20190159 Ver 1_Final Draft Mitigation Plan_2020_20200821

ID#* 20190159 Version* 1
Select Reviewer:*
Erin Davis
Initial Review Completed Date 08/24/2020
Mitigation Project Submittal - 8/21/2020
Is this a Prospectus, Technical Proposal or a New Site?* r Yes r No
Type of Mitigation Project:*
V Stream r Wetlands W Buffer r- Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name:*
Jeremiah Dow
Project Information
.................................................................................................................................................................................
ID#:* 20190159
Existing IDY
Project Type: r DMS r Mitigation Bank
Project Name: Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project
County: Johnston
Document Information
Email Address:*
[e-mail]
Version:
*1
Existing Version
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Plans
File Upload: StrawberryHill_100094_FDMP 2020.pdf 66.47MB
Rease upload only one RDFcf the conplete file that needs to be subnitted...
Signature
Print Name:* Jeremiah Dow
Signature:*

This mitigation plan has been written in conformance with the requirements of the following:
• Federal rule for compensatory mitigation project sites as described in the Federal Register Title 33 Navigation
and Navigable Waters Volume 3 Chapter 2 Section § 332.8 paragraphs (c)(2) through (c)(14).
• NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services In-Lieu Fee Instrument signed and dated July 28, 2010
These documents govern NCDMS operations and procedures for the delivery of compensatory mitigation.

Final Draft Mitigation Plan
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project
DMS Project #: 100094 | Contract #: 7745 | RFP: 16-007576
USACE Action ID: SAW-2020-00332 | DWR #20190159
Neuse River Basin | HUC 03020201 | Johnston County, North Carolina
July 2020

Prepared For:
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
Prepared By:
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC
For Environmental Banc & Exchange – Neuse I, LLC
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652

3600 Glenwood Avenue, Suite 100
Raleigh, NC 27612
919-209-1052
1

MEMORANDUM

3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100 Raleigh, North Carolina 27612 919.209.1062 tel.
919.829.9913 fax
TO: Jeremiah Dow – Project Manager
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services

FROM: Jamey McEachran – Project Manager
Resource Environmental Services, LLC

DATE: July 28th, 2020
RE: Response to Strawberry Hill Draft Mitigation Plan Comments DMS Project ID No.
100094, Contract #7745

Stream Mitigation Plan:
1. Title Page
a. Add DWR # 20190159.
The DWR # has been added to the title page

2. Table 3
a. Please delete the “65m” in the Level IV Ecoregion designation.
In Table 3, “65m” has been deleted.

3. Section 4.1
a. DMS recommends removing text describing industry standards prior to IRT review.
Statements defining industry standards have been removed from Section 4.1.

b. Geomorphology section - Will all, or most, sediment from upstream sources be addressed by
restoration? How will sediment source from the ditch draining to JH1A be addressed? This refers
to Section 6.3 as well. Is the intent to promote bar storage? Also, a sentence states “The restoration
is also designed to accumulate woody debris by having defined shallow riffle…” Please add a
sentence or reword to explain “defined shallow riffle.”
Further explanation of how sediment from upstream sources will be addressed through restoration
is provided in The Geomorphology section in Section 4.1. Additionally, a short description of how
the sediment from the ditch draining to JH1-A will be addressed in the design through the addition
of large pools and livestaking was added to Section 6.3.

The word “shallow” was removed from the sentence to just refer to riffles.

2

4. Table 9
a. For items 4 and 5 in the “Objective” column, please consider changing “Unmeasurable” to
“Unmeasured” or “Not Measured,” etc., or remove italicized text.
Italicized text has been removed entirely from the “Objective” column for the Physicochemical
and Biology categories.

5. Section 6.1
a. Reference Watershed Characterization – Recommend changing the first sentence to “The selected
reference stream is UT to Buffalo Creek which is part of the most downstream portion of the
Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation site…”
The sentence has been revised per the comment.

b. The reference stream has a drainage area of 709 acres, which is significantly larger than the
drainage areas of project reaches. The draft mitigation plan indicates that a scaling factor is used
based on the difference between bankfull widths. Please verify other design parameters are also
scaled down accordingly, and add a brief discussion about the scaling factors used for design.
The Reference Channel Morphology section has been revised accordingly.

6. Section 6.2
a. Under the “Typical Design Sections” heading the 2nd sentence states, “The cross sections were
altered slightly to facilitate constructability; however, the cross-sectional area, width to depth
ratio, and side slopes were preserved.” Please clarify. Were all cross sections altered? Are they
altered/preserved from the reference dimensions, typicals from the plan sheets, etc.?
The Typical Design Sections write-up has been revised accordingly. The sentence has been revised
to say “All cross-section dimensions were developed from the analog reach but were altered based
on existing site conditions, hydraulic modeling, and observations from other mitigation sites in
the area.”

7. Section 6.3 – See comment 3b above.
An additional paragraph was added to Section 6.3 to clarify how sediment from ditches will be
addressed in restoration reaches.

8. Section 6.4
a. Under the “Soil Restoration” heading, reference is made to “… any unstable material identified
in the pond bed will be removed and replaced with material suitable for stream construction.” No
pond is shown within the easement boundary, please clarify.
The sentence has been removed, as there are no ponds within the easement boundary.

9. Section 8.5
a. A sentence states that vegetation monitoring will occur “between July 1st and leaf drop.” This
contradicts the buffer mitigation plan which states that vegetation data will be collected no earlier
than late August.
The section has been updated to be consistent with the Buffer Mitigation Plan vegetation
monitoring date criterion. Therefore, vegetation monitoring at the Project will occur between late
August and leaf drop for both the stream and buffer components. The revised sentenced reads,
“Monitoring will occur in Years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7 between late August and leaf drop.”
3

10. Figure 7
a. Please identify and label all ditches around the project, specifically the ditch draining to JH1-A.
All ditches have been symbolized in the figure, including the ditch draining to JH1-A as well as
the yard swale that drains into JH1-B. Likewise, Figures 8 & 9 of the Stream Mitigation Plan and
Figure 2 of the Buffer Mitigation Plan have been revised to incorporate these features.

11. Figure 9
a. Please move the JH3 and JH4 labels so they do not obstruct the vegetation plots.
Figure 9 has been revised accordingly.

b. Because the stream is intermittent throughout its entire project length, DMS suggests adding an
additional flow gage for monitoring intermittent flow.
The flow gauge near the top of reach JH1-A is intended to indicate presence/duration of flow for
the entire stream length, under the principle that if there is sufficient flow near the top then there
should be similar, if not more, flow downstream of that point as the drainage area increases. RES
believes that the stream determination scores likely underrate the “perenniality” of the stream due
to the extensive manipulation of the stream and the fact that the forms were completed in the
summer dry season. Also, to be conservative, the forms were completed at the top of each reach.
Therefore, RES is confident that the lower end of reach JH1-B will have no issues with flow,
especially considering the size of the drainage area and the groundwater input from the
surrounding wetlands. With that said, ultimately, the stage recorder near the downstream end can
be utilized to also monitor flow, if deemed necessary in future monitoring years.

12. Appendix B – Plan Sheets
a. Title Sheet – Please add “for NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services” at the top of the page.
Also, add the DWR number to bottom left corner.
These changes have been incorporated.

b. Please include construction sequence sheet between sheet E1 and E2.
Stream construction sequence notes have been added to sheet E1.

c. Final Plan Sheets need to be Sealed.
Final Plans will be sealed for construction after all required permits are in hand.

d. Sheet S3 – It appears that between stations 12+50 and 13+00 there is ≈ 25 lf to 30 lf of creditable
stream length with less than 50’ of buffer width.
A 50’ buffer could not be obtained along the right bank from station 12+59 to 13+03 (44 LF)
because the stream must be aligned with the NCDOT culvert. This accounts for ~1% of the total
restoration length and will not influence crediting per the 2016 Wilmington District Stream and
Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update.

e. Sheet S7 – Near station 39+00 a channel plug is depicted across the constructed channel. Is this
correct?
The channel plug has been revised to no longer intersect the proposed channel.

4

Riparian Buffer Mitigation Plan:

1. Section 3.2.1
a. Please clarify “…Zone 2 (31-50 feet) of the existing stream channel are not eligible for riparian
buffer credit due to violation of the Neuse Buffer Rules.” Tree clearing in Zone 2 is not a violation
of the Neuse Buffer Rules according to 15A NCAC 02B .0233 (6). The Table of Uses states under
the Vegetation Management section that “Periodic mowing and harvesting of plant products in
Zone 2 only” is an Exempt activity. Were Zone 2 areas deemed not eligible for credit due to the
recency of the tree clearing?
During the buffer viability site visit, Katie Merritt of DWR highlighted that because the clear-cut
activity did not only occur in Zone 2 but also occurred in Zone 1, Zone 2 would therefore not be
eligible to generate credit. Perhaps the defining word in “Periodic mowing and harvesting of plant
products in Zone 2 only” is “only”. Therefore, Zone 2 areas were deemed not eligible for credit
based on the discussion in the field with the NCDWR and the Site Viability letter based on that
site visit.

b. See last two sentences referring to JH5. Please discuss why the right bank area of JH5 was
excluded from the easement, differing from the proposal submitted to DMS.

This area is not included within the Project easement for two main reasons. The first, because it
is not eligible for riparian buffer credit within Zones 1 and 2 according to the buffer viability
determination, just like the other ineligible areas throughout the Project. The second reason, the
original proposal proposed stream Enhancement II as well as some buffer preservation credit in
Zone 2, off the right bank, of JH5; however, after the IRT site visit/evaluation, IRT determined
that JH5 was not suitable for any stream credit other than restoration. But because restoration is
not possible on JH5 within the confines of the Project boundary, the reach was rendered not
suitable for stream credit. Therefore, due to these circumstances, RES is only proposing to
generate riparian buffer credit along the left bank of JH5. With that said, the easement boundary
will still include the JH5 stream channel, plus an additional five feet off of the right stream top of
bank in order to maintain protection of the entire channel.

To clarify, the sentences regarding JH5 within the Section 3.2.1 have been revised to read,
“Notably, JH5 contains a small portion of recently cleared, regenerating forest off the right bank
that is not eligible for riparian buffer credit within Zones 1 and 2 due to circumstances described
above. Therefore, this area will not be part of the Project, although the entire stream channel will
still be included within the conservation easement in order to maintain protection of the entire
stream channel: this conservation easement boundary will be offset approximately five feet from
the right top of bank…”

2. Section 3.2.3
a. See comment 1a above. Zone 2 tree harvesting is not a violation of the Neuse Buffer Rules.
Please see 1a response above.

5

3. Section 3.3
a. Sentence states that “vegetation data will be collected no earlier than August of each year.” See
comment 9a for the Stream Mitigation Plan. The stream and buffer mitigation plans need to be
consistent.
Please see response 9a above. The stream and buffer mitigation plan will both state that vegetation
monitoring at the Project will occur between late August and leaf drop.

4. Section 4.1
a. It is stated that “…there will be 13 vegetation plots measuring riparian buffer mitigation success.”
Please verify that only the fixed vegetative plots will be used for riparian buffer success criteria,
and not the 4 random plots.
This is correct. Only the 13 fixed vegetation plots will be utilized to monitor buffer mitigation
success. Random plots will not be utilized for buffer mitigation success.

Electronic Files:
1. Please include the zero credit stream features that connect creditable features (i.e. between JH1-B and
JH1-A).
The line shapefile has been updated to include these features.

2. “Planting Zones” feature represents 859,425 sq. ft, while total Riparian Buffer area is reported as
740,948 sq. ft. Please provide features for riparian buffer that accurately represent the creditable area
reported in Table 1. Also, please provide separate features for riparian preservation and restoration.
Planting zones include both creditable and non-creditable buffer area. Creditable buffer shapes have
been added to the polygon shapefile.
This mitigation plan has been written in conformance with the requirements of the following:
• Federal rule for compensatory mitigation project sites as described in the Federal Register Title 33 Navigation
and Navigable Waters Volume 3 Chapter 2 Section § 332.8 paragraphs (c)(2) through (c)(14).
• NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services In-Lieu Fee Instrument signed and dated July 28, 2010
These documents govern NCDMS operations and procedures for the delivery of compensatory mitigation.

Final Draft Mitigation Plan
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project
DMS Project #: 100094 | Contract #: 7745 | RFP: 16-007576
USACE Action ID: SAW-2020-00332 | DWR #20190159
Neuse River Basin | HUC 03020201 | Johnston County, North Carolina
July 2020

Prepared For:
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
Prepared By:
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC
For Environmental Banc & Exchange – Neuse I, LLC
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652

3600 Glenwood Avenue, Suite 100
Raleigh, NC 27612
919-209-1052
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan ii July 2020
DMS Project #100094

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 PROJECT INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 1 Project Components ................................................................................................................ 1 Project Outcomes .................................................................................................................... 1
2 WATERSHED APPROACH AND SITE SELECTION ............................................................... 2 Site Selection .......................................................................................................................... 2
3 BASELINE AND EXISTING CONDITIONS .............................................................................. 4 Watershed Summary Information .......................................................................................... 4 Landscape Characteristics ...................................................................................................... 4 Land Use - Historic, Current, and Future ............................................................................... 6 Regulatory Considerations and Potential Constraints ............................................................ 6 Reach Summary Information ................................................................................................. 8 Existing Wetlands ................................................................................................................. 10 Potential Constraints ............................................................................................................. 11
4 FUNCTIONAL UPLIFT POTENTIAL ....................................................................................... 13 Anticipated Functional Benefits and Improvements ............................................................ 13
5 MITIGATION PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ............................................................ 15
6 MITIGATION WORK PLAN ..................................................................................................... 17 Reference Stream .................................................................................................................. 17 Design Parameters ................................................................................................................ 18 Sediment Control Measures ................................................................................................. 22 Vegetation and Planting Plan ............................................................................................... 22 Mitigation Summary ............................................................................................................. 24 Determination of Credits ...................................................................................................... 25
7 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS ................................................................................................ 27 Stream Restoration Success Criteria..................................................................................... 27 Vegetation Success Criteria .................................................................................................. 27
8 MONITORING PLAN ................................................................................................................. 29 As-Built Survey .................................................................................................................... 29 Visual Monitoring ................................................................................................................ 29 Hydrology Events ................................................................................................................. 29 Cross Sections ...................................................................................................................... 30 Vegetation Monitoring ......................................................................................................... 30 Scheduling/Reporting ........................................................................................................... 30
9 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN ......................................................................................... 32
10 LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN ..................................................................................... 32
11 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 33

Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan iii July 2020
DMS Project #100094
List of Tables
Table 1. Strawberry Hill Project Stream Components Summary ........................................................... 1
Table 2. Project Parcel and Landowner Information .............................................................................. 3
Table 3. Project Watershed Summary Information ................................................................................ 4
Table 4. Mapped Soil Series ................................................................................................................... 5
Table 5. Regulatory Considerations ....................................................................................................... 8
Table 6. Summary of Existing Channel Characteristics ......................................................................... 8
Table 7. Summary of Existing Stream Parameters ................................................................................. 9
Table 8. Jurisdictional Wetland Information ........................................................................................ 11
Table 9. Functional Benefits and Improvements .................................................................................. 16
Table 10. Peak Flow Comparison ........................................................................................................ 20
Table 11. Stable Channel Design Output ............................................................................................. 21
Table 12. Comparison of Allowable and Proposed Shear Stresses ...................................................... 21
Table 13. Comparison of Permissible and Proposed Velocities ........................................................... 22
Table 14. Proposed Plant List ............................................................................................................... 23
Table 15. Stream Mitigation Credits .................................................................................................... 26
Table 16. Monitoring Requirements ..................................................................................................... 31

List of Figures
Figure 1 – Project Vicinity
Figure 2 – USGS Quadrangle
Figure 3 – Landowner Parcels
Figure 4 – Land use
Figure 5 – Mapped Soils
Figure 6 – Historical Conditions
Figure 7 – Existing Conditions
Figure 8 – Conceptual Plan
Figure 9 – Monitoring Plan

Appendices
Appendix A - Strawberry Hill Buffer Mitigation Plan
Appendix B - Plan Sheets
Appendix C - Data Analysis and Supplementary Information
Appendix D - Site Protection Instrument
Appendix E - Credit Release Schedule
Appendix F - Financial Assurance
Appendix G - Maintenance Plan
Appendix H - DWR Stream Identification Forms
Appendix I - USACE District Assessment Forms
Appendix J - Wetland JD Forms and Maps
Appendix K - Invasive Species Plan
Appendix L - Approved FHWA Categorical Exclusion
Appendix M - DMS Floodplain Requirements Checklist
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 1 July 2020
DMS Project #100094
1 PROJECT INTRODUCTION
Project Components
The Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project (Project) is located within a mostly rural watershed in Johnston
County in Smithfield, NC at the crossroads of Yelverton Grove Road and Brogden Road. The Project
lies within the Neuse River Basin, North Carolina United States Geological Survey (USGS) 8-digit
Cataloguing Unit 03020201 (Neuse 01) and 14-digit hydrologic unit code (HUC) 03020201140010, a
NC Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) Targeted Local Watershed (TLW) and the Division of
Water Resources (NCDWR) sub-basin 03-04-02 (Figure 1). This Project was selected by DMS as a
full delivery project to provide stream mitigation units (SMUs) and buffer credits in the Neuse 01 (DMS
#100094). The Project proposes to restore 3,719 linear feet (LF) that will provide water quality benefit
for 383 acres of drainage area. Additionally, the Project will restore and preserve riparian buffer area
within the project area, which will provide 656,593.451 buffer credits for the Neuse 01 watershed. The
Buffer Mitigation Plan is found in Appendix A. Also, notably, the Project is in very close proximity
(approximately 0.4 miles) to the RES Polecat Stream Mitigation Bank Site, offering even more
functional uplift to the local watershed.

The Project area, in whole, is comprised of a 22.12-acre easement involving two unnamed tributaries
to Polecat Branch, which eventually drains to the Neuse River. One of the tributary streams, and its
associated ditches, will not be subjected to stream mitigation and will only be utilized for buffer
mitigation. This portion of the Project will not be discussed in the stream mitigation section of this
mitigation plan but will be discussed in detail in the Buffer Mitigation Plan in Appendix A. Therefore,
the stream mitigation component of the Project involves one tributary, totaling 3,267 existing LF.
Stream mitigation components are summarized in Table 1.

The Project is accessible from both Yelverton Grove Road and Brogden Road. Coordinates for the
Project area are approximately 35.469579, -78.323896 at the NC Department of Transportation (DOT)
culvert exiting the Project at Brogden Road.
Project Outcomes
The stream proposed for restoration has been significantly impacted by historic relocation and
straightening, crop production, and lack of riparian buffer. Proposed improvements to the Project will
help meet the river basin needs expressed in the 2010 Neuse River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP)
(amended August 2018).

Through stream restoration, the Project presents 3,719 LF of proposed stream, generating 3,719.000
Warm Stream Mitigation Units (SMUs) (Table 1). This mitigation plan is consistent with the Updated
June 12, 2019 Post-Contract IRT Meeting Minutes (Appendix C).

Table 1. Strawberry Hill Project Stream Components Summary

Stream Mitigation
Mitigation Approach Linear Feet Ratio Warm SMU
Restoration 3,719 1:1 3,719.000
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 2 July 2020
DMS Project #100094
2 WATERSHED APPROACH AND SITE SELECTION
The Project was selected based on its potential to support the objectives and goals of the DDMS 2010
Neuse RBRP (amended August 2018). The Neuse RBRP identified several restoration needs for the
entire Neuse River Basin, as well as for HUC 03020201, specifically. The Project watershed was
identified as a TLW (HUC 03020201140010, Neuse River Watershed), a watershed that exhibits both
the need and opportunity for stream, wetland, and riparian buffer restoration. Approximately 34% of
this TLW is agricultural land, 62% is forested, and 0.4% is impervious surface. Basinwide goals for all
Catalog Units (CUs) outlined in the 2010 Neuse RBRP (amended August 2018) and CU Specific Goals
for the Neuse 01 include:

Basinwide Goals for all CUs

1. Promote nutrient reduction in municipal areas through the implementation of stormwater best
management practices;

2. Promote nutrient and sediment reduction in agricultural areas by restoring and preserving
wetlands, streams, and riparian buffers; and

3. Continue targeted implementation of projects under the Nutrient Offset and Buffer programs,
as well as focusing DOT sponsored restoration in areas where they will provide the most
functional improvement to the ecosystem.

CU 03020201 Specific Goals

1. Support the Falls Lake Watershed Management Plan; a separate prioritization process for
DMS will be developed in next 1-2 years;
2. Continue to implement planning initiatives including the NCDMS Phase IV LWP for the Upper
Neuse (incorporates updates for DMS LWPs including Ellerbe Creek, Lake Rogers/Ledge
Creek, Lick Creek, Little Lick Creek, and Upper Swift Creek), the Upper Neuse River Basin
Association’s Upper Neuse Watershed Management Plan, and the DMS Neuse 01 Regional
Watershed Plan; and
3. Protect, augment and connect Natural Heritage Areas and other conservation lands.
Agriculture and unbuffered streams are significant contributing factors to water quality impairment and
habitat degradation in this watershed, and the Project will help address these identified stressors as
described in Section 2.1.
Site Selection
The Project will directly and indirectly address stressors identified in the RBRP by reconstructing a
natural channel within one stream’s natural floodplain that will exhibit stable stream banks, floodplain
connectivity, and reduced sediment and nutrient loads as well as restoring forested buffers to streams
and ditches. Project-specific goals and objectives will be addressed further in Section 5. Watershed
planning priority boundaries are shown on Figure 1, and the Project’s drainage areas are shown on
Figure 2.
The Project will address three of the goals outlined in the 2010 Neuse RBRP. Firstly, the Project
includes stream and associated riparian buffer restoration that will directly promote nutrient and
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 3 July 2020
DMS Project #100094
sediment reduction in agricultural areas (RBRP Basinwide Goal 2). Specifically, this project is seeking
to restore a riparian buffer to a stream and ditch system that has had row crop production occurring up
to the top of bank of the stream and ditches. Therefore, there has been no buffer to diffuse the sediments
and nutrients from the agricultural activities from entering the waterways. Secondly, the buffer
mitigation component of the Project will employ the Nutrient Offset and Buffer program to offset non-
point source pollution (RBRP Basinwide Goal 3). Lastly, the Project will augment another conservation
area (the RES Polecat Stream Mitigation Bank Site, located 0.4 mile away) by continuing the
restoration and protection of streams and buffers that feed their shared receiving water, Polecat Branch
(RBRP CU 03020201 Specific Goal 3).

The land required for the construction, management, and stewardship of this Project includes portions
of seven parcels in Johnston County with the following ownership in Table 2 & Figure 3. Once
finalized, a copy of the land protection instrument will be included in Appendix D. The DMS
Conservation Easement model template will be utilized to draft the site protection instruments.
Table 2. Project Parcel and Landowner Information
Owner of Record
PIN
Or
Tax Parcel ID#
Project Reach
Jan Penny Hill
260200-26-4743
260200-45-0227
260200-36-4485
260200-35-1474
Portion of JH1-B
JH2 (Ditch)
JH3 (Ditch)
JH4 (Ditch)
JH5
William Christian Carpenter 260200-36-4710 Portion of JH1-B
Melrose Haas 260200-46-0253 Portion of JH1-A
Bridgette Edwards Davis 260200-46-1831 Portion of JH1-A

Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 4 July 2020
DMS Project #100094
3 BASELINE AND EXISTING CONDITIONS
Watershed Summary Information
Drainage Area and Land Cover
The only reach proposed for stream mitigation credit is JH1 and comprises the entire northern easement
segment; whereas, the rest of the reaches, JH5 and three of its ditches, JH2, JH3, and JH4, comprise
the southern easement section and will only be utilized for riparian buffer credit (Appendix A).
Therefore, the total drainage area for the whole Project is 383 acres (0.60 mi2) (Table 3); whereas the
total drainage area for the stream restoration segment (JH1) is 266 acres (0.42 mi2). Specifically, the
drainage area of Reach JH1-A is 193 acres (0.30 mi2); Reach JH1-B is 266 acres (0.42 mi2). Reach JH2
(a ditch) is 69 acres (0.12 mi2); Reach JH3 (a ditch) is 71 acres (0.11 mi2); Reach JH4 (a ditch) is 20
acres (0.03 mi2); and Reach JH5 is 117 acres (0.18 mi2) (Figure 2). Land use within the drainage area
consists of approximately 55% Agriculture, 21% Forest, 11% Brush, 6% Residential, 6% Residential,
3% Dirt Racetrack, 2% Impervious Surface, 1% Industrial, and 1% Water (Figure 4). The Project’s
tributaries drain directly to Polecat Branch, which has been assigned class C and Nutrient Sensitive
Waters (NSW) (NCDWQ 2011).
Table 3. Project Watershed Summary Information
Watershed Feature Designation
Level IV Ecoregion Rolling Coastal Plain
River Basin Neuse
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8-digit 03020201
USGS Hydrologic Unit 14-digit 03020201140010
DWR Sub-basin 03-04-02
Project Drainage Area (acres) Whole Project - 383; Stream Restoration Project - 266
Percent Impervious Area 2%
Surface Water Classification (drains to) Class C and NSW
Landscape Characteristics
Physiography and Topography
The Project is located within the Rolling Coastal Plain Level IV ecoregion within the Southeastern
Plains Level III ecoregion and is characterized by greater relief, elevation, and stream gradients
compared to the Mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain to the east with better drained soils and a slightly cooler
and shorter growing season. It is a productive agricultural region with typical crops of corn, soybeans,
tobacco, cotton, sweet potatoes, peanuts, and wheat (Griffith et al. 2002). However, the Project’s
specific landscape does not have much relief or elevation change, and the stream gradient is quite low:
Elevations range from 141 to 133 feet above mean sea level (NAD 83), based upon topographic survey
and the historic floodplain is very flat and wide (Figure 2). The land use within the Project watershed
is typical of the ecoregion, though, and is approximately 55% agriculture and mainly soybean and corn
row crops (Figure 4).
Geology and Soils
According to geology data from the North Carolina Geologic Survey, published in 1985, the Project is
within geologic map unit Tt, occurring in the Coastal Plain Belt. This map unit is associated with
sedimentary type rocks of the Terrace Deposits and Upland Sediment formation that formed within the
Tertiary period of the Cenozoic era between two and 63 million years ago. This formation is composed
of gravel, clayey sand, sand, and minor iron-oxide cemented sandstone. The Project area reflects this
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 5 July 2020
DMS Project #100094
map unit description, as it is underlain by sandy loams and sandy clay loams while stream substrate
consists mostly of sand and finer sediment.

The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) depicts four soil map units across the Project
(Figure 5). The Project area is dominated by Rains sandy loam, with successively smaller proportions
of Goldsboro sandy loam, Lynchburg sandy loam, and Cowarts loamy sand. Rains sandy loam,
Goldsboro sandy loam, and Lynchburg sandy loam are zero to two percent slopes and not flooded,
while Cowarts loamy sand is two to six percent and not flooded. The soil characteristics of these map
units are summarized in Table 4.

All soils on-site are formed in loamy or loamy and sandy marine deposits. Rains sandy loam is the only
soil on-site to be considered hydric by the NRCS. Goldsboro sandy loam and Lynchburg sandy loam
have minor hydric inclusions, and Cowarts loamy sand has none. Goldsboro sandy loam is considered
to be prime farmland, while Lynchburg sandy loam and Rains sandy loam are considered to be prime
farmland if drained. Cowarts loamy sand is not considered prime farmland.

Soil cores evaluated on-site indicate that NRCS soil map units appear to be accurately depicted, as
cores contained sandy loam and sandy clay loams, while poor drainage was evident by hydric soils and
wetland indicators around much of the Project stream.
Table 4. Mapped Soil Series
Map Unit
Symbol Map Unit Name Percent
Hydric Drainage Class Hydrologic
Soil Group
Landscape
Setting
CoB
Cowarts loamy
sand, 2-6% slopes,
not flooded
0% Well Drained C
Coastal plains,
low ridges on
marine terraces
GoA
Goldsboro sandy
loam, 0-2% slopes,
not flooded
2% Moderately
Well Drained B
Flats on
marine
terraces,
coastal plains
Ly
Lynchburg sandy
loam, 0-2% slopes,
not flooded
8% Somewhat
Poorly Drained B/D
Marine
terraces,
coastal plains
Ra
Rains sandy loam,
0-2% slopes, not
flooded
90% Poorly Drained A/D
Marine
terraces on
coastal plains
Vegetation
Current land use around the Project is primarily composed of row crops, forest, and early successional
forest. Fields rotating soybean and corn directly abut most of the banks of Project streams and ditches.
Part of the uppermost portion of the main Project reach (JH1-A) contains a forest along the left bank
that resembles a disturbed Mesic Mixed Oak-Hickory Forest (Coastal Plain Subtype) that consists of
red maple (Acer rubrum), loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), southern red oak (Quercus falcata), water oak
(Quercus nigra), laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia), sweetbay (Magnolia virginiana), sweetgum
(Liquidambar styraciflua), common persimmon (Diospyros virginiana), mockernut hickory, (Carya
tomentosa), Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), roundleaf greenbriar (Smilax rotundifolia), poison ivy
(Toxicodendron radicans), muscadine (Vitis rotundifolia), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica),
evening trumpetflower (Gelsemium sempervirens), giant cane (Arundinaria gigantea), and Nepalese
browntop (Microstegium vimineum). The other distinct community type within the Project is
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 6 July 2020
DMS Project #100094
regenerating forest that resembles a disturbed Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp. The area along reach
JH1-B was clear-cut approximately six to seven years ago and contains a mosaic of scrub-shrub and
emergent wetland areas with upland pockets and berms. Species in these areas include loblolly pine,
water oak, red maple, sweetgum, American sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), sweetbay, redbay
(Persea borbonia), common sweetleaf (Symplocos tinctoria), swamp titi (Cyrilla racemiflora), eastern
baccharis (Baccharis halimifolia), black elderberry (Sambucus nigra), sawtooth blackberry (Rubus
argutus), muscadine, winged sumac (Rhus copallinum), big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii), giant
cane, common rush (Juncus effuses), seedbox (Ludwigia alterniflora), common reed (Phragmities
australis), woolgrass (Scirpus cyperinus), dogfennel (Eupatorium capillifolium), and goldenrod
(Solidago sp.). Also, stream and ditch channels contain locally dense areas of murdannia (Murdannia
sp.) and narrowleaf cattail (Typha angustifolia).

Notable exotic invasive species include Chinese privet, Japanese honeysuckle, Nepalese browntop, and
narrowleaf cattail; however, these species are scattered throughout the Project and do not appear to
present a nuisance, currently.
Land Use - Historic, Current, and Future
Aerial imagery over time indicates that historic and current land-use within the immediate Project area
has involved row crop production and forestry since at least before 1939. Natural drainage patterns
throughout the Project’s watershed have been altered through agricultural production and direct
manipulation of stream channels. Specifically, between 1939 and 1965, the Project streams were
rerouted and straightened, and a network of ditches were dug to promote crop production, while in the
years since, additional manipulation and rerouting occurred on drainages associated with reach JH1-A.
Also, these agricultural practices have eliminated or degraded riparian buffers throughout, and it is clear
that forests in and around riparian areas have been cleared and converted to cropland (Figure 6).
Notably, for a few decades, some of the fields were utilized to grow strawberries and other berries until
several years ago when these fields were converted to soybean and corn. Further, approximately six or
seven years ago, forest adjacent to reaches JH1 and JH5 were clear-cut up to the streams’ tops of bank
and are currently in an early stage of succession (Figure 7). Overall, these activities have very
negatively impacted water quality, channel stability, flood function, and habitat in Project streams and
riparian areas.

The future land use for the Project area will include 22.12 acres of conservation easement that will be
protect streams, ditches, and their riparian buffers in perpetuity. Outside the Project, the area will likely
remain in agricultural use.
Regulatory Considerations and Potential Constraints
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)/ Hydrologic Trespass
The Project is not within a mapped FEMA Regulatory Floodway or 100-year floodplain (Figure 7).
While designing the Strawberry Hill Project, appropriate measures were taken to eliminate hydrologic
trespass of the adjacent agricultural fields. The adjacent land use will not be affected by the proposed
design, and no detrimental impacts are expected beyond the easement limits. The DMS Floodplain
Requirements Checklist can be found in Appendix M.
Environmental Screening and Documentation
Because DMS mitigation projects are considered to be a category of activities that do not individually
or cumulatively have an impact on the human environment, they do not require preparation of an
environmental assessment or environmental impact statement. To ensure that a project meets the
“Categorical Exclusion” criteria, the Federal Highways Administration (FHWA) and DMS have
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 7 July 2020
DMS Project #100094
developed a categorical exclusion (CE) checklist that is included as part of each mitigation project’s
Environmental Screening process. The CE Approval Form for the Strawberry Hill Project is included
in Appendix L and was approved by DMS and FHWA in August 2019.
Threatened and Endangered Species
Plants and animals with a federal classification of endangered or threatened are protected under
provisions of Sections 7 and 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. According to the
United States Fish and Wildlife (USFWS) IPAC database review tool (USFWS 2018) and the self-
certification process conducted by RES and submitted to the USFWS on June 12th, 2019 the list of
threatened and endangered species includes the Red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis), the
Atlantic Pigtoe (Fusconaia masoni), the Tar River Spinymussel (Elliptio steinstansana), and Michaux’s
Sumac (Rhus michauxii). Two additional species on the list submitted to USFWS are proposed for
listing, the Neuse River Waterdog (Necturus lewisi) and the Carolina Madtom (Noturus Furiosus). The
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project does not contain any suitable habitat for the Red-cockaded
woodpecker, the Atlantic Pigtoe, the Tar River Spinymussel, the Neuse River Waterdog, the Carolina
Madtom, and the Michaux’s Sumac. A self-certification letter was sent to USFWS (on August 2nd,
2019) This consultation was conducted as part of the CE process and supporting documentation and
correspondence can be found in Appendix L

The Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act requires consultation with state fish and wildlife agencies when
“waters of any stream or other body of water are proposed or authorized, permitted or licensed to be
impounded, diverted…or otherwise controlled or modified. The North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission (NCWRC) was consulted during the CE process and the NCWRC did not comment on
any state or federally listed species; however, they did recommend the use of biodegradable and
wildlife-friendly sediment and erosion control devices and to treat invasive species as part of the
Project. Documentation is included in Appendix L.
Cultural Resources
A review of North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) GIS Web Service (accessed 14
August 2018) database did not reveal any registered occurrences within the Project area; however, there
is one nationally registered house (JT0994 - the Watson-Sanders House) on Brogden Road just west of
the Project and one “Determined Eligible” house (JT1920 - Stevens Sausage Company
Homeplace/Office) on Stevens Sausage Road just south of the Project. RES consulted with the SHPO
during the CE process and the SHPO had “conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic
resources which would be affected by the project.” Cultural Resources screening met the Categorical
Exclusion Criteria for FHWA and DMS projects and documentation is included in Appendix L.
Clean Water Act - Section 401/404
Impacts to jurisdictional streams and wetlands and protected buffer will be unavoidable due to the
restoration activities proposed. Although these impacts are unavoidable, the proposed stream treatment
will result in an overall functional uplift of the stream and wetland system, as described in Section 4.
Stream restoration of reaches JH1-A and JH1-B will have permanent stream impacts due to stream
realignment and construction of one culvert crossing. All wetlands (WA, WB, WC, and WD) will also
have some impacts due to stream restoration and construction of one culvert crossing as well, including
both permanent and temporary impacts. There will also be impact to the protected riparian buffer
through stream restoration efforts. However, these impacts will be limited where possible, and overall,
the Project will greatly increase the function of riparian buffers by both increasing riparian buffer area
and improving buffer composition quality and protecting these riparian areas into perpetuity through a
conservation easement. Moreover, all stream, wetland, and buffer impacts will be accounted for in the
Pre-Construction Notification form.
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 8 July 2020
DMS Project #100094

Table 5 is a summary of regulatory considerations for the Project. Supporting documentation can be
found in Appendix L and Appendix M.
Table 5. Regulatory Considerations
Regulation Applicable Resolved Supporting
Documentation
Waters of the United States - Section 404 Yes No To be submitted*
Waters of the United States - Section 401 Yes No To be submitted*
Endangered Species Act Yes Yes Appendix L
National Historic Preservation Act Yes Yes Appendix L
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA)
/Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) No N/A N/A
FEMA Floodplain Compliance No No Appendix M
Magnuson-Stevens Act - Essential Fisheries
Habitat No N/A N/A
*PCN for the Nationwide Permit General Permit 27 will be submitted after the Final Mitigation Plan is approved
Reach Summary Information
The Project area is comprised of two easement sections: a northern and a southern. As mentioned
before, the southern easement section is proposed solely for riparian buffer credit. The northern
easement section where stream work will be conducted is divided by two easement breaks to account
for the Yelverton Grove Road crossing and one crossing for agriculture and forestry purposes. The
stream channel within this easement includes one unnamed tributary that flows east to west and is split
into two reaches, upstream and downstream of Yelverton Grove Road (Figure 7). Results of the
preliminary data collection for these two reaches are presented in Table 6.
In general, the entire stream proposed for restoration (JH1) does not function to its full potential.
Current conditions demonstrate significant degradation due to historic channel relocating and
straightening, continued crop production, and recent clear-cutting that has resulted in disturbed riparian
buffer or no riparian buffer. Restoration reaches are incised, have little to no bedform, and have little
to no pattern (Figure 7). A summary of the morphological parameters is located in Appendix C.
Channel characteristics are summarized in Table 6.
Table 6. Summary of Existing Channel Characteristics
Reach Drainage
Area
(acres)
ABKF
(ft2)
WBKF
(ft)
BKF
Mean
Depth
(ft)
W/D
Ratio
Bank
Height
Ratio
Entrenchment
Ratio
Sinuosity Slope
(ft/ft)
JH1-A 193 7.1 6.7 1.1 6.3 1.5 1.9 1.00 0.001
JH1-B 266 8.5 9.6 1.0 10.5 1.7 2.1 1.01 0.002
BKF = cross-sectional area (measured at approximate bankfull stage as estimated using existing conditions data and NC
Regional Curve equations where field indicators were not present)
Channel Classification
The stream reaches have been classified as intermittent streams using the NCDWR Stream
Identification Form version 4.11 (Figure 7 & Appendix H). Stream determinations have been verified
by the NCDWR in the field (Appendix A) and the USACE (Appendix J). The streams were also
assessed using the USACE Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet (Appendix I). Table 7 summarizes
these stream parameters.
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 9 July 2020
DMS Project #100094
Table 7. Summary of Existing Stream Parameters
Reach Hydrology
Status
Stream Determination
Score*
USACE Stream Quality
Assessment Score
Reach Length (LF)
JH1-A Intermittent 22 32 921
JH1-B Intermittent 25 40 2,355
* Stream determinations were performed in the dry, summer season.
Existing Channel Morphology
JH1
JH1-A
Reach JH1-A comprises the easternmost section of the Project and flows from a forested area east
into the project area. The reach flows west through a row crop field and then through two vertically
offset 30" culverts under Yelverton Grove Road where it becomes reach JH1-B. The reach has been
historically straightened and maintained as a field ditch for the row-crop fields that extend to the
right top of bank and the lower third of the left top of bank. As such, the channel is entrenched,
disconnected from its floodplain, lacking bedform, and has some active bank erosion at drainage
points from the field. Buffer along the right bank is non-existent, while the buffer on the left bank is
forested for approximately the first two-thirds of its length but non-existent for the last third.

Reach JH1-A
Looking upstream
(Winter)
Reach JH1-A
Looking upstream
(Summer)

Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 10 July 2020
DMS Project #100094

JH1-B
Reach JH1-B continues from JH1-A through the two 30” RCP culverts under Yelverton Grove Road.
The culverts are vertically offset, and one appears to function as a high-flow culvert. The reach flows
west and turns south before exiting the project through an oval 42”x30” culvert under Brogden Road.
Additionally, the reach flows through a 30” RCP culvert farm crossing approximately halfway along
its length. This reach has also been historically relocated and straightened as a field ditch for the row-
crop field to its south, and resulting agricultural maintenance has incised the channel, removed
floodplain connectivity, and removed bedform. Drainage from the field has concentrated in spots
and led to bank erosion, and piles of concrete and brick have been installed in an attempt to attenuate
this flow. Additionally, buffer along the left bank is nonexistent for almost the entirety of its length
and buffer along the right bank is composed of regenerating forest which was most recently cleared
in 2015.

Reach JH1-B
Looking upstream
(Summer)
Reach JH1-B
Looking downstream
(Winter)
Existing Wetlands
A detailed wetland delineation was completed February 5th, 2020. Wetland boundaries were delineated
using current methodology outlined in the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Wetland
Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987). Soils were characterized and classified using
the Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States, Version 7.0 (NRCS, 2010). Within the
boundaries of the Project, four jurisdictional wetlands are present (Figure 7). Wetlands are labeled as
WA (Wetland A) through WD (Wetland D) and are described in Table 8. A preliminary jurisdictional
determination (PJD) request was sent to the USACE on February 14th, 2020 and a confirmed PJD was
received, signed May 4th, 2020 (Appendix J).

Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 11 July 2020
DMS Project #100094

Table 8. Jurisdictional Wetland Information
Wetland
ID
Cowardin
Type
Hydrology
Source
Soil Series Area* Vegetation
WA PSS Groundwater Rains sandy
loam 3.408 ac.
Sapling Statum:
Sweetgum, water oak, red bay, sweetleaf,
swamp titi, loblolly pine

Shrub Stratum:
Blackberry

Herb Stratum:
Big bluestem, giant cane
Woody Vine Stratum:
Poison ivy
WB PSS Groundwater Rains sandy
loam 0.923 ac.
Sapling Statum:
Loblolly pine, sweetbay, sweetgum

Shrub Stratum:
Eastern baccharis, blackberry, black
elderberry

Herb Stratum:
Big bluestem, woolgrass, seedbox, soft
rush
Woody Vine Stratum:
Evening trumpetflower
WC PSS Groundwater Rains sandy
loam 0.432 ac.
Sapling Statum:
N/A

Shrub Stratum:
Blackberry, eastern baccharis, black
elderberry

Herb Stratum:
Wrinkleleaf goldenrod (Solidago rugosa),
woolgrass, common reed
Woody Vine Stratum:
Japanese honeysuckle
WD PSS
Groundwater
Rains sandy
loam 0.303 ac.
* This is the area within the Project’s proposed easement. Larger area was delineated in PJD study area.
The USFWS National Wetland Inventory Map (NWI) does not depict any additional wetland areas
within the Project (Figure 7).
Potential Constraints
There are no significant hydrologic or infrastructure constraints to the Project; however, the DOT
culverts at Yelverton Grove Road and Brogden Road pose elevation constraints that will need to be tied
into. Therefore, some Priority 2 Restoration will be necessary. There are overhead transmission lines,
buried water lines, sewer lines, and buried telephone lines along roadsides adjacent to Project reaches.
Two fire hydrants exist along the water lines: One is located along Brogden Road at the downstream
end of reach JH1-B and the other at the downstream end of reach JH1-A along Yelverton Grove Road
(Figure 7). The Project will not affect these utilities and the proposed easement will not intersect the
existing utility easements. There will be two easement breaks: One will account for the Yelverton Grove
Road crossing and the other will account for an upgraded culvert crossing on reach JH1-B to facilitate
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 12 July 2020
DMS Project #100094
landowner access to the rest of the parcel (Figure 8). Any culvert maintenance will be the responsibility
of RES through completion of monitoring. Once the Project has completed monitoring and the Project
is closed out, the culvert will be the responsibility of the landowner(s).
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 13 July 2020
DMS Project #100094
4 FUNCTIONAL UPLIFT POTENTIAL
The Stream Functions Pyramid Framework (Harman et al. 2012) uses stream functions to describe
project objectives, existing condition assessments and monitoring, performance metrics, and design
criteria. The Framework separates stream functions into five categories, ordered into a hierarchy, which
communicate the interrelations among functions and illustrate the dependence of higher-level functions
(biology, physicochemical and geomorphology) on lower level functions (hydrology and hydraulics).
Functions that affect the greatest number of other functions are illustrated at the base of the Pyramid,
while functions that have the least effect on other functions are illustrated at the top.
Fischenich (2006) found that the most critical functions include those that address hydrodynamic
processes, sediment transport processes, stream stability and riparian buffer restoration. By addressing
these fundamental functions and processes, a restored stream and riparian system are capable of
supporting more dependent functions that typically require time to establish, such as diverse biological
communities, chemical and nutrient processes, diverse habitats and improved water and soil quality.
The objectives of the Project will address the most critical functional objectives that will allow for
compounded restorative benefits to the stream and riparian buffer over time.
A functional based approach broadens the reach-scale goals of a restoration project by contextualizing
the functional uplift to the watershed scale. The Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project will provide
numerous ecological and water quality benefits within the Neuse River Basin by applying an ecosystem
restoration approach. The restoration approach at the reach scale of this project will have the greatest
effect on the hydraulic and geomorphic function of the system but will benefit the upper-level functions
(physicochemical and biology) over time, and in combination with other projects within the watershed.
The anticipated functional benefits and improvements within the Project area, as based on the Function-
Based Framework, are outlined in Table 9.
Anticipated Functional Benefits and Improvements
Hydrology
The Project will locally address several historic hydrologic disturbances including deforestation and
channelization; however, it is not anticipated that the Project will have a significant effect on hydrology
at the watershed scale.
Hydraulic
The greatest potential uplift at the Project will be achieved through constructing a sinuous, single-thread
channel through the historic floodplain that will enable healthy transport of water through the system
and re-establish and maintain channel-floodplain connectivity. Additionally, channels will be designed
and constructed with adequate energy dissipation and grade control to achieve stable flow dynamics.
Currently, hydraulic parameters for reaches JH1-A and JH1-B are not functioning due to lack of buffer,
historic realignment, and maintenance for agricultural drainage and will be functioning post-restoration.
Geomorphology
Sediment Transport will be improved by designing channels that transport sediment until it reaches an
appropriate place to settle, like a point bar, and reducing the excess sediment load entering the stream.
This reduction will be achieved by constructing channels that maintain stable dimension, plan, and
profile and establishing a functional buffer. Large Woody Debris Transport and Storage will be
improved through the use of woody debris such as brush bed sills, brush toes, and log sills for in-stream
structures. The restoration is also designed to accumulate woody debris by having defined riffles where
bed material catches and holds woody debris and leaf packs. Overall, existing riparian vegetation is not
functioning properly at the Project. Therefore, riparian buffers will be planted out to a minimum of 50
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 14 July 2020
DMS Project #100094
feet on stream reaches, though much wider (100 feet or more) in most areas in order to improve the
riparian vegetation to functioning levels. Bed form diversity will be improved in restoration areas by
using a natural riffle-pool sequence from a functioning reference reach to inform design. This bed form
diversity will promote the cycling of sediment and woody material by promoting temporary storage on
point bars and in pools but allowing for the long-term transport of this material downstream during high
flows. By promoting a mix of depositional and transport areas throughout the reach the aquatic habitat
will further improve and diversify. Sediment storage will also be achieved through bank planting and
the installation of toe protection which increase bank roughness, therefore, reducing near bank
velocities and promoting sediment accumulation near the banks. All these functional parameters are
interconnected and ultimately depend on each other to function properly. Therefore, by focusing
improvements to these parameters, the restored channels will achieve dynamic equilibrium and provide
maximum geomorphic functional uplift.
Physicochemical
Although this project would support the overarching goal in the Neuse River Basin Priorities to promote
nutrient and sediment reduction in agricultural areas, it is difficult to measure nutrient and sediment
reduction at this project level because they can be affected by so many variables. However, several
restoration actions are known to help reduce nutrients and sediment even though they may not be
measurable at the project level. These activities include filtering sediment runoff through buffer areas,
conversion of active farm fields to forested buffers, and improved denitrification and nutrient uptake
through buffer zones. Additional benefits may also come from functional uplift of the lower level
stream functions (hydraulics and geomorphology), which will reduce sediment and nutrients in the
system through bank stabilization and floodplain reconnection. Temperature regulation will also be
improved through the restoration of canopy tree species to the stream buffer areas. Oxygen regulation
will occur through two actions: Firstly, the temperature of the water directly impacts the amount of gas
held by the water. Therefore, through planting the buffer to shade the channel, water temperature is
decreased, and dissolved oxygen is increased. Secondly, by reconstructing a stable channel with
functioning riffle-pool sequences and including log-drop structures, mixing zones will form where
oxygen dissolves much faster than the standard exchange rate. The processing of organic matter will
be improved once healthy riffles are shallow enough to catch twigs and branches that then retain leaves.
Many of these physicochemical benefits occur slowly over time and are dependent on multiple variables
within the stream ecosystem. Therefore, it is not practical or feasible to directly measure these
parameters within the monitoring timeframe of this project. With that said, it is logical to use existing
riparian buffer and visual performance standards to demonstrate the positive correlation between
geomorphic parameters and physicochemical parameters. For example, as riparian buffer trees grow,
as represented in annual monitoring reports, it is anticipated that canopy cover is actively shading the
stream channel and reducing water temperature.
Biology
As mentioned for the physicochemical stream function, it will be difficult to measure the functional
uplift of the biological functions at this site within the monitoring period of the project. However, since
the life histories of many species likely to benefit from stream restoration are depending on all the
lower-level functions (Hydrology, Hydraulics, Geomorphology, and Physicochemical), benefit to
biology over time and in combination with other projects within the watershed is anticipated. Again,
there is no substitute for direct biological monitoring, but it is important to understand the hierarchy of
the Stream Functions Pyramid Framework in order to help project long-term benefits of the Project,
though only the hydraulic and geomorphology categories will be directly measured during the seven-
year monitoring period.
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 15 July 2020
DMS Project #100094
5 MITIGATION PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The purpose of the proposed Project is to deliver compensatory mitigation credits for DMS’ In-Lieu
Fee Instrument, specifically in the Neuse River Basin. Through the comprehensive analysis of the
Project’s maximum functional uplift using the Stream Functions Pyramid Framework, specific,
attainable goals and objectives will be realized by the Project. These goals clearly help to address the
degraded water quality and nutrient input from agricultural practices that were identified as major
watershed stressors in the 2010 Neuse RBRP (amended August 2018). Ultimately, the Project will
support the RBRP Goals outlined in Section 2.

The project goals will help alleviate stressors identified in the watershed, and include the following:
• Improve water transport from watershed to the channel in a non-erosive manner;
• Improve water quality within the restored reaches and downstream watercourses by reducing
sediment and nutrient loads;
• Improve flood flow attenuation on site and downstream by allowing for overbanks flows and
connection to the floodplain;
• Improve instream and riparian habitat;
• Create diverse bedforms and stable channels that achieve healthy dynamic equilibrium and
provide suitable habitat for life;
• Restore and preserve native floodplain vegetation; and
• Support the life histories of aquatic and riparian plants and animals through stream and buffer
restoration activities

The project goals will be addressed through the following project objectives:
• Design and construct stream channels sized to convey bankfull flows that will maintain a stable
dimension, profile, and planform based on modeling, watershed conditions, and reference reach
conditions;
• Install in-stream structures such as brush toes, woody riffles, and pools of varying depths to
provide bank stabilization, bedform diversity, stream channel protection, and aquatic habitat;
• Reduce bank height ratios and increase entrenchment ratios;
• Establish and increase forested riparian buffers to 50 feet and greater feet along both sides of
the channel along the project reaches with a hardwood riparian plant community;
• Treat exotic invasive species; and
• Establish a permanent conservation easement on the Project.

Anticipated functional uplift, benefits, and improvements within the Project area, as based on the
Function Based Framework are outlined in Table 9.

Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 16 July 2020
DMS Project #100094
Table 9. Functional Benefits and Improvements
Level Function Goal Objective Measurement Method
1
Hydrology
Transport of water
from the watershed to
the channel
To transport water from
the watershed to the
channel in a non-
erosive manner
Convert land-use of streams
and drainages from crop
fields to riparian forest
Percent Project drainage
area converted to riparian
forest
(indirect measurement)

2
Hydraulic
Transport of water in
the channel, on the
floodplain, and
through the sediments
To transport water
within streams and
floodplains in a stable,
non-erosive, non-
aggrading manner
Improve flood bank
connectivity by reducing
bank height ratios and
increase entrenchment ratios
Cross sections

Stage Recorders

Bank Height Ratio

Entrenchment Ratio
3
Geomorphology
Transport of wood and
sediment to create
diverse bedforms and
dynamic equilibrium
To create a diverse
bedform
To achieve dynamic
equilibrium
Reduce erosion rates and
increase channel stability

Improve bedform diversity
(pool spacing, percent riffles,
etc.)

Increase buffer width to 50+
feet and preserve existing
buffer
As-built stream profile

Cross sections

Visual monitoring

Vegetation plots
4
Physicochemical °
Temperature and
oxygen regulation;
processing of organic
matter and nutrients
To promote healthier
levels for water
temperature, dissolved
oxygen concentration,
and important nutrients
including but not
limited to Nitrogen and
Phosphorus
Establish and protect native
hardwood riparian buffer to
provide canopy shade and
absorb nutrients
Vegetation plots
(indirect measurement)

Established conservation
easement protected in
perpetuity
(indirect measurement)
5
Biology °
Biodiversity and life
histories of aquatic
life histories and
riparian life
To achieve functionality
in levels 1-4 to support
the life histories of
aquatic and riparian
plants and animals
Improve aquatic habitat by
installing habitat features,
constructing pools of varying
depths, and planting the
riparian buffer

As-Built Survey
(indirect measurement)

° These categories are measured indirectly

Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 17 July 2020
DMS Project #100094
6 MITIGATION WORK PLAN
Reference Stream
The restoration portions of the Project are currently characterized by agricultural practices. Physical
parameters of the Project were used, as well as other reference materials, to determine the target stream
type. The “Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina” was also used to narrow the
potential community types that would have existed at the Project (Schafale, 2012). From that point, an
iterative process was used to finalize the details of the Project design.

Targeted reference conditions included the following:
• Located within the physiographic region and ecoregion,
• Similar land use on site and in the watershed,
• Similar soil types on site and in the watershed,
• Ideal, undisturbed habitat – several types of woody debris present,
• Similar topography,
• Similar slope,
• Morphology common among Coastal Plain streams, and
• Minimal presence of invasive species.
Reference Watershed Characterization
The selected reference stream is UT to Buffalo Creek which is part of the most downstream portion of
the Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation site and is located in the Upper Neuse River Basin. The reach
that was surveyed and analyzed is approximately 375 feet long with a drainage area of 1.11 square
miles (709 acres). The land use in the watershed is not dominated by any one land use, but has major
components of cropland, pasture, and forests, with minor components of developed area, wetlands,
herbaceous, and open water. Site photographs of the reference stream are located in Appendix C.

The current State classification for Buffalo Creek downstream of the reference reach is C and NSW
(NCDWR 2011). Class C waters are those protected for uses such as secondary recreation, fishing,
wildlife, fish consumption, aquatic life including propagation, survival, and maintenance of biological
integrity, and agriculture. Secondary recreation includes wading, boating, and other uses involving
human body contact with water where such activities take place in an infrequent, unorganized, or
incidental manner. Waters given the supplemental classification of Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW)
are those needing additional nutrient management due to being subject to excessive growth of
microscopic or macroscopic vegetation. Further, Buffalo Creek is listed on the 2018 303d list for
impaired waters (North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality [NCDEQ] 2018). It received a
Fair Bioclassification rating for benthic ecological/ biological integrity.
Reference Discharge
Several hydrologic models/methods were used to develop a bankfull discharge along with indicators of
bankfull stage for the reference site. Existing drainage area, land use, slope, roughness, and cross-
sectional area were all factors considered when performing the calculations. Using a combination of
Coastal Regional Curves, in-house spreadsheet tools, and a project specific regional flood frequency
analysis, the existing discharge for UT to Buffalo Creek was found to be around 18-21 cubic feet per
second (ft3/s). See Section 6.2 for a more detailed description of the hydrologic analyses performed for
this project.
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 18 July 2020
DMS Project #100094
Reference Channel Morphology
In comparison to the restoration reaches, reference reach UT to Buffalo Creek is larger than the
designed restoration reaches when comparing pattern, dimension and profile, which is the reason for
using a scaling factor of 0.78 was used to develop a preliminary design. The scaling factor is based on
the difference in bankfull width of the reference channel. This scaling factor is applied to the entire
cross section and therefore changes channel area, depth, etc. During scaling, bank slopes remain
constant. The resulting scaled channel is then further modified utilizing tools outlined in the Stream
Restoration Approach section to develop our final design cross sections. Morphological parameters and
cross section plots are included in Appendix C.
Design Parameters
Stream Restoration Approach
The treatment plan and design approach were developed based on the existing conditions, project goals,
and objectives outlined in Sections 2 and 5. The Project will include Priority I and II Restoration.
Stream restoration will incorporate the design of a single-thread, meandering channel with parameters
based on data taken from published empirical relationships, regional curves developed from existing
project streams, NC and VA Regional Curves, Two-Dimensional modeling, and the reference site.
Analytical design techniques will also be a crucial element of the project and will be used to determine
the design discharge and to verify the overall design. The Conceptual plan is provided in Figure 8.

The detailed treatment plan and design approach is as follows:
Reach JH1-A
An offline restoration approach is proposed for this reach to address historic ditching and buffer
impacts. Restoration activities will include:
- Grading a new single thread channel in the existing floodplain,
- Installing log structures to provide grade control and habitat,
- Establishing a riffle-pool sequence throughout the new channel,
- Installing toe protection on meander bends,
- Installing live stakes to stabilize the banks and provide channel shading,
- Filling the existing channel,
- Riparian planting, and
- Invasive vegetation treatment.
Reach JH1-B
A mix of offline and inline, P1 and P2 restoration are proposed for this reach to address historic ditching
and buffer impacts. Restoration activities will include:
- Grading a new single thread channel in a mix of existing and excavated floodplains,
- Installing log structures to provide grade control and habitat,
- Establishing a riffle-pool sequence throughout the new channel,
- Installing toe protection on meander bends,
- Replacing a culvert crossing between STA 23+13 and STA 23+74,
- Removing trash and debris throughout the easement area,
- Installing live stakes to stabilize the banks and provide channel shading,
- Filling the existing channel,
- Riparian planting, and
- Invasive vegetation treatment.
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 19 July 2020
DMS Project #100094
Ditch Reaches JH2, JH3, JH4, and Stream Reach JH5
Buffer restoration and preservation is proposed to address buffer impacts along these channels. More
specifics on buffer activities may be found in the Buffer Mitigation Plan provided in Appendix A.
Generally, buffer activities will include:
- Installing live stakes to stabilize the banks and provide channel shading,
- Removing irrigation system and debris piles, and
- Riparian planting.
Typical Design Sections
Typical cross sections for riffles and pools are shown on the design plan sheets in Appendix B. All
cross-section dimensions were developed from the analog reach but were altered based on existing site
conditions, hydraulic modeling, and observations from other mitigation sites in the area.
Meander Pattern
The design plans showing the proposed channel alignment are provided in Appendix B. The meander
pattern was derived directly from the analog reach and was altered in some locations to provide
variability in pattern, to avoid on site constraints, to follow the valley pattern, and to make the channel
more constructible. The morphologic parameters summarized in Appendix C were applied wherever
these deviations occurred.
Longitudinal Profiles
The design profiles are presented in Appendix B. These profiles extend throughout the restoration
reaches for the proposed channel alignment. The profiles were designed using the analog reach bed
features that were sized with the scaling factors. The bed slopes and bankfull energy gradients were
determined for each design reach based on the existing valley slope and the sinuosity of the design
reach. Log structures will be utilized in the design to control grade, divert flows, and provide additional
habitat diversity and stability.
In-Stream Structures
Woody debris structures will be incorporated into the channel design to provide additional stability and
improve aquatic habitat. Typical structures that will protect the channel bed will include brush bed sills,
log sills, and woody riffles. Bank stability measures include the installation of brush toe, hay bale toe,
coir matting, seeding, and live staking. Typical details for proposed in-stream structures and revetments
are in Appendix B.
Data Analysis
Stream Hydrologic Analysis
Hydrologic evaluations were performed for the design reaches using multiple methods to determine
and validate the design bankfull discharge and channel geometry required to provide regular floodplain
inundation. The use of various methods allows for comparison of results and eliminates reliance on a
single model. Peak flows (Table 10) and corresponding channel cross sectional areas were determined
for comparison to design parameters using the following methods:

• Regional Flood Frequency Analysis,
• AutoCAD’s Hydraflow Hydrographs, and
• NC and VA Regional Curves for the Rural Coast.

Regional Flood Frequency Analysis
A flood frequency analysis was completed for the study region using historic gauge data on all nearby
USGS gauges with drainage areas less than 6,400 acres (10 mi2) which passed the Dalrymple
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 20 July 2020
DMS Project #100094
homogeneity test (Dalrymple, 1960). These are subsets of gauges used for USGS regression equations.
Regional flood frequency equations were developed for the 1.1- and 1.5-year peak discharges based on
the gauge data. Discharges were then computed for the design reach. These discharges were compared
to those predicted by the discharge regional curves and Hydraflow hydrographs.

AutoCAD’s Hydraflow Express
Hydraflow Express was used to simulate the rainfall-runoff process and establish peak flows for the
watersheds. Rainfall data reflecting a 200 peak shape factor were used along with standard Type II and
SCS 6-hr distributions, and NRCS hydrology (time of concentrations and runoff curve numbers)
(USDA NRCS, 1986), to simulate the rainfall-runoff process.

Regional Curve Regression Equations
The North Carolina Coastal regional curves by Doll et al. (2003) and Sweet and Geratz (2003) and the
Virginia Rural Coastal regional curves by Krstolic and Chaplin (2007) for discharge were used to
predict the bankfull discharge for the Project. The NC regional curves predicted flows that are similar
to, or lower than, those predicted by the 1.1-year flood frequency, while the VA curves predicted flows
between the 1.1- and 1.5- year flood frequencies. The regional curve equations for NC and VA:

(1) Qbkf=16.56*(DA)0.72 (Doll et al., 2003)
(2) Qbkf=8.79*(DA)0.76 (Sweet and Geratz, 2003)
(3) Qbkf= 28.3076*(DA)0.59834 (Krstolic and Chaplin, 2007)

Where Qbkf=bankfull discharge (ft3/s) and DA=drainage area (mi2).

Table 10. Peak Flow Comparison
Reach Drainage
Area (ac)
FFQ
Q1.1
FFQ
Q1.5
NC Regional
Curve Q (1)
NC Regional
Curve Q (2)
VA Regional
Curve Q (3) Design Q
JH1-A 193 8 23 7 4 14 8
JH1-B 266 10 28 9 5 17 13

Sediment Transport Analysis
An erosion and sedimentation analysis was performed to confirm that the restoration design creates a
stable sand bed channel that neither aggrades nor degrades over time. Typically, sediment transport is
assessed to determine a stream’s ability to move a specific grain size at specified flows. Various
sediment transport equations may be easily applied when estimating entrainment for gravel bed
streams; however, these equations are not as effectively applied to sand bed channels where the entire
bed becomes mobile during geomorphically significant flows. Therefore, more sophisticated modeling
techniques were used to analyze the stream design for this project. The following methods and functions
were utilized during the sediment transport analysis:

• HEC-RAS Stable Channel Design
• Permissible Shear Stress Approach
• Permissible Velocity Approach

Stable Channel Design
Design cross-section dimensions were evaluated using the stable channel design functions within HEC-
RAS. These functions are based upon the methods presented in the SAM Hydraulic Design Package
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 21 July 2020
DMS Project #100094
for Channels developed by the USACE Waterways Experiment Station. The Copeland Method was
developed specifically for sand bed channels (median grain size restriction of 0.0625 mm to 2 mm).
The method sizes stable dimensions as a function of slope, discharge, roughness, side slope, bed
material gradation, and the inflowing sediment discharge. Results are presented as a range of widths
and slopes, and their unique solution for depth, making it easy to adjust channel dimensions to achieve
stable channel configurations. The stable design output parameters are listed in Table 11. The results
are acceptable and match closely with the design reach parameters.

Table 11. Stable Channel Design Output
Reach Q (ft/s3) Bottom
Width (ft) Depth (ft) Energy
Slope (ft/ft)
Composite
n value
Velocity
(ft/s)
Shear Stress
(lbs/ft2)
JH1-A/B 8 / 13 3 1.3 0.0013 0.04 1.2 0.1

Shear Stress Approach
Shear stress is a commonly used tool for assessing channel stability. Allowable channel shear stresses
are a function of bed slope, channel shape, flows, bed material (shape, size, and gradation),
cohesiveness of bank materials, vegetative cover, and incoming sediment load. The shear stress
approach compares calculated shear stresses to those found in the literature.

Existing critical shear stress is the shear stress required to initiate motion of the existing channels
median particle size (D50).

Table 12. Comparison of Allowable and Proposed Shear Stresses
Reach
Proposed Bed Shear
Stress at Bankfull Stage
(lbs/ft2)
Existing Critical
Shear Stress
(lbs/ft2)
Allowable Shear Stress1
Sand (lbs/ft2) Fine Gravel
(lbs/ft2)
Vegetation
(lbs/ft2)
JH1-A 0.05 0.03 0.02 to .075 0.075 to 0.33 0.7 to 1.7
JH1-B 0.16 0.03 0.02 to .075 0.075 to 0.33 0.7 to 1.7
1(Fischenich, 2001)

Review of the above table shows that the proposed bed shear stresses for the Project design reaches are
consistent with the allowable shear stresses of the native substrate. Proposed riffles will incorporate
native materials and will be supplemented with woody debris.

Velocity Approach
Published data are readily available that provide entrainment velocities for different bed and bank
materials. A comparison of calculated velocities to these permissible velocities is a simple method to
aid in the verification of channel stability. Table 13 compares the proposed velocities calculated using
Manning’s equation with the permissible velocities.

Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 22 July 2020
DMS Project #100094
Table 13. Comparison of Permissible and Proposed Velocities
Reach Manning’s “n”
Value1
Design Velocity
(ft/s)
Proposed Bed
Material
Permissible Velocity2
(ft/sec)
JH1-A 0.05 0.9 Sand/Fine Gravel 1.75 - 2.5
JH1-B 0.05 1.5 Sand/Fine Gravel 1.75 - 2.5
1(Chow, 1959)
2(Fischenich, 2001)

Sediment Supply
In addition to the stability assessment, a qualitative analysis of sediment supply was performed by
characterizing watershed conditions. A combination of field reconnaissance and windshield surveys,
existing land use data, and historical aerial photography were analyzed to assess existing and past
watershed conditions to determine if any changes occurred that would significantly impact sediment
supply.

Channel instability and erosion along the channels appears to be a result of historic channel realignment,
maintenance for agricultural drainage, and agricultural activities occurring up to and along channel
banks and not from watershed activities. It is anticipated that sediment supply will decrease as buffers
are restored and widened and channels are stabilized and realigned.
Sediment Control Measures
A suite of sediment control measures will be utilized for the Project to reduce direct effluent inputs,
pollutant contamination, and sediment loading. The combination of the following sediment control
measures: riparian buffer planting, bank stabilization, and stream restoration will ultimately lead to the
functional uplift of the site.

The riparian buffer will be restored along all project reaches. Restored riparian buffers are established
adjacent to and up-gradient from watercourses of water bodies to improve water quality.

All ditches that tie directly to the restoration reaches are designed to have large pools to reduce peak
sediment loading to the downstream reach. They will also be planted with live stakes to further promote
a reduction in sediment loading as outlined in section 4.1 - Geomorphology.
Vegetation and Planting Plan
Plant Community Restoration
The restoration of the plant communities is an important aspect of the restoration Project. The selection
of plant species is based on what was observed in the forest surrounding the restoration Project and
what is typically native to the area. Specifically, species identified in the regenerating forest area around
the Project along with species described in the 2012 Guide to the Natural Communities of North
Carolina, Fourth Approximation (Schafale, 2012) for coastal plain small stream communities were used
to determine the most appropriate species for the restoration project.

A Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp (Schafale, 2012) will be the target community along the Project
reaches. This was likely the historic community that occurred throughout the majority of the site and is
still resembled in a disturbed state in many areas. This community composition is highly diverse and is
suitable for wet tolerances from somewhat wet to very wet that will ultimately prove successful given
the Project’s soil and landscape characteristics. The target community will be used for the planting
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 23 July 2020
DMS Project #100094
areas within the Project, shown in Appendix B and Figure 9. The plant species list has been developed
and can be found in Table 14. Species with high dispersal rates are not included because of locally-
occurring, adjacent seed sources and the high potential for natural regeneration. The most notable high
dispersal species that is appropriate, and most likely to occur on site, is red maple and is often found in
coastal plain communities as well as many early successional communities and will quickly fill
disturbance gaps. Therefore, it is possible that red maple may become a natural component of the
community and volunteers may be counted toward vegetative success in accordance with the 2016
Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update guidance as long as they
do not become a nuisance amongst the planted species.

The restoration of plant communities along the Project will provide stabilization and diversity. For
rapid stabilization of the stream banks (primarily outside meanders), silky dogwood (Cornus amomum)
and black willow (Salix nigra) were chosen for live stakes along the restored channels. Willows grow
at a faster rate than the species planted around them, providing faster bank stabilization and contribution
of organic matter to the channel than the other planted woody species. As the community matures, the
willows will slowly stop growing or die out as the other species outgrow them and create shade that the
willows do not tolerate. The live stake species will be planted along the outside of the meander bends
to three feet from the top of bank, creating a three-foot section along the top of bank. The live stakes
will be spaced at least one per three linear feet with alternate spacing vertically.

It is anticipated that the vegetation planting/replanting will be conducted between November 15 and
March 15, per the October 2016 USACE/NCIRT monitoring guidance; however, if construction is
completed after March 15, the Project will be planted no later than April 30. Furthermore, there will be
at least 180 days until the initiation of the first year of monitoring.

Table 14. Proposed Plant List
Bare Root Planting Tree Species
Species Common Name Wetland
Status*
Spacing
(ft) Unit Type
% of Total
Species
Composition
Platanus occidentalis American sycamore FACW 9x6 Bare root 10
Taxodium disticum Bald cypress OBL 9x6 Bare root 10
Betula nigra River birch FACW 9x6 Bare root 10
Nyssa biflora Swamp tupelo FACW 9x6 Bare root 10
Liriodendron tulipifera Yellow poplar FACU 9x6 Bare root 10
Quercus laurifolia Laurel oak FACW 9x6 Bare root 10
Quercus lyrata Overcup oak OBL 9x6 Bare root 10
Quercus michauxii Swamp chestnut oak FACW 9x6 Bare root 10
Quercus nigra Water oak FAC 9x6 Bare root 10
Quercus phellos Willow oak FACW 9x6 Bare root 10
Live Staking and Live Cuttings Bundle Tree Species
Species Common Name % of Total Species
Composition
Salix nigra Black willow 60
Cornus amomum Silky dogwood 40
* Based on USDA NRCS Wetland Status for Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 24 July 2020
DMS Project #100094
On Site Invasive Species Management
Treatment for invasive species will be required within the entire easement area. Invasive species will
require different and multiple treatment methods, depending on plant phenology and the location of the
species being treated (Appendix K). All treatment will be conducted as to maximize its effectiveness
and reduce chances of detriment to surrounding native vegetation. Treatment methods will include
mechanical (cutting with loppers, clippers, or chain saw) and chemical (foliar spray, cut stump, and
hack and squirt techniques). Invasive or aggressive plants containing mature, viable seeds will be
removed from the Project and properly disposed. All herbicide applicators will be supervised by a
certified ground pesticide applicator with a North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer
Services (NCDA&CS) license and adhere to all legal and safety requirements according to herbicide
labels, and NC and Federal laws. Management records will be kept on the plant species treated, type of
treatment employed, type of herbicide used, application technique, and herbicide concentration and
quantities used. These records will be included in all reporting documents.
Soil Restoration
After construction activities, the subsoil will be scarified, and any compaction will be deep tilled before
the topsoil is placed back over the Project. Any topsoil that is removed during construction will be
stockpiled and placed over the Project during final soil preparation. These processes should provide
favorable soil conditions for plant growth throughout the Project. Rapid establishment of vegetation
will provide natural stabilization for the Project.
Mitigation Summary
Natural channel design techniques have been used to develop the restoration designs described in this
document. A combination of analytical and analog design methods was determined to be appropriate
for this Project because the watershed is rural, the causes of disturbance are known and have been
abated, and there are minimal infrastructure constraints. The original design parameters were developed
from the measured analog/reference reach data and applied to the subject stream. The parameters were
then analyzed and adjusted through an iterative process using analytical tools and numerical simulations
of fluvial processes. The design presented in this report provides for the restoration of natural Coastal
Plain channel features with stable channel dynamics, floodplain connectivity, and diverse bedforms.
The proposed design will improve water quality by reducing sediment and nutrient loads, provide
aquatic habitat, and promote overbank flooding that will improve flood flow attenuation.

Native material will be installed throughout the restored stream to reduce bank stress, provide grade
control, and increase habitat diversity.

Forested riparian buffers will be established along the Project reaches. An appropriate riparian plant
community (Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp) will be established to include a diverse mix of species.
The plant species list has been developed and can be found in Table 14. Replanting of native species
will occur where the existing buffer is impacted during construction.

A combination of sediment control measures will be used on site; riparian buffer planting, bank
stabilization, and stream restoration. This combination of sediment control measures will ultimately
lead to the functional uplift of the site by minimizing sedimentation and nutrient input from ongoing
agricultural production outside of the conservation easement.

Due to the nature of the project, complete avoidance of stream, wetland, and buffer impacts is not
possible. Proposed permanent stream impacts will be due to stream relocation and upgrade of one
culvert while temporary impacts will be due to structure placement to improve long-term stability of
the stream and culvert work. Wetland impacts associated with restoration efforts will be both permanent
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 25 July 2020
DMS Project #100094
and temporary. However, it is anticipated that the Project will result in net positive wetland area and
overall function due to increased hydrology from raising bed elevations and relocating channels within
natural valleys. All stream, wetland, and buffer impacts will be accounted for in the Pre-Construction
Notification (PCN) form.
Determination of Credits
Mitigation credits presented in Table 15 are projections based upon project design (Figure 8). Upon
completion of construction, the project components and credits data will only be revised to be consistent
with the as-built condition if there is a large discrepancy and with an approved mitigation plan
addendum. This will be approved by the USACE.
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 26 July 2020
Project #100094
Table 15. Stream Mitigation Credits
Project
Component
(reach ID)
Wetland
Position and
Hydro Type
Existing
Footage Proposed Stationing
Mitigation
Plan
Footage
As-Built
Footage
Restoration
Level
Approach
Priority
Level
Mitigation
Ratio
(X:1)
Mitigation
Credits Notes/Comments

JH1-A

901 1+57 to 11+64 1,007 TBD R P1 1:1 1,007.000
Channel restoration, riparian
planting (Stream Crossing: STA
11+64 to 12+59)
JH1-B

889 12+59 to 23+13 1,054 TBD R P2 1:1 1,054.000
Channel restoration, riparian
planting (Stream Crossing: STA
23+13 to 23+74)
JH1-B 1,477 23+74 to 40+32 1,658 TBD R P1 1:1 1,658.000 Channel restoration, riparian
planting
No Wetland Mitigation
Length and Area Summations by Mitigation Category

Overall Assets Summary
Restoration Level
Stream Riparian Wetland Non-riparian Wetland Overall
(linear feet) (acres) (acres) Asset Category Credits
Riverine Non-Riverine
Restoration 3,719 Stream 3,719.000
Enhancement RP Wetland NA
Enhancement I NR Wetland NA
Enhancement II
Enhancement II
(5:1)
Enhancement II
(7.5:1)
Creation
Preservation
High Quality Pres
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 27 July 2020
Project #100094
7 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
The success criteria for the Project will follow accepted and approved performance standards presented
in the 2016 USACE Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update and
subsequent agency guidance. Specific success criteria components are presented below.

Performance standards for the buffer mitigation component of the Project are outlined in the Buffer
Mitigation Plan in Appendix A.
Stream Restoration Success Criteria
Bankfull Events
Four bankfull flow events must be documented within the seven-year monitoring period. The bankfull
events must occur in separate years. Otherwise, the stream monitoring will continue until four bankfull
events have been documented in separate years.
Cross Sections
There should be little change in as-built cross sections. If changes do take place, they should be
evaluated to determine if they represent a movement toward a less stable condition (for example down-
cutting or erosion) or are minor changes that represent an increase in stability (for example settling,
vegetative changes, deposition along the banks, or decrease in width/depth ratio). Cross sections shall
be classified using the Rosgen stream classification method, and all monitored cross sections should
fall within the quantitative parameters defined for channels of the design stream type (Rosgen 1996).
Bank height ratio shall not exceed 1.2, and entrenchment ratio shall be greater than 2.2 within restored
riffle cross sections.
Digital Image Stations
Digital images will be used to subjectively evaluate channel aggradation or degradation, bank erosion,
success of riparian vegetation, and effectiveness of erosion control measures. Longitudinal images
should not indicate the absence of developing bars within the channel or an excessive increase in
channel depth. Lateral images should not indicate excessive erosion or continuing degradation of the
banks over time. A series of images over time should indicate successional maturation of riparian
vegetation.
Surface Flow
Intermittent stream reaches will be monitored to document intermittent or seasonal surface flow. This
will be accomplished through direct observation and the use of automatic-logging pressure transducers
with data loggers (flow gauge). Reaches must demonstrate a minimum of 30 consecutive days of flow.
Vegetation Success Criteria
Within the stream mitigation component of the Project, specific and measurable success criteria for
plant density within the riparian buffers will follow IRT Guidance. The interim measures of vegetative
success for the Project will be the survival of at least 320 planted three-year old trees per acre at the
end of Year 3, five-year old trees at 7 feet in height at the end of Year 5, and the final vegetative
success criteria will be 210 trees per acre with an average height of 10 feet at the end of Year 7.
Volunteer trees will be counted, identified to species, and included in the yearly monitoring reports,
but will not be counted towards the success criteria of total planted stems. Moreover, any single
species can only account for up to 50 percent of the required number of stems within any vegetation
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 28 July 2020
Project #100094
plot. Any stems in excess of 50 percent will be shown in the monitoring table but will not be used to
demonstrate success.

Vegetation success criteria for the buffer mitigation component of the Project are outlined in the
Buffer Mitigation Plan in Appendix A.
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 29 July 2020
Project #100094
8 MONITORING PLAN
Annual monitoring data will be reported using the DMS Monitoring Report Template dated June 2017
and NC IRT monitoring guidance. The monitoring report shall provide a project data chronology that
will facilitate an understanding of project status and trends, research purposes, and assist in decision
making regarding project close-out. Monitoring reports will be prepared annually and submitted to
DMS. Monitoring of the Project will adhere to metrics and performance standards established by the
USACE’s April 2003 Wilmington District Stream Mitigation Guidelines and the IRT’s October 2016
Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update. Table 16 outlines the
links between project objectives and treatments and their associated monitoring metrics and
performance standards within the context of functional uplift based on the Stream Functions Pyramid
Framework. Figure 9 depicts the proposed monitoring plan, including approximate numbers and
locations of monitoring devices for the Project.

The monitoring plan for the buffer mitigation component of the Project is outlined in the Buffer
Mitigation Plan in Appendix A.
As-Built Survey
An as-built survey will be conducted following construction to document channel size, condition, and
location. The survey will include a complete profile of thalweg, water surface, bankfull, and top of bank
to compare with future geomorphic data. Longitudinal profiles will not be required in annual
monitoring reports unless requested by USACE.
Visual Monitoring
Visual monitoring of all mitigation areas will be conducted a minimum of twice per monitoring year
by qualified individuals. The visual assessments will include vegetation density, vigor, invasive species,
and easement encroachments. Visual assessments of stream stability will include a complete stream
walk and structure inspection. Digital images will be taken at fixed representative locations to record
each monitoring event, as well as any noted problem areas or areas of concern. Fixed image locations
will exist at each cross section, each vegetation plot, each stage recorder, and each flow gauge. Results
of visual monitoring will be presented in a plan view exhibit with a brief description of problem areas
and digital images. Photographs will be used to subjectively evaluate channel aggradation or
degradation, bank erosion, success of riparian vegetation, and effectiveness of erosion control
measures. Longitudinal photos should indicate the absence of developing bars within the channel or an
excessive increase in channel depth. Lateral photos should not indicate excessive erosion or continuing
degradation of the banks over time. A series of photos over time should indicate successional
maturation of riparian vegetation. Specifically, each cross section, vegetation plot, stage recorder, and
flow gauge location will be used as permanent digital image stations.
Hydrology Events
Continuous stage recorders, a combination of manual crest gauges and automatic-logging pressure
transducers, will be installed to document the height and frequency of bankfull events on Priority 1
Restoration reaches. A minimum of one gauge will be installed on each tributary that is greater than
1,000 feet in length, with one gauge required for every 5,000 feet of length on each tributary and a
maximum of five gauges per tributary. Where restoration activities are proposed for intermittent
streams, monitoring flow gauges should be installed to track the frequency and duration of stream flow
events. Specifically, a stage recorder will be installed on the lower third of reach JH1-B. Additionally,
one flow gauge, consisting of an automatic-logging pressure transducer, will be installed on the upper
third of reach JH1-A.
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 30 July 2020
Project #100094
Cross Sections
Permanent cross sections will be installed at approximately one per 20 bankfull widths with half in
pools and half in riffle on all Restoration reaches. Morphological data will be measured and recorded
for all cross-sections; however, only riffle cross sections will include bank height ratio and
entrenchment ratio measurements. A total of 14 cross sections are proposed across the Project. These
cross sections will be monitored in Years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7.
Vegetation Monitoring
Vegetation monitoring plots will be 100 square meters, or 0.025 acres, in size and cover a minimum of
two percent of the planted area. There will be 17 plots within the planted area (19.73 acres) of the entire
Project; however, only plots located in the northern easement section (along reaches JB1-A and JB1-
B) will be applied toward the stream mitigation component of the Project: the planted area of the
northern easement section is 13.59 acres. Therefore, for stream mitigation vegetation success, there will
be 11 plots and will be a mixture of fixed and random plots; with 7 fixed plots and 4 random plots.
Planted area indicates all area in the easement that will be planted with trees. Existing wooded areas
are not included in the planted area; however, these areas will be planted with supplemental trees in
disturbed areas where existing tree density is insufficient. The following data will be recorded for all
trees in the fixed plots: species, height, planting date (or volunteer), and grid location. For random plots,
species and height will be recorded for all woody stems. The location (GPS coordinates and orientation)
of the random plots will be confined to the northern easement section and will be identified in the
annual monitoring reports. Vegetation will be planted and plots established at least 180 days prior to
the initiation of the first year of monitoring. Monitoring will occur in Years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7 between
late August and leaf drop. Invasive and noxious species will be monitored so that none become
dominant or alter the desired community structure of the Project. If necessary, RES will develop a
species-specific treatment plan.

Vegetation monitoring for the buffer mitigation component of the Project is outlined in the Buffer
Mitigation Plan in Appendix A.
Scheduling/Reporting
A baseline monitoring report and as-built drawings documenting stream restoration activities will be
developed within 60 days of the planting completion on the Project. The report will include all
information required by DMS mitigation plan guidelines, including elevations, photographs and
sampling plot locations, gauge locations, and a description of initial species composition by community
type. The report will also include a list of the species planted and the associated densities. Baseline
vegetation monitoring will include species, height, date of planting, and grid location of each stem. The
baseline report will follow DMS As-Built Baseline Monitoring Report Template June 2017 and
USACE guidelines.

The monitoring program will be implemented to document system development and progress toward
achieving the success criteria. The restored stream morphology will be assessed to determine the
success of the mitigation. The monitoring program will be undertaken for seven years or until the final
success criteria are achieved, whichever is longer.

Monitoring reports will be prepared in the fall of each year of monitoring and submitted to DMS. The
monitoring reports will include all information and be in the format required by USACE.
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 31 July 2020
Project #100094
Table 16. Monitoring Requirements
Level Treatment Outcome Monitoring
Metric Performance Standard Hydrology Convert land-use of
Project reaches from
cropland to riparian
forest

Improve the
transport of water
from the
watershed to the
Project reaches in
a non-erosive
way
N/A N/A Hydraulic Reduce bank height
ratios and increase
entrenchment ratios by
reconstructing channels
to mimic reference reach
conditions
Improve flood
bank connectivity
by reducing bank
height ratios and
increasing
entrenchment
ratios
Stage recorders:
Inspected
quarterly
Four bankfull events occurring in
separate years
Flow gauge:
Inspected
quarterly
At least 30 days of continuous flow each
year
Cross sections:
Surveyed in
years 1, 2, 3, 5
and 7
Entrenchment ratio shall be no less than
2.2 within restored reaches
Bank height ratio shall not exceed 1.2 Geomorphology Establish a riparian
buffer to reduce erosion
and sediment transport
into project streams.
Establish stable banks
with live stakes, erosion
control matting, and
other in stream
structures.
Reduce erosion
rates and channel
stability to
reference reach
conditions

Improve bedform
diversity (pool
spacing, percent
riffles, etc.

Increase buffer
width to 50+ feet
As-built stream
profile N/A
Cross sections:
Surveyed in
years 1, 2, 3, 5
and 7
Entrenchment ratio shall be no
less than 2.2 within restored
reaches
Bank height ratio shall not exceed
1.2
Visual
monitoring:
Performed at least
semiannually
Identify and document significant
stream problem areas; i.e.
erosion, degradation,
aggradation, etc.
Vegetation plots:
Surveyed in
years 1, 2, 3, 5
and 7
MY 1-3: 320 trees/acre
MY 5: 260 trees/acre (7 ft. tall)
MY 7: 210 trees/acre (10 ft. tall) Physicochemical Plant riparian buffer and
establish permanent
conservation easement
Improve stream
temperature
regulation through
introduction of
canopy

Decrease sediment
and nutrient
loading through
filtration of
planted riparian
buffer
Vegetation plots:
Surveyed in
years 1, 2, 3, 5
and 7
(indirect
measurement)
MY 1-3: 320 trees/acre
MY 5: 260 trees/acre (7 ft. tall)
MY 7: 210 trees/acre (10 ft. tall)
Visual assessment
of established
conservation
signage:
Performed at least
semiannually
(indirect
measurement)
Inspect signage.
Identify and document any
damaged or missing
signs

Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 32 July 2020
Project #100094
9 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN
In the event the mitigation site or a specific component of the mitigation site fails to achieve the
necessary performance standards as specified in the mitigation plan, the sponsor shall notify the
members of the IRT and work with the IRT to develop contingency plans and remedial actions.
Additionally, routine maintenance activities for the Project are outlined in Appendix G.
10 LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN
The site will be transferred to the NCDEQ Stewardship Program (or 3rd party if approved). This party
shall serve as conservation easement holder and long-term steward for the property and will conduct
periodic inspection of the site to ensure that restrictions required in the conservation easement are
upheld. Funding will be supplied by the responsible party on a yearly basis until such time an
endowment is established. The NCDEQ Stewardship Program is developing an endowment system
within the nonreverting, interest‐bearing Conservation Lands Conservation Fund Account. The use of
funds from the Endowment Account will be governed by North Carolina General Statute GS 113A‐
232(d)(3). Interest gained by the endowment fund may be used for the purpose of stewardship,
monitoring, stewardship administration, and land transaction costs, if applicable.

The Stewardship Program will periodically install signage as needed to identify boundary markings as
needed. Permanent crossings will be the responsibility the owner of the underlying fee to maintain.
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 33 July 2020
Project #100094
11 REFERENCES
Chow, Ven Te. 1959. Open-Channel Hydraulics. McGraw-Hill, New York.

Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and
Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological
Services, FWS/OBS-79/31. U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC.

Doll, B.A., A.D. Dobbins, J. Spooner, D.R. Clinton and D.A. Bidelspach. (2003). Hydraulic
Geometry Relationships for Rural North Carolina Coastal Plain Streams. NC Stream
Restoration Institute, Report to N.C. Division of Water Quality for 319 Grant Project No.
EW20011.

Environmental Laboratory. 1987. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual,
Technical Report Y-87-1. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg,
Mississippi.

FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency). 2018. FEMA Flood Map Service Center. North
Carolina Panel 2602; map number 3720260200K, effective 6/20/2018.

Fischenich, C. 2001. ‘‘Stability thresholds for stream restoration materials.’’ ERDC Technical Note
No. EMRRP-SR-29, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg,
Miss.

Fischenich, J.C., 2006. Functional Objectives for Stream Restoration, EMRRP Technical Notes
Collection (ERDC TN-EMRRP-SR-52), US Army Engineer Research and Development
Center, Vicksburg, Mississippi. (available online at
https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a456784.pdf)

Harman, W., R. Starr, M. Carter, K. Tweedy, M. Clemmons, K. Suggs, C. Miller. 2012. A Function-
Based Framework for Stream Assessment and Restoration Projects. US Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Washington, DC EPA 843-
K-12-006.

Krstolic, J.L., and Chaplin, J.J. (2007). Bankfull regional curves for streams in the non-urban, non-
tidal Coastal Plain Physiographic Province, Virginia and Maryland: U.S. Geological Survey
Scientific Investigations Report 2007–5162, 48 p. (available online at
http://pubs.water.usgs.gov/sir2007–5162)

Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act of 1934. Public Law 85-72, 79 Stat. 216. 16 USC 661-667(d).

Lee, T.L, Peet, R.K., Roberts, S.D., and Wentworth, T.R. 2006. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording
Vegetation, Version 4.2. http://cvs.bio.unc.edu/protocol/cvs-eep-protocol-v4.2-lev1-2.pdf.

National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (as amended Section 106). 16 USC 470. 36 CFR 800, 23
CFR 771, 36 CFR 60, 36 CFR 63.
North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR). 2017. “NC Surface Water Classifications.”
Surface Water Classification.
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Water%20Quality/Planning/CSU/Surface%20Water/River%20Basi
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 34 July 2020
Project #100094
n%20Water%20Quality%20Classifications%20as%20of%20Dec%209%202013/CapeFear_H
ydro_order.pdf. (Accessed August 2019).

NCDWR. 2010. Methodology for Identification of Intermittent and Perennial Streams and Their Origins. Version
4.11. Raleigh.

NCDWR. 2011. A Guide to Surface Freshwater Classifications in North Carolina. Raleigh.
https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/planning/classification-
standards/classifications#DWRPrimaryClassification; accessed September 2019.

North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ). (2018). 2018 NC Category 5
Assessments “303(d) List” Final. Water Quality Section. Retrieved from
https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/planning/modeling-assessment/water-
quality-data-assessment/integrated-report-files

North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS). “Neuse River Basin Restoration Priorities
2010. Amended August 2018.”

North Carolina Environmental Management Commission. 2014. Rule 15A NCAC 02B.0295 -
Mitigation Program Requirements for the Protection and Maintenance of Riparian Buffers.

NCNHP (North Carolina Natural Heritage Program). 2019. Natural Heritage Element Occurrences.
June 2019.

NCSHPO (North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office). 2018. North Carolina Listings in the
National Register of Historic Places as of August 14, 2018. http://www.hpo.ncdcr.gov/NR-
PDFs.pdf; accessed August 2018.

Rosgen, D. (1996), Applied River Morphology, 2nd edition, Wildland Hydrology, Pagosa Springs, CO

Schafale, M.P. 2012. Guide to the Natural Communities of North Carolina, Fourth Approximation.
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, NCDENR,
Raleigh, NC.

Sweet, W. V. and Geratz, J. W. 2003. Bankfull Hydraulic Geometry Relationships And Recurrence
Intervals For North Carolina's Coastal Plain. JAWRA Journal of the American Water
Resources Association, 39: 861–871.

US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), 2002. Regulatory Guidance Letter. RGL No. 02-2,
December 24, 2002.

USACE. 2003. April 2003 NC Stream Mitigation Guidelines.

USACE. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual:
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region (Version 2.0), ed. J. S. Wakeley, R. W. Lichvar, and
C. V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-10-20. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and
Development Center.

USACE. 2016. Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update.

Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan 35 July 2020
Project #100094
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS).
1986. Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds. Technical Release 55.

USDA NRCS. 2007. Stream Restoration Design Handbook (NEH 654), USDA

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS),
1994. Soil Survey of Johnston County, North Carolina.

USDA NRCS. 2010. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States, Version 7.0. L.M. Vasilas,
G.W. Hurt, and C.V. Noble (eds.). USDA, NRCS, in cooperation with the National Technical
Committee for Hydric Soils.

USDA NRCS. Web Soil Survey; http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov (March 2020).

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1999. EPA Manual. Quantifying Physical
Habitat in Wadeable Streams.

United States Fish and Wildlife Service. “Threatened and Endangered Species in North Carolina.”
North Carolina Ecological Services. http://www.fws.gov/raleigh/. (September 2014).

Figures
0 1,000500
Feet
Figure 1 - Project Vicinity
Strawberry HillMitigation Project
Johnston County, North Carolina
Legend
Proposed Easem ent
Polecat Mitigation Site
Neuse River Basin - 03020201
TLW - 03020201140010
©Date: 6/23/2020
Drawn by: SCF
Checked by: JRM
Document Path: R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\MXD\4_Mitigation Plan\Figure 1 - Project Vicinity.mxd1 inch = 1,000 feet
Stra wberry HillMitigation Projec t
Project Coordinta tes:35.469579, -78.323896
0 2,0001,000
Feet
Figure 2 - USGSFour Oaks NE (1997)
Strawberry HillMitigation Project
Johnston County, North Carolina
Legend
Proposed Easement
Drainage Area
©Date: 6/11/2020
Drawn by: SCF
Checked by: JRM
Document Path: R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\MXD\4_Mitigation Plan\Figure 2 - USGS.mxd1 inch = 2,000 feet
JH1-B266 AC JH1-A193 AC
JH5117 AC
JH2 (Ditch)69 AC
JH4 (Ditch)20 AC
JH3 (Ditch)71 AC
Jan Penny Hill260200-65-1474
MelroseEdwards Haas260200-46-0253
BridgetteEdwards Davis260200-46-1831
Jan Penny Hill260200-45-0227
Jan Penny Hill260200-45-0227
Jan Penny Hill260200-26-3725
William ChristianCarpenter260200-36-4710
Jan Penny Hill260200-36-4485
0 500250
Feet
Figure 3 - Landowner Parcels
Strawberry HillMitigation Project
Johnston County, North Carolina
Legend
Proposed Easement
Project Parcels
Parcels
©Date: 6/11/2020
Drawn by: MDD
Checked by: JRM
Document Path: R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\MXD\4_Mitigation Plan\Figure 3 - Landowner Parcels.mxd1 inch = 500 feet
0 1,000500
Feet
Figure 4 - Land-use
Strawberry HillMitigation Project
Johnston County, North Carolina
Legend
Proposed Easement
Drainage Area
Land-use
Agriculture (55%)
Forest (21%)
Brush (11%)
Residential (6%)
Racetrack (3%)
Impervious (2%)
Industrial (1%)
Open Water (1%)
©Date: 6/11/2020
Drawn by: SCF
Checked by: JRM
Document Path: R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\MXD\4_Mitigation Plan\Figure 4 - Land-use.mxd1 inch = 1,000 feet
Ra
Ra
NoA
GoA
Ly
Ra
GoA
Ly
LyGoA
GoA
Ly
Ly
NoA
GoA
GoA
GoA
CoB
NoA
NoA
CoB
GoA
GoA
GoA GoA
NoA
GoA
GoA
CoBUcC
Ly
0 500250
Feet
Figure 5 - Mapped Soils
Strawberry HillMitigation Project
Johnston County, North Carolina
Legend
Proposed Easement
Soils Symbology
Hydric (100%)
Predominantly Hydric (66-99%)
Predominantly Hydric (33-65%)
Predominantly Nonhydric (1-32%)
Nonhydric (0%)
©Date: 6/11/2020
Drawn by: SCF
Checked by: JRM
Document Path: R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\MXD\4_Mitigation Plan\Figure 5 - Mapped Soils.mxd1 inch = 500 feet
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit NameCoBCowarts loamy sand, 2% to 6% sl opesGoAGoldsboro sandy l oam, 0% to 2% slopesLyLynchburg sandy l oam, 0% to 2% slopesRaRains sandy loam, 0% to 2% sl ope s
Document Path: R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\MXD\4_Mitigation Plan\Figure 6 - Historic Imagery.mxd1939
1971 1993
Legend
Proposed Easement
Figure 6 - Historic Imagery
Strawberry HillMitigation Project
Johnston County, North Carolina
©Date: 6/11/2020
0 1,000500
Feet 1 inch = 1,000 feet
1965
Source: Johnston County GIS
Source: Johnston County GIS
Source: Johnston County GIS
Source: NCOneMap
Drawn by: SCF
Checked by: JRM
T
TTTTTTTTTTTTT T T
TTTTTTTTPFO4A
PUBHx
PUBHx
PUBHx
PUBHx
PUBHx
PUBHx
PUBHh
WA
WB
WC
WD
JH1-B
JH2
JH5JH1-A
JH3JH4
0 500250
Feet
Figure 7 - Existing Conditions
Strawberry HillMitigation Project
Johnston County, North Carolina
Legend
Proposed Easement
Existing Wetland
NWI Wetlands (USFWS 10/09/2019)
FEMA Zone AE (None)
Existing Intermittent Stream
Existing Ditch
Existing Swale
Utilities
T T Overhead Power Line
Sewer Line
Water Line
©Date: 7/23/2020
Drawn by: MDD
Checked by: JRM
Document Path: R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\MXD\4_Mitigation Plan\Figure 7 - Existing Conditions.mxd1 inch = 500 feet
Existing CulvertCrossing
cExisting culvertcrossingExisting CulvertCrossing
Fire Hydrant
Fire Hydrant
Existing Pond
Existing Pondccccc
ExposedIrrigation Pipe(Abandoned)
Underground Telephone LineAlong DOT Right-of-Way
Yard Swale
J H 1 -B
JH2
JH5J H 1 -A
JH3JH4JH1-B
0 500250
Feet
Figure 8 - Stream Mitigation Conceptual
Strawberry HillMitigation Project
Johnston County, North Carolina
Legend
Proposed Easement (22.12 ac)
Stream Mitigation Approach
Restoration
No Credit
Ditch
Swale
©Date: 7/23/2020
Drawn by: MDD
Checked by: JRM
Document Path: R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\MXD\4_Mitigation Plan\Figure 8 - Conceptual.mxd1 inch = 500 feet
Tie yard swale to JH1-B
Replace Culvert
Tie field ditch to JH1-A
Fill Ditch
Reach Mitigation Type Proposed Length (LF)Mitiation Ratio SMUs
JH1-A Res toration 1,007 1:1 1,007.000
Res toration 1,054 1:1 1,054.000
Res toration 1,658 1:1 1,658.000
Totals 3,719 3,719.000
Strawberry Hill Project Stream Credits
JH1-B
vªJH1-A
JH1-BJH1-BJH5JH4JH3
JH2
0 500250
Feet
Figure 9 - Stream Monitoring Plan
Strawberry HillMitigation Project
Johnston County, North Carolina
Legend
Proposed Easement (22.12 ac)
Planting Area
Fixed Vegetation Plots
Stream and Buffer
Buffer Only
ªStage Recorder
v Flow Gauge
Cross Section
Stream Mitigation Approach
Restoration
No Credit
Ditch
Swale
©Date: 7/23/2020
Drawn by: MDD
Checked by: JRM
Document Path: R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\MXD\4_Mitigation Plan\Figure 9 - Monitoring.mxd1 inch = 500 feet
In addition to the 7 fixed vegetation plots there will be 4random vegetation plots, for a total of 11 plots utilized forstream vegetative success. The random plots will only beplaced in the northern easement section but will vary inlocation from year-to-year.
Fixed image locations will exist at each cross section, eachvegetation plot, each stage recorder, and each flow gauge.

Appendix A

Buffer Mitigation Plan

This mitigation plan has been written in conformance with the requirements of the following:
• The Consolidated Buffer Mitigation Rule, 15A NCAC 02B .0295, effective November 1, 2015
These documents govern NCDMS operations and procedures for the delivery of compensatory mitigation.

Draft Buffer Mitigation Plan
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project
DMS Project #: 100094 | Contract #: 7745 | RFP: 16-007576 | DWR #: 2019-0159

Neuse River Basin | HUC 03020201 | Johnston County, North Carolina
July 2020

Prepared For:
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
Prepared By:
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC
For Environmental Banc & Exchange –
Neuse I, LLC (EBX-Neuse)
3600 Glenwood Avenue, Suite 100
Raleigh, NC 27612
919-209-1052

Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project Buffer Mitigation Plan
DMS Project #: 100094 1 July 2020
Table of Contents
1 MITIGATION PROJECT SUMMARY ......................................................................................... 1
1.1 Project Overview ........................................................................................................................ 1
1.2 Project Location ......................................................................................................................... 3
1.3 Existing Conditions .................................................................................................................... 4
2 REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS .......................................................................................... 7
2.1 Determination of Credits ............................................................................................................ 7
2.2 Other regulatory considerations ................................................................................................. 8
3 RIPARIAN RESTORATION AND ENHANCEMENT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN ........... 10
3.1 Site Preparation ........................................................................................................................ 10
3.2 Methods .................................................................................................................................... 10
3.3 Planting Plan ............................................................................................................................ 13
3.4 Easement Boundaries ............................................................................................................... 14
4 MONITORING PLAN .................................................................................................................. 15
4.1 Monitoring Protocol and Success Criteria ................................................................................ 15
4.2 Adaptive Management Plan and Project Maintenance ............................................................. 16
5 STEWARDSHIP ............................................................................................................................ 17
6 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................... 18

FIGURES
Figure 1 - Service Area
Figure 2 – Existing Conditions
Figure 3 – Vicinity Map
Figure 4 – Conceptual Design Plan for Buffer
Figure 5 – USGS Quadrangle
Figure 6 – Mapped Soils
Figure 7 – Monitoring Plan

APPENDIX
A1 – Project Buffer Credits (DWR Template)
A2 – Buffer Viability and Stream Determination
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project Buffer Mitigation Plan
DMS Project #: 100094 1 July 2020
1 MITIGATION PROJECT SUMMARY
Environmental Banc & Exchange – Neuse I, LLC (EBX-Neuse I), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Resource
Environmental Solutions (RES), is pleased to provide this Buffer Mitigation Plan as a component of the
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project (Project), a full-delivery stream and buffer mitigation project for the
Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) (DMS #100094). This buffer component of the Project is
designed to provide riparian buffer mitigation credits for unavoidable impacts due to development within
the Neuse River Basin, United States Geological Survey (USGS) 8-digit Cataloguing Unit 03020201
(Neuse 01) (Figure 1). This Buffer Mitigation Plan is in accordance with the Consolidated Buffer
Mitigation Rule 15A NCAC 02B .0295. The Buffer Mitigation Plan is designed in concurrence with the
Strawberry Hill Stream Mitigation Project (SAW-2020-00332).
1.1 Project Overview
The conservation easement of the Strawberry Hill Project will total approximately 22.12 acres and
includes two unnamed tributaries and three ditches that drain into Polecat Branch and eventually the Neuse
River. Current land use within the Project is primarily crop production and disturbed riparian forest. The
Project area has been used extensively for agricultural and forestry purposes for over 80 years. Currently,
the Project reaches and adjacent areas are in either crop production or forest regeneration. Water quality
stressors currently affecting the Project include pollution from crop production and lack of forested
riparian buffer (Figure 2). Current buffer conditions demonstrate significant degradation with the loss of
stabilizing vegetation because of continued crop production and recent clear cut of adjacent riparian forest.
The goal of the buffer component of the Project is to restore and preserve ecological function to the
existing streams and their associated riparian buffer areas by establishing appropriate plant communities
while minimizing temporal and land disturbing impacts. Buffer and surrounding riparian area
improvements will filter runoff from agricultural fields, thereby reducing nutrient and sediment loads to
Project channels and provide water quality benefit to the overall watershed.
The easement is comprised of two main sections: a northern and a southern. The northern section can be
accessed by either Yelverton Grove Road or Brogden Road, while the southern section can be accessed
by Yelverton Grove Road (Figure 3). The Strawberry Hill Project is composed of two intermittent stream
channels: JH1 (divided into JH1-A and JH1-B) and JH5; and three ditches: JH2, JH3, and JH4 (Figure 2).
Furthermore, the buffers and surrounding riparian areas of all stream reaches and ditches were determined
to be subject to the buffer rules. There will be three easement breaks: two of which account for the
Yelverton Grove Road crossing and one that accounts for an upgraded agricultural crossing. All streams
and ditches have been straightened and are incised; however, reaches JH1-A and JH1-B will be restored
via stream restoration as part of the stream mitigation component of the Project. Stream determinations
were verified by the DWR site visit on February 27th, 2019. Correspondence regarding this
determination is in Appendix A2.
Buffer and riparian area mitigation efforts along the Project streams and ditches will be
accomplished through the planting, establishment, and protection of a hardwood forest community.
The result will be a riparian area that functions to mitigate nutrient and sediment inputs from the
surrounding uplands. The buffer mitigation plan proposed is being submitted for review under the
Consolidated Buffer Mitigation Rule 15A NCAC 02B .0295. In addition to traditional riparian
restoration, the Project will also incorporate the alternative buffer mitigation options: Preservation
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project Buffer Mitigation Plan
DMS Project #: 100094 2 July 2020
of Buffers on Subject Streams, as outlined in 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o) (5), and Restoration and
Enhancement of Ditches, as outlined in 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o) (8). DWR staff performed an
onsite viability assessment for buffer mitigation on February 27th, 2019. Correspondence regarding
this assessment is provided in Appendix A2 and dated April 30th, 2019. The Project will provide
significant functional uplift to the watershed and will assist DMS with achieving its mitigation goals in
the Neuse 01 watershed. The Project presents the opportunity to provide up to 656,593.451 ft2 (15.07
acres) of riparian buffer mitigation units (BMU). These will be derived from restoration and preservation
of the riparian buffer and surrounding riparian areas. Project attributes are summarized in Table 1.
Table 1. Project Attributes
Project Name Strawberry Hill
Hydrologic Unit Code 03020201140010 (14 digit)
River Basin Neuse River
Geographic Location (Lat, Long) 35.469579, -78.323896
Site Protection Instrument (DB, PG)
5199, 272 Johnston (Hill)
5111, 571 Johnston (Hill)
3754, 814 Johnston (Carpenter)
3960, 792 Johnston (Davis)
4060, 391 Johnston (Haas)
Total Credits (BMU) 656,593.451
Types of Credits Riparian Buffer
Mitigation Plan Date June 2020
Initial Planting Date December 2021
Baseline Report Date January 2022
MY1 Report Date December 2022
MY2 Report Date December 2023
MY3 Report Date December 2024
MY4 Report Date December 2025
MY5 Report Date December 2026

Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project Buffer Mitigation Plan
DMS Project #: 100094 3 July 2020
The riparian buffer mitigation credits will be produced by establishing a native forested and herbaceous
riparian plant community and protecting buffers in perpetuity with a conservation easement. For stream
channels, buffers will have a minimum width of 50 feet and a maximum of 200 feet from the edge of the
channels. These will be derived from 496,540 ft2 (11.40 acres) from the top of bank to 100 feet of
Restoration; 16,097 ft2 (0.37 acres) of 101 to 200 feet of Restoration; 80,893 ft2 (1.86 acres) from the top
of bank to 100 feet of Preservation; and 792 ft2 (0.02 acres) from 101 to 200 feet of Preservation. For ditch
channels, buffers will have a minimum width of 30 feet and maximum of 50 feet from the edge of the
channel. These will be derived from 146,626 ft2 (3.37 acres) from the top of bank to 50 feet of Restoration.
The new plant community will be established in conjunction with the treatment of any existing exotic or
undesirable plant species. Figure 4 shows the Conceptual Design Plan for Buffer and Credit Determination
Map and Section 2.1 provides details of the mitigation determination on the Strawberry Hill Project.
1.1.1 Parcel Ownership
The land required for the construction, management, and stewardship of this Project includes portions of
the parcels listed in Table 2. EBX-Neuse I will obtain conservation easements from the current landowners.
The easement deeds and survey plats will be submitted to DMS and the State Property Office (SPO) for
approval and will be held by the State of North Carolina. The easement deeds followed the DMS Full
Delivery Conservation Easement Template dated May 5, 2017 and is included in Appendix D. The
recorded easement allows EBX-Neuse I to proceed with the Project development and protect the mitigation
assets in perpetuity. A finalized copy of the land protection instrument(s) is included in Appendix D.
Table 2. Parcel and Landowner Information
Landowners Pin or Tax Parcel ID Agreement Type County
Jan Penny Hill
260200-26-4743
260200-45-0227
260200-36-4485
260200-35-1474
Easement Johnston
William Christian Carpenter 260200-36-4710 Easement Johnston
Melrose Haas 260200-46-0253 Easement Johnston
Bridgette Edwards Davis 260200-46-1831 Easement Johnston

1.2 Project Location
The Strawberry Hill Project is within the Neuse River Basin within the 8-digit HUC 03020201, 14-digit
HUC 03020201140010 and DWR Sub-basin Number 03-04-02.
The Strawberry Hill Project is located in Johnston County in Smithfield, NC at the crossroads of Yelverton
Grove Road and Brogden Road (Figure 1). To access the Project from Raleigh, take I-40 East to US-70
East. Then take US-70 BUS West until taking a right onto South 3rd Street in downtown Smithfield. Then
take a left onto Brogden Road. Follow Brogden Road for 2.9 miles and the downstream extent of reach
JH1-B will be on your left. The coordinates are 35.469579 °N and -78.323896 °W.
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project Buffer Mitigation Plan
DMS Project #: 100094 4 July 2020
1.3 Existing Conditions
1.3.1 Surface Water Classification
The Project’s tributaries drain directly to Polecat Branch, which has been assigned class C and Nutrient
Sensitive Waters (NSW). Class C waters are protected for uses such as secondary recreation, fishing,
wildlife, fish consumption, aquatic life including propagation, survival and maintenance of biological
integrity, and agriculture. Secondary recreation includes wading, boating, and other uses involving human
body contact with water where such activities take place in an infrequent, unorganized, or incidental
manner. NSW designation is intended for waters needing additional nutrient management due to being
subject to excessive growth of microscopic or macroscopic vegetation (NCDWQ 2011).
1.3.2 Physiography and Soils
The Project is located within the Rolling Coastal Plain Level IV ecoregion within the Southeastern Plains
Level III ecoregion and is characterized by greater relief, elevation, and stream gradients compared to the
Mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain to the east with better drained soils and a slightly cooler and shorter growing
season. However, it is a productive agricultural region with typical crops of corn, soybeans, tobacco,
cotton, sweet potatoes, peanuts, and wheat. (Griffith et al. 2002). Elevations range from 133 to 141 feet
above mean sea level (NAD 83) based upon topographic survey (Figure 5).
The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) depicts four soil map units across the Project
(Figure 6). The Project area is dominated by Rains sandy loam, with successively smaller proportions of
Goldsboro sandy loam, Lynchburg sandy loam, and Cowarts loamy sand. Rains sandy loam, Goldsboro
sandy loam, and Lynchburg sandy loam are zero to two percent slopes and not flooded, while Cowarts
loamy sand is two to six percent and not flooded. The soil characteristics of these map units are
summarized in Table 3.
Table 3. Project Mapped Soil Series
Map Unit
Symbol Map Unit Name Percent
Hydric Drainage Class Hydrologic
Soil Group
Landscape
Setting
CoB Cowarts loamy sand, 2-
6% slopes, not flooded 0% Well Drained C
Coastal plains, low
ridges on marine
terraces
GoA Goldsboro sandy loam,
0-2% slopes, not flooded 2% Moderately
Well Drained B
Flats on marine
terraces, coastal
plains
Ly Lynchburg sandy loam,
0-2% slopes, not flooded 8% Somewhat
Poorly Drained B/D Marine terraces,
coastal plains
Ra Rains sandy loam, 0-2%
slopes, not flooded 90% Poorly Drained A/D Marine terraces on
coastal plains

1.3.3 Wetlands
A detailed wetland delineation was completed February 5th, 2020. Wetland boundaries were delineated
using current methodology outlined in the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Wetland
Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987). Soils were characterized and classified using the
Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States, Version 7.0 (NRCS, 2010). Within the boundaries of
the Project, four jurisdictional wetlands are present (Figure 2). Wetlands are labeled as WA (Wetland A)
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project Buffer Mitigation Plan
DMS Project #: 100094 5 July 2020
through WD (Wetland D). A preliminary jurisdictional determination (PJD) request was sent to the
USACE on February 14th, 2020 and a confirmed PJD was received, signed May 4th, 2020 (Appendix J).
The US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetland Inventory Map (NWI) does not depict any
additional wetland areas within the Project (Figure 2).
1.3.4 Landscape Communities
A. Existing Vegetation Communities
Current land use around the Project is primarily composed of row crops, forest, and early successional
forest. Fields rotating soybean and corn directly abut most of the banks of Project streams and ditches.
Part of the uppermost portion of the main Project reach (JH1-A) contains a forest along the left bank that
resembles a disturbed Mesic Mixed Oak-Hickory Forest (Coastal Plain Subtype) that consists of red maple
(Acer rubrum), loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), southern red oak (Quercus falcata), water oak (Quercus nigra),
laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia), sweetbay (Magnolia virginiana), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua),
common persimmon (Diospyros virginiana), mockernut hickory, (Carya tomentosa), Chinese privet
(Ligustrum sinense), roundleaf greenbriar (Smilax rotundifolia), poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans),
muscadine (Vitis rotundifolia), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), evening trumpetflower
(Gelsemium sempervirens), giant cane (Arundinaria gigantea), and Nepalese browntop (Microstegium
vimineum). The other distinct community type within the Project is regenerating forest that resembles a
disturbed Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp. The area along reach JH1-B was clear-cut approximately
six to seven years ago and contains a mosaic of scrub-shrub and emergent wetland areas with upland
pockets and berms. Species in these areas include loblolly pine, water oak, red maple, sweetgum,
American sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), sweetbay, redbay (Persea borbonia), common sweetleaf
(Symplocos tinctoria), swamp titi (Cyrilla racemiflora), eastern baccharis (Baccharis halimifolia), black
elderberry (Sambucus nigra), sawtooth blackberry (Rubus argutus), muscadine, winged sumac (Rhus
copallinum), big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii), giant cane, common rush (Juncus effuses), seedbox
(Ludwigia alterniflora), common reed (Phragmities australis), woolgrass (Scirpus cyperinus), dogfennel
(Eupatorium capillifolium), and goldenrod (Solidago sp.). Also, stream and ditch channels contain locally
dense areas of murdannia (Murdannia sp.) and narrowleaf cattail (Typha angustifolia).
Notable exotic invasive species include Chinese privet, Japanese honeysuckle, Nepalese browntop, and
narrowleaf cattail.
B. Riparian Vegetation
In general, all of the reaches within the Strawberry Hill Project do not function to their full potential.
Current conditions demonstrate significant habitat degradation with a loss of stabilizing vegetation as a
result of impacts from ongoing crop production and forestry. Specifically, the buffer and riparian area off
the right bank of reach JH1-B was clear-cut sometime around 2014 and is currently in an early successional
state of regeneration, although much of the area has failed to regenerate trees. Also, notably, the clear-cut
violated the Neuse Buffer Rules; therefore, any clear-cut area within 50 feet of the existing stream channel
is not eligible for buffer mitigation credit. Throughout the Project there are scattered invasive plant species
that will be treated to the extent practicable.

Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project Buffer Mitigation Plan
DMS Project #: 100094 6 July 2020
1.3.5 Existing Conditions Photos
Looking Upstream along JH1-A
January 16, 2020
Looking Downstream along JH1-A
January 16, 2020

Looking Upstream along JH1-B
January 16, 2020
Looking Downstream along JH1-B
January 16, 2020

Looking Upstream at JH2 (Ditch)
January 16, 2020
Looking Upstream along JH3 (Ditch)
January 16, 2020

Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project Buffer Mitigation Plan
DMS Project #: 100094 7 July 2020
Looking Upstream at JH4 (Ditch)
January 16, 2020
Looking Upstream along JH5
January 16, 2020

2 REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS
2.1 Determination of Credits
This Project has the potential to generate up to 656,593.451 ft2 (15.07 acres) riparian buffer mitigation
credits within a 22.12-acre conservation easement as depicted in Figure 4. These will be derived from
buffer restoration and buffer preservation. The riparian buffer mitigation credits generated will service the
Neuse 01 watershed. The total potential mitigation credits that the Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project will
generate are summarized in Table 4 and the detailed Project credit breakdown, utilizing the DWR “Project
Credit Table Template (Updated November 2019),” is provided in Appendix A1.
Table 4. Strawberry Hill Project (DMS #: 100094) Riparian Buffer Mitigation Summary
Total Riparian Buffer Mitigation Credits
Mitigation Totals Square Feet Credits
Restoration 659,263 648,478.015
Preservation 81,685 8,115.436
Total Riparian Buffer 740,948 656,593.451
Note: Stipulation for untreated flow entering riparian buffer restoration areas according to 15A NCAC
02B.0242(9)(d)(iii) and Buffer Interpretation/Clarification #2008-019 Memorandum dated 08/19/2008 were
accounted for in the riparian buffer credit area and calculations. These areas are depicted in Figure 4.

Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project Buffer Mitigation Plan
DMS Project #: 100094 8 July 2020
2.2 Other regulatory considerations
2.2.1 Environmental Screening and Documentation
Because DMS mitigation projects are considered to be a category of activities that do not individually or
cumulatively have an impact on the human environment, they do not require preparation of an
environmental assessment or environmental impact statement. To ensure that a project meets the
“Categorical Exclusion” criteria, the Federal Highways Administration (FHWA) and NCDMS have
developed a categorical exclusion (CE) checklist that is included as part of each mitigation project’s
Environmental Screening process. The CE Approval Form for the Strawberry Hill Project is included in
Appendix L and was approved by DMS and FHWA in August 2019.
2.2.2 Threatened and Endangered Species
Plants and animals with a federal classification of endangered or threatened are protected under provisions
of Sections 7 and 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. According to the United States
Fish and Wildlife IPAC database review tool (USFWS 2018) and the self-certification process conducted
by RES and submitted to the USFWS on June 12th, 2019 the list of threatened and endangered species
includes the Red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis), the Atlantic Pigtoe (Fusconaia masoni), the
Tar River Spinymussel (Elliptio steinstansana), and Michaux’s Sumac (Rhus michauxii). Two additional
species on the list submitted to USFWS are proposed for listing, the Neuse River Waterdog (Necturus
lewisi) and the Carolina Madtom (Noturus Furiosus). The Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project does not
contain any suitable habitat for the Red-cockaded woodpecker, the Atlantic Pigtoe, the Tar River
Spinymussel, the Neuse River Waterdog, the Carolina Madtom, nor the Michaux’s Sumac. A self-
certification letter sent to USFWS (on August 2nd, 2019) A copy of this letter is enclosed. No response
was provided by USFWS which is typical as the certification letter (provided) is their official response
unless they do not concur with the determination. This consultation was conducted as part of the CE
process and supporting documentation and correspondence can be found in Appendix L
The Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act requires consultation with state fish and wildlife agencies when
“waters of any stream or other body of water are proposed or authorized, permitted or licensed to be
impounded, diverted…or otherwise controlled or modified. The North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission (NCWRC) was consulted during the CE process and the NCWRC did not comment on any
state or federally listed species; however, they did recommend the use of biodegradable and wildlife-
friendly sediment and erosion control devices and to treat invasive species as part of the Project.
Documentation is included in Appendix L.
2.2.3 Cultural Resources
A review of North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) GIS Web Service (accessed 14
August 2018) database did not reveal any registered occurrences within the Project area; however, there
is one nationally registered house (JT0994 - the Watson-Sanders House) on Brogden Road just west of
the Project and one “Determined Eligible” house (JT1920 - Stevens Sausage Company Homeplace/Office)
on Stevens Sausage Road just south of the Project. RES consulted with the SHPO during the CE process
and the SHPO had “conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which would
be affected by the project.” Cultural Resources screening met the Categorical Exclusion Criteria for
FHWA and DMS projects and documentation is included in Appendix L.
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project Buffer Mitigation Plan
DMS Project #: 100094 9 July 2020
2.2.4 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)/ Hydrologic Trespass
The Project is not within a mapped FEMA Regulatory Floodway or 100-year floodplain (Figure 2). While
designing the Strawberry Hill Project, appropriate measures were taken to eliminate hydrologic trespass
of the adjacent agricultural fields. The adjacent land use will not be affected by the proposed design, and
no detrimental impacts are expected beyond the easement limits. The DMS Floodplain Requirements
Checklist can be found in Appendix M.
2.2.5 Clean Water Act - Section 401/404
Because this Project also includes a stream mitigation component that involves stream restoration and
culvert work, impacts to jurisdictional streams and wetlands and protected buffer will be unavoidable
due to the restoration activities proposed. All stream, wetland, and buffer impacts will be accounted for
in the Pre-Construction Notification form. Information about impacts and permitting are discussed
further in Section 3.4 of the Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan.

Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project Buffer Mitigation Plan
DMS Project #: 100094 10 July 2020
3 RIPARIAN RESTORATION AND ENHANCEMENT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Riparian restoration and preservation areas adjacent to streams are shown in Figure 4 and were
approved by the DWR in the letter dated April 30th, 2019 (Appendix A2).
3.1 Site Preparation
Preparation at the Project will involve spraying crops and exotic invasive species, clearing undesirable
scrub-shrub vegetation, contoured ripping, seeding, and planting. Additionally, culverts, agricultural
building structures, and old, abandoned irrigation pipes will be removed from buffer restoration areas.
Prior to construction a Pre-construction Notification for the Nationwide Permit 27, under Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act, and a DWR 401 Water Quality Certification, under Section 401 of the Clean Water
Act, will be obtained. Following the issuance of the Nationwide Permit, an erosion and sediment control
permit will be obtained. Stabilization and implementation of dispersal techniques will be utilized where
surface flows have become concentrated to minimize the chances of non-diffuse flow. A combination of
silt fencing, erosion control wattles, temporary seeding, and erosion control matting will be used to reduce
erosion and stabilize soil in riparian areas during any land disturbance activities. These erosion control
measures shall be inspected and properly maintained at the end of each working day to ensure measures
are functioning properly until permanent vegetation is established.
Immediately following completion of restoration activities, disturbed areas will be stabilized to prevent
erosion by seeding with a mixture of temporary and permanent seed mix within ten working days upon
completion of final grading. The proposed seed mix was chosen to maximize successful herbaceous
growth in upland and wetland riparian areas, as both are characteristic of the site, while also incorporating
valuable pollinator species (Appendix B, P1). Areas of compacted soils will be ripped and disked prior
to seed mix application and tree planting. Temporary and permanent riparian seeding shall be done in
accordance with the erosion control plan. Soil amendments will be provided as needed based on the results
of soil fertility tests. After construction activities, the subsoil will be scarified, and any compaction will
be deep tilled before the topsoil is placed back over the site. Any topsoil that is removed during
construction will be stockpiled and placed over the site during final soil preparation. This process should
provide favorable soil conditions for plant growth. Bare root plantings and live stakes shall be planted
according to detail shown in the planting plan (Appendix B, P1).
All riparian buffer restoration activities will commence in concurrence with the stream mitigation
activities and not before. The riparian restoration areas will be surveyed, and information will be provided
in the As-Built report.
3.2 Methods
Riparian buffer mitigation activities will include restoration and preservation along streams and restoration
along viable ditches. All restoration and preservation areas were determined by the mitigation
determination performed during the viability assessment by DWR (Appendix A2).
3.2.1 Riparian Restoration Activities - Streams
For stream channels, the Project will provide riparian buffer and surrounding area restoration in
accordance with the Consolidated Buffer Mitigation Rule 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (n). Restoration activities
will include the planting of bare root plantings as described in Section 3.3. These restoration activities will
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project Buffer Mitigation Plan
DMS Project #: 100094 11 July 2020
begin from the tops of the proposed stream banks and extend a minimum of 50 feet from the stream
outward to a maximum of 200 feet perpendicular to the stream channel. Restoration will occur where
cropland is currently present as well as selective areas of early successional, regenerating forest that lack
suitable density and composition. In the early successional, regenerating forested areas, the buffer
restoration areas are determined based on whether there are less than 25 percent of the tree canopy cover
and a lack of dense growth of smaller woody stems (i.e. shrubs or saplings) in accordance with the
Consolidated Buffer Mitigation Rule 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (b) (12). Furthermore, these selective areas
were determined by the mitigation determination performed during the viability assessment by DWR
(Appendix A2). Also, as determined in the viability assessment, all recently cleared areas within Zone 1
(0-30 feet) and Zone 2 (31-50 feet) of the existing stream channel are not eligible for riparian buffer credit
due to violation of the Neuse Buffer Rules; however, these areas will still be planted and protected within
the conservation easement (Figure 4). Specifically, reaches JH1-A, JH1-B, and JH5 will include riparian
buffer restoration (Figure 4). Notably, JH5 contains a small portion of recently cleared, regenerating forest
off the right bank that is not eligible for riparian buffer credit within Zones 1 and 2 due to circumstances
described above. Therefore, this area will not be part of the Project, although the entire stream channel
will still be included within the conservation easement in order to maintain protection of the entire stream
channel: this conservation easement boundary will be offset approximately five feet from the right top of
bank (Figure 4).
Since the northern easement section is also proposed for stream restoration as part of the stream mitigation
component of the Project, buffer mitigation activities along reaches JH1-A and JH1-B will coincide with
stream restoration. The stream design approach will include constructing a meandering stream channel
within the natural valley and stabilizing stream banks using a combination of grading, erosion control
matting, live-stake planting, native material revetment techniques (i.e. bioengineering), structure
placement, and sod transplants where possible. These activities will also include backfilling the abandoned
stream channels to the elevation of the floodplain and planting. (Appendix B).
Also, as denoted in Section 2.1, there will be credit deductions for untreated flow entering riparian buffer
restoration areas according to 15A NCAC 02B.0242 (9) (d) (iii) and Buffer Interpretation/Clarification
#2008-019 Memorandum dated 08/19/2008. Specifically, there is untreated flow that enters reach JH1-A,
laterally, at its upstream extent. Therefore, where untreated flow enters the easement boundary, a 120º
angle wedge, drawn 50 feet below the easement boundary, was removed from the associated buffer area
for crediting purpose (Figure 4). However, this area of exemption will still be planted and contained
within the conservation easement.
3.2.2 Riparian Restoration Activities – Ditches
The southern easement section of the Project includes three ditch reaches: JH2, JH3, and JH4 (Figure 4).
These ditches are proposed for riparian buffer restoration in accordance with the alternative mitigation
option of Consolidated Buffer Mitigation Rule 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o) (8) and the DWR buffer viability
assessment (Appendix A2). As no stream work is proposed on these ditches, the only restoration activities
will include the planting of bare root tree plantings as described in Section 3.3 and the other activities
mentioned in 3.2.4. These restoration activities will begin from the tops of the ditch banks and extend a
minimum of 30 feet from the ditch outward to a maximum of 50 feet perpendicular to the ditch channel.
All these riparian areas are currently cropland except for a small segment along the left bank of JH3, which
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project Buffer Mitigation Plan
DMS Project #: 100094 12 July 2020
contains portions of dilapidated agricultural structures, which will be demolished as part of the Project
(Figure 4).
The ditch reaches meet criteria for riparian buffer restoration according to Rule 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o)
(8) in the following ways:
(A) Each ditch drains directly to reach JH5, an intermittent stream.
(B) The stream (JH5) and all ditches, including their confluence, will be protected by a contiguous,
perpetual conservation easement that will prevent any future maintenance or manipulation of the
ditches.
(C) Stormwater runoff and overland flow drain toward the ditches.
(D) Each ditch is between one and three feet in depth (as measured during the DWR buffer viability
site visit and depicted in the issued buffer viability letter (Appendix A2):
• JH2 – 2.50 feet
• JH3 – 2.95 feet
• JH4 – 2.70 feet
(E) The entire length of each ditch has been in place prior to the effective date of the Neuse Buffer
Rule (see Strawberry Hill Mitigation Plan, Figure 6).
Additionally, the watersheds (DA) draining to each ditch were delineated (Figure 5) and determined to be
at least four times (multiplier of 4) larger than the restored area along their corresponding ditches, as
expressed in the following calculations:
• JH2/JH3: (71 ac. DA) / (2.79 ac. restored area)= 25 multiplier
• JH4: (20 ac. DA) / (0.58 ac. restored area)= 34 multiplier
Also, as denoted in Section 2.1, there will be credit deductions for untreated flow entering ditches
according to 15A NCAC 02B.0242(9)(d)(iii) and Buffer Interpretation/Clarification #2008-019
Memorandum dated 08/19/2008. Specifically, there will be untreated ditch flow that enters reaches JH2
and JH4 from upstream, out of the proposed easement, and there is an untreated, lateral ditch that enters
JH2 further downstream. Therefore, where these untreated ditches enter the easement boundary, a 120º
angle wedge, drawn 50 feet below the easement boundary, were removed from the associated buffer area
for crediting purpose (Figure 4). However, these areas of exemption will still be planted and contained
within the conservation easement.
3.2.3 Riparian Preservation Activities
Preservation will take place in limited forested areas within the Project where existing tree growth was
determined adequate, and in accordance with the alternative mitigation option of Consolidated Buffer
Mitigation Rule 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o) (5) and the DWR buffer viability assessment (Appendix A2).
Specifically, reaches JH1-A and JH1-B contain forested areas that will be preserved (Figure 4). A portion
of riparian area off the left bank of JH1-A is mostly mature forest, while selective portions of riparian area
along JH1-B contain regenerating forest that has sufficient growth of tree saplings and shrubs that are
adequate for preservation. Because these preservation areas are associated with proposed stream restoration
under the stream mitigation component of the Project, some of these areas may need to be cleared during
construction of the new stream corridor. Therefore, these impacted areas will be planted using the same
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project Buffer Mitigation Plan
DMS Project #: 100094 13 July 2020
criteria as restoration areas; however, will still only generate preservation credit. Also, as mentioned above
in Section 3.3.1, all recently cleared areas within Zone 1 (0-30 feet) and Zone 2 (31-50 feet) of the existing
stream channel are not eligible for riparian buffer credit due to violation of the Neuse Buffer Rules;
however, these areas will still be planted and protected within the conservation easement (Figure 4). In
addition, preservation activities will include the permanent protection of the riparian area from cutting,
clearing, filling, grading, and similar activities that would affect the functioning of the buffer through a
conservation easement that will have clearly visible easement markers and signs (see Section 3.5 for further
description of the easement boundaries).
3.2.4 Other Activities
Other activities involved with the buffer mitigation component of the Project include culvert removal,
debris removal, irrigation piping removal, demolition of building structures, and local livestaking (Figure
4). Three culverts currently used as agricultural crossings will be removed in the southern easement
section: two on reach JH2 and one at the transition of JH3 to JH5. Upon removal of these culverts, the
banks will be graded to match the existing channel dimensions and stabilized. Debris removal will occur
throughout the Project where piles of brick and concrete have been used by landowners as makeshift
erosion control structures. The debris will be removed from the conservation easement and any remaining
rills or areas of concentrated flow entering the easement will be stabilized. Along reaches JH2, JH3, and
JH4, there are exposed, abandoned irrigation piping that will be removed from buffer restoration areas and
disposed of off-site as well. Along reach JH3, there are abandoned, dilapidated agricultural building
structures that will be demolished, and the debris materials will be stockpiled away from the conservation
easement for future disposal to be conducted by the landowner. Upon completion of the demolition
activities, the riparian area will be planted as specified above in Section 3.3.2. Livestakes will be planted
on stream and ditch banks where stability is compromised, such as existing areas of erosion and areas
where culverts and irrigation pipe are removed. See Appendix B, S1-S9 for more detail regarding these
activities.
3.3 Planting Plan
All riparian restoration areas will be planted from top of bank back at least 30 feet from ditches and 50
feet from mitigated streams (and in the case of JH5, the existing stream) with bare root tree seedlings on
a nine by six-foot spacing to achieve an initial density of 680 trees per acre. Planting of the Project where
riparian buffer restoration is being performed will meet the performance standards outlined in the Rule
15A NCAC 02B .0295. The vegetation data will be collected no earlier than late August of each year. This
includes treating invasive species and planting at least four species of native hardwood bare root trees.
The buffer mitigation planting plan and species composition will also be consistent with the stream
mitigation planting plan. Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp (Schafale 2012) will be the target community
type and will be used for all areas within the Project. This community composition is highly diverse and
is suitable for wet tolerances from somewhat wet to very wet that will ultimately prove successful given
the Project’s soil and landscape characteristics and will provide water quality and ecological benefits.
Notably, although bald cypress (Taxodium distichum) is technically considered a softwood tree, it is
included in the planting plan due to the significant amount of existing wetland at the Strawberry Hill site
and its proven success at other stream, wetland, and buffer mitigation projects with similar site
characteristics in Johnston County and the Neuse 01 service area. The initial planting of bare root trees
will occur either before Spring 2021 or after November 2021. The list of bare root tree species to be planted
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project Buffer Mitigation Plan
DMS Project #: 100094 14 July 2020
and their percentage of total species composition can be found in Table 5. Wherever possible, mature
vegetation will be preserved and incorporated into the buffer. Some areas adjacent to the forested areas
may require maintenance due to the rapid regeneration of some species, such as red maple (Acer rubrum),
sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), and loblolly pine (Pinus taeda). Additionally, the live-stake
plantings mentioned above in Section 3.2.4 will consist of black willow (Salix nigra) and silky dogwood
(Cornus amomum). Furthermore, the planting plan is depicted in Appendix B, P1.
Table 5. Tree Planting List
Bare Root Planting Tree Species
Species Common Name Spacing (ft) Unit Type Canopy or
Sub-canopy
% of Total
Species
Composition
Platanus occidentalis American sycamore 9X6 Bare Root Canopy 10
Betula nigra River birch 9X6 Bare Root Canopy 10
Liriodendron tulipifera Yellow poplar 9X6 Bare Root Canopy 10
Taxodium disticum Bald cypress 9x6 Bare Root Canopy 10
Quercus phellos Willow oak 9X6 Bare Root Canopy 10
Quercus michauxii Swamp chestnut oak 9X6 Bare Root Canopy 10
Quercus nigra Water oak 9X6 Bare Root Canopy 10
Quercus laurifolia Laurel oak 9X6 Bare Root Canopy 10
Quercus lyrata Overcup oak 9X6 Bare Root Canopy 10
Nyssa biflora Swamp tupelo 9X6 Bare Root Canopy 10
3.4 Easement Boundaries
Easement boundaries will be identified in the field to ensure clear distinction between the Project and
adjacent properties. Boundaries may be identified by marker, bollard, post, tree-blazing, or other means
as allowed by Project conditions and/or conservation easement. Boundaries will be marked with signs
identifying the property as a mitigation project and will include the name of the long-term steward and a
contact number. Boundary markers disturbed, damaged, or destroyed will be repaired and/or replaced on
an as needed basis. The easement boundary will be checked annually as part of monitoring activities and
the conditions as well as any maintenance performed will be reported in the annual monitoring reports to
DWR.

Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project Buffer Mitigation Plan
DMS Project #: 100094 15 July 2020
4 MONITORING PLAN
4.1 Monitoring Protocol and Success Criteria
Annual vegetation monitoring and visual assessments will be conducted. Riparian vegetation monitoring
where riparian buffer mitigation credits are being generated will be based on the “Carolina Vegetation
Survey-Ecosystem Enhancement Program Protocol for Recording Vegetation: Level 1-2 Plot Sampling
Only Version 4.2”. Annual vegetation monitoring will occur each year for a minimum of five years and
will be conducted during the fall season with the first year occurring at least 6 months from initial planting.
Monitoring plots will be installed a minimum of 100 meters squared in size and will cover at least two
percent of the planted mitigation area. The entire planted area of the Project will generate riparian buffer
mitigation credits in the form of restoration and preservation; however, only the planted area within the
riparian buffer restoration areas will be monitored for vegetative success. Therefore, the creditable
restoration planted area is 15.13 acres, and there will be 13 vegetation plots measuring riparian buffer
mitigation success. These plots will be randomly placed throughout the planted riparian restoration area
and will be representative of the riparian community (Figure 7). The following data will be recorded for
all trees in the plots: species, height, planting date (or volunteer), and grid location. All stems in plots will
be flagged with flagging tape.
The measures of vegetative success for the Project will be the survival of at least four native hardwood
tree species, where no one species is greater than 50 percent of stems, at a density of at least 260 stems
per acre at the end of Year 5. Native volunteer species may be included to meet the performance standards
upon approval by DWR. Invasive and noxious species will be monitored and treated so that none become
dominant or alter the desired community structure of the site.
Photos will be taken from all photo points each monitoring year and provided in the annual reports. Visual
inspections and photos will be taken to ensure that applicable areas are being maintained and compliant.
A visual assessment of the conservation easement will also be performed each year to confirm:
• Easement markers are in good condition throughout the site;
• no encroachment has occurred;
• no invasive species occur in areas were invasive species were treated,
• diffuse flow is being maintained in the conservation easement areas; and
• there has not been any cutting, clearing, filling, grading, or similar activities that would
negatively affect the functioning of the buffer.

A summary of project monitoring and maintenance activities can be found in Table 6.

Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project Buffer Mitigation Plan
DMS Project #: 100094 16 July 2020
Table 6. Summary of Project Monitoring and Maintenance Activities
Component/
Feature
Monitoring Maintenance through project close-out
Vegetation Annual
vegetation
monitoring
Vegetation shall be maintained to ensure the health and vigor of the targeted plant
community. Routine vegetation maintenance and repair activities may include
supplemental planting, pruning, mulching, and fertilizing. Exotic invasive plant species
shall be treated by mechanical and/or chemical methods. Any vegetation requiring
herbicide application will be performed in accordance with NC Department of
Agriculture (NCDA) rules and regulations. Vegetation maintenance activities will be
documented and reported in annual monitoring reports. Vegetation maintenance will
continue through the monitoring period.
Invasive and Nuisance
Vegetation
Visual
Assessment
Invasive and noxious species will be monitored and treated so that none become
dominant or alter the desired community structure of the Project. Locations of invasive
and nuisance vegetation will be mapped.
Project Boundary Visual
Assessment
Project boundaries shall be identified in the field to ensure clear distinction between the
mitigation project and adjacent properties. Boundaries will be marked with signs
identifying the property as a mitigation project and will include the name of the long-
term steward and a contact number. Boundaries may be identified by fence, marker,
bollard, post, tree-blazing, or other means as allowed by Project conditions and/or
conservation easement. Boundary markers disturbed, damaged, or destroyed will be
repaired and/or replaced on an as-needed basis. Easement monitoring and staking/
signage maintenance will continue in perpetuity as a stewardship activity.

4.2 Adaptive Management Plan and Project Maintenance
Adaptive measures will be developed, or appropriate remedial actions taken if in the event that the project,
or a specific component of the project, fails to achieve the defined success criteria. DMS must approve all
adaptive management plans prior to submittal to DWR.
Remedial actions will be designed to achieve the success criteria specified in this Mitigation Plan, and will
include identification of the causes of failure, remedial design approach, work schedule, and monitoring
criteria that will consider physical and climatic conditions.
Initial plant maintenance may include a one-time mowing, prior to initial planting to remove undesirable
species. If mowing is deemed necessary by RES during the monitoring period, RES must first receive
approval by DMS and then by DWR prior to any mowing activities to ensure that no buffer violations will
be committed. Failure to receive approval to mow within the Neuse River buffer, as defined in 15A NCAC
02B .0233 by DWR, could result in Neuse River buffer violations and violations of the conservation
easement. If necessary, RES will develop a species-specific control plan.
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project Buffer Mitigation Plan
DMS Project #: 100094 17 July 2020
5 STEWARDSHIP
The Project will be transferred to the NCDEQ Stewardship Program. NCDEQ Stewardship Program shall
serve as the conservation easement holder and entity responsible for long term stewardship of the Project.
This party shall serve as conservation easement holder and long-term steward for the property and will
conduct periodic inspection of the Project to ensure that restrictions required in the conservation easement
are upheld. The NCDEQ Stewardship Program is developing an endowment system within the non-
reverting, interest‐bearing Conservation Lands Conservation Fund Account. The use of funds from the
Endowment Account will be governed by North Carolina General Statute GS 113A‐232(d)(3). Interest
gained by the endowment fund may be used for the purpose of stewardship, monitoring, stewardship
administration, and land transaction costs, if applicable.
The Stewardship Program will periodically install signage to identify boundary markings as needed. Any
livestock or associated fencing or permanent crossings will be the responsibility of the owner of the
underlying fee to maintain.

Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project Buffer Mitigation Plan
DMS Project #: 100094 18 July 2020
6 REFERENCES
Endangered Species Act of 1973. Public Law 93-205, 87 Stat. 884. 16 USC 1531-1543,
Environmental Laboratory. (1987). U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual,
Technical Report Y-87-1. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg,
Mississippi.
FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency). 2018. FEMA Flood Map Service Center. North
Carolina Panel 2602; map number 3720260200K, effective 6/20/2018.
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act of 1934. Public Law 85-72, 79 Stat. 216. 16 USC 661-667(d).
Lee, T.L, Peet, R.K., Roberts, S.D., and Wentworth, T.R. 2006. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording
Vegetation, Version 4.2. http://cvs.bio.unc.edu/protocol/cvs-eep-protocol-v4.2-lev1-2.pdf.
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (as amended Section 106). 16 USC 470. 36 CFR 800, 23
CFR 771, 36 CFR 60, 36 CFR 63.
NCDENR. 2010. “N.C. Wetland Assessment Method User Manual Version 4.1.” N.C. Wetland
Functional Assessment Team.
NCDWQ (North Carolina Division of Water Quality). 2011. A Guide to Surface Freshwater
Classifications in North Carolina. Raleigh. http://portal.ncdenr.org/c/document_library/
get_file?p_l_id=1169848&folderId=2209568&name=DLFE-35732.pdf; accessed January 2018.
NCDWQ. (North Carolina Division of Water Quality). 2010. Methodology for Identification of
Intermittent and Perennial Streams and Their Origins. Version 4.11. Raleigh.
NC Environmental Management Commission. 2014. Rule 15A NCAC 02B.0295 - Mitigation Program
Requirements for the Protection and Maintenance of Riparian Buffers.
NCNHP (North Carolina Natural Heritage Program). 2019. Natural Heritage Element Occurrences. June
2019.
Schafale, M.P. 2012. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina, Fourth
Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation,
NCDENR, Raleigh, NC.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual: Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region (Version 2.0), ed. J. S.
Wakeley, R. W. Lichvar, and C. V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-10-20. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army
Engineer Research and Development Center.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) - Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS).
1994. Soil Survey of Johnston County, North Carolina.
USDA-NRCS. 2014. Web Soil Survey GIS Data
.http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm; accessed March 2020.
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project Buffer Mitigation Plan
DMS Project #: 100094 19 July 2020
USFWS (United States Fish and Wildlife Service). 2015. Information, Planning, and Conservation
(IPAC) Online Screening Tool. https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/; accessed June 2019.

Figures
0 52.5
Miles
Figure 1 - Service Area
Strawberry HillMitigation Project
Johnston County, North Carolina
Legend
Proposed Easement
Neuse River Basin - 03020201
©Date: 6/24/2020
Drawn by: MDD
Checked by: JRM
Document Path: R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\MXD\5_BPDP\Figure 1 - Service Area.mxd1 inch = 5 miles
Strawberry HillMitigation Project
T
TTTTTTTTTTTTT T T
TTTTTTTTPFO4A
PUBHx
PUBHx
PUBHx
PUBHx
PUBHx
PUBHx
PUBHh
WA
WB
WC
WD
JH1-B
JH2
JH5JH1-A
JH3JH4
Crop Field
0 500250
Feet
Figure 2 - Existing Conditions
Strawberry HillMitigation Project
Johnston County, North Carolina
Legend
Proposed Easement
Existing Wetland
NWI Wetlands (USFWS 10/09/2019)
FEMA Zone AE (None)
Existing Intermittent Stream
Existing Ditch
Existing Swale
Utilities
T T Overhead Power Line
Sewer Line
Water Line
©Date: 7/23/2020
Drawn by: MDD
Checked by: JRM
Document Path: R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\MXD\5_BPDP\Figure 2 - Existing Conditions.mxd1 inch = 500 feet
Existing CulvertCrossing
c cExisting CulvertCrossing
Fire HydrantFire Hydrant
Existing Pond
Existing Pond
cccccExposedIrrigation Pipe(Abandoned)
Underground Telephone LineAlong DOT Right-of-Way
Clear-cutRegenerating Forest(Fair Growth)
Clear-cutRegenerating Forest(Fair Growth)
Clear-cutRegenerating Forest(Poor Growth)
Crop Field
Crop Field
Crop FieldCrop Field
Crop Field
Mature Forest
Building Structures
Yard Swale
0 1,000500
Feet
Figure 3 - Project Vicinity
Strawberry HillMitigation Project
Johnston County, North Carolina
Legend
Proposed Easement
©Date: 6/16/2020
Drawn by: MDD
Checked by: JRM
Document Path: R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\MXD\5_BPDP\Figure 3 - Project Vicinity.mxd1 inch = 1,000 feet
JH1-B
JH1-A
JH5JH4JH3
JH2
0 500250
Feet
Figure 4 - Buffer Mitigation Conceptual
Strawberry HillMitigation Project
Johnston County, North Carolina
Legend
Proposed Easement (22.12 ac.)
Proposed Top of Bank
Riparian Buffer Mitigation Approach
Restoration, 0-100'
Restoration, 101-200'
Restoration (Ditch), 0-50'
Preservation, 0-100'
Preservation, 101-200'
©Date: 6/24/2020
Drawn by: MDD
Checked by: JRM
Document Path: R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\MXD\5_BPDP\Figure 4 - Conceptual.mxd1 inch = 500 feet
Replace Culvert &Crossing
c cRemove Culverts
cccccRemove AbandonedIrrigation Pipe
Demolish Buildings
Debris, such as brick and concrete piles, scattered throughout the Project area, will be removed and disposed of off-site. See Appendix B, S1-S9 for locations of these areas and more detail regarding removal activities.
0 2,0001,000
Feet
Figure 5 - USGSFour Oaks NE (1997)
Strawberry HillMitigation Project
Johnston County, North Carolina
Legend
Proposed Easement
Drainage Area
©Date: 6/11/2020
Drawn by: SCF
Checked by: JRM
Document Path: R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\MXD\5_BPDP\Figure 5 - USGS.mxd1 inch = 2,000 feet
JH1-B266 AC JH1-A193 AC
JH5117 AC
JH2 (Ditch)69 AC
JH4 (Ditch)20 AC
JH3 (Ditch)71 AC
Ra
Ra
NoA
GoA
Ly
Ra
GoA
Ly
LyGoA
GoA
Ly
Ly
NoA
GoA
GoA
GoA
CoB
NoA
NoA
CoB
GoA
GoA
GoA GoA
NoA
GoA
GoA
CoBUcC
Ly
0 500250
Feet
Figure 6 - Mapped Soils
Strawberry HillMitigation Project
Johnston County, North Carolina
Legend
Proposed Easement
Soils Symbology
Hydric (100%)
Predominantly Hydric (66-99%)
Predominantly Hydric (33-65%)
Predominantly Nonhydric (1-32%)
Nonhydric (0%)
©Date: 6/15/2020
Drawn by: SCF
Checked by: JRM
Document Path: R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\MXD\5_BPDP\Figure 6 - Mapped Soils.mxd1 inch = 500 feet
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit NameCoBCowarts loamy sand, 2% to 6% sl opesGoAGoldsboro sandy l oam, 0% to 2% slopesLyLynchburg sandy l oam, 0% to 2% slopesRaRains sandy loam, 0% to 2% sl ope s
JH1-B
JH1-A
JH4JH3 JH2
JH50 500250
Feet
Figure 7 - Buffer Monitoring Plan
Strawberry HillMitigation Project
Johnston County, North Carolina
Legend
Proposed Easement (22.12 ac)
Proposed Top of Bank
Planting Area
Fixed Vegetation Plots
Stream and Buffer
Buffer Only
Riparian Buffer Mitigation Appr oa ch
Restoration, 0-100'
Restoration, 101-200'
Restoration (Ditch), 0-50'
Preservation, 0-100'
Preservation, 101-200'
©Date: 6/24/2020
Drawn by: MDD
Checked by: JRM
Document Path: R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\MXD\5_BPDP\Figure 7 - Monitoring.mxd1 inch = 500 feet

Appendix A1

Buffer Credit Calculation

Table 1. [Strawberry Hill], [DMS# 100094], Project CreditsProject AreaN Credit Conversion Ratio (ft2/pound)P Credit Conversion Ratio (ft2/pound)Credit Type LocationSubject? (enter NO if ephemeral or ditch 1)Feature Type Mitigation ActivityMin‐Max Buffer Width (ft)Feature NameTotal Area (ft2)Total (Creditable) Area of Buffer Mitigation (ft2)Initial Credit Ratio (x:1)% Full Credit Final Credit Ratio (x:1)  Convertible to Riparian Buffer?  Riparian Buffer Credits  Convertible to Nutrient Offset?  Delivered Nutrient Offset: N (lbs)  Delivered Nutrient Offset: P (lbs) Buffer Rural No Ditch Restoration 0‐50 JH2, JH3, JH4 146,626 146,626 1 100% 1.00000 N/A 146,626.000 N/A 7,651.141 —Buffer Rural Yes I / P Restoration 0‐100 JH1, JH5 496,540 496,540 1 100% 1.00000 N/A 496,540.000 N/A 25,910.121 —Buffer Rural Yes I / P Restoration 101‐200 JH1, JH5 16,097 16,097 1 33% 3.03030 N/A 5,312.015 N/A 839.963 —————————————————————————————————————————————————Totals:659,263 659,263Enter Preservation Credits BelowEligible for Preservation (ft2):219,754Credit Type Location Subject? Feature Type Mitigation ActivityMin‐Max Buffer Width (ft)Feature Name Total Area (sf) Total (Creditable) Area for Buffer Mitigation (ft2)Initial Credit Ratio (x:1)% Full Credit Final Credit Ratio (x:1)  Riparian Buffer Credits BufferRural Yes I / P0‐100 JH1, JH5 80,893 80,893 10 100% 10.00000 8,089.300BufferRural Yes I / P 101‐200 JH1, JH5 792 792 10 33% 30.30303 26.136Buffer—Buffer—Buffer—Buffer Preservation—Buffer—Buffer—Buffer—Buffer—Buffer—Preservation Area Subtotal (ft2):81,685Preservation as % Total Area of Buffer Mitigation:9.3%Ephemeral Reaches as % Total Area of Buffer Mitigation:0.0%Square Feet Credits659,263 648,478.0150 0.00081,685 8,115.4360 740948740,948 656,593.451659263Square Feet CreditsNitrogen:0.0001.  The Randleman Lake buffer rules allow some ditches to be classified as subject according to 15A NCAC 02B .0250 (5)(a).Phosphorus:0.000last updated 01/17/2020Neuse 03020201 ‐ Outside Falls Lake19.16394N/ARestoration:Enhancement:Mitigation Totals0TOTAL AREA OF BUFFER MITIGATION (TABM)TOTAL NUTRIENT OFFSET MITIGATIONMitigation TotalsNutrient Offset:Preservation:Total Riparian Buffer:

Appendix A2

Buffer Viability

ROY COOPER
Governor
MICHAEL S. REGAN
Secretary
LINDA CULPEPPER
Director
Jamey McEachran
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
(via electronic mail: [e-mail])
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
April 30, 2019
DWR# 2019-0159
Johnston County
Re: Site Viability for Buffer Mitigation & Nutrient Offset — Strawberry Hill Site
Located near 3105 Brogden Rd, Smithfield
Neuse 03020201
Dear Ms. McEachran,
On February 25, 2019, Katie Merritt, with the Division of Water Resources (DWR), received a
request from Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC (RES) for an onsite mitigation determination
near the above -referenced site (Site). The Site is located within the Neuse River Basin in the 8-digit
Hydrologic Unit Code 03020201. The Site is being proposed as part of a full -delivery nutrient offset,
stream and riparian buffer mitigation project for the Division of Mitigation Services (RFP #16-
007576). Staff from the Division of Mitigation Services were also present onsite. At your request,
on February 27, 2019, Ms. Merritt performed an onsite assessment of riparian land uses adjacent to
streams and ditches onsite, which are shown on the attached map labeled "Figure 3-Existing
Conditions". Additionally, on March 18, 2019, RES provided ditch parameters showing the channel
depths per Ms. Merritt's request. This information is included with this letter.
Ms. Merritt's evaluation of the features onsite and their associated mitigation determination for the
riparian areas are provided in the table below. This evaluation was made from Top of Bank (TOB)
and landward 200' from each feature for buffer mitigation pursuant to 15A NCAC 02B .0295
(effective November 1, 2015) and for nutrient offset credits pursuant to 15A NCAC 02B .0240.
Feature
Classification
'Subject
Riparian Land uses
Buffer
Credit
2Nutrient
Offset
6Mitigation Type Determination
onsite
to
adjacent to Feature
w/in riparian areas
Buffer
0-200'
Viable
Viable at
2,273.02
Rule
lbs-N per
acre
JH 1 A
Stream
Yes
Mostly non -forested
3Yes
Yes (non-
Fields - Restoration Site per 15A
agriculture fields with areas of
forested
NCAC 02B .0295 (n)
mature forest along the left
fields only)
Forested Areas - Preservation Site
bank
per 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(5)
E Q , North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources
_ 512 North Salisbury Street 11617 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
NORTH CARQL�
°+_1­11'6�1+ 11 � 919.707.9000

Strawberry Hill Site
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC.
April 30, 2019
Feature
Classification
'Subject
Riparian Land uses
Buffer
2Nutrient
6Mitigation Type Determination
onsite
adjacent to Feature
w/in riparian areas
to
Credit
Offset
Buffer
0-200'
Viable
Viable at
Rule
2,273.02
Ibs-N per
acre
JH I B
Stream
Yes
Left Bank - Mostly non-
3Yes
Yes (non-
Fields - Restoration Site per 15A
forested agriculture fields w/
forested ag
NCAC 02B .0295 (n)
timbered areas downstream
fields only)
(near road)
Timbered Neuse Buffer (Zone 1 &
Right Bank - combination of
Zone 2)- no credit
timbered disturbed forest and
cleared areas not in
Timbered & Cleared areas (beyond
agriculture.
the Neuse Buffer) - Restoration
Neuse riparian buffers shown
Site per 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (n)
in Figure 3 were impacted
from timbering between 2014-
Timbered & Regenerated forest
2016 in violation of the Neuse
(beyond the Neuse Buffer) -
Buffer rules. Therefore, no
Preservation Site per 15A NCAC
buffer credit can be generated
02B .0295 (o)(5)
within Zone I or Zone 2 of
the Neuse riparian buffer that
was timbered.
JH2
Ditch
No
Mostly non -forested
*see note
Yes
Fields - Restoration Site per 15A
agriculture fields with a pond
(non-
NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(8)
located on the left side. Area
forested ag
beyond pond is forested
fields only &
Forested Areas - no credit
excluding
the pond
*Buffer Mitigation Note -
footprint)
Assessment concludes the ditch
meets 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(8)
(A, B, C, D & E). More information on
the watershed is required to be
provided in a mitigation plan for
complete assessment. See rule.
Areas of impeded flow from
collapsed or compromised culverts
must be restored.
P
Irrigation
No
Combination of grass and
*see note
No
*Buffer Mitigation Note - If pond is
pond planned
mature forest around pond
drained, backfilled and planted, it can
to be drained,
perimeter. Not in agriculture
become a restored riparian area along
backfilled &
JH2 and this area will be viable for
planted
Restoration per 15A NCAC 02B
.0295 (o)(8)
Feature
Classification
'Subject
Riparian Land uses
Buffer
2Nutrient
6Mitigation Type Determination
onsite
adjacent to Feature
w/in riparian areas
to
Credit
Offset
0-200'
Buffer
Viable
Viable at
Rule
2,273.02
Ibs-N per
acre
Page 2 of 5

Strawberry Hill Site
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC.
April 30, 2019
JH3
Ditch
No
non -forested agriculture fields
Yes
Yes (non-
Fields - Restoration Site per 15A
(Starts at Rd
forested ag
NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(8)
and ends at
fields only))
JH5 DWR
*Buffer Mitigation Note -
flag)
Assessment concludes the ditch
meets 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(8)
(A, B, C, D & E). More information on
the watershed is required to be
provided in a mitigation plan for
complete assessment. See rule.
Culvert is partially compromised and
needs to be replaced or removed.
Irrigation piping observed parallel to
channel & needs to be removed
JH5
Stream
Yes
Left Bank - Ag field
'Yes
Yes (non-
Fields - Restoration Site per 15A
From DWR
Right Bank - mostly non-
forested ag
NCAC 02B .0295 (n)
flag-
forested agriculture with some
fields only)
Easement
areas timbered & regenerated
Timbered Neuse Buffer (Zone 1 &
boundary
forest not in agriculture.
Zone 2)- no credit
(see map)
Neuse riparian buffers shown
in Figure 3 were impacted
Timbered & Regenerated forest
from timbering between 2014-
(beyond the Neuse Buffer) -
2016 in violation of the Neuse
Preservation Site per 15A NCAC
Buffer rules. Therefore, no
02B .0295 (o)(5)
buffer credit can be generated
within Zone 1 or Zone 2 of
the Neuse riparian buffer that
was timbered.
JH4
Ditch
No
Non -forested agriculture
*see note
Yes
Fields - Restoration Site per 15A
fields
NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(8)
*Buffer Mitigation Note -
Assessment concludes the ditch
meets 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(8)
(A, B, C, D & E). More information on
the watershed is required to be
provided in a mitigation plan for
complete assessment. See rule.
A
Ditch
No
Non -forested agriculture
N/A
N/A
N/A
fields
Located outside of proposed
easement boundary and not assessed
Page 3 of 5

Strawberry Hill Site
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC.
April 30, 2019
This viability assessment will expire on April 30, 2021 or upon the submittal of an As -Built Report to
the DWR, whichever comes first.
Please contact Katie Merritt at [phone] if you have any questions regarding this
correspondence.
Sincerely,
Ci
Karen Higgins, Supervisor
401 and Buffer Permitting Branch
KAH/km
Attachments: Figure 3-Existing Conditions Map, Ditch Parameters Figure
cc: File Copy (Katie Merritt)
Jeff Schaffer- DMS ( via electronic mail)
Page 5 of 5

p • �,A.W 1+44mA Duos p
�e�rtsK�Kiin
FA
T00
rat
71,
Proposed Easement
�t
i
AWM�Figure 3 - Existing Conditions Date: 2/22/2019
Strawberry Hill Drawn by: MDE
Mitigation Project Checked by JRM
Johnston County, North Carolina 1 inch= 500 Feet
fires

` s
` It
Y y
- y
JH4
DA=18.9ac
Restored Buffer = 0.7 ac _ ;�— �" " •'
Restored Buffer Area/DA = 3.70%�—�
j
JH2/JH3
DA = 72.2 ac
Restored Buffer = 3.3 ac �,-,+AL.ALI.�°"
Restored Buffer Area/DA = 4.6%'
'-
Measured Average
L fiend Ditch Reach Channel Depth Channel Depth
Proposed Easement (21.81 ac +/-) (ft.) (ft.)
2.4
® Drainage Area
y 1.8
Buffer Mitigation 2.5
- -- Restoration 0-100 JH2 2.6 2.5
Preservation 0-100 2.8
2.9
Stream Mitigation 3
Restoration
JH3 2.9
2.95
Enhancement II JH4 2.8 2.7
2.
Buffer Viability Date 3/18/2019
w E Requested Ditch Parameters
,tj� Drawn by: MDD res
0 250 s500 Strawber��Checked by: BPB Hill Miti ation Site Feet
Johnston County, North Carolina 1 inch=500 feet

Appendix B

Plan Sheets

OHEOHE
OHE
OHEOHE BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
BB
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB BB BB
BBBBBBTB
TBTBTBTB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB
TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB
TB
TBTBTBTBTBTB TB TB
TBTBTBTB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB
TB
TBTBTB TBTBTBTBTBTBBBBBBB
TB
TBOHEOHE SSSSSS1S2S3S4S5S6S7S9S8PROJECT LOCATIONDMS PROJECT #:CONTRACT #:USACE ACTION ID #:RFP #:DWR #:1000947745SAW-2020-0033216-00757620190159SITE MAPNTSPROJECT TOPOGRAPHY AND EXISTING CONDITIONSPLANIMETRICS SURVEY WAS PROVIDED BY WSP USA,INC. (NC FIRM LICENSE NUMBER F-0891,CHRISTOPHER A. MELKE, NC PLS L-5021), DATEDMARCH 18, 2020DESIGNED BY:RESOURCE ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, LLC3600 GLENWOOD AVE., SUITE 100RALEIGH, NC 27612DESIGNED FOR:JEREMIAH DOWNC DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITYDIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES217 WEST JONES ST., SUITE 3000ARALEIGH, NC 27603SURVEYED BY:WSP USA, INC.128 TALBERT ROADSUITE AMOORESVILLE, NC 28117Know what'sbelow.before you digCallNOTICE TO CONTRACTORPRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, DIGGING, OR EXCAVATION THECONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR LOCATING ALL UNDERGROUNDUTILITIES (PUBLIC OR PRIVATE) THAT MAY EXIST AND CROSS THROUGHTHE AREA(S) OF CONSTRUCTION, WHETHER INDICATED ON THE PLANSOR NOT. CALL "811" A MINIMUM OF 72 HOURS PRIOR TO DIGGING OREXCAVATING. REPAIRS TO ANY UTILITY DAMAGED RESULTING FROMCONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THECONTRACTOR.FILE NAME:R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\CAD\DWG\0674_SHT_COVER.dwg SAVED BY: Sfasking
SHEET NUMBER:REVISIONS:
RELEASED FOR:
PLOT DATE:PROJECT NUMBER:PROJECT MANAGER:DESIGNED:DRAWN:CHECKED:SEAL3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100Raleigh, NC 27612Main: 919.829.9909www.res.usRESOURCE ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, LLC3600 GLENWOOD AVE, SUITE 100RALEIGH, NC 27612VICINITY MAPNTSEngineering Services Provided By:Angler Environmental LLCLicense: F-1428STRAWBERRY HILL MITIGATION SITEJOHNSTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINANEUSE RIVER BASIN: HUC 03020201JUNE 20202/18/2020
PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION----0674JRMBRCSCFAFMSheet List TableSheet NumberSheet Title--COVERA1OVERALL AERIAL VIEWE1GENERAL NOTES &LEGENDE2EXISTING CONDITIONSS1REACH JH1S2REACH JH1S3REACH JH1S4REACH JH1S5REACH JH1S6REACH JH1S7REACH JH1S8REACH JH2S9REACH JH3-5M1MAINTENANCE PLANM2MAINTENANCE PLANP1PLANTING PLAND1DETAILSD2DETAILSD3DETAILSD4DETAILSPROJECT DIRECTORYREACH JH1-BREACH JH1-AREACH JH5DITCH JH4DITCH JH3DITCH JH2FOR NCDEQ DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
OHEOHEOHE
OHE
OHE
OHE OHEOHEOHEOHE BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB BB
BB
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
BBBB
BBBBBBBBBBBBBB BB BB BB
BBBBBBBBBBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB TB TB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB
TB
TB
TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB TB TB TB
TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB
TB
TB
TB
TBTBTBTB
TB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB TBBBBBBBBBBB
TB
TBOHEOHEOHEOHE SSSSSSSSTBTBLCELCELCELCELCELCE
LCELCE LCE
LCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCE LCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCE
150300150REACH JH1-B0FULL SCALE: 1"= 2" = FULL SCALE1" = HALF SCALEFILE NAME:R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\CAD\DWG\0674_SHT_ESC.dwg SAVED BY: Sfasking
DRAWING TITLE:
PROJECT NAME:SHEET NUMBER:REVISIONS:
RELEASED FOR:
PLOT DATE:PROJECT NUMBER:PROJECT MANAGER:DESIGNED:DRAWN:CHECKED:SEAL3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100Raleigh, NC 27612Main: 919.829.9909www.res.usEngineering Services Provided By:Angler Environmental, LLCLicense: F-1428AFMSCFBRCJRM0674A1PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
STRAWBERRY HILL MITIGATION SITE
OVERALL AERIAL VIEW
JOHNSTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
7/22/2020REACH JH5DITCH JH4DITCH JH2DITCH JH3REACH JH1-A
LEGENDTBTBBBBBOHEEXISTING TREELINELCELIMITS OF PROPOSEDCONSERVATION EASEMENT5050EXISTING OVERHEAD ELECTRIC UTILITY LINEPROPOSED TOP OF BANKEXISTING FENCELINEEXISTING BOTTOM OF BANKEXISTING TOP OF BANKPROPOSED CONTOUR MINORPROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOREXISTING CONTOUR MINOREXISTING CONTOUR MAJOREXISTING WETLANDPROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG(SEE DETAIL D2)LOG SILL(SEE DETAIL D3)LOG STRUCTURE(PROFILE)PROPERTY LINEPROPOSED CENTERLINE OF CHANNELEXISTING TREEEXISTING STREAMTBTBBBBBBRUSH TOE(SEE DETAIL D3)WOODY RIFFLE(SEE DETAIL D4)BRUSH BED SILL(SEE DETAIL D4)FILE NAME:R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\CAD\DWG\0674_SHT_SITE.dwg SAVED BY: Sfasking
DRAWING TITLE:
PROJECT NAME:SHEET NUMBER:REVISIONS:
RELEASED FOR:
PLOT DATE:PROJECT NUMBER:PROJECT MANAGER:DESIGNED:DRAWN:CHECKED:SEAL302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110Raleigh, NC 27605Main: 919.829.9909www.res.usEngineering Services Provided By:Angler Environmental, LLCLicense: F-1428JOHNSTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
GENERAL NOTES & LEGEND
STRAWBERRY HILL MITIGATION SITE
7/22/2020
PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONE10674JRMBRCSCFAFM STREAM CONSTRUCTION NOTES:1.REMOVE AND STOCKPILE TOPSOIL WITHIN AREAS THAT ARE TO BE CUT 9" OR MORE BELOW EXISTINGGRADE. STOCKPILED TOPSOIL IS TO BE PLACED ALONG THE FLOODPLAIN BENCHES.2.STRUCTURES ARE TO BE INSTALLED IN LOCATIONS SHOWN ON PLAN SHEETS (AS INDICATED ON THESTRUCTURE TABLES) USING METHODS DESCRIBED IN THE DETAIL SHEETS. PRIOR TO FINE GRADING,OBTAIN APPROVAL OF THE ENGINEER ON INSTALLATION OF STRUCTURES.WEXISTING WATER LINESEXISTING SEWER LINEHAY BALE TOE(SEE DETAIL D3)STREAM CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE:1.CONDUCT PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING INCLUDING OWNER, ENGINEER, ASSOCIATED CONTRACTORS,AND OTHER AFFECTED PARTIES.2.EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL (E&SC) PERMIT AND A CERTIFICATE OF COVERAGE (COC) MUST BEOBTAINED BEFORE ANY LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITIES OCCUR. THE COC CAN BE OBTAINED BY FILLINGOUT THE ELECTRONIC NOTICE OF INTENT (e-NOI) FOR AT DEQ.NC.GOV/NCG01. PLEASE NOTE, THEe-NOI FORM MAY ONLY BE FILLED OUT ONCE THE PLANS HAVE BEEN APPROVED. A COPY OF THE E&SCPERMIT, THE COC, AND A HARD COPY OF THE PLAN MUST BE KEPT ON SITE, PREFERABLY IN A PERMITSBOX, AND ACCESSIBLE DURING INSPECTION.3.CONTRACTOR IS FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING ALL APPROPRIATE PARTIES AND ASSURINGTHAT UTILITIES ARE LOCATED PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION. CALL NC 811 FORUTILITY LOCATING SERVICES 48 HOURS PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORK. CONTRACTORSHALL VERIFY LOCATION AND DEPTH OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.4.PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, STABILIZED GRAVEL ENTRANCE/EXIT AND ROUTES OF INGRESS AND EGRESSSHALL BE ESTABLISHED AS SHOWN ON THE PLANS AND DETAILS.5.PRIOR TO ANY LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITIES, INSTALL SILT FENCING AND ANY ASSOCIATED EROSIONARRESTING DEVICES (CHECK DAMS, WATTLES, DIVERSION DIKES, ETC.) AS SHOWN ON THE PLANS ANDDETAILS.6.INSTALL TEMPORARY STREAM CROSSINGS AS SHOWN ON PLANS. TEMPORARY STREAM CROSSINGSSHOULD ONLY BE INSTALLED WHEN NECESSARY.7.PREPARE STAGING AND STOCKPILING AREAS IN LOCATIONS AS SHOWN ON THE CONSTRUCTION PLANSOR AS APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER. ANY EXCESS SPOIL FROM STREAM CONSTRUCTION SHALL BEUSED TO CONSTRUCT CHANNEL PLUGS AS SHOWN ON PLANS.8.CONTRACTOR TO PERFORM SOIL TESTING TO DETERMINE VEGETATIVE VIABILITY PRIOR TO LANDDISTURBANCE.9.ALL PROPOSED CHANNELS AND TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT CROSSINGS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED INA DRY CONDITION VIA OFFLINE CONSTRUCTION WHERE POSSIBLE. PUMP AROUND OPERATIONSSHOULD BE LIMITED TO AREAS WHERE THE EXISTING AND PROPOSED CHANNEL ALIGNMENTS OVERLAP.10.INSTALL PUMP AROUND APPARATUS AND IMPERVIOUS DIKES AT UPSTREAM END OF PROJECT. ASCONSTRUCTION PROGRESSES, MOVE PUMP AROUND OPERATION DOWNSTREAM.11.CONSTRUCT UPSTREAM PORTION OF THE CHANNEL FIRST, WORKING IN AN UPSTREAM TODOWNSTREAM DIRECTION UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER.12.ROUGH GRADING OF CHANNEL SHALL BE PERFORMED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF STRUCTURES.13.INSTALL STRUCTURES AS SHOWN ON PLANS AND DETAILS. PRIOR TO FINE GRADING, OBTAINAPPROVAL OF THE ENGINEER ON INSTALLATION OF STRUCTURES.14.UPON COMPLETION OF FINE GRADING, INSTALL STREAM BANK STABILIZATION INCLUDING, EROSIONCONTROL MATTING OR SOD MATS ALONG CHANNEL BANKS.15.FILL AND STABILIZE ABANDONED SEGMENTS OF THE EXISTING CHANNEL PER DIRECTION OF THEENGINEER.16.ALL IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND PUMPING APPARATUS SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE STREAM AT THE ENDOF EACH DAY TO RESTORE NORMAL FLOW BACK TO THE CHANNEL UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED BYTHE ENGINEER. WITH APPROVAL, A PUMP AROUND MAY BE ALLOWED TO RUN CONTINUOUSLY IF THEREIS NO FORECAST FOR RAIN OVERNIGHT, AND/OR THE PUMP APPARATUS IS MAINTAINED ANDMONITORED CONTINUOUSLY.17.DURING STREAM CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES, THE WORK AREA SHALL BE STABILIZED IMMEDIATELYAFTER GRADING AND AT THE END OF EACH WORKING DAY.18.INSTALL LIVE STAKE, BARE ROOT, AND CONTAINERIZED PLANTINGS AS SPECIFIED ON PLANTING PLANS.19.WHEN THE PROJECT IS COMPLETE, THE PERMITTEE SHALL CONTACT DEMLR TO CLOSE OUT THE E&SCPLAN. AFTER DEMLR INFORMS THE PERMITTEE OF THE PROJECT CLOSE OUT, VIA INSPECTION REPORT,THE PERMITTEE SHALL VISIT DEQ.NC.GOV/NCG01 TO SUBMIT AN ELECTRONIC NOTICE OF TERMINATION(e-NOT). A $100 ANNUAL GENERAL PERMIT FEE WILL BE CHARGED UNTIL THE e-NOT HAS BEEN FILLEDOUT.
OHEOHEOHE
OHE
OHE
OHE OHEOHEOHEOHE BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB BB
BB
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
BBBB
BBBBBBBBBBBBBB BB BB BB
BBBBBBBBBBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB TBTB TB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB
TB
TB
TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB TB TB TB
TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB
TB
TB
TB
TBTBTBTB
TB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB TBBBBBBBBBBB
TB
TBWWWWWWWWWWW
W
OHEOHEOHEOHE SSSSSSSSTBTBLCELCELCELCELCELCE
LCELCE LCE
LCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCE LCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCE
150300150REACH JH1-B0FULL SCALE: 1"= 2" = FULL SCALE1" = HALF SCALEFILE NAME:R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\CAD\DWG\0674_SHT_SITE.dwg SAVED BY: Sfasking
DRAWING TITLE:
PROJECT NAME:SHEET NUMBER:REVISIONS:
RELEASED FOR:
PLOT DATE:PROJECT NUMBER:PROJECT MANAGER:DESIGNED:DRAWN:CHECKED:SEAL302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110Raleigh, NC 27605Main: 919.829.9909www.res.usEngineering Services Provided By:Angler Environmental, LLCLicense: F-1428AFMSCFBRCJRM0674E2PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
STRAWBERRY HILL MITIGATION SITE
EXISTING CONDITIONS
JOHNSTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
7/22/2020REACH JH5DITCH JH4DITCH JH2DITCH JH3WETLAND WAWETLAND WBWETLAND WCWETLAND WDREACH JH1-A
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB BB BB BB BB BB BB BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB TB TB TB TB TB TB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB TB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB1400+000+501+001+502+002+503+003+504+004+505+005+506+006+
5
0S1.1S2.1S1.3S1.4S1.2MATCH LI
N
E

6
+
0
0
S2SCALE: HOR 1"=30'; VERT 1"=3'1301351401451501301351401451500+000+501+001+502+002+503+003+504+004+505+005+506+00-0.10%S1.1S1.4S1.2S1.3S1.4S1.3S1.2S1.2(STA 1+57)LIMITS OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT306030REACH JH1-ARESTORATIONSTA 1+57 TO 11+64EXISTING GRADEALONG STREAMCENTERLINEPROPOSEDCHANNEL BEDPROPOSED TOPOF BANKTIE REACH JH1 INTOEXISTING BEDEXISTING TOPOF BANKTYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS SECTION℄℄TYPICAL RIFFLE CROSS SECTION℄TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS SECTION3.3'1.5'9.6'1.4'6.2'1.5'12.0'2.2'2.2'1.5'6.2'12.0'BANKFULL STAGEBANKFULL STAGEBANKFULL STAGEREACH JH1 STA 1+57 TO STA 40+744.3'4.3'0FULL SCALE: 1"= 2" = FULL SCALE1" = HALF SCALEFILE NAME:R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\CAD\DWG\0674_SHT_JH1.dwg SAVED BY: Sfasking
DRAWING TITLE:
PROJECT NAME:SHEET NUMBER:REVISIONS:
RELEASED FOR:
PLOT DATE:PROJECT NUMBER:PROJECT MANAGER:DESIGNED:DRAWN:CHECKED:SEAL3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100Raleigh, NC 27612Main: 919.829.9909www.res.usEngineering Services Provided By:Angler Environmental, LLCLicense: F-1428AFMSCFBRCJRM0674S1PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
7/22/2020
STRAWBERRY HILL MITIGATION SITE
REACH JH1
JOHNSTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA EXISTING CHANNEL TO BEABANDONED AND BACKFILLEDSEE DETAIL D2EXISTING CHANNEL TO BEABANDONED AND BACKFILLEDSEE DETAIL D2TIE EXISTING DITCHTO REACH JH1-A
OHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHE36" RCPW. INV: 135.82'E. INV: 135.85'30" RCPW. INV: 138.09'E. INV: 138.04'BBBBBBBBBB BB
BB
BB
BB
BB BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
BB
BB
BB
BB BB BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB
TB TB
TB
TB
TB
TB
TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB
TB
TB
TB
TB TB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB
TB
TB
TB
TB
TB
TB24" RCPN. INV: 138.23'S. INV: 137.55'TB
TB
TB
TBTBTBTBTBTB
SSS1401391395+005+506+006+507+007+508+008+509+009+5010+0010+5011+0011+5012+0012+5013+00S2.1S1.4S2.2S2.3S2.5S2.4S1MATCH LINE 6+00
MATCH LINE 11+50
S3SCALE: HOR 1"=30'; VERT 1"=3'1301351401451501301351401451506+006+507+007+508+008+509+009+5010+0010+5011+0011+50S2.1S2.5S2.3S2.2S2.4-0.10%S2.4306030EXISTING GRADEALONG STREAMCENTERLINEPROPOSEDCHANNEL BEDPROPOSED TOPOF BANKTYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS SECTION℄℄TYPICAL RIFFLE CROSS SECTION℄TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS SECTION3.3'1.5'9.6'1.4'6.2'1.5'12.0'2.2'2.2'1.5'6.2'12.0'BANKFULL STAGEBANKFULL STAGEBANKFULL STAGEREACH JH1 STA 1+57 TO STA 40+744.3'4.3'0FULL SCALE: 1"= 2" = FULL SCALE1" = HALF SCALEFILE NAME:R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\CAD\DWG\0674_SHT_JH1.dwg SAVED BY: Sfasking
DRAWING TITLE:
PROJECT NAME:SHEET NUMBER:REVISIONS:
RELEASED FOR:
PLOT DATE:PROJECT NUMBER:PROJECT MANAGER:DESIGNED:DRAWN:CHECKED:SEAL3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100Raleigh, NC 27612Main: 919.829.9909www.res.usEngineering Services Provided By:Angler Environmental, LLCLicense: F-1428AFMSCFBRCJRM0674S2PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
7/22/2020
STRAWBERRY HILL MITIGATION SITE
REACH JH1
JOHNSTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA REACH JH1-ARESTORATIONSTA 1+57 TO 11+64EXISTING TOPOF BANKEXISTING CHANNEL TO BEABANDONED AND BACKFILLEDSEE DETAIL D2TIE REACH JH1 INTOEXISTING BED
OHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHE36" RCPW. INV: 135.82'E. INV: 135.85'30" RCPW. INV: 138.09'E. INV: 138.04'BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB BB BB BB BB BB BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB BB BB BB BB BBBBBBBBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB TBTBTBTBTB TBTBTBTBTB TB TB TB TB TB TB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB24" RCPN. INV: 138.23'S. INV: 137.55'TB TB TB TBTBTBTBTBSSS13914014014013913813813914214113913913811+0011+5012+0012+5013+00 13+5014+0014+5015+0015+5016+0016+5017+0017+5018+0018+5019+00S2.5S3.1S3.2S3.3S3.4S3.5S2MATCH LINE 11+50
MATCH LINE 18+00S4SCALE: HOR 1"=30'; VERT 1"=3'13013514014515013013514014515011+5012+0012+5013+0013+5014+0014+5015+0015+5016+0016+5017+0017+5018+00S3.5S3.1S3.4S3.3S3.2EX 36" RCPEX 30" RCP-0.10%(STA 11+64)(STA 12+59)CONSERVATIONEASEMENTBREAK306030EXISTING GRADEALONG STREAMCENTERLINEPROPOSEDCHANNEL BEDPROPOSED TOPOF BANKTYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS SECTION℄℄TYPICAL RIFFLE CROSS SECTION℄TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS SECTION3.3'1.5'9.6'1.4'6.2'1.5'12.0'2.2'2.2'1.5'6.2'12.0'BANKFULL STAGEBANKFULL STAGEBANKFULL STAGEREACH JH1 STA 1+57 TO STA 40+744.3'4.3'0FULL SCALE: 1"= 2" = FULL SCALE1" = HALF SCALEFILE NAME:R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\CAD\DWG\0674_SHT_JH1.dwg SAVED BY: Sfasking
DRAWING TITLE:
PROJECT NAME:SHEET NUMBER:REVISIONS:
RELEASED FOR:
PLOT DATE:PROJECT NUMBER:PROJECT MANAGER:DESIGNED:DRAWN:CHECKED:SEAL3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100Raleigh, NC 27612Main: 919.829.9909www.res.usEngineering Services Provided By:Angler Environmental, LLCLicense: F-1428AFMSCFBRCJRM0674S3PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
7/22/2020
STRAWBERRY HILL MITIGATION SITE
REACH JH1
JOHNSTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA REACH JH1-BRESTORATIONSTA 12+59 TO 23+13EXISTING TOPOF BANKEXISTING CHANNEL TO BEABANDONED AND BACKFILLEDSEE DETAIL D2TIE EXISTING YARDSWALE TO REACH JH1-BTIE REACH JH1 INTOEXISTING BED
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
TBTBTBTBTBTBTB
TB
TBT
B
TBTBTBTBTBTBTB TBTBTB TBTBTBTB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB30"
RCPW.

INV
:
135
.18
'E.

INV
:
135
.44
'14014013913813813914013913813813914113917+0017+5018+0018+5019+0019+5020+0020+5021+0021+5022+0022+
5
0
23+0023+5024+002
4
+
5
0
25+00S3.4S3.5S4.1S4.3S4.2S5.1S4.4S3MATCH LINE 18+00M
A
T
C
H

L
I
N
E

2
4
+
0
0
S
5SCALE: HOR 1"=30'; VERT 1"=3'13013514014515013013514014515018+0018+5019+0019+5020+0020+5021+0021+5022+0022+5023+0023+5024+00-0.10%S4.3S4.1S4.1S4.2S4.3PROPOSED2 @ 24" HDPES4.4S4.1S4.2S4.3(STA 23+13)
(STA 23+74)CONSERVATIONEASEMENTBREAK306030EXISTING GRADEALONG STREAMCENTERLINEPROPOSEDCHANNEL BEDPROPOSED TOPOF BANKTYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS SECTION℄℄TYPICAL RIFFLE CROSS SECTION℄TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS SECTION3.3'1.5'9.6'1.4'6.2'1.5'12.0'2.2'2.2'1.5'6.2'12.0'BANKFULL STAGEBANKFULL STAGEBANKFULL STAGEREACH JH1 STA 1+57 TO STA 40+744.3'4.3'0FULL SCALE: 1"= 2" = FULL SCALE1" = HALF SCALEFILE NAME:R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\CAD\DWG\0674_SHT_JH1.dwg SAVED BY: Sfasking
DRAWING TITLE:
PROJECT NAME:SHEET NUMBER:REVISIONS:
RELEASED FOR:
PLOT DATE:PROJECT NUMBER:PROJECT MANAGER:DESIGNED:DRAWN:CHECKED:SEAL3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100Raleigh, NC 27612Main: 919.829.9909www.res.usEngineering Services Provided By:Angler Environmental, LLCLicense: F-1428AFMSCFBRCJRM0674S4PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
7/22/2020
STRAWBERRY HILL MITIGATION SITE
REACH JH1
JOHNSTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA REACH JH1-BRESTORATIONSTA 12+59 TO 23+13EXISTING CHANNEL TO BEABANDONED AND BACKFILLEDSEE DETAIL D2EXISTING PIPE TO BEREMOVED ANDDISPOSED OF OFF-SITEPROPOSED 32 LFOF DBL 24" HDPEINV. IN = 135.41'INV. OUT = 135.35'(PIPES BURRIED 0.4')EXISTING TRASH TO BEREMOVED ANDDISPOSED OF OFF-SITE
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB BBBBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB TB12" RCPN. INV: 134.92'S. INV: 134.49'METAL PIPE30" RCPW. INV: 135.18'E. INV: 135.44'13713713723+0023+5024+0024+5025+0025+5026+0026+502
7+
0
0
27+5028+0028+5029+0029+5030+0030+5031+00S5.1S5.2S5.3S5.4S4.4S4MATCH LINE 24+00MATCH LINE 30+00S6SCALE: HOR 1"=30'; VERT 1"=3'13013514014515013013514014515024+0024+5025+0025+5026+0026+5027+0027+5028+0028+5029+0029+5030+00-0.10%S5.2S5.1S5.4S5.3S5.1S5.4306030EXISTING GRADEALONG STREAMCENTERLINEPROPOSEDCHANNEL BEDPROPOSED TOPOF BANKTYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS SECTION℄℄TYPICAL RIFFLE CROSS SECTION℄TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS SECTION3.3'1.5'9.6'1.4'6.2'1.5'12.0'2.2'2.2'1.5'6.2'12.0'BANKFULL STAGEBANKFULL STAGEBANKFULL STAGEREACH JH1 STA 1+57 TO STA 40+744.3'4.3'0FULL SCALE: 1"= 2" = FULL SCALE1" = HALF SCALEFILE NAME:R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\CAD\DWG\0674_SHT_JH1.dwg SAVED BY: Sfasking
DRAWING TITLE:
PROJECT NAME:SHEET NUMBER:REVISIONS:
RELEASED FOR:
PLOT DATE:PROJECT NUMBER:PROJECT MANAGER:DESIGNED:DRAWN:CHECKED:SEAL3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100Raleigh, NC 27612Main: 919.829.9909www.res.usEngineering Services Provided By:Angler Environmental, LLCLicense: F-1428AFMSCFBRCJRM0674S5PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
7/22/2020
STRAWBERRY HILL MITIGATION SITE
REACH JH1
JOHNSTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA REACH JH1-BRESTORATIONSTA 23+74 TO 40+32EXISTING CHANNEL TO BEABANDONED AND BACKFILLEDSEE DETAIL D2EXISTING PIPE TO BE REMOVED ANDDISPOSED OF OFF-SITE
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB
TB
TB TB TB TB
T
B
TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB12" RCPN. INV: 134.92'S. INV: 134.49'13713713729+0029+5030+0030+5031+0031+50 32+0032+5033+0033+5034+0034+5035+0035+
5
0
36+0036+50S5.3S5.4S6.1S6.3S6.4S6.5S7.1S6.2S5MATCH LINE 30+00
MATCH LINE 36+00
S7SCALE: HOR 1"=30'; VERT 1"=3'13013514014515013013514014515030+0030+5031+0031+5032+0032+5033+0033+5034+0034+5035+0035+5036+00S6.1S6.5S6.4S6.3S6.2-0.10%S6.2S6.3S6.4306030EXISTING CHANNEL TO BEABANDONED AND BACKFILLEDSEE DETAIL D2EXISTING GRADEALONG STREAMCENTERLINEPROPOSEDCHANNEL BEDPROPOSED TOPOF BANKTYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS SECTION℄℄TYPICAL RIFFLE CROSS SECTION℄TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS SECTION3.3'1.5'9.6'1.4'6.2'1.5'12.0'2.2'2.2'1.5'6.2'12.0'BANKFULL STAGEBANKFULL STAGEBANKFULL STAGEREACH JH1 STA 1+57 TO STA 40+744.3'4.3'0FULL SCALE: 1"= 2" = FULL SCALE1" = HALF SCALEFILE NAME:R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\CAD\DWG\0674_SHT_JH1.dwg SAVED BY: Sfasking
DRAWING TITLE:
PROJECT NAME:SHEET NUMBER:REVISIONS:
RELEASED FOR:
PLOT DATE:PROJECT NUMBER:PROJECT MANAGER:DESIGNED:DRAWN:CHECKED:SEAL3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100Raleigh, NC 27612Main: 919.829.9909www.res.usEngineering Services Provided By:Angler Environmental, LLCLicense: F-1428AFMSCFBRCJRM0674S6PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
7/22/2020
STRAWBERRY HILL MITIGATION SITE
REACH JH1
JOHNSTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA REACH JH1-BRESTORATIONSTA 23+74 TO 40+32
OHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHE
OHE OHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHE OHEOHE OHEOHEOHE
OHE
WARPED CMP3.4' WIDE, 2.45' HIGHN. INV: 132.78'S. INV: 132.22'15" RCPW. INV: 135.36'E. INV: 135.59'BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB BB BB BB BB BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB TB TB TB TB TB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB
TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB TBTBTBTB TB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB TBTBTB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB TB TB TB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB BB BB BB BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBSSSSSSSSSSBBBBBBTB TB
TBTBTBTB TBBBBBBB1351364
1+
0
634+0034+5035+0035+50 36+0036+5037+0037+5038+0038+5039+0039+5040+0040+504
1+
0
0S6.5S7.1S7.2S7.3S7.4S6MATCH LINE 36+00
SCALE: HOR 1"=30'; VERT 1"=3'13013514014515013013514014515036+0036+5037+0037+5038+0038+5039+0039+5040+0040+5041+0041+50-0.27%S7.2S7.4WARPED CMP3.4' W, 2.45' HS7.1S7.3S7.3(STA 40+32)
LIMITS OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT
306030EXISTING CHANNEL TO BEABANDONED AND BACKFILLEDSEE DETAIL D2EXISTING GRADEALONG STREAMCENTERLINEPROPOSEDCHANNEL BEDPROPOSED TOPOF BANKTIE REACH JH1 INTOEXISTING BEDTYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS SECTION℄℄TYPICAL RIFFLE CROSS SECTION℄TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS SECTION3.3'1.5'9.6'1.4'6.2'1.5'12.0'2.2'2.2'1.5'6.2'12.0'BANKFULL STAGEBANKFULL STAGEBANKFULL STAGEREACH JH1 STA 1+57 TO STA 40+744.3'4.3'0FULL SCALE: 1"= 2" = FULL SCALE1" = HALF SCALEFILE NAME:R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\CAD\DWG\0674_SHT_JH1.dwg SAVED BY: Sfasking
DRAWING TITLE:
PROJECT NAME:SHEET NUMBER:REVISIONS:
RELEASED FOR:
PLOT DATE:PROJECT NUMBER:PROJECT MANAGER:DESIGNED:DRAWN:CHECKED:SEAL3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100Raleigh, NC 27612Main: 919.829.9909www.res.usEngineering Services Provided By:Angler Environmental, LLCLicense: F-1428AFMSCFBRCJRM0674S7PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
7/22/2020
STRAWBERRY HILL MITIGATION SITE
REACH JH1
JOHNSTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA REACH JH1-BRESTORATIONSTA 23+74 TO 40+32EXISTING TOPOF BANKEXISTING CHANNEL TO BEABANDONED AND BACKFILLEDSEE DETAIL D2
TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB
TBTBTBTBTBTB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB140140 1401400+001+002+003+004+005+006+007+008+009+0010+0010+390+000+501+001+502+002+50143142143144142
1431431
4
3 141141141WWWWWWOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHE OHEOHEOHE SSSSSSSLCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCE LCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCES9MATCH LINE50100500FULL SCALE: 1"= 2" = FULL SCALE1" = HALF SCALEFILE NAME:R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\CAD\DWG\0674_SHT_SITE.dwg SAVED BY: Sfasking
DRAWING TITLE:
PROJECT NAME:SHEET NUMBER:REVISIONS:
RELEASED FOR:
PLOT DATE:PROJECT NUMBER:PROJECT MANAGER:DESIGNED:DRAWN:CHECKED:SEAL302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110Raleigh, NC 27605Main: 919.829.9909www.res.usEngineering Services Provided By:Angler Environmental, LLCLicense: F-1428AFMSCFBRCJRM0674S8PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
STRAWBERRY HILL MITIGATION SITE
REACH JH2
JOHNSTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
7/22/2020EXISTING PIPES TO BEREMOVED ANDDISPOSED OF OFF-SITEEXISTING PIPE PILE TOBE REMOVED ANDDISPOSED OF OFF-SITEEXISTING IRRIGATIONSYSTEM TO BE REMOVEDAND DISPOSED OF OFF-SITEDITCH JH2BUFFER MITIGATION
TBTBTBTBTB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB
TBTBTBTB TB TB
TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB
TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB
TB
TB
TB
TB
TB
TB
TB
TB
TB
TB
TBTBTBTBTB TBTBTBTB
TB
TB
TB
TB
TBTB
TB TBTB1401
4
0
140140140
140
1401408+009+0010+0010+390+000+501+001+502+002+503+003+410+00
1+00
2+00
2+
9
7
139139139
139139
139
139
1
4
1
139139139WWWWWWOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHE
OHE
OHEOHE SSSSSS0+001+002+0
0
3+00
4+00
5+00
6+007+008+009+009+84LCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCE LCELCELCE
LCE
LCE
LCELCE
LCE
LCE
LCE
LCE
LCELCELCELCELCELCELCE
LCELCELCES8MATCH LINE5010050EXISTING PIPE TO BEREMOVED ANDDISPOSED OF OFF-SITE0FULL SCALE: 1"= 2" = FULL SCALE1" = HALF SCALEFILE NAME:R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\CAD\DWG\0674_SHT_SITE.dwg SAVED BY: Sfasking
DRAWING TITLE:
PROJECT NAME:SHEET NUMBER:REVISIONS:
RELEASED FOR:
PLOT DATE:PROJECT NUMBER:PROJECT MANAGER:DESIGNED:DRAWN:CHECKED:SEAL302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110Raleigh, NC 27605Main: 919.829.9909www.res.usEngineering Services Provided By:Angler Environmental, LLCLicense: F-1428AFMSCFBRCJRM0674S9PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
STRAWBERRY HILL MITIGATION SITE
REACH JH3-5
JOHNSTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
7/22/2020EXISTING ASPHALT TOBE REMOVED ANDDISPOSED OF OFF-SITEDITCH JH3BUFFER MITIGATIONDITCH JH4BUFFER MITIGATIONREACH JH5BUFFER MITIGATIONEXISTING POSTS TO BEREMOVED ANDDISPOSED OF OFF-SITEEXISTING RIP-RAP TO BEREMOVED ANDDISPOSED OF OFF-SITEEXISTING BUILDINGS TOBE DEMOLISHED ANDDEBRIS REMOVEDFROM EASEMENT
OHEOHEOHEOHEOHE
OHE
OHE
OHE
OHE OHEOHEOHE OHEOHETBTB BB BB BB BB BB BB BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB BB BBBBBB BB BBBBBB
BB
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
BB
BB
BB
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
BB BBBBBBBBTBTBTB TB TB TB TB TB TB TB TB TB TB TB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB
TB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB
TB
TB
TB
TB
TBTBTBTBTBTB
TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB TB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB
TB
TBTBTBTBTB
TB
TB
TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB TBTBBBBBBBBB BB BB BB36" RC
PW.

INV
:
135
.54
'
E
.

INV
:
135
.73
'TBTB
TBTB
1401401401
4
0139139139
139 139139139 WWWWWWWWWWWWWW
W
W
OHE
OHE
OHE
OHE
OHE
OHE
OHES SSSSSSSSSSBBTBTBLCELCELCELCELCELCE
LCE
LCELCELCELCE
LCE LCELCE
LCE
LCE
LCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCE LCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCE
M2MA
T
C
H

L
I
N
E
100200100REMOVE EXISTING PIPEAND DISPOSE OFOFF-SITE0FULL SCALE: 1"= 2" = FULL SCALE1" = HALF SCALEFILE NAME:R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\CAD\DWG\0674_SHT_SITE.dwg SAVED BY: Sfasking
DRAWING TITLE:
PROJECT NAME:SHEET NUMBER:REVISIONS:
RELEASED FOR:
PLOT DATE:PROJECT NUMBER:PROJECT MANAGER:DESIGNED:DRAWN:CHECKED:SEAL302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110Raleigh, NC 27605Main: 919.829.9909www.res.usEngineering Services Provided By:Angler Environmental, LLCLicense: F-1428AFMSCFBRCJRM0674M1PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
STRAWBERRY HILL MITIGATION SITE
MAINTENANCE PLAN
JOHNSTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
7/22/2020REMOVE EXISTING PIPEAND DISPOSE OFOFF-SITEREMOVE EXISTINGCONCRETE ANDDISPOSE OF OFF-SITEREMOVE EXISTINGCONCRETE ANDDISPOSE OF OFF-SITEREMOVE EXISTINGCONCRETE ANDDISPOSE OF OFF-SITEWETLAND WAWETLAND WBWETLAND WCWETLAND WDREACH JH1-BREMOVE EXISTINGTRASH AND DISPOSEOF OFF-SITEREACH JH1-A
OHEOHETBTB
TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB TB TB TB TB TB TBTBTBTBTB TB TB TB TB36" RCPW. INV: 135.54'E. INV: 135.73'1401
4
0
140140140 140
140140143142143144142
1431431
4
3 141141141139139139 139139139139141139139139 WWWWWWWWWWWOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHE SSSSSSSSSLCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCE LCE LCE LCE LCE LCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCE
LCELCELCELCELCEM1MATCH LINE1002001000FULL SCALE: 1"= 2" = FULL SCALE1" = HALF SCALEFILE NAME:R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\CAD\DWG\0674_SHT_SITE.dwg SAVED BY: Sfasking
DRAWING TITLE:
PROJECT NAME:SHEET NUMBER:REVISIONS:
RELEASED FOR:
PLOT DATE:PROJECT NUMBER:PROJECT MANAGER:DESIGNED:DRAWN:CHECKED:SEAL302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110Raleigh, NC 27605Main: 919.829.9909www.res.usEngineering Services Provided By:Angler Environmental, LLCLicense: F-1428AFMSCFBRCJRM0674M2PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
STRAWBERRY HILL MITIGATION SITE
MAINTENANCE PLAN
JOHNSTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
7/22/2020 REMOVE EXISTING PIPEAND DISPOSE OFOFF-SITEREMOVE EXISTING PIPEAND DISPOSE OFOFF-SITEREMOVE EXISTING PIPEAND DISPOSE OFOFF-SITEREMOVE EXISTINGIRRIGATION SYSTEM ANDDISPOSE OF OFF-SITEREMOVE EXISTING PIPEPILE AND DISPOSE OFOFF-SITEREMOVE EXISTINGASPHALT PILE ANDDISPOSE OF OFF-SITEREACH JH5DITCH JH4DITCH JH2DITCH JH3EXISTING POSTS TO BEREMOVED ANDDISPOSED OF OFF-SITEEXISTING RIP-RAP TO BEREMOVED ANDDISPOSED OF OFF-SITEDEMOLISH EXISTINGBUILDINGS ANDREMOVE DEBRIS FROMEASEMENT
OHEOHEOHE
OHE
OHE
OHE OHEOHEOHEOHE BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB BBBBBBBB BB
BB
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
BBBB
BBBBBBBBBBBBBB BB BB BB
BBBBBBBBBBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB TB TB TB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB
TB
TB
TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB TB TB TB
TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB
TB
TB
TB
TBTBTBTB
TB TBTBTBTBTBTBTBTB TBBBBBBBBBBB
TB
TB1401
4
0
14
0
140
140
140
140140143142143144142
1431431
4
3141 141141139139139
139 139
139
139
1
4
1139139139 WWWWWWWWWWW
W
OHEOHEOHEOHE SSSSSSSSTBTBLCELCELCELCELCELCE
LCELCE LCE
LCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCE LCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCELCE
150300150PLANTING LEGENDLive Staking and Live Cuttings Bundle Tree SpeciesCommon NameScientific NamePercentCompositionBlack WillowSalix nigra60%Silky DogwoodCornus amomum40%PLANTING TABLELCEBare Root Planting Tree SpeciesCommon NameScientific NamePercentCompositionAmerican SycamorePlatanus occidentalis10%Bald CypressTaxodium disticum10%River BirchBetula nigra10%Swamp TupeloNyssa biflora10%Yellow PoplarLiriodendron tulipifera10%Laurel OakQuercus laurifolia10%Overcup OakQuercus lyrata10%Swamp Chestnut OakQuercus michauxii10%Water OakQuercus nigra10%Willow OakQuercus phellos10%EXISTING TREELINEPROPERTY LINERIPARIAN PLANTING(TOTAL AREA: 19.73 AC)0FULL SCALE: 1"= 2" = FULL SCALE1" = HALF SCALEFILE NAME:R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\CAD\DWG\0674_SHT_SITE.dwg SAVED BY: Sfasking
DRAWING TITLE:
PROJECT NAME:SHEET NUMBER:REVISIONS:
RELEASED FOR:
PLOT DATE:PROJECT NUMBER:PROJECT MANAGER:DESIGNED:DRAWN:CHECKED:SEAL302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110Raleigh, NC 27605Main: 919.829.9909www.res.usEngineering Services Provided By:Angler Environmental, LLCLicense: F-1428AFMSCFBRCJRM0674P1PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
STRAWBERRY HILL MITIGATION SITE
PLANTING PLAN
JOHNSTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
7/22/2020PLANTING NOTESALL PLANTING AREAS1.EROSION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE PROPERLY MAINTAINED UNTIL PERMANENT VEGETATIONIS ESTABLISHED AND FINAL APPROVAL HAS BEEN ISSUED. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSPECTEROSION CONTROL MEASURES AT THE END OF EACH WORKING DAY TO ENSURE MEASURES AREFUNCTIONING PROPERLY.2.DISTURBED AREAS NOT AT FINAL GRADE SHALL BE TEMPORARILY VEGETATED WITHIN 10WORKING DAYS. UPON COMPLETION OF FINAL GRADING, PERMANENT VEGETATION SHALL BEESTABLISHED FOR ALL DISTURBED AREAS WITHIN 10 WORKING DAYS. SEEDING SHALL BE INACCORDANCE WITH EROSION CONTROL PLAN.3.ALL DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE PREPARED PRIOR TO PLANTING BY DISC OR SPRING-TOOTHCHISEL PLOW TO MINIMUM DEPTH OF 12 INCHES. MULTIPLE PASSES SHALL BE MADE ACROSSPLANTING AREAS WITH THE IMPLEMENT AND THE FINAL PASS SHALL FOLLOW TOPOGRAPHICCONTOURS.4.BARE ROOT AND LIVE STAKE TREE SPECIES SHALL FOLLOW THE COMPOSITION SHOWN IN THETABLE TO THE LEFT. SPECIES MAY BE SUBSTITUTED BASED ON AVAILABILITY.5.BARE ROOT AND LIVE STAKE TREE SPECIES SHALL BE PLANTED ACCORDING TO THEIR RESPECTIVEDETAILS.6.BARE ROOT PLANTING DENSITY IS APPROXIMATELY 800 STEMS PER ACRE. SPECIES SHALL BEDISTRIBUTED SUCH THAT 3 TO 6 PLANTS OF THE SAME SPECIES ARE GROUPED TOGETHER.7.TREATMENT/REMOVAL OF INVASIVE SPECIES, PINES AND SWEET GUMS LESS THAN 6" DBH SHALLBE PERFORMED THROUGHOUT THE PLANTED AREAS.8.TEMPORARY SEED MIX SHALL BE APPLIED AT A RATE OF 150 LBS/ACRE TO ALL DISTURBED AREASWITH SLOPES EQUAL TO OR STEEPER THAN 3:1.9.PERMANENT RIPARIAN SEED MIX SHALL BE APPLIED TO ALL DISTURBED RIPARIAN PLANTING AREASWITHIN THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT AT A RATE OF 15 LBS/ACRE. Permanent Riparian Seed MixCommon NameScientific NamePercentCompositionVirginia WildryeElymus virginicus15%Fox SedgeCarex vulpinoidea15%Switchgrasspanicum virgatum10%Narrowleaf SunflowerHelianthus angustifolius10%Riverbank WildryeElymus riparius10%Big BluestemAndopogon gerardii10%Bur MarigoldBidens aristosa10%DeertongueDichanthelium clandestinum10%Swamp MilkweedAsclepias incarnata5%Showy TicktrefoilDesmodium canadense5%LIMITS OF CONSERVATIONEASEMENT
WHEN AND WHERE TO USE ITSILT FENCE IS APPLICABLE IN AREAS:WHERE THE MAXIMUM SHEET OR OVERLAND FLOW PATH LENGTH TO THE FENCE IS 100-FEET.WHERE THE MAXIMUM SLOPE STEEPNESS (NORMAL [PERPENDICULAR] TO FENCE LINE) IS 2H:1V.THAT DO NOT RECEIVE CONCENTRATED FLOWS GREATER THAN 0.5 CFS.DO NOT PLACE SILT FENCE ACROSS CHANNELS OR USE IT AS A VELOCITY CONTROL BMP.CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS:1.USE A SYNTHETIC FILTER FABRIC OF AT LEAST 95% BY WEIGHT OF POLYOLEFINS OR POLYESTER, WHICH ISCERTIFIED BY THE MANUFACTURER OR SUPPLIER AS CONFORMING TO THE REQUIREMENTS IN ASTM D 6461.SYNTHETIC FILTER FABRIC SHOULD CONTAIN ULTRAVIOLET RAY INHIBITORS AND STABILIZERS TO PROVIDE AMINIMUM OF 6 MONTHS OF EXPECTED USABLE CONSTRUCTION LIFE AT A TEMPERATURE RANGE OF 0° TO 120°F.2.ENSURE THAT POSTS FOR SEDIMENT FENCES ARE 1.33 LB/LINEAR FT STEEL WITH A MINIMUM LENGTH OF 5 FEET.MAKE SURE THAT STEEL POSTS HAVE PROJECTIONS TO FACILITATE FASTENING THE FABRIC.CONSTRUCTION:1.CONSTRUCT THE SEDIMENT BARRIER OF EXTRA STRENGTH SYNTHETIC FILTER FABRICS.2.ENSURE THAT THE HEIGHT OF THE SEDIMENT FENCE DOES NOT EXCEED 24 INCHES ABOVE THE GROUNDSURFACE. (HIGHER FENCES MAY IMPOUND VOLUMES OF WATER SUFFICIENT TO CAUSE FAILURE OF THESTRUCTURE.)3.CONSTRUCT THE FILTER FABRIC FROM A CONTINUOUS ROLL CUT TO THE LENGTH OF THE BARRIER TO AVOIDJOINTS. WHEN JOINTS ARE NECESSARY, SECURELY FASTEN THE FILTER CLOTH ONLY AT A SUPPORT POST WITH 4FEET MINIMUM OVERLAP TO THE NEXT POST.4.EXTRA STRENGTH FILTER FABRIC WITH 6 FEET POST SPACING DOES NOT REQUIRE WIRE MESH SUPPORT FENCE.SECURELY FASTEN THE FILTER FABRIC DIRECTLY TO POSTS. WIRE OR PLASTIC ZIP TIES SHOULD HAVE MINIMUM50 POUND TENSILE STRENGTH.5.EXCAVATE A TRENCH APPROXIMATELY 4 INCHES WIDE AND 8 INCHES DEEP ALONG THE PROPOSED LINE OFPOSTS AND UPSLOPE FROM THE BARRIER.6.PLACE 12 INCHES OF THE FABRIC ALONG THE BOTTOM AND SIDE OF THE TRENCH.7.BACKFILL THE TRENCH WITH SOIL PLACED OVER THE FILTER FABRIC AND COMPACT. THOROUGH COMPACTIONOF THE BACKFILL IS CRITICAL TO SILT FENCE PERFORMANCE.8.DO NOT ATTACH FILTER FABRIC TO EXISTING TREES.MAINTENANCE:INSPECT SEDIMENT FENCES AT LEAST ONCE A WEEK AND AFTER EACH RAINFALL. MAKE ANY REQUIRED REPAIRSIMMEDIATELY.SHOULD THE FABRIC OF A SEDIMENT FENCE COLLAPSE, TEAR, DECOMPOSE OR BECOME INEFFECTIVE, REPLACE ITPROMPTLY.REMOVE SEDIMENT DEPOSITS AS NECESSARY TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE STORAGE VOLUME FOR THE NEXT RAIN AND TOREDUCE PRESSURE ON THE FENCE. TAKE CARE TO AVOID UNDERMINING THE FENCE DURING CLEANOUT.REMOVE ALL FENCING MATERIALS AND UNSTABLE SEDIMENT DEPOSITS AND BRING THE AREA TO GRADE AND STABILIZEIT AFTER THE CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA HAS BEEN PROPERLY STABILIZED.8"4"24" MIN
24" MIN
8"RUNOFFRUNOFF18" TO 24"FLAT-BOTTOM TRENCH DETAILV-SHAPED TRENCH DETAILSILT FENCE INSTALLATION18" TO 24"TEMPORARY SILT FENCENTSCOIR MATTINGNTSINSTALLATION NOTES:SITE PREPARATION1.GRADE AND COMPACT AREA.2.REMOVE ALL ROCKS, CLODS, VEGETATION, AND OBSTRUCTIONS SO THAT MATTING WILLHAVE DIRECT CONTACT WITH THE SOIL.3.PREPARE SEEDBED BY LOOSENING 3 TO 4 INCHES OF TOPSOIL ABOVE FINAL GRADE.4.TEST SOILS FOR ANY NUTRIENT DEFICIENCIES AND SUBMIT SOIL TEST RESULTS TO THEENGINEER. APPLY ANY TREATMENT SUCH AS LIME OR FERTILIZERS TO THE SOIL IF NEEDED.SEEDING1.SEE PLANTING SHEETS FOR SEEDING REQUIREMENTS.2.APPLY SEED TO SOIL BEFORE PLACING MATTING.INSTALLATION - STREAM BANK1.SEE GRADING NOTES ON PLAN AND PROFILE SHEETS AND DETAIL SHEETS FORINFORMATION REGARDING WHAT AREAS ARE TO RECEIVE COIR MATTING.2.OVERLAP ADJACENT MATS 6" (IN DIRECTION PARALLEL TO FLOW) AND ANCHOR EVERY 12"ACROSS THE OVERLAP. THE UPSTREAM MAT SHOULD BE PLACED OVER THE DOWNSTREAMMAT.3.EDGES SHOULD BE SHINGLED AWAY FROM THE FLOW OF WATER.4.LAY MAT LOOSE TO ALLOW CONTACT WITH SOIL. DO NOT STRETCH TIGHT.5.ANCHOR MAT USING BIODEGRADABLE STAKES.6.EXTEND MAT 2 TO 3 FEET PAST TOP OF BANK.7.PLACE ADJACENT ROLLS IN THE ANCHOR TRENCH WITH A MINIMUM OF 4" OVERLAP.SECURE WITH BIODEGRADABLE STAKES, BACKFILL ANCHOR TRENCH, AND COMPACT SOIL.8.STAKE AT 12" INTERVALS ALONG OVERLAP.9.IF MORE THAN ROLL IS REQUIRED TO COVER THE CHANNEL FROM THE TOP OF BANK DOWNTO THE TOE, THEN OVERLAP MATTING BY A MINIMUM OF 1'.EROSION CONTROL MATTING MUST MEET OR EXCEED THEFOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS (UNLESS APPROVED BY THEENGINEER):·100 % COCONUT FIBER (COIR) TWINE WOVEN INTO AHIGH STRENGTH MATRIX.·THICKNESS - 0.35 IN. MINIMUM.·SHEAR STRESS – 5 LBS/SQFT·FLOW VELOCITY- OBSERVED 16 FT/SEC·WEIGHT - 29 OZ/SY·OPEN AREA - 38%·SLOPES – UP TO A MAXIMUM OF 1:1SEE S
ITE
P
LAN EXIST
ING
ROAD50' MIN.VARIES COARSE AGGREGATE -STONE SIZE = 2"-3"PURPOSE:STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES SHOULD BE USED AT ALL POINTS WHERE TRAFFIC WILL BE LEAVING ACONSTRUCTION SITE AND MOVING DIRECTLY ONTO A PUBLIC ROAD. INSTALL A CULVERT PIPE ACROSS THE ENTRANCEWHEN NEEDED TO PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE.CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS:1.CLEAR THE ENTRANCE AND EXIT AREA OF ALL VEGETATION, ROOTS, AND OTHER OBJECTIONABLE MATERIAL ANDPROPERLY GRADE IT.2.PLACE THE GRAVEL TO THE SPECIFIC GRADE AND DIMENSIONS SHOWN ON THE DETAIL, AND SMOOTH IT.3.PROVIDE DRAINAGE TO CARRY WATER TO A SEDIMENT TRAP OR OTHER SUITABLE OUTLET.4.USE GEOTEXTILE FABRICS BECAUSE THEY IMPROVE STABILITY OF THE FOUNDATION IN LOCATIONS SUBJECT TOSEEPAGE OR HIGH WATER TABLE.MAINTENANCE:MAINTAIN THE GRAVEL PAD IN A CONDITION TO PREVENT MUD OR SEDIMENT FROM LEAVING THE CONSTRUCTION SITE.THIS MAY REQUIRE PERIODIC TOP DRESSING WITH 2-INCH STONE. AFTER EACH RAINFALL, INSPECT ANY STRUCTUREUSED TO TRAP SEDIMENT AND CLEAN IT OUT AS NECESSARY. IMMEDIATELY REMOVE ALL OBJECTIONABLE MATERIALSSPILLED, WASHED, OR TRACKED ONTO PUBLIC ROADWAYS, OR AIRFIELD PAVEMENTS.TEMPORARY GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCENTSNOTE: HOSE SHOULD BEKEPT OUTSIDE OF WORKAREANOTES:1.EXCAVATION SHALL BE PERFORMED ONLY IN DRY AND/OR ISOLATED SECTIONS OF CHANNEL.2.IMPERVIOUS DIKES SHOULD BE USED TO ISOLATE WORK AREAS FROM STREAM FLOW.3.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT DISTURB MORE AREA THAN CAN BE STABILIZED IN ONEWORKING DAY. A MAXIMUM OF 200 FEET MAY BE DISTURBED AT ANY ONE TIME.4.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DETERMINING PUMP SIZE SUFFICIENT TOPUMP BASE FLOW.5.DIKE MUST BE CONSTRUCTED OF NON-ERODIBLE MATERIALS SUCH AS SANDBAGS.SEQUENCE OF CONSTRUCTION:1.INSTALL STILLING BASIN AND STABILIZED OUTFALL USING CLASS A RIP RAP AT THEDOWNSTREAM END OF THE DESIGNATED PROJECT WORKING AREA.2.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL THE PUMP AROUND PUMP AND THE TEMPORARY PIPINGTHAT WILL CONVEY THE BASE FLOW FROM UPSTREAM OF THE WORK AREA TO THESTABILIZED OUTFALL.3.INSTALL UPSTREAM IMPERVIOUS DIKE AND BEGIN PUMPING OPERATIONS FOR STREAMDIVERSION.4.INSTALL THE DOWNSTREAM IMPERVIOUS DIKE AND DEWATERING PUMPING APPARATUS IFNEEDED TO DEWATER THE ENTRAPPED AREA. THE PUMP AND HOSE FOR THIS PURPOSESHALL BE OF SUFFICIENT SIZE TO DEWATER THE WORK AREA. THIS WATER WILL ALSO BEPUMPED TO AN OUTFALL STABILIZED WITH CLASS A RIP RAP.5.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL EXCAVATE ANY ACCUMULATED SILT AND DEWATER BEFOREREMOVAL OF THE IMPERVIOUS DIKE. WHEN DEWATERING AREA, ALL DIRTY WATER MUST BEPUMPED THROUGH A SILT BAG. REMOVE IMPERVIOUS DIKES, PUMPS, AND TEMPORARYFLEXIBLE HOSE/PIPING STARTING WITH THE DOWNSTREAM DIKE FIRST.6.ONCE THE WORKING AREA IS COMPLETED, REMOVE ALL RIP RAP AND IMPERVIOUS DIKES ANDSTABILIZE DISTURBED AREAS WITH SEED AND MULCH.7.ALL WORK IN CHANNEL MUST BE COMPLETED BEFORE REMOVING IMPERVIOUS DIKE.SILT BAG PROFILE15' TO 20'FLOWINTAKE HOSEPUMP AROUNDPUMPCLASS ASTONEWORKAREADE-WATERINGPUMPIMPERVIOUSDIKESILT BAGLOCATIONSTABILIZED OUTFALLCLASS A STONEFILTER FABRICEXISTINGGROUNDDISCHARGEHOSE8" OF CLASS ASTONEFILTER FABRICSTABILIZED OUTFALLCLASS A STONEEXISTINGCHANNELDISCHARGE HOSEIMPERVIOUS DIKECLASS ASTONEPUMP AROUND & DEWATERING DETAILNTSTEMPORARY ROCK CHECK DAMNTSFLOWSECTION A-ANOTE: END OF DIKE AT GROUND LEVEL TO BEHIGHER THAN THE LOWEST POINT OF FLOW CHECK.SUFFICIENT SANDBAGS ARE TO BE PLACED TOPREVENT SCOURING.SECTION B-BBBAAPLAN VIEWSANDBAG BARRIERS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED OF THREE LAYERS OF SANDBAGS.THE BOTTOM LAYER SHALL CONSIST OF 3 ROWS OF BAGS, THE MIDDLE LAYERSHALL CONSIST OF 2 ROWS OF BAGS AND THE TOP LAYER SHALL CONSIST OF 1ROW OF BAGS. THE RECOMMENDED DIMENSION OF A FILLED SANDBAG SHALL BEAPPROXIMATELY 0.5 FT X 0.5 FT X 1.5 FT.SANDBAG IMPERVIOUS DIKENTSEROSION CONTROL WATTLENTSNOTES:1.EROSION CONTROL WATTLES OR COIR LOGS/WATTLESMAY BE USED IN PLACE OF SILT FENCE.2.INSTLL A MINIMUM OF 2 UPSLOPE STAKES AND 4DOWNSLOPE STAKES AT AN ANGLE TO WEDGE WATTLEIN PLACE.BACKFILL TRENCH WITHCOMPACTED EARTH1.25 LB./LINEAR FT. STEEL POSTSEXTRA STRENGTHFILTER FABRICUSE EITHER FLAT-BOTTOMOR V-BOTTOM TRENCHSHOWN BELOWBURY FABRICHEAVY DUTY PLASTIC TIEFOR STEEL POSTS6' MAX WITH STANDARD FABRICFILTER FABRICCOMPACTEDEARTHFILTER FABRICFILTER FABRICCOMPACTEDEARTHRUNOFFFILTERFABRIC6" MIN.MIDDLE LAYERBOTTOM LAYERTOP LAYEREARTH SURFACETRENCH 0.25' DEEPONLY WHEN PLACED ONEARTH SURFACEENDS OF BAGS INADJACENT ROWS BUTTEDSLIGHTLY TOGETHERSEE NOTELOWEST POINTGROUND LEVELEARTH SURFACE1
.
0
'MI
N
.KEY-IN MATTINGSTAKE MATTING JUSTABOVE CHANNEL TOEAND BACKFILL W/RIFFLE MATERIAL2.0'MIN.6" RIFFLEMATERIALEXISTINGGRADEMINIMUM 9" EROSIONCONTROL COIR WATTLE/LOGSLOPEINSTALL WATTLE IN2" TO 3" TRENCH2" x 2" X 2' WOODENSTAKE ON 2' CENTERSPROFILE VIEWSECTION B-BFLOWSECTION A-APLANFLOWCLASS B RIP RAPSPILLWAY CREST1' MIN OF # 5WASHED STONECLASS BRIP RAPFILTER FABRICNOTES:1.CONSTRUCT DAM ACCORDING TO NCDENREROSION CONTROL MANUAL2.RIPRAP SHALL BE CLASS I3.PLACE ROCK DAM AS SHOWN ON PLANS.EXTEND CLASS B RIP RAP ROCK APRON 2 FEETDOWNSTREAM FROM TOE OF ROCK DAM1.0' THICK CLASSB ROCK APRON1.0' THICK CLASSB ROCK APRONCUTOFF TRENCHFILTER FABRIC# 5 WASHED STONEBBAA3:
1
2:175% BKF
(2' MAX.)2' MIN.W (SPILLWAY)MIN. 23 STREAM WIDTH75% BKF
(2' MAX.)BANKFULLINSTALL PIPEPER DESIGNFILE NAME:R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\CAD\DWG\0674_SHT_DETAILS.dwg SAVED BY: Sfasking
DRAWING TITLE:
PROJECT NAME:SHEET NUMBER:REVISIONS:
RELEASED FOR:
PLOT DATE:PROJECT NUMBER:PROJECT MANAGER:DESIGNED:DRAWN:CHECKED:SEAL3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100Raleigh, NC 27612Main: 919.829.9909www.res.usEngineering Services Provided By:Angler Environmental, LLCLicense: F-1428JOHNSTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
DETAILS
STRAWBERRY HILL MITIGATION SITE
7/22/2020
PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIOND10674JRMBRCSCFAFMMAINTENANCE:1.INSPECT WATTLE PERIODICALLY AND AFTER EACH SIGNIFICANTRAINFALL EVENT FOR DAMAGE AND SEDIMENT ACCUMULATION2.REPLACE OR CLEAN WATTLE AS NEEDED TO ALLOW WATER TODRAIN THROUGH THE NATURAL FIBERS BETWEEN RAINFALL EVENTSMAINTENANCE:1.INSPECT CHECK DAM PERIODICALLY AND AFTER EACH SIGNIFICANTRAINFALL EVENT FOR DAMAGE AND SEDIMENT ACCUMULATION2.AT A MINIMUM, REMOVE SEDIMENT WHEN ACCUMULATIONS REACHONE-HALF THE HEIGHT OF THE SEDIMENT CONTROL STONE3.REPLACE OR CLEAN SEDIMENT CONTROL STONE AS NEEDED TOALLOW WATER TO DRAIN THROUGH THE DEVICE BETWEEN RAINFALLEVENTSMAINTENANCE:1.PERIODICALLY INSPECT SANDBAG DIKE FOR DAMAGE AND LEAKS ANDREPAIR AS NEEDED2.REMOVE IMPOUNDED TRASH AND SEDIMENT
LINE PANELWOVEN WIRE:ASTM CLASS 3 GALVANIZED.TOP AND BOTTOM WIRES MIN. 12 GAUGE.INTERMEDIATE AND STAY WIRES MIN.12 1/2 GAUGE.NOTES:1.LINE POSTS (WOODEN): MIN. 4 IN. DIAM. OR 4 IN. SQUARE.2.LINE POSTS (STEEL): STUDDED OR PUNCHED T, U, OR Y SHAPED, WITH ANCHOR PLATES.3.MIN. WEIGHT 1.3 LBS./FT. (EXCLUDING ANCHOR PLATE). POSTS SHALL BE DRIVEN A MINIMUMOF 18" DEEP AND MUST BE AT LEAST 5.5 FT IN LENGTH4.SPECIES AND TREATMENT FOR ALL WOOD: USE UNTREATED DURABLE POSTS OF SPECIESSUCH AS RED CEDAR, BLACK LOCUST OR OSAGE-ORANGE WITH BARK REMOVED, ORNON-DURABLE WOOD THAT IS PRESERVATIVE PRESSURE TREATED (0.40 LBS./CUBIC FOOTCCA, OR EQUIVALENT NON-CCA TREATMENT). DO NOT USE RED PINE.WOVEN WIRE FENCE (NRCS DETAIL 382A)NTSWOVEN WIRE WITH ONE BARB DETAILTIMBER MAT CROSSINGTIMBER MAT APPROACHFLOW(5' MIN)RIP RAP APPROACHPLAN VIEWSECTION VIEWTIMBER MAT TEMPORARY CROSSINGNTSNOTES:1.TIMBER MATS SHALL BE USED FOR TEMPORARYCONSTRUCTION ACCESS TO TRAVERSE WET AND/OR MUDDYARES ADJACENT TO THE STREAM AND TO CROSS THESTREAM AND OTHER CONCENTRATED FLOW AREAS.2.THE STREAM CROSSING SHALL BE INSTALLED WHEN FLOW ISLOW. THERE SHALL BE MINIMAL TO NO DISTURBANCE OF THECHANNEL BED AND BANKS AS A RESULT OF INSTALLING THEAPPROACHES OR CROSSING.3.THE LENGTH OF TIMBER MAT REQUIRED TO CROSS THESTREAM OR CONCENTRATED FLOW AREAS SHALL BE SUCHTHAT THE TIMBER MAT EXTENDS PAST THE TOP OF BANK ONEACH SIDE OF THE CROSSING A SUFFICIENT DISTANCE TOSUPPORT THE MAXIMUM EQUIPMENT SIZE USING THECROSSING.4.STREAM CROSSINGS SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH THE TIMBERMAT LENGTHS ORIENTED PERPENDICULAR TO THE TOPS OFTHE STREAM BANKS. TIMBER MAT STREAM APPROACHESSHALL BE INSTALLED WITH THE TIMBER MAT LENGTHSORIENTED PARALLEL TO THE TOPS OF THE STREAM BANKS.5.STREAM CROSSING APPROACHES FROM DRY AREAS SHALLBE CONSTRUCTED USING CLASS B RIP RAP PLACED OVERFILTER FABRIC.6.ALL TIMBER MATS, FILTER FABRIC, AND RIP RAP SHALL BECOMPLETELY REMOVED FROM THE SITE WHEN THE CROSSINGIS REMOVED.16' MAX.4" TO 6"3" MIN.32" TO 42"6"6' MIN.2' MIN.TOP OF BANKCLASS B RIP RAPTIMBER MAT INSTALLEDPERPENDICULARTIMBER MAT INSTALLEDPARALLELTIMBER MAT(TYP)CARRIAGE BOLTTOE OF BANK(TYP)TIMBER MAT INSTALLEDPERPENDICULARTOP OF BANKCLASS B RIP RAPCARRIAGE BOLT(TYP)FILTER FABRICAPPROXIMATE BASE FLOWWATER SURFACETIMBER MATINSTALLED PARALLELTOE OF BANKLINE POSTWOVEN WIREBARBED ORELECTRIC WIRELINE POSTBARBED ORELECTRIC WIREWOVEN WIREGROUND LINELINE POSTNTSNOTES:1.CONSTRUCT STREAM CROSSING WHEN FLOW IS LOW.2.INSTALL STREAM CROSSING PERPENDICULAR TO FLOW.3.CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE APPROPRIATE BEDDING MATERIAL WITH MANUFACTURER.4.FILTER FABRIC USED SHALL BE NCDOT TYPE 2 ENGINEERING FABRIC OR EQUIVALENT.5.WIDTH OF TYPICAL FARM CROSSINGS SHALL BE PER PLAN OR A MINIMUM OF 12'.6.WHEN REQUIRED, CONTRACTOR TO ENSURE PIPE MATERIAL AND COVER MEET H-20LOADING REQUIREMENTS.PROPOSED CULVERT CROSSINGNTSSTREAM CHANNELFLOW MIN 3'MIN 3'PLAN VIEWSECTION VIEW10' MIN.10' MIN.MIN. 2', MAX 3'(UNLESS ADDITIONAL COVER ISREQUIRED BY MANUFACTURER)FILTER FABRICCOARSE AGGREGATE(#5 WASHED STONE) 6" DEEPEARTH FILLPIPE SIZE PER PLANINSTALL CLAY PLUG 2 FEETBELOW CULVERT INVERTCOARSE AGGREGATE(#5 WASHED STONE)EARTH FILLTOP OF BANKSEE PLAN SHEET FORCULVERT INVERTELEVATIONS ANDBURIAL DEPTHSSET LOG ELEVATION AT CHANNELBED AS SPECIFIED ON PLANSHEET PROFILE VIEWFILE NAME:R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\CAD\DWG\0674_SHT_DETAILS.dwg SAVED BY: Sfasking
DRAWING TITLE:
PROJECT NAME:SHEET NUMBER:REVISIONS:
RELEASED FOR:
PLOT DATE:PROJECT NUMBER:PROJECT MANAGER:DESIGNED:DRAWN:CHECKED:SEAL3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100Raleigh, NC 27612Main: 919.829.9909www.res.usEngineering Services Provided By:Angler Environmental, LLCLicense: F-1428JOHNSTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
DETAILS
STRAWBERRY HILL MITIGATION SITE
7/22/2020
PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIOND20674JRMBRCSCFAFM MAX. 75'EXISTINGCHANNELMIN. 25'FILL TO TOP OFBANKFILL AT LEAST70% OF CHANNELMAX. 75'MIN. 25'NOTES:1.FILL EXISTING CHANNEL TO TOP OF BANK ELEVATION WHEN POSSIBLE.2.CHANNEL MUST BE FILLED IN 12" TO 18" LIFTS,3.IF CHANNEL CANNOT BE COMPLETELY FILLED TO TOP OF BANK, FILL TO TOP OFBANK FOR 25' OUT OF EVERY 100' SEGMENT.CHANNEL BACKFILLNTSBOTTOM OFEXISTING CHANNELEXISTING CHANNELTOP OF BANKCOMPACTED BACKFILL(12" TO 18" LIFTS)MAX. 14"FINISHED GRADE30'F
L
O
W
TYPICAL SECTIONCHANNEL PLUGNTSOLD CHANNEL TO BEDIVERTED OR ABANDONEDNEW CHANNEL TO BECONSTRUCTEDCOMPACTED BACKFILL(12" LIFTS)IMPERVIOUS SELECT MATERIAL(PER DIRECTION OF ENGINEER)10' MINUNCOMPACTED BACKFILL1.5' MINIMUM1111CHANNEL PLUG30' MIN.BANKFULL ELEVATIONNEW CHANNEL BANK SHALLBE TREATED AS SPECIFIEDIN PLANSPROPOSEDCHANNEL INVERTTOE PROTECTIONPLAN VIEWDIBBLE PLANTING METHODUSING THE KBC PLANTING BAR1. INSERTPLANTING BAR ASSHOWN AND PULLHANDLE TOWARDPLANTER.4. PULL HANDLE OFBAR TOWARDPLANTER, FIRMINGSOIL AT BOTTOM.2. REMOVEPLANTING BARAND PLACESEEDING ATCORRECT DEPTH.3. INSERTPLANTING BAR 2INCHES TOWARDPLANTER FROMSEEDING.5. PUSHHANDLEFORWARDFIRMING SOILAT TOP.6. LEAVECOMPACTIONHOLE OPEN.WATERTHOROUGHLY.PLANTING NOTES:PLANTING BAGDURING PLANTING, SEEDLINGS SHALLBE KEPT IN A MOIST CANVAS BAG ORSIMILAR CONTAINER TO PREVENT THEROOT SYSTEMS FROM DRYING.KBC PLANTING BARPLANTING BAR SHALL HAVE A BLADEWITH A TRIANGULAR CROSS SECTION,AND SHALL BE 12 INCHES LONG, 4INCHES WIDE AND 1 INCH THICK ATCENTER.ROOT PRUNINGALL SEEDLINGS SHALL BE ROOTPRUNED, IF NECESSARY, SO THAT NOROOTS EXTEND MORE THAN 10INCHES BELOW THE ROOT COLLAR.NOTES:BARE ROOTS SHALL BE PLANTED 6FT. TO 10 FT. ON CENTER,RANDOM SPACING, AVERAGING 8FT. ON CENTER, APPROXIMATELY680 PLANTS PER ACRE.BARE ROOT PLANTINGNTS2"
TYPICAL PLAN VIEWCHANNEL TOPOF BANKCHANNEL BOTTOMOF BANKCOIR MATTINGFLOWBRUSH TOENTSNOTES:1.OVER EXCAVATE THE OUTSIDE BEND OF THE CHANNEL. PLACE LARGER BRANCHESAND LOGS IN A CRISS-CROSS PATTERN. LOCK IN PLACE WITH FILL COVERING 6 INTO 12 IN OF THE LARGER BRANCHES/SMALL LOGS.2.PLACE SMALLER BRANCHES AND BRUSH OVER THE LARGER BRANCHES/SMALLLOGS (HARDWOOD SPECIES ONLY) AND COMPACT LIGHTLY TOGETHER. BACKFILLAND COMPACT TO LOCK IN PLACE.3.PLACE LIVE CUTTINGS OVER THE SMALL BRANCHES AND BRUSH. SEE TABLE ONPLANTING SHEET FOR ACCEPTABLE LIVE CUTTING AND LIVE STAKE SPECIES ANDCOMPOSITION. CUTTINGS SHOULD BE RINSED AT CUTTING POINT TO ALLOWBETTER ROOTING.4.INSTALL EROSION CONTROL (COIR) MATTING OVER COMPACTED SOIL PERDIRECTION OF ENGINEER. COIR MATTING SHOULD BE KEYED INTO TOP OF BANK.5.INSTALL 1 TO 3 ROWS OF LIVE STAKES ABOVE THE LIVE CUTTINGS LAYER PERDIRECTION OF ENGINEER.6.LIVE CUTTINGS SHOULD NOT EXTEND PAST 13 OF CHANNEL BOTTOM WIDTH.AASECTION A-ASMALL LOGS AND/ORLARGE BRANCHES WITH AMIN DIAMETER OF 4"SMALL BRANCHESAND BRUSHCOMPACTED SOIL LIFTTOP OF BANKLIVE STAKES1/4 MAX POOL DEPTH1/4 MAX POOL DEPTHLIVE CUTTINGSINSTALL COIR MATTING PER DETAILSEE DWG D1MIN 2.0'6"TOE PROTECTION(LARGER CHANNELS)KEY COIR MATTINGINTO BANKMIN5.0'FILE NAME:R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\CAD\DWG\0674_SHT_DETAILS.dwg SAVED BY: Sfasking
DRAWING TITLE:
PROJECT NAME:SHEET NUMBER:REVISIONS:
RELEASED FOR:
PLOT DATE:PROJECT NUMBER:PROJECT MANAGER:DESIGNED:DRAWN:CHECKED:SEAL3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100Raleigh, NC 27612Main: 919.829.9909www.res.usEngineering Services Provided By:Angler Environmental, LLCLicense: F-1428JOHNSTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
DETAILS
STRAWBERRY HILL MITIGATION SITE
7/22/2020
PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIOND30674JRMBRCSCFAFMNOTES:1.SEE TABLE ON PLANTING SHEET FOR ACCEPTABLE SPECIES AND COMPOSITION.2.LIVE STAKES SHOULD BE 2 TO 3 FEET LONG AND 0.75 TO 2 INCHES IN DIAMETER.3.LIVE STAKES SHALL BE PLANTED ON 1.5' ALTERNATING SPACING ON LARGECHANNELS (POOL DEPTH > 2FT) AND 1.0' ALTERNATING SPACING ON SMALLCHANNELS (POOL DEPTH < 2FT).4.LIVE STAKES SHALL BE PLANTED ON ALL RESTORATION REACHES AND ALONG ALLENHANCEMENT REACHES AS SHOWN ON LIVE STAKE SHEETS.LIVE STAKINGNTSPLAN VIEWNWSTYPICAL SECTIONCOIR FIBERMATTINGSMALL CHANNELSPACINGLARGE CHANNELSPACINGNWSTOB1.5'3.0'1.5'3.0'LIVESTAKE SPACINGLARGE CHANNELINSTALL LIVESTAKESAROUND OUTSIDE OFMEANDER BENDSINSTALL LIVESTAKESAROUND STRUCTURESFLOW
LIVESTAKECOIR FIBERMATTINGNWSTOB1.0'1.0'2.0'LIVESTAKE SPACINGSMALL CHANNELLIVESTAKECOIR FIBERMATTINGWATER TABLECOIR FIBERMATTINGFLAT TOP ENDLATERAL BUDSIDE BRANCHREMOVED ATSLIGHT ANGLE45 DEGREETAPERED BUTT END0.5' TO 1.5'18" MIN.0.75" TO 2"DETAILNTSLOG SILLSECTION A-A' (OPT 1)SECTION B-B'FLOWTYPICAL PLAN VIEWAA'BB'FLOWMIN. 5.0'5.0'MINHIGHLOWHIGHLOWNOTES:1.LOGS SHOULD BE RELATIVELY STRAIGHT HARDWOOD AND RECENTLY HARVESTED.2.COARSE AGGREGATE BACKFILL SHALL CONSIST OF AN EQUAL MIX OF SURGESTONE AND CLASS A RIPRAP.3.HIGH SIDE OF LOG SHALL BE APPROX. 0.2' HIGHER THAN LOW END.4.LOG DIMENSIONS:MIN DIAM. = 12", MIN LENGTH = 18'NAIL FILTER FABRIC USING 3" 10D GALVANIZED COMMON NAIL EVERY 1.5' ALONGTHE LOG.MIN. 4.0'CHANNEL TOPOF BANKCOARSE AGGREGATEBACKFILL (SEE NOTE #2)CHANNEL BOTTOMOF BANKDUCKBILL ANCHOR(OR EQUIVALENT)COIR MATTINGPROPOSEDSTREAM BEDTACK FABRICTO LOGHEADER LOGFOOTER LOGBACKFILL WITH COARSEAGGREGATE (SEE NOTE #2)POOLBACKFILL WITH COARSEAGGREGATE (SEE NOTE #2)NON-WOVENGEOTEXTILE FABRIC(NCDOT TYPE II)NON-WOVENGEOTEXTILE FABRIC(NCDOT TYPE II)BRUSH TOE PROTECTIONLENGTH = BKF WIDTH(UNLESS OTHERWISENOTED ON THE PLANS)SECTION A-A' (OPT 2)FLOWMIN. 5.0'DUCKBILL ANCHOR(OR EQUIVALENT)PROPOSEDSTREAM BEDTACK FABRICTO LOGBACKFILL WITH COARSEAGGREGATE (SEE NOTE #2)SEE PROFILE FORPOOL DEPTHSCOUR POOLNON-WOVENGEOTEXTILE FABRIC(NCDOT TYPE II)SEE PROFILE FORPOOL DEPTH5 - 20°2 - 4%POINT REFERENCED INSTRUCTURE TABLE;TOLERANCE ± 0.1'POINT REFERENCEDIN STRUCTURE TABLE;TOLERANCE ± 0.1'SECTION A-ACOMPACTED SOIL LIFTTOP OF BANKLIVE STAKESLIVE CUTTINGSINSTALL COIRMATTING PER DETAILMIN 2.0'KEY COIR MATTINGINTO BANKHAY BALE TOEMIN 0.3'NTSHAY BALE SHALL BE EVEN WITH DESIGNED BANKSLOPE. AVOID EXCESSIVE PROTUSION FROMBANK.DOWNSTEAM HEADOF RIFFLE ELEVATIONMIN3.0'TYPICAL PLAN VIEWCHANNEL TOPOF BANKCHANNEL BOTTOMOF BANKCOIR MATTINGF
LOW
AA1.HAY BALES SHALL BE APPROXIMATLY 14" X 18" X 36" STANDARD 2 STRAND(BIODEGADABLE TWINE) BALES.2.OVER EXCAVATE THE OUTSIDE BEND OF THE CHANNEL. INSTALL HAY BALE,BACKFILL AND COMPACT TO LOCK IN PLACE.3.HAY BALES SHOULD BE INSTALLED SUCH THAT THE TOP OF THE BALE IS AT THESAME ELEVATION AS THE HEAD OF THE DOWNSTREAM RIFFLE.4.HAY BALES CAN BE INSTALLED ON THE 14" OR 18" SIDE DEPENDING ONREQUIRED ELEVATION.5.PLACE LIVE CUTTINGS OVER THE HAY BALE. SEE TABLE ON PLANTING SHEET FORACCEPTABLE LIVE CUTTING AND LIVE STAKE SPECIES AND COMPOSITION.CUTTINGS SHOULD BE RINSED AT CUTTING POINT TO ALLOW BETTER ROOTING.6.LIVE CUTTINGS SHOULD NOT EXTEND PAST 13 OF CHANNEL BOTTOM WIDTH.7.INSTALL COMPACTED SOIL LIFT. COIR MATTING SHOULD BE WRAPED UNDERSOIL LIFT AND KEYED INTO TOP OF BANK.8.INSTALL 1 TO 3 ROWS OF LIVE STAKES ABOVE THE LIVE CUTTINGS LAYER PERDIRECTION OF ENGINEER.
WOODY RIFFLENTSPLAN VIEWPROFILECROSS SECTION A-A'FLOWVARIESVARIES CHANNELBOTTOM WIDTHFLOWVARIESVARIESVARIESRIFFLERUNGLIDE 0.75' MINCHANNELBOTTOM WIDTHNOTES:1.WOODY RIFFLES SHALL BE INSTALLED IN NEWLY GRADED CHANNEL SECTIONS,AS SPECIFIED BY THE DESIGNER.2.ELEVATION CONTROL POINTS SHALL BE DESIGNATED AT THE BEGINNING ANDEND OF RIFFLE POINTS TO ESTABLISH PART OF THE PROFILE OF THE CHANNEL.SURVEY OF CONTROL POINTS SHALL BE REQUIRED TO ESTABLISH ACCURATERIFFLE INSTALLATION WITHIN A TOLERANCE OF ±0.2'.3.RIFFLE MATERIAL SHALL BE COMPRISED OF A 60/40 MIX OF NATIVE MATERIALAND WOODY MATERIAL. WOODY MATERIAL SHALL CONSIST OF LOGS,BRANCHES, AND BRUSH NO GREATER THAN 4" IN DIAMETER. NATIVE MATERIALSHALL BE EXCAVATED, STOCKPILED, AND RE-USED FROM ABANDONEDCHANNEL SECTIONS.4.THE PLACEMENT OF RIFFLE MATERIAL SHALL BE DONE IN A MANNER TO CREATEA SMOOTH PROFILE, WITH NO ABRUPT “JUMP” (TRANSITION) BETWEEN THEUPSTREAM POOL-GLIDE AND THE RIFFLE, AND LIKEWISE NO ABRUPT “DROP”(TRANSITION) BETWEEN THE RIFFLE AND THE DOWNSTREAM RUN-POOL. THEFINISHED CROSS SECTION OF THE RIFFLE MATERIAL SHALL GENERALLY MATCHTHE SHAPE AND DIMENSIONS SHOWN ON THE RIFFLE TYPICAL SECTION.5.THE END OF RIFFLE CONTROL POINT MAY TIE IN TO ANOTHER IN-STREAMSTRUCTURE (LOG SILL OR J-HOOK).A'APOOLFILE NAME:R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\CAD\DWG\0674_SHT_DETAILS.dwg SAVED BY: Sfasking
DRAWING TITLE:
PROJECT NAME:SHEET NUMBER:REVISIONS:
RELEASED FOR:
PLOT DATE:PROJECT NUMBER:PROJECT MANAGER:DESIGNED:DRAWN:CHECKED:SEAL3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100Raleigh, NC 27612Main: 919.829.9909www.res.usEngineering Services Provided By:Angler Environmental, LLCLicense: F-1428JOHNSTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
DETAILS
STRAWBERRY HILL MITIGATION SITE
7/22/2020
PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIOND40674JRMBRCSCFAFMSECTION B-B'TYPICAL PLAN VIEWAA'BB'FLOW5.0'MINHIGHLOWHIGHLOWNOTES:1.LOGS SHOULD BE RELATIVELY STRAIGHT HARDWOOD AND RECENTLYHARVESTED.2.HIGH SIDE OF LOG SHALL BE APPROX. 0.2' HIGHER THAN LOW END.3.LOG DIMENSIONS:MIN DIAM. = 12", MIN LENGTH = 18'NAIL FILTER FABRIC USING 3" 10D GALVANIZED COMMON NAIL EVERY1.5' ALONG THE LOG.SECTION A-A'FLOW5 - 20°2 - 4%MIN 1'END RIFFLECONTROL POINTPROPOSED TOPOF BANKBEGIN RIFFLECONTROL POINTBEGIN RIFFLEEND RIFFLETOP OF BANKTOE OF BANKTOP OF BANKRIFFLE MATERIALTOP OF BANKPROPOSED TOEOF BANKTHALWEGTHALWEGRIFFLE MATERIAL; MIX OFWOODY DEBRIS (BRANCHES ANDBRUSH) AT 40%, AND NATIVESUBSTRATE MATERIAL AT 60%RIFFLE MATERIAL; MIX OF WOODYDEBRIS (BRANCHES AND BRUSH) AT40%, AND NATIVE SUBSTRATEMATERIAL AT 60%CHANNEL TOPOF BANKCOMPACTED BACKFILLCHANNEL BOTTOMOF BANKCOIR MATTINGHEADER LOGFOOTER LOGPOOLNON-WOVENGEOTEXTILE FABRIC(NCDOT TYPE II)BRUSH TOE PROTECTIONLENGTH = BKF WIDTH(UNLESS OTHERWISENOTED ON THE PLANS)PROPOSEDSTREAM BEDTACK FABRICTO LOGCOMPACT BACKFILLSEE PROFILE FORPOOL DEPTHSCOUR POOLNON-WOVENGEOTEXTILE FABRIC(NCDOT TYPE II)POINT REFERENCED INSTRUCTURE TABLE;TOLERANCE ± 0.1'POINT REFERENCEDIN STRUCTURE TABLE;TOLERANCE ± 0.1'WOODY DEBRIS FILL(LOGS, BRANCHES, ANDBRUSH) COMPACTEDWITH SOILWOODY DEBRIS FILL(LOGS, BRANCHES, ANDBRUSH) COMPACTEDWITH SOILBEGIN RIFFLEBRUSH BED SILLNTSMIN. 5.0'PROPOSED RIFFLE LENGTH

Appendix C

Data/Analysis/Supplementary Information

MEMORANDUM

302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110 Raleigh, North Carolina 27605 919.209.1052 tel. [phone] fax
TO: Jeff Schaffer, DMS
FROM: Brad Breslow (RES)
DATE: May 14, 2019 (Updated June 12, 2019)
RE: Strawberry Hill Site Post-Contract IRT Site Visit Minutes
CU: 03020201
DEQ Contract No: 7745
DMS Project ID: 100094
County: Johnston
DMS Project Manager: Jeff Schaffer

Updates to the below meeting minutes have been made based upon a phone conversation that
occurred on June 12th between Todd Tugwell (USACE), Mac Haupt (DWR), Jeff Schafer (DMS),
Brad Breslow (RES) and Jamey McEachran (RES). These updates are reflected in red. Comments
received via email before the phone conversation mentioned above are in blue for Todd Tugwell
(USACE) and orange for Mac Haupt (DWR).

Meeting Summary:
Date/Time: February 27, 2019- 9:00 am
IRT Attendees: Todd Tugwell (USACE), Mac Haupt (DWR), Travis Wilson (WRC)
DMS: Jeff Schafer, Lindsay Crocker
RES: Brad Breslow, Frasier Mullen, David Godley, Matt DeAngelo, Burt Rudolph

General Summary
IRT members agreed that the Strawberry Hill Site (the “Site) is suitable to provide compensatory
stream mitigation and final credit ratios will be determined in the approved Mitigation Plan. RES
and DMS understand that final design approaches and crediting rationale must be fully justified in
the mitigation plan. Katie Merritt (DWR) was unable to attend the February 27 site visit; Katie and
Jeff Schaffer met RES onsite on March 14, 2019 to conduct stream determinations and buffer
viability assessments of the project reaches.
• Mac Haupt Response (Email 6/12/2019): General Comment; for a stream site this project is
small. In the future, this type of site may not be accepted.

Reach JH1-A
• Stream Enhancement II along with buffer restoration/preservation is proposed for this
reach.
• Enhancement II activities would include stabilizing banks and installing log sills and brush
toes to address erosional areas and provide in-stream habitat as well as riparian buffer

planting. USACE expressed concerns about the functional uplift of this approach and,
instead, suggested a Priority 1 (P1) Restoration approach. RES explained that the elevation
constraints at both the upstream boundary of the reach and the NCDOT road culvert at the
downstream end of the reach, combined with the short length (~914 LF) of the reach
dictated the proposed Enhancement II treatment.
• Alternatively, RES and DWR discussed the benefit of applying an Enhancement I approach
that could include floodplain benching along the right bank, installing structures to promote
bedform diversity and instream habitat, installing single wing deflectors to promote base
flow pattern, and adding large woody debris. RES agreed that this approach would provide
more functional uplift.
• Todd Tugwell Response (Email 5/24/2019) : For Reach JH1A, I don't believe that an E2
approach would be appropriate as it would basically be planting buffers on a ditch, similar to what
was proposed for JH5. I understand that a restoration approach may not be possible due to site
constraints, but I think this is really what is needed. For an E1 approach, I am just concerned that
it would not result in conditions that are that different than what we would see with an E2 approach.
The channel was not particularly unstable, and benching would not add significantly to the ability
of the system to flood out of its banks. This might be a reach that should also be excluded because
constraints prevent taking the approach that the reach needs.
• Phone Conversation Outcome: It was generally agreed upon by the parties on the phone
that some combination of restoration (priority 1 and 2) and potentially areas of
enhancement I would be agreeable as an approach on this reach. However, concerns were
raised about the capacity for the drainage area and that an adequate slope could be
maintained. USACE and DWR agreed that the risk is the responsibility of RES and DMS
and the practicality would need to be provided within the Draft Mitigation Plan.
Reach JH1-B
• Stream Restoration and buffer restoration/preservation are proposed for this reach.
• The reach will start with Priority 2 (P2) Restoration just below the NCDOT road culvert
and transition to P1 for the remainder. WRC expressed concerns about the functional uplift
provided within the P2 area regarding hydrology benefits and in-stream habitat. RES will
base design and length of the P2 upon a detailed topographic survey. Justification for the
treatment approach will be provided in the mitigation plan.
• All agreed that Restoration was appropriate approach for the reach. Based on the
discussion, RES is proposing to combine the two crossing to a single, shared crossing at
the midpoint of the reach. RES will enter negotiations with the landowners, and the
resulting crossing plan will be depicted in the mitigation plan.
• Mac Haupt Response (Email 6/12/2019): Reach JH1-B- proposed as Restoration.
Probably a combo P1/2. I am ok with this approach, Travis expressed some trepidation
with amount of functional uplift (some of the stream was not incised and did not show
evidence of getting out of bank). I believe moving the stream over and giving it more
floodplain access and likely restoring some wetlands in the process is worthwhile.

Reaches JH2, JH3, and JH4

• Buffer restoration is proposed for these reaches.
• Did not assess during initial visit

Reach JH5
• Stream Enhancement II along with buffer restoration/preservation is proposed for this
reach.
• USACE, DWR, and WRC expressed concerns about the functional uplift of this approach
and, instead, suggested a Priority 1 (P1) Restoration approach. RES explained that the
elevation constraints at both the upstream and downstream extents of the reach combined
with the short length (~756 LF) of the reach, made a Restoration approach impractical for
the Project as proposed. Therefore, RES discussed the potential opportunity to include the
downstream parcel in order to lengthen the Project thereby making P1 Restoration of the
entire reach practical. Alternatively, RES may exercise the option to include this reach at
a reduced credit ratio, likely 5:1 or 7.5:1, and also to include the reach for riparian buffer
crediting. Ultimately, the approach will be justified in the mitigation plan.
• Todd Tugwell Response (Email 5/24/2019): I do not believe that reach JH5 should be
included in the project as proposed. As you noted, we did not review JH2, 3, or 4, so I
cannot really comment on these, but without a connection downstream of JH5, I feel this
section should be excluded from the project. If it were included with other reaches and
connected downstream, I think that we would also need to reassess the site and that a
different approach may be warranted (e.g., restoration).
• Mac Haupt Response (Email 6/12/2019): This reach is more of a reach for riparian
buffer credit. In addition, I did not feel the 1,000 foot Bank add on was feasible for a
project (short reach).
• Phone Conversation (6/12/2019): RES heard everyone’s comments and intends to only
use this part of the project for Riparian Buffer Credit based on the buffer viability calls
made by NCDWR’s Katie Merritt and will not be pursuing stream credit on this reach.

X
X
X
X
X
X 3
2
1
5
4
6
JH1
JH5DitchDitchDitch
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID,IGN, and the GIS User Community
0 400200
Feet
Legend
Proposed Easement
X XS Location
Stream
Ditch
©Date: 1/20/2020
Drawn by: MDD
Checked by: xxxxxxxx
Document Path: R:\resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\MXD\PostDataCollection_StrawberryHill.mxdPost-Data Collection Map
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project
Johnston County, North Carolina 1 inch = 400 feet
Upstream Downstream
95.5
96
96.5
97
97.5
98
98.5
99
99.5
100
100.5
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26Elevation (ft)Distance (ft)
Reach JH1 - XS1 (Riffle)
Ground Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
Upstream Downstream
96
96.5
97
97.5
98
98.5
99
99.5
100
100.5
0 5 10 15 20 25Elevation (ft)Distance (ft)
Reach JH1 - XS2 (Riffle)
Ground Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
Upstream Downstream
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
0 5 10 15 20 25 30Elevation (ft)Distance (ft)
Reach JH1 - XS3 (Riffle)
Ground Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
Upstream Downstream
96
96.5
97
97.5
98
98.5
99
99.5
100
100.5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30Elevation (ft)Distance (ft)
Reach JH1 - XS4 (Riffle)
Ground Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
Upstream Downstream
96
96.5
97
97.5
98
98.5
99
99.5
100
100.5
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24Elevation (ft)Distance (ft)
Reach JH1 - XS5 (Riffle)
Ground Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
Upstream Downstream
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22Elevation (ft)Distance (ft)
Reach JH5 - XS6 (Riffle)
Ground Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
Upstream Downstream
185
186
187
188
189
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35Elevation (ft)Distance (ft)
Buffalo Branch Reference Reach -XS1 (Riffle)
Reference Reach Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
Upstream Downstream
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40Elevation (ft)Distance (ft)
Buffalo Branch Reference Reach -XS2 (Pool)
Reference Reach Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
Upstream Downstream
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35Elevation (ft)Distance (ft)
Buffalo Branch Reference Reach -XS3 (Pool)
Reference Reach Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
Upstream Downstream
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40Elevation (ft)Distance (ft)
Buffalo Branch Reference Reach -XS4 (Riffle)
Reference Reach Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
Strawberry Hill Morphological Parameters
Feature Riffle Pool Riffle Riffle Riffle Riffle Riffle Pool Riffle Pool
Drainage Area (ac)
Drainage Area (mi2)
NC Regional Curve Discharge (cfs)2
VA Regional Curve Discharge (cfs)3
Design/Calculated Discharge (cfs)1
Dimension
BKF Cross Sectional Area (ft2)12.8 11.8 7.1 8.3 9.3 8.5 8.8 14.9 8.8 14.9
BKF Width (ft)12.3 8.5 6.7 11.8 9.3 9.6 9.6 12.0 9.6 12.0
BKF Mean Depth (ft)1.1 1.4 1.1 0.7 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.2 0.9 1.2
BKF Max Depth (ft)1.8 2.2 1.5 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.4 2.2 1.4 2.2
Wetted Perimeter (ft)13.2 10.1 7.8 12.3 10.3 10.5 10.2 12.9 10.2 12.9
Hydraulic Radius (ft)1.0 1.2 0.9 0.7 0.9 0.8 0.9 1.2 0.9 1.2
Width/Depth Ratio 12.3 6.2 6.3 16.9 9.3 10.8 10.4 9.7 10.4 9.7
Floodprone Width (ft)33.8 35.6 12.4 15.5 11.6 20.2 >25 >25 >25 >25
Entrenchment Ratio 3.0 4.2 1.9 1.3 1.2 2.1 >2.2 >2.2 >2.2 >2.2
Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.1 1.5 1.9 2.3 1.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Substrate
Description (D50)
D16 (mm)
D50 (mm)
D84 (mm)
Pattern
Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max
Channel Beltwidth (ft)6 28 ----9 24 7 32
Radius of Curvature (ft)20 25 ----20 30 17 30
Radius of Curvature Ratio 2 2 ----2.1 3.1 1.8 3.1
Meander Wavelength (ft)43 81 ----67 112 55 111
Meander Width Ratio 0 2 ----7.0 11.7 5.7 11.6
Profile
Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max
Riffle Length (ft) 7 22 - - - - 10 38 9 43
Run Length (ft)3 15 --------
Pool Length (ft)5 24 ----15 33 10 35
Pool -to-Pool Spacing (ft)23 53 ----33 60 32 73
Additional Reach Parameters
Valley Length (ft)
Channel Length (ft)
Sinuosity
Valley Slope (ft/ft)
Channel Slope (ft/ft)
Rosgen Classification
1 Bankfull stage was estimated using NC Regional Curve equations and existing conditions data
2 NC Regional Curve equations source: Doll et al. (2003)
3 VA Regional Curve equations source: Krstolic and Chaplin (2007)
Reference Existing
UT to Buffalo Creek JH1-A JH1-B JH1-B
1.11 0.30 0.42
193 266
0.30 0.42
709 193 266
JH1-A
7
14
17 - -8
18 7 9
30 14 17
0.4 - -
Very Coarse Sand Sand Sand
5.7 - -
-1.6 - -
-
312 921
924
1041
255 920
2461
2438
0.003 0.001 0.002
1.13
0.016
1.22 1.00 1.01
0.002 0.001 0.002
C5/E5E5 F5 F5
0.001
0.006
0.001 - 0.003
C5/E5
Design
-
-
2427
2777
1.14
9
17
13
Sand/Fine Gravel
--
Sand/Fine Gravel

Appendix D

Site Protection Instrument

SITE PROTECTION INSTRUMENT
Site Protection Instrument(s) Summary Information
The land required for the construction, management, and stewardship of this mitigation project includes
portions of the parcels listed below in Table D1. EBX-Neuse I, LLC (an entity of RES) will obtain a
conservation easement from the current landowners for the project area. The easement deed and survey plat
will be submitted to DMS and State Property Office (SPO) for approval and will be held by the State of
North Carolina. The easement deed will follow the NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement
Template dated May 5, 2017 and included in this appendix. Once recorded, the secured easement will allow
EBX-Neuse I, LLC to proceed with the project development and protect the mitigation assets in perpetuity.
Once finalized, a copy of the land protection instrument(s) will be included in Appendix D.

Table D1. Project Parcel and Landowner Information
Owner of Record Tax Parcel
ID # County Site Protection
Instrument
Deed Book and
Page Numbers
Acreage
Protected
Jan Penny Hill
260200-26-4743
260200-45-0227
260200-36-4485
260200-35-1474
Johnston
Conservation
Easement

05111-0571 ~18.21
William Christian
Carpenter 260200-36-4710 Johnston
Conservation
Easement

03754-0814 ~0.24
Melrose Haas 260200-46-0253 Johnston Conservation
Easement 04060-0391 ~1.26
Bridgette Edwards
Davis 260200-46-1831 Johnston Conservation
Easement 03960-0792 ~2.18

NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template AG reviewed 11 May 2017

Page 1 of 11

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT
AND RIGHT OF ACCESS PROVIDED
PURSUANT TO
FULL DELIVERY
MITIGATION CONTRACT
_______________ COUNTY

SPO File Number:
DMS Project Number:

Prepared by: Office of the Attorney General
Property Control Section
Return to: NC Department of Administration
State Property Office
1321 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1321

THIS DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND RIGHT OF ACCESS, made
this ________day of ________________, 20__, by Landowner name goes here ,
(“Grantor”), whose mailing address is Landowner address goes here , to the State of North
Carolina, (“Grantee”), whose mailing address is State of North Carolina, Department of
Administration, State Property Office, 1321 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1321. The
designations of Grantor and Grantee as used herein shall include said parties, their heirs,
successors, and assigns, and shall include singular, plural, masculine, feminine, or neuter as
required by context.

WITNESSETH:

WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-214.8 et seq., the State of
North Carolina has established the Division of Mitigation Services (formerly known as the
Ecosystem Enhancement Program and Wetlands Restoration Program) within the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources for the purposes of acquiring, maintaining, restoring,
enhancing, creating and preserving wetland and riparian resources that contribute to the protection
and improvement of water quality, flood prevention, fisheries, aquatic habitat, wildlife habitat, and
recreational opportunities; and
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template AG reviewed 11 May 2017

Page 2 of 11

WHEREAS, this Conservation Easement from Grantor to Grantee has been negotiated,
arranged and provided for as a condition of a full delivery contract between ( insert name and address
of full delivery contract provider ) and the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, to provide stream, wetland and/or buffer mitigation pursuant to the North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources Purchase and Services Contract Number
__________.

WHEREAS, The State of North Carolina is qualified to be the Grantee of a Conservation
Easement pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 121-35; and

WHEREAS, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources and the United States
Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District entered into a Memorandum of Understanding,
(MOU) duly executed by all parties on November 4, 1998. This MOU recognized that the
Wetlands Restoration Program was to provide effective compensatory mitigation for authorized
impacts to wetlands, streams and other aquatic resources by restoring, enhancing and preserving
the wetland and riparian areas of the State; and

WHEREAS, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the North Carolina
Department of Transportation and the United States Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington
District entered into a Memorandum of Agreement, (MOA) duly executed by all parties in
Greensboro, NC on July 22, 2003, which recognizes that the Division of Mitigation Services
(formerly Ecosystem Enhancement Program) is to provide for compensatory mitigation by
effective protection of the land, water and natural resources of the State by restoring, enhancing
and preserving ecosystem functions; and

WHEREAS, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, the North Carolina Division of Water Quality,
the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management, and the National Marine Fisheries Service
entered into an agreement to continue the In-Lieu Fee operations of the North Carolina Department
of Natural Resources’ Division of Mitigation Services (formerly Ecosystem Enhancement
Program) with an effective date of 28 July, 2010, which supersedes and replaces the previously
effective MOA and MOU referenced above; and

WHEREAS, the acceptance of this instrument for and on behalf of the State of North
Carolina was granted to the Department of Administration by resolution as approved by the
Governor and Council of State adopted at a meeting held in the City of Raleigh, North Carolina,
on the 8th day of February 2000; and

WHEREAS, the Division of Mitigation Services in the Department of Environment and
Natural Resources, which has been delegated the authority authorized by the Governor and
Council of State to the Department of Administration, has approved acceptance of this instrument;
and

NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template AG reviewed 11 May 2017

Page 3 of 11

WHEREAS, Grantor owns in fee simple certain real property situated, lying, and being in
__________ Township, ___________ County, North Carolina (the "Property"), and being more
particularly described as that certain parcel of land containing approximately ________ acres and
being conveyed to the Grantor by deed as recorded in Deed Book _____ at Page ____ of the
_________ County Registry, North Carolina; and

WHEREAS, Grantor is willing to grant a Conservation Easement and Right of Access
over the herein described areas of the Property, thereby restricting and limiting the use of the areas
of the Property subject to the Conservation Easement to the terms and conditions and purposes
hereinafter set forth, and Grantee is willing to accept said Easement and Access Rights. The
Conservation Easement shall be for the protection and benefit of the waters of if known, insert
name of stream, branch, river or waterway here.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, terms, conditions, and
restrictions hereinafter set forth, Grantor unconditionally and irrevocably hereby grants and
conveys unto Grantee, its successors and assigns, forever and in perpetuity, a Conservation
Easement and Right of Access together with an access easement to and from the Conservation
Easement Area described below.

The Conservation Easement Area consists of the following:

Tracts Number ________________ containing a total of _________ acres as shown on the plats
of survey entitled “Final Plat, Conservation Easement for North Carolina Division of Mitigation
Services, Project Name: ___________, SPO File No.__________, DMS Site No. ___________,
Property of _________________________,” dated ___________, 20__ by name of surveyor, PLS
Number __________ and recorded in the ______________ County, North Carolina Register of
Deeds at Plat Book _______ Pages __________.

See attached “Exhibit A”, Legal Description of area of the Property hereinafter referred to as the
“Conservation Easement Area”

The purposes of this Conservation Easement are to maintain, restore, enhance, construct,
create and preserve wetland and/or riparian resources in the Conservation Easement Area that
contribute to the protection and improvement of water quality, flood prevention, fisheries, aquatic
habitat, wildlife habitat, and recreational opportunities; to maintain permanently the Conservation
Easement Area in its natural condition, consistent with these purposes; and to prevent any use of
the Easement Area that will significantly impair or interfere with these purposes. To achieve these
purposes, the following conditions and restrictions are set forth:

I. DURATION OF EASEMENT

Pursuant to law, including the above referenced statutes, this Conservation Easement and
Right of Access shall be perpetual and it shall run with, and be a continuing restriction upon the
use of, the Property, and it shall be enforceable by the Grantee against the Grantor and against
Grantor’s heirs, successors and assigns, personal representatives, agents, lessees, and licensees.
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template AG reviewed 11 May 2017

Page 4 of 11

II. ACCESS EASEMENT
choose one option based on survey and deed, delete other
[SPECIFIC LOCATION OPTION] Grantor hereby grants and conveys unto Grantee, its
employees, agents, successors and assigns, a perpetual, non-exclusive easement for ingress and
egress over and upon the Property at all reasonable times and at the location more particularly
described on Exhibit ___ (“Access Easement”) attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
reference, to access the Conservation Easement Area for the purposes set forth herein. This grant
of easement shall not vest any rights in the public and shall not be construed as a public dedication
of the Access Easement. Grantor covenants, represents and warrants that it is the sole owner of
and is seized of the Property in fee simple and has the right to grant and convey this Access
Easement.

[GENERAL LOCATION OPTION] Grantor hereby grants and conveys unto Grantee, its
employees, agents, successors and assigns, a perpetual, non-exclusive easement for ingress and
egress over and upon the Property at all reasonable times and at such location as practically
necessary to access the Conservation Easement Area for the purposes set forth herein (“Access
Easement”). This grant of easement shall not vest any rights in the public and shall not be construed
as a public dedication of the Access Easement. Grantor covenants, represents and warrants that it
is the sole owner of and is seized of the Property in fee simple and has the right to grant and
convey this Access Easement.

III. GRANTOR RESERVED USES AND RESTRICTED ACTIVITIES

The Conservation Easement Area shall be restricted from any development or usage that
would impair or interfere with the purposes of this Conservation Easement. Unless expressly
reserved as a compatible use herein, any activity in, or use of, the Conservation Easement Area by
the Grantor is prohibited as inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation Easement. Any
rights not expressly reserved hereunder by the Grantor have been acquired by the Grantee. Any
rights not expressly reserved hereunder by the Grantor, including the rights to all mitigation
credits, including, but not limited to, stream, wetland, and riparian buffer mitigation units, derived
from each site within the area of the Conservation Easement, are conveyed to and belong to the
Grantee. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the following specific uses are
prohibited, restricted, or reserved as indicated:

A. Recreational Uses. Grantor expressly reserves the right to undeveloped recreational uses,
including hiking, bird watching, hunting and fishing, and access to the Conservation Easement
Area for the purposes thereof.

B. Motorized Vehicle Use. Motorized vehicle use in the Conservation Easement Area is
prohibited except within a Crossing Area(s) or Road or Trail as shown on the recorded survey plat.

C. Educational Uses. The Grantor reserves the right to engage in and permit others to engage
in educational uses in the Conservation Easement Area not inconsistent with this Conservation
Easement, and the right of access to the Conservation Easement Area for such purposes including
organized educational activities such as site visits and observations. Educational uses of the
property shall not alter vegetation, hydrology or topography of the site.
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template AG reviewed 11 May 2017

Page 5 of 11

D. Damage to Vegetation. Except within Crossing Area(s) as shown on the recorded survey
plat and as related to the removal of non-native plants, diseased or damaged trees, or vegetation
that destabilizes or renders unsafe the Conservation Easement Area to persons or natural habitat,
all cutting, removal, mowing, harming, or destruction of any trees and vegetation in the
Conservation Easement Area is prohibited.

E. Industrial, Residential and Commercial Uses. All industrial, residential and commercial
uses are prohibited in the Conservation Easement Area.

F. Agricultural Use. All agricultural uses are prohibited within the Conservation Easement
Area including any use for cropland, waste lagoons, or pastureland.

G. New Construction. There shall be no building, facility, mobile home, antenna, utility
pole, tower, or other structure constructed or placed in the Conservation Easement Area.

H. Roads and Trails. There shall be no construction or maintenance of new roads, trails,
walkways, or paving in the Conservation Easement.

All existing roads, trails and crossings within the Conservation Easement Area shall be shown on
the recorded survey plat.

I. Signs. No signs shall be permitted in the Conservation Easement Area except interpretive
signs describing restoration activities and the conservation values of the Conservation Easement
Area, signs identifying the owner of the Property and the holder of the Conservation Easement,
signs giving directions, or signs prescribing rules and regulations for the use of the Conservation
Easement Area.

J. Dumping or Storing. Dumping or storage of soil, trash, ashes, garbage, waste, abandoned
vehicles, appliances, machinery, or any other material in the Conservation Easement Area is
prohibited.

K. Grading, Mineral Use, Excavation, Dredging. There shall be no grading, filling,
excavation, dredging, mining, drilling, hydraulic fracturing; removal of topsoil, sand, gravel, rock,
peat, minerals, or other materials.

L. Water Quality and Drainage Patterns. There shall be no diking, draining, dredging,
channeling, filling, leveling, pumping, impounding or diverting, causing, allowing or permitting
the diversion of surface or underground water in the Conservation Easement Area. No altering or
tampering with water control structures or devices, or disruption or alteration of the restored,
enhanced, or created drainage patterns is allowed. All removal of wetlands, polluting or
discharging into waters, springs, seeps, or wetlands, or use of pesticide or biocides in the
Conservation Easement Area is prohibited. In the event of an emergency interruption or shortage
of all other water sources, water from within the Conservation Easement Area may temporarily be
withdrawn for good cause shown as needed for the survival of livestock on the Property.

NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template AG reviewed 11 May 2017

Page 6 of 11

M. Subdivision and Conveyance. Grantor voluntarily agrees that no further subdivision,
partitioning, or dividing of the Conservation Easement Area portion of the Property owned by the
Grantor in fee simple (“fee”) that is subject to this Conservation Easement is allowed. Any future
transfer of the Property shall be subject to this Conservation Easement and Right of Access and to the
Grantee’s right of unlimited and repeated ingress and egress over and across the Property to the
Conservation Easement Area for the purposes set forth herein.

N. Development Rights. All development rights are permanently removed from the
Conservation Easement Area and are non-transferrable.

O. Disturbance of Natural Features. Any change, disturbance, alteration or impairment of
the natural features of the Conservation Easement Area or any intentional introduction of non-
native plants, trees and/or animal species by Grantor is prohibited.

The Grantor may request permission to vary from the above restrictions for good cause
shown, provided that any such request is not inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation
Easement, and the Grantor obtains advance written approval from the Division of Mitigation
Services, 1652 Mail Services Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652.

IV. GRANTEE RESERVED USES

A. Right of Access, Construction, and Inspection. The Grantee, its employees, agents,
successors and assigns, shall have a perpetual Right of Access over and upon the Conservation
Easement Area to undertake or engage in any activities necessary to construct, maintain, manage,
enhance, repair, restore, protect, monitor and inspect the stream, wetland and any other riparian
resources in the Conservation Easement Area for the purposes set forth herein or any long-term
management plan for the Conservation Easement Area developed pursuant to this Conservation
Easement.
B. Restoration Activities. These activities include planting of trees, shrubs and herbaceous
vegetation, installation of monitoring wells, utilization of heavy equipment to grade, fill, and
prepare the soil, modification of the hydrology of the site, and installation of natural and manmade
materials as needed to direct in-stream, above ground, and subterraneous water flow.

C. Signs. The Grantee, its employees and agents, successors or assigns, shall be permitted to
place signs and witness posts on the Property to include any or all of the following: describe the
project, prohibited activities within the Conservation Easement, or identify the project boundaries
and the holder of the Conservation Easement.

D. Fences. Conservation Easements are purchased to protect the investments by the State
(Grantee) in natural resources. Livestock within conservations easements damages the investment
and can result in reductions in natural resource value and mitigation credits which would cause
financial harm to the State. Therefore, Landowners (Grantor) with livestock are required to restrict
livestock access to the Conservation Easement area. Repeated failure to do so may result in the
State (Grantee) repairing or installing livestock exclusion devices (fences) within the conservation
area for the purpose of restricting livestock access. In such cases, the landowner (Grantor) must
provide access to the State (Grantee) to make repairs.

NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template AG reviewed 11 May 2017

Page 7 of 11

E. Crossing Area(s). The Grantee is not responsible for maintenance of crossing area(s),
however, the Grantee, its employees and agents, successors or assigns, reserve the right to repair
crossing area(s), at its sole discretion and to recover the cost of such repairs from the Grantor if
such repairs are needed as a result of activities of the Grantor, his successors or assigns.

V. ENFORCEMENT AND REMEDIES

A. Enforcement. To accomplish the purposes of this Conservation Easement, Grantee is
allowed to prevent any activity within the Conservation Easement Area that is inconsistent with
the purposes of this Conservation Easement and to require the restoration of such areas or features
in the Conservation Easement Area that may have been damaged by such unauthorized activity or
use. Upon any breach of the terms of this Conservation Easement by Grantor, the Grantee shall,
except as provided below, notify the Grantor in writing of such breach and the Grantor shall have
ninety (90) days after receipt of such notice to correct the damage caused by such breach. If the
breach and damage remains uncured after ninety (90) days, the Grantee may enforce this
Conservation Easement by bringing appropriate legal proceedings including an action to recover
damages, as well as injunctive and other relief. The Grantee shall also have the power and
authority, consistent with its statutory authority: (a) to prevent any impairment of the Conservation
Easement Area by acts which may be unlawful or in violation of this Conservation Easement; (b)
to otherwise preserve or protect its interest in the Property; or (c) to seek damages from any
appropriate person or entity. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Grantee reserves the immediate
right, without notice, to obtain a temporary restraining order, injunctive or other appropriate relief,
if the breach is or would irreversibly or otherwise materially impair the benefits to be derived from
this Conservation Easement, and the Grantor and Grantee acknowledge that the damage would be
irreparable and remedies at law inadequate. The rights and remedies of the Grantee provided
hereunder shall be in addition to, and not in lieu of, all other rights and remedies available to
Grantee in connection with this Conservation Easement.

B. Inspection. The Grantee, its employees and agents, successors and assigns, have the right,
with reasonable notice, to enter the Conservation Easement Area over the Property at reasonable
times for the purpose of inspection to determine whether the Grantor is complying with the terms,
conditions and restrictions of this Conservation Easement.

C. Acts Beyond Grantor’s Control. Nothing contained in this Conservation Easement shall
be construed to entitle Grantee to bring any action against Grantor for any injury or change in the
Conservation Easement Area caused by third parties, resulting from causes beyond the Grantor’s
control, including, without limitation, fire, flood, storm, and earth movement, or from any prudent
action taken in good faith by the Grantor under emergency conditions to prevent, abate, or mitigate
significant injury to life or damage to the Property resulting from such causes.

D. Costs of Enforcement. Beyond regular and typical monitoring expenses, any costs
incurred by Grantee in enforcing the terms of this Conservation Easement against Grantor,
including, without limitation, any costs of restoration necessitated by Grantor’s acts or omissions
in violation of the terms of this Conservation Easement, shall be borne by Grantor.

NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template AG reviewed 11 May 2017

Page 8 of 11

E. No Waiver. Enforcement of this Easement shall be at the discretion of the Grantee and
any forbearance, delay or omission by Grantee to exercise its rights hereunder in the event of any
breach of any term set forth herein shall not be construed to be a waiver by Grantee.

VI. MISCELLANEOUS

A. This instrument sets forth the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the
Conservation Easement and supersedes all prior discussions, negotiations, understandings or
agreements relating to the Conservation Easement. If any provision is found to be invalid, the
remainder of the provisions of the Conservation Easement, and the application of such provision
to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is found to be invalid, shall not be
affected thereby.

B. Grantor is responsible for any real estate taxes, assessments, fees, or charges levied upon
the Property. Grantee shall not be responsible for any costs or liability of any kind related to the
ownership, operation, insurance, upkeep, or maintenance of the Property, except as expressly
provided herein. Upkeep of any constructed bridges, fences, or other amenities on the Property are
the sole responsibility of the Grantor. Nothing herein shall relieve the Grantor of the obligation to
comply with federal, state or local laws, regulations and permits that may apply to the exercise of
the Reserved Rights.

C. Any notices shall be sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested to the
parties at their addresses shown herein or to other addresses as either party establishes in writing
upon notification to the other.

D. Grantor shall notify Grantee in writing of the name and address and any party to whom the
Property or any part thereof is to be transferred at or prior to the time said transfer is made. Grantor
further agrees that any subsequent lease, deed, or other legal instrument by which any interest in
the Property is conveyed is subject to the Conservation Easement herein created.

E. The Grantor and Grantee agree that the terms of this Conservation Easement shall survive
any merger of the fee and easement interests in the Property or any portion thereof.

F. This Conservation Easement and Right of Access may be amended, but only in writing
signed by all parties hereto, or their successors or assigns, if such amendment does not affect the
qualification of this Conservation Easement or the status of the Grantee under any applicable laws,
and is consistent with the purposes of the Conservation Easement. The owner of the Property shall
notify the State Property Office and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in writing sixty (60) days
prior to the initiation of any transfer of all or any part of the Property or of any request to void or
modify this Conservation Easement. Such notifications and modification requests shall be
addressed to:

NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template AG reviewed 11 May 2017

Page 9 of 11

Division of Mitigation Services Program Manager
NC State Property Office
1321 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1321

and

General Counsel
US Army Corps of Engineers
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, NC 28403

G. The parties recognize and agree that the benefits of this Conservation Easement are in gross
and assignable provided, however, that the Grantee hereby covenants and agrees, that in the event
it transfers or assigns this Conservation Easement, the organization receiving the interest will be a
qualified holder under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 121-34 et seq. and § 170(h) of the Internal Revenue Code,
and the Grantee further covenants and agrees that the terms of the transfer or assignment will be
such that the transferee or assignee will be required to continue in perpetuity the conservation
purposes described in this document.

VII. QUIET ENJOYMENT

Grantor reserves all remaining rights accruing from ownership of the Property, including
the right to engage in or permit or invite others to engage in only those uses of the Conservation
Easement Area that are expressly reserved herein, not prohibited or restricted herein, and are not
inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation Easement. Without limiting the generality of
the foregoing, the Grantor expressly reserves to the Grantor, and the Grantor's invitees and
licensees, the right of access to the Conservation Easement Area, and the right of quiet enjoyment
of the Conservation Easement Area,

TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said rights and easements perpetually unto the State of
North Carolina for the aforesaid purposes,

AND Grantor covenants that Grantor is seized of the Property in fee and has the right to
convey the permanent Conservation Easement herein granted; that the same is free from
encumbrances and that Grantor will warrant and defend title to the same against the claims of all
persons whomsoever.

NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template AG reviewed 11 May 2017

Page 10 of 11

IN TESTIMONY, WHEREOF, the Grantor has hereunto set his hand and seal, the day
and year first above written.

___________________________________ (SEAL)

NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF _________________

I, _____________________________, a Notary Public in and for the County and State aforesaid,
do hereby certify that _________________________, Grantor, personally appeared before me this
day and acknowledged the execution of the foregoing instrument.

IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and Notary Seal this the __________
day of ___________________, 20__.

________________________________________
Notary Public

My commission expires:

______________________________

NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template AG reviewed 11 May 2017

Page 11 of 11

Exhibit A

[INSERT LEGAL DESCRIPTION]

Appendix E

Credit Release Schedule

CREDIT RELEASE SCHEDULE
All credit releases will be based on the total credit generated as reported in the approved final mitigation
plan, unless there are major discrepancies and then a mitigation plan addendum will be submitted. Under
no circumstances shall any mitigation project be debited until the necessary Department of the Army (DA)
authorization has been received for its construction or the District Engineer (DE) has otherwise provided
written approval for the project in the case where no DA authorization is required for construction of the
mitigation project. The DE, in consultation with the IRT, will determine if performance standards have
been satisfied sufficiently to meet the requirements of the release schedules below. In cases where some
performance standards have not been met, credits may still be released depending on the specifics of the
case. Monitoring may be required to be restarted or be extended, depending on the extent to which the site
fails to meet the specified performance standard. The release of project credits will be subject to the criteria
described as follows in Table E1.

Table E1. Stream Credit Release Schedule
Credit
Release
Milestone
Release Activity Interim
Release
Total
Release

0 Initial Allocation – see requirements below 30% 30%

1 First year monitoring report demonstrates performance
standards are being met 10% 40%

2 Second year monitoring report demonstrates
performance standards are being met 10% 50%

3 Third year monitoring report demonstrates performance
standards are being met 10% 60%

4 Fourth year monitoring report demonstrates performance
standards are being met 5% 65%
(75%**)
5 Fifth year monitoring report demonstrates performance
standards are being met 10% 75%
(85%**)
6* Sixth year monitoring report demonstrates performance
standards are being met 5% 80%
(90%**)
7 Seventh year monitoring report demonstrates
performance standards are being met and project has
received closeout approval
10% 90%
(100%**)
*Please note that vegetation data may not be required with monitoring reports submitted during these monitoring years
unless otherwise required by the Mitigation Plan or directed by the IRT.
**10% reserve of credits to be held back until the bankfull event performance standard has been met.

Initial Allocation of Released Credits
The initial allocation of released credits, as specified in the mitigation plan, can be released by DMS without
prior written approval of the DE upon satisfactory completion of the following activities:
1) Approval of the final Mitigation Plan.
2) Recordation of the preservation mechanism, as well as a title opinion acceptable to the USACE
covering the property.
3) Completion of project construction (the initial physical and biological improvements to the
mitigation site) pursuant to the mitigation plan; per the DMS Instrument, construction means
that a mitigation site has been constructed in its entirety, to include planting, and an as-built
report has been produced. As-built reports must be sealed by an engineer prior to project
closeout, if appropriate but not prior to the initial allocation of released credits.
4) Receipt of necessary DA permit authorization or written DA approval for projects where DA
permit issuance is not required.
Subsequent Credit Releases
All subsequent credit releases must be approved by the DE, in consultation with the IRT, based on a
determination that required performance standards have been achieved. For stream projects a reserve of
10% of a site’s total stream credits shall be released after four bankfull events have occurred, in separate
years, provided the channel is stable and all other performance standards are met. In the event that less than
four bankfull events occur during the monitoring period, release of these reserve credits shall be at the
discretion of the IRT. As projects approach milestones associated with credit release, DMS will submit a
request for credit release to the DE along with documentation substantiating achievement of criteria
required for release to occur. This documentation will be included with the annual monitoring report.

Appendix F

Financial Assurance

FINANCIAL ASSURANCE

Pursuant to Section IV H and Appendix III of the NCDEQ DMS (formerly Ecosystem Enhancement
Program) In-Lieu Fee Instrument dated July 28, 2010, the North Carolina Department of Environmental
Quality (NCDEQ) has provided the USACE-Wilmington District with a formal commitment to fund
projects to satisfy mitigation requirements assumed by NCDEQ DMS. This commitment provides financial
assurance for all mitigation projects implemented by the program.

Appendix G

Maintenance Plan

MAINTENANCE PLAN
The site will be monitored on a regular basis and a physical inspection will be conducted a minimum of
once per year throughout the post construction monitoring period until performance standards are met.
These site inspections may identify site components and features that require routine maintenance. Routine
maintenance should be expected most often in the first two years following site construction and may
include the following:

G1. Maintenance Plan
Component/Feature Maintenance through project close-out
Stream Routine channel maintenance and repair activities may include chinking of
in-stream structures to prevent piping, securing of loose coir matting, and
supplemental installations of live stakes and other target vegetation along the
channel. Areas where stormwater and floodplain flows intercept the channel
may also require maintenance to prevent bank failures and head-cutting.
Stream maintenance activities will be documented and reported in annual
monitoring reports. Stream maintenance will continue through the
monitoring period.
Wetland N/A
Vegetation Vegetation shall be maintained to ensure the health and vigor of the targeted
plant community. Routine vegetation maintenance and repair activities may
include supplemental planting, pruning, mulching, and fertilizing. Exotic
invasive plant species shall be treated by mechanical and/or chemical
methods. Any vegetation requiring herbicide application will be performed
in accordance with NC Department of Agriculture (NCDA) rules and
regulations. Vegetation maintenance activities will be documented and
reported in annual monitoring reports. Vegetation maintenance will continue
through the monitoring period.
Site Boundary Site boundaries shall be identified in the field to ensure clear distinction
between the mitigation site and adjacent properties. Boundaries will be
marked with signs identifying the property as a mitigation site, and will
include the name of the long-term steward and a contact number. Boundaries
may be identified by fence, marker, bollard, post, tree-blazing, or other means
as allowed by site conditions and/or conservation easement. Boundary
markers disturbed, damaged, or destroyed will be repaired and/or replaced on
an as-needed basis. Easement monitoring and staking/signage maintenance
will continue in perpetuity as a stewardship activity.
Road Crossing Road crossings within the site may be maintained only as allowed by
conservation easement or existing easement, deed restrictions, rights of way,
or corridor agreements. Crossings in easement breaks are the responsibility
of the landowner to maintain.
Beaver Routine site visits and monitoring will be used to determine if beaver
management is needed. If beaver activity poses a threat to project stability or
vegetative success, RES will trap beavers and remove impoundments as
needed. All beaver management activities will be documented and included
in annual monitoring reports. Beaver monitoring and management will
continue through the monitoring period.

Appendix H
DWR Stream Determination,
ID Forms, and Maps
ROY COOPER
Governor
MICHAEL S. REGAN
Secretary
LINDA CULPEPPER
Director
Bridgette Edwards
3200 Brogden Rd.
Smithfield, NC 27577
Jan Hill
3188 Stevens Sausage Rd.
Smithfield, NC 27577
William Carpenter
3032 Yelverton Grove Rd.
Smithfield, NC 27577
Melrose Haas
3299 Brogden Rd.
Smithfield, NC 27577
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
April 23, 2019
DWR Project # 2019-0159
Johnston County
Subject: On -Site Determination for Applicability to the Neuse Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 02B .0233)
Project Name: Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project
Parcel 1D Number(s): 260200-46-1831; 260200-26-4743; 260200-45-0227; 260200-35-1474;
260200-46-0253; 260200-36-4710
Address/ Location: 3105 Brogden Rd., Smithfield, NC
Stream(s) Evaluated: Unnamed Tributaries to Polecat Branch
Determination Date: 3/14/2019 Staff: Shelton Sullivan
Dear Sir / Madam:
On March 14, 2019, Shelton Sullivan of the Division of Water Resources (DWR) Central
Office conducted an on -site review of features located on the subject properties at the
request of Jamey McEachran of Resource Environmental Solutions to determine the presence
or absence of streams on the site and their ephemeral/ intermittent/ perennial (E/UP)
characteristics and transition points and the applicability to the Neuse Riparian Area Protection
Rules (15A NCAC 02B .0233).
The enclosed map (s) depict the features evaluated and this information is also
summarized in the table below. Streams that are considered "Subject' have been located
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources
512 North Salisbury Street 1 1617 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
uonmc.vnwe
919.707.9000

DWR#20190159 Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project
Johnston County
Page 2 of 3
on the most recently published NRCS Soil Survey of Johnston County and/or the most
recent copy of the USGS Topographic (at 1:24,000 scale) map(s), have been located on the
ground at the site, and possess characteristics that qualify them to be at least intermittent
streams. Features that are considered "Not Subject" have been determined to not be at
least intermittent or not present on the property or not depicted on the required maps.
There may be other streams or features located on the property that do not appear on the
maps referenced above but may be considered jurisdictional according to the US Army
Corps of Engineers and subject to the Clean Water Act.
See the following table for the features rated during the DWR site visit:
Feature ID
Feature Type
*E/l/P/
Subject
to Buffer
Start @
Stop @
Depicted on
Depicted on
Other
Rules
Soil Survey
USGS Topo
At eastern
Continues
JH1-A
Stream
"I" at least
Yes
property and
throughout to
No
Yes
wood line
property line
at Bro den Rd.
Continues
JH1-B
Stream
"I" at least
Yes
Continuation of
throughouttoJH1-A
Yes
Yes
property line
at Bro den Rd.
JHS
Stream
"1" at least
Yes
JH5 Start at
Continues
No
Yes
culvert, see map
throughout
JH4
Ditch
n/a
No
On the property,
Confluence
No
Yes
see map
with JH5
JH3
Ditch
n/a
No
Ravens Sausage
At JHS Start
No
Yes
Eastern
Stevens
JH2
Ditch
n/a
No
properly
Sausage Rd.
No
Yes
bounds
* E: Ephemeral
I: Intermittent
P: Perineal
This on -site determination shall expire five (5) years from the date of this letter.
Landowners or affected parties that dispute a determination made by the DWR may
request a determination by the Director. An appeal request must be made within sixty (60)
calendar days of the date of this letter to the Director in writing.
Ifsending via U.S Postal Service:
DWR- 401 & Buffer Permitting Branch
c/o Karen Higgins
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
If sending via delivery service (UPS, FedEx, etc.)
DWR- 401 & Buffer Permitting Branch
c/o Karen Higgins
512 N Salisbury St
Raleigh, NC 27604
This determination is final and binding as detailed above, unless an appeal is requested within
sixty (60) calendar days.

DWR #20190159 Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project
Johnston County
Page 3 of 3
This determination only addresses the applicability to the buffer rules and does not approve any
activity within buffers or within waters of the state. If you have any additional questions or
require additional information, please call Shelton Sullivan at [phone]. This
determination is subject to review as provided in Articles 3 & 4 of G.S.150B.
Sincerely,
r
Karen Higgins, Superviso
401 & Buffer Permitting Bra ch
KAH/sos
Enclosures: Site Map(s), USGS Topo, Soil Survey
cc: Resource Environmental Solutions, Jamey McEachran, imceachranares.us
Resource Environmental Solutions, Brad Breslow, bbreslowPres.us
401 & Buffer Permitting Branch files
Filename: 20190159_StrawHillStreamBufferDetLetter 4-23-2019.docx

k T7
Cropland
,_ ,
Proposed Easement
Project
Project Ditch
'�. `',
,r�VI
r. F AN
_ a
J no
:9e /
.b�
i
F
Figure 3 - Existing Conditions oeN 2122)2019
Strawberry Hill Drawn by MOE ���
Mitigation Project Che ka by 1RM
Johnston County, North Carolina 1inch=500(enl 0

Strawberry Hill Aerials /'1 n��v I it I I I c/
South of Brogden Road

GC 565 11%aP
E

x
y . -
K
T

0 500250
Feet
NRCS Soil Survey
Strawberry HillMitigation Project
Johnston County, North Carolina
Legend
Proposed Easem ent
Stream Determ inations (DWR)
Stream
Ditch
©Date: 6/18/2020
Drawn by: MDE
Checked by: JRM
Document Path: R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\MXD\7_Buffer Viability Request\Figure 4 - Soil Survey.mxd1 inch = 500 feet
Johnston County (1994)
0 2,0001,000
Feet
USGS Four Oaks Quadrangle
Strawberry HillMitigation Project
Johnston County, North Carolina
Legend
Proposed Easem ent
©Date: 6/18/2020
Drawn by: MDE
Checked by: JRM
Document Path: R:\Resgis\dropboxgis\projects\NC\Strawberry Hill\MXD\7_Buffer Viability Request\Figure 2 - USGS Map.mxd1 inch = 2,000 feet
(1997)
JH-1 A
fr L D W Q Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: $ ) t Project/Site: <i Latitude:
IrT-fxw In
Evaluator:
M � p � � V County: J 0 h Y) 54Or1 Longitude:
Total Points: ^ Stream Determination (circle one) Other
Stream is at least intermittent Ephemeral ntermitten Perennial e.g. quad Name:
if>_ i� orperennial if z 30*
/11
A. Geomor holo (Subtotal =
Absent
Weak
1
Moderate
2
Strong
3
1 a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
2. Sinuosity of channel along th'alweg
0
1
1
2
2
3
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
1z
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
a
No = 0
es =
...u�uv _ air..lua laacu, occ ulovuoolullo III IIIGIIUGI
B. Hvdroloov (Subtotal = 4.6)
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
.1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
es =
lam. DIUIUUV (AUDiotal = 'D i-. )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
'0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
1
1.5
25. Algae
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75;
BL = 1 Other = 0
"perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

-NU UWV Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: C� ' q l 1 ProjectlSite: r , �.�,• 11 Latitude:
Evaluator: h 0\!'u m County: J 0 �-� Longitude:
Total Points: Stream Determination (circle one) Other
Stream is at least perennial
ttent a Ephemeral ntermitte Perennial e.g. Quad Name:
if z 19 or erennial if >_ 30*
A. Geonnornhoinov -rSuhtntal Absant I Pak ___F Mnddaratn Ic+..,.,.,
1 a, Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3 y
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
O
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
0
1
1 63
2
3
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
7. Recent alluvial deposits
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
(Dj
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
a
No = 0
es = 3
OILu al U11411GS dl0 11Ul1dlCU, See UISGUS51Un5 In manual
B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal = (o_ 6 )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
r Yes -3
u. m1uluLw 1 n"nTOTa1 = In . -7 1
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
_
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
70"N
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
.5)
1
1.5
25. Algae
®0
0.5
1 1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75;
_ Other = 0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

A-5
.NU D W Q Ntream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: /14Project/Site: s.'-aW `. 1, Latitude:
Evaluator: M, DO- A�qe�� County: J0L,�,5}a,� Longitude:
Total Points: Stream Determination (circle one) Other
Stream is at least intermittent if 2 19 or erennia! if >_ 30* 7 Ephemeral ntermitten Perennial e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomoroholoav (Subtotal = - 5 Absent Weak I Mnrtprato I Qfrr% n
18. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
0."
1
1
2
2
3
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool s uence
0
0
0
Q1
1
j
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
5. Active/relict floodplain
6. Depositional bars or benches
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1 .
2
3
8. Headcuts
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0�
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
_ 0.5
! 1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
Yes = 3
.1L11 .. W1. .Oa OI ..Ut IQLOu, OWU UISGubblul15 III 111dnual
B. HAroloov (Subtotal = (. _If
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
%
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
(-0)
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
70
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
._Yes
%-. L:)Iuluuv IOUMEIUJI = ...1-1. )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed4
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
".1.
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
T
2
3
22. Fish
_
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
*51
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
AC =
OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: �/a er : r v�v% i o o
vo v6,
- ray s
r ,grow
Sketch:

Appendix I

USACE District Assessment Forms

JH1-A JH1-B
1 Presence of flow / persistent
pools in stream 34
2 Evidence of past human alteration 1 1
3 Riparian zone 2 2
4 Evidence of nutrient or chemical
discharges 33
5 Groundwater discharge 1 2
6 Presence of adjacent floodplain 1 2
7 Entrenchment / floodplain access 1 0
8 Presence of adjacent wetlands 0 3
9 Channel sinuosity 0 1
10 Sediment input 3 3
11 Size & diversity of channel bed
substrate NA NA
12 Evidence of channel incision or
widening 33
13 Presence of major bank failures 3 3
14 Root depth and density on banks 1 2
15 Impact by agriculture, livestock, or
timber production 21
16 Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool
complexes 01
17 Habitat complexity 1 2
18 Canopy coverage over streambed 2 1
19 Substrate embeddedness NA NA
20 Presence of stream invertebrates 2 2
21 Presence of amphibians 1 1
22 Presence of fish 0 0
23 Evidence of wildlife use 2 3
32 40BiologyTotal Score:
USACE Stream Quality Assessment
Worksheet Summary
Reach
PhysicalStabilityHabitat

Appendix J

Wetland JD Forms and Maps

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT

Action Id. SAW-2020-00332 County: Johnston U.S.G.S. Quad: NC- Four Oaks NE

NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION

Requestor: Resource Environmental Solutions
Matt DeAngelo
Address: 302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Telephone Number: 757-202-4471
E-mail: [e-mail]

Size (acres) 39.14 Nearest Town Smithfield
Nearest Waterway Polecat Branch River Basin Neuse
USGS HUC 03020201 Coordinates Latitude: 35.4705
Longitude: -78.3197
Location description: The project comprises portions of multiple properties situated along two unnamed tributaries of Polecat
Branch, occurring both north and south of Brogen Rd (S.R. 1007), near its intersection with Yelverton Grove Rd (S.R. 2508).

Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
☒ There appear to be waters, including wetlands on the above described project area/property, that may be subject to
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33
USC § 403). The waters, including wetlands have been delineated, and the delineation has been verified by the Corps to be
sufficiently accurate and reliable. The approximate boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map
dated 2/14/2020. Therefore this preliminary jurisdiction determination may be used in the permit evaluation process,
including determining compensatory mitigation. For purposes of computation of impacts, compensatory mitigation
requirements, and other resource protection measures, a permit decision made on the basis of a preliminary JD will treat
all waters and wetlands that would be affected in any way by the permitted activity on the site as if they are jurisdictional
waters of the U.S. This preliminary determination is not an appealable action under the Regulatory Program
Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 331). However, you may request an approved JD, which is an
appealable action, by contacting the Corps district for further instruction.
☐ There appear to be waters, including wetlands on the above described project area/property, that may be subject to
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC §
403). However, since the waters, including wetlands have not been properly delineated, this preliminary jurisdiction
determination may not be used in the permit evaluation process. Without a verified wetland delineation, this preliminary
determination is merely an effective presumption of CWA/RHA jurisdiction over all of the waters, including wetlands at the
project area, which is not sufficiently accurate and reliable to support an enforceable permit decision. We recommend that you
have the waters, including wetlands on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to accomplish this
wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that can be verified by the
Corps.
B. Approved Determination

☐ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described project area/property subject to the permit
requirements of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403) and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for
a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
☐ There are waters, including wetlandson the above described project area/property subject to the permit requirements of Section
404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
☐We recommend you have the waters, including wetlands on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be
able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that
can be verified by the Corps.

☐The waters, including wetlands on your project area/property have been delineated and the delineation has been verified by
the Corps. The approximate boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map dated DATE. We strongly
suggest you have this delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be reviewed and verified by the Corps. Once
verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA jurisdiction on your property which, provided
there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years.
☐The waters, including wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed by the
Corps Regulatory Official identified below onDATE. Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
☐ There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described project area/property which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
☐ The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA).
You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Morehead City, NC, at [phone] to determine their
requirements.

Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US, including wetlands, without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). Placement of dredged or fill material, construction or
placement of structures, or work within navigable waters of the United States without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Sections 9 and/or 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 USC § 401 and/or 403). If you have any questions
regarding this determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact Christopher Hopper at [phone] (x35) or
[e-mail].

C. Basis For Determination: See the preliminary jurisdictional determination form dated 2/14/2020 and
the attached figure, ‘Potential Wetland or Non-Wetland Waters of the U.S. Map Strawberry Hill
Mitigation Project’, dated February 2/14/2020.
D. Remarks: None.

E. Attention USDA Program Participants

This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps’ Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the particular site
identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security
Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in USDA programs, you should request
a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.

F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in B.
above)

This correspondence constitutes an approved jurisdictional determination for the above described site. If you object to this
determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. Enclosed you will find a
Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and request for appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal this determination you
must submit a completed RFA form to the following address:

US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Attn: Phillip Shannin, Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW, Room 10M15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801

In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for appeal
under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP. Should you
decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by Not applicable.
**It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this correspondence.**

Corps Regulatory Official: ______________________________________________________

Date of JD: 2/14/2020 Expiration Date of JD: Not applicable

The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we
continue to do so, please complete the Customer Satisfaction Survey located at
http://corpsmapu.usace.army.mil/cm_apex/f?p=136:4:0

Copy furnished:

Property Owner: Bridgitte Edwards Davis
Address: 3200 Brogden Road
Smithfield, NC 27577
Telephone: [phone]

Property Owner: Jan Hill
Address: 3188 Stevens Sausage Road
Smithfield, NC 27577
Telephone: [phone]

Property Owner: Joseph Madert & Stephen Madert
Address: 4910 Pine Lake Drive
Myrtle Beach, SC 29577
Telephone: [phone]

Property Owner: Melorse Haas
Address: 3299 Brogden Road
Smithfield, NC 27577
Telephone: [phone]

Property Owner: William Carpenter
Address: 3032 Yelverton Grove Road
Smithfield, NC 27577
Telephone: [phone]

NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: Resource Environmental Solutions, Matt
DeAngelo
File Number: SAW-2020-00332 Date: 05/04/2020
Attached is: See Section below
☐ INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission) A
☐ PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission) B
☐ PERMIT DENIAL C
☐ APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION D
☒ PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION E
SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision.
Additional information may be found at or http://www.usace.army.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/RegulatoryProgramandPermits.aspx
or the Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331.
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
 ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all
rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the
permit.
 OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request
that the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district
engineer. Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will
forfeit your right to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your
objections and may: (a) modify the permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your
objections, or (c) not modify the permit having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After
evaluating your objections, the district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in
Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit
 ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all
rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the
permit.
 APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein,
you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of
this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days
of the date of this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by
completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division
engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or provide new
information.
 ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the
date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
 APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers
Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the district engineer. This form
must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.

E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION : You do not need to respond to the Corps regarding the
preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved JD (which may be
appealed), by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may provide new information for further
consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD.

SECTION II - REQUEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an initial
proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons or
objections are addressed in the administrative record.)

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum for the
record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to
clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record.
However, you may provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative
record.
POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION:
If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the
appeal process you may contact:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division
Attn: Christopher Hopper
Raleigh Regulatory Office
U.S Army Corps of Engineers
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587

If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may
also contact:
Mr. Phillip Shannin, Administrative Appeal Review Officer
CESAD-PDO
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
60 Forsyth Street, Room 10M15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government
consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15 day
notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportunity to participate in all site investigations.

________________________________________
Signature of appellant or agent.
Date: Telephone number:

For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits send this form to:

District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, Attn: Christopher Hopper, 69 Darlington Avenue, Wilmington, North
Carolina 28403

For Permit denials, Proffered Permits and Approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this form to:

Division Engineer, Commander, U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic, Attn: Mr. Phillip Shannin, Administrative
Appeal Officer, CESAD-PDO, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 10M15, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]

PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD: 05/04/2020
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: Resource Environmental Solutions, Matt
DeAngelo, 302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110, Raleigh, NC 27605
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Wilmington District, Strawberry Hill Mitigation
Project, SAW-2020-00332
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The project comprises portions of
multiple properties situated along two unnamed tributaries of Polecat Branch, occurring both north and south
of Brogen Rd (S.R. 1007), near its intersection with Yelverton Grove Rd (S.R. 2508).
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES
AND/OR AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: NC County: Johnston City: Smithfield
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Latitude: 35.4705 Longitude: -78.3197
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Polecat Branch
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):

☒Office (Desk) Determination. Date: 5/04/2020
☐Field Determination. Date(s):
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES IN REVIEW AREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO
REGULATORY JURISDICTION

Site Number Latitude
(decimal
degrees)
Longitude
(decimal
degrees)
Estimated
amount of
aquatic
resources in
review area
(acreage and
linear feet, if
applicable
Type of aquatic
resources (i.e.,
wetland vs.
non-wetland
waters)
Geographic authority to
which the aquatic
resource “may be”
subject (i.e., Section 404
or Section 10/404)
JH1 34.46986 -78.316736 3,361 l.f. Non-Wetland
Waters
Section 404
JH5 35.465638 -78.318587 939 l.f. Non-Wetland
Waters
Section 404
Wetland A 35.470905 -78.319172 8.745 ac. Wetland Section 404
Wetland B 35.470374 -78.322813 1.322 ac. Wetland Section 404
Wetland C 35.470033 -78.322705 0.432 ac. Wetland Section 404
Wetland D 35.469676 -78.323350 0.347 ac. Wetland Section 404

1. The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional aquatic resources in the
review area, and the requestor of this PJD is hereby advised of his or her option to request
and obtain an approved JD (AJD) for that review area based on an informed decision after
having discussed the various types of JDs and their characteristics and circumstances when
they may be appropriate.
2. In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or a Nationwide
General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring "pre- construction
notification" (PCN), or requests verification for a non-reporting NWP or other general
permit, and the permit applicant has not requested an AJD for the activity, the permit
applicant is hereby made aware that: (1) the permit applicant has elected to seek a permit
authorization based on a PJD, which does not make an official determination of
jurisdictional aquatic resources; (2) the applicant has the option to request an AJD before
accepting the terms and conditions of the permit authorization, and that basing a permit
authorization on an AJD could possibly result in less compensatory mitigation being
required or different special conditions; (3) the applicant has the right to request an
individual permit rather than accepting the terms and conditions of the NWP or other
general permit authorization; (4) the applicant can accept a permit authorization and
thereby agree to comply with all the terms and conditions of that permit, including
whatever mitigation requirements the Corps has determined to be necessary; (5)
undertaking any activity in reliance upon the subject permit authorization without
requesting an AJD constitutes the applicant's acceptance of the use of the PJD; (6)
accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered individual permit) or undertaking
any activity in reliance on any form of Corps permit authorization based on a PJD
constitutes agreement that all aquatic resources in the review area affected in any way by
that activity will be treated as jurisdictional, and waives any challenge to such jurisdiction
in any administrative or judicial compliance or enforcement action, or in any administrative
appeal or in any Federal court; and (7) whether the applicant elects to use either an AJD or
a PJD, the JD will be processed as soon as practicable. Further, an AJD, a proffered
individual permit (and all terms and conditions contained therein), or individual permit
denial can be administratively appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331. If, during an
administrative appeal, it becomes appropriate to make an official determination whether
geographic jurisdiction exists over aquatic resources in the review area, or to provide an
official delineation of jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review area, the Corps will
provide an AJD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable. This PJD finds that
there "may be" waters of the U.S. and/or that there "may be" navigable waters of the U.S.
on the subject review area, and identifies all aquatic features in the review area that could
be affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information:

SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply) Checked items are included in the administrative
record and are appropriately cited:
☒Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor:
Map: Potential Wetland or Non-Wetland Waters of the U.S. Map Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project’, dated February
2/14/2020
☒Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor. Datasheets:
☒Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
☐Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Rationale:
☐Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
☐ Corps navigable waters' study:
☐U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
☐USGS NHD data:
☐USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps:
☐U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: 24k Four Oaks, NC
☒Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Johnston County Soil Survey, Sheet 11
☐National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
☐State/local wetland inventory map(s):
☐FEMA/FIRM maps:
☐100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
☒ Photographs: ☒ Ae rial (Name & Date): Undated color aerial: Source unknown (attached exhibit)
or ☐ Other (Name & Date):
☐Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
☐ Other information (please specify):

IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily been verified by the Corps
and should not be relied upon for later jurisdictional determinations.

Signature and date of Regulatory
staff member completing PJD
2/14/2020

Signature and date of person requesting PJD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining the signature is
impracticable) 1

1 Districts may establish timeframes for requester to return signed PJD forms. If the requester does not respond within the established
time frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is necessary prior to finalizing an action.
MM
MMMMDP-3
DP-2
DP-5
DP-4
DP-6DP-7
©
0 300150
Feet
REFERENCE
1) Horizontal Datum is NAD83 UTM Zone 17N.
2) Map Projection is NAD_1983_StatePlane_
North_Carolina_FIPS_3200_Feet
Date: 2/14/2020 Drawn by: MDD
Checked by: JLS
Legend
Study Area
Potential Wetland Waters of the US
Potential Non-wetland Waters of the US
Ditch
M Wetland Datapoint
M Upland Datapoint
Potential
Wetland or Non-Wetland Waters
of the U.S. Map
Strawberry Hill
Mitigation Project
Johnston County, North Carolina
1 in = 300 feet
Revisions: NONE
Feature ID Length (LF)
JH1 3,361
JH5 939
Total 4,300
Feature ID Area (acres)
WA 8.745
WB 1.322
WC 0.432
WD 0.347
Total 10.846
Potential Non-Wetland Waters of the U.S.
Potential Wetland Waters of the U.S
DP-2
05-Feb-20
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Logged about 6 years ago
City/County:
State:
, or Hydrology
, or Hydrology
Project/Site:
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Applicant/Owner:
Sampling Date:
Lat.:
Hydric Soil Present?
Long.:
Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):
T
(If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation
Are "Normal Circumstances" present?
Soil Map Unit Name:
Datum:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
NWI classification:
Remarks:
R
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Are Vegetation
Section, Township, Range: S
significantly disturbed?
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
, Soil
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
% /
, Soil
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0US Army Corps of Engineers
Subregion (LRR or MLRA):
Strawberry Hill Johnston County
Resource Environmental Solutions NC
M. DeAngelo
Flat
MLRA 234 in LRR P 35.471030 -78.317103 NAD83
Rains sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes Upland
Slope:0.0Local relief (concave, convex, none):°0.0flat
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No Yes No
HYDROLOGY
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (B1)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Dry Season Water Table (C2)
Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?
Water Table Present?
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of 2 required)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Use scientific names of plants.
0
0
0
30
2
0
0
20
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Yes No
60.0%
0.0%
60.0%
0.0%
100.0%
0
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0 0
93.8%FAC
15 30
6.3%FAC
112 336
0 0
32
0 0
0.0%
127 366
0.0%
2.882
80.0%FAC
20.0%FACW
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
25
0.0%
0.0%
15
0 0.0%
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0
Woody Vine Stratum
(B)
= Total Cover
Indicator
Status
= Total Cover
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.0
= Total Cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
US Army Corps of Engineers
VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata) -
Dominance Test worksheet:
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Prevalence Index = B/A =
(A/B)
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
Herb Stratum
= Total Cover
Number of Dominant Species
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
FACU species
UPL species
Column Totals:
x 1 =
x 2 =
x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
(A)
(A)
Percent of dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
(B)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Tree Stratum
Shrub Stratum
Absolute
% Cover
2 - Dominance Test is > 50%
Dominant
Species?
Rel.Strat.
Cover
1
1
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
0
15
0
0
0
0.0%
100.0%FAC
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
10
15
15
5
18.2%FACW
27.3%FAC
27.3%FAC
55
9.1%FAC
= Total Cover
Sapling or Sapling/Shrub Stratum
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
10 18.2%FAC
0.0%
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
0
0
0.0%
0.0%Definition of Vegetation Strata:
DP-2Sampling Point:
)
)
)
)
)(Plot size:30
50% of Total Cover:7.5 20% of Total Cover:3
50% of Total Cover:12.5 20% of Total Cover:5
50% of Total Cover:16 20% of Total Cover:6.4
50% of Total Cover:27.5 20% of Total Cover:11
0 0.0%
50% of Total Cover:0 20% of Total Cover:0
0 0.0%
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
1
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
3 ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1m) tall.
(Plot size:30
(Plot size:30
Cyrilla racemiflora
Pinus taeda
Quercus nigra
Symplocos tinctoria
Liquidambar styraciflua
(Plot size:30
Rubus argutus
Baccharis halimifolia
(Plot size:30
Andropogon gerardii
Arundinaria gigantea
Smilax rotundifolia
DP-2SOILSampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
(inches) Color (moist) Color (moist)
Matrix Redox Features
%Loc²Texture RemarksType%
Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains ²Location: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Yes No
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils :
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Hydric Soil Present?
Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Histosol (A1)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Sandy Muck Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
Redox Depressions (F8)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
1
1
3
3
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
Marl (F10) (LRR U)
Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 153B)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
0-1
1-7
7-12
10YR
10YR
2.5Y 6/6
4/2
2/1 100
100
100
Sandy Loam
Sandy Loam
Sandy Loam
DP-3
05-Feb-20
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Logged about 6 years ago
City/County:
State:
, or Hydrology
, or Hydrology
Project/Site:
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Applicant/Owner:
Sampling Date:
Lat.:
Hydric Soil Present?
Long.:
Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):
T
(If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation
Are "Normal Circumstances" present?
Soil Map Unit Name:
Datum:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
NWI classification:
Remarks:
R
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Are Vegetation
Section, Township, Range: S
significantly disturbed?
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
, Soil
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
% /
, Soil
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0US Army Corps of Engineers
Subregion (LRR or MLRA):
Strawberry Hill Johnston County
Resource Environmental Solutions NC
M. DeAngelo
Flat
MLRA 234 in LRR P 35.470907 -78.317250 NAD83
Rains sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes PSS
Slope:0.0Local relief (concave, convex, none):°0.0

flat
2
0
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No Yes No
HYDROLOGY
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (B1)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Dry Season Water Table (C2)
Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?
Water Table Present?
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of 2 required)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Use scientific names of plants.
15
15
2
0
0
0
0
20
0
0
0
40
25
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Yes No
646.9%
46.9%
86.3%
0.0%
75.0%
32
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0 0
100.0%FAC
40 80
0.0%
120 360
0 0
20
0 0
0.0%
160 440
0.0%
2.750
61.5%FAC
38.5%FACW
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
65
0.0%
0.0%
10
0 0.0%
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0
Woody Vine Stratum
(B)
= Total Cover
Indicator
Status
= Total Cover
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.0
= Total Cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
US Army Corps of Engineers
VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata) -
Dominance Test worksheet:
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Prevalence Index = B/A =
(A/B)
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
Herb Stratum
= Total Cover
Number of Dominant Species
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
FACU species
UPL species
Column Totals:
x 1 =
x 2 =
x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
(A)
(A)
Percent of dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
(B)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Tree Stratum
Shrub Stratum
Absolute
% Cover
2 - Dominance Test is > 50%
Dominant
Species?
Rel.Strat.
Cover
1
1
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
0
10
0
0
0
0.0%
100.0%FAC
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
20
15
10
10
30.8%FAC
23.1%FAC
15.4%FACW
65
15.4%FAC
= Total Cover
Sapling or Sapling/Shrub Stratum
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
5
5
7.7%FAC
7.7%FACW
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
0
0
0.0%
0.0%Definition of Vegetation Strata:
DP-3Sampling Point:
)
)
)
)
)(Plot size:30
50% of Total Cover:5 20% of Total Cover:2
50% of Total Cover:32.5 20% of Total Cover:13
50% of Total Cover:10 20% of Total Cover:4
50% of Total Cover:32.5 20% of Total Cover:13
0 0.0%
50% of Total Cover:16 20% of Total Cover:6.4
0 0.0%
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
1
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
3 ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1m) tall.
(Plot size:30
(Plot size:30
Liquidambar styraciflua
Quercus nigra
Persea borbonia
Symplocos tinctoria
Pinus taeda
Cyrilla racemiflora
(Plot size:30
Rubus argutus
(Plot size:30
Andropogon gerardii
Arundinaria gigantea
Gelsemium sempervirens
DP-3SOILSampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
(inches) Color (moist) Color (moist)
Matrix Redox Features
%Loc²Texture RemarksType%
Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains ²Location: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Yes No
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils :
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Hydric Soil Present?
Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Histosol (A1)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Sandy Muck Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
Redox Depressions (F8)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
1
1
3
3
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
Marl (F10) (LRR U)
Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 153B)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
0-2
2-6
6-12
10YR
10YR
10YR 5/1
4/2
2/1 100
90
90
10YR
10YR
5/6
5/6
10
10
C
C
PL
M
Peat
Sandy Loam
Sandy Loam
DP-4
05-Feb-20
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Logged about 6 years ago
City/County:
State:
, or Hydrology
, or Hydrology
Project/Site:
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Applicant/Owner:
Sampling Date:
Lat.:
Hydric Soil Present?
Long.:
Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):
T
(If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation
Are "Normal Circumstances" present?
Soil Map Unit Name:
Datum:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
NWI classification:
Remarks:
R
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Are Vegetation
Section, Township, Range: S
significantly disturbed?
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
, Soil
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
% /
, Soil
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0US Army Corps of Engineers
Subregion (LRR or MLRA):
Strawberry Hill Johnston County
Resource Environmental Solutions NC
M. DeAngelo
Flat
MLRA 234 in LRR P 35.470993 -78.3321611 NAD83
Rains sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes PSS
Slope:0.0Local relief (concave, convex, none):°0.0

flat
0
0
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No Yes No
HYDROLOGY
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (B1)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Dry Season Water Table (C2)
Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?
Water Table Present?
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of 2 required)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Use scientific names of plants.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
20
15
10
0
35
20
10
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
Yes No
70.0%
0.0%
70.0%
0.0%
100.0%
0
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
35 35
44.4%FAC
15 30
33.3%FAC
107 321
0 0
45
0 0
22.2%FACW
157 386
0.0%
2.459
50.0%FAC
28.6%OBL
14.3%OBL
7.1%OBL
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
70
0.0%
0.0%
5
0 0.0%
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0
Woody Vine Stratum
(B)
= Total Cover
Indicator
Status
= Total Cover
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.0
= Total Cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
US Army Corps of Engineers
VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata) -
Dominance Test worksheet:
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Prevalence Index = B/A =
(A/B)
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
Herb Stratum
= Total Cover
Number of Dominant Species
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
FACU species
UPL species
Column Totals:
x 1 =
x 2 =
x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
(A)
(A)
Percent of dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
(B)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Tree Stratum
Shrub Stratum
Absolute
% Cover
2 - Dominance Test is > 50%
Dominant
Species?
Rel.Strat.
Cover
1
1
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
0
5
0
0
0
0.0%
100.0%FAC
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
30
5
2
0
81.1%FAC
13.5%FACW
5.4%FAC
37
0.0%
= Total Cover
Sapling or Sapling/Shrub Stratum
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
0
0
0.0%
0.0%Definition of Vegetation Strata:
DP-4Sampling Point:
)
)
)
)
)(Plot size:30
50% of Total Cover:2.5 20% of Total Cover:1
50% of Total Cover:35 20% of Total Cover:14
50% of Total Cover:22.5 20% of Total Cover:9
50% of Total Cover:18.5 20% of Total Cover:7.4
0 0.0%
50% of Total Cover:0 20% of Total Cover:0
0 0.0%
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
1
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
3 ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1m) tall.
(Plot size:30
(Plot size:30
Pinus taeda
Magnolia virginiana
Liquidambar styraciflua
(Plot size:30
Baccharis halimifolia
Rubus argutus
Sambucus nigra
(Plot size:30
Andropogon gerardii
Scirpus cyperinus
Ludwigia alternifolia
Juncus effusus
Gelsemium sempervirens
DP-4SOILSampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
(inches) Color (moist) Color (moist)
Matrix Redox Features
%Loc²Texture RemarksType%
Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains ²Location: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Yes No
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils :
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Hydric Soil Present?
Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Histosol (A1)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Sandy Muck Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
Redox Depressions (F8)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
1
1
3
3
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
Marl (F10) (LRR U)
Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 153B)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
0-2
2-6
6-12
10YR
10YR
10YR 6/1
5/1
2/1 100
90
85
10YR
10YR
5/6
5/6
10
15
C
C
PL
M
Mucky Peat
Silt Loam
Silty Clay Loam
DP-5
05-Feb-20
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Logged about 6 years ago
City/County:
State:
, or Hydrology
, or Hydrology
Project/Site:
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Applicant/Owner:
Sampling Date:
Lat.:
Hydric Soil Present?
Long.:
Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):
T
(If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation
Are "Normal Circumstances" present?
Soil Map Unit Name:
Datum:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
NWI classification:
Remarks:
R
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Are Vegetation
Section, Township, Range: S
significantly disturbed?
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
, Soil
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
% /
, Soil
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0US Army Corps of Engineers
Subregion (LRR or MLRA):
Strawberry Hill Johnston County
Resource Environmental Solutions NC
M. DeAngelo
Flat
MLRA 234 in LRR P 35.470993 -78.3321611 NAD83
Rains sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes Upland
Slope:0.0Local relief (concave, convex, none):°0.0

convex
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No Yes No
HYDROLOGY
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (B1)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Dry Season Water Table (C2)
Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?
Water Table Present?
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of 2 required)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Use scientific names of plants.
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
25
20
10
0
20
20
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Yes No
6100.0%FACU
0.0%
90.0%
0.0%
66.7%
5
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0 0
45.5%FAC
5 10
36.4%FAC
115 345
35 140
55
10 50
18.2%UPL
165 545
0.0%
3.303
40.0%FAC
40.0%FACU
20.0%FACU
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
50
0.0%
0.0%
15
0 0.0%
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0
Woody Vine Stratum
(B)
= Total Cover
Indicator
Status
= Total Cover
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.0
= Total Cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
US Army Corps of Engineers
VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata) -
Dominance Test worksheet:
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Prevalence Index = B/A =
(A/B)
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
Herb Stratum
= Total Cover
Number of Dominant Species
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
FACU species
UPL species
Column Totals:
x 1 =
x 2 =
x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
(A)
(A)
Percent of dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
(B)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Tree Stratum
Shrub Stratum
Absolute
% Cover
2 - Dominance Test is > 50%
Dominant
Species?
Rel.Strat.
Cover
1
1
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
0
10
5
0
0
0.0%
66.7%FAC
33.3%FAC
0.0%
0.0%
35
5
0
0
87.5%FAC
12.5%FACW
0.0%
40
0.0%
= Total Cover
Sapling or Sapling/Shrub Stratum
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
0
0
0.0%
0.0%Definition of Vegetation Strata:
DP-5Sampling Point:
)
)
)
)
)(Plot size:30
50% of Total Cover:7.5 20% of Total Cover:3
50% of Total Cover:25 20% of Total Cover:10
50% of Total Cover:27.5 20% of Total Cover:11
50% of Total Cover:20 20% of Total Cover:8
0 0.0%
50% of Total Cover:2.5 20% of Total Cover:1
0 0.0%
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
1
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
3 ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1m) tall.
Liriodendron tulipifera
(Plot size:30
(Plot size:30
Pinus taeda
Magnolia virginiana
(Plot size:30
Rubus argutus
Baccharis halimifolia
Rhus glabra
(Plot size:30
Andropogon gerardii
Schizachyrium scoparium
Eupatorium capillifolium
Smilax rotundifolia
Gelsemium sempervirens
DP-5SOILSampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
(inches) Color (moist) Color (moist)
Matrix Redox Features
%Loc²Texture RemarksType%
Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains ²Location: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Yes No
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils :
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Hydric Soil Present?
Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Histosol (A1)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Sandy Muck Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
Redox Depressions (F8)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
1
1
3
3
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
Marl (F10) (LRR U)
Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 153B)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
0-2
2-7
7-12
10YR
10YR
10YR 6/4
4/2
3/2 100
100
100
Silt Loam
Silt Loam
Silt Loam
DP-6
05-Feb-20
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
logged approx. 6 years ago
City/County:
State:
, or Hydrology
, or Hydrology
Project/Site:
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Applicant/Owner:
Sampling Date:
Lat.:
Hydric Soil Present?
Long.:
Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):
T
(If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation
Are "Normal Circumstances" present?
Soil Map Unit Name:
Datum:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
NWI classification:
Remarks:
R
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Are Vegetation
Section, Township, Range: S
significantly disturbed?
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
, Soil
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
% /
, Soil
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0US Army Corps of Engineers
Subregion (LRR or MLRA):
Strawberry Hill Johnston County
Resource Environmental Solutions NC
M. DeAngelo
Floodplain
MLRA 234 in LRR P 35.469795 -78.323126 NAD83
Rains sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes PSS
Slope:0.0Local relief (concave, convex, none):°0.0

flat
2
0
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No Yes No
HYDROLOGY
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (B1)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Dry Season Water Table (C2)
Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?
Water Table Present?
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of 2 required)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Use scientific names of plants.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
5
40
0
50
5
15
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Yes No
30.0%
0.0%
40.0%
0.0%
75.0%
0
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
15 15
4.3%FACW
7 14
10.6%FAC
95 285
5 20
47
0 0
85.1%FAC
122 334
0.0%
2.738
71.4%FAC
7.1%FACW
21.4%OBL
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
70
0.0%
0.0%
5
0 0.0%
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0
Woody Vine Stratum
(B)
= Total Cover
Indicator
Status
= Total Cover
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.0
= Total Cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
US Army Corps of Engineers
VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata) -
Dominance Test worksheet:
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Prevalence Index = B/A =
(A/B)
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
Herb Stratum
= Total Cover
Number of Dominant Species
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
FACU species
UPL species
Column Totals:
x 1 =
x 2 =
x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
(A)
(A)
Percent of dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
(B)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Tree Stratum
Shrub Stratum
Absolute
% Cover
2 - Dominance Test is > 50%
Dominant
Species?
Rel.Strat.
Cover
1
1
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
0
5
0
0
0
0.0%
100.0%FACU
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0
0.0%
= Total Cover
Sapling or Sapling/Shrub Stratum
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
0
0
0.0%
0.0%Definition of Vegetation Strata:
DP-6Sampling Point:
)
)
)
)
)(Plot size:30
50% of Total Cover:2.5 20% of Total Cover:1
50% of Total Cover:35 20% of Total Cover:14
50% of Total Cover:23.5 20% of Total Cover:9.4
50% of Total Cover:0 20% of Total Cover:0
0 0.0%
50% of Total Cover:0 20% of Total Cover:0
0 0.0%
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
1
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
3 ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1m) tall.
(Plot size:30
(Plot size:30
(Plot size:30
Sambucus nigra
Baccharis halimifolia
Rubus argutus
(Plot size:30
Solidago rugosa
Phragmites australis
Scirpus cyperinus
Lonicera japonica
DP-6SOILSampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
(inches) Color (moist) Color (moist)
Matrix Redox Features
%Loc²Texture RemarksType%
Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains ²Location: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Yes No
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils :
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Hydric Soil Present?
Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Histosol (A1)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Sandy Muck Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
Redox Depressions (F8)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
1
1
3
3
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
Marl (F10) (LRR U)
Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 153B)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
0-12
12-18
10YR
10YR 4/1
4/1 90
100
10YR 6/4 10 C PL Clay Loam
Sandy Clay Loam
DP-7
05-Feb-20
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
logged approx. 6 years ago and spoil
City/County:
State:
, or Hydrology
, or Hydrology
Project/Site:
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Applicant/Owner:
Sampling Date:
Lat.:
Hydric Soil Present?
Long.:
Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):
T
(If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation
Are "Normal Circumstances" present?
Soil Map Unit Name:
Datum:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
NWI classification:
Remarks:
R
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Are Vegetation
Section, Township, Range: S
significantly disturbed?
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
, Soil
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
% /
, Soil
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0US Army Corps of Engineers
Subregion (LRR or MLRA):
Strawberry Hill Johnston County
Resource Environmental Solutions NC
M. DeAngelo
Floodplain
MLRA 234 in LRR P 35.469795 -78.323126 NAD83
Rains sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes Upland
Slope:0.0Local relief (concave, convex, none):°0.0

convex
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No Yes No
HYDROLOGY
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (B1)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Dry Season Water Table (C2)
Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?
Water Table Present?
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of 2 required)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Use scientific names of plants.
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
10
0
0
20
15
30
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Yes No
5100.0%FAC
0.0%
70.0%
0.0%
71.4%
5
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0 0
50.0%FAC
0 0
50.0%FAC
70 210
60 240
20
0 0
0.0%
130 450
0.0%
3.462
30.8%FACU
23.1%FAC
46.2%FAC
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
65
0.0%
0.0%
40
0 0.0%
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0
Woody Vine Stratum
(B)
= Total Cover
Indicator
Status
= Total Cover
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.0
= Total Cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
US Army Corps of Engineers
VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata) -
Dominance Test worksheet:
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Prevalence Index = B/A =
(A/B)
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
Herb Stratum
= Total Cover
Number of Dominant Species
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
FACU species
UPL species
Column Totals:
x 1 =
x 2 =
x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
(A)
(A)
Percent of dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
(B)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Tree Stratum
Shrub Stratum
Absolute
% Cover
2 - Dominance Test is > 50%
Dominant
Species?
Rel.Strat.
Cover
1
1
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
0
40
0
0
0
0.0%
100.0%FACU
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0
0
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0
0.0%
= Total Cover
Sapling or Sapling/Shrub Stratum
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
0
0
0.0%
0.0%Definition of Vegetation Strata:
DP-7Sampling Point:
)
)
)
)
)(Plot size:30
50% of Total Cover:20 20% of Total Cover:8
50% of Total Cover:32.5 20% of Total Cover:13
50% of Total Cover:10 20% of Total Cover:4
50% of Total Cover:0 20% of Total Cover:0
0 0.0%
50% of Total Cover:2.5 20% of Total Cover:1
0 0.0%
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
1
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
3 ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1m) tall.
Acer rubrum
(Plot size:30
(Plot size:30
(Plot size:30
Ligustrum sinense
Rubus argutus
(Plot size:30
Eupatorium capillifolium
Solidago rugosa
Microstegium vimineum
Lonicera japonica
DP-7SOILSampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
(inches) Color (moist) Color (moist)
Matrix Redox Features
%Loc²Texture RemarksType%
Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains ²Location: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Yes No
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils :
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Hydric Soil Present?
Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Histosol (A1)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Sandy Muck Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
Redox Depressions (F8)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
1
1
3
3
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
Marl (F10) (LRR U)
Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 153B)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
0-18 10YR 4/2 100 Clay Loam

Appendix K

Invasive Species Plan

INVASIVE SPECIES PLAN
Annual monitoring and semi-annual site visits will be conducted to assess the condition of the finished
project. These site inspections may identify the presence of invasive vegetation. RES will treat invasive
species vegetation within the project area and provide remedial action on a case by- case basis. Common
invasive species vegetation, such as Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora),
tree-of-heaven (Ailanthus altissima), and Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), will be treated to
allow native plants to become established within the conservation easement. Invasive species vegetation
will be treated by approved mechanical and/or chemical methods such that the percent composition of
exotic/invasive species is less than 5% of the total riparian buffer area. Any control methods requiring
herbicide application will be performed in accordance with NC Department of Agriculture (NCDA) rules
and regulations. If areas of invasive species exist within the easement, they will be monitored yearly as part
of the monitoring protocol, and treated if necessary. If required, problem areas will continue to be treated
until the project easement shows overall trending towards meeting all monitoring requirements.

Appendix L

Approved FHWA Categorical Exclusion
Form

Appendix A
Categorical Exclusion Form for Division of Mitigation Services Projects
Version 2
Note: Only Appendix A should to be submitted (along with any supporting documentation) as the environmental
document.
Part
1: General Project Information
Project ame:
Strawberry Hill
County Name:
Johnston County
DMS Number:
100094
Project Sponsor:
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC
Project Contact Name:
Jamey McEachran
Project Contact Address:
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110, Raleigh, NC 27605
Pra'ect Contact E-mail:
[e-mail]
QMS Project Mana er: Jeff Schaffer
ProjectDescription
The Strawberry Hill Project is a 21.81 acres proposed conservation easement on seven parcels in Johnston County,
North Carolina. The Project will involve the restoration of unnamed tributaries to the Polecat Branch and the
restoration and preservation of the riparian buffers of the unnamed tributaries and the ditches within the project. The
Project will restore and enhance up to 4,448 linear feet of stream and restore and preserve up to 16.38 acres of
riparian buffers in the Neuse River Basin.
For Official Use Only
Reviewed By:
S-2c9 --t 9
Date DMS Project Manager
Conditional Approved By:
Date For Division Administrator
FHWA
❑ Check this box if there are outstanding issues
Final Approval By:
P&,ga" G(J g4z6 - 8- 20-19
Date For Division Administrator
FHWA

North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Governor Roy Cooper Office of Archives and History
Secretary Susi H. Hamilton Deputy Secretary Kevin Cherry
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6599

May 31, 2019

Kimberly Browning
Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Mitigation Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Drive
Wake Forest, NC 27587

Re: Strawberry Hill Mitigation Site, Yelverton Grove Road & Brogden Road, Smithfield, SAW 2019-00124,
Johnston County, ER 19-1717

Dear Ms. Browning:
We have received a public notice concerning the above project.
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which would be affected by
the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed.

The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation’s Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR
Part 800.

Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-807-6579 . In all future
communication concerning this project, please cite the above referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,

Ramona Bartos, Deputy
State Historic Preservation Officer

NCNHDE-9173
June 3, 2019
Matthew DeAngelo
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC
302 Jefferson Street
Raleigh, NC 27607
RE: Strawberry Hill (Updated)
Dear Matthew DeAngelo:
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide
information about natural heritage resources for the project referenced above.
Based on the project area mapped with your request, a query of the NCNHP database indicates that
there are no records for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, and/or
conservation/managed areas within the proposed project boundary. Please note that although there
may be no documentation of natural heritage elements within the project boundary, it does not
imply or confirm their absence; the area may not have been surveyed. The results of this query
should not be substituted for field surveys where suitable habitat exists. In the event that rare
species are found within the project area, please contact the NCNHP so that we may update our
records.
The attached ‘Potential Occurrences’ table summarizes rare species and natural communities that
have been documented within a one-mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these
records suggests that these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area
if suitable habitat exists. Tables of natural areas and conservation/managed areas within a one-mile
radius of the project area, if any, are also included in this report.
If a Federally-listed species is found within the project area or is indicated within a one-mile radius of
the project area, the NCNHP recommends contacting the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for
guidance. Contact information for USFWS offices in North Carolina is found here:
https://www.fws.gov/offices/Directory/ListOffices.cfm?statecode=37.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation
planning, project review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria
for regulatory decisions. Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published
without prior written notification to the NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information
source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP data may not be redistributed without permission.
The NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional correspondence if a
Dedicated Nature Preserve, Registered Heritage Area, Clean Water Management Trust Fund
easement, or Federally-listed species are documented near the project area.
If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance,
please contact Rodney A. Butler at [e-mail] or 919-707-8603.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
Natural Heritage Element Occurrences, Natural Areas, and Managed Areas Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Strawberry Hill (Updated)
June 3, 2019
NCNHDE-9173
Element Occurrences Documented Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Taxonomic
Group
EO ID Scientific Name Common Name Last
Observation
Date
Element
Occurrence
Rank
Accuracy Federal
Status
State
Status
Global
Rank
State
Rank
Dragonfly or
Damselfly
33753 Somatochlora
georgiana
Coppery Emerald 2004-Pre H? 5-Very
Low
--- Significantly
Rare
G3G4 S2?
No Natural Areas are Documented Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
No Managed Areas are Documented Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Definitions and an explanation of status designations and codes can be found at https://ncnhde.natureserve.org/content/help. Data query generated on June 3, 2019; source: NCNHP, Q2 Apr 2019.
Please resubmit your information request if more than one year elapses before project initiation as new information is continually added to the NCNHP database.
Page 2 of 3
Page 3 of 3
Raleigh Field Office
P.O. Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726


Self-Certification Letter
Project Name______________________________
Dear Applicant:
Thank you for using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) Raleigh Ecological
Services online project review process. By printing this letter in conjunction with your
project review package, you are certifying that you have completed the online project
review process for the project named above in accordance with all instructions
provided, using the best available information to reach your conclusions. This letter,
and the enclosed project review package, completes the review of your project in
accordance with the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531-1544, 87 Stat.
884), as amended (ESA), and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C.
668-668c, 54 Stat. 250), as amended (Eagle Act). This letter also provides
information for your project review under the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (P.L. 91-190, 42 U.S.C. 4321-4347, 83 Stat. 852), as amended. A copy of this
letter and the project review package must be submitted to this office for this
certification to be valid. This letter and the project review package will be maintained
in our records.
The species conclusions table in the enclosed project review package summarizes
your ESA and Eagle Act conclusions. Based on your analysis, mark all the
determinations that apply:
“no effect” determinations for proposed/listed species and/or
proposed/designated critical habitat; and/or
“may affect, not likely to adversely affect” determinations for proposed/listed
species and/or proposed/designated critical habitat; and/or
“may affect, likely to adversely affect” determination for the Northern long-
eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) and relying on the findings of the January 5,
2016, Programmatic Biological Opinion for the Final 4(d) Rule on the
Northern long-eared bat;
“no Eagle Act permit required” determinations for eagles.
8/2/2019
Strawberry Hill
✔
✔
Applicant Page 2
We certify that use of the online project review process in strict accordance with the
instructions provided as documented in the enclosed project review package results in
reaching the appropriate determinations. Therefore, we concur with the “no effect” or
“not likely to adversely affect” determinations for proposed and listed species and
proposed and designated critical habitat; the “may affect” determination for Northern
long-eared bat; and/or the “no Eagle Act permit required” determinations for eagles.
Additional coordination with this office is not needed. Candidate species are not
legally protected pursuant to the ESA. However, the Service encourages consideration
of these species by avoiding adverse impacts to them. Please contact this office for
additional coordination if your project action area contains candidate species.
Should project plans change or if additional information on the distribution of
proposed or listed species, proposed or designated critical habitat, or bald eagles
becomes available, this determination may be reconsidered. This certification letter is
valid for 1 year. Information about the online project review process including
instructions, species information, and other information regarding project reviews
within North Carolina is available at our website http://www.fws.gov/raleigh/pp.html.
If you have any questions, you can write to us at [e-mail] or please contact
Leigh Mann of this office at 919-856-4520, ext. 10.
Sincerely,
/s/Pete Benjamin
Pete Benjamin
Field Supervisor
Raleigh Ecological Services
Enclosures - project review package
United States Department of the Interior S" x k
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
;���, Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office y '
RCH $ Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
In Reply Refer To:
Consultation Code: 04EN2000-2019-SLI-1004
Event Code: 04EN2000-2019-E-02292
Project Name: Strawberry Hill
June 07, 2019
Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project
location, and/or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:
The species list generated pursuant to the information you provided identifies threatened,
endangered, proposed and candidate species, as well as proposed and final designated critical
habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project and/or may be affected by
your proposed project. The species list fulfills the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of
species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Please feel free to
contact us if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to
federally proposed, listed, and candidate species and federally designated and proposed critical
habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the
Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be
completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be
completed by visiting the ECOS-IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and
implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested
through the ECOS-IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list.
Section 7 of the Act requires that all federal agencies (or their designated non-federal
representative), in consultation with the Service, insure that any action federally authorized,
funded, or carried out by such agencies is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any
federally -listed endangered or threatened species. A biological assessment or evaluation may be
prepared to fulfill that requirement and in determining whether additional consultation with the
Service is necessary. In addition to the federally -protected species list, information on the
species' life histories and habitats and information on completing a biological assessment or

06/07/2019 Event Code: 04EN2000-2019-E-02292 2
evaluation and can be found on our web page at http://www.fws.gov/raleigh. Please check the
web site often for updated information or changes
If your project contains suitable habitat for any of the federally -listed species known to be
present within the county where your project occurs, the proposed action has the potential to
adversely affect those species. As such, we recommend that surveys be conducted to determine
the species' presence or absence within the project area. The use of North Carolina Natural
Heritage program data should not be substituted for actual field surveys.
If you determine that the proposed action may affect (i.e., likely to adversely affect or not likely
to adversely affect) a federally -protected species, you should notify this office with your
determination, the results of your surveys, survey methodologies, and an analysis of the effects
of the action on listed species, including consideration of direct, indirect, and cumulative effects,
before conducting any activities that might affect the species. If you determine that the proposed
action will have no effect (i.e., no beneficial or adverse, direct or indirect effect) on federally
listed species, then you are not required to contact our office for concurrence (unless an
Environmental Impact Statement is prepared). However, you should maintain a complete record
of the assessment, including steps leading to your determination of effect, the qualified personnel
conducting the assessment, habitat conditions, site photographs, and any other related articles.
Please be aware that bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668 et seq.), and projects affecting these species may require
development of an eagle conservation plan (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/
eagle_guidance.html). Additionally, wind energy projects should follow the wind energy
guidelines (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/) for minimizing impacts to migratory birds and
bats.
Guidance for minimizing impacts to migratory birds for projects including communications
towers (e.g., cellular, digital television, radio, and emergency broadcast) can be found at: http://
www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Hazards/towers/towers.htm; http://
www.towerkill.com; and http://www.fws. og v� rg atorybirds/CurrentBirdlssues/Hazards/towers/
comtow.html.
Not all Threatened and Endangered Species that occur in North Carolina are subject to section 7
consultation with the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service. Atlantic and shortnose sturgeon, sea
turtles,when in the water, and certain marine mammals are under purview of the National Marine
Fisheries Service. If your project occurs in marine, estuarine, or coastal river systems you should
also contact the National Marine Fisheries Service, http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/
We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages
Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project
planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Tracking Number in
the header of this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project
that you submit to our office. If you have any questions or comments, please contact John Ellis
of this office at [e-mail].

06/07/2019 Event Code: 04EN2000-2019-E-02292
Attachment(s):
Official Species List

06/07/2019 Event Code: 04EN2000-2019-E-02292
Official Species List
This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the
requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether
any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed
action".
This species list is provided by:
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
[phone]

06/07/2019 Event Code: 04EN2000-2019-E-02292 2
Project Summary
Consultation Code: 04EN2000-2019-SLI-1004
Event Code: 04EN2000-2019-E-02292
Project Name: Strawberry Hill
Project Type: STREAM / WATERBODY / CANALS / LEVEES / DIKES
Project Description: RES has entered into contracts to purchase conservation easements
totaling approximately 21.81 acres on seven parcels comprising the
Strawberry Hill Project (Project), in Johnston County, North Carolina.
The Project will involve the restoration and enhancement of streams, as
well as restoration and preservation of buffers in the Neuse River
Watershed.
Project Location:
Approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:
www. goo gle. com/maps/place/3 5.465 87401816285N78.31470822466244W
�pran
L
Counties: Johnston, NC

06/07/2019 Event Code: 04EN2000-2019-E-02292 3
Endangered Species Act Species
There is a total of 6 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.
Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include
species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species
list because a project could affect downstream species.
IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA
Fisheriesl, as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the
Department of Commerce.
See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially
within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office
if you have questions.
NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an
office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of
Commerce.
Birds
NAME
Red -cockaded Woodpecker Picoides borealis
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws. og v/ecp/species/7614
Amphibians
NAME
Neuse River Waterdog Necturus lewisi
There is proposed critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not
available.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws. og v/ecp/species/6772
Fishes
NAME
Carolina Madtom Noturus furiosus
There is proposed critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not
available.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws. og v/ecp/species/528
STATUS
Endangered
STATUS
Proposed
Threatened
STATUS
Proposed
Endangered

06/07/2019 Event Code: 04EN2000-2019-E-02292 4
Clams
NAME
Atlantic Pigtoe Fusconaia masoni
There is proposed critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat.
Species profile: htips://ecos.fvvs. og v/ecp/species/5164
Tar River Spinymussel Elliptio steinstansana
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: htips:Hecos.fws. oe v/ecp/species/1392
Flowering Plants
KIARAr
Michaux's Sumac Rhus michauxii
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws. og v/ecp/species/5217
STATUS
Proposed
Threatened
Endangered
STATUS
Endangered
Critical habitats
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S
JURISDICTION.

Species Conclusions Table Project Name: _______________________________________________________________________ Date: ____________________________________________________ Species / Resource Name Conclusion ESA Section 7 / Eagle Act Determination Notes / Documentation Acknowledgement: I agree that the above information about my proposed project is true. I used all of the provided resources to make an informed decision about impacts in the immediate and surrounding areas. Date 6WUDZEHUU\ +LOO5HGFRFNDGHG:RRGSHFNHU3LFRLGHVERUHDOLV1R VXLWDEOH KDELWDW SUHVHQW1R(IIHFW1HXVH5LYHU:DWHUGRJ1HFWXUXVOHZLVL1R VXLWDEOH KDELWDWSUHVHQW1R (IIHFW&DUROLQD 0DGWRP1RWXUXV)XULRVXV1R VXLWDEOH KDELWDWSUHVHQW1R (IIHFW$WODQWLF3LJWRH)XVFRQDLDPDVRQL1R VXLWDEOH KDELWDWSUHVHQW1R (IIHFW7DU5LYHU6SLQ\PXVVHO(OOLSWLRVWHLQVWDQVDQD1R VXLWDEOH KDELWDWSUHVHQW1R (IIHFW0LFKDX[
V6XPDF5KXVPLFKDX[LL1R(IIHFW+DELWDWDQGVSHFLHVVXUYH\FRQGXFWHGRQ$XJXVW'HWHUPLQHGQRVXLWDEOHKDELWDWQRUVSHFLHVSUHVHQFH&RQFOXVLRQDQGGHWHUPLQDWLRQUHYLVHGWRUHIOHFWWKLV6HHFRQFOXVLRQOHWWHUSJ&ULWLFDO +DELWDW QR FULWLFDO KDELWDWSUHVHQW1R (IIHFW%DOG HDJOH XQOLNHO\ WR GLVWXUEQHVWLQJ EDOG HDJOHV1R (DJOH $FW 3HUPLW 5HTXLUHG-DPH\0F(DFKUDQ_______________________________________________________________ Signature /Title ___________________________ 1R VXLWDEOH KDELWDWSUHVHQWDQG
NCNHDE-9173
June 3, 2019
Matthew DeAngelo
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC
302 Jefferson Street
Raleigh, NC 27607
RE: Strawberry Hill (Updated)
Dear Matthew DeAngelo:
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide
information about natural heritage resources for the project referenced above.
Based on the project area mapped with your request, a query of the NCNHP database indicates that
there are no records for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, and/or
conservation/managed areas within the proposed project boundary. Please note that although there
may be no documentation of natural heritage elements within the project boundary, it does not
imply or confirm their absence; the area may not have been surveyed. The results of this query
should not be substituted for field surveys where suitable habitat exists. In the event that rare
species are found within the project area, please contact the NCNHP so that we may update our
records.
The attached ‘Potential Occurrences’ table summarizes rare species and natural communities that
have been documented within a one-mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these
records suggests that these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area
if suitable habitat exists. Tables of natural areas and conservation/managed areas within a one-mile
radius of the project area, if any, are also included in this report.
If a Federally-listed species is found within the project area or is indicated within a one-mile radius of
the project area, the NCNHP recommends contacting the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for
guidance. Contact information for USFWS offices in North Carolina is found here:
https://www.fws.gov/offices/Directory/ListOffices.cfm?statecode=37.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation
planning, project review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria
for regulatory decisions. Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published
without prior written notification to the NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information
source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP data may not be redistributed without permission.
The NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional correspondence if a
Dedicated Nature Preserve, Registered Heritage Area, Clean Water Management Trust Fund
easement, or Federally-listed species are documented near the project area.
If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance,
please contact Rodney A. Butler at [e-mail] or 919-707-8603.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
Natural Heritage Element Occurrences, Natural Areas, and Managed Areas Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Strawberry Hill (Updated)
June 3, 2019
NCNHDE-9173
Element Occurrences Documented Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Taxonomic
Group
EO ID Scientific Name Common Name Last
Observation
Date
Element
Occurrence
Rank
Accuracy Federal
Status
State
Status
Global
Rank
State
Rank
Dragonfly or
Damselfly
33753 Somatochlora
georgiana
Coppery Emerald 2004-Pre H? 5-Very
Low
--- Significantly
Rare
G3G4 S2?
No Natural Areas are Documented Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
No Managed Areas are Documented Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Definitions and an explanation of status designations and codes can be found at https://ncnhde.natureserve.org/content/help. Data query generated on June 3, 2019; source: NCNHP, Q2 Apr 2019.
Please resubmit your information request if more than one year elapses before project initiation as new information is continually added to the NCNHP database.
Page 2 of 3
Page 3 of 3
RE: Rhus michauxii Survey at Strawberry Hill site, Johnston County, NC
A plant survey for the federally listed Michaux’s sumac,Rhus michauxii (Fed E, S2
G2G3),was conducted on August 1st, 2019 at our Strawberry Hill site (a Federal-Aid project
(FHWA lead federal agency) administered by the North Carolina Division of Mitigation
Services), located 8 miles southeast of Smithfield, NC in Johnston County; no populations were
located in this area.R. michauxii,a shrub endemic to the southeastern United States, is native to
the piedmont and coastal plains of Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, and
Florida. In North Carolina, current populations exist in Cumberland, Davie, Durham, Franklin,
Hoke, Mecklenburg, Moore, Nash, Richmond, Scotland, and Wake counties. In Johnston County
it is considered to be historic (having been observed more than 50 years ago). R. michauxii
typically grows in submesic loamy swales that are affected by disturbance, such as road sides,
fire-dependent forests with an exposed understory, or artificial clearings (powerline cuts, etc.).
The Strawberry Hill mitigation site consists of densely vegetated plots of land dissecting and
surrounding exposed corn fields. In some areas throughout the easement there are roadsides and
forest margins; however, the vegetation and conditions that line the boundaries lend no suitable
habitat for R. michauxii. The areas thought to be most likely suitable for this species (along the
forested margins within the easement) were in fact too sandy and wet, consisting largely of
wetland species. The species diversity throughout the Strawberry Hill site included, Solanum
carolinense,Campsis radicans, Parthenocissus quinquefolia, Rubus pensilvanicus, Eupatorium
capillifolium, Acer rubrum, Liquidambar styraciflua, Smilax sp., Typha latifolia, Solidago sp.,
Toxicodendron radicans, Rhus copallinum, Muscadinia rotundifolia, Magnolia sp., Carex sp.,
Phytolacca Americana, Setaria sp.,Chamaecrista fasciculata,Rhexia sp.,Verbena brasiliensis,
Ambrosia artemisiifolia, Diospyros virginiana, Rhus glabra, Ligustrum sinense, Pinus sp.,
Microstegium vimineum, Arundinaria gigantea, Sambucus canadensis, Boehmeria cylindrica,
Oxydendrum arboreum, Lonicera japonica, Juncus sp., Quercus stellata, Persicaria sp., Ilex
opaca, and Aralia spinosa.
Our method for surveying included splitting up (among two people) walking the
boundaries of the stream, forest margins, and roadsides within the easement, recording the
species present and any occurrences of potential suitable habitat. Due to heavy vegetation and/or
sparse sun exposure along the margins, the land within the easement did not represent suitable
habitat for R. michauxii. Since Johnston County has historical observations of R. michauxii,yet
lacks current observations, there is a possibility that within the last 50+ years there have been
certain climatic, environmental, or developmental changes to the area, lowering the reproductive
success of any remaining species, therefore making it unlikely that there would be a population
occurrence on the Strawberry Hill site.
Two different reference populations were visited on the way to the Strawberry Hill site.
One population was first observed in 2007, located in Knightdale, NC, at the margin of a
forested stream buffer surrounded by immature pines and blackberry; this large population (close
to 500 stems) is surrounded by protective fencing. The second population, which was first
observed in 1985, is located in southeast Raleigh along the east and west road banks of Barwell
Road adjacent to the intersection of Walnut Creek and the Neuse River; this population was less
abundant and seemed unhealthy (likely due to chemical spraying). Both survey members, Matt
DeAngelo and Emily Ulman, had dichotomous keys for the genus Rhus,adapted from Weakley
(2008) and had researched the information and pictures provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service for R. michauxii prior to conducting the survey.Matt and Emily have performed rare
plant surveys in the past for threatened and endangered plant species throughout North Carolina.
In conclusion, after conducting a more thorough evaluation of the habitat present at the
Strawberry Hill Mitigation Site and surveying for R. michauxii specifically, we have determined
that there is no suitable habitat present within the Strawberry Hill Mitigation Site easement;
therefore, we are changing the conclusion on the species conclusion table on the self-certification
letter from may affect to no effect on any R. michauxii populations.

North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Gordon Myers, Executive Director

Mailing Address: Habitat Conservation • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]

July 12, 2019

Mr. Jamey McEachran
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605

Subject: Request for Environmental Information for the Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project, Johnston
County, North Carolina.

Dear Mr. McEachran,

Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) have reviewed the
proposed project description. Comments are provided in accordance with certain provisions of the Clean
Water Act of 1977 (as amended), Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16
U.S.C. 661-667e) and North Carolina General Statutes (G.S. 113-131 et seq.).

Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC has developed the Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project for the NC
Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Mitigation Services. The proposed project will restore
and enhance unnamed tributaries to the Polecat Branch and restore, enhance and preserve riparian buffers
of unnamed tributaries and ditches within the project. This project is in the Neuse River Watershed, a
Targeted Local Watershed that is being impacted by agricultural non-point source pollution through lack
of riparian buffers. This project will restore/enhance 4,448 linear feet of stream and associated riparian
buffer.

Stream restoration projects often improve water quality and aquatic habitat. Establishing native, forested
buffers in riparian areas will help protect water quality, improve aquatic and terrestrial habitats and
provide a travel corridor for wildlife species. The NCWRC recommends the use of biodegradable and
wildlife-friendly sediment and erosion control devices. Silt fencing, fiber rolls and/or other products
should have loose-weave netting that is made of natural fiber materials with movable joints between the
vertical and horizontal twines. Silt fencing and similar products that have been reinforced with plastic or
metal mesh should be avoided as they impede the movement of terrestrial wildlife species. Excessive silt
and sediment loads can have detrimental effects on aquatic resources including destruction of spawning
habitat, suffocation of eggs and clogging of gills. Any invasive plant species that are found onsite should
be removed.

Page 2

July 12, 2019
Scoping – Strawberry Hill Mitigation Project

Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this project. If I can be of further assistance,
please contact me at [phone] or [e-mail].

Sincerely,

Gabriela Garrison
Eastern Piedmont Habitat Conservation Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program

Appendix M

DMS Floodplain Requirements Checklist

FEMA_Floodplain_Checklist.docx Page 1 of 4

EEP Floodplain Requirements Checklist

This form was developed by the National Flood Insurance program, NC Floodplain
Mapping program and Ecosystem Enhancement Program to be filled for all EEP projects.
The form is intended to summarize the floodplain requirements during the design phase of
the projects. The form should be submitted to the Local Floodplain Administrator with
three copies submitted to NFIP (attn. State NFIP Engineer), NC Floodplain Mapping Unit
(attn. State NFIP Coordinator) and NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program.

Project Location

Name of project:

Strawberry Hill Site
Name if stream or feature:

Unnamed Tributary to Polecat Branch
County:

Johnston County
Name of river basin:

Neuse River Basin
Is project urban or rural?

Rural
Name of Jurisdictional
municipality/county:

Johnston County (Town of Four Oaks ETJ)
DFIRM panel number for
entire site:

2602
(map number 3720260200K, effective date June 20,
2018)
Consultant name:

Resource Environmental Solutions
Phone number:

919-209-1055
Address:

3600 Glenwood Avenue, Suite 100
Raleigh, NC 27612

FEMA_Floodplain_Checklist.docx Page 2 of 4

Design Information

The Strawberry Hill Mitigation Site is located within a rural watershed in Johnston
County, North Carolina within the Neuse River Basin and USGS 14-digit HUC
03020201140010. The Project proposes to restore 3,719 linear feet (LF) of streams as
well as restore 15.13 acres and preserve 1.88 acres of riparian buffer area that will
provide water quality benefit for 383 acres of drainage area. The purpose of the Project is
to meet water quality improvements addressed in the River Basin Restoration Priorities
and improve overall stream function.

Reach Length (LF) Mitigation Type
JH1-A 1,007 Restoration
JH1-B 2,712 Restoration

FEMA_Floodplain_Checklist.docx Page 3 of 4
Floodplain Information

Is project located in a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA)?
Yes No

If project is located in a SFHA, check how it was determined:
Redelineation
Detailed Study
Limited Detail Study
Approximate Study
Don't know

List flood zone designation: Zone X (outside 0.2% floodplain)

Check if applies:
AE Zone
Floodway
Non-Encroachment
None
A Zone
Local Setbacks Required
No Local Setbacks Required

If local setbacks are required, list how many feet:

Does proposed channel boundary encroach outside floodway/non-
encroachment/setbacks?

Yes No

Land Acquisition (Check)
State owned (fee simple)
Conservation easment (Design Bid Build)
Conservation Easement (Full Delivery Project)
Note: if the project property is state-owned, then all requirements should be addressed
to the Department of Administration, State Construction Office (attn: Herbert Neily,
[phone])

Is community/county participating in the NFIP program?
Yes : No
Note: if community is not participating, then all requirements should be addressed to
NFIP (attn: State NFIP Enizineer. [phone])
Name of Local Floodplain Administrator:
Floodplain Requirements
This section to be filled by designer/applicant following verification with the LFPA
4 No Action
I - No Rise
1 - Letter of Map Revision
i- Conditional Letter of Map Revision
i Other Requirements
List other requirements:
Comments:
Name: Samuel C. Faskincy Signature:
v
Title: Engineer I Date: 06.23.2020
FEMA Floodplain_checklist.docx Page 4 of 4