20110106 Ver 1_Year 4 Monitoring Report_20160224

Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Monitoring Report MY04
DMS Project # 94647
DMS Contract # 003273
Submitted to:
NCDMS, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
Construction Completed: October 2011
Data Collection: July 2015
Submitted: December 2015

Monitoring and Design Firm
KCI
TECHNOLOGIES
KCI
ASSOCIATES OF NC
ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGIES
AND CONSTRUCTION, INC.
Landmark Center II, Suite 220
4601 Six Forks Road
Raleigh, NC 27609
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Project Manager: Tim Morris
Email: [e-mail]
Project No: 20100798
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY / PROJECT ABSTRACT.................................................................. l
1.1 Vegetation Success Criteria.............................................................................................. 2
1.2 Hydrology Success Criteria...............................................................................................2
1.3 Soil Success Criteria........................................................................................................... 3
2.0 METHODOLOGY...........................................................................................................................3
3.0 REFERENCES..................................................................................................................................4
Appendix A — Project Vicinity Map and Background Tables
Figure 1. Project Site Vicinity Map............................................................................................................. 6
Figure 2. Project Site Mitigation Plan View................................................................................................7
Table1 — Project Components.....................................................................................................................8
Table 2 — Project Activity and Reporting History....................................................................................... 9
Table3 — Project Contacts........................................................................................................................... 9
Table4 — Project Attributes....................................................................................................................... 10
Appendix B — Visual Assessment Data
Figure 3. Current Condition Plan View..................................................................................................... 12
Table 5 — Vegetation Condition Assessment............................................................................................. 13
PhotoPoint Photos..................................................................................................................................... 14
VegetationPlot Photos............................................................................................................................... 18
Appendix C — Vegetation Plot Data
Table 6 — Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment.......................................................................................... 26
Table 7 — CVS Vegetation Plot Metadata.................................................................................................. 27
Table 8 — CVS Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot and Species.......................................................... 28
Appendix D — Hydrologic Data
30-70 Percentile Graph.............................................................................................................................. 31
Precipitation and Water Level Plots........................................................................................................... 32
Table 9 — Wetland Hydrology Criteria Attainment.................................................................................... 43
Appendix E — Soil Data
SoilProfile Descriptions............................................................................................................................ 45
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY / PROJECT ABSTRACT
The Buffalo Flats Restoration Site (BFRS) is a full -delivery project that was developed for the North
Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (DMS). Construction was completed in October 2011. The site
is within the 03040105 Watershed Cataloging Unit (8 -digit HUC) and the Local Watershed Unit (14 -digit
HUC) 03040105020050. In DMS's most recent publication of excluded and Targeted Local
Watersheds/Hydrologic Units, this 14 -digit HUC has been identified as a Targeted Local Watershed.
The project goals and objectives are listed below.
Project Goals
• Create diverse bottomland hardwood and low elevation seep communities that are integrated into
the Dutch Buffalo Creek Corridor.
• Buffer nutrient and sediment impacts to Dutch Buffalo Creek from adjacent grazing practices.
Project Objectives
• Fill field ditches and ponds to slow the removal of hydrology from the site.
• Redevelop wetland microtopography to capture surface hydrology and slow subsurface drainage.
• Plant the mitigation area with species native to bottomland riparian forest and low elevation seep
communities.
• Install livestock exclusion fencing.
The project site, which is protected by a 20.2 -acre permanent conservation easement held by the State of
North Carolina, is situated in Cabarrus County in the Southern Outer Piedmont ecoregion of the Piedmont
physiographic province. The site is located on a single parcel located off of Gold Hill Road approximately
six miles northeast of Concord, North Carolina.
An additional 2.6 acre permanent conservation easement located adjacent and contiguous with the project
site is held by KCI Technologies and contains 1.6 acres of restored riparian wetlands. This site is
monitored as an additional, non -creditable component of the site that is available to make up for any
portions of the BFRS that do not achieve the target success criteria.
The BFRS provided mitigation for wetland impacts within Hydrologic Unit 03040105 by restoring,
preserving, and creating 20.2 acres of wetland, generating 11.6 riparian wetland mitigation units
(WMU's) and 3.4 non -riparian WMU's.
The BFRS will be monitored to determine if the project is on -track to meeting jurisdictional wetland
status. In the restoration areas, the wetland site will be deemed successful once hydrology is established
and vegetation success criteria are met. In the creation area, success will be achieved if wetland hydrology
and vegetation are present along with indicators of hydric soils.
1.1 Vegetation Success Criteria
The wetland mitigation is comprised of four areas that combine preservation, creation, and restoration.
The site will be monitored for at least seven years or until the success criteria are achieved. The success
criteria for the planted species in mitigation areas will be based on density measured from monitoring
plots. The site will demonstrate the re-establishment of targeted vegetative communities based on survival
of planted species and volunteer colonization, with an average stem density of 320 stems/acre after three
years, 288 stems/acre after four years, 260 stems/acre after five years, and 210 stems/acre after 7 years.
To determine the success of the planted mitigation area, thirteen permanent vegetation monitoring plots
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 2 KCIAssociates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

(10 by 10 meters) have been established in the wetland restoration and creation areas at a density that
statistically represents the total mitigation acreage. Three of these plots are located in Wetland Area 1,
nine of these plots are located in Wetland Area 2, and one plot is located in Wetland Area 3. The average
density of these plots will determine whether the site meets the success criterion. Non -target species must
not constitute more than 20% of the woody vegetation based on permanent monitoring plots.
The fourth-year vegetation monitoring was based on the Level 2 CVS-EEP vegetation monitoring
protocol. The site's average density for this monitoring period was 588 planted stems/acre. Eleven of the
thirteen plots had greater than 288 planted stems/acre. Including volunteers, the site averaged 2,490 total
stems/acre. The site received supplemental planting in January 2013. During the second -year vegetation
monitoring, some of the supplemental planted species may have been recorded as volunteers. During the
2014 monitoring season, KCI mapped the location of these species and recorded them as planted stems.
Additionally an extra vegetation monitoring plot was installed in an adjacent restored wetland, which is
described in Section 1.2. This vegetation plot was found to have a planted and total stem density of 1,052
total stems/acre.
1.2 Hydrology Success Criteria
Due to the inherent variability in the site's features and its geomorphic position, it is unlikely that the
project will homogeneously exhibit common hydrologic conditions across the site, making a single
hydrologic performance criterion unrepresentative of the sites performance. As such, the gauge data will
be evaluated as a spatial average with each gauge representing the area half the distance to adjacent
gauges or wetland type boundaries. The spatial average by wetland type will be the calculated value for
comparison with the performance standard for credit validation. Gauges not achieving a minimum of 5%
saturation will be considered non -attaining even if the spatial average exceeds the credit validation
performance standard (5% for non -riparian and 10% for riparian).
The water table of the restored wetlands must be within 12" of the soils surface continuously for at least
5% (12 days) in the non -riparian wetland area (3.4 acres) and 10% (25 days) in the riparian wetland area
(11.6 acres), (50% probability of reoccurrence) of the growing season during normal weather conditions.
A "normal" year is based on NRCS climatological data for Cabarrus County, and using the 30th to 70th
percentile thresholds as the range of normal, as documented in the USACE Technical Report "Accessing
and Using Meteorological Data to Evaluate Wetland Hydrology" (Sprecher, 2000).
The growing season for Cabarrus County extends from March 23 to November 11 for a total of 233 days
(MRCS 1995). An automatic recording gauge was installed on the site on May 23, 2013 to record the soil
temperature at 30 cm below the ground surface. If these data demonstrate the soil temperature is above
biological zero (43°F) beyond the 233 day range, it can be used to document the extended growing season
(Skaggs, 2012). In the interest of being conservative, this data was used to define the beginning of the
growing season and the Cabarrus County Soil Survey was used to define the end of it. For 2015 this
resulted in a growing season of 234 days, beginning on March 23 and ending on November 11.
The daily rainfall data was obtained from a local weather station in Kannapolis, NC; provided by the NC
State Climate Office. For the 2015 -year, November experienced above average rainfall, while February,
April, July, August, September, and October experienced average rainfall. The months of January, March,
May, and June recorded below average rainfall for the site. Overall, the area experienced average rainfall
during the 2015 growing season.
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 3 KCIAssociates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

In addition to the wetlands that have been monitored at this site so far, there is also a small 1.2 acre
riparian wetland that is contiguous to and was restored at the same time as this site. This additional
wetland area is within an adjacent 2.6 acre conservation easement held by KCI Technologies, but is not
included in the creditable assets for this site. One additional wetland gauge was installed in this restored
riparian wetland on March 20, 2014. This wetland will be monitored as an additional component of the
site that is not creditable, but is considered an ancillary benefit/feature of the site. During the site's fourth
growing season, all eight wells in the riparian areas met the success criterion of having saturated soil
conditions occurring within 12 inches of the ground surface for a minimum continuous period of 10% (23
days) of the growing season during average climatic conditions. All three wells in the non -riparian areas
met the success criterion of 5% (12 days) of the growing season. Additionally, the extra well met the
hydrology success criteria with 46 consecutive days of saturated soil conditions. Overall, wetland
hydrology was achieved at all eleven groundwater monitoring gauges in the riparian and non -riparian
restoration areas.
1.3 Soil Success Criteria
Beginning in Monitoring Year 2, soils were monitored within the 1.2 acre wetland creation area on site.
Two permanent monitoring plots were established adjacent to Well 6 and Well 7 and soil profiles will be
monitored yearly for evidence of the development of redoximorphic features by a licensed soil scientist.
Soil profiles will be compared from year to year and changes will be documented in the yearly monitoring
reports. Although several studies exist in the scientific literature that investigate temporal changes in soils
resulting from wetland creation projects, there are no studies that suggest that jurisdictional hydric soils
will develop under the appropriate hydrology conditions within the seven-year monitoring period. As
such, KCI will monitor the soils for changes in chroma, organic matter content and document other
indications that the soil is subject to low oxygen conditions. These indicators would include oxidized root
channels, concretions, mottles and other observations that suggest the soil is subject to low oxygen
conditions etc.
A detailed soils profile description was conducted at two permanent monitoring plots by a licensed soil
scientist (# 187) on June 1, 2015. Both soil plots met the hydric soil criteria with an indicator of depleted
matrix (F3) and redox depressions (F8). The upper 12 inches of both soil plots also had positive reactions
to alpha, alpha-dipyridyl, providing further evidence that the soil is hydric. Additionally, evidence that the
seasonal high water table has continued to develop more fully can be seen in the increased mottling
present in the soil this year. No mottles were reported within either soil profile during MY -02, and during
the MY -03, mottles ranging from 5 — 10% of their respective soil horizons were reported within the upper
12 inches of the soil. This year, mottling accounted for 10 — 30% of the upper 12 inches in each soil plot.
This indicates the continuation of anaerobic conditions in the soil caused by surface saturation from
precipitation, overbank flooding and inundation and is maintained due to the very slow permeability of
the compacted, angular structured subsurface horizons. See Appendix E for both soil profile descriptions.
Summary information/data related to the occurrence of items such as beaver or encroachment and
statistics related to performance of various project and monitoring elements can be found in the tables and
figures in the report appendices. Narrative background and supporting information formerly found in
these reports can be found in the Baseline Monitoring Report and in the Mitigation Plan documents
available on the DMS website. All raw data supporting the tables and figures in the appendices are
available from DMS upon request.
2.0 METHODOLOGY
The CVS-EEP protocol, Level 2 (hgp:Hcvs.bio.unc.edu/methods.htm) was used to collect vegetation data
from the site. The vegetation monitoring was completed on July 8, 2015.
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 4 KCIAssociates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

K�li7DI01049N` Naomi
Lee, M.T., R.K. Peet, S.D. Roberts, and T.R. Wentworth. 2006. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation,
Version 4.0 (http://cvs.bio.unc.edu/methods.htm)
USACE. 2003. Stream Mitigation Guidelines. USACE, NCDENR-DWQ, USEPA, NCWRC.
Skaggs, R. Wayne. 2012. Effect of Growing Season on the Criterion for Wetland Hydrology. Society of
Wetland Scientists. Wetlands 32:1135-1147
Sprecher, S. W. and Warne, A. G. 2000. "Accessing and Using Meteorological Data to Evaluate Wetland
Hydrology," ERDC/EL TR -WRAP -00-01, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center,
Vicksburg, MS.
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 5 KCIAssociates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

Appendix A
Project Vicinity Map and Background Tables
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 6 KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

dREOELL ROWAN
ROWAN COUNTY
LANEST KANNAPOLIS r05 - .:
CABARRUS
YpEMECKLENBURG
STANLY
a
Q4
6
- D
r
AFF ry
�a
0
s�ry�R.gaKiSER�o o� �
CABARRUS COUNTY
a
m
c�
m txy$
r to = N4R
CONCORD
x
C3
4 � d
7�
e
GO
0444
0 0.25 0-5 1 PROJECT SITE VICINITY MAP h
Mmes BUFFALO FLATS RESTORATION SITE
CABARRUS COUNTY, NC
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 7 KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

i
Nonriparian Restoration (3.4 ac) Conservatbn Easement
Riparian Creation (1.2 ac) Streams
Riparian Restoration (11,2 ac)
Upland (4.4 ac)
Lv 47
Ar,
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 8 KCIAssociates of NC, PA
DMS Project# 94647 2015-MY04
7- 7. .'r
..........
PROJECT SITE MITIGATION PLAN VIEW
0300BUFFALO FLATS RESTORATION
SITE
Source: OFthoirnagery,
Feet CABARRUS COUNTY, NC
Cabarrus County 2DD9
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 8 KCIAssociates of NC, PA
DMS Project# 94647 2015-MY04

Table 1. Project Components
Project Number and Name: 94647 - Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Mitigation
Credits
Non-
Nitrogen
Riparian
Phosphorous
Stream
Wetland
riparian
Buffer
Nutrient
Nutrient
Offset
Wetland
Offset
Type
R
RE
R RE
R RE
Acres
-
-
11.2 1.2
3.4 -
Credits
-
-
11.2 0.4
3.4 -
-
-
-
TOTAL
11.6
3.4
CREDITS
Project Components
Project
Restoration
Component
Stationing/
Existing
Approach
-or-
Restoration
Mitigation
Footage/
Footage
-or-
Location
(PI, PH etc.)
Restoration
Ratio
Reach ID
Acreage
g
Equivalent
or Acreage
Southeastern
Wetland Area 1
corner of
3.4 acres
-
Restoration
3.4 acres
1:1
ro'ect
North to south
throughout the
Wetland Area 2
11.2 acres
-
Restoration
11.2 acres
1:1
center of
ro'ect
West -central
Wetland Area 3
portion of the
1.2 acres
-
Creation
1.2 acres
3:1
project
Component Summation
Buffer
Restoration
Stream
Riparian Wetland
Non
-riparian
Upland
Level
(linear feet)
(acres)
Wetland (acres)
(square
(acres)
feet)
Riverine
Non-
Riverine
Restoration
-
11.2 acres
-
3.4 acres
-
-
Enhancement
-
-
-
-
Enhancement I
-
Enhancement II
-
Creation
1.2 acres
-
-
-
Preservation
-
-
-
-
4.4 acres
High Quality
Preservation
TOTAL
12.4 acres
-
3.4 acres
4.4 acres
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 9 KCIAssociates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

Table 2. Project Activity & Reporting History
Project Number and Name: 94647 - Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Elapsed Time Since Grading Complete: 4 yr 2 months
Elapsed Time Since Planting Complete: 3 yr 9 months
Number of Reporting Years: 4
Activity or Report
Data Collection
Complete
Actual Completion
or Delivery
Mitigation Plan
Dec 10
Final Design - Construction Plans
Dec 10
Construction
Oct 11
Planting
Feb 12
Baseline Monitoring/Report
Feb/March 12
July 12
Year 1 Monitoring
Oct 12
Dec 12
Supplemental Planting
Jan 13
Soil temperature gauge installed
May 13
Invasive Species Maintenance
Aug13
Year 2 Monitoring
Oct 13
Dec 13
Year 3 Monitoring
June 14
Nov 14
Year 4 Monitoring
July 15
Dec 15
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 10 KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

Table 3. Project Contacts
Project Number and Name: 94647 - Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Design Firm
KCI Associates of North Carolina, PA
Landmark Center II, Suite 220
4601 Six Forks Rd.
Raleigh, NC 27609
Contact: Mr. Tim Morris
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
KCI Environmental Technologies and
Construction Contractor
Construction, Inc.
Landmark Center II, Suite 220
4601 Six Forks Rd.
Raleigh, NC 27609
Contact: Mr. Tim Morris
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Planting Contractor
Bruton Nurseries and Landscapes
PO Box 1197
Freemont, NC 27830
Contact: Mr. Charlie Bruton
Phone: [phone]
Monitoring Performers
MY00-MY04
KCI Associates of North Carolina, PA
Landmark Center I1, Suite 220
4601 Six Forks Rd.
Raleigh, NC 27609
Contact: Mr. Adam Spiller
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 11 KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

Table 4. Project Attribute Table
Project Number and Name: 94647 — Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
County
Cabarrus County
Project Area (acres)
20.20 acres
Project Coordinates (lat. and long.)
35.456988 N, -80.496325 W
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province
Piedmont
River Basin
Yadkin -Pee Dee
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8 -digit
03040105
USGS Hydrologic Unit 14 -digit
03040105020050
DWQ Sub -basin
03-07-12
Project Drainage Area (acres)
106 acres
Project Drainage Area Percentage
of Impervious Area
lobo
CGIA Land Use Classification
3.6% Cultivated, 54.1 % Managed Herbaceous Cover, 32.5% Mixed Upland
Hardwoods, 5.2% Southern Yellow Pine, and 4.6% Water Bodies
Wetland Summary Information
Parameters
Wetland Area 1
Wetland Area 2
Wetland Area 3
Size of Wetland (acres)
3.4 acres
11.2 acres
1.2 acres
Wetland Type (non -riparian, riparian
riverine or riparian non-riverine)
Non -riparian
Riparian non-riverine
Riparian non-riverine
Mapped Soil Series
Chewacla
(Wehadkee and Armenia by
detailed soil investigation)
Chewacla
(Wehadkee and Armenia by
detailed soil investigation)
Chewacla
Drainage class
Poorly drained
Poorly drained
Somewhat poorly
drained
Soil Hydric Status
Drained Hydric
Drained Hydric
Non hydric
Source of Hydrology
Hillside seepage
Surface/Overbank Flow
Surface/Overbank Flow
Hydrologic Impairment
Ditching and Pasture
Ditching and Pasture
Ditching and Pasture
Native vegetation community
Pasture
Pasture
Pasture
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 12 KCIAssociates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

Appendix B
Visual Assessment Data
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 13 KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

Table 5. Vegetation Condition Assessment
Project Number and Name: 94647 — Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Planted Acrea a 15.8 Easement Acrea a 20.2
Number of
Combined
Vegetation Category
Definitions
Mapping Threshold
CCPV Depiction
Polygons
Acreage
% of Planted Acreage
Very limited cover of both woody and
1. Bare Areas
0.1 acres
Pattern and Color
0
0.00
°
0.0%
herbaceous material.
Woody stem densities clearly below
Not Depicted,
2. Low Stem Density
target levels based on MY3, 4, or 5
0.1 acres
Covers Most of
0
0.00
0.0%
Areas
stem count criteria.
Restoration Area
Total
0
0.00
0.0%
Areas with woody stems of a size
3. Areas of Poor
class that are obviously small given the
0.25 acres
Pattern and Color
0
0.00
0.0%
Growth Rates or Vigor
monitoring year.
Cumulative Total
0
0.00
0.00/0
4. Invasive Areas of
Areas or points (if too small to render
Pattern
1000 SF
and Color
0
0.00
0.0%
Concern
as o ons at ma scale).
5. Ease me nt
Areas or points (if too small to render
none
Pattern and Color
0
0.00
0.0%
Encroachment Areas
as polygons at map scale).
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 15 KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

Photo Point Photos
Photo Point 1: View looking west, from the southeastern
corner of the project site. 3/1/2012— Baseline
Photo Point 2: View looking north, from the southeastern
corner of the project site. 3/1/2012— Baseline
Photo Point 3: View looking south, from the eastern
easement boundary. 3/1/2012— Baseline
Photo Point 1: View looking west, from the southeastern
corner of the project site. 7/6/2015 - W04
Photo Point 2: View looking north, from the southeastern
Photo Point 3: View looking south, from the eastern
easement boundary. 7/6/2015 - MY04
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 16 KCl Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

Photo Point 4: View looking west, from the eastern
easement boundary. 3/1/2012— Baseline
Photo Point 5: View looking north, from the eastern
Photo Point 6: View looking southwest, from the eastern
easement boundary. 3/1/2012— Baseline
Photo Point 4: View looking west, from the eastern
easement boundary. 7/6/2015 - MY04
Photo Point 5: View looking north, from the eastern
Photo Point 6: View looking southwest, from the eastern
easement boundary. 7/6/2015 - MY04
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 17 KCl Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

'All
Photo Point 7: View looking northwest, from the eastern
Photo Point 8: View looking southwest, from the eastern
easement boundary. 3/1/2012— Baseline
Photo Point 9: View looking west, from the eastern
easement boundary. 3/1/2012— Baseline
Photo Point 7: View looking northwest, from the eastern
easement boundary. 7/6/2015 - MY04
Photo Point 8: View looking southwest, from the eastern
easement boundary. 7/6/2015 - MY04
Photo Point 9: View looking west, from the eastern
easement boundary. 7/6/2015 - MY04
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 18 KCl Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

A.him
w
z �� .,}..: �,r • .lam ,<, .:.t.'°'�
Photo Point 10: View looking north, from the eastern
easement boundary. 3/1/2012— Baseline
Photo Point 11: View looking south, from the north
eastern corner of the project site. 3/1/2012— Baseline
Photo Point 10: View looking north, from the eastern
easement boundary. 7/6/2015 - MY04
Photo Point 11: View looking south, from the north
eastern corner of the project site. 7/6/2015 - MY04
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 19 KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

Vegetation Plot Photos
Vegetation Plot 1: 7/6/2015 - MY04
Vegetation Plot 2: 7/6/2015 - MY04
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 20
DMS Project # 94647
KCI Associates of NC, PA
2015-MY04

Vegetation Plot 3: 7/6/2015 - MY04
a
w1j;
Vegetation Plot 4: 7/6/2015 - MY04
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 21 KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

Vegetation Plot 5: 7/6/2015 - MY04
Vegetation Plot 6: 7/6/2015 - MY04
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 22 KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04
Ak
Vegetation Plot 5: 7/6/2015 - MY04
Vegetation Plot 6: 7/6/2015 - MY04
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 22 KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

Vegetation Plot 7: 7/6/2015 - MY04
Vegetation Plot 8: 7/6/2015 - MY04
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 23 KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

Vegetation Plot 9: 7/6/2015 - MY04
Vegetation Plot 10: 7/6/2015 - MY04
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 24 KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

L.
Vegetation Plot 11: 7/8/2015 - MY04
Vegetation Plot 12: 7/8/2015 - MY04
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 25 KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

I
` j •
Y
I � p
' 75
Vegetation Plot 13: 7/8/2015 - MY04
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 26 KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

Appendix C
Vegetation Plot Data
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 27 KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

Table 6. Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment
Project Number and Name: 94647 - Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Vegetation Survival Threshold
Vegetation Plot ID Met? (288 planted stems/acre)
Monitoring Year 04
Planted Stem Density
(stems/acre)
Monitoring Year 04
Total Stem Density
(stems/acre)
1 Yes
688
1174
2 No
243
809
3 No
243
1,821
4 Yes
445
1,538
5 Yes
526
1,902
6 Yes
405
850
7 Yes
567
5,666
8 Yes
971
2,185
9 Yes
809
2,469
10 Yes
567
1,214
11 Yes
607
2,104
12 Yes
850
6,232
13 Yes
728
4,411
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 28 KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

Table 7. CVS Vegetation Plot Metadata
Project Number and Name: 94647 - Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Report Prepared By
Bethany Williams
Date Prepared
7/29/2015 13:45
database name
KC1-2014-B.mdb
database location
M:A2010\20100798 Buffalo Flats\Vegetation
computer name
12-3ZV4FP1
file size
61476864
DESCRIPTION OF WORKSHEETS IN THIS DOCUMENT------------
Metadata
Description of data base file, the report worksheets, and a summary of project(s)
and projectdata.
Proj, planted
Each project is listed with its PLANTED stems per acre, for each year. This
excludes live stakes.
Proj, total stems
Each project is listed with its TOTAL stems per acre, for each year. This includes
live stakes, all planted stems, and all natural/volunteer stems.
Plots
List of plots surveyed with location and summary data (live stems, dead stems,
missing, etc.).
Vigor
Frequency distribution of vigor classes for stems for all plots.
Vigor bSpp
Freq uency distribution of vigor classes listed by s pecies.
Damage
List of most frequent damage classes with number of occurrences and percent of
total stems im acted by each.
Damage by Spp
Damage values tallied by type for each s pecies.
Damage by Plot
Damage val ues tallied by type for each plot.
Planted Stems by Plot and Spp
A matrix of the count of PLANTED living stems of each species for each plot; dead
and missi ng stems are excluded.
ALL Stems by Plot and spp
A matrix of the count of total living stems of each species (planted and natural
volunteers combined) for each lot; dead and missing stems are excluded.
PROJECT SUMMARY -------------------------------------
Project Code
94647
project Name
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Descri tion
Wetland Restoration Site
River Basin
Yadkin River Basin
Sampled Plots
13
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 29 KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

Table 8. CVS Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot and Species
Project Number and Name: 94647 - Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Current Plot Data (MY4-2015)
Species
Scientific Name Common Name Type
E94647-EEP-0001
PnoLS113-all T
E94647-EEP-0002
PnoLS P -all T
E94647-EEP-0003
Pnol-S P -all T
E94647-EEP-0004
Pnol-S P -all T
E94647-EEP-0005
Pnol-S P -all T
E94647-EEP-0006
Pnol-S P -all T
E94647-EEP-0007
PnoLS P -all T
E94647-EEP-0008
Pnol-S P -all T
Acer negundo boxelder Tree
2
1
2
13
8
1
Acer rubrum red maple Tree
1
4
3
3
80
Baccharis halimifolia eastern baccharis Shrub
2
1
Betula nigra river birch Tree
1
1
11
1
11
11
1
1
1
2
2
2
Diospyrosvirginiana common pe rsi mmoi Tree
1
Fraxinus pennsylvanic green ash Tree
3
3
3
31
5
7
3
1
1
2
7
Juniperus virginiana eastern redcedar Tree
1
Liquidambar styraciflu sweetgum Tree
6
2
10
7
23
21
Liriodendron tulipifer tuliptree Tree
2
2
2
Nyssa aquatica watertupelo Tree
2
21
2
Pinus taeda loblolly pine Tree
2
Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree
2
21
2
1
1
5
4
1
1
1
2
2
7
1
1
12
Populus deltoides eastern cottonwooc Tree
4
Quercus oak Tree
Quercus laurifolia laurel oak Tree
1 4
4
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
Quercus lyrata overcup oak Tree
Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oal Tree
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
5
5
5
Quercus pagoda cherrybark oak Tree
5
5
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
4
4
4
4
4
2
2
2
7
7
8
Quercus palustris pin oak Tree
4
4
5
2
2
2
1
1
1
Quercus phellos willow oak Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
8
8
8
6
6
6
1
1
1
3
3
5
9
9
9
Salix nigra blackwillow Tree
10
Ulmus americana American elm Tree
2
Unknown Shrub or Tree
Stem count
size (ares)
size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE
171
171 29
6 6 20
6 6 45
11
111
38
13
13 47
101 101 21
141
14
140
241
241
54
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02
5 5 9 4 4 6 5 5 9 3 3 9 4 4 11 5 5 7 8 8 12 5 5
8
688 688 1174 243 243 809 243 243 1821 4451 445115381 5261 526 1902 405 40518501 5671 5671 56661 971 971
2185
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 30 KCI Associates ofNC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

Table 8. CVS Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot and Species Cont.
Project Number and Name: 94647 - Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Current Plot Data (MY3-2014)
Annual Means
Scientific Name
Species
Common Name Type
E94647-EEP-0009
PnoLS P -all T
E94647-EEP-0010
PnoLS P -all T
E94647-EEP-0011
PnoLS P -all T
E94647-EEP-0012
PnoLS P -al T
E94647-EEP-0013
PnoLS P -al T
MY4 (2015)
PnoLS P -all T
MY3 (2014)
PnoLS P -all T
MY2 (2013)
PnoLS P -all T
MY1(2012)
PnoLS P -all T
MYO (2012)
PnoLS P -all T
Acer negundo
boxelder Tree
6
10
3
46
61
41
16
Acer rubrum
red maple Tree
8
9
5
3
5
121
101
53
5
Baccharis halimifolia
eastern baccharis Shrub
1
1
-51
91
3
Betula nigra
river birch Tree
1 3
3
3
2
2
2
3
31
3
4
4
4
1
11
1
181
18
18
22
22
221
25
25
25
27
27
27
47
47
47
Diospyros virginiana
common persimm Tree
1
1
2
7
12
5
5
4
Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash Tree
3
3
27
2
11
4
4
64
6
6
73
17
17
235
17
17
118
30
14
Juniperus virginiana
eastern redcedar Tree
1
6
2
9
4
Liquiclambarstyraciflua
sweetgum Tree
2
21
3
31
791
35
251
7
Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree
1
1
1
1
1
2
4
4
5
4
4
51
4
4
7
4
4
4
Nyssa aquatica
watertupelo Tree
1 1
1
1
3
3
3
1
1
1
31
3
3
5
51
5
15
15
15
18
18
18
18
18
18
16
16
161
6
6
6
Pinus taeda
loblolly pine Tree
2
1
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamor Tree
3
3
7
1
1
3
4
4
12
8
8
51
1
1
7
24
24
111
24
24
93
3
31
84
3
3
33
Populus deltoides
eastern cottonwoc Tree
1
41
2
2
Quercus
oak Tree
4
4
11
1
1
1
3
3
3
Quercus laurifolia
laurel oak Tree
8
8
8
6
61
6
7
7
7
10
101
101
19
191
19
Quercus lyrata
overcup oak Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Quercus michauxii
swamp chestnut o Tree
2
13
13
15
13
13
13
15
Quercus pagoda
cherrybark oak Tree
4
4
4
41
4
41
5
5
5
2
2
21
391
39
401
39
39
40
36
36
39
42
42
43
24
24
24
Quercus palustris
pin oak Tree
7
7
8
7
7
7
7
7
7
8
8
8
Quercus phellos
willow oak Tree
6
6
6
3
3
3
1
1
3
1
4
4
4
43
43
49
44
44
46
34
34
37
29
291
29
14
14
14
Salix nigra
blackwillow Tree
1
11
Ulmus americana
American elm Tree
2
1
Unknown
Shrub or Tree
3
3
3
11
11
11
124
124
124
Stem count
size (ares)
size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE
20
20
61
14
14
30
15
15 52
21 21 154
18 18 109
189
189 800
195
195 580
142
142 410
152 152
231
237
237
237
1 1 1 1 1 13 13 13 13 13
0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32
61 61 101 61 61 1-01 61 61 111 5 5 12 6 6 11 11 11 21 11 11 19 11 11 18 11 11 17 7 7
7
809 809 2469 567 567 1214 607 607121-041 850 850 62321 72817281 44111 5881 5881 24901 6071 607 1-8061 4421 4421 12761 4731 473171-91 7381 7381
738
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 31 KCI Associates ofNC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

Appendix D
Hydrologic Data
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 32 KCI Associates of NC PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

7.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
w
a 3.0
2.0
1.0
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
30-70 Percentile Graph
WETS Station Name: KRUQ - Rowan County Airport
W) W)
rA O °
Date Z
� 2015 Rainfall —F 30% Less Than f 30% Greater Than
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 33 KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

658
651
Ground Surface
w_
c 656
12" Below Surface
W
as
655
a
0
0
L7
654
Sensor D th
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 1- Nonriparian (12 Days Minimum)
Begin Growing
Season
March 23
�M
44
4
End Growing
Season
November 11
3.5
3
15 Days
2.5
28 Days
U
2
C
Iv
1.5
1
0.5
653'"�'—'S41-'►P-i16)
U�-I
I A
i"
II
AI
'J
-I �
1 ^T"
-r%
i1111
N
11
fil
I1j�1
pill
,L
. '
1-11
•-�-"
.Y
0
t.„
O
1p
00
Y,
.11a
o
A
.-
A
W
O
'O
s
00
00
J
A
W
a@
AT
O
U,
1p
C.
0O
C°
T
0
lei
0
0
<
N
z
a
z
o
O
z
o
d
o0
d
Date
Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface Sensor Depth Rainfall
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 34 KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

658
657
w
c 656
W
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 2 - Riparian (25 Days Minimum)
654
653
.- N C7, — N N N — N J N W N W �O N W N N --
1P
O 1O 0O Vi .A A W O 'O 00 Q\ N N �-' O 00 J A W O 'O
O O o Z Z Z d 6 6
CD
v' k.A k.A v' ^cn n ^ v r v v
Date
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
C
d
1.5
1
0.5
0
Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface Sensor Depth Rainfall
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 35 KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

657
656
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 3 - Riparian (25 Days Minimum)
N
654
653
N O� N v, N �l
O \O 00 Vi W O �O 00 O� Vi N O W J A W O 'O 00 0 T Vi N O W J
Cn O O o Z Z Z d C7 CJ
Date
4
3.5
3
2.5
7�
2
1.5
l
0.5
0
Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface Sensor Depth Rainfall
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 36 KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 201 S-MY04

660
660
659
659
F
c 658
W 658
a�
PC
3
c 657
657
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 4 - Nonriparian (12 Days Minimum)
4
3.5
3
2.5
656 n 1% 1 1 11 n n
w i IV I
116rJU�u �
n n Al
i I_ J\ n MA
n J 1 n n\. _ 11 111 111 sI hL I--�41
N 01 N
O 1p 00 WCD
VA N~
N
J N
W N W l0
N Vi ~
N N
J N W N W
tD N
Y Y Y
'1 'O 'C
Y Y
O O O Z Z Z
d d d
_ a- 'D
h
;�
C `C
:-
a? d�0 Q�0 'C 'C
C C C
co tc
th th tllto VI
V' c f i f
t.n to cn
c.n c.n c.n
V' v' cn i1� to to tJ�
v� �n V' 'A cn cf
Date
1.5
1
0.5
0
Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface Sensor Depth Rainfall
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 37 KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 5 - Riparian (25 Days Minimum)
657
656
655
w
0
0
W 654
3
a
0 653
652
651
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
d
1.5
1
0.5
0
N OA N Vi
N N J
N
W N W VD N lh N
N J N W
o
N W 1p N
d
w n'TJ
co� co�° 0 0 z
z z d d
�� ��,�
Date
Rainfall
Groundwater Depth
Ground Surface
12 Inches Below Ground Surface
Sensor Depth
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 38 KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

657
656
655
654
653
652
N O\ N Vi N N J N W N W lD N lh N N J N W N W �O N
w w n'TJ Y Y Y m `" C Y a o coo cco cco O O o Z Z Z d t7 ld
n cn v v n ^^ r in n ^ •�n �n v, v v' n n in n n " " •- •
v v „ v, cn v v n v v n v cn
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 6 - Riparian -Creation (25 Days Minimum)
4
3.5
3
%W
Date
1
0.5
0
Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface Sensor Depth Rainfall
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 39 KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

659
658
657
0
w
as
W
L7
655
654
Buffalo Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauize 7 Riparian -Creation (25 Days Minimum
Begin Growing End Growing
Season Season
March 23 November 11
Ground Surface
45 Days
12" Below Surface
Sensor De )th
4
3.5
3
2.5
7�
2 E'
m
1.5—
0
N O� N to
O p oa A .A
�'c.n
N N J
W O \O oo O�
N
vi
W N W �O N is N
N �--� O oo J -P W O
N J
'D oo T
11 'TJ
� aaa�
"`" aa0 LnCnCID
00
zzzddd
Date
Rainfall
Groundwater Depth
Ground Surface
12 Inches Below Ground Surface
Sensor Depth
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 40 KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

659
658
w
,? 657
W
i • i
655
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 8 - Riparian (25 Days Minimum)
N U� N In N NJ
O 1D 00 Y, W O 'O 00 T Vi N .- O 00 J A W O �O 00 Vi N O 00 J
zJw c Y Y Y w a c a Y Y coo vi �n �n O O o Z Z Z d t7 ld
'A Un
Date
4
3.5
3
2.5
7�
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface Sensor Depth Rainfall
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 41 KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04
Begin Growing End Growing
Season Season
March 23 November 11
Ground Surface
45 Days
i
12" Below Surface
Sensor Depth
N U� N In N NJ
O 1D 00 Y, W O 'O 00 T Vi N .- O 00 J A W O �O 00 Vi N O 00 J
zJw c Y Y Y w a c a Y Y coo vi �n �n O O o Z Z Z d t7 ld
'A Un
Date
4
3.5
3
2.5
7�
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface Sensor Depth Rainfall
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 41 KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

657
656
655
w
0
e�
654
W
s.
e�
653
0
i
C7
652
651
N 01 N V1 N N J N W N W ID N Vi N N -_l N W N W �C N
O \O 0oY,-F, W O is �O Q� 1I1 N - O Ir J -F,W O \O 00 T Y, N r - O Ir J
�� �
't in
cs - - s �n cr cn
n �n �'
Ln to cn cn to to n n n n n n
Date
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 9 - Riparian (25 Days Minimum)
4
3.5
3
2.5
7�
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface Sensor Depth Rainfall
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 42 KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

661
660
659
7.
u
656
655
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 10 - Nonriparian (12 Days Minimum)
Begin Growing End Growing
Season Season
March 23 November I 1
Ground Surface 17
12" Below Surface 44 Days
Gauge malfunction
Sensor Depth ,
---I A UA A A A -A
�' �' O O o Z Z Z d t7 t7
vi U �,
Date
4
3.5
3
2.5
0
Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface Sensor Depth Rainfall
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 43 KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

Table 9. Wetland Hydrology Criteria Attainment Table
Project Number and Name: 94647 - Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Success Criteria Achieved / Max Consecutive Days
During Growing Season (Percentage)
Wetland Area 1
Success Criteria 12
My -01
MY -02
MY -03
MY -04
days (5%)
2012
2013
2014
2015
MY -OS
Yes/23
Yes/64
Yes/60
Yes/44
Well
9.7%
27.5%
23.9%a
17.7%
No/6
Yes/33
Yes/52
Yes/21
Well
2.4%
14.2%
20.9%
8.2%
Well 10
No/O
No/1
Yes/78
Yes/44*
Installed May 23, 2012)
0%
0.4%
31.1%
17.7%
Wetland Area 2
Success Criteria 25
MY-Ol
MY -02
MY -03
MY -04
days (10%)
2012
2013
2014
2015
MY -OS
No/20
Yes/36
Yes/58
Yes/43
Well
8.6%
15.2%
23.3%
17.3%
Yes/134
Yes/236
Yes/120
Yes/90
Well
(57.3%)
(100%)
(48.0%)
(35.9%)
Yes/28
Yes/172
Yes/60
Yes/48
Well
11.8%
73.6%
23.9%
19.1%
No/19
Yes/98
Yes/61
Yes/45
Well
7.9%
42.0%
24.5%
17.9%
Yes/23
Yes/103
Yes/67
Yes/51
Well
10.0%)
44.2%
26.9%
20.3%
Wetland Area 3
Success Criteria
MY -01
MY -02
MY -03
MY -04
25 days (10%)
2012
2013
2014
2015
MY -005
Yes/25
Yes/71
Yes/61
Yes/42
Well 6 (Creation Area)
10.7%
30.5%
24.5%
16.7%
No/18
Yes/70
Yes/62
Yes/45
Well 7 (Creation Area)
7.5%
30.0%
24.7%
17.9%
*=gauge malfunction, data only recorded for 106 out of 233 days during MY04 growing season
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 44 KCl Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

Appendix E
Soil Data
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 45 KCI Associates of NC PA
DMS Project # 94647 2015-MY04

KCI
ASSOCIATES OF
NORTH CAROLINA, PA
Client: KCI Associates of North
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
P.A. Date: June 1, 2015
Project: Buffalo Flats Wetland Restoration Site
County: Cabarrus
Location: 4939 Gold Hill Road Site/Lot: MW# 6
Soil Series: Chewacla Variant
Soil Classification: Fine -loamy, mixed, active, thermic Fluvaquentic Dystrochrepts
AWT: >36" SHWT: 6-12" Slope: 0-1% Aspect:
Elevation: —655 Drainage: Poorly Drained Permeabilit Moderate to Moderately slow
Vegetation: Herbaceous: Predominantly Virginia Wildrye with planted River Birch, Green Ash, American Sycamore
Project #: 20100798 6MO.Y4
State: NC
Borings terminated at 54 Inches
HORIZON
DEPTH (IN)
MATRIXJR5
TLES
TEXTURE
STRUCTURE
CONSISTENCE
BOUNDARY
NOTES
A
0-6
I0YR 5/3
/6c2
sl
1 fsbk
mfr
cs
SYR mottles 10% in matrix, oxidized mots
5/6c2d
7.5YR mottles 10% re linin s
B I
6 11
10YR 5/2R
4/4
sl
Ifsbk
mfr
cs
30%redox in re linins and matrix
B 2
11 18
I OYR 5/2R
3/4
sl
1 fsbk
20% mottles in re linins and matrix
R 2/2
2% Mn concretions
B 3
18-36
6/5GY
5/8m3d
cl
I msbk
mfr
w
30% mottles in re linins and matrix
R 2/2
2% soft masses and concretions
4/3c2d
5% mottles m re linin sand matrix
B 4
36-49
6/10Y
5/8m3
c
I msbk
mft
w
30% mottles in re linin s and matrix
R 2/2
29c soft masses and concretions
4/3c2d
5%mottles in re linings and matrix
ravel) with quartz
C
49-54
6/l0Y
5/8m3
sc
massive
mfi
30% mottles N pow linins and matrix
COMMENTS:
No surface water present.
The SHWT develops more fully each year from surface saturation from precipitation, overbank flooding and inundation and is maintained
due to the very slow permeability of the compacted, angular structured subsurface horizons.
Meets hydric soil criteria F3: Depleted Matrix and F8: Redox Depressions
using Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region (Version 2.0)
Top 12" of surface has positive reaction with alpha, alpha-dipyridyl. The reagent provides evidence that the soil is hydric.
DESCRIBED BY SFS DATE 6/1/2015

QWE�TLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: i"PF,4Gv F/'+A City/County: i�" e4hA 114A.u4J Sampling Date: &'/
Applicant/Owner: *-,Lr /"r el%C State: e- Sampling Point: !N K/ # (o
Investigator(s): 5, 5�okaS it Section, Township, Range: p
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): %ddd� �a/iJ Local relief (concave, convex, none): &71Ca-ydo Slope (%): 0 ")
Subregion (LRR or MLRn^A):: L.RR P Lat: 3$ 7 ,2 ..5 7 Long: 4SD 0.t9 17, 12,77 " Datum: A/4 9.3
Soil Map Unit Name: �.-�1 QW0.t.A. L%A.At 1� NWI classification: 51A
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes '= No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ✓ No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓ No within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓" No
Remarks:
f.6t.09nG�,L(,c, %1 �/` LtJCI.�� (,� i0 " 1 i• t,y�,C.�.t,7,
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (66)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (1314)
_, 'Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
—Drainage Patterns (B10)
_ Saturation (A3)
vf Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
_ Water Marks (B1)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (62)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (133)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (64)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (65)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water -Stained Leaves (69)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
_ Aquatic Fauna (613)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches): 7 /8 r
Water Table Present? Yes No
Depth (inches): 10080
Saturation Present? Yes No
Depth (inches): > S n
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: rh
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
= Total Cover Present? Yes No
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
rs here or on a separate sheet.)
e"Z"%VAt.. VCG(f otJ !/1 t al}Gt?Q✓
vl�
`rte PAO- CaaC� a, DBL
�}'� U�e�vneyCac:ru�st. G,Bz; �✓
9
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
36 4t
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
)
% Cover
Species?
Status
Number of Dominant Species
0
_�
✓
FACO _
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
2. A z,, ne.qu,n
10
✓
Inl
3 p1 WA, n 60�
A�
ID
�,
F� W
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
r
4.
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7.
= Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
20% of
total cover:
I
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 304
FACW species x 2 =
11— Ae.011L . ,
U
)0
V
1=1te_
FAC species x 3 =
Sltq
RA " * Jt w,
10
✓
F& t
FACU species x 4 =
3
UPL species x 5 =
4.
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5'
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
2 -Dominance Test is >50%
9.
_
3 -Prevalence Index is 53.0'
50% total I
= Total Cover
20% total
_
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
of cover:
)
of
cover:
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1. ('a/n u ilC.ttQttw SP.
30
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
2. &A—LX v
�S
✓
08L_
Aar+ ✓1ta.P.lntA+ t4"
unua
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3.
✓►t
✓
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4' raXCA4A,:6'
O_
/6
0 y
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5. Bed -p"_ Yu(Y A,
S
F* IJ
6 So -&.X A,4F
30
SL
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
7.
$
height.
8. QiA cb u&o4GL4AGia.
s
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
9
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
10•
m) tall.
11.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
9 =
Total Cover
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
50% of total cover: 41 S 20% of total cover:
h
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot
size: )
height.
1.
2.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
= Total Cover Present? Yes No
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
rs here or on a separate sheet.)
e"Z"%VAt.. VCG(f otJ !/1 t al}Gt?Q✓
vl�
`rte PAO- CaaC� a, DBL
�}'� U�e�vneyCac:ru�st. G,Bz; �✓
9
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or
Depth Matrix
(inches) Color (moist) %
0 -to I0 s 8D
b �l 10 y
t1-18 D s/ `ID
i
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Sampling Point: Yh W*O
Redox Features
Color (moist) % Type To Texture Remarks
S14 R_ V6
e- »n s 2. LLco( d
,S �%
)0 C P1.
A.S' q/4
3.0 0, 5
a 2�2.
1 Q I?. >M now 6�rtc�tc n�
X5 ASL
I LI,
RM=Reduced Matrix. MS=Masked Sand Grains.
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A71)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S7) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Dark Surface (S7)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
V" Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Sc
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF1 2)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ' ` No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

KCI
ASSOCIATES OF
NORTH CAROLINA, PA
Client:
Project:
County:
Location:
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A. Date: June 1, 2015
Buffalo Flats Wetland Restoration Site Project #: 20100798 6MO.Y4
Cabarrus
4939 Gold Hill Road
Soil Series: Chewacla Variant
State:
Site/Lot:
NC
MW# 7
Soil Classification: Fine -loamy, mixed, active, thermic Fluvaquentic Dystrochrepts
AWT: >36" SHWT: 0-12 Slope: 04% Aspect:
Elevation: —657 Drainage: Poorly Drained Permeabilit: slow
Vegetation: Herbaceous: Predominantly Virginia Wildrye with Cherry -bark Oak, Red Maple
Borings terminated at 36 Inches
HORIZON
DEPTH (IN)
MATRIX
MOTTLES
TEXTURE
STRUCTURE
CONSISTENCE
BOUNDARY NOTES
Ap
0-8
IOYR 4/I
5YR4/6clp
sl
I fsbk
mfr
cs 159 redox concentrations in
5YR 2.5/2c2p
pores aces & 3% soft masses in matrix
2.5YR 4/8c1
15% pore linings
Bwl
812
1 OYR 5/4
10YR 6/6c2f
sl
1 fsbk
mfr
cs 10% mottles, 5mm concretions
7.5YR 5/8c2d
59 mottles in matix
Bw2
12-17
7.5YR 5/8
10YR 5/1
sc
Imsbk
mfi
9W 209 redox in pore linings, matrix
many BB sized concretions
7.5YR 3/4c2f
10% pore linings
2.5YR 416c Ip
5% on pore linings
C I
17-35
5/5GY
2.5Y 6/6c2p
sc
mass
mfi
9W 5% pore linings
7.5YR 3/4c2
5% mottles on ped surfaces
7.5R 5/6c2d
10% mottles pore linings and matrix
2.5YR 2.5/2c2
5% marble sized concretions, much plinthite
2" chunk of linthite
C 2
35-36
5/1 OY
7.5YR 416c2p
sc
mass
mfi
155E redox in pore linings and matrix
1/4"-1" quartz gravels
COMMENTS:
No surface water present.
The SHWT develops more fully each year from surface saturation from precipitation, overbank flooding and inundation and is maintained
due to the very slow permeability of the compacted, angular structured subsurface horizons.
Meets hydric soil criteria F3: Depleted Matrix and F8: Redox Depressions
using Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region (Version 2.0)
Top 12" of surface has positive reaction with alpha, alpha-dipyridyl. The reagent provides evidence that the soil is hydric.
DESCRIBED BY: SFS DATE: 6/1/2015

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Bp-Ficaup F/a-gs City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: keX 1455 DCI C-kS '0",r �-J L State: Sampling Point: ►11 W-0'
Investigator(s): "5 $`FOklS4 7.Evttgp�t� Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): fl&o- 4szoo a., Local relief (concave, convex, none): CQmeA (u. Slope
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): Lat: 350,2,7 ��'/ . Qit) 2 R Long: _ 80'-29 "Z 7, 70.5-/ " Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: C' Qp AJ&1d t Vn)V1k1Y& NWI classification: p I
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes _
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed?
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic?
No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ✓ No
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes
Hydric Soil Present? Yes
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
No I Is the Sampled Area
No within a Wetland?
No
I,B, D —1 ;L.
P.A4-
Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (B10)
_ Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (B1)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (B3)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (B5)
v' Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
_ Shallow Aquitard (133)
_ Water -Stained Leaves (69)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
7 FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No ,,
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
Depth (inches): > 3(o"
Saturation Present? Yes No
Depth (inches): > 30`
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes L' No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: r' W lt'7
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1.
8.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A)
2.
_ 2 -Dominance Test is >50%
Total Number of Dominant
iD
3•
Species Across All Strata:
(B)
4.
= Total Cover
_ 4 -Morphological Adaptations (Provide supporting
50% of total cover: Jr
20%
of total cover:
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A/B)
6.
1. aru lA .
✓
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
7
I 0
= Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
OBL species x 1 =
Saplino/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: _3 )
4._Q WACaAd I I
FACW species x 2 =
1. OUAA ncc,4 ide
W
FAC species x 3 =
2 tc% ��;
r. f FAC
FACU species x 4 =
3
6
UPL species x 5 =
4
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
Column Totals: (A)
(B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
7.
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
_ 2 -Dominance Test is >50%
9.
iD
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
= Total Cover
_ 4 -Morphological Adaptations (Provide supporting
50% of total cover: Jr
20%
of total cover:
-.
Herb Stratum (Plot size: I M )
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1. aru lA .
✓
1iG�1
�
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
2. �
I 0
f
FA•G +
3 4
Jr
�,
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4._Q WACaAd I I
_
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5. 5-,o-. 5 u' 'VA A;+i cX
6
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
7.
height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
9 than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
10. m) tall.
11. Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
= Total Cover of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
50% of total cover: '+(r,20% of total cover.
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
-height.
1.
3.
4. Hydrophytic
5. Vegetation
= Total Cover Present? Yes _Z_ No
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Svc, VX& su i�r.. t' 2A•
r
ID
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: M1 -WQ
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
Redox Features
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
(inches)
Color (moist) %
Color (moist)
%
Type'
Loc Texture Remarks
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_✓ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF1 2)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
✓ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
o u. -1,4 8'
10 VOL
10
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
yv% 52. 5 vh m co -n cALAe w )
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic.
J 2=
7, s '� !o S
1 D s
a o
D
p S G ftv—Au, 88 sic &
t
10
GPL
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A76)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_✓ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF1 2)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
✓ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
LAa
Hydric Soil Present? Yes L' No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0