, DWR will accept established forestry protocols (e.g. fixed radius
plot sampling) to be used to determine existing tree densities in any non - forested buffer
area. Sufficient numbers of plots should be used to accurately assess stem densities and
delineate areas of the site with varying densities. Plot data should not be averaged to
determine an overall stem density unless the site is fairly homogeneous in terms of
vegetative coverage. Existing forested areas should be delineated out and not included in
stem density calculations. DWR has not considered the drip line to represent the outer
edge of a wooded area for several years and will not consider it in the future. Existing
wooded areas should be delineated at the trunks of the outer edge of the areas.