20110106 Ver 1_401 Application_20110111

fffff???
KC I
TECHNOLOGIES
ENGINEERS • SCIENTISTS • SURVEYORS • CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS
Landmark Center II, Suite 220 4601 Six Forks Road Raleigh, NC 27609 [phone] [phone] Fax
Date: January 27, 2011
Company: NC DWQ
401 /Wetland Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699
Contact: 401 Wetlands Unit
Project:
LJ
A I ""
Buffalo Flats Wetland
Restoration
241 10 106
Number of Ite
5 ms Description
Copies - PCN form and supporting documentation
3 ( 11 X 17 Plans
2 Full Sized Plans
1 Check # 1540 for Processing Fee

? In accordance with your request
® For your review
? For processing
? Plans reviewed and accepted
? Plans reviewed and accepted as noted
? For revision by you
? For your use/files
? Please call when ready
? Please return to this office
® Approval requested
? Conference requested
at your convenience
JAN 3 2011 1?.7?
DENR - WATER QUALITY
WETLANDS AND ST"WATER BRANCH
Tim Morris
Associate
Ecosystem Dynamics Practice
KCI Associates of NC, P.A.
KCI TECHNOLOGIES
www.kci.com
Employee-Owned Since 1988
L . ,r
2 0 1 1 0 1 0 E
PCN Permit Application
Buffalo Flats Wetland Restoration Project, A Full Delivery
Mitigation Project for the NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program
Applicant - KCI Technologies, Inc. (Full Delivery Provider)
A Full Delivery Mitigation Project for the NC Ecosystem
Enhancement Program
Contents
PCN Permit Application
401 Oversight/Express Permitting PCN Submittal Checklist
Attachment 1- Agent Authorization Letter
Attachment 2 - JD Plat and Letter
Attachment 3 - Categorical Exclusion Report Excerpt
Attachment 4 - Mitigation Plan Approval Letter from NCEEP
Attachment 5 - Mitigation Plan and Project Plans
Enclosures -11"X17" Plans (5), Full Sized Plans (2)

Version 1.4
January 9, 2009
401 Oversight/Express Permitting PCN Submittal Checklist
® The application fee (Checks may be made out to "N.C. Division of Water Quality"
$240.00 for 401 Water Quality Certification with minor impacts
$570.00 for 401 Water Quality Certification with major impacts
Express Review Fee (Amount requested on Acceptance Letter)
Check is attached to application.
® Five (5) complete and collated copies of the PCN Application and supporting
documentation (instead of providing 5 copies of the full size plans you may provide two
copies of full size plans along with three copies of 11 X 17 plans)
Plan Copies Included, as requested.
? Stormwater Management Plan (if applicable - see PCN Form Help File Section E)
1) Please provide three (3) copies of the stormwater management plans along with all
supporting information pertaining to this project including the following:
a. Entire site development/layout plans delineating all drainage areas;
b. Design calculation sheets for all proposed BMP(s) sized for both on-site and
off-site drainage;
c. BMP supplements for each proposed BMP and Required Items Check List
(http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/su/bmp forms.htm) along with all required
items;
d. A Notarized Operation & Maintenance Agreement for each stormwater
management facility;
e. Detailed construction drawing sheets shall include
(i) Erosion and sediment control plans;
(ii) Installation and planting schedules for the proposed BMPs;
(iii) Appropriately scaled plan views and cross sectional details of all
BMPs and associated components - inlet and outlet structures,
forebay, respective zones and pertinent elevations.
? If your project is located within a State implemented Riparian Buffer Rule Area, submit the
following along with site plans and PCN form:
1) Three (3) copies of the details for on-site diffuse flow provisions, (refer to
http://h2o.enr. state. nc. us/su/bmp_forms. htm).
? DWQ Stream Determination Forms for streams on property and DWQ determination
letter for wetlands or streams (if applicable).
The following is the most critical of all the information that you must provide. The quality and
detail of the information will often determine the expeditiousness of the review. The following is
a checklist of the types of pertinent information required at a minimum:
Maps and Plans:
® The most recent version of the 1:24,000 USGS Topographic Map - Please cleanly draw or
delineate the site boundaries on the topographic map.
t,
Version 1.4
January 9, 2009
USGS Topo map is contained on page 4 of the enclosed Mitigation Plan.
® The most recent version of the bound and published County NRCS Soil Survey Map -
(required for projects within the Neuse River Basin, Tar-Pamlico River Basin, Randleman
Lake Watershed and the Catawba River Basin, also recommended for all projects) -
Please clearly delineate the site boundaries, etc. on the map. If the delineation obscures
any of the features, it is recommended that a clean copy be provided. Copies of the
current soil survey and/or soil survey map sheets can be obtained from the local NRCS
County Office (http://www.nc.nres.usda.gov/). GIS soil layers are not acceptable.
Soils Map is included as an addendum 5.1 to page 5 of the enclosed
Mitigation Plan.
® Vicinity map - Please clearly mark the location and approximate boundaries of the property
and project on the map. Please indicate north arrow and scale. Please include applicable
road names or State Road numbers.
Vicinity Map is included on Page 3 of the enclosed Mitigation Plan
® The Site Plan - The most critical map to be provided is the site plan. You must provide full
sized plans. The following is the minimum list of plans that are typically needed.
Two full sized plans and 3 half sized plans have been included in this
submittal.
® Pre-construction/Pre-existing conditions - This sheet (or sheets) must include:
• All jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional wetland, stream, water features, State regulated
buffers (delineated into Zones 1 and 2)
• Topographic contours with elevations
• Any existing structures and impervious areas
• Existing utility lines and easements
• Existing roads, culverts, and other pertinent features
• North arrow and the scale (1":50' scale is recommended).
Existing Conditions are included in the enclosed project plans on Grading
Plan Sheets 4, 5, 6.
® Proposed conditions - This sheet (or sheets) must include:
• All jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional wetland, stream, water features, State regulated
buffers (delineated into Zones 1 and 2)
• Lot layout (if a subdivision or commercial development is proposed) - lots must be
developable without further impacts to jurisdictional and non-iurisdictional wetlands,
streams, water features, and State regulated buffers. Building envelopes must be
provided when streams, wetlands, riparian buffers, or water features exist on a lot
• All built-out structures and impervious cover
• Final grading contours with elevations
.t
Version 1.4
January 9, 2009
• All utilities and easements (including septic fields on all lots within 100 feet of stream,
wetland, or water features - if applicable)
• Impacted areas - these should correspond with the Impact numbers listed on your PCN
form.
Proposed Conditions are included in the enclosed project plans on Grading
Plan Sheets 4, 5, 6.
? Drainage Plans - Final drainage plans must include the following:
• Locations and pertinent elevations and sizes of the stormwater collection system and
drainage ways
• All inlets and outlets must also be shown with pertinent elevations (All outlets to
wetlands must be at a non-erosive velocity, generally less than 2 ft/sec during the peak
flow from the 10-yr storm)
• Scaled stormwater BMPs must also be indicated as required by DWQ rules and policies
• In certain cases (see Section E of PCN form), final stormwater management plans must
also be provided (see Stormwater Management Plan Checklist)
® Proposed Impacts - All impacts to jurisdictional and non jurisdictional wetland, stream,
water features, and State regulated buffers must be shown and labeled on the site plans at
a scale no smaller than 1" = 50'. All excavation, fill, flooding, stabilization, and other impacts
that will be conducted in or near jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional wetland, stream, water
features, and State regulated buffers must be indicated. Please provide cross sectional
details showing the provisions for aquatic life passage (burial of culvert 20% for culverts <_ 48
inches, and 1-foot for culverts > 48 inches).
Wetland Impacts:
® Precise grading and final elevation contours must be provided. Existing
vegetation and any clearing must be specified.
? All subsurface utility lines must indicate the location of anti-seep collars.
Construction detail for anti-seep collars must be provided. (NA)
? Roadway or other crossings of riparian wetlands may require floodway culverts to
maintain existing hydrological conditions. (NA)
® Plans should show that the hydrology of remaining wetlands on the site will be
maintained.
Stream Impacts: (NA)
? Stream impacts must be clearly shown on the plans. The centerline as well as
the banks of the stream must be surveyed or located by GPS for the portion of
the stream to be impacted.
? The inlet and the outlet of all culverts should be aligned with the stream as
much as possible. Inlet and outlet elevations and streambed elevations should
be indicated. Any inlet or outlet protection must be shown and enumerated on
the impact map(s).
Y-*
Version 1.4
January 9, 2009
? For bottomless culverts or other spans, a vertical cross section should be
provided that shows the minimum distance from each span to each stream bank,
the stream cross section, the height of the span above the stream and the
minimum distance from the edge of each footer to each stream bank.
Additionally, please provide a signed and sealed geotechnical report of
subsurface soils at the proposed bottomless culvert location. The report must
comply with the Division of Highways - Guidelines for Drainage Studies and
Hydraulic Design, prepared by A. L. Hankins, Jr., State Hydraulics Engineer -
1999.
? Multiple culverts or sectioned box culverts typically require the use of sills, off-
setting or other means to match the cross section of the existing stream (in order
to maintain stream stability and provide aquatic life passage). A vertical cross
section of the culverts should be shown overlain with the up and downstream
stream cross section including the stream flood-prone area.
? Impacts associated with dam construction must indicate and enumerate all fill
associated with the dam footprint, spillway and any bank stream bank
stabilization. The length of stream impounded must also be indicated and
enumerated.
J
TF9OG
0F W A
o?
1 1 >
I?.?1 0 <
201 10 106
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Pre-Construction Notification PC Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
1 a. Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
®Section 404 Permit El Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 27 or General Permit (GP) number:
1 c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps? ? Yes ® No
1 d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
® 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular ? Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
? 401 Water Quality Certification - Express ? Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required? For the record only for DWQ 401
Certification:
? Yes ® No For the record only for Corps Permit:

? Yes ® No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program proposed for mitigation
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in-lieu
fee program. ? Yes ® No
1 g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below. ? Yes ® No
1h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)? ? Yes ® No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project: Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
2b. County: Cabarrus
2c. Nearest municipality / town: Concord, NC
au '',
U
L th
2d. Subdivision name: NA IA Al
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no: NA
2aft., WW

3. I;
Owner Information W%Rwft
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed: Jordan, James B. and Janet O.
3b. Deed Book and Page No. DB 436 PG 659
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable): NA
3d. Street address: 4939 Gold Hill Road
3e. City, state, zip: Concord, NC 28025
3f. Telephone no.: 704-795-3465
3g. Fax no.:
3h. Email address:
Page 1 of 12
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is: ® Agent ? Other, specify:
4b. Name: Timothy J. Morris
4c. Business name
(if applicable): KCI Technologies, Inc.
4d. Street address: 4601 Six Forks Road, Ste. 220
4e. City, state, zip: Raleigh, NC 27609
4f. Telephone no.: 919-783-9214
4g. Fax no.: 919-783-9266
4h. Email address: [e-mail]
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
5c. Street address:
5d. City, state, zip:
5e. Telephone no.:
5f. Fax no.:
5g. Email address:
Page 2 of 12
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID): 5652-4457-660000
Latitude: 35.456988 Longitude: -
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): 80.496325
(DD.DDDDDD) (-DD.DDDDDD)
1c. Property size: Total Easement is 20.20 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to Dutch Buffalo Creek
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water: Class C, Water Supply II and High Quality Waters
2c. River basin: Yadkin-Pee Dee
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
The site is currently used as pastureland. The hydrologic characteristics of the property have been modified over the
years to encourage surface drainage. This was primarily accomplished through the installation of ditches, shallow
surface drains and tile drains. The general land use in the local area is a mix of agricultural land and forest land. The
City's of Concord and Kannapolis are both located within a 10-mile radius of the site, and commercial and residential
development increase as you approach those two cities.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
0.55
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
550' on site, 2,175' along western boundary of the site (Dutch Buffalo Creek)
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
This project is a full-delivery wetland mitigation project (FDP) being developed for the NC Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (EEP). The goal is to create diverse bottomland hardwood and low elevation seep communities that are
integrated into the Dutch Buffalo Creek floodplain corridor. This will buffer nutrient and sediment impacts to Dutch Buffalo
Creek from adjacent grazing practices.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The project will consist of 11.2 acres of riparian wetland restoration, 1.2 acres of riparian wetland creation, 3.4 acres of
non-riparian wetland restoration and 4.4 acres of upland preservation. A bulldozer, tracked skid-steer, dump trucks and
track hoe are anticipated to be used to construct this restoration project. The project consists of filling field ditches and
man-made farm ponds to increase the hydroperiod on the site. The plow layer will be redeveloped by surface grading
targeted to create wetland microtopography that will capture surface hydrology and slow subsurface drainage. This site
will be planted with species common and native to bottomland riparian forest and lowland elevation seep as defined by
Schafale and Weakley, 1990. Livestock exclusion fencing will be installed as needed to keep livestock from entering the
easement area.
Page 3 of 12
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
®Yes El No El Unknown
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Comments:
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
? Preliminary ®Final
of determination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas? Agency/Consultant Company: US Army Corps of
Name (if known): Steve Stokes, KCI, verified by Steve Engineers
Chapin, US ACOE Other: Asheville Regulatory Field Office
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
October 1, 2010: Action ID - 2010 - 01570
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for ? Yes ® No ? Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? ? Yes ® No
[! If yes, explain.
Page 4 of 12
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
® Wetlands ? Streams - tributaries ? Buffers
? Open Waters ? Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a. 2b. 2c. 2d. 2e. 2f.
Wetland impact Type of jurisdiction
number - Type of impact Type of wetland Forested (Corps - 404, 10 Area of impact
Permanent (P) or (if known) DWQ - non-404, other) (acres)
Temporary T
W1 ? P ®T Fill PEM ? Yes
® No ® Corps
® DWQ 0.03
W2 ? P ® T Fill PEM ? Yes
® No ® Corps
® DWQ 0.42
W3 ? POT Fill PEM ? Yes
® No ® Corps
® DWQ 0.04
W4 ? P ®T FIII PEM ? Yes
® No ® Corps
® DWQ 0.02
W5 ? P ® T Fill PEM ? Yes
® No ® Corps
® DWQ 0.03
W6 ? P ®T Fill PEM ? Yes
® No ® Corps
® DWQ 0.007
2g. Total wetland impacts 0.547 ac
2h. Comments: Existing fringe wetlands along man-made drainage features will be filled to allow the local groundwater
elevation to restore juristictional hydrology withing surrounding areas. Impacted (filled) areas will ultimately be restored as
part of the overall mitigation plan and thus are considered temporary impacts for the purpose of this application.
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a. 3b. 3c. 3d. 3e. 3f. 3g.
Stream impact Type of impact Stream name Perennial Type of jurisdiction Average Impact
number - (PER) or (Corps - 404, 10 stream length
Permanent (P) or intermittent DWQ - non-404, width (linear
Temporary (T) (INT)? other) (feet) feet)
S1 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S2 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S3 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S4 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S5 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S6 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
3i. Comments:
Page 5 of 12
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a. 4b. 4c. 4d. 4e.
Open water Name of waterbody
impact number - (if applicable) Type of impact Waterbody type Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
01 ?P?T
02 ?P?T
03 ?P?T
04 ?P?T
4E Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If and or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a. 5b. 5c. 5d. 5e.
Wetland Impacts (acres) Stream Impacts (feet) Upland
Pond ID Proposed use or purpose (acres)
number of pond
Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded
P1
P2
5f. Total
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
? Yes ? No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If an impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
? Neuse ?Tar-Pamlico ? Other:
Project is in which protected basin? ? Catawba ? Randleman
6b. 6c. 6d. 6e. 6f. 6g.
Buffer impact
number - Reason Buffer Zone 1 impact Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P) or for Stream name mitigation (square feet) (square feet)
Temporary T impact required?
131 ?P?T ?Yes
? No
B2 ?P?T ?Yes
? No
B3 ?P?T ?Yes
? No
6h. Total buffer impacts
6i. Comments:
Page 6 of 12
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1 a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
We are applying for a Nationwide 27 permit. This permit authorizes impacts to juristictional waters for the purpose of
conducting aquatic habitat restoration, establishment and enhancement activities. Based on our analysis of site soils and
hydrology, we believe a large portion of this site (+/-16 acres) had historically been wetlands. This belief is predicated on the
presence of relic hydric soils, an evaluation of wetlands on the opposite side of the Dutch Buffalo Creek floodplain, and the
evaluation of soils maps and other available site data. The existing wetlands that remain on-site are located within or along
existing drainage features created to maximize the potential for agricultural land on the property. In order to reestablish
wetland hydrology throughout a much larger area, these drainage features (and existing wetlands) will be filled. We
anticipate that filling these ditches will result in the upward movement of groundwater that would in turn serve to extend the
hydroperiod and allow the growth and propagation of hydrophytic vegetation.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Existing wetland hydrophytes, including sod mats, will be transplanted where practical prior to filling the drainage features.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State? ? Yes ® No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply): ? DWQ ? Corps

2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project? ? Mitigation bank
? payment to in-lieu fee program

? Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter) Type Quantity
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In-lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in-lieu fee program is attached. ? Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested: linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature: ? warm ? cool ?cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only): square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4f. Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested: acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 7 of 12
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) - required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation? ? Yes ? No
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.

Zone 6c.
Reason for impact 6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier 6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1 3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2 1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in-lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 8 of 12
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified ? Yes ® No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
? Yes ? No
Comments:
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project? 0%
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan? ? Yes ® No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why: No impervious area will be created on
this project. This is a wetland restoration project.
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
NA
? Certified Local Government
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan? ? DWQ Stormwater Program
? DWQ 401 Unit
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project? Cabarrus County
? Phase II
3b. Which of the following locally-implemented stormwater management programs ? NSW
? USMP
apply (check all that apply): ? Water Supply Watershed
? Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been ? Yes ? No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
? Coastal counties

4a. Which of the following state-implemented stormwater management programs apply ? HQW
? ORW
(check all that apply):
? Session Law 2006-246
? Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached? ? Yes ? No
S. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements? ? Yes ? No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met? ? Yes ? No
Page 9 of 12
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the ® Yes ? No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State ® Yes ? No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.)
Comments: A Categorical Exclusion report has been prepared and is included as ? Yes ® No
an attachment to this permit application. This CE Report is required by the Federal
Highway Administration for North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Projects to
demonstrate compliance with NEPA and SEPA for environmental mitigation
projects.
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards, ? Yes ® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. Is this an after-the-fact permit application? ? Yes ® No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in ? Yes ® No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
This is a wetland restoration project. No wastewater will be generated.
Page 10 of 12
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
S. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or ® Yes ? No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act ® Yes ? No
impacts?
?
Raleigh
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted. ® Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
NCDENR, Wildlife Resources Commission. Carolina Wildlife Profiles.
http://www. ncwildlife.org/fs-index_07_conservation. htm
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. North Carolina's Threatened and Endangered Species.
hftp://www.fws.gov/southeast/es/county%201ists.htm.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat? ? Yes ® No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
http://www.saw.usace.army. mil/wetlands/NWP2007/specialwaters.html
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation ? Yes ® No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
See attached Categorical Exclusion Report and Correspondence with John Mintz, State Archaeologist
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain? ® Yes ? No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements: Based on conversations with Cabarrus County and considering the
minimal extent of the work on the site, we anticipate providing justification for a No-rise Certification for this project. This
No-rise Certification will be supported by technical data and signed by a registered professional engineer.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? HEC-RAS
Joseph J. Pfeiffer, Jr.
Vice President 1-26-11
KCI Associates of N.C., P.A.
App ' Agent's Signature
J Date
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name (Agent's'sign
e is v ly if an authorization letter from the applicant
is provided.)
ar
y
Page 11 of 12
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
Page 12 of 12
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
Attachment 1
Agent Authorization Letter
AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
LOT NO.
PLAN NO. KCI Job # 12100798 PARCEL ID: 56524457660000
Site Coordinates in (decimal degrees) Lat: 35.457206 Long: 80.496336
STREET ADDRESS: 4939 Gold Hill Road
Concord. NC 28025
Please print:
Property Owner: James B. Jordan
Property Owner:
The undersigned, registered property owners of the above noted property, do hereby authorize
Steven F. Stokes of KCI Associates of NC
(Contractor / Agent) (Name of consulting firm)
to act on my behalf and take all actions necessary for the processing, issuance and acceptance of
this permit or certification and any and all standard and special conditions attached.
Property Owner's Address (if different than property above):
Telephone: [phone]
We hereby certify the above information submitted in this application is true and accurate to the
best of our knowledge.
worked Siggnatu Authorized Signature
It Date: (U Date:
Attachment 2
JD Plat and Letter
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id. 201001570 County: Cabarrus U.S.G.S. Quad: Concord/Mt. Pleasant
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Property Owner/Agent: Mr. James B. Jordan
Address: 4939 Gold Hill Road
Concord, NC 28025
Telephone No.:
Property description:
Size (acres) 31 Nearest Town Concord
Nearest Waterway Dutch Buffalo Creek River Basin Yadkin
USGS HUC Coordinates N 35.457206 W -80.496336
Location description Buffalo Flats Wetland Restoration site located within a 31 acre study area at 4939 Gold Hill
Road: NE of Concord
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
Based on preliminary information, there may be wetlands on the above described property. We strongly suggest you have
this property inspected to determine the extent of Department of the Army (DA) jurisdiction. To be considered final, a
jurisdictional determination must be verified by the Corps. This preliminary determination is not an appealable action
under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process ( Reference 33 CFR Part 331).
B. Approved Determination
There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described property subject to the permit requirements of
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Unless there is a change in the law or
our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
X There are waters of the U.S. including wetlands on the above described 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 strongly suggest you have the wetlands on your property delineated. Due to the size of your property and/or our
present workload, the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner. For a more timely
delineation, you may wish to obtain a consultant. To be considered final, any delineation must be verified by the Corps.
_ The wetland on your property have been delineated and the delineation has been verified by the Corps. 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.
X The waters of the U.S. including wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat
signed by the Corps Regulatory Official identified below on 10/1/2010. 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 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.
Page 1 of 2
Action ID:
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 Washington, NC, at [phone] to determine
their requirements.
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify limits of COE's 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.
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US and/or wetlands without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). If you have any questions regarding this
determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact Steve Chapin at 828-271-7980x224
C. Basis For Determination
The site contains wetlands as determined by the USACE 1987 Wetland Delineation Manual and is adiacent to stream
channels located on the property that exhibit indicators of ordinary high water marks. The stream channel on the
property is an unnamed tributary to Dutch Buffalo Creek which flows into Dutch Buffalo Creek which flows into the
Rocky River which flows into the Yadkin River which is a Section 10 navigable-in-fact waterway at Blewett Falls dam
and ulitmately flows into the Atlantic Ocean.
D. Remarks
E. 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:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division
Attn:Steve Chapin, Project Manager,
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Ave., Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
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 District 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 12/1/10.
**It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the District Office if you do not object to the determination in this
correspondence.
Corps Regulatory Official:
Date 10/01/2010 Expiration Date 10/01/2015
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 our website at http://re ug latoKy.usacesurvpy.com/ to
complete the survey online.
Copy furnished:
KCI Associates of NC
Page 2 of 2

ntY?AP `
Rd 81-
w
b .,,mac ° v °?m a?wwa`.,•o '-=ZZ?
Y - ?o a ¢ ?w?as?"" WN=O0
'ALL a ?
°a°?? :7` W o:u
°UOw ?.= i y <a °Nwm 7 m
? pN
L ?N ? Yo ` ?ZU? i z? z< ¢n O z z
x ?? w Z V
.. .r.rmo-.. ? ?? wo?k"•; `rc ?"'ioc- `? Q °?wsi?o?5 c w ? ?
m
O z? 7i
Zo N_h•-am?`??
Ub ?ra°a?oa ?' ? ? Q zwmp°oN°ww < ? N
J rzzN \ t ??'?' ooaFwW ?? U?
azw?? ova 0 z ? o 7Z Q
Z g
w* w0 ;???zaWo3 W
Q Q c4'i ¢'-<amcwiiv, _ m
N w?
"oy oes LLi„`,°oQrciw e` o?.?-ao?°?n'd O°aq
z Z
<^K
ILI
ovd Zoo M o a _oNzc>a?om do
~ W UT ?Wa
_ w ww 4? O?
o it°o,?o°v1°n d?
zN - oo?ro? rin v, U?
° x w
z= ?? am w
o w ¢ v1 ¢
UN J o«c?u<uu¢¢ ua¢c?Q
> ? WZ OJU Z m Wr)NQNr)pOIO Z 2 (t
zNa rw m°o ¢0000000,:1 >
oow ? ?$ w 1 ?
Z D
N x?g
w 2 11.E
zY'-? ai ?6rc W Q CO
°zw w5 ?,5+ ii w 0 J 4
z? op ? Z N ¢
i ?+? 0333333v1r?
?Of?G° of Z- oz ~ G
O9m§ NO ZV N J
N uo ?k' °?' aw v1
63
P JV ^ /
<l-2
5 P
I a M? r?? `Se 1.
1
I \N?Na I ?snN `? 94pZ, 4 1
I zp I w„,o a55O
I 2 I Z°m ,,L• w 1 IP's
°o I I _° <? Id
=R? I z I a o? l0
m N00'34'19-W 725.00' N00'34'19'W
i?uh,o 271.04' ? N i` ?.•?, i
0
?< \ P o
I ?Y? \ \O
Z o \(m ?.
T ° <N \ \\I
m o < _
N ¢ ?? 11
°? \ \
?. °z
° ; o JO \
'ary ? <I JZ ew i \
W 8e n wpm ?3
Z' N \
<: oo
CREEK
aoNl pUTCKBUFFALO
I ? I
m
3 °2m I
-- I I s I
r / o I I
?? I?? ?8;? I ? 8n I I
? I I
??xiNPn I ?? ? zd-+ 1
°?°N? i ° ? am I I
?? I I i I
I
o n m
'ii l< o
-N
m o m P M o a m ?n I Z °°
o mo o

a q
<
m R
<
? 1 <
lm 1
p1 2 °m In m N ? o '°'m
' i m o I m:.
I5 0 ° '° ? m ml ?nl ? o ol m
'b' O+
a P m m P P
to o f
o p I ?

??I o l

?
el
m n n ?i
ml N1
ml N
m v
m
mi
a ???
?
m{m n
mim
??
"
U _?N
I I n
<
I m' m nm rn
I o
I -
I lv nl, e .? m
1 l.
1 m°-'° ry?`„
I I v eN
I ryn
I m m on
I N
I r a
I
N 3 IN
3 3 3i 3 X5,3 3 ; 3 I
3 3 3 1
3 3 3 I I
3 3; 3 3 I
3 I
3 3 I
3 3 I
3 I
; I
3 3 3 I
3 3
a=_°P
w2 U w?P
~ I
n
<m m m

u? ? m?Fj
? z
I ?
e
N

elm
m
.?
N ni
h ^

Vi NomKp O??°
ow
F F
` ,
m
-
m
I
m'
U
F
F
O 20 Zha V??W
So?
? io ?`
Q (
Z-
o H
h N n mo
m
^ n
" H P
m
?H
?
i
Z
w x v n 2

?;?

ml

m
"<

? ao?FOF }' V
a° z i
a
?
I in
p I
3 i
31 I
; 1
3 3 I I
3 3 I I
3 3
?i N
rn
° mm ? o9 p o
o
z
0 I
o m
o apa ?? ?O
3o
w
''"w ?W?
C7 ? ?
¢ k
..
`
a o
m t
i
? ?
?o?ww?
a wi
? a
z Oar¢
O r=ZZ _
mQ
Jm
_ z
F Vf VI J -

p i?P?o u?N
? Of X
z?1n°c/1a
r NY=ia°ZZK
'Pit ? w Q K

m
m
m
z
u C5
Z¢
< °
l '^za
wo?u a J J
z
U I ii i <_ °
?oLLr I` c
0 3
m
; 3 ;
?
??°i?apo
w 2 O
m
J =rcm?~?viO?
In
¢
' ?
s?? °waW
J a Z z
lu,
?
°ac
rn
=
?O N
z
rc aw4
.
a uoai#a ZO Za 1p
? bK
?om E.W.. o moo.
ndy w '? -
' ??m
U

z
? c
o ? ?m
V] s ?T
0. Q W m
,n
O?m
? 1 z
° <
a <
m
zz° N n 1 z
w i i Q
- > Z

M a: o 1
?Ti maW. ?
w °rn°rn°Z??? ?.. ?1 / III
., n? i Q / ^I 11 1 xa?
f.1-481- z
?I I
nl i I W 9
fan?? / ? I I o °o. 1
I
Z U] 50 ? / 2ov ? I ? o
pl2' 25 h ? Z a
i? I 1 1 ?
/I I U
'o / 9` I
c-,* I = n
bd Q
s, ' d
i
Ern Or In -Qs \? ^
UV

a e n n /I I^ \ \?
N

g?vlnOP ?? / n? 1
m
i Im m ?Y 3
i
l
0 3333 313 / ?
x C
? ?/ /2
r a ?7i ?ti i \ o o \
y{i-? I Q
\
?
Z

n J cD ?Ipp
?pI ~- 3
/

/
? /
Sr ?

9r\ `

? -
\
I J
1\`l' ->•ti, 'V I w
?ti II m m ?n P \
3? N m / I I I I m \
n
3
I
i
?
? w

W
o I
j/I
z oN

x c? m
U
Q' W in

3 3
3
n
3 3

Z /
J wok
91>
In a h
bj : r
s
rn
/ I
3 /
I w alp
?

z
T -
-
3 0
0
:'1
pUTCH

- l ' o n m ?
.' ? a o'
a ,ryi l -
° < ? N m m
a
`
° I ml t
IQ? < c rn m ?
m
I o
zii <
;olm SI N
m <
.m mm m m m ..
.c ,
v
mm m m'; ?.
m;ml m mm '?

N
l i
l
l
l I
l l
l
l
l
I! I
n l
i
l

p

hN

N

tn

N

NN

N

N a

N

;

, 1 l 1
7
I
I I
. N
W Z ?
a
2
0 a
_ w
R'
\\ o
J %
vi
0
Z
a
w
0
O
N
O
I ?
N00'34'19"W 725.00'
JN U m?wa
N ` J
Q
N U Z? Q U? J W
pwwp¢°a-?
off
wso
?
, •? ?
Ojp°XV%yf
ca°?'T' a W g P3 ?y

V

'^mzmo?ao3
_ z a

'-"oho ?ok? i
r'
c
w O j? ? J C UU Z F p Q
1 \
1 \
1 \
1 \
I 1 `\
1 \
I \
I \
1
I \
1 \
I v
J NIA ?6?
sl < Oel
p 8
0S\
8O
N, s \ 9
1 \
1 \
1 \
1 \
\\ z
\ J Ii7 I
/ 1 3 \ W ` n
1 N\ 3 s
I I \
I I
1 ?
3 1 ?
p 3
Z aoz
a
3 J? a l m
0
w?
N J

gljFO?O ORE?K
00?

- v ,

>=
z
a o

r 0 a
o ?-=zz
CO z VI
U?
W ?
3
zg U
W

Z Z
U W =
W
ZO ?Z¢O
V
CD Q C)

1 -

m
w ?
7 m
0!
'^ a a
a
ZW
<
z
z
oo _
z
a J
Fo S«<
E-
U c $wa

a"S
r
r?
dz
z
W
J
a ? (? U
Z
n
f/f
U

CL
i
0-4
^?
a
u O \
`/6U
I??, ?
g
O III
271.04'
C
w
0
dW
?w
x
o
I I 3
N N N N
I I
N ? I
? ? a rn
I
I
IA ?
i /
i
Attachment 3
Categorical Exclusion Report Excerpts
Appendix
Supporting Documentation for
Categorical Exclusion Form for Ecosystem Enhancement
Program Projects
Contents
,"" rff / -)
Limited Phase IESA - EDR Report
l..
SHPO Correspondence
SHPO Response
SHPO Response to Memo
Uniform Act Correspondence
USFWS Correspondence
NHP Correspondence
NHP Response
Endangered Species Biological Conclusion
NRCS Correspondence
NRCS Form AD-1006
WRC Correspondence
WRC Response
Figure 1 - Vicinity Map
Figure 2 - Topographic/Watershed Map
Figure 3 - Land Use Map
Figure 4 - Existing Conditions Map
Affidavit of Public Notice
NNWMMW4?
??ari?ra
KC1
TECHNOLOGIES
August 10, 2010
ENGINEERS • SCIENTISTS • SURVEYORS • CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS
Landmark Center 11, Suite 220 4601 Six Forks Road Raleigh, NC 27609 [phone] [phone] Far
Ms. Renee Gledhill-Earley
Environmental Review Coordinator - SHPO
4617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 276994617
Subject: Cultural Resources Review
Buffalo Flats Wetland Restoration Site
Dear Ms. Gledhill-Earley:
The Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) requests review and comment on any possible issues that might emerge with
respect to archaeological or cultural resources associated with a potential wetland and stream restoration project on the above
referenced site. The subject site, known as the Buffalo Flats wetland restoration site, is located east of Kannapolis, NC in
Cabarrus County (Figure 1). Specifically, the site is approximately one-mile northeast of the intersection of Gold Hill Road
and Irish Potato Road north and east of Concord. It is situated within the 03040105 (Yadkin 05) Watershed Cataloging Unit
and the 03040105020050 Local Watershed Unit (Figure 2). Land use in the watershed is primarily agricultural or forest land
with some low density residential and commercial property (Figure 3). Please accept the attached information as a submittal
for cultural resources review by the State Historic Preservation Office and the Office of State Archaeology.
The property is currently under investigation as a stream restoration project for the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program. Land use at this site is primarily pastureland with small areas of both wetland and upland forest occurring within and
adjacent to the project area (Figure 4). Significant portions of the parcel are situated within the floodplain of Dutch Buffalo
Creek. The planned restoration work typically involves restoring hydrology to the site by plugging ditches and drain tiles,
performing minor grading activities and stabilizing the site with native vegetation. In addition, fencing will be installed to
exclude cattle from the completed project. There will not be any impacts to existing structures (buildings, barns, etc.) on the
subject property. It is anticipated that there will not be an impact to archeological resources on the subject property. No
architectural structures or archeological artifacts have been observed or noted during preliminary surveys of the site for
restoration purposes. In addition, the majority of the site has historically been disturbed due to agricultural purposes such as
tilling and cattle grazing.
Following the review of the included documentation, please provide a determination regarding any potential impacts to cultural
resources associated or historical properties with this project.
Please feel free to contact me at 919-278-2511, should you have any questions or require any further information concerning
the extent of site disturbance associated with this project. Thank you in advance for your assistance and attention.
Sincerely,
_77
Timothy J. Morris
Senior Environmental Scientist
Ecosystem Dynamics Practice
Attachments
KCI TECHNOLOGIES www.kci.com
Employce-Owned Since 1988
?f d? STS 4
N a ?a?
Q?NM
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Peter B. Sandbeck, Administrator
Beverly Eaves Perdue, Governor
Linda A. Carlisle, Secretary
Jeffrey J. Crow, Deputy Secretary
August 30, 2010
Timothy Morris
Ecosystem Dynamics Practice
Landmark Center II, Suite 220
4601 Six Forks Road
Raleigh, NC 27609
Re: Buffalo Flats Wetland Restoration, Cabarrus County, ER 10-1548
Thank you for your letter of August 10, 2010, concerning the above project.
Office of Archives and History
Division of l listorical Resources
David Brook, Director
Based on the topographic and hydrological situation, we have determined that there is a high probability that
archaeological sites may exist within the project area. We therefore recommend that if any earth moving
activities are scheduled to take place, that a comprehensive archaeological survey be conducted by an
experienced archaeologist to identify and evaluate the significance of any archaeological remains that may be
damaged or destroyed by the proposed project. Please note that our office now requests consultation with the Office of
State Archaeology to discuss appropriate field methodology prior to the archaeological field investigation.
to
If an archaeological field investigation is conducted, two copies of the resulting archaeological survey report, as
well as one copy of the appropriate site forms should be forwarded to us for review and comment as soon as
they are available and well in advance of any earth moving activities.
We have determined that the project as proposed will not have an adverse effect on any historic structures.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and 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,
please 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,
(1? auduL4DAt
TePeter Sandbeck
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6599
KCI
TECHNOLOGIES
ENGINEERS • SCIENTISTS • SURVEYORS • CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS
Landmark Center II, Suite 220 4601 Six Forks Road Raleigh, NC 27609 [phone] [phone] Fax
September 17, 2010
Mr. John Mintz
State Archeologist
4617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-4617
Subject: Cultural Resources Review
Buffalo Flats Wetland Restoration Site
KCI Job Number - 20100798
Dear Mr. Mintz:
This letter serves as a follow up to our phone conversation on 9-17-10 regarding the above mentioned project. As you are
aware your office issued a letter to us, dated August 30, 2010 requesting that additional archeological surveys would be
required on the Buffalo Flats property. I have attached that letter for your reference. The conclusions in that letter were based
on the topography on the site and the limited information provided in our letter to you dated August 10, 2010.
As I indicated in our phone conversation, the majority of our study area is dominated by hydric soils that have been drained for
agricultural purposes. These shallow drainage ditches run perpendicular to Dutch Buffalo Creek and are visible as darker
green features (approximately 20 of them) on the attached aerial photos. Our detailed soil investigation conducted by a
licensed soil scientist confirmed the presence of hydric soils over most of the site, with the exceptions being the areas in the
levee position along Dutch Buffalo Creek, and the tributary draining from the on-site pond. These upland areas will not be
disturbed as part of this project. The only grading that will occur on the site is in the relic hydric soil areas where the lateral
ditches will be filled in to restore the wetland hydrology.
Based on the historic condition of the site as wetlands, the disturbed condition of the site from agricultural activities, and the
limited amount of earthwork that will be conducted, KCI would like to ask that your office reconsider the need for a further
detailed archeological investigation on the Buffalo Flats site. I have included several attachments that may assist you in
making your determination.
Please feel free to contact me at 919-278-2511, should you have any questions or require any further information concerning
the extent of site disturbance associated with this project. Thank you in advance for your assistance and attention.
Sincerely,

Timothy J. Morris
Senior Environmental Scientist
Ecosystem Dynamics Practice
Attachments
KCI TECHNOLOGIES www.kci.com
Employee-Owned Since 1988
?Ty di'? 4
a?
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Peter B. Sandbeck, Administrator
Beverly Laves Perdue, Governor
Linda A. Carlisle, Secretary
Jeffrey J. Crow, Deputy Secretary
September 28, 2010
Timothy Morris
Ecosystem Dynamics Practice
Landmark Center II, Suite 220
4601 Six Forks Road
Raleigh, NC 27609
Re: Buffalo Flats Wetlands Restoration Site, Cabarrus County, ER 10-1548
Dear Mr. Morris:
Office of Archives and History
Division of Historical Resources
David Brook, Director
Thank you for the additional information dated September 17, 2010, concerning the above project.
Based on the information contained in your recent letter regarding the previous ground disturbing activities in
the project area and the overall change in project scope, I am withdrawing our (North Carolina Office of State
Archaeology) request that a comprehensive archaeological survey be conducted at the above noted project
locale. The amount and scope of previous earth moving activity in and around the project area has greatly
diminished the likelihood that significant, intact archaeological resources are present.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and 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,
please 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,

Peter Sandbeck
Location: 109 Bast Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6599
KCI
TECHNOLOGIES
August 10, 2010
ENGINEERS • SCIENTISTS • SURVEYORS • CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS
Landmark Center II, Suite 220 4601 Six Forks Road Raleigh, NC 27609 [phone] [phone] Fax
Mr. James Jordan and Mrs. Janet Jordan
4939 Gold Hill Road
Concord, NC 28025
Subject: Notification of Uniform Act Provisions
KCI Job Number - 20100798
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Jordan:
As part of the environmental documentation process in preparation for the wetland restoration project on your
property, this letter is to inform you of important provisions in the Federal Highway Administration Uniform
Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended, referred to as the Uniform
Act.
The Uniform Act was developed to provide for uniform and equitable treatment of persons displaced from their
homes, businesses, non-profit associations, or farms by federal and federally-assisted programs, and establishes
uniform and equitable land acquisition policies. The Act assures that such persons are treated fairly, consistently,
and equitably, and so that they will not suffer disproportionate injuries.
This act applies to any project which utilizes federal funds for the purchase of any interest in real property, including
conservation easements. A portion of the funding for this project is ultimately provided by the US Department of
Transportation, through the NC Department of Transportation for in-kind mitigation to offset impacts from
transportation projects in the area, and therefore we are required to inform you of the following provisions.
The provisions of this act require that we inform you in writing that this conservation easement transaction is
voluntary and that the project is being developed by KCI for the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program
(NCEEP), and as a result, KCI or NCEEP does not have the authority to acquire the property by eminent domain in
the event negotiations fail to reach an amicable agreement. In addition, the Act requires that we indicate the agreed
purchase price of $25,000 per acre.
This letter is for your information, and no response is necessary. Please feel free to contact me at 919-278-2511,
should you have any questions or require any further information.
Sincerely,

Timothy J. Morris
Senior Environmental Scientist
Ecosystem Dynamics Practice
KCI TECHNOLOGIES www.kci.com
Employee-Owned Since 1988
wr?¦ir???rr
KCI
TECHNOLOGIES
August 23, 2010
ENGINEERS • SCIENTISTS • SURVEYORS • CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS
Landmark Center It, Suite 220 4601 Six Forks Road Raleigh, NC 27609 [phone] [phone] Fax
Marella Buncick,
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801
Subject: Endangered Species Act, Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, Migratory Bird Treaty Act
Buffalo Flats Stream Restoration Site
KCI Job # 20100798
Dear Ms. Buncick:
Please accept this information pertaining to the proposed Buffalo Flats Wetland Restoration Project for natural area
and rare species review by the US Fish and Wildlife Service. The subject site is located east of Kannapolis, NC in
Cabarrus County (Figure 1). Specifically, the site is approximately one-mile northeast of the intersection of Gold
Hill Road and Irish Potato Road. It is situated within the 03040105 (Yadkin 05) Watershed Cataloging Unit and the
03040105020050 Local Watershed Unit (Figure 2). Land use in the watershed is primarily agricultural or forest
land with some low density residential and commercial property (Figure 3).
A portion of this property (Figure 4) is currently under investigation for a wetland restoration project for the North
Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program. The vegetation at this site is primarily pastureland with small areas of
both wetland and upland forest occurring within and adjacent to the project area. Significant portions of the parcel
are situated within the floodplain of Dutch Buffalo Creek. The planned restoration work typically involves restoring
hydrology to the site by plugging ditches and drain tiles, performing minor grading activities and stabilizing the site
with native vegetation. In addition, fencing will be installed to exclude cattle from the completed project.
Following the review of the included documentation, please provide a determination of the potential effects to
endangered species, wildlife, or migratory birds associated with this project. We have already obtained an updated
species list for Cabarrus County from your web site (http://nc-es.fws.gov/es/countyfr.html) and summarized our
findings (Attachment 1).
Please feel free to contact me at [phone], should you have any questions or require any further information
to process this request. Thank you in advance for your assistance.
Sincerely,

Timothy J. Morris
Project Manager
Enclosures
KCI TECHNOLOGIES www.kci.com
Employee-Owned Since 1988
Attachment 1
Endangered Species Review for Buffalo Flats Wetland Mitigation Site
Cabarrus County, North Carolina
A review of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) listing of federally
endangered species, threatened species, species of concern and candidate species revealed
two endangered and four federal species of concern in Cabarrus County (Table 1).
Table 1. Species in Cabarrus County, North Carolina listed under the federal Endangered
Species Act.
Major

Taxonomic
Scientific Name Common Federal Status/

Group Name Record Status
Lotus Prairie
Vascular Plant unifoliolatus var. birdsfoot-trefoil FSC*/Current
helleri
Vascular Plant Helianthus Schweinitz's Endangered/Current
schweinitzii sunflower
Vascular Plant Virginia
uillwort Isoetes virginica FSC/Current
Invertebrate Villosa Carolina FSC/Current
vau haniana creekshell
Invertebrate Lasmigona Carolina

decorata
Heels litter E/Historic
Vertebrate
Anguilla rostrata American eel FSC/Current
Vertebrate Etheostoma
Collis Collis Carolina Darter FSC/Current
*Federal Species of Concern
Species and Habitat Description (Endangered Species)
Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii)
Schweinitz's sunflower is endemic to the Piedmont physiographic province of North
Carolina and South Carolina. The species is currently known from Anson, Cabarrus,
Davidson, Gaston, Mecklenburg, Montgomery, Randolph, Rowan, Stanly, Stokes, Surry
and Union counties in North Carolina and York and Lancaster counties in South
Carolina. It is believed that this species formerly occupied prairie like habitats or Post
Oak - Blackjack Oak savannas that were maintained by fire. Current habitats include
roadsides, power line clearings, old pastures, woodland openings and other sunny or
semi-sunny situations. Schweinitz's sunflower is known from a variety of soil types but
is generally found growing on shallow, poor, clayey and/or rocky soils, especially those
derived from mafic rocks. In the few sites where Schweinitz's sunflower occurs in
relatively natural vegetation, the natural community is considered a Xeric Hardpan Forest
(Schafale and Weakley 1990).
)
(Source: http://www.fws.gov/nc-es/plant/schwsun.htmi
Carolina Heelsplitter (Lasmigona decorata)
The Carolina heelsplitter, a freshwater mussel, currently has a very fragmented, relict
distribution but historically was known from several locations within the Catawba and
Pee Dee River systems in North Carolina and the Pee Dee and Savannah River systems,
and possibly the Saluda River system, in South Carolina. Historically, the species was
collected from the Catawba River, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina; several streams
and ponds in the Catawba River system around the Charlotte area of Mecklenburg
County, North Carolina; one small stream in the Pee Dee River system in Cabarrus
County, North Carolina; one pond in the Pee Dee River system in Union County, North
Carolina; and an area in South Carolina referred to only as the Abbeville District, a
terminology no longer employed (Clarke 1985, Keferl and Shelly 1988, Keferl 1991).
The records from the Abbeville District, South Carolina, were previously believed to
have been from the Saluda River system (Clarke 1985, Keferl and Shelly 1988, Keferl
1991). However, as a.result of surveys funded by the U.S. Forest Service and the South
Carolina Department of Natural Resources, a population of the Carolina heelsplitter was
discovered in the spring of 1995 in the Savannah River system (Stevens Creek
watershed) (Alderman 1995 and 1998). Therefore, the historic records from the Abbeville
District may have been from either the Saluda River system or the Savannah River
system or both.
The Carolina heelsplitter lives in shallow streams and rivers, and occasionally, a pond.
The species can usually be found in mud, or mixed sediments. They are usually found
along stable stream banks, but have also been found in the middle of a water way. It is
important that the water does not carry much sediment.
(Source: http://www.fws.gov/nc-es/plant/schwsun.html)
Potential Habitat at the Buffalo Flats Wetland Restoration Site
Existing Conditions:
The project site is located on the floodplain of Dutch Buffalo Creek. This area is not one
of the six units composing the Critical Habitat Designation for the Carolina heelsplitter
(50 CFR Part 17). In the area of the project site, Dutch Buffalo Creek has been ditched
and straightened for agricultural purposes sometime prior to 1938 (the date of the oldest
available aerial photograph). The proposed wetland restoration area is on the floodplain
of Dutch Buffalo Creek within adjacent pastureland. The fields contain shallow drainage
ditches that have effectively drained the fields to allow for more dependable grazing and
agricultural use. The goal of the project is to reestablish the more natural drainage
patterns throughout the fields, reestablishing soil structure damaged by years of grazing
and compaction and plant appropriate riparian shrubs, trees and herbaceous plants to
restore a naturalized wetland floodplain to Dutch Buffalo Creek. No active grading will
occur within the mainstem of Dutch Buffalo Creek. We believe this project will improve
the water quality in Dutch Buffalo Creek through attenuating storm events and
assimilating pollutant loads (sediment and nutrients). Both of these goals will help
reduce pollutant loading to Dutch Buffalo Creek and thereby enhance the freshwater
mussel habitat. The project will also result in the addition of approximately 500 feet of
protected buffer along the southern bank of Dutch Buffalo Creek.
Biological Conclusion: No effect.
Habitat for Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii)
Current habitats include roadsides, power line clearings, old pastures, woodland openings
and other sunny or semi-sunny situations. The project area is currently an active cattle
farm and lacks this type of habitat. The species has not been documented in the area and
no Critical Habitat rules have been published for Schweinitz's sunflower. The post
construction condition of the site may create appropriate habitat for Schweinitz's
sunflower, however due to the grazing impacts and active disturbance of the existing land
use, the habitat for this endangered species is currently lacking.
Biological Conclusion: No effect.
Reference:
NCDENR, Wildlife Resources Commission. 2006. Carolina Wildlife Profiles.
http://www.ncwildlife.orv-/fs index 07 conservation.htm
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2006. North Carolina's Threatened and
Endangered Species. http //www fws.gov/southeast/es/county%201ists.htm.
KCI
TECHNOLOGIES
August 10, 2010
ENGINEERS - SCIENTISTS - SURVEYORS - CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS
Landmark Center II, Suite 220 4601 Six Forks Road Raleigh, NC 27609 [phone] [phone] Fax
Ms. Linda Pearsall, Program Head
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program
1601 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27529
Subject: Natural Heritage Review
Buffalo Flats Wetland Restoration Project
KCI Project Number: 20100798
Dear Ms. Pearsall:
Please accept this information pertaining to the proposed Buffalo Flats Wetland Restoration Project for natural area
and rare species review by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program. The subject site is located east of
Kannapolis, NC in Cabarrus County (Figure 1). Specifically, the site is approximately one-mile northeast of the
intersection of Gold Hill Road and Irish Potato Road. It is situated within the 03040105 (Yadkin 05) Watershed
Cataloging Unit and the 03040105020050 Local Watershed Unit (Figure 2). Land use in the watershed is primarily
agricultural or forest land with some low density residential and commercial property (Figure 3).
A portion of this property (Figure 4) is currently under investigation for a wetland restoration project for the North
Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program. The vegetation at this site is primarily pastureland with small areas of
both wetland and upland forest occurring within and adjacent to the project area. Significant portions of the parcel
are situated within the floodplain of Dutch Buffalo Creek. The planned restoration work typically involves restoring
hydrology to the site by plugging ditches and drain tiles, performing minor grading activities and stabilizing the site
with native vegetation. In addition, fencing will be installed to exclude cattle from the completed project. There
will not be any impacts to existing structures (buildings, barns, etc.) on the subject property.
Following the review of the included documentation, please provide a determination regarding any potential impacts
to rare species or natural areas associated with this project.
Please feel free to contact me at [phone], should you have any questions or require any further information
to process this request. Thank you in advance for your assistance.
Sincerely,
Timothy J. Morris
Senior Environmental Scientist
Ecosystem Dynamics Practice
KCI TECHNOLOGIES www.kei.com
Employee-Owned Since 1988
WDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Office of Conservation, Planning, & Community Affairs
Beverly Eaves Perdue, Governor Linda Pearsall, Director
August 24, 2010
Mr. Timothy J. Morris
KCI Technologies
Landmark Center II, Suite 220
4601 Six Forks Road
Raleigh, NC 27609
Subject: Buffalo Flats Wetland Restoration Project; Cabarrus County
Dear Mr. Morris:
Dee Freeman, Secretary
The Natural Heritage Program has no record of significant natural communities or conservation/managed
areas at the site nor within a mile of the project area. However, Dutch Buffalo Creek, which forms
the western boundary of the project area, has been identified as a Regionally significant Natural
Heritage aqautic habitat, because it contains populations of the State Endangered and Federal Species
of Concern Carolina creekshell (Villosa vaughaniana). Thus, it is important that sedimentation not reach
this creek during the restoration project. We hope and assume that the restoration project, in the long
run, will benefit the Carolina creekshell and other animals that live in the creek.
You may wish to check the Natural Heritage Program database website at www.ncnhp.org for a listing of
rare plants and animals and significant natural communities in the county and on the quad map. Our
Program also has a new website that allows users to obtain information on element occurrences and
significant natural heritage areas within two miles of a given location: ,
<http://nhpweb.enr.state.nc.us/nhis/public/gmap75_main.phtml>. The user name is "public" and the
password is "heritage". You may want to click "Help" for more information.
NC OneMap now provides digital Natural Heritage data online for free. This service provides site
specific information on GIS layers with Natural Heritage Program rare species occurrences and
Significant Natural Heritage Areas. The NC OneMap website provides Element Occurrence (EO) ID
numbers (instead of species name), and the data user is then encouraged to contact the Natural Heritage
Program for detailed information. This service allows the user to quickly and efficiently get site specific
NHP data without visiting the NHP workroom or waiting for the Information Request to be answered by
NHP staff. For more information about data formats and access, visit <www.nconemag.com>, then click
on "FTP Data Download", and then "nheo.zip". [to the right of "Natural Heritage Element Occurrences"].
You may also e-mail NC OneMap at <dataq(c)ncmail.net> for more information.
Please do not hesitate to contact me at 919-715-8697 if you have questions or need further information.
Sincerely,
-//? z 1, 0 ? ?
Harry E. LeGrand, Jr., Zoologist
Natural Heritage Program
1601 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1601 One
Phone: [phone] \ FAX: [phone] Internet: www.oneNCNaturally.org NorthCarohna
An Equal Opportunity \ Affirmative Action Employer- 50% Recycled \ 10% Post Consumer Paper Naturally
KCI
TECHNOLOGIES
August 10, 2010
ENGINEERS • SCIENTISTS • SURVEYORS • CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS
Landmark Center[[, Suite 220 4601 Six Forks Road Raleigh, NC 27609 [phone] [phone] Fax
Mr. Larry Hendrix
USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service
530 West Innes Street
Salisbury, NC 28144
Subject: Farmland Conversion Impact Rating
Buffalo Flats Wetland Restoration Site
KCI Job Number 20100798
Dear Mr. Hendrix:
The purpose of this letter is to inform NRCS of our contractual intent to complete a wetland restoration project on
the James Jordan farm in Cabarrus County. This work is expected to occur over the course of the next year. The
subject site, known as the Buffalo Flats wetland restoration site, is located east of Kannapolis, NC in Cabarrus
County (Figure 1). Specifically, the site is approximately one-mile northeast of the intersection of Gold Hill Road
and Irish Potato Road north and east of Concord. It is situated within the 03040105 (Yadkin 05) Watershed
Cataloging Unit and the 03040105020050 Local Watershed Unit (Figure 2). Land use in the watershed is primarily
agricultural or forest land with some low density residential and commercial property (Figure 3).
A portion of the Jordan property (Figure 4) is currently under investigation as a wetland restoration project for the
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program. The funding for this project comes from the USDOT Federal
Highway Administration through the North Carolina Department of Transportation. Land use at this site is
primarily pastureland with small areas of both wetland and upland forest occurring within and adjacent to the project
area. Significant portions of the parcel are located within the floodplain of Dutch Buffalo Creek. The planned
restoration work typically involves restoring hydrology to the site by plugging ditches and drain tiles, performing
minor grading activities and stabilizing the site with native vegetation. In addition, fencing will be installed to
exclude cattle from the completed project. There will not be any impacts to existing structures (buildings, barns,
etc.) on the subject property.
Following the review of the included documentation, please provide a determination regarding any potential impacts
from farmland conversion associated with this project. Included is the Farmland Conversion Impact Rating Form
(AD-1006); please complete Parts II, IV and V. Please feel free to contact me at tim.morrisng,kci.com, or 919-278-
2511, should you have any questions or require any further information concerning the extent of site disturbance
associated with this project. Thank you in advance for your assistance.
Sincerely,

Timothy J. Morris
Senior Environmental Scientist
Ecosystem Dynamics Practice
KCI TECHNOLOGIES www.kci.com
Employee-Owned Since 1988
Tim Morris
From: Clary, Kent - Waynesville, NC ([e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, August 20, 2010 3:45 PM
To: Tim Morris
Cc: Hendrix, Larry - Salisbury, NC
Subject: Cabarrus AD-1006
Attachments: Cabarrus_BuffaloFlats_8-10.pdf
Tim,
Attached is the AD-1006 for the Buffalo Flats project with parts II, IV, and V completed as required of NRCS. Let me know
if you have questions.
(Y
M. kent czar
Area Resource Soil Scientist
USDA-NRCS
589 Raccoon Road Suite 246
Waynesville, NC 28786
828.456.6341 ext. 105
FAX.' 828.452.7031
Tim Morris
From: Hendrix, Larry - Salisbury, NC [[e-mail]
Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 2:03 PM
To: Tim Morris
Subject: RE: Farmland Conversion Rating Form - Jordan Property, Cabarrus County NC
Attachments: image001.png; Completed impact rating page 1 Jordan prop.pdf; Soil_Report Jordan
property.pdf; James_B_Jordan.pdf
Attached is completed page 1 of impact rating. Also attached are some files I created while doing the report.
Census has 66,780 acres of agriculture land in Cabarrus with 18 in this project = .02695%
The map unit AaB is only 0.4 acres and are the only prime farmland on project area. County contains 1011 acres of this
map unit. The ChA is probably statewide important as it can be drained. In the county there are 22,857 acres of this map
unit.
larry
From: Tim Morris [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, August 13, 2010 2:39 PM
To: Hendrix, Larry - Salisbury, NC
Subject: Farmland Conversion Rating Form - Jordan Property, Cabarrus County NC
Larry,
I have attached the partially completed form as well as a vicinity map and a property map showing the area of land that
we will be putting under conservation easement. Note that on Figure 5 we are only going to be doing Option A, which is
a total of 18.1 acres of conversion.
The instructions for filling out this form can be found at:
http:Hwww.nres.usda.gov/programs/fppa/pdf files/AD1006 PDF
The land is owned by:
Mr. James B. Jordan and wife Janet Q, Jordan
4939 Gold Hill Road
Concord, NC 28025
[phone] Home
Thanks for your help.
Timothy J. Morris
Associate - Ecosystem Dynamics Practice
KCI Associates of NC, P.A.
Landmark Center II, Suite 220
4601 Six Forks Road
Raleigh, NC 27609
Direct Line - 919-278-2511
Mobile - 919-793-6886
1

U.S. Department of Agriculture
FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING
PART 1(To be completed by Federal Agency) Date Of Land Evaluation Request 8/13/10
Name Of Project Buffalo Flats Wetland Restoration Project Federal Agency Involved US DOT / FHWA
Proposed Land Use Wetland Restoration County And State Cabarrus County, North Carolina
PART II (To be completed by NRCS) Date Request Received By NRCS
Does the site contain prime, unique, statewide or local important farmland? Yes No
(if no, the FPPA does not apply -- do not complete additional parts of this form). ® ? Acres Irrigated
- Average Farm Size
109 acres
Major Crop(s)
Hay, Oats, Corn Farmable Land In Govt. Jurisdiction
Acres: 202,401 % 87 Amount Of Farmland As Defined in FPPA
Acres: 166,841 %72
Name Of Land Evaluation System Used
Cabarrus Cales Name Of Local Site Assessment System Date Land Evaluation Returned By NRCS
8/20/10
F
d
l A
l
d b Alternative Site Ratin
era
gency)
ete
y
e
PART III (To be comp Site A Site B Site C Site D
A. Total Acres To Be Converted Directly 18.1
B. Total Acres To Be Converted Indirectly
C. Total Acres In Site 18.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
PART IV (To be completed by NRCS) Land Evaluation Information
A. Total Acres Prime And Unique Farmland 0.4
B. Total Acres Statewide And Local Important Farmland
C. Percentage Of Farmland In County Or Local Govt. Unit To Be Converted 0.0
D. Percentage Of Farmland In Govt. Jurisdiction With Same Or Higher Relative Value 14.3
PART V (To be completed by NRCS) Land Evaluation Criterion
Relative Value Of Farmland To Be Converted (Scale of 0 to 100 Points) 87 0 0 0
PART VI (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Site Assessment Criteria (These criteria are explained in 7 CFR 658.5(b) Maximum
Points
1. Area In Nonurban Use 15
2. Perimeter In Nonurban Use 10
3. Percent Of Site Being Farmed 10
4. Protection Provided By State And Local Government 20
5. Distance From Urban Builtup Area 15
6. Distance To Urban Support Services 15
7. Size Of Present Farm Unit Compared To Average 5
8. Creation Of Nonfarmable Farmland 0
9. Availability Of Farm Support Services 5
10. On-Farm Investments 20
11. Effects Of Conversion On Farm Support Services 0
12. Compatibility With Existing Agricultural Use 0
TOTAL SITE ASSESSMENT POINTS 160 115 0 0 0
PART VII (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Relative Value Of Farmland (From Part V) 100 87 0 0 0
Total Site Assessment (From Part VI above or a local
site assessment) 160 115 0 0 0
TOTAL POINTS (Total of above 2 lines) 260 202 0 0 0

Site Selected: Site A
Date Of Selection 8/20/10 Was A Local Site Assessment Used?

Yes ® No
J
Reason For Selection: This project will restore existing wetlands and riparian buffers and is compatible with surrounding agricultural operations.
(See Instructions on reverse side) Form AD-1006 (10-83)
This form was electronically produced by National Production Services Staff
¦?NNNWM&?
X41 ?
¦
KCI
TECHNOLOGIES
August 10, 2010
ENGINEERS • SCIENTISTS • SURVEYORS • CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS
Landmark Center 11, Suite 220 4601 Six Forks Road Raleigh, NC 27609 [phone] [phone] Fax
Ms. Shannon Deaton
Habitat Conservation Program Manager
NC Wildlife Resources Commission
Division of Inland Fisheries
1721 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Subject: Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act
Buffalo Flats Wetland Restoration Site
KCI Project Number - 20100798
Dear Ms. Deaton:
The purpose of this letter is to request review and comment from the NC Wildlife Resources Commission with
respect to potential fish and wildlife impacts associated with the above referenced project. The subject site, known
as the Buffalo Flats wetland restoration site, is located east of Kannapolis, NC in Cabarrus County (Figure 1).
Specifically, the site is approximately one-mile northeast of the intersection of Gold Hill Road and Irish Potato Road
north and east of Concord. It is situated within the 03040105 (Yadkin 05) Watershed Cataloging Unit and the
03040105020050 Local Watershed Unit (Figure 2). Land use in the watershed is primarily agricultural or forest
land with some low density residential and commercial property (Figure 3).
This site is currently under investigation for use as a wetland restoration project for the North Carolina Ecosystem
Enhancement Program. The funding for this project comes from the USDOT Federal Highway Administration
through the North Carolina Department of Transportation. Land use at this site is primarily pastureland with small
areas of both wetland and upland forest occurring within and adjacent to the project area. Significant portions of the
parcel are situated within the floodplain of Dutch Buffalo Creek. The planned restoration work typically involves
restoring hydrology to the site by plugging ditches and drain tiles, performing minor grading activities and
stabilizing the site with native vegetation. In addition, fencing will be installed to exclude cattle from the completed
project. There will not be any impacts to existing structures (buildings, barns, etc.) on the subject property. As part
of the environmental documentation process (Categorical Exclusion), coordination with the NCWRC and the
USFWS is required for compliance with the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act.
Following the review of the included documentation, please provide a determination of the potential effects to
wildlife associated with this project. Please feel free to contact me at [e-mail], or 919-278-2511, should
you have any questions or require any further information concerning the extent of site disturbance associated with
this project. Thank you in advance for your assistance.
Sincerely,

Timothy J. Morris
Senior Environmental Scientist
Ecosystem Dynamics Practice
KCI TECHNOLOGIES www.kci.com
Employee-Owned Since 1988
El North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission I_---J
Gordon Myers, Executive Director
31 August 2010
Timothy J. Morris, Senior Environmental Scientist
KCI Technologies
Landmark Center II, Suite 220
4601 Six Forks Road
Raleigh, NC 27609
Subject: Buffalo Flats Wetland Restoration Site, Cabarrus County, North Carolina.
Dear Mr. Morris:
Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission have reviewed the subject
information. Our comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d) and North Carolina General Statutes (G.S. 113-131 et seq.).
The project site is primarily pasture land with small areas of wetland and upland forest. Significant
portions of the site are in the floodplain. Proposed restoration includes restoring hydrology by plugging ditches
and drain tiles, performing minor grading activities, and planting native vegetation. In addition, fencing will be
installed to exclude cattle.
Dutch Buffalo Creek is a tributary to Rocky River in the Yadkin-Pee Dee River basin. There are
records for the federal species of concern and state endangered Carolina creekshell (Villosa vaughaniana), the
federal species of concern and state special concern Carolina darter (Etheostoma collis), the state special
concern notched rainbow (Villosa constricta), and the state significantly rare Eastern creekshell (Villosa
delumbis) in Dutch Buffalo Creek.
Wetland restoration projects often improve water quality and aquatic and terrestrial wildlife habitat.
Provided measures are taken to minimize erosion and sedimentation from construction/restoration activities, we
do not anticipate the project to result in significant adverse impacts to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife resources.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this proposed project. If we can provide further assistance,
please contact our office at [phone].
Sincerely,
Shari L. Bryant
Piedmont Region Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
1 '
IREDELL ROWAN
CABARRUS
STANLY
MECKLENBURG
UNION
Camp Juli
Rd Qa Q
CC
?a
p w Potato or
O
a
6
x
? cn 2c ?a
a o x' R?a90
A ?a r
= a
0
o
n
? o
a
3
a ?
7 n A_ CP
Ao Dr
K1$er Rd
O?
a
F o?'? R T
gea%y s¢
- a
i n
07
V
A -r-0
° a
U
a` rLO'Qa `e? ?
3
6
eey5?a phan/P/ch4rohp_. SSk.CaryerR?
1
q
f
30
2
^ 7
Foxtord
ki a/moo
?kIa
Kluttz Rd
E
a
Ra o
0
m
w
6
Z
O
v
v D?\ ` ei
o?
y G
t ?
a
a/ea /
o Ba Link Rd

/J
n, Y
? a ?
r ?
r - Leurelwood Ct F _°c'
c _ in st e Rd
i
F
m _3? ° a r
8r kenbe C
Ridge Dr 73
m
Q- ocx" ?
o°
Or ?a n
a ?s .0

gldennao Rd
F
y
?? a o o nt PI. sa t
?a
y0
0 a -0
? y, 49
go
?`k'
`r Y O ?N
Figure 1. Vicinity Map
P
j
t Sit
L
ti

tar`t>_ ro
ec
e
oca
on
w? E
Major Roads s
? m Other Roads 1:63,360 `
KC I -Major Rivers 1 in = I miles

Cities and Towns 0.5
o
t
M;t.

? If
1
+r
L11"i
?,M
,. I
.r 1
w ?2IW
. I]
t
r°
,17,
q \ '' It r r ., ?^';.

?r

r ? ?`V ? ? .?11? ' ? yCr ? ? ? ? ,n?"._.'? !\ `???t .? ?\t 1 tit` ? ` r I ?^f ! ? { L - I f
?'•. 1•? I ?J ?? C J ?. ?j-?, ?, l f-*! I' 4 -??.} ?.1 /ryrJ `?' ??i i1??' a ???i + I??
, }.ij--72g5?.• JJ , '`?L?`? !^,,,: , ? yti ? r ( , ??' J/`, 1., .? -„?? pyf a j .... / 1 ? _.1
- ? .-?,?_ , _.rr?e__,r rK ? '`F ?-,".?? ./ •? i, +I ? ? I 'tf ?fl'?, b, ,? ?. ? r..
u ?
Figure 2. Project Watershed
Project Watershed (239 ac/ 0.37 sq. mile) w?E
Proposed Project s
124,000
KC I Quadrangle Boundaries
1 inch = 2,000 feet
2,000 1,000 0 2,000
111- 1 Source: USGS DRGs, Concord (1976) and ADD. Pleasan! (1980) Feet
'T
a
JF.
I. Pv
Figure 3. Project Watershed Land Use
A riculture (46.1%)
° )
- J g _ j Low Density Residential (10.0%
Commercial (5.5%) Water (4.4%) w?E
Forest (34.0%) Proposed Project 1:12,000
C T 1 inch = 1,000 feet E„ at„K,K o??
Il ?rc? ccH,sR„cnn„. w?.
1,000 500 0 1,000
K
Source: Carbarrus County Orthoitnagery, 2005. Feet
tp`
k4
jpv�jo
- "i .
Iry
#k r4 A,

Independent Tribune
Advertising Affidavit
KCI ASSOCIATES OF NC, PA.
LANDMARK CENTER 11, SUITE 220
4601 SIX FORKS ROAD
RALEIGH, NC 27609
North Carolina Community Newspapers
PO Box 968
Hickory, NC 28603
I Data Category Description Ad Number Ad Size
08/24/2010 Legal Notices
pttMAlWll An
Notice of Opportunity for an Information
Account NumMr
3517806
Date
August 18, 2010
0002003997 1 x 15 L
b9al pAtMe rq Media General Operations, Inc.
rlgbts H gtnnus
rc consa+stla Publisher of
1 acts of Wiiig
IMi?lerty 41001<ed
Nil
d
l
Independent Tribune
an
Dalc
i
*kq the s wet
Cabarrus County
ds to welluds 11A
tie deYet*vd is
Folik meding he
t a rem by k* Before the undersigned, a Notary Public of Catawba County, North
at

46 Sit Falki
kqft
281ad b nal

Carolina, duly commissioned, qualified, and authorized by law to
administer oaths, in said County and State; that he/she is authorized to
Tim Mats d 919• make this affidavit and sworn statement; that the notice or other legal
119h cantina Eco• advertisement, a copy of which is attached hereto, was published in the
EEp isms the indcpendent'fribune on the following dates:
Ilb,Wi
08!1912010
and that the said newspaper in which such notice, or legal advertisement
was published, was a newspaper meeting all the requirements and
qualifications of Section 1-597 of the General Statutes of North Carolina.
A 2-41" L -
Asai of Boakkeepe
Newspaper reference: 0002003997
Q
I da
wom t and subscribed before me
this
of 2010
,
y
JL
Notary ublic ?1%? OAA ??C

My Commission expires: V. ?J
G
A08
D
mac,
THIS IS N OT A BILL. PLEASE PAY FROM INVOICE. THAN1__?t c ;

a?
9
ti
t?
Q
N
'Q
L
?i
R
C
O
V
a
0
a
Q.
R
Q
3
a
z
'c
E
E
0
v
a
e
O
L
R
v
0
z
i
a
t
a
Attachment 4
Mitigation Plan Approval Letter
NCEEP
r _11V_
4l;j
tern...:
January 12, 2011 P.$.?1 u: Rt'
PROGRAM
Mr. Tim Morris - Project Manager
KCI Technologies, Inc.
4601 Six Forks Road, Suite 220
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609
Subject; Mitigation Plan for the
Buffalo Flats Wetland Mitigation Site - Full Delivery Project
Yadkin River Basin - CU# 03040105 - Cabarrus County
Contract No. 003273
Dear Mr. Morris:
On December 8, 2010, the Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) received the Buffalo Flats
Restoration Site Mitigation Plan from KCI Technologies, Inc. (KCI). The plan anticipates the
restoration of 11.2 acres of riverine wetland restoration, 1.2 acres of riverine wetland
enhancement, and 3.4 acres of non-riparian wetland restoration for a total anticipated Wetland
Mitigation Units of 15.
The EEP has completed its review of the mitigation plan and has no additional comments at this
time. Please proceed with acquiring all necessary permits and/or certifications and complete the
implementation of the earthwork portion of the mitigation project (Task 4). A copy of this letter
should be included with your 401/404 permit applications.
For the purpose of obtaining approval of the erosion and sedimentation control plan for this
project, I have also attached a memorandum confirming that KCI is the Owner and Financially
Responsible Party, and has full operational control for all matters pertaining to construction of
this project. Please sign and attach this memorandum to the Financial Responsibility/Ownership
form of the erosion and sedimentation control plan application. Failure to do so may delay
approval of the plan.
Sincerely,
Guy C. Pearce
EEP Full Delivery Program Supervisor
cc: file
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 tail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 21699-1652 / 919-715-0476 / wvnv.nceep.net

Ecos stem
T
PROGRAM
December 20, 2010
Mr. Tim Morris - Project Manager
KCI Technologies, Inc.
4601 Six Forks Road, Suite 220
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609
Subject: Mitigation Plan for the
Buffalo Flats Wetland Mitigation Site - Full Delivery Project
Yadkin River Basin - CU# 03040105 - Cabarrus County
Contract No. 003273
Dear Mr. Morris:
On December 8, 2010, the Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) received the Buffalo Flats
Restoration Site Mitigation Plan from KCI Technologies, Inc. (KCI). The plan anticipates the
restoration of 11.2 acres of riverine wetland restoration, 1.2 acres of riverine wetland
enhancement, and 3.4 acres of non-riparian wetland restoration for a total anticipated Wetland
Mitigation Units of 15. The following are our comments:
Page i, Executive Summary - Please include totals in the table at the bottom of the page.
Page 16, Section 5.0 Determination of Credits - Please total the columns for mitigation
credits and acreages.
Page 18, Wetland Area 2 - Please state where the fill will come from for filling the pond.
Page 20, Section 7.0 Maintenance Plan - The document states "...a physical inspection of
the site a minimum of once per year...." While this may be a minimum, please note that
failure of equipment to collect data to justify hydrologic success is not an excuse to
overlook monitoring data for that time period.
Page 21, Section 8.0 Performance Standard, Paragraph 2 - Please note that the
commenting Agencies have expressed extreme concern over setting a minimum wetland
standard of 5% hydrology. Please consider revising.
Page 21, Section 8.0 Performance Standard, Paragraph 3 - Please note that success
criteria for vegetation is based upon planted stems per acre.
LVIWI
NCDENR
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 / 919-715-0476 / www.n(eep.net
Mr. Tim Morris -Project Manager
KCI Technologies, Inc.
December 20, 2010
Page 2
Please review the comments above and revise the plan as necessary. If have any questions or
concerns, please contact me at 919-715-7915 or [e-mail].
Sincerely,
Tim Baumgartner
EEP Full Delivery Program Specialist
cc: file
2
KCI ENGINEERS • SCIENTISTS • SURVEYORS • CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS
Landmark Center II, Suite 220 4601 Six Forks Road Raleigh, NC 27609 [phone] [phone] Fax
TECHNOLOGIES
December 29, 2010
Tim Baumgartner
EEP Full Delivery Specialist
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
RE: Mitigation Plan Comments Response, Buffalo Flats Wetland Restoration Project
KCI Project Number - 20100798
EEP Project Number -
Dear Mr. Baumgartner,
KCI has received your comment letter dated December 20, 2010 regarding the Buffalo Flats DRAFT Mitigation
Plan. We have incorporated responses to your comments in the enclosed Mitigation Plan. Below is a summary
of the changes that were made:
EEP Comment #I - Page I, Executive Summary - Please include totals in the table at the bottom of the page.
Response: Added acres row and total credits row.
EEP Comment #2 - Page 16, Section 5.0, Determination of Credits - Please total the columns for mitigation
credits and acreage.
Response - Added same rows as on Page i plus total acres at very end
EEP Comment #3 Page 18, Wetland Area 2 - Please state where the fill will come from for filling the pond.
Response - Added language indicating the source of fill.
EEP Comment Page 20, Section 7.0, Maintenance Plan . The document state "....a physical inspection of the
site a minimum of once per year...." While this may be a minimum, please note that failure of equipment to
collect data to justify hydrologic success is not an excuse to overlook monitoring data for that period.
Response - Comment noted.
EEP Comment, Page 21, Section 8.0 Performance Standard, Paragraph 2 - Please note that the commenting
Agencies have expressed extreme concern over setting a minimum wetland standard of 5% hydrology. Please
consider revising.
Response - Comment noted. While KCI understands that not all areas that are saturated or inundated
continuously for 5% of the growing season are wetlands, many of these areas are jurisdictional wetlands
KCI TECHNOLOGIES www.kci.com
Employee-Owned Since 1988
if appropriate hydrologic indicators are present and other wetland parameters meet the criteria
established in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. The site search criteria that we
use to find sites generally lead us to sites that are cleared (typically agricultural land) and ditched, or
otherwise hydrologically modified. Many of the sites are areas that were farmable during dryer years,
but not during wet years. This land is typically located just below the transition zone between wetland
and upland and as a result, hydrology criteria may often fall between 5% and 12.5%. KCI feels that if
the agencies want us to find sites with a minimum hydrology standard above 12.5%, that many, if not
most, of these areas would not have been cleared for agriculture (especially in the Piedmont) because they
were just too wet for the farmer to justify the effort that it would require to drain the land for
agricultural purposes. As such, the Agencies may have to start considering forested sites with alternate
existing land uses. Currently the agencies tend to discourage use of these types of land uses due to the
forest impacts that would be required for restoration.
The language we provided in the Mitigation Plan addresses your concern that not all areas with
hydrology between 5% and 12.5% are wetlands, but to establish a minimum standard above 12.5%
would be inconsistent with the current regulatory definition of wetlands as defined in the 1987 Corps of
Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. No change was made to the language in the mitigation plan
regarding this comment.
At EEP's request, KCI also included an additional figure entitled "Proposed Mitigation Plan View" on Page 20.
If you have questions, or require additional information, please feel free to call me at 919-278-2511 or email me
at tim.morrisgkci.com.
Sincerely,
?.7
Timothy J. Morris
Associate
Ecosystem Dynamics Practice
Attachments
KCI TECHNOLOGIES www.kci.com
Employee-Owned Since 1988
Attachment 5
Mitigation Plan and Project Plans
MITIGATION PLAN
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Cabarrus County, North Carolina
EEP Contract 003273
Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin
Prepared for:
IN-
rAj
Eca stem
P110IURAM
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
December 2010
Cataloging Unit 03040105
MITIGATION PLAN
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Cabarrus County, North Carolina
EEP Contract 003273
Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin
Cataloging Unit 03040105
Prepared for:
"No
Foos stem
PROGRAM
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
Prepared by:
KI GIES
ww=w=Nr4?
mmmmmr* ?
Ohio
KCI EwwoNwwAI TECRNOloGws
AND CONSTRUCTION. INC.
AY,0 .krr_<()F Ni.
KCI Associates of North Carolina, PC
4601 Six Forks Rd, Suite 220
Raleigh, NC 27609
[phone]
December 2010
Mitigation Plan Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
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).
• NCDENR Ecosystem Enhancement Program In-Lieu Fee Instrument signed and dated July 28, 2010
These documents govern NCEEP operations and procedures for the delivery of compensatory mitigation.
The Buffalo Flats Restoration Site (BFRS) is a full-delivery mitigation project being developed for the
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP). The site offers the opportunity to restore a
heavily impacted wetland system in order to buffer Dutch Buffalo Creek from water quality degradation
and to expand aquatic and terrestrial habitat in the Rocky River Watershed (03040105). The project is
located in the Upper Dutch Buffalo Creek Drainage (03040105020050), which the EEP has identified as a
Targeted Local Watershed.
The project goals address stressors identified in the TLW and include the following:
- Create diverse bottomland hardwood and low elevation seep communities that are integrated
into the Dutch Buffalo Creek Corridor.
- Buffer nutrient and sediment impacts to Dutch Buffalo Creek from adjacent grazing practices.
The project goals will be addressed through the following objectives:
- Fill field ditches and ponds to slow the removal of hydrology from the site.
- Redevelop wetland microtopography to capture surface hydrology and slow subsurface
drainage.
- Plant the mitigation area with species native to bottomland riparian forest and lowland
elevation seep.
- Install livestock exclusion fencing.
The site is currently used for pasture. Past anthropogenic modifications have involved installing lateral
field ditches to drain hillside seepage and surface overflow from the site. Existing seeps have also been
developed into ponds, which in turn drain to Dutch Buffalo Creek. Three separate wetland areas are
proposed to provide riparian wetland restoration and creation and nonriparian wetland restoration. The
ditches and ponds across the site will be filled and redeveloped to retain and distribute surface flow
across the site. Once site grading is complete, the riparian communities will be planted as Bottomland
Hardwood Forest and the non-riparian wetland will be planted as a Low Elevation Seep (Schafale and
Weakley 1990). The site will be monitored for five years or until the success criteria are met.
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site, Cabarrus County
Mitigation Credits

Stream
Riparian
Wetland
Non-riparian
Wetland
Buffer Nitrogen
Nutrient
Offset Phosphorous
Nutrient
Offset
Type R RE R RE R RE
Acres 11.2 1.2 3.4
Credits 11.2 0.4 3.4
TOTAL CREDITS 11.6 3.4
R= Restoration RE= Restoration Equivalent of Creation or Enhancement
Mitigation Plan Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
J
Mitigation Plan
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 RESTORATION PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ................................................................1
2.0 SITE SELECTION ...................................................................................................................1
2.1 Directions ................................................................................................................................. ...1
2.2 Site Selection ..............................................................................................................................1
2.3 Vicinity Map ................................................................................................................................3
2.4 Watershed Map ..........................................................................................................................4
2.5 Soil Survey ...................................................................................................................................5
2.6 Current Condition Plan View ...................................................................................................... 6
2.7 Historical Condition Plan View .................................................................................................... 7
2.8 Site Photographs ....................................................................................................................... .. 9
3.0 SITE PROTECTION INSTRUMENT ........................................................................................ 12
3.1 Site Protection Instrument Summary Information ................................................................... 12
3.2 Site Protection Instrument Figure ............................................................................................ 12
4.0 BASELINE INFORMATION .................................................................................................. 13
4.1 Watershed Summary Information ............................................................................................ 14
4.2 Reach Summary Information .................................................................................................... 14
4.3 Wetland Summary Information ................................................................................................ 14
4.4 Regulatory Considerations ........................................................................................................ 15
5.0 DETERMINATION OF CREDITS ........................................................................................... 16
6.0 MITIGATION WORK PLAN ................................................................................................. 17
6.1 Target Wetland Types and Plant Communities ........................................................................ 17
6.2 Design Parameters .................................................................................................................... 17
6.3 Data Analysis ............................................................................................................................. 19
6.4 Proposed Mitigation Plan View ................................................................................................ 20
7.0 MAINTENANCE PLAN ........................................................................................................ 21
8.0 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS ............................................................................................. 22
9.0 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS ......................................................................................... 23
10.0 LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN .................................................................................... 24
11.0 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN ............................................. 24
..........................................
12.0 FINANCIAL ASSURANCES ................................................................................................... 24
13.0 OTHER INFORMATION ....................................................... 25
...............................................
13.1 Definitions ................................................................................................................................. 25
13.2 References ................................................................................................................................ 26
13.3 Appendix A. Site Protection Instrument ................................................................................... 27
13.4 Appendix B. Baseline Information Data .................................................................................... 39
13.5 Appendix C. Mitigation Work Plan Data and Analyses ............................................................. 72
iii
Mitigation Plan
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
iv
Mitigation Plan Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
1.0 RESTORATION PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
EEP develops River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRPs) to guide its restoration activities within each of
the state's 54 cataloging units. RBRPs delineate specific watersheds that exhibit both the need and
opportunity for wetland, stream and riparian buffer restoration. These watersheds are called Targeted
Local Watersheds (TLWs) and receive priority for EEP planning and restoration project funds.
The 2009 Lower Yadkin Pee-Dee RBRP identified HUC 03040105020050 (Upper Dutch Buffalo Creek) as a
Targeted Local Watershed (NCDENR, EEP 2009). Forests and wetlands are the predominant land use in
the watershed at 53.46%.
The 2009 Lower Yadkin Pee-Dee RBRP identified animal operations and population growth as the major
stressors within this TLW. The Buffalo Flats Restoration Site was identified as a wetland opportunity to
buffer a high-quality stream and expand habitat within the TLW.
The project goals address stressors identified in the TLW and include the following:
- Create diverse bottomland hardwood and low elevation seep communities that are integrated
into the Dutch Buffalo Creek Corridor.
- Buffer nutrient and sediment impacts to Dutch Buffalo Creek from adjacent grazing practices.
The project goals will be addressed through the following objectives:
- Fill field ditches and ponds to slow the removal of hydrology from the site.
- Redevelop wetland microtopography to capture surface hydrology and slow subsurface
drainage.
- Plant the mitigation area with species native to bottomland riparian forest and lowland
elevation seep.
- Install livestock exclusion fencing.
2.0 SITE SELECTION
2.1 Directions
The BFRS is located on a single parcel located off of Gold Hill Road approximately six miles northeast of
Concord, North Carolina. To reach the site from Raleigh: proceed west on 1-40 for approximately 80
miles. Then travel on 1-85 south toward High Point. Take Exit 64 toward Kannapolis. Turn left at Lane
Street and then another left onto Old Salisbury-Concord Road. Next take a slight right onto Irish Potato
Road. Travel for 5 miles and then turn left onto Gold Hill Road. The site will be approximately 1.3 miles
ahead on the left (shortly after crossing the bridge over Dutch Buffalo Creek).
2.2 Site Selection
The site is part of the 03040105 Watershed Cataloging Unit (Rocky River). The Rocky River Watershed as
a whole is experiencing a large amount of habitat alteration due to population growth from Charlotte
and its surrounding metropolitan area. As a result, the focus in this watershed is on mitigating impacts
from stormwater and protecting existing habitat (NCDENR, EEP 2009).
1
Mitigation Plan Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Within the Rocky River Watershed, the Upper Dutch Buffalo Creek drainage (03040105020050) remains
relatively unaffected by urban development. The drainage is expected to gain an estimated 1,400 new
residents over the period from 2000 to 2015 (NCDENR, EEP 2009). The drainage also contains several
Natural Heritage Elements of Occurrences. The project site was selected due to its location along a
section of Dutch Buffalo Creek (DWQ 13-17-11-(1)) that is classified as Class C, Water Supply II (WS-II)
and High Quality Waters (HQW) (NCDENR, DWQ 2010a). According to the most recent listing under
Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act, no reach of Dutch Buffalo Creek is listed as an impaired water
body (NCDENR, DWQ 2010b). The current land use of pasture and evidence of hydrologic modification in
this important geographic setting indicated that the site had a high potential for wetland mitigation.
Once the site was located, historic aerials from Cabarrus County were examined for land use trends over
the recent history of the site. The reviewed aerials are found in Section 2.7 and include images from
1938, 1956, 1964, 1975, 1987, 1995, 2001, and 2005. This photographic chronology shows that the area
surrounding the project site has been used for agriculture for many years. As early as 1938, drainage
ditches are evident across the project site. The 1938 aerial shows the unnamed tributary to Dutch
Buffalo Creek that runs through the site is already a straightened channel. Drainage ditches that run east
to west were already in place at that time as well. The pond located in the southwest corner was likely
already constructed in 1956. A farm pond to the east of the project property was constructed by the
current landowner and is seen by 1995. These land use trends indicated that restoring this property
back to a wetland corridor along Dutch Buffalo Creek would provide an important buffer to grazing and
agricultural practices further up in the watershed.
The soils at the site were also examined for their wetland potential. The Soil Survey of Cabarrus County
has the BFRS mapped as having Chewacla soils, but a detailed investigation determined that the soils at
the site are primarily Wehadkee and Armenia, which are classified as hydric soils (see Appendix C for a
detailed description).
Based on these watershed and site-specific attributes, the BFRS was selected as an ideal candidate for
wetland mitigation that has the potential to provide an important buffer to approximately 2,200 linear
feet of Dutch Buffalo Creek. The restored site will also expand forested wetland habitat in an area that
has been actively used for agriculture since at least 1938.
2
Mitigation Plan
2.3 Vicinity Map
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
IREDELL ROWAN
ROWAN COUNTY
KANNAPOLISp 4 < CABARRUS
A
O?? O QQ ?? PEES
0 MECKLENBURG STANLY
?o
QQ
o z Q??
i
RUFF RD T?
F?
it0^
? o
A
N4, c?2 0
k F <
?v
0
?ry?RRO o outchBu01 Gee s?Cbc106
FRROKtS?RaD OA ? ST
CABARRUS COUNTY 0 ?o
yGR
C,y
000
m O 4p 9??
o e? COUNT RV eARNDR?5 o J???o
O??y Mu S c\R
G0?
"42q ° o
t LU
o W
Rp 0 0
E/E11 N 0 pR 3 0
?yK'1' ? ? FSHE?yRD
CONCORD
73 99
CIO,
2
pN RD yQ QO
0 0.25 0.5 1 PROJECT SITE VICINITY MAP N
Miles BUFFALO FLATS RESTORATION SITE A
CABARRUS COUNTY NC
3
Mitigation Plan
2.4 Watershed Map
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
%_r 15\ ..
x gJ111
1 QUAD
fl /Ifs j ?/1 .r? r?•rti:, ''., _`` ?? -- ?f,r r 1 ??.-,??-???• f'1
;?ld `f'I •(' ^-'`( ?'?I t 'ire ? I i' ' ^? ` ?--7 ? • ??? ! 1 ?,? :1 1 o'.
' ??f'-'ice??11t',V -k=1
has- _ _, : ? . r ,' ,? :--•_ -, !; - ? ,,
l?
, C3 Project Easement
Project Watershed (106 ac 10.17 sq. mi.)
PROJECT SITE WATERSHED MAP
750 1,500 Source: USGS ORGs
BUFFALO FLATS RESTORATION SITE Mt. Pleasant (1980)
Feet CABARRUS COUNTY, NC and Concord (1975) Quads.
4
EnB
d \

t
GuD2 `
Ch 'C52
ur CuB2
w
EnB
HwB U! C02 CuD2

HvvD Ch
2x29 ? to
2
UK
CCB2
. 7408 ?
E nB S
H rnr 8
GCD2
' w t' AaB
C h Cub 2
C3
FaF_
CUD2
I ^?fc11 Ch
?.r p qa
ADDENDUM SHEET 5.1 N
0 500 1,000 Source: Soil Survey
Feet PROJECT SITE NRCS SOIL SURVEY Cabarrus County, 198 8
BUFFALO FLATS RESTORATION SITE - CABARRUS COUNTY, NC SCS, USDA
Mitigation Plan
2.5 Soil Survey
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
.?{x t `
.?U
4 }
Aa B
Cu82 O.F Z r +t?r
` f
i r -CCB2s
F Y r. A ? t,y?
06,

? E
9rf
r'?r' .fin .J
t

r raj
' W e^
t
?
t? LdB2.?
!Ld
r

a
IX
4? r Yr { ?li?i f CCD2
?. s ° *a;

%
?,
f
r
..s t '" w

82

ChA V

Ah
t
r
..
:A
e
IO
?, .? ?. +
' yr^
'i+C:
` a. EnB A`
C
CB2

. t.F
«
' ?
^?-
a; •
:
k ! Y
F ?,
?a?_f?
4 ??
?
?
? CcB2
r
41'x.
's
l3; iY ? t
B
Y ? y

4> w
i?aF
C
u

?CuB2 E B. ca " t r "JK r, n2
ii
PROJECT SITE NRCS SOIL SURVEY MAP x
0 500 1.000
Feet BUFFALO FLATS RESTORATION SITE Source: County, Ortoimagery
CABARRUS COUNTY, NC from Cabarrus Co. GIS, 2009,
5
Mitigation Plan
2.6 Current Condition Plan View
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
7 _3
k. ?
4 .v
t° .
., zu. !Er
?... ,
Existing Wetlands
- 5-ft contour
1-ft contour

? < t ,. t a ?
WS
14 x':.
` r Example of- Lateral
Field Ditch
V`
3
?a 3 ?3s ' mo o q r 's ? 5^' o •?tE a `ri Y .?
W?
g 4
INI
dot
PROJ
0 150 300
Feet
ECT SITE CURRENT CONDITION PLAN VIEW
BUFFALO FLATS RESTORATION SITE Source:Orthotmagery
CABARRUS COUNTY, NC from Cabarrus Co GIS,20D9 A
6
En B
C c?,o?
a
h U) CUB2
IV
EnB
a .f
HwB cc?? CcD2 CuD2
C3? ?
HwD Ch
429
We cD2 - w
CcB 2
h' 4 CCB?
`? ` 2?1tT8 3
E nB S Gta2
HwB
EnB
CcD2
' w AaB
cv CuB 2
E aF
C02
--
co ch
?p ?a&
ADDENDUM SHEET 5.1 N
0 500 1,000 Source: Soil Survey
I PROJECT SITE NRCS SOIL SURVEY C:abarrus County, 198
8
Feet
I BUFFALO FLATS RESTORATION SITE - CABARRUS COUNTY, NC SCS, USDA
Mitigation Plan Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
2.7 Historical Condition Plan View
1964 1975
PROJECT SITE HISTORICAL CONDITION PLAN VIEW
o soo i,ooo BUFFALO FLATS RESTORATION SITE County Cabarrus
I?Feet CABARRUS COUNTY, NC CounryGlS.
7

Mitigation Plan
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
8
Mitigation Plan
2.8 Site Photographs
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Mitigation Plan Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
10
Mitigation Plan
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
I
r
3,

^a .

- 'iii. r
!frR •
•'?'1?Yn"
?
_ ..
^?'..
.''??
w
+t,yry?'?e ? W 7l ?•?hYi : «?^ `?? ? N.?M ? J.ti ? ti ? - ?
r
2
?
.?'M
s? AGfR??.?k-Wt
..wow...
? R??.?`r
!6.
r.. .-
?zw
Y y -
yy
?
•1.'is y
...? ? i`7
.r.. ..sue ?
View toward the south of the lower pond in the southwestern
corner of the project. 11/5/2010 Spoil remaining from the pond construction. 3/2/2010
N
I
1 c tt f ~Y
lip
,.r.'{ q.. A",
..'. T S
R

` `?
r
?+I ?? •
?I???.? ,
?
ye. ?. .' .? t i
.y
C

,a CAM

?, `? ?ap.f p'7o. "?r • ??
_. r 1?Wj;,' , cjW ' Jt =V: r. •'?? ? ? ?p1 ? a? ?? -,?,.
71
Looking upstream (northeast) at ditch draining lower pond into The southwestern corner of the site; the bridge taking Gold Hill
Dutch Buffalo Creek. 3/2/2010 Road over Dutch Buffalo Creek is in the background. 11/5/2010
?y
r. ;
View toward the east along the southern project boundary.
11/5/2010 Looking west along southern project boundary. 11/5/2010
11
Mitigation Plan
3.0 SITE PROTECTION INSTRUMENT
3.1 Site Protection Instrument Summary Information
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
The project site will be placed in a conservation easement held by the State of North Carolina and will
consist of 20.20 acres.
Site Protection Deed Book and Acreage
Landowners PIN County Instrument Page Number protected
James and 5652-4457- Conservation
Parcel A Cabarrus DB 436 PG 659 20.20 acres
Janet Jordan 660000 Easement
3.2 Site Protection Instrument Figure
The conservation easement documents were finalized in December 2010. See Appendix A for the Site
Protection Instrument and Figure.
12
Mitigation Plan
4.0 BASELINE INFORMATION
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Project Information
Project Name Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
County Cabarrus County
Project Area (acres) 20.20 acres
Project Coordinates (lat. and long.) 35.456988 N, -80.496325 W
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province Piedmont
River Basin Yadkin-Pee Dee
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8-digit 03040105 USGS Hydrologic Unit 14-digit 03040105020050
DWQ Sub-basin 03-07-12
Project Drainage Area (acres) 106 acres
Project Drainage Area Percentage of
Impervious Area 1%
CGIA Land Use Classification 3.6% Cultivated, 54.1% Managed Herbaceous Cover, 32.5% Mixed Upland
Hardwoods, 5.2% Southern Yellow Pine, and 4.6% Water Bodies
Wetland Summary Information
Parameters Wetland Area 1 Wetland Area 2 Wetland Area 3
Size of Wetland (acres) 3.4 acres 11.2 acres 1.2 acres
Wetland Type (non-riparian, riparian

riverine or riparian non-riverine)
Non riparian
Riparian non-riverine
Riparian non-riverine

Mapped Soil Series Chewacla
(Wehadkee and Armenia by
detailed soil investigation) Chewacla
(Wehadkee and Armenia by
detailed soil investigation)
Chewacla
Drainage class Poorly drained Poorly drained Somewhat poorly
drained
Soil Hydric Status Drained Hydric Drained Hydric Non hydric
Source of Hydrology Hillside seepage Surface/Overbank Flow Surface/Overbank Flow
Hydrologic Impairment Ditching and Pasture Ditching and Pasture Ditching and Pasture
Native vegetation community Pasture Pasture Pasture
Percent composition of exotic
invasive vegetation
0%
09°
2%
Regulatory Considerations
Regulation Applicable? Resolved? Supporting
Documentation
Waters of the United States - Section
404 Yes Applying for NWP 27 Jurisdictional
Determination
Waters of the United States-Section
401 Yes Applying for NWP 27 Jurisdictional
Determination
Endangered Species Act* No N/A N/A
Historic Preservation Act* No N/A N/A
Coastal Zone Management Act
(CZMA)/ Coastal Area Management
Act (CAMA)
No
N/A
N/A
FEMA Floodplain Compliance Yes Coordinating No-Rise
Certification with county FEMA Model
Essential Fisheries Habitat* No N/A N/A
-4 0 a,uIE55E m u is l.awgui K A! rALIUMwn in Appenaix ts.
13
Mitigation Plan
4.1 Watershed Summary Information
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
The site is part of the 03040105 Watershed Cataloging Unit (Rocky River). The Rocky River Watershed as
a whole is experiencing extensive habitat alteration due to population growth from Charlotte and its
surrounding metropolitan area. Currently, only 16% of the watershed is developed, but the area is
expected to continue to grow. The other predominant land uses are 43% forest and 40% agriculture
(NCDENR, EEP 2009).
The project drainage is comprised of 0.17 square mile (106 acres) that flow through the project
floodplain before reaching Dutch Buffalo Creek. The total impervious cover of the project drainage is
approximated at 1% (CWP 2003). Dutch Buffalo Creek ultimately drains into the Rocky River
downstream of the project site. The project area is located in the United States Geological Survey (USGS)
Mt. Pleasant Quadrangle (1980).
4.2 Reach Summary Information
Not applicable for this project.
4.3 Wetland Summary Information
Currently, there is 0.55 acre of existing wetland on the BFRS. The wetland data forms are included in
Appendix B. Existing wetlands were delineated in August 2010 using the methods outlined by the US
Army Corps of Engineers (Environmental Laboratory 1987). All six existing wetland communities on the
site show signs of anthropogenic modification. Wetland W1 is a naturalized manmade ditch located on
the southern portion of the project site, draining to Dutch Buffalo Creek, and includes 0.03 acre (1,410
sq ft) dominated by herbaceous and shrub-scrub vegetation. Wetland W2 is formed by two springs that
have been enlarged by excavation into ponds and are connected by an excavated linear ditch 18" deep
and 12-18' wide. The 0.42 acre (18,380 sq ft) wetland is dominated by herbaceous and shrub-scrub
vegetation in the shallow areas. The two springs (approximately 0.046 acres and 0.277 acre,
respectively) currently exist as open water. W2 drains into W1. Wetland W3 is a constructed cattle
watering hole located in the northwestern corner of the project site and includes 0.04 acre (1,755 sq ft).
The wetland has sporadic herbaceous vegetation but it has not naturalized due to the number of cows
using the watering hole. Wetland W4 is similar to W3, but it is located in the extreme northeastern
corner of the project site. W4 consists of 0.02 acre (780 sq ft) and is dominated by herbaceous
vegetation around the perimeter of the watering hole. Wetland W5 is a naturalized cattle watering hole
located in the southwestern portion of the site below the unnamed tributary to Dutch Buffalo Creek. W5
consists of 0.03 acre (1,160 sq ft) dominated by herbaceous vegetation around its perimeter. Wetland
W6 is a shallow manmade ditch located adjacent to the unnamed tributary in the central portion of the
site and includes 0.007 acre (315 Sq ft) dominated by herbaceous and shrub-scrub vegetation. These
wetlands are shown on the Current Condition Plan View (Section 2.6).
The project site has experienced significant hydrologic and vegetative modifications to allow for cattle
grazing across the property. The historic aerials indicate that the existing streams were channelized and
the site has been ditched since at least 1938. Currently, the site is still being used for cattle grazing. The
landowner has installed a series of drainage ditches and ponds to optimize livestock grazing, which has
created a system with drained hydric soils without hydrophytic vegetation.
14
Mitigation Plan
4.4 Regulatory Considerations
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
A jurisdictional determination was approved by the US Army Corps of Engineers on October 1, 2010 (see
Appendix B). Following the completion of the mitigation plan, a pre-construction notification (PCN) will
be completed to apply for a Nationwide 27 Permit (NWP) to comply with Sections 401 and 404 of the
Clean Water Act with the Wilmington District of the US Army Corps of Engineers and the NCDENR
Division of Water Quality.
The BFRS is also located within the 100-year floodplain (Zone AE). It is the intent of the restoration
design to maintain the existing 100-year flood elevations. KCI has acquired the existing HEC-RAS model
from FEMA as shown on DFIRM Panel 5652 for Cabarrus County. KCI has developed a conditional
floodplain model by updating the published hydraulic data with the detailed topographic survey used to
prepare the construction drawings. The proposed model represents the conditions following changes to
the channel and floodplain as a result of the restoration. Following completion of the final design, the
proposed model will be updated and submitted to Cabarrus County for approval. Preliminary indications
are that the proposed project will not produce hydrologic trespass conditions outside of the
conservation easement (see EEP Floodplain Requirements Checklist in Appendix B).
15
Mitigation Plan
5.0 DETERMINATION OF CREDITS
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site, Cabarrus County
Mitigation Credits
Nitrogen Phosphorous
Stream Riparian Non-riparian Buffer Nutrient Nutrient
Wetland Wetland Offset Offset
Type R RE R RE R RE
Acres 11.2 1.2 3.4
Credits - 11.2 0.4 3.4
TOTAL CREDITS 11.6 3.4
Project Components
Project
Existing Restoration
Restoration
Component Stationing/
Footage/ Approach -or-
Footage Mitigation
-or- Location Acreage (PI, P11 etc.) Restoration or Acreage Ratio
Reach ID Equivalent
Wetland Area 1 Southeastern 3.4 acres Restoration 3.4 acres 1:1
corner of project
North to south
Wetland Area 2 throughout the 11.2 acres Restoration 11.2 acres 1:1
center of project
West-central
Wetland Area 3 portion of the 1.2 acres Creation 1.2 acres 3:1
project
Component Summation
Restoration Stream Riparian Wetland Non-riparian Wetland Buffer
(square Upland
Level (linear feet) (acres) (acres)
feet) (acres)
Non-
Riverine Riverine
Restoration 11.2 acres 3.4 acres
Enhancement
Enhancement I
Enhancement II
Creation 1.2 acres
Preservation 4.4 acres
High Quality
Preservation
TOTAL 12.4 acres 3.4 acres 4.4 acres
R= Restoration RE= Restoration Equivalent of Creation or Enhancement
16
Mitigation Plan Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
6.0 MITIGATION WORK PLAN
6.1 Target Wetland Types and Plant Communities
Plantings shall consist of native species commonly found in the Piedmont Bottomland Forest Community
and Low Elevation Seep Community as described by Schafale and Weakley (1990). Trees and shrubs will
be planted at a density of 436 trees per acre (10 feet by 10 feet spacing). Plant placement and groupings
will be randomized during installation in order to develop a more naturalized appearance. Woody
vegetation planting will be conducted during dormancy. Tree species to be planted within the wetland
site will consist of the following species:
Piedmont Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Common Name Scientific Name Indicator Status (Region 2)
Sugarberry Celtis laevigata FACW
Buttonbush Cephalanthus occidentalis OBL
Green ash* Fraxinus pennsylvanica FACW
Tulip poplar* Liriodendron tulipifera FAC
Water tupelo Nyssa aquatica OBL
Overcup oak Quercus lyrata OBL
Swamp chestnut oak Quercus michauxii FACW-
Cherrybark oak Quercus pagoda FAC+
Willow oak* Quercus phellos FACW-
American Elm* Ulmus americana FACW
Low Elevation Seep
Common Name Scientific Name Indicator Status (Region 2)
Tulip poplar* Liriodendron tulipifera FAC
Laurel oak Quercus laurifolia FACW
Swamp chestnut oak Quercus michauxii FACW-
Cherrybark oak Quercus pagoda FAC+
Willow oak* Quercus phellos FACW-
American sycamore* Platanus occidentalis FACW-
American Elm* Ulmus americana FACW
*Trees observed on-site or in adjacent floodplain
6.2 Design Parameters
Modifications at the BFRS will focus on restoring hydrology to the proposed wetland mitigation areas.
This will be achieved by undoing the anthropogenic modifications that have been implemented across
the site and will result in improved surface storage of hillside seepage for the nonriparian wetland and a
lengthened or impeded flowpath of surface water throughout the riparian wetland. Please see the
mitigation overview in Section 6.4 and the wetland plans included in Appendix D.
Wetland Area 1- 3.4 acres of nonriparian wetland restoration
In this area, wetland restoration will be implemented along hydric soils that have developed below
hillside seeps as the landscape slopes down to the Dutch Buffalo Creek floodplain. Lateral field ditches
(seen in Section 2.6) currently drain seepage entering the site. An existing seep in the southeastern
17
Mitigation Plan Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
corner of the site has been developed into a pond, which has a ditch extending out to drain directly to
Dutch Buffalo Creek (the upper portion of Existing Wetland W1). In order to restore hydrology, the field
ditches draining the site will be filled. Minor variations in ground elevations will be maintained in order
to increase surface retention of hillside seepage. The existing pond in the southeastern corner will be
filled with the adjacent spoil and the seep redeveloped into a hydrologic source for the upper slopes.
Following the completion of site grading, the nonriparian wetland will be planted as a Low Elevation
Seep Community as described in Section 6.1
Wetland Area 2 -11.2 acres of riparian wetland restoration
This section of wetland restoration comprises the largest component of mitigation on the BFRS. Wetland
Area 2 is located on the floodplain of Dutch Buffalo Creek and the restored wetland community will
merge into the narrow riparian buffer along a levee at the creek. Overbank flooding from Dutch Buffalo
Creek will provide occasional hydrologic inputs to the wetland, but the predominant source of hydrology
will come from surface inputs that are currently being routed off the site. The field ditches that begin in
the slopes coming down to the Dutch Buffalo Creek floodplain continue through the pastures that make
up Wetland Area 2. Existing Wetlands W1, W2, W3, W4, and W5 all consist of anthropogenic features
that are reducing the hydroperiod in proposed Wetland Area 2. In the northern section of Wetland Area
2, W4 is a ponded area that is preventing surface water from moving to the southwest. The ponded area
will be filled in and developed to elongate the flowpath of surface hydrology throughout this upper
section. At W3, a large pond has been cut through an existing levee along Dutch Buffalo Creek. This
pond will be filled and its outlet will be graded up to the existing top of bank elevation along Dutch
Buffalo Creek. Existing spoil material left from the original pond construction will be used to fill the
pond. The spoil areas are generally located in proximity to the pond. Some of the larger spoil areas are
readily apparent on the 1-foot topographic maps. Other areas of spoil are located along the levee
position of Dutch Buffalo Creek, generally at elevation 657 (see grading plan Sheet 6 of 14). The ditch
draining W5 will also be filled and the outlet brought up to the existing top of bank elevation. In the
southwestern corner of the site, the lower end of Existing Wetland W1 as well as W2 will be filled using
the adjacent spoil piles remaining from the original pond excavation. Ditch plugs will be installed along
the linear section of W2 and at the outlets of W1, W3, and W5.
In addition to the major grading of the existing ponds, the lateral field ditches will also be filled. As in
Wetland Area 1, minor variations in elevation will be maintained in order to reproduce natural wetland
microtopography. Once the grading is completed, Wetland Area 2 will be planted as a Bottomland
Hardwood Forest as described in Section 6.1.
Wetland Area 3 -1.2 acres of wetland creation
in the central portion of the site, a small section of creation will be developed that will tie into Wetland
Area 2. A natural high spot in the soils has developed in this location. These soils will be reshaped to
develop microtopography that will match the elevations of Wetland Area 2. Spoil adjacent to the
unnamed tributary to Dutch Buffalo Creek will also be removed from this area. Wetland Area 3 will also
be planted as a Bottomland Hardwood Forest.
Reference Wetland
A suitable reference wetland was found west of the BFRS and on the opposite side of Dutch Buffalo
Creek. The site is consistent with the Bottomland Hardwood Community that will be the primary
wetland type at the project site. A groundwater monitoring well has also been installed to document the
reference wetland hydrology during the course of monitoring.
18
Mitigation Plan
6.3 Data Analysis
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
The numerous modifications to the hydrology of the BFRS have effectively drained the historic wetlands
on-site. The development of a network of field ditches has significantly altered the retention of surface
hydrology in these areas. The pre and post-restoration effects of ditching on wetland hydrology was
evaluated using a hydrologic budget for the site (see Appendix Q.
Existing Conditions
Existing site hydrology was modeled by developing an annual water budget that calculates hydrologic
inputs and outputs in order to calculate the change in storage on a monthly time step. In order to set up
the water budget, historic climatic data were obtained from the North Carolina State Climatic Office.
The weather station in Concord, North Carolina was used, which is approximately 13 miles to the
southwest of BFRS. Monthly precipitation totals from the entire period of record (1934-2009) were
reviewed and three years were selected to represent a range of precipitation conditions: dry year
(1986), average year (1996), and wet year (1975).
Potential inputs to the water budget include precipitation, groundwater, and surface inputs. For
precipitation, the data from the three selected years were used in the budget. Groundwater inputs likely
exist, particularly in the upper portions of the site, but they were considered to be negligible to be
conservative for the purposes of this study. Surface water input was calculated using the USDA Soil
Conservation Service (SCS) runoff curve number equation (USDA, SCS 1986).
Outputs from the site include potential evapotranspiration (PET), groundwater, and surface water
diversion. PET was calculated by the Thornthwaite method using mean monthly temperatures
determined from the chosen years of record: 1986, 1996, and 1975. Surface water was assumed entirely
lost during the existing condition.
Once the inputs and outputs were determined, a net monthly total was calculated in inches and used to
estimate a yearly water budget. The model assumes unsaturated conditions at the beginning of the
year. A maximum wetland water volume of 5.4 inches was calculated based on the specific yield of 0.15
for 36 inches of Wehadkee soil. The resulting hydrographs for the average, dry, and wet years show a
seasonal pattern. The model shows that the majority of hydrologic inputs to the site come during the
rainy spring months. The site begins to lose saturation in the upper twelve inches in the late spring and
early summer months. The late fall sees a small increase in hydrologic inputs again. The dry year shows
very little hydrology overall. It is clear from the existing model output that the ditches within the site are
exerting a larger influence on the site than the water budget is accurately able to predict. The site is
currently not achieving the wetland hydrology that the model predicts.
Proposed Conditions
A modified water budget was developed to analyze the effect of mitigation actions on the site
hydrology. All surface flow is assumed to be retained in the proposed condition, because it will no longer
be immediately routed off the site. To estimate the impact from re-creating wetland microtopography,
an additional two inches of hydrologic capacity was added to the calculations. Based on these changes,
the budget shows an increase in jurisdictional wetland hydrology in the spring for the average and wet
years when compared to the existing conditions. The dry year remains relatively unchanged from the
pre-construction condition.
19
Mitigation Plan
6.4 Proposed Mitigation Plan View
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
err; ., :W
!S 6c. K4W ,
_!.
_Afl
A
"M n
Y.pr k'i? ? x ?
?•• , ?,.v
W
4
VI. t ,
® Nonriparian Restoration (3.4 ac) Conservation Easement
0 Riparian Creation (1.2 ac) Streams
® Riparian Restoration (11.2 ac)
Upland (4.4 ac)
fi
. rir.
MO---
rv
f
'?,?r?. spats

r
PROJECT SITE PROPOSED MITIGATION PLAN VIEW
1) $0 300 BUFFALO FLATS RESTORATION SITE Cabarrus C County 200 Source ounty 200,
Fit 9
CABARRUS COUNTY, NC
20
Mitigation Plan
7.0 MAINTENANCE PLAN
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
KCI shall monitor the site on a regular basis and shall conduct a physical inspection of the site 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:
Component/Feature Maintenance Through Project Close-Out
Routine wetland maintenance and repair activities may include securing of loose coir
Wetland matting and supplemental installations of live stakes and other target vegetation within the
wetland. Areas where stormwater and floodplain flows intercept the wetland may also
require maintenance to prevent scour.
Vegetation shall be maintained to ensure the health and vigor of the targeted plant
community. Routine vegetation maintenance and repair activities may include
Vegetation supplemental planting, pruning, mulching, and fertilizing. Exotic invasive plant species shall
be controlled by mechanical and/or chemical methods. Any vegetation control requiring
herbicide application will be performed in accordance with NC Department of Agriculture
(NCDA) rules and regulations.
Site boundaries shall be identified in the field to ensure clear distinction between the
mitigation site and adjacent properties. Boundaries may be identified by fence, marker,
Site Boundary 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.
Utility Right-of-Way Utility rights-of-way within the site may be maintained only as allowed by Conservation
Easement or existing easement, deed restrictions, rights of way, or corridor agreements.
21

Mitigation Plan
8.0 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
The BFRS will be monitored to determine if the project is on-track to meeting jurisdictional wetland
status. In the restoration areas, the wetland site will be deemed successful once hydrology is established
and vegetation success criteria are met. In the creation area, success will be achieved if wetland
hydrology and vegetation are present along with indicators of hydric soils.
Wetland hydrology criteria will be considered established if well data from the site indicate that the
upper 12 inches of the soil profile is continuously saturated or inundated for a minimum of 5% of the
growing season during normal weather conditions. As described in the 1987 US Army Corps of
Engineers, Wetland Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987), if the upper soil profile is
continuously saturated or inundated for less than 5% of the growing season, the area of influence of
that monitoring well will be considered upland. If the upper 12 inches of the soil profile is saturated or
inundated continuously between 5% and 12.5% of the growing season, monitoring data will also have to
show that the hydrophytic vegetation criteria is satisfied and evidence of other hydrology indicators are
present. Primary and secondary hydrology indicators would include water marks, drift lines, sediment
deposits, drainage patterns, oxidized root channels, water stained leaves and the FAC neutral test. If the
upper soil profile is saturated or inundated continuously for greater than 12.5% of the growing season,
then the hydrologic criteria will be considered successful without the need to collect additional data. A
normal year will be defined using climatological data for Cabarrus County and using 30th to 70th
percentile thresholds as the range of normal (Sprecher 2000). The growing season for Cabarrus County
extends from March 23 to November 11 for a total of 233 days (NRCS 1995). Therefore, success will be
achieved if the water table is within 12 inches of the soil surface for at least 12 consecutive days during
the growing season. KCI reserves the right to adjust the duration of the NRCS growing season if soil
temperature data collected during the course of monitoring indicates that the growing season is less
than or greater than the 233-day period.
The success criteria for the planted species in mitigation areas will be based on survival and growth.
Permanent monitoring plots (10 by 10 meters) will be established in the wetland restoration and
creation areas at a density that will ensure adequate coverage of the total mitigation acreage. The
average density of these plots will determine whether the site meets the success criterion of a planted
stem density of 320 stems/acre after three years, 288 stems/acre after four years, and 260 stems/acre
after five years. Non-target species must not constitute more than 20% of the woody vegetation based
on permanent monitoring plots.
Soils will be monitored within the 1.2 acre creation area on site. Two permanent monitoring plots will
be established and soil profiles will be monitored yearly for evidence of the development of
redoximorphic features. Profiles will be compared from year to year and changes will be documented in
the yearly monitoring reports. Although several studies exist in the scientific literature that investigate
temporal changes in soils resulting from wetland creation projects, there are no studies that suggest
that jurisdictional hydric soils will develop under the appropriate hydrology conditions within the five-
year monitoring period. As such, KCI will monitor the soils for changes in chroma, organic matter
content and document other indications that the soil is subject to low oxygen conditions. These
indicators would include oxidized root channels, concretions, mottles etc.
22
Mitigation Plan
9.0 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
The first scheduled monitoring will be conducted during the first full growing season following project
completion. Monitoring shall subsequently be conducted annually for a total period of five years or until
the project meets its success criteria.
Groundwater elevations will be monitored to evaluate the attainment of jurisdictional wetland
hydrology. Verification of wetland hydrology will be determined by automatic recording well data
collected within the project area and reference wetland. Five to six automatic recording gauges will be
established within the mitigation areas. Daily data will be collected from the automatic gauges over the
5-year monitoring period following wetland construction. A nearby reference wetland will also be
monitored using the same procedures for comparative analysis (see Appendix B for reference wetland
data sheet and location map).
Beginning at the end of the first growing season, KCI will monitor the planted vegetation for five years or
until the success criterion is met. The survivability of the vegetation plantings will be evaluated using a
sufficient number of 100 mz vegetative sampling plots randomly placed throughout the created and
restored wetlands. Permanent monuments will be established at the corners of each monitoring plot
and documented by either conventional survey or GPS. These plots will be monitored according to the
current CVS/EEP monitoring protocol. Additionally, a photograph will be taken of each monitoring plot,
allowing yearly qualitative comparison of vegetation conditions.
Photograph reference points (PRPs) will be established to assist in characterizing the site and to allow
qualitative evaluation of the site conditions. The location of each photo point will be marked in the
monitoring plan and the bearing/orientation of the photograph will be documented.
Annual monitoring reports will be prepared and submitted after all monitoring tasks for each year are
completed. The report will document the monitored components and include all collected data,
analyses, and photographs. Each report will provide the new monitoring data and compare the most
recent results against previous findings. The monitoring report format will be similar to that set out in
the most recent EEP monitoring protocol.
Required Parameter Quantity Frequency Notes
Groundwater monitoring gauges with
Yes Groundwater 5-6 gauges annual data recording devices will be installed
Hydrology on site; the data will be downloaded on a
monthly basis during the growing season

Will be distributed to ensure Vegetation will be monitored using the
Yes Vegetation sufficient coverage of planted annual Carolina Vegetation Survey (CVS)
vegetation protocols
Exotic and
Yes nuisance annual Locations of exotic and nuisance
vegetation vegetation will be mapped
Project Locations of fence damage, vegetation
Yes boundary semi-annual damage, boundary encroachments, etc.
will be mapped
23
Mitigation Plan
10.0 LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Upon approval for close-out by the Interagency Review Team (IRT), the site will be transferred to the
NCDENR Division of Natural Resource Planning and Conservation's Stewardship Program. This party shall
be responsible for periodic inspection of the site to ensure that restrictions required in the conservation
easement are upheld. Endowment funds required to uphold easement and deed restrictions shall be
negotiated prior to site transfer to the responsible party.
The NCDENR Division of Natural Resource Planning and Conservation's Stewardship Program currently
houses EEP stewardship endowments within the non-reverting, interest-bearing Conservation Lands
Stewardship Endowment Account. The use of funds from the Endowment Account is governed by North
Carolina General Statute GS 113A-232(d)(3). Interest gained by the endowment fund may be used only
for the purpose of stewardship, monitoring, stewardship administration, and land transaction costs, if
applicable. The NCDENR Stewardship Program intends to manage the account as a non-wasting
endowment. Only interest generated from the endowment funds will be used to steward the
compensatory mitigation sites. Interest funds not used for those purposes will be re-invested in the
Endowment Account to offset losses due to inflation.
11.0 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Upon completion of site construction, KCI will implement the post-construction monitoring protocols
previously defined in this document. Project maintenance will be performed as described previously in
this document. If, during the course of annual monitoring it is determined the site's ability to achieve
site performance standards are jeopardized, KCI will notify the EEP and the USACE of the need to
develop a Plan of Corrective Action. Once the Corrective Action Plan is prepared and finalized KCI will:
1. Notify the EEP and USACE as required by the Nationwide 27 permit general conditions.
2. Revise performance standards, maintenance requirements, and monitoring requirements as
necessary and/or required by the USACE.
3. Obtain other permits as necessary.
4. Implement the Corrective Action Plan.
5. Provide the USACE a Record Drawing of Corrective Actions.
12.0 FINANCIAL ASSURANCES
Pursuant to Section IV H and Appendix III of the Ecosystem Enhancement Program's In-Lieu Fee
instrument dated July 28, 2010, the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
has provided the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wilmington District with a formal commitment to fund
projects to satisfy mitigation requirements assumed by EEP. This commitment provides financial
assurance for all mitigation projects implemented by the program.
24

Mitigation Plan Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
13.0 OTHER INFORMATION
13.1 Definitions
Native vegetation community - a distinct and reoccurring assemblage of populations of plants, animals,
bacteria and fungi naturally associated with each other and their population; as described in Schafale,
M.P. and Weakley, A. S. (1990), Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina, Third
Approximation.
Project Area - includes all protected lands associated with the mitigation project.
25
Mitigation Plan
13.2 References
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Center for Watershed Protection. 2003. Impacts of Impervious Cover on Aquatic Systems. Watershed
Protection Research Monograph No. 1. Ellicott City, MD.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report
Y-87-1. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station.
NCDENR, Division of Water Quality. 2010a. Surface Water Classification. Last accessed 11/2010 at:
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/ps/csu
NCDENR, Division of Water Quality. 2010b. 2010 Final 303(d) list. Raleigh, NC. Last accessed 11/2010 at:
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/ps/mtu/assessment
NCDENR, Ecosystem Enhancement Program. 2009. Lower Yadkin Pee-Dee River Basin Priorities 2009.
Raleigh, NC. Last accessed 11/2010 at:
http://www.nceep. net/services/restplans/Yadkin_Pee_Dee_RBRP_2009_Final.pdf
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina,
3rd Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, NCDEHNR, Division of Parks and
Recreation. Raleigh, NC.
Sprecher, S.W. 2000. Accessing and Using Meteorological Data to Evaluate Wetland Hydrology.
Headquarters, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Operations Division, Regulatory Branch.
USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2010. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United
States: a Guide for Identifying and Delineating Hydric Soils, Version 7.0.
USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Water and Climate Center. 1995. WETS Table for
Concord, North Carolina. Portland, OR. Last accessed 11/2010 at:
http://www.wcc. nres.usda.gov/ftpref/support/climate/wetlands/nc/37025.txt
USDA, Soil Conservation Service. 1986. Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds. Technical Release 55.
Washington, DC: Soil Conservation Service.
USDA, Soil Conservation Service. 1988. Soil Survey of Cabarrus County. Raleigh, NC.
26
Mitigation Plan
13.3 Appendix A. Site Protection Instrument
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
27
Mitigation Plan
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
28
9401
0144
FILED Dec 10, 2010 01:43 pm
BOOK 09401
PAGE 0144 Tmu 0152
INSTRUIMENT ! 20661
EXCISE TAX $148.00
WL
FILED
CABARRUS
COUNTY NC
LINDA F. WABEE
REGISTER
OF DEEDS
cu?,,`o4 : >; 14-&-a.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
AND RIGHT OF ACCESS
CABARRUS COUNTY
,,/Prepared by / return to: Paul Arena, Poyner Spruill LLP, 301 S. College St., Suite 2300, Charlotte, NC
28202-6021
THIS DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND RIGHT OF
ACCESS, pursuant to the provisions ofN.C. General Statutes Chapter 121, Article 4 and
made this A2-day of Pec.el-ler , 2010, by James B. Jordan and wife Janet
0. Jordan, "Grantor"), whose mailing address is 4939 Gold Hill Road, Concord NC
28025, to KCI Environmental Technologies and Construction, Inc., a Delaware
corporation ("Grantee"), whose mailing address is 4601 Six Forks Road, Suite 220,
Landmark Center II, Raleigh, NC 27609. The designations 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:
9 P-1?6
210-
WHEREAS, Grantee is qualified to be the Grantee of a Conservation Easement
pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 121-35; and
WHEREAS, Grantor owns in fee simple certain real property situated, lying, and
being in No. 6 Township, Cabarrus County, North Carolina (the "Property"), and being
more particularly described as that certain parcel of land containing approximately 43.51
acres and being conveyed to the Grantor by deed as recorded in Deed Book/Page 436 /
659 of the Cabarrus 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 included areas of the Property 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 Dutch
Buffalo Creek.
9401
0145
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 along with a general Right of Access.
The Easement Area consists of the following:
Tract Number 2 containing a total of 2.6 acres as shown on the plats of survey entitled
"Conservation Easement for Buffalo Flats Restoration, State of North Carolina
Ecosystem Enhancement Program," dated August 18, 2010 by James M. Gellenthin, PLS
Number L-3860 and recorded in the Cabarrus County, North Carolina Register of Deeds
at Plat Book 59 Page q-2-.
See attached "Exhibit A", Legal Description of area of the Property hereinafter referred
to as the "Easement Area"
The purposes of this Conservation Easement are to maintain, restore, enhance,
construct, create and preserve wetland and/or riparian resources in the 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 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:
1. 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.
II. GRANTOR RESERVED USES AND RESTRICTED ACTIVITES
The 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 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. 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
Easement Area for the purposes thereof.
2
4
9401
0146
B. Usage of motorized vehicles in the Easement Area is prohibited.
C. Educational Uses. The Grantor reserves the right to engage in and permit others
to engage in educational uses in the Easement Area not inconsistent with this
Conservation Easement, and the right of access to the 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.
D. Vegetative Cutting. Except as related to the removal of non-native plants,
diseased or damaged trees, or vegetation that destabilizes or renders unsafe the Easement
Area to persons or natural habitat, all cutting, removal, mowing, harming, or destruction
of any trees and vegetation in the Easement Area is prohibited.
E. Industrial, Residential and Commercial Uses. All industrial, residential and
commercial uses are prohibited in the Easement Area.
F. Agricultural Use. All agricultural uses are prohibited within the 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 Easement Area.
H. Roads and Trails. There shall be no construction of roads, trails, walkways, or
paving in the Easement Area.
1. Signs. No signs shall be permitted in the Easement Area except interpretive signs
describing restoration activities and the conservation values of the 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 Easement
Area may be allowed.
J. Dumping or Storing. Dumping or storage of soil, trash, ashes, garbage, waste,
abandoned vehicles, appliances, machinery, or any other material in the Easement Area is
prohibited.
K. Grading, Mineral Use, Excavation, Dredging. There shall be no grading,
filling, excavation, dredging, mining, drilling; 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 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
9401
0147
of wetlands, polluting or discharging into waters, springs, seeps, or wetlands, or use of
pesticide or biocides in the Easement Area is prohibited. In the event of an emergency
interruption or shortage of all other water sources, water from within the Easement Area
may temporarily be used for good cause shown as needed for the survival of livestock
and agricultural production on the Property.
M. Subdivision and Conveyance. Grantor voluntarily agrees that no subdivision,
partitioning, or dividing of the underlying Property owned by the Grantor in fee simple
("fee") that is subject to this Easement is allowed. Unless agreed to by the Grantee in
writing, any future conveyance of the underlying fee and the rights conveyed herein shall
be as a single block of property. Any future transfer of the fee simple shall be subject to
this Conservation Easement. Any transfer of the fee is subject to the Grantee's right of
unlimited and repeated ingress and egress over and across the Property to the Easement
Area for the purposes set forth herein.
N. Development Rights. All development rights are permanently removed from the
Easement Area and are non-transferrable.
0. Disturbance of Natural Features. Any change, disturbance, alteration or
impairment of the natural features of the 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 N.C.
Ecosystem Enhancement Program, whose mailing address is 1652 Mail Services Center,
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652.
III. GRANTEE RESERVED USES
A. Right of Access, Construction, and Inspection. The Grantee, its employees and
agents, successors and assigns, receive a perpetual Right of Access by motor vehicles,
pedestrians and machinery to the Easement Area over the Property at reasonable times to
undertake any activities to restore, construct, manage, maintain, enhance, and monitor the
stream, wetland and any other riparian resources in the Easement Area, in accordance
with restoration activities or a long-term management plan. Unless otherwise specifically
set forth in this Conservation Easement, the rights granted herein do not include or
establish for the public any access rights.
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.
4
9401
0148
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.
IV. ENFORCEMENT AND REMEDIES
A. Enforcement. To accomplish the purposes of this Conservation Easement,
Grantee is allowed to prevent any activity within the Easement Area that is inconsistent
with the purposes of this Easement and to require the restoration of such areas or features
in the 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 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 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 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
5
9401 '
0149
acts or omissions in violation of the terms of this Conservation Easement, shall be borne
by Grantor.
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.
V. 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 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 U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers in writing sixty (60) days prior to the initiation of any transfer of all or any part
6
9401
0150
of the Property. Such notification shall be addressed to: Justin McCorkle, 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.
VI. 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 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 Easement Area, and the
right of quiet enjoyment of the Easement Area.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said rights and easements perpetually unto
Grantee for the aforesaid purposes.
AND Grantor covenants that Grantor is seized of said premises 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.
[rest of page intentionally blank]
7
9401
0151
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Grantor has hereunto set his hand and seal,
the day and year first above written.
??y-- (SEAL)
J s B. Jordan-
??.k6 (SEAL)
et O. Jordan
NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF IYIeCk? en hu T
I, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the County and State aforesaid, do hereby
certify that James B. Jordan and wife Janet O. Jordan, 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
/0 ?'?' day of btC' em ber , 2010.
,A . AIMA13sz
Print name: reca ?. rren , Notary Public
My commission expires:
5A 8 11,
%
?; • •? '?
•
??••A??'? ti
14 8

9401
0152
Exhibit A
TRACT 2
2.60 ACRE ADDITIONAL NONRIPARIAN WMU AREA
A Tract of land designated as a Nonriparian W11dU Area located on lands now or formerly owned by James & Janet
Jordan (Deed Book 436 Page 659) in No. 6 Township, Cabarrus County, North Carolina and being more particularly
described as follows:
Commencing at a found iron pin on the North line of Gold Hill Road (60' public right-of-way) at the intersection with
the East tine of said lands now or formerly owned by James & Janet Jordan, said pin having North Carolina State Plane
Coordinates of N:623981.58 and E:1555367.83 (NAD'83).
Thence on a grid bearing South 78° 15'01" West a distance of 249.39 feet to a point;
Thence North 24126'30" West a distance of 279.47 feet to a point;
Thence North 6303738" West a distance of 307.80 feet to a point;
Thence North 36°07'32" West a distance of 258.06 feet to a point;
Thence North 06116'52" West a distance of 328.85 feet to a point;
Thence North 01 °21'08" West a distance of 14.86 feet to the Point of Beginning;
Thence North 33°4242" West a distance of 127.99 feet to a point;
Thence North 14°27' 15" West a distance of 496.01 feet to a point;
Thence North 33°18'37" West a distance of 245.64 feet to a point;
Thence North 03°23'24" East a distance of 63.40 feet to a point;
Thence North 05°28'39" West a distance of 46.81 feet to a point on the South line of lands now or formerly owned by
James and Janet Jordan (Deed Book 541 Page 676);
Thence North 87°19'37" East on the said South line of lands owned by James and Janet Jordan (Deed Book 541 Page
676) a distance of 143.22 feet to a point;
Thence South 28°55'23" East a distance of 221.80 feet to a point;
Thence South 08°24'42" East a distance of 531.11 feet to a point;
Thence South 00°44' 17" East a distance of 189.11 feet to the Point of Beginning.
Containing 2.60 acres, more or less.
.. ":a .s wp a Z'
?3?? T Zoe t(??, f G -
x ! i S tA( y?N ? [
5
S-.. - ?? S ?L cJO Nr ?
- I' e 3
^ W O U N U ?'• r
_? zr 7 ? ?ma?W y? -
8
:? 1 t
?I - 1 s t 1
1 t 4
1 ? 5 1
1
1 I [ V-'1
? 1 l
111 ; • r, t ?. , ? J..? t\t\
st
gg \
t L rp C i 1. 9 \ \
1
r
1
_J
5

1
f
fl
I
f'
I
i
fr
f
YF
J
.y
\
1 \ \
y \ t
f \t
1 V\
I
I
1
I
I
I
11
1
1 /
J?
1
Mitigation Plan
13.4 Appendix B. Baseline Information Data
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
39
Mitigation Plan
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
40
Mitigation Plan
USACE WETLAND DETERMINATION FORMS
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
41
Mitigation Plan
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
42
DATA FORM p?
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Determination Manual)
Project! Site: Buffalo Flats Restoration Site Date: 8-18-2010
Applicant / Owner: K Cr County: Cabarrus
Investigator: Steven F. Stokes LSS State: NC

Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes No tom''
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical situation)? Yes No ? Community ID:
Transect ID:
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No ? Plot ID:_'?f i tdefe.Ami?
(explain on reverse if needed)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Ju11l..t* effUSE S .3 FAe-L + 9.
2. ELCOCAO-P-6 o6f mm, 3 0r1L. 10.
3, U M 861 2 UI nL__3 _ [-^CIAJ 11.
4. dycAvUia&a , rAcw 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC excluding FAC-). 100i?
Remarks:
f
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs Primary Indicators:
Other _ Inundated
_ Saturated in Upper 12"
No Recorded Data Available Water Marks
Drift Lines
Field Observations: - Sediment Deposits
_ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators:

Depth to Free Water in Pit: ? Oxidized Roots Channels in Upper 12"
Water-Stained Leaves

Depth to Saturated Soil: > ( (in.) _ Local Soil Survey Data
? FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
r?
N7
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase):- l cue. A aci.k-,,, t Drainage Class: ??a ... L/e.0
Taxonomy (Subgroup): F)Kv ctei,y c i?i?aa c(e. Confirm Mapped Type? Yes._ No ?
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Mansell Moist) (Mansell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0 3 I"1 tJ ?p_ 5
- 5 ?? ; Z sk 1 -Y,
? 1 -10% 4J1
3- 8 . ` e `??? rn,3a e? ? w, snt?

9. ! ti f?Q ;, 3 l Q r
3 YYl 3 C ?- Y+??;?>f scar
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
?_ Sulfidic Odor -Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed On Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions ?- Listed on National Hydric Soils List
? Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ? No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ? No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes ? No
Remarks:
Is the Sampling Point
Within a Wetland? Yes ?" No
N:Ienvirolsstokes/11-2409/16-002836 YD-05/James Jordan/Permits 1Data FormslWetlands.
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Determination Manual)
Project 1 Site: Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Applicant / Owner: k0 T
Investigator: Steven F. Stokes LSS Date: 8-18-2010
County: Cabarrus
State: NC

Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes ? No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical situation)? Yes No ?
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No ?
(explain on reverse if needed) Community ID:
Transect ID:
Plot ID: Pf"e 2 Ahkir--T'
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. cJ Gl.l? (t/J. a e f-p sa-s 9.
2. FesY-gs,4 arund„16Lde0- 3 10.
3. A.-S'&LRM dily,_Iati.[at? _ Ir1ic-r 11.
4. Qln' btt i1 tAeLA t :sta. rA6 It 12.
S. 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8• 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC excluding FAC-). 95 11D
Remarks:

HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe In Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators
_ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs Primary Indicators:
- Other Inundated
_
_ Saturated in Upper 12"
No Recorded Data Available Water Marks
Drift Lines
Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators:
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) Oxidized Roots Channels in Upper 12"
_ Water-Stained Leaves

Depth to Saturated Soil: ?1? (in.) _ Local Soil Survey Data
_ FAC-Neutral Test
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:

J)P•# ) A16,11
SOILS
Map Unit Name
/
(Series and Phase): Oe kt/kee-
Drainage Class: ?nleb. L'1)

Taxonomy (Subgroup): F/rt d2 9r.:,ri. ? I'Tvr- o Gt. , r, eAAss Confirm Mapped Type? Yes_ No
,,-"
;l -
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
Inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) AbundancelContrast Structure, etc.
0-3 _ L a yg- 5 1% -e
e 16 , 1'l 6.7-k e I h;
+3

13- 10' c. 5 r], ?,' '/3 c 2-c(-. e Q I nt sh/z _
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol _ Concretions
_ Histic Epipedon _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_ Aquic Moisture Regime ?' Listed On Local Hydric Soils List
_ Reducing Conditions ?Listed on National Hydric Soils List
? Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
DI?

WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ? No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes ? No
Remarks:
Is the Sampling Point
Within a Wetland? Yes No ?
Wenvirolsstokesl11-24-09116-002836 YD-05/James Jordan/Permits 10ata FormslWetlands:
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Determination Manual)
Project 1 Site: Buffalo Flats Restoration Site Date: 8-18-2010
Applicant I Owner: County: Cabarrus
Investigator: Steven F. Stokes LSS State: NC
Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes No .? Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical situation)? Yes No ? Transect ID:
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No ? Plot ID: 15P,w 3 w -
(explain on reverse if needed)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Sadifta,^,,x G ?140ia _ P'm_ 9.
2. T?l?fYl lP?? CctD?j1Jt5 1_ Fhe W 10.
3. A.1" a gj
3
5 it "U.s
I i4,'.t 1
11.
1
4._Lttdt, ar3L 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC excluding FAC-). In t) a1n
Remarks:

HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe In Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators
____ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
- Aerial Photographs Primary Indicators:
Other Inundated
Saturated in Upper 12"
No Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks
Drift Lines
Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits
A Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: lv (in.) Secondary Indicators:
Depth to Free Water in Pit: Oxidized Roots Channels in Upper 12"
Water-Stained Leaves

Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.) _ Local Soil Survey Data
? FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
SOILS

Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): (y?-AaAkee, ?A ,tiaN7 Drainage Class: of i,rrlcl.;
Taxonomy (Subgroup): :t vn.g1Ce. w hr_ ?t ? 1r . 5 Confirm Mapped Type? Yes
No v"'
_
()
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.

.? /?_
o " 3 641
eQ rnclSr ?iG
3to !s 2- 5 5
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol _ Concretions
Histic Epipedon _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor _lOrganic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_Aquic Moisture Regime _? Listed On Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions . /Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors -Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes v"' No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ? No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes ? No
Remarks:
Is the Sampling Point
Within a Wetland? Yes ? No
N:/envirolsstokes/11-24-09/16.002836 YD-05/James Jordan/Permits 1Data FonnsMetlands.1
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Determination Manual)
Project 1 Site: Buffalo Flats Restoration Site Date: 8-18-2010
Applicant 1 Owner: County: Cabarrus
Investigator. Steven F. Stokes LSS State: NC

Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes No_Z Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical situation)? Yes No Transect ID:
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No ? Plot ID: >JtJ
(explain on reverse if needed)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Sr)?an1 o) Arb11heA?0_ 3 FA6 u.. 9.
2* C A D A.-1"%4 L tq 3 ?u 14, _ 10.
3. 5 ?-a.r i s q u ea__ 11.
4. ., 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC excluding FAC-). 3 3 ?1n
Remarks:
(/y')?//llll
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe In Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs Primary Indicators:
Other _ Inundated
Saturated in Upper 12"
_ No Recorded Data Available Water Marks
_ Drift Lines
Field Observations: Sediment Deposits
_ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators:

Depth to Free Water in Pit: Oxidized Roots Channels in Upper 12"
Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: % (in.) - FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
7)
SOILS

Map Unit Name
)
?
p
¢
e.
u c
(Series and Phase): tk ®c
f
Drainage Class:
Taxonomy (Subgroup): flu urt4 ?.?_ti? Ri te. ir.,; 3 k p p,,'? Confirm Mapped Type? Yes_ No ,.?
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munseil Moist) (Munsell Moist) AbundancelCOntrast Structure, etc.

I F `?2
0-7
.?1? ?ati.

.J f
0 t S ?z.d.
IS-lz 04 3 love y?? I r_'Vt C-4 d- C. 5A k.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol _ Concretions
_ Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
____ Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime ? Listed On Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions ? Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gieyed or Low-Chroma Colors -other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
D R. 6, /.Av1
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No ?"
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No v"
Hydric Soils Present? Yes v% No
Remarks:
Is the Sampling Point
Within a Wetland? Yes_ No v`
N:renvirolsstokes111-24-09116-002836 YD-051James Jordan/Permits (Data FormslWettands.
6 ypli
W
V I
??yob

F
$; z&
l??QgN N¢
w o
zr
<~ 4
?O
Wj
°Z?G? ==2 V??
W.?9 30
<?° ?i
z?Zy gz(
?3?5 =2S ?t m
?N ~O

6i 'drc
} w?
o? =o
Z
N
o°g? ga
zm<4
u ski
o
? ? J 3 Z
p<? 3F

LL? iW
s
s?
?Hri
X?-g aka ?21 21 ?n

A I S.
N
?
?
W ?W'y O?2 m
{y
y
UNW?Nmyr7
a?> dz
`
??m
siz
Z
ZZ
NUOwao?J? ?
p ? pYp <
?.r=-N?N?N 40p?
O .?
?p?W7? n Y

Y
W
p j W K N N
? v ?
NB??m$.?
?>ipa WUi<? ? ? D

?w€zzw?aar?
O O m? p J p V 2
0
LLJ
3
W
J
m
Fa-
a
w
Q
O
Z
Q
3
z
O
U
Z J Q ?ZUZ
p J
w ? m
3 ?
rc N
`zw Uc
?a zq
F ?, a n
z ? a
W ?^ g"
o
F ' ?z
\ U?Wm
o?
_z
aYi U a
y
F-4,4
y R
U ? n
3
r _
jj-
VJ i ??5t?y5?0 1
_ ? i y,EV'y1y pG
zz $? I ??nN I y0? { {
oi8$ , I a? , O r f { { O OF
I
?I
I
z
f
a
s?W_ I
sm ?
Q?
w? O
3
<
o?
N
Y
<Om <?
N g
r
i
r
i
r
a.
?js ^m \ \\o
ZZ o \?, \
m
<
Zto
J N

f
a N W
Q Q Q
o v o
z vi Z
W y?
L7
J
00
1\1
& I I
mm? ,
Nmm I
?Z® I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I

z i °
I ?
I I m of I I
N
a I ?_ o ? ? -I I I

ICI Y`_'n O m ? OI
- 'alo gic o 0 o o 5" ? _

1 y
?'3 333I313333
3
3'3 3 I
3
3 `V
1
31313 3 3 .3
3
3 3
3 v
3 3 1
I
O
C
Z
C
a$ ?
x
z
s=
i ? V O
22 d<O a <
? ? O O J? ?? p ¢¢U 2 ? ?
Z (/1
NI??

O I
UU ?

c
I
o
? <
s

n 3 -J7

i ? 2
.n
1.':
iii
\ / b
/ /2m

m ar z
3
?
J
n 1 ?
3 W
N
/
h /
N I Q I
Q Q ? /
N w
\

1 i
1
Q
<nn
? N 0 ;
W ;
d W N 3
1E;
7
377.69'
, ? N . In .. ?? '5962 f
pUTC//
??\\\\\1111111??

Z OO' 32 =
3"?In u O J
Im a <
z papa

ml ? pp o Z Z
=?wu? O r u
K
°!JI n x ? mo?f..N ?` °
Z,00?<
zm ,a
b <YNa°ix o
pOwUN<<ZZ Q
y
Cdr z oaQ??
Q JZ<z
4 U
rl r
w
?
3 w
,010
°w
rrc?
z
w
m
, is
O
f
nc°?
??? v n3
Zww<?)U Q
xp K ?m Z
u? <s°mui? Q
< Uy
.x-60?no
z °z'6

LL d
p
n z
?x

d>
o= ?a
z
Z?Z ? Ell `^ a a
e W _ s
jb?n
2 < a O .Yi Z
O2w Z
N ? ¢
\ N
1
1
?1I
/ 31
/ I
1
1 0 $ 1
x I
/
2'

/ r, I 1

+
\1 1 W
a
v
V) n _
a

e ? V
oel
P \'
o
0 \
z
J N
FJ
1
\ \
\
^ 1
:

22 \
3ti
I
6 ? \ JN sue.: \

rr 5 ? ° \ -9 \
?-I '" man m ? \
N
3 3 ?
?3 3 I
a02< \
E I
r? ? a g,9
\\ I

I ? ? - I I ?n
I v ?
Z 'f I VY O a? IT Oily b o
?
O U ?o ??o I n on ip aP

N N'h a n m rim
11,'1 m
1 of - n n .
^' ?
?? ^ m'ry
-II n'.n n N?.,ry
'I?I
p ? VIN V1 U1 VIVA VI 41 I%I I/1 N U11/1
s I ?1 UI
? UI VI iN VIINIUf
\\\\\\\11111111 f111??'
N/
w " < sum °d?uwav 'r' 1• Z 06. Iz
0
N 3
Zg?OFIn0
L. no ??A• - w 0
O < r wwFG FF 5 fna°ZZ¢ / H O JIpKS..
Z \ R N =NZ?u? ,i \ °"a i?°di s O Z 0 40m0
J W " $?'?',rc ?.w70 ' \ Q V"V"°6Z r < Q OJZ<z
3 'U^b aWV_1Z~ozJ C ? 1^ ??==?a¢°?H w ? m -
??<O7opF W~ V v l `` O ISm Ir
O~?Vi (3
WW 3 (? pp
~ O W I J b N 8 Z L N r W O m I m m 2 W
ao _<"w ?w I<miz" U z g u
u?Ua;i'? yio?b?ao [z.? m
w "u?w??zwa w aak'o?ia° o ?w iz a<o 0 C Q $"°'
a w i° ?aa?w aul z o
2 0?7?-O70V Z F O a _°n?U<?Om d W?
a O
m -
W U? La
s ?" ?xm
r aW -
Z
o J U ? ?
W y rv
O L I
n n
°1m o
rcom
zW" u00"4'19"W 725.00' %C0'34'!9'W 271.0n'
1\?
?1 ?v C
1 \
I 1 \
1 \ C9
I 1 W
1 zo
1 x o?
I 1 ¢w
I 1 ?W
I 1
1 /
I 1 ?
1 A
\ a
I 1 \ ?" ' h
?pi\ s LFl ,? ? ' H in
I Y •p2\`?,y. "1 to ?
1
\ \ N
1 \
y'i 1 \ Imo. ?/ m
1 \/ N ?
1 ?\
Z
1 3 ? \ J ih °
? 3 \
3
o ?
? Z <az ?•
3 Q ? a-am
goFF'L° cREO I
„? a2 Oro I
.a w
a
'ss r
sr r ? I
'r
/ I
/ I I
Mitigation Plan
REFERENCE WETLAND
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
54
Mitigation Plan
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
55
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project Site: Buffalo Flats Wetland Restoration Project Jordan Property)
Applicant/Owner: KCI Associates of NC
Investigator: T. Morris
County:
State: 11-5-10
Cabarrus
North Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? ® Yes ? No Community ID: PFO
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? ? Yes ® No Transect ID: NA
Is Area a Potential Problem Area? (if needed, explain on reverse) ? Yes ? No Plot ID: 1

VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1 speckled alder Alnus senulata S FACW+ 8 red maple aver rubrum T FAC
2 soft rush Juncus effusus H FACW+ 9 river birch betula ni ra T FACW
3 Canada rush Juncus Canadensis H OBL 10 Vir inia Pine Pinus vir iniana T FAC
4 wool grass Sci us c nnus H OBL 11 Quercus hellos willow oak T FACW-
5 American sycamore Platanus occidentalis T FACW- 12
6 black raspberry Rubus occidentalis H FACU 13
7 sweet um Li uidambar s raciflua T FACT 14
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-):
Remarks. Sparse canopy, dense herbaceous cover.
HYDROLOGY
? Recorded Data (describe in Remarks) Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
g Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Prima Indicators: Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Aerial Photographs ? Inundated ® Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12"
Other ® Saturated in Upper 12 inches ® Water-Stained Leaves
X corded data available ® Water Marks ? Local Soil Survey Data
Field Observations: ® Drift Lines ® FAC-Neutral Test
Depth of Surface Water: 0 (In.) ® Sediment Deposits ? Other (explain in remarks)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 18 (In.) ® Drainage Patters in Wetlands
Depth to Saturated Soil: 6 (In.)
Remarks. Evidence of inundation.
SOILS
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase):
Taxonomy (Subgroup): wedhadkee Loam
T is Fluva uents Drainage Class: Poorly Drained
Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Description

Depth inches
Horizon Matrix Color
Munsell Moist Mottle Colors
Munsell Moist Mottle Abundance/
Size/Contrast
Texture, Concretions, Structure, etc.
0-6 A 10 YR 6/3 10 YR 4/4 Few/Faint Silt Loam
6-15 B 10 YR 5/2 10YR 4/4 Common/Distinct Silt Loam
15-22 C 10 YR 6/1 None None Silty Clay Loam

H dric Soil Indicators:
? Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfdic Odor
Aquatic Moisture Regime
ICI Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Concretions
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
? High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
® Listed on National Hydric Soils List
® Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
? Other (explain in remarks)
Remarks: Hydric Soil criteria met.
W t 1 LAN U
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present' . ® Yes ? No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland' . ? Yes 0 No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? ® Yes ? No
Remarks: Hydrology, vegetation and soils criteria indicate that the plot is within a wetland.
Form Content Aooroved by
Buffalo Flats - Reference Wetland Data Form. doc
i
Mitigation Plan
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site • Q Reference Wetland Gauge
'.; Project Easement
.. ,. Gam.
r.
AbIL,
} y ....
41,
him
Y. ;1W > Z + n
t
G :. 4 v 1. t?
PROJECT SITE REFERENCE WETLAND
BUFFALO
'? 300 FLATS RESTORATION SITE
FISrL.-C.-barrus prtholmag@ry
eet CABARRUS COUNTY, NC Co. GIS, 2009.
57
Mitigation Plan
FHWA Categorical Exclusion Form
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
58
Mitigation Plan
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
59
November 8, 2010
Mr. Tim Morris - Project Manager
KCI Technologies, Inc.
4601 Six Forks Road, Suite 220
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609
Subject: Categorical Exclusion Form for the
Buffalo Flats Wetland Mitigation Site - Full Delivery Project
Yadkin River Basin - CU# 03040105 - Cabarrus County
Contract No. 003273
Dear Mr. Morris:
Attached please find the approved Categorical Exclusion Form for the subject full delivery
project. I have approved your invoice, in the amount of $62,175.00 (5% of contract) for
completion of the Task 1 deliverable. Please include a copy of the form in your Mitigation Plan.
If you have any questions, or wish to discuss this matter further, please contact me at any time. I
can be reached at [phone], or email me at guy.pearce@ncdenr.g_ov
Sincerely,
Guy C. Pearce
EEP Full Delivery Program Supervisor
cc: file
Forth Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program,1652 Flail Service Center; Raleigh, IK 27699-1652 / 919-715-0476 / mm.nceep.net

Categorical Exclusion Form for Ecosystem Enhancement
Program Projects
Version 1.4
Note: Only Appendix A, should to be submitted (along with any supporting documentation) as the
environmental document.
t-ra eCt Name: Buffalo Flats Wetland Restoration Project
Count Name: Cabarrus Count , NC
EEP Number: 003273
Project Sponsor: KCI Technologies, Inc.
r<ry ucL %,oniaci Name: i im Morris
Project Contact Address: 4609 Six Forks Rd, Suite 220, Rale gh, NC 27609
Project Contact E-mail: Tim.morris kci.com
\ \ cl
Date
Conditional Approved By:
Date
? Check this box if there are outstanding issues
Final Approval By:
I I_ r- / J
Date
E
nager
For Division Administrator
FHWA
.s
For Division Ad mi
FHWA
Vr
cFi?c0S
4 /. 014,01rlC
Part 2: All Projects
Regulation/Question Response
Coastal Zone Management Act CZMA
1. Is the project located in a CAMA county? ? Yes
® No
2. Does the project involve ground-disturbing activities within a CAMA Area of ? Yes
Environmental Concern (AEC)? ? No
® N/A
3. Has a CAMA permit been secured? Yes
? No
® N/A
-
4. Has NCDCM agreed that the project is consistent with the NC Coastal Management yes
17
Program? ? No
® N/A
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liabili Act C ERCLA
1. Is this a "full-delivery" project? ® Yes
? No
2. Has the zoning/land use of the subject property and adjacent properties ever been Yes
designated as commercial or industrial? ® No
? N/A
3. As a result of a limited Phase I Site Assessment, are there known or potential ? Yes
hazardous waste sites within or adjacent to the project area? ® No
? N/A
4. As a result of a Phase I Site Assessment, are there known or potential hazardous ? Yes
waste sites within or adjacent to the project area? ? No
® N/A
5. As a result of a Phase II Site Assessment, are there known or potential hazardous ? Yes
waste sites within the project area? ? No
® N/A
6. Is there an approved hazardous mitigation plan? ? Yes
? No
® N/A
National Historic Preservation Act Section 106
1. Are there properties listed on, or eligible for listing on, the National Register of ? Yes
Historic Places in the project area? ® No
2. Does the project affect such properties and does the SHPO/THPO concur? ? Yes
? No
® N/A
3. If the effects are adverse, have they been resolved? ? Yes
? No
® N/A
Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Prog)erty Ac uisition Policies Act Uni form Act
1. Is this a "full-delivery" project? ® Yes
? No
2. Does the project require the acquisition of real estate? ® Yes
? No
? N/A
3. Was the property acquisition completed prior to the intent to use federal funds? ? Yes
® No
? N/A
4. Has the owner of the property been informed: Yes
* prior to making an offer that the agency does not have condemnation authority; and ? No
* what the fair market value is believed to be? ? N/A
Version 1.4, 8/18/05

Part 3: Ground-Disturbing Activities
Regulation/Question Response
American Indian Reli ious Freedom Act AIRFA
1. Is the project located in a county claimed as "territory" by the Eastern Band of Yes
Cherokee Indians? ® No
2. Is the site of religious importance to American Indians? Yes
? No
IN
3. Is the project listed on, or eligible for listing on, the National Register of Historic Yes
Places? ® No
? N/A
4. Have the effects of the project on this site been considered? Yes
? No
® N/A
Antiquities Act AA
1. Is the project located on Federal lands? Yes
No
2. Will there be loss or destruction of historic or prehistoric ruins, monuments or objects Yes
of antiquity? ® No
? N/A
3. Will a permit from the appropriate Federal agency be required? Yes
® No
? N/A
4. Has a permit been obtained? Yes
? No
® N/A
Archaeological Resources Protection Act ARPA
1. Is the project located on federal or Indian lands (reservation)? Yes
® No
2. Will there be a loss or destruction of archaeological resources? ? Yes
® No
? N/A
3. Will a permit from the appropriate Federal agency be required? Yes
® No
N/A
4. Has a permit been obtained? Yes
? No
® N/A
Endangered Species Act ESA
1. Are federal Threatened and Endangered species and/or Designated Critical Habitat Yes
listed for the county? ? No
2. Is Designated Critical Habitat or suitable habitat present for listed species? Yes
® No
N/A
3. Are T&E species present or is the project being conducted in Designated Critical ? Yes
Habitat? ® No
? N/A
4. Is the project "likely to adversely affect" the specie and/or "likely to adversely modify" Yes
Designated Critical Habitat? ? No
® N/A
5. Does the USFWS/NOAA-Fisheries concur in the effects determination? ® Yes
(By virtue of no-response) ? No
? N/A
6. Has the USFWS/NOAA-Fisheries rendered a "jeopardy" determination? Yes
® No
? N/A
Version 1.4, 8/18/05
Executive Order 13007 Indian Sacred Sites
1. Is the project located on Federal lands that are within a county claimed as "territory" ? Yes
b the EBCI? ® No
2. Has the EBCI indicated that Indian sacred sites may be impacted by the proposed ? Yes
project? ? No
® N/A
3. Have accommodations been made for access to and ceremonial use of Indian sacred ? Yes
sites? ? No
® N/A
Farmland Protection Policy Act FPPA
1. Will real estate be acquired? ® Yes
? No
2. Has NRCS determined that the project contains prime, unique, statewide or local Yes
important farmland? ? No
? N/A
3. Has the completed Form AD-1006 been submitted to NRCS? Yes
? No
? N/A
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act FWCA
1. Will the project impound, divert, channel deepen, or otherwise control/modify any Yes
water body? ® No
2. Have the USFWS and the NCWRC been consulted? ® Yes
? No
? N/A
Land and Water Conservation Fund Act Section 6
1. Will the project require the conversion of such property to a use other than public, ? Yes
outdoor recreation? ® No
2. Has the NPS approved of the conversion? ? Yes
? No
® N/A
Ma nuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish Habitat
1. Is the project located in an estuarine system? ? Yes
No
2. Is suitable habitat present for EFH-protected species? ? Yes
? No
® N/A
3. Is sufficient design information available to make a determination of the effect of the ? Yes
project on EFH? ? No
® N/A
4. Will the project adversely affect EFH? ? Yes
? No
® N/A
5. Has consultation with NOAA-Fisheries occurred? ? Yes
? No
® N/A
Mi rato Bird Treaty Act MBTA
1. Does the USFWS have any recommendations with the project relative to the MBTA? ? Yes
® No
2. Have the USFWS recommendations been incorporated? ? Yes
? No
® N/A
Wilderness Act
1. Is the project in a Wilderness area? ? Yes
® No
2. Has a special use permit and/or easement been obtained from the maintaining Yes
federal agency? ? No
® N/A
Version 1.4, 8/18/05
Mitigation Plan
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
65
Mitigation Plan
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
FEMA Compliance - EEP Floodplain Requirements Checklist
66
Mitigation Plan
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
67
r?
Fcos?%stem
PROGRAM
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. Edward Curtis), NC Floodplain Mapping Unit
(attn. John Gerber) and NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program.
Project Location
Name of project: Buffalo Flats Wetland Restoration
Name if stream or feature: Dutch Buffalo Creek
County: Cabarrus
Name of river basin: Yadkin
Is project urban or rural? Rural
Name of Jurisdictional
municipality/county: Unincorporated/Cabarrus County
DFIRM panel number for
entire site: 5652
Consultant name: Kristin Knight-Meng
Phone number: [phone]
Address: 4601 Six Forks Rd, Suite 220
Raleigh, NC 27609
FEMA_Floodplain_Checklist_BF.docm Page 1 of 3
Design Information
Provide a general description of project (one paragraph). Include project limits on a
reference orthophotograph at a scale of 1" = 500".
Summarize stream reaches or wetland areas accordinp, to their restoration priority
Wetland Area Length Priori
Wetland Area 1 3.4 acres Restoration
Wetland Area 2 11.2 acres Restoration
Wetland Area 3 1.2 acres Creation
Floodplain Information
Is project located in a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA)?
MYes UNo
If project is located in a SFHA, check how it was determined:
r- Redelineation
r- Detailed Study
i? Linked Detail Study
f" Approximate Study
C` Don't know
List flood zone designation: Zone AE
Check if applies:
WO AE Zone
C Floodway
1: Non-Encroachment
M None
r- A Zone
1 Local Setbacks Required
U No Local Setbacks Required
If local setbacks are required, list how man feet:
Does proposed channel boundary encroach outside floodway/non-
encroachment/setbacks?
FEMA_Floodplain_Checklist_BF.docm Page 2 of 3
GYes ENo
Land Acquisition (Check)
f- State owned (fee simple)
f 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,
919 807-4101
Is community/county participating in the NFIP program?
E Yes F, No
Note: if community is not participating, then all requirements should be addressed to
NFIP attn: Edward Curtis, 919) 715-8000 x369
Name of Local Floodplain Administrator: Robbie Foxx
Phone Number: 704 920-2138
Floodplain Requirements
This section to be filled by designer/applicant following verification with the LFPA
F No Action
W No Rise
f- Letter of Map Revision
r Conditional Letter of Map Revision
F Other Requirements
List other requirements:
Comments:
Name: -Kristin Knight Signature:
Title: Environmental Scientist Date:
FEMA_Floodplain_Checklist_BF.docm Page 3 of 3
Mitigation Plan
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
71
Mitigation Plan
13.5 Appendix C. Mitigation Work Plan Data and Analyses
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
72
Mitigation Plan
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
73
Mitigation Plan
Groundwater Modeling/Hydrologic Budget
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
74
Mitigation Plan
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
75
Buffal Flats Restoration Site - Existina Conditions
D Year Water Inputs Water Outputs Change in Excess Wetland
1986 P Si' Gi PET So Go Storage Water Volume
January 1.16 0.02 0.00 0.13 0.02 1.04 -0.01 0.00 0.00
February 1.23 0.00 0.00 0.57 0.00 1.04 -0.38 0.00 0.00
March 2.55 0.07 0.00 1.07 0.07 1.04 0.44 0.00 0.44
April 1.12 0.04 0.00 2.75 0.04 1.04 -2.67 0.00 0.00
May 1.64 0.01 0.00 3.82 0.01 1.04 -3.22 0.00 0.00
June 0.32 0.00 0.00 6.45 0.00 1.04 -7.17 0.00 0.00
July 4.39 0.05 0.00 6.98 0.05 1.04 -3.63 0.00 0.00
August 5.03 0.22 0.00 5.16 0.22 1.04 -1.17 0.00 0.00
September 1.13 0.00 0.00 4.13 0.00 1.04 -4.04 0.00 0.00
October 3.33 0.33 0.00 2.36 0.33 1.04 -0.07 0.00 0.00
November 3.84 0.03 0.00 0.99 0.03 1.04 1.81 0.00 1.81
December 3.46 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.00 1.04 2.17 0.00 3.99
Annual Totals 29.20 0.78 0.00 34.64 0.78 12.48
Avg. Year Water Inputs Water Outputs Change in Excess Wetland
1996 P Si. Gi PET So Go Storage Water Volume
January 4.81 0.32 0.00 0.14 0.32 1.04 3.63 0.00 3.63
February 2.40 0.29 0.00 0.42 0.29 1.04 0.94 0.00 4.57
March 3.44 0.10 0.00 0.72 0.10 1.04 1.68 0.85 5.40
April 3.94 0.06 0.00 2.22 0.06 1.04 0.68 0.68 5.40
May 2.40 0.00 0.00 4.30 0.00 1.04 -2.94 0.00 2.46
June 3.77 0.12 0.00 5.79 0.12 1.04 -3.06 0.00 0.00
July 5.69 0.28 0.00 6.23 0.28 1.04 -1.58 0.00 0.00
August 4.40 0.05 0.00 5.38 0.05 1.04 -2.02 0.00 0.00
September 5.26 0.64 0.00 4.00 0.64 1.04 0.22 0.00 0.22
October 3.18 0.27 0.00 2.08 0.27 1.04 0.06 0.00 0.28
November 3.30 0.02 0.00 0.63 0.02 1.04 1.63 0.00 1.91
December 2.34 0.01 0.00 0.45 0.01 1.04 0.85 0.00 2.76
Annual Totals 44.93 2.15 0.00 32.35 2.15 12.48
Wet Year Water In uts Water Outputs Change in Excess Wetland
1975 P Si • Gi PET So Go Storage Water Volume
January 6.01 0.41 0.00 0.46 0.41 1.04 4.51 0.00 4.51
February 3.09 0.09 0.00 0.61 0.09 1.04 1.44 0.55 5.40
March 6.99 0.47 0.00 0.79 0.47 1.04 5.16 5.16 5.40
April 2.93 0.06 0.00 2.11 0.06 1.04 -0.22 0.00 5.18
May 10.29 1.69 0.00 4.19 1.69 1.04 5.06 4.84 5.40
June 6.7 0.61 0.00 5.35 0.61 1.04 0.31 0.31 5.40
July 9.2 2.30 0.00 5.61 2.30 1.04 2.55 2.55 5.40
August 2.34 0.10 0.00 6.04 0.10 1.04 -4.74 0.00 0.66
September 8.75 1.11 0.00 3.98 1.11 1.04 3.73 0.00 4.39
October 3.19 0.36 0.00 2.60 0.36 1.04 -0.45 0.00 3.94
November 2.34 0.13 0.00 1.19 0.13 1.04 0.11 0.00 4.06
December 2.95 0.04 0.00 0.31 0.04 1.04 1.60 0.26 5.40
Annual Totals 64.78 7.37 0.00 33.23 7.37 12.48

00
. E?

? 7
Ey
...-
n
fV
y X .
O W
OD W
l6
to
0

C C C c O
l0 N
?'
7
co Q O C C
v m
Z`
j
N
0] rn ici U O Q
?
I (
i 1
r+ Nl
co O
m ?
v O
? V
O p?
0
x
W

?.
N,

7
E '
-
O l 1
X
I
i
a

CN I
O
? O

I
I ' i f r?

U
O ?\
3
N (n

\

\ o
0

10942
2
a0
Jag
4'a1011,
1 119
O?J
/ 119
tiara
as
b
F aG
on
' TP
?Ga
b
9JJP
2P
,J9a
y
2P
?G
P„
O) 00 1- co In It M N r O
(sayaui) ownlOA CORM puRROM
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site - Proposed Conditions
D Year Water Inputs Water Outputs Change in Excess
1986 P Si' Gi PET So Go Storage Water Wetland Volume
January 1.16 0.02 0.00 0.13 0.00 1.04 0.01 0.00 0.01
February 1.23 0.00 0.00 0.57 0.00 1.04 -0.38 0.00 0.00
March 2.55 0.07 0.00 1.07 0.00 1.04 0.52 0.00 0.52
April 1.12 0.04 0.00 2.75 0.00 1.04 -2.62 0.00 0.00
May 1.64 0.01 0.00 3.82 0.00 1.04 -3.21 0.00 0.00
2 0.00 0.00 6.45 0.00 1.04 -7.17 0.00 0.00
9 0.05 0.00 6.98 0.00 1.04 -3.58 0.00 0.00
3 0.22 0.00 5.16 0.00 1.04 -0.95 0.00 0.00
W 13 0.00 0.00 4.13 0.00 1.04 -4.04 0.00 0.00
3 0.33 0.00 2.36 0.00 1.04 0.26 0.00 0.26
4 0. 03 0.00 0.99 0.00 1.04 1.85 0.00 2.11
December 6
3.46 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.00 1.04 2.17 0.00 4.28
Annual Totals 29.20 0.78 0.00 34.64 0.00 12.48
Avg. Year Water Inputs Water Ou UtS Change in Excess
1996 P Si* Gi PET So Go Storage Water Wetland Volume
January 4.81 0.32 0.00 0.14 0.00 1.04 3.95 0.00 3.95
February 2.40 0.29 0.00 0.42 0.00 1.04 1.23 0.00 5.18
March 3.44 0.10 0.00 0.72 0.00 1.04 1.78 0.00 6.95
April 3.94 0.06 0.00 2.22 0.00 1.04 0.75 0.00 7.70
May 2.40 0.00 0.00 4.30 0.00 1.04 -2.94 0.00 4.77
June 3.77 0.12 0.00 5.79 0.00 1.04 -2.94 0.00 1.83
July 5.69 0.28 0.00 6.23 0.00 1.04 -1.30 0.00 0.53
August 4.40 0.05 0.00 5.38 0.00 1.04 -1.97 0.00 0.00
September 5.26 0.64 0.00 4.00 0.00 1.04 0.86 0.00 0.86
October 3.18 0.27 0.00 2.08 0.00 1.04 0.33 0.00 1.19
November 3.30 0.02 0.00 0.63 0.00 1.04 1.65 0.00 2.84
December 2.34 0.01 0.00 0.45 0.00 1.04 0.86 0.00 3.69
Annual Totals 44.93 2.15 0.00 32.35 0.00 12.48
Wet Year Water Inputs Water Outtp uts Change in Excess
1975 P Si' Gi PET So Go Storage Water Wetland Volume
January 6.01 0.41 0.00 0.46 0.00 1.04 4.92 0.00 4.92
February 3.09 0.09 0.00 0.61 0.00 1.04 1.53 0.00 6.45
March 6.99 0.47 0.00 0.79 0.00 1.04 5.62 4.28 7.80
April 2.93 0.06 0.00 2.11 0.00 1.04 -0.16 0.00 7.64
May 10.29 1.69 0.00 4.19 0.00 1.04 6.75 6.60 7.80
June 6.7 0.61 0.00 5.35 0.00 1.04 0.92 0.92 7.80
July 9.2 2.30 0.00 5.61 0.00 1.04 4.85 4.85 7.80
August 2.34 0.10 0.00 6.04 0.00 1.04 4.64 0.00 3.16
September 8.75 1.11 0.00 3.98 0.00 1.04 4.84 0.20 7.80
October 3.19 0.36 0.00 2.60 0.00 1.04 -0.08 0.00 7.72
November 2.34 0.13 0.00 1.19 0.00 1.04 0.25 0.16 7.80
December 2.95 0.04 0.00 0.31 0.00 1.04 1.64 1.64 7.80
Annual Totals 64.78 7.37 0.00 33.23 0.00 12.48
Note: An increase in capacity of 0.2 feet (2.4 inches) of surface water is assumed based on the creation of microtopography during wetland restoration.
N
t
t0
E C U C 0
2 N
Z f0 N U ?
N
X CN N NN m

C mj 3 CC ca T
CL 0

W

G C
7
m
O
O } 0)

>
r? U m (7 m cm O
?
I
I I i
H
d=
?
CO O
V U
0.a
d
0 O
?a
=a`

fff I
.

U

"' U 7
C
N CJ N (n

W

f?
I I
I
?

U
N
0
O
Z
U
O
C.
a>
V)
N
f :3
71
Q
T
c

.n
Q
t
m
a

O co n CO LO 't co N ?- O
(sayaui) ownlOA J048M puRROM
Mitigation Plan
Soil Delineation and Characterization
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
80
Mitigation Plan
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
81
Mitigation Plan Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
A detailed soils investigation at the BFRS was conducted by a licensed soil scientist (# 187) to determine
the extent and distribution of the hydric soils and to classify the predominate soils to the soil series
level. The investigation consisted of delineating the hydric soil boundaries with pink flagging and
wooden survey stakes in accordance with the US Army Corps of Engineers, Wetland Delineation Manual
(1987) and the USDA Field Indicators Of Hydric Soils In The United States: A Guide for Identifying and
Delineating Hydric Soils, Version 7.0 (2010). Areas that were identified as possible hydric soil mapping
units were surveyed at a higher intensity until the edge of the mapping unit was identified. The
boundary of the hydric and non-hydric soil mapping units were then followed by continual sampling and
observations as the boundary line was identified and delineated. In those areas where the boundary was
found to be a broad gradient rather than a distinct break, microtopography, landscape position, soil
textural changes, redoximorphic features, and depleted matrices were additionally considered to
identify the extent of the hydric soils.
In developing a detailed soils map, several soil borings were advanced on the site in the general hydric
soil areas identified by landscape position, vegetation and slope. Once the hydric soil borings were
identified, the soil scientist marked the points and established a visual line to the next auger boring
where again hydric soil conditions were confirmed by additional borings. The soil scientist moved along
the edges of the mapping unit and marked each point along the line. To confirm the hydric soil mapping
unit and taxonomic classification, soil borings were advanced to a depth of 50 inches. The soil profile
descriptions identified the individual horizons in the topsoil and upper subsoil as well as the depth,
color, texture, structure, boundary, and evidence of restrictive horizons and redoximorphic features.
Delineated hydric soils boundaries were in contrast to those mapped in the Soil Survey of Cabarrus
County, North Carolina. The delineated hydric soil boundaries are shown in the following figure, Detailed
Soils Map.
Taxonomic Classification
The predominant soils identified on the site were of the Wehadkee (Fine-Loamy, mixed, active, nonacid,
thermic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts) soil series. Inclusions of other soil series include Armenia (Fine,
smectitic, thermic Typic Argiaquolls), Altavista (Fine-loamy, mixed, semiactive, thermic Aquic
Hapludults), Hiwassee (Fine, Kaolinitic, thermic Rhodic Kanhapludults), Sedgefield (Fine, mixed, active,
thermic Aquultic Hapludalfs). The Wehadkee and Armenia series are listed as hydric soils in Cabarrus
County, North Carolina. They are defined as hydric due to saturation for a significant period during the
growing season. Armenia is also defined as hydric due to ponding for long to very long duration during
the growing season. These two soils are listed as hydric on the federal, state and local lists. The
Wehadkee and Armenia series are also listed by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) as
hydric soils.
Profile Description
The Wehadkee series is described as very deep, poorly drained and very poorly drained soils typically
found on floodplains along streams that drain from the mountains and piedmont. They are formed in
loamy sediments with slopes ranging from 0 to 2 percent. The Armenia series is described as very deep,
poorly drained slowly permeable soils that formed in clayey material mostly weathered from dark
colored, basic rocks. It is commonly overlain by a thin, 10 to 20 inch, layer of loamy alluvium. These soils
are on small to medium floodplains or nearly level upland flats and depressions of the Piedmont
Plateau. Slopes commonly are less than 1 percent but range to as much as 2 percent.
82
Mitigation Plan Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Typical Pedon Description of the Wehadkee mapping unit:
WEHADKEE SERIES
TAXONOMIC CLASS: Fine-loamy, mixed, active, nonacid, thermic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
TAXONOMIC CLASS: Fine-loamy, mixed, active, nonacid, thermic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
TYPICAL PEDON: Wehadkee fine sandy loam -- cultivated (Colors are for moist soil unless otherwise
stated.)
Ap--O to 8 inches; grayish brown (10YR 5/2) fine sandy loam; weak medium granular structure; very
friable; few flakes of mica; moderately acid; abrupt smooth boundary. (6 to 14 inches thick)
Bgl--8 to 17 inches; dark gray (10YR 4/1) loam; common medium prominent strong brown (7.5YR 5/6)
soft masses of iron accumulation; weak fine and medium subangular blocky structure; friable; few flakes
of mica; moderately acid; clear smooth boundary. (8 to 20 inches thick)
Bg2--17 to 40 inches; gray (10YR 6/1) sandy clay loam; common medium prominent strong brown (7.5YR
5/6) soft masses of iron accumulation; weak medium subangular blocky structure; friable; common
flakes of mica; moderately acid; clear smooth boundary. (0 to 30 inches thick)
Cg--40 to 50 inches; gray (10YR 6/1) sandy loam; common medium faint grayish brown (10YR 5/2) iron
depletions and prominent strong brown (7.5YR 5/6) soft masses of iron accumulation; massive; friable;
common flakes of mica; moderately acid.
TYPE LOCATION: Catawba County, North Carolina; 1/2 mile south of Witherspoon Crossroads on SR
1801, 3/4 mile east on SR 1807, and 650 feet north of bridge on Hogan Creek.
RANGE IN CHARACTERISTICS: Solum thickness ranges from about 20 to more than 60 inches. The
content of mica flakes ranges from few too many. The soil ranges from very strongly acid through
neutral, but some part of the 10 to 40 inch control section is moderately acid through neutral. Content
of rock fragments ranges from 0 to 5 percent by volume in the A and B horizons and from 0 to 20
percent by volume in the C horizons. Fragments are dominantly pebble size.
The Ap or A horizon has hue of 10YR or 2.5Y or is neutral, value of 3 to 6, and chroma of 0 to 4. Some
pedons have soft masses of iron accumulation in shades of brown or red. Texture is fine sandy loam,
very fine sandy loam, loam, silty clay loam, sandy loam, or silt loam. Some pedons have recent layers of
overwash as much as 20 inches thick that are loamy and variable in color. Many pedons have an Ab
horizon that has the same color and texture range as the A horizon.
The Bg horizon has hue of 10YR to 5Y or is neutral, value of 4 to 6, and chroma of 0 to 2. Soft masses of
iron accumulation are in shades of red, yellow, and brown. Texture is sandy clay loam, silt loam, loam,
clay loam, or silty clay loam.
The Cg horizon has hue of 10YR to 5Y or is neutral, value of 4 to 7, and chroma of 0 to 2. Soft masses of
iron accumulation are in shades of brown, red, and yellow. Texture is commonly sandy loam, loam, or
83
Mitigation Plan Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
silt loam, but in some pedons the Cg horizon contains stratified layers of sandy clay loam, clay loam, silty
clay loam, loamy sand, sand, and gravel. Sandy textures are restricted to depths below 40 inches.
Typical Pedon Description of the Armenia mapping unit:
ARMENIA SERIES
The Armenia series consists of very deep, poorly drained, slowly permeable soils that formed in clayey
material mostly weathered from dark colored, basic rocks. It is commonly overlain by a thin, 10 to 20
inch, layer of loamy alluvium. These soils are on small to medium flood plains or nearly level upland flats
and depressions of the Piedmont Plateau. Slopes commonly are less than 1 percent but range to as
much as 2 percent. Near the type location the average annual precipitation is about 46 inches and the
average annual temperature is about 61 degrees F.
TAXONOMIC CLASS: Fine, smectitic, thermic Typic Argiaquolls
TYPICAL PEDON: Armenia loam on a 0.5 percent slope, in a pasture on a narrow flood plain. (Colors are
for moist soil unless otherwise stated.)
Ap1--0 to 2 inches; dark brown (10YR 3/3) loam, grayish brown (10YR 5/2) dry; weak medium
subangular blocky structure parting to moderate medium granular; friable; many fine and medium
roots; many fine pores; few black concretions; neutral; abrupt smooth boundary. (2 to 11 inches thick)
Ap2--2 to 7 inches; dark grayish brown (2.5Y 4/2) loam, grayish brown (10YR 5/2) dry; few fine faint dark
yellowish brown (10YR 4/6) mottles; weak medium subangular blocky structure parting to moderate
medium granular; friable; common fine and medium roots; many fine pores; few black concretions;
neutral; clear wavy boundary. (0 to 5 inches thick)
BA1--7 to 16 inches; very dark gray (10YR 3/1) sandy clay loam, dark gray (10YR 4/1) dry; weak coarse
subangular blocky structure; slightly sticky, slightly plastic; common fine roots; common fine and few
medium pores; few fine and medium black concretions; neutral; clear wavy boundary. (0 to 14 inches
thick)
BA2--16 to 20 inches; very dark grayish brown (2.5Y 3/2) sandy loam, grayish brown (10YR 5/2) dry; few
fine distinct dark yellowish brown (10YR 4/4) mottles; moderate coarse subangular blocky structure;
sticky, plastic; common distinct clay films in pores; few fine roots; common very fine pores; few fine and
medium black concretions; neutral; clear wavy boundary. (0 to 8 inches thick)
Btg--20 to 29 inches; very dark gray (N 3/0) clay, gray (10YR 5/1) dry; common fine distinct olive brown
(2.5Y 4/4) mottles; moderate coarse subangular blocky structure; sticky, very plastic; common distinct
clay films in pores; few fine roots; few fine pores; few fine and medium black concretions; few fine
pebbles of feldspar; mildly alkaline; gradual wavy boundary. (8 to 41 inches thick)
Btgc--29 to 48 inches; dark gray (N 4/0) clay loam; few fine faint olive brown (2.5Y 4/4) mottles; weak
coarse subangular blocky structure; sticky, very plastic; common faint clay films in pores; few fine roots;
84
Mitigation Plan Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
few very fine and fine pores; common fine and medium black concretions; few fine pebbles of feldspar;
mildly alkaline; gradual wavy boundary. (0 to 19 inches thick)
BC--48 to 67 inches; mottled gray (5Y 5/1), light olive brown (2.5Y 5/6), light gray (10YR 7/2), and strong
brown (7.5YR 5/8) sandy clay loam; massive; sticky, plastic; pockets of clay and coarse sandy clay loam;
common faint clay films in some pores; few very fine pores; common fine and medium black
concretions; few fine pebbles of quartz and feldspar; neutral; clear wavy boundary. (0 to 20 inches thick)
C--67 to 80 inches; mottled gray (5Y 5/1), strong brown (7.5YR 5/8); light gray (10YR 7/2), and reddish
brown (5YR 4/3) sandy clay loam; massive; friable; common fine pebbles of feldspar; few fine and
medium pebbles of quartz; slightly acid.
TYPE LOCATION: Chester County, South Carolina; 8.2 miles northeast of Chester on State Highway 191;
1,050 feet west of junction of State Highway 191 and 323; 100 feet north of Highway 191; 25 feet east of
drainageway.
RANGE IN CHARACTERISTICS: Solum thickness is 30 to more than 60 inches. Depth to bedrock is more
than 5 feet. Content of dark concretions range from few to common. Content of pebbles range from 0 to
6 percent by volume. The A horizon is moderately acid to neutral and the B and C horizons are slightly
acid to mildly alkaline.
The A horizon has hue of 10YR or 2.5Y, value of 2 or 3, and chroma of 1 to 3. Some pedons have recent
deposition with a value of 4. It is loam, sandy loam, silt loam, or clay loam.
The Btg horizon has hue of 10YR to 5Y or it is neutral, value of 3 to 6, and chroma of 2 or less. The Btg
horizon commonly is mottled in shades of brown, yellow or olive. It is clay, sandy clay, clay loam, or silty
clay.
The Btgc horizon, where present, has hue of 10YR to 5Y or it is neutral, value of 4 to 6, and chroma of 2
or less. It commonly is mottled in shades of brown, yellow or olive. It is clay, sandy clay, clay loam, or
silty clay.
The BC horizon, where present, is commonly mottled in hue of 7.5YR to 5Y or it is neutral, value of 3 to
8, and chroma of 1 to 8. Some pedons have a BCg horizon that has matrix color with chroma of 2 or less
and mottles in shades of yellow, olive, and black. The BC horizon is sandy clay loam or clay loam.
The C or Cg horizon is mottled in hue of 7.5YR to 5Y or it is neutral, value of 3 to 8, and chroma of 1 to 8,
or it has matrix chroma of 2 or less and mottles in shades of yellow, olive, brown and black. It is sandy
loam, loam, clay loam, or sandy clay loam.
85

WMENMMMWi?
wmm==1i?
???
??
mmmma?
E*
KCI
ssocIAUS of SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
)MM COWNk ?A
Client: Date: March 2, 2010
Project: Buffalo Flats Project #:
County: Cabarrus State: NC
Location: Jordan Farm-Gold Hill Road, Concord, NC Site/Lot: 1 (SD # 1)
Soil Series: Wehadkee Variant
Soil Classification: Fine-loamy, mixed,active, nonacid, thermic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
AWT: 14" SHWT: Slope: Aspect:
Elevation: Drainage: Poorly Drained Permeability: Moderately slow
Vegetation: Pasture grasses
Borings terminated at 38 Inches
HORIZON DEPTH (IN) MATRIX MOTTLES TEXTURE STRUCTURE CONSISTENCE PERM. k/h, NOTES
0-4 l0YR 4/2 sl i f mfr Collivium
4-11 10YR 5/3 10YR 5/2c2d 1 lm r mfr Colluvium
F 7.SYR 4/4c1
Ab 11-13 IOYR 6/2 sl Ifsbk mfr
B 1 13-18 IOYR 5/2 IOYR 5/4c2d I Ifsbk mfr
B g2 18-30 10YR 6/2 10YR 5/3m2 sl-Is Ifsbk mfr
B g3 30-36 IOYR 5/2 SO Imsbk mfr
1 OYR 5/3
10YR 5/6
B g4 36-43 IOYR 6/1 sc Imsbk mfi
10YR 5/4
C 43+ IOYR 6/1 sl massive mfr

COMMENTS:
DESCRIBED BY: Steven F. Stokes 3/2/2010

KCI
ASSOCIAnS OF SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
WMM CAWM PA
Client: Date: March 2, 2010
Project: Buffalo Flats Project #:
County: Cabarrus State: NC
Location: Jordan Farm-Gold Hill Road, Concord, NC Site/Lot: 2 (SD # 2)
Soil Series: Wehadkee Variant
Soil Classification: Fine-loamy, mixed,active, nonacid, thermic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
AWT: 12" SHWT: Slope: Aspect:
Elevation: Drainage: Poorly Drained Permeability: slow
Vegetation: Pasture Grasses
Borings terminated at 50 Inches
HORIZON DEPTH (M) MATRIX MOTTLES TEXTURE STRUCTURE CONSISTENCE PERM, kVhr NOTES
A l 0-4 10YR 4/2 l OYR 4/4 Sl I f mfr
A p2 4-10 IOYR 4/1 10YR 4/4c2d sl if mfr
E 10-13 IOYR 6/1 is if mfr
B 1 13-18 10YR 5/1 IOYR 5/6c2d sc lmsbk mfi
C 1 18-24 4/5GY sc massive mfi
10YR 5/1
10YR 5/4
C g2 24-50 10YR 5/1 4/5GY sc massive mfi

COMMENTS:
DESCRIBED BY: Steven F. Stokes 3/2/2010
===M==1i
wmmmmwllha
aaaaarllb?
aaaar?
??
mmmwmmdo?
KCI
ASSOCIATES OF
NORTH CUOUNA, PA
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Client: KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A.
Project: Buffalo Flats Wetland Restoration Site
County: Cabarrus
Location: 4939 Gold Hill Road
Soil Series: Armenia
Date: August 18, 2010
Project #: 20100798
State: NC
Site/Lot: 3 (BF#I Pasture # 2)
Soil Classification: Fine, smectitic, thermic Typic Argiaquolls
AWT: > 58" SHWT: 3"-8" Slope: 0-1% Aspect:
Elevation: -657' Drainage: Poorly Drained Permeability: slow
Vegetation: Pasture Grasses
Borings terminated at 58 Inches
HORIZON DEPTH (IN) MATRIX MOTTLES TEXTURE STRUCTURE CONSISTENCE BOUNDARY NOTES
A 1 0-3 IOYR3/2 sl if r mfr as
A p2 3-8 IOYR 5/2 sl Ifsbk mfr cw
BAI 8-14 10YR511 1OYR4/4171 f sl Ifsbk mfr cw
BA2 14-19 10YR5/2 10YR5/4c2d scl Ifsbk mfr cw
Bt 1 19-36 2.5Y6/2 IOYR5/6c2d sc 2msbk mfi w
C 1 36-46 511OY IOYR5/6c2 c massive mfi cw
C g2 46-58 2.5Y6/2 IOYR5/6c2d c massive mfi

COMMENTS:
Pedon did not exhibit the concretions commonly associated with this soil.
DESCRIBED BY: SFS DATE: 8/18/2010

=====Er`?
???
mmmmgb?
KCI
(WrHCIAC?M& PA
Soil Classification: Fine-Loamy, mixed, active, nonacid, thermic Fluvaquentic Endo uepts
AWT: 48" SHWT: 3-5" Slope: 0-2% Aspect:
Elevation: -660' Drainage: Poorly Drained Permeability: moderately slow
Vegetation: Pasture Grasses
Borings terminated at 48 Inches
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Client: KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A.
Project: Buffalo Flats Wetland Restoration Site
County: Cabarrus
Location: 4939 Gold Hill Road
Soil Series: Wehadkee Variant
HORIZON DEPTH (IN) MATRIX MOTTLES TEXTURE STRUCTURE CONSISTENCE BOUNDARY NOTES
A 1 0-3 10YR4/1 2.5YR3/6fl sl If r mfr
A p2 3-5 IOYR 511 10YR5/4flf sl if r mfr
Abl 5-8 10YR4/2 10YR6/4flf sl if r mfr
B 1 8-12 10YR5/2 2.5Y6/2flf scl Ifsbk mfr
B g2 12-18 10YR5/1 2.5Y5/2c2d scl ifsbk mfr
B g3 18-36 10YR5/1 10YR5/6c2d sc 2msbk mfi
B g4 36-40 2.5Y6/2 5/5GYc2 sc 2msbk mfi
10YR5/6c2d
C 4048 2.5Y6/2 5/5GYc2 SO massive mfi
10YR5/6c2d
R 48 Auger refusal on weathered granite, gneiss,
or sandstone

COMMENTS:
Apparent water table is at 48 inches.
Wehadkee Variant due to sandy clay B horizon.
Date: August 18, 2010
Project #: 20100798
State: NC
Site/Lot: 4 (BF3 - Pasture # 3)
DESCRIBED BY: SFS DATE: 8/18/2010
MMWWWMVi
omwmonw-dW?
mmnwl+?
KCI
ASSOCIATES OF
NORTH CAROLINA, PA
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Client: KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A. Date: August 18, 2010
Project: Buffalo Flats Wetland Restoration Site Project #: 20100798
County: Cabarrus State: NC
Location: 4939 Gold Hill Road Site/Lot: 5 (BF#2 Pasture # 3)
Soil Series: Wehadkee Variant
Soil Classification: Fine-Loamy, mixed, active, nonacid, thermic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
AWT: > 51" SHWT: 4"-8" Slope: 0-2% Aspect:
Elevation: -660' Drainage: Poorly Drained Permeability: moderate
Vegetation: Pasture Grasses
Borings terminated at 51 Inches
HORIZON DEPTH (IN) MATRIX MOTTLES TEXTURE STRUCTURE CONSISTENCE BOUNDARY NOTES
Apt 0-4 IOYR5/2 5YR4/6cld sl if r mfr as
10YR5/3c2f
A p2 4-8 2.5Y6/2 2.5Y5/6c2d fsl if r mfr cs
I OYRS/3c2d
Abl 8-15 2.5Y6/2 2.5Y5/4f2f Is If r ml cs
Ab2 15-18 2.5Y5/2 sl Ifsbk mfr cs
B 1 18-24 2.5Y5/2 10YR5/8c2 scl Imsbk mfr cs
B g2 24-38 10YR6/2 10YR5/8c2 sc 2msbk mfi *w
B g3 38-46 6/10Y 2.5Y6/2f2 cl Imsbk mfr w
2.5Y5/6fld
C 1 46-51 2.5Y6/4 Is massive mfr cs
R 51 auger refusal on weathered granite, gneiss,
or sandstone

COMMENTS:
Wehadkee Variant due to sandy clay B horizon.
DESCRIBED BY: SFS DATE: 8/18/2010
I '
Mitigation Plan Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Soils Udorthents
{ r - Cecil Upland
ChewaGa V*hadkee
r j _ r n Armenia • Soil Borings
i
? d s y
Jill
VIP
t
0 •
Ww- -P
`,yet Re z i• .
?9 f }'Y K y:, .? tai yF A?
t y r. '• ? 1 S\
i ,
- `? •
-` 2
AV ??7 4*
r
'w t I
A.Y
6 vuq?V
Ik'
F v t. t `••kF ,.F*? A?? 1 t t y f 41. , ? ,N s.
PROJECT SITE DETAILED SOILS MAP
o uo 30o BUFFALO FLATS RESTORATION SITE LIt.C.b magery
Feet C ABARRUS COUNTY, NC Co GIS,2009
91
Mitigation Plan
Appendix D. Project Plan Sheets
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
92
Mitigation Plan
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
93

t .'nr
i
N a
Lgj
as
x
Y
00 ??
Z
W ?. ? ,~ Q
? Z ci a?
U w
j
E- U czar a
w ?h
H
12
e ? r
® ? W
a? g ?? F o w
W 0. ? ? % i' e z ? m
z
JF - A g z
\?i U W h
F O
a y ?. z g
p
m G?bK S` O g gz't
Ouhh BWH ,? ul u?l
z Z I ?i+ ec ?-
LLyy ° o 5 W
! ,. V zoo°? S z ? 6 S ^O
.wo 3 a
00 3Z
go 3`a
wrl? y W?aN J? = 3
_ - ? mot}; Z p? ? ? m 3 m 3 `
?' !? ?n7O'V ? R k i o
l ?u V F? aoanrr 33 6 $ ? o
s1 , O gto ; R d yF y
P., oog
O O
E O01OZ #SO! Io?I £L ZFOO , 1317
'WIN0311

SNOWA N
ataun uw xowx3o 41,, U"iP?fE .ilf? nx,om,uea+'w?nv O
' U1a]S.&SOJ'>? vNnoav3 Niaor+'uNnoosnaavm'aao3NOO R .aro 3
?yU2
MIS NOLLVUO1S3H Zko?
_ ,.. .. _ ?? I ?Il S1M3 OlV33f18 oza?
k
X W
x
w wQ =
C x
¢ r >2
0 Z2
8 1V? o
m W Q / 10
Cl)
10
Q W a? W O u
QQ
w O S W •V a W 0 M
o a w H W LL m C^?1 C U
r o 0
r ?" () m u ? m
Q ¢ ?y ` J ?? ` LL O
ca 0 -.x
T z °z< 0 L 'O O O O K O
C > mw p > o m V p r oc
W m x wz m m u G O
C .4 OV
r N C iA C
O J o ¢ V Ol Cl O ^I « « -M Ga Q
R~Jyy ?_ "wN" m 00 y 'y 'N O V G
Wj W N J OOC !?- N
N
of m O HO ?1 W W LU
Zr, C7 2 «J\
1-4 Sa r •¢ W
O¢ 72m
21 Um
°o a?•Q v a ®x
?V mWm a2¢ 44
1 1
Y O O <rWW mrr O ?_1 MA w
00y w00Nm,D O+emv,0e ¢ JO VO '?i
mWw av ~ INN O .+n g O e1 ri On.-inn N.y FOzg rZ?
p¢ Wme+? $vva ,env+ri au /?/ ?y
r` ,Q2,Qa W?u?o •Wnun?oe??n ,n iv u,o ,o,n ,o IOww oUa w IcO4
v MOLL ?¢4JJ< roLLH ? l?
pp ,D ?IO,ON n NN Om"p 00 J `
?mx OONT10 O,mNmO,OmneCQtOn00 J2< JW2
mr 2?titi•'?.+TI?OOei 1?IGNOIOYI OG 01"1W¢ Jr? r?
?HZ ?" mmmnmmm..mWm,nm wo ? am v
01 •D Nmnmmmm NN•ym•-101rv ?r >•-•m n
Qo eeaeaeeeaaeaeeme W Q <mw ? ?? 4
m2 QNNY1 Y1 Yf Y1 Y1 u1NU1NY1NY1NNYf xW2 •• Zti
AOW Wemi•'?•le'?i•'?-1HN-1 •'?-I rl •-i e?•-iti•-?•-i •q e?e+ JrmW Z26hri ? ?
'¢m NNNNV,mv,Nh Mrm¢ «mJ ?'1 Q /?
WOQOm ¢<29 LLz m 1C ?/
N Q O C
Z 2 0 M r o o< -<-
0
Q o 17 n.+m oN mm Nmmmn mmmm <wa UJ.+c7 /1 m ,N O
2emmn,n,nn ?i mv?m,o u,nmm 'OZZ o <a z ?V ,L
wQQZO =e O.?ppl?n Nph?G O?m,GV1?1?Nn 060Q 6WOr u_ >
>
O mH rry NNmnmmin0, .'?iMYf?Nn,p W6r, OUrm 7 O O c
C m
mWr ¢e ? gimme Qe eNNN r rm m< X U?•• 1 C r
< N N N N N N N N N < W O 2 mw Q h
O •V U a o ....... N N N N
2227 I, ,Dbmmmmmml0 >xW0 O¢6W cO J J f W
¢F<•O ..Ur wr mW2J O Y C C
(7<mw OX2zr• rwo, O O p O O.
¢m?'z-' Nme,mm?m .O-, ?Nmavf ,On Z1LS"'?z F W IL K m C C V N
aaaaaasasasaaaaa oJrJ< J wo 3
<JJJ <JrnJ¢ 0
x2 O O 'O
J J J V U V V U U U V V V U V V V V V V ¢ Q 3< r r 2 r Q
m« Q ..........
Y Y Y Y Y Y Y (? ? ?? N b N ? V V N N
C
a a a O a a
0 o O x a O o
d 1 1 LU CL a
1 ( I

m19tlM' 'a1W WIOMAM
yp?dy,?g}j ......
..
Vll;l+?l?ur:(
NY[LMl1WIV ON'HSiP'tl
? '0`0151"0?1154pp°

VNnONVONINON'uNnoosnaavsvo'oaoONOD

MIS NOLMOMN r
slvi:j oiv:i-qne 0

0
K;
= S?
0
w a:

?I
X.
CSI w
OI _
N, w
1
J
W • O Q
e'I L _
v? F a J S
xa
W =
a U ?f

?,
~
oy
~
z
Z
Z
a 00 FO _
Q
a i R' ¢
CL m a? W
O = O U W
U
I- 03s N
1. J
¢ +-? r m

iliah
o L FwW
_wm WU

?_
mx
F
N J
IL lai
W
U?
¢ oa
1 1 f
SNCOM
yT}',t,,;??'L;i- uuz?ewuv?wwon ws3nx ? -
mroxr. uw wumon0 lti?JS.L?(IJ`?'t 063110010tl clwmnc l°w vNnoavo HisowA1Nnoo Snuwm'aaooNo7 _
3115 NOLLtl2101S32i
I ?H S.Lv1;f ow:uns k
0
Y? n
u
o
i T,1L 1
Ill: ? ??i?., -?1?Z ? ??j1?I l}Y W :7
W? I / /\ i1?1'111 J? I
N O
r ? ? I I
/ ?1 I
i
(DK
w
N
v/ " 11 F
om ? I i ? v I ? ?
I
o /

uw ?« mom, e
- - lliJ?a?1?1)•"t.? MNf108VO H11lON'A1Nf10o Sl121MV/8`do'0210oN0o i g
uawa?c.su?rxna.cm a z
?? prra???v. ? 311S NOLLNLIO1S321 ? ? $5
I ?X MM Slv1zi Oltl:iztf19 -
h
0
d ?
s
o g. 1
V1
yn 11
r,
\
OX I ? I I ?w
G H r
I
\1 / a 1
I I \ I
W
vw "k
{ I \ ? v
W \ W
O ppy \ ? }1
pppp \
V W ? \. ? v ( I IRy
Z
? 2O NZ /
a
J I
/ I 1
?//I 1 I N oT /
I
h
N
b
j s\Y,i11< 11 TY,n? ,I¢; ?
MATCMIJNE-SEEi'6MEET4 I\ r /

?0bi" ?w 0 lli?jc?Y? °a "Y6OtlO"° vNnoavO ruaoN'uNnoosnaavm'aaooNOo "s =
311S NOLLtl2iO1S38
? ? °qaa
L, I ?x slvi:j oivAzins
Elm
o« s
°
yi
V j;
6b
S I
° C ?'lll
N_ I I
' CONSERVATION EASEMENT l - II
6c /? w°2a
/ 65'I oMc
° z UO
E ? ?J ? ? ? r o n l??
_ ? 660 ? ? , Ems.
lei l I
? el
? I
? ? e r , i II
' ;? i1 '?I I I ' I
e ? \ ? ?X y I I I I? ? I' I, it
v
e
X26 /' \ I 11
on= \ ? 7? 655 IIII `I ? II
cSr 1 O I ?
m I
' ox? ?? a ? ?? a 11 I I'I;111 i ? o f
z I
?,, 1 4 ??, I???I I l
1 ?? I
11 1 651 "? I ???
I e ``J iz \\? ?I i
? ? Hg I ?;? I
5 ? WAS ?I'
`J ?6 66- 8 655 \ I I
II I
55 ! - ? i
i
'1 OONSERVATION EASEMENT ?NB(IFF'V'?CR£EK j
0??" UO
KW
rm
F
h

SNOM98
'
a3nouur aiw ?gwuxao -
?
' weu a?wav?iuaoa
aa3iv
xe3uic avoa swm ns gym a
.
tMf7021tl3 H1NON'A
Nn
'
lll?j
A?J
:' 1
Oo SniliNBYJ 0i10
JNOD i
z
mu??c•sa?nw•ws?r« w?a UIS NOIl"O
LS38
- 5°
I'J?I slvi-i oiv=une n
Oi0L ?3C NOLLMLLM xIMU3WWYnS
O
V Sy3-S 33S- I7N?yyw
6
O <
U'

-
qN

Z
O
z `
N
KA

w

l
A
i

..

Q

I a
F /

'y So
/ 1 - 8 II
S \ I `I
?Sg \
\ I
I

Z .
l
-
y
\ \
O Q
Ip
T

1
/ ?

?vt
1
I

? -
1 W
v I
I

1 I
1

- ?
i'
I

% w

...

v
J.
yN3?S??LLY?b
3S
-?.
Hp?
?
I

i
. ,
0
u
m d
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
0
-`7
CONSERVATION EASEMENT �N�FFAL
i
OBIZttY10tlY° IXI'W°131vL
""N3a
x�r�v
IJn
vNnoays HlaoN �uNnoo snaavev0 'oaoalloo
311SNOII"O1S38
13
S1VOlVj3f19
Z z
Sa
t� a
P3A°bddtl a1V0 \pldftl�56] W
0
u
m d
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
0
-`7
CONSERVATION EASEMENT �N�FFAL

? r
SOMA
miaw uq wuwe3a'1.::i.'r}_° .xwur?lueoxuv _
' Uu?c?saY:[' oa aurc rnau swlmmlon vrmOilWJ N1tlON'uNf100 Sf1tlMtl8VJ 'U1lOONO3 i
z
311S NOLLVUO1S3U ga
I ?H ? s1v1d oivd?ne s a
zI
o'
al
I
OI
~I 8
of
y W
of z-0
Q ? ?e
y 0
ySS 2r
z U?UU?-?UUU W=
Z uM oo'm QQQ
w z
o oowwww F?
U F O0
SSSC O
d y ?a W Z
w Q QQ Qilzm N
U 2 Z K U a m 2
VN
N Ujd m Z
f QU>7 aD,O Q>QO2 a
w ¢ ZZQ Q?Q Qm2ZUQ 2(07WY y W TZ
O Q C Zi WWOOrGaWH!AIEW Whw 1SS'
z O Y gJj=<jjjj< WW{N{Uu y
rcl < w F's Oywwww0 €yu rc
ga Sa U;
G 0 W0 ?'1'0 W K »»? LLwr a
ULL7 rZ00000 ozm O
pp r o z0 w
3 nN Y 0 .? ~
of <o ?o p m>a ?w
a o r _ Z
Z C.
?li m¢g
arc w O z0 a oa
WU 3 K>S C?Y'm mSm wW
Z.. 1'Ik? 2Q Q V <S? OwYW w_w mm
?W 0 mZ<O?jU?>O< ?wow W
FN no
O. gza ?OwawKa?o¢ o-i
?i rQ? nm c?kw0?w?w?w r0? z?
mmi rc? m?e I n m0?3ou5i0?$a zo°
m
W
z
0
N
?I
z.
o'
a
a
O
O m nm$
w0
de m W
0 w
Q z0
Q p
'533.#3 wR
i ?
W u1QiLLLLLLLL< HQ
? S
v 5 aw
5I
a Z
0'. o
W z o.
N
U S N U> m Z
N 4FQ- j? mJN 2
2z <Q ON J
00 w F,, 0p Q I a
jl0 w_ L) z
>
z S2
YID S.aaa Mu X
ga Z FI WZUUUVm wUw m
O U w 0MMM0 FaLL
z wN '?. JMgooooD ow. o
oz 0 o. Z ?x Ili Z o gw? W0
5 0? 0 5Y °_
rcrc w cu i, o yi oa
`, ¢s K< JfnYWY<W WS2 Km
W, K Q1?N LLZQSpz S H
Q 6 f W O d U W LL U F N z
3 F Z Q H 7 W j< W j W YW- w f Z
ie° ma c°i ?aSNC=i? io° '?
W
z :...
O
14
r
a/ann3a ......
aaronmr aim upimxas zwa?r?wnonHanw o
tl (J?595(}7?i °?'i aB'?Oi?409 VNf10LIVoH1tlON A1Nf100 SnHilVBtlO'OilO0N0O KC7
i1NW3?f •LbaWM/b•6a33N?113 z2
311S NOLLtlMO1S32! ze5
7 rre?vv Slvld oiv-qA s m a
ae ?3o wrnuauwnu I ?.l 11
z
m
o w9?? z
g^ •0 2?oao<33?< j ,
Y? ?bomw<FOp ? ? W
_O pw2W wFF i / \ J
`
61
0.1
gym ? / ? / \ V
Wpy ? ? .:
10 Z. Z.
low wWm
zI WU wyQY Y \, / F3N-0.0
LLW Z?W3 \ \\ ?\ \i /?.. ?ay=UQgC YV
V /U WFywjFZyVa??
\ \\`? 1 m?2W?F
u \- / l J FSiwfoa
m V / /
oz
=p o i
pin ?.
zOw - 3$w`zw \ w
WOW / V/OWM
O m K 2>>C
w FF
wo QN
1 HO
w
z z \\ aWZVwi?9(,
°uoLL =wmuzdi
1 \1 /%`, C o
i g
2-1
f ? ftJ?wz
pU
mY
f?? 2
Aw ?\ w
Hid
FF-
?y/ W y
a?
N U
N a U N
N N
M w .? o
? U
o
O F
is
3
w
f
_ z
w
x
- x
a 11IN o1o0 - W
_j U
w
<ZZ xa I O
wx a2- AN.
Za0
Z° ghow o
o
°
x
® m
w
Z
N -
® ry
Q Z ?Q
LLJ
O Z
oFr< ?w
aa aW I?
i? O
FEW a o
a '
z U g~o -
NJ m^0 "o w
y?o
Z O W
?U L5?
= w =
_.
Y
y
w z Z U z w
O ??yy F « y S a 1 I? H 5 Q
/cy w MQ I F a U 'S
z O N W ?) O o w Y
<-? U w = < 4
C a '` O ` W o
p_ 0
® ?*4 z<
a gam" ? ?
WZ
<Z-
aa<
o:
I
zao N W
gXw ad
U U
Q V) Q
ad N
Q O
ICI M LU N
® w O ?2 zO it Q II
V a gw O II Z
t?1 r F w Q Z II m
.. ?wxrr = ° Q O O D
o
Eti vii ~ Z ?-
C 10 Ov??Jr y _ U,
O y
_ -t Qi? - 7 YI 4J W a' f..
o to .. ?zxo¢ k? O tl
o. a0 O J O O W ?
g? z,;?' Z cc U O
.. )?t. ENO w?w¢' 4 g O
w N Z M Z Q
Dutch Buffalo Cr?K A. NS'1 N ) a a w Q
?zZ?l~i J
?Q 113
LU
t z S W w J GC Z OC W GC W
~= Q Q 3 Q 3 O
tR'SH POTATO
LL, 7
RD- F-J
OZF- Q Q n z Q Z t-
U, 0 X, U., zo \ JQ2' F• Ow J Z J fY J
SL,
zooQ
Vns '. /'. pz0ZWx ~ Ui Q
U
3 o?-e
U Y?o?ao 3 Z 3 Q re 9L
r. W<}-JWLL fIJMW
sAPP aD < 3 of -j
L 2i31r}M'?lN3A
?, Ir OM?Mfd
?OZ 10 g
z?+ '0 z
W O Q~O j ~? o 7 tI?
¢? a a a S
°a a3lS?3N
d
UUYO?X0 ij .may ?
E
_- LI; N? ONRD C -v~??a? ??? o 3 M ZZ 0 Z
00
° ?? NG V . p?OwaW
W
Z =aSFx- x'e` gg J O Z }
?xx a wwa?$o y °
y doe ??ouamy Q Q
o°woo- ° wz l/ C,
H Wcrz - Hrn Z
.? ?,ly lu - f wU¢QOU)U) I
L / WO?Qf-WO C _ O O O
M Ep m
O I
13 Vy
L86ZOO[OZ: #SOl IO?I FL ZJFOO
sNoD
? s
SN0ISIA38
p. 609LZ VNIl08V0 H180N'H0131VH ° J
03A08ddV 31VO NOU18OS30 'WAS - OZZ311ns'0V0i1SNTJ0dXISL09b `dNIIOUVOHlaoN'uNnoosnaadevo'aaOON0o
Q 00 0
S1SI1N310S • Sd3NNVld • SH33NI0N3 m 0 LU L W Z
_ 31lS N0liVHO1S3H ww-,w
ON 30 SS3??M70SSV z ~ O
Lw,
I FJIl Slb'l-i 0ivAA e ° z (DzaJ W
OLOZ 0317 NV1d N0IIVE)WIN HWA 03111vyans v ?- rn
x
X ? I I
w ~¢ O
U) w
D ¢WO X O
¢ w U
> Z --
0 o z° O
lL U) W <
0 O mU
W ¢ O
O
C7 O ~ J W U
> z
o Q R; Q w cn O C C C
C/) ?+ > x
w p vi
m c x w u Lu
CL m x ?? ? W
F-
O C V
~ H H C7
W z U ° m -a m
¢ ¢ J H L? ! f 1 u V N rt-
q m H 0 N4 L 0 L
¢ O
-0 C
z o o m , -O O ?n '?r C j N u -?C
F- o u) O O W V ' u oG
F H J C¢7 W C > 0 to
3 z -0 0
u a
m - O ` u
= Wz 44 0
y N O
o HOi q 01 ~ ~ N y c
J J D¢ c c c 0 U- = -c °- Ii
O w cn o A
5 Ww O - E O
N O~ W N N N r _ u
?el _
F-
U) m m LU L) F- O W W W VI _J N N J Cie H N
OZ
Z 1"{ 0 Z_ fn J
on-
¢ w F
F- • ir
C7 J
LLJ
cc W W W J
-j F- MZm
Z
W ~ J U
`D ~ ~ V
C) 0 LU W x
W U - n 7QU
z e^
O
U) CLOW
2Y Z J2 fn • aZ-4¢ NN
'? xc7 0r+-+.-+ooa,-lww1-1?ornaooLnov ~JU Lm-1 HL)iv
U) LU QLn`nor'no.-1-iLnoov,rl "r*na„-1 F-ozQ FIq--3
wr?I?lololooLnLnLnLnLnLnLnLnLnLnLn zzgQ z0¢
W?o?om?o?o??oLn?o?o?o?oLO?o?o?oLO Oww OUa
cc z -j O
cDL?aa
wo° H W °a -w 10S
mx
(nw 0mLnmwLn0w"NLn?10-:TM -+o MU Cl) J Qw~
DUF Ur V N0110 Q101N0001010 rl ?LD l, 00 J(gZQ J W Z
¢ W Z Ol rV NN e4 m I-? 66 "4 I-: 6N6 V Ln o0 UH W ¢ H JH r`
"I "I ci 1,00 ai mr,m alm"100 Ln 00 Ln 10 z0w O Q m lV'l
CJF- Z ?"LmloLnooF,LomLnmNN"+m.-+mN I- >"U)
QO nLnvvvv-It ZT v"T my w Q q<nw
CC) in q Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln v) Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln ^ x W Z • • Z H
(? H w Ln Lt) Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln to
"L "4 "I "1 "I "1 "4 "4 "4 1-4 .1 J F- m w z ¢ a H
W ^I
Q 1Ji O
UQTOq FQ•+Q F-O J W
U ?
woOm LLLI F- 1ZLm az¢
Q U
(71,.io0oNOOmrnnmLnoor,en 1a1m <LU0-Q UJ"0 y N C C
?LLIZ Z a 00 m 1, Ln Ln N M Ln M Ln w w m 1, 0o m g7 0 Qa Z O
M Q O =rn W N Q01 f^Y1 (^n 0l^0 a Ln Lmn UV L`Tn NOa.r-I1 O ¢ O Q ¢ w 0? a
°wwH OC N14'M"Wr,W -11,01.--4MLnI,NN? o waL-1 OUF(n O a O N y ` >
'?T ?* Ln M Ln M 'ZT m m lZr Cr 'ZT Ln Ln Ln F- U) m Q U Lti Q
O D U o -T Q N N N N" N (14 N N N N N N N N N N Q W U Z Co w Q x V) ' W
zzzm z 10 L0 Lo L0 L0 w w U 10 Lo Lo w w Lo 10 Lo w >x W O ? ¢ ¢ W J J
Q '" < cc Q F- -i C/) D F- -0 t C ?
C7Q?w0 U U- ?U)ZJ (D u -he L L *'
ZwHiZ CD xzzl-+ }m0J u 8 > > O
11mmH 0"4 N M 'IT Ln ION Hw3: I~-I U) LL (D 1 O
V cn
¢ 14Nm V Ln LD r, 0001"4"1"1 c 1 1-4 11 ri "1 pJF?JQ J w0
QJJJ *_2* 2i 2i L* a !? *_X*_t 2X Lt L* _X EXALti QJHJ¢ 1-l0 xz O O
WJJJ uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu ?g3QF- ?zF- q O O y V V O O
mQQQ YYY]C]C Y Y]G]C Y Ne Ne le]C]G]LY
N
N L_ N N
CL a a C N 0 O o O
0_ a
0 0 0
a O.. G. w a a
SNOISIA3a
VNIlO21V0 HLtlON 'H0131Va
L
°
03AO'dddV 31VO NOI1 M0630 'WAS t 609
Z
OZZ 311ns'avom SN2d03 XIS 1090 VNnoado H
iaON 'uNnoo snaavavo QaOONOO ¢ o
, .> . N
' cq
J
S1SUN3106 • S113NN-d • S1133NION3 31lS NOUV 63H X
.
° w M
ON JO ShVIO09SV -?- ivii o z
s
oid=i=jn®
OLOL 030 NVId NOIIVOIIIW H11M 03111W8f1S V

O
O Oi
Z
O _
1- j U.
~
j
w, w
i
J O
(
7
W .
,
w
Z
W:
P H
Q
Q;
>
CD,

z Z
;
cn F-
X J
J
;7< T- co
w
o m w
a
LL
z
z z
0'L X C) Q•[ L N
O
W w
O cq U J vi
w
J C7 to
f/1
CL J
Q J LLI
H = a
LLI t = U CD
Q
°
o w
Z Z z

Q > ``^^
U) °
V Z O o
Q lU
a D J Z LL (n JQ
= O-
a
J N ° U

U)
o < g °
U N
w
H o J
Q? o
° (n~
? m
Q
w
U) U
ZW
gw

I co ca io a !n
Www

U L W z? =
> w
Z z F-
<
z a LL
D
w
=O
UD
H
Q oa
SNOISIA3a
°
609LZ VNI308VO HibON 'HO131VId
03?OHddtl 31tl0 NOI1dIa0530 .? 0zZ 311f1S'OVOa SNHOd xis w9b b'NIIO2JVO HiHON 'l.1Nnoo Snaae9vo aaOONOO w z °
S1SI1N310S • S83NNVld • SH33NION3 Z
AAO S31M00SSV ^ 311S NOIldb OlS32i <a Q
I ?,lll = sivil Oldiif e cD N
OLOL 030 NVId NOIIVOIIIW H11M 03111WSOS V
O
?O
o w S 133HS 33S m J
3N?lH?lyn
?r M
Vf
= O
1 O
off ? '
II , I'I. to
F-
z u)
co
J
LU W
Z Oo
i
Kw
w Ogg ?? ¢m
Q
z zcn
z yJ"
I f ?l?l ? ? \? ? \ SS9
n ? v I M
Cl) (Do ,
1\ it
zz
Xw
y,l
rJ
\ v?l / ? I
L
V) ? l
.??II ? ? rf ?`? --.fir-??a. _ r??? ?,??,m /

0
z
g

i

??11
0
CIO,
?0?1 b?b3SNO? - .
j
19I
W
V
O
J I?
m
V
J
4 I
SNOISIAM
NOI1 MOS30
OLOZ O30 NVld NOUVOILM H11M 03111W90S
O
,O
w
J �C
M V
V1
Ln
U
a
o
0
I
4U ttl,X ii; zttt p�
lti3�"':i;_
9�Ij
O�X
609LZ VNI1OHVO Hi8ON'H9131VN
OZZ 31IOS'(iVOiI SM103 X1S L09b
SISLLN310S• Sa3NNVld• SH33NION3
ONJOS31N00SSV --^
I�x
VNIIOMdO HiNON 'AlNnoo snHa ,`d8V0 '42i00N00
SUIS NOIl` WiS3H
sivii oiv�une
S 3N`�N01dW
9 y3�NS?��Y/ I'll"IA
� O
Lf)X
i
LOX
o
0
�o
W \
W0 I
�a
VY
Z 0
0
W Q
W K
iir
W0
a?
LI)
G
Y
z
z
LLJLIJ
f-
LU
U)
z
0
ww
Z JJ
H
J
O
W
2
Z LO
O
U
W�g
zz
O_
�I
�W
°
O a
i
�3
orV
Luy
LD
m�Jw�
W
I
w
�N=y
OmY�zZ
jc~nmw?
1
4U ttl,X ii; zttt p�
lti3�"':i;_
9�Ij
O�X
609LZ VNI1OHVO Hi8ON'H9131VN
OZZ 31IOS'(iVOiI SM103 X1S L09b
SISLLN310S• Sa3NNVld• SH33NION3
ONJOS31N00SSV --^
I�x
VNIIOMdO HiNON 'AlNnoo snHa ,`d8V0 '42i00N00
SUIS NOIl` WiS3H
sivii oiv�une
S 3N`�N01dW
9 y3�NS?��Y/ I'll"IA
� O
Lf)X
i
LOX
o
0
�o
W \
W0 I
�a
VY
Z 0
0
W Q
W K
iir
W0
a?
LI)
Ln i
i
0
ZZ
O g
Wa
LL <
(v
A
G
Y
ZZ
ZZ
f-
LU
U)
LU
Ln i
i
0
ZZ
O g
Wa
LL <
(v
A
G
Y
H
W
f-
00
UO
Oo
ww
Z JJ
O
co
Q
Wo r�
Z LO
I
r
�I
i
Z�)
LD
W
i
V
1
m
i
i
z
U
�l
l
�j
I;
Ili

SNOISIA3H
N'HO131VU
L
VN
1
dV0 HiN
03A0HddV 31VO NOUNOS30 'WAS 609
Z
1
0
O
' '
€ l 1, J ?; ?`?I) 0ZZ 31U1S
0VO i smod XIS 8094 VNn0aV0 HibON
,uNnoo smiHv9vO (38O3NO0 W z $
Z
S1SI.LN310S • Sd3NNVld • SU33NION3
31lS NOI Vb MS3?1
<
ON1os31mOossv -?

e y
OIOZ 030 NVId NOIIVOIIIW H11M 03llIW90S V
O
10

/
LU

? co
V
N
N,?Gq?N V
1 _-
{
A /
I II
\ I
_
I / / I i I I

CONSERVATI

i ON EASEMENT

LLJ
000
[L DZ
woo
Iw
-? , W-O ' 1
/ Wa1 // I
D_K
I//p I
uo pp
I loo b<
660 % / / III
4K
?a
i uo X /
Lu
7
`I
Z Z W
? X w 2
W3
/ O
W
/ co
2
j
? ?' ?IIIIII
-?/ ?
0
i
oho I I ) v? ?
woo
r
a
wZ
w ou)=? ?,l? ? ?\ 655
w MwW it p
N Of a
J
X ? 0 v Z
`° \ 0
J
o Z
W
O
Z
O
I
i
I
I I ??, /? r III ?
(7Z
z P \ \\I
655
CONSERVATION EASEMENT OUrCN BUFFALO C1{EElC W
` H
Y7
0o
00
JN
JJ
? m
to F
? In

SNOISIA38
i
L '
609LZ VNIIOHVD HiHON'HO131V'd
alnoadad 3ida NoudlaDsdo INAs
t� 3`A
ou 3ilns'avoa smw xis x9v
VNI]MAVO HibON 'AiNnoo snH2 iV8Vo '(IHOONOO
z
o
kA
S15IIN310S• SM3NNVld• SL133NION3
311S NOUVd JOlS3H
w o
Z
Deiosaino`osTsv ��
I �n
sivizi Oib'33n8
a
a
N
OIOZ 030 NVId NOIIVDIIIW H11M (mimans V
O
�O
LU
J
V Q .:::::::: m
....
LU .
:.... w
.....:
Z:::::::::: Z
= O ..........: o
O N
�n
I
O
M
I •
:\
gyp• : �. f
-7d : F
Z
Lu
w
Lu
Z
w
c '
o ::•..
i
MATCHLINE - SEE --SHEET 7
3N��HSidW
C.

SNOISIA3a
609LZ VNIlOaVO H180N'H0131VN °
03AONddV 31VO NOI1 NOS30 4VAS i I ?., 0: OZZ 311n5'OV0m SHa03 XIS 1094 VNllObV3 H1a0N 'AlNnoO sn2f vado 'OHOONOO Z o
'r S1SI1N310S • S2DNNVld • Sd33NI9N3 m H Z
AdOS31WOSSn 311S NOlltfb OlS32i w , !5
OLOZ 030 NVId NOUVEXIVY H11M 03111W9nS V ^- e m
O
.p /
LU
r0i U
N
a i
N`b GetD V _
3
0
Ln
I i' CONSERVATION EASEMENT ?I
O
.....
... .. ... .. '; /?
Leo::: ' l
.
46fiQ
Z
.
f
..
...... f /f ._. ' (I
...... /..; ...: . :.: III
p??Py?.: l 111 it
li
GOB .. '•?•.. „ ' ;' •.. ,; .. .. .., ... .. ..: •.•. •••:,' ... r ?? ...;' ., •. IIII
,', •?::; •.. .:•' .., ...?. .. ,; ... .:: •.:: .:: .. '??: .. „ ' ... ? Ali I ?
.. .:: .. '•... ... •r :I.( ; : ? I II
y.
r
:
...
,
.: ; LU
,
,
• • . • • .. • • ' ' • • , ' • . L p
. ... •. / I lij dill
i
I
.; .. iii
• II
'I
H
W
W
y
W
W
fn
w
z
J
U
Q
t-

III
I'?lil
?I
655 ' ?i ? '
J
i
0

sss
C
? `6s6
CONSERVATION EASEMENT FFA?O CREEK
p?TCN e? _ .
SNOISIA34 ° '"
609LZ VNI308V0 HiHOWHOI3lV?l
03AOHddV 31V0 NOUIHOS30 WAS OZZ 31NIS'OVOil SM03 XIS 109b VNIIOaJVO H1a0N 'AlNnoo snaadevo (a00N00 w y z o
S-ISI-IN310S • S213NNVld • S1133NION3 w 0 z
31lS NOUVHO1S321 a °
ON 30 S3IVIODSSV
I ??I Y sivi=i oie:jjne o = g
OIOZ 0,30 NV ld NOUVE)UM H1IAA 0311IW80S V ^- y
U'
Z
g LoLoLoLoLo0?`n0 °
CL Lo muluo uo 0 u)m0 v
LL
O
J
Q
H
0
~ O
LL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O
w
cn x
b? H
w LL
O0 z0
Q (D C.
LLI
z UJUUJJUUUU WZ
Q
w Z LL0LLLL00LLLLLLLL FF
ED g aw
U
g J (D2°w z
Q zz(n ON
U z2w Vm >- LLJ (D
Z W ' W Z W
am z
LL w
U) U f a - m U [n z
w UJJ x¢C/) }pp g
Op IQ'.OZHQFQp-JQ 2>-U) a
w U z Q <?zZ¢=W U (nQ W Z
Z UCA M 2
0 z U W?a?Hj2JRaaw ww
Z " ggjza»»Q U)U U
U) z ~' zw UUUU V? www a
w C) Lu P:mX 0(n=af am? Fa:-IL w
0 Q J Q U J a Q u) W W W W 2 LL w
LL of a s w w mEmono } J LL W H Q
p 0 ?m 0 UUU JZOOOOx 0Zm p
0 ?~ H° Z0w w
3. OW ¢ Y -a•J (/)c
O mw O Z
NZ 0_. ?Y ??p LL
i Qg ww w O Z0 LL
y0Q pa
p w N~1 wU 2 }x Q?QJL VJY J xU) W W
cn pZ? mm
z W> ?Q Q aU) w<OWXYW
g pz m2 z wmQO?ammoa =°W ?0
zQU vw o wzza?Ua??U ~w°' coZ
0. g?Q N? Q?waw=2m0F LLj?J pJ
F H Q V 2 U' F- W J F W Q W J W F U H Z J
co w?? 00v L) Wmo??ou)L) < z0°
m
w
z
0
N
F
z
g nr`co C')co MIS
a N(MV O WO)ON V
LL
0
J
Q
H
O
~ (O Co nCl)co m co O
LL - O
0
0
U) W
wF
0: Lij LL
Q'' Z O
C7
UI zo
>> °
F Z' 0000000 W Z
W ZLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
LU
W !5
Q~
U ? w
w om
(D?W Z
w ¢ ¢0(n N
VYm
w z
w?
a
? dF-Q_ M U) z
'wOX¢ma > U= g
O w F-0LL?pOZ <0? a
z Q z OU=0Q2? 2¢U 2
O U mO?2n.aw wow ~
(n w U)
Q z Luz w - w m
Ja W 01¢-WWWW= I=-a--i
W ¢ L) g D -j -j LL <n
z w Fr C/) ?n.OC='JCp'a5 0WU) 0
F- ° Y
w
NO O ¢
00J ?p
w g ?° 0 0 m>¢ WI-
?I~?11l 0w 2 ?a -WZ U?
z ¢5 Ir Ir w L) ?o v~iOQ pa
wa wa Q 5U)Y ww w ?_2 mw
z ¢EE ¢v) z a- ZQxQ¢Z WZw aF-
w p¢ m2 z OQOUmOQ x0 t- D0
J za Qw O aU-1aw-U ~1=m Tz
w g?0 N? 2 aRwZ- w0HE L) pJ
H Z Q J W Q W W F W J
0 0 v, ro cc00 0' p2xJ2 0?0 O
?
J. '1zM ?v Qi ?< (M) Q z0H- .

03AOHddV 31V0 sNOisin38
NOI1d121OS30 'yyAg 609LZ VNIIONVO H1NON'HO13lVN o m
E l t s: ,} ozz 311n5'avoa sham xis lo9r VNIIOU 'O HibON 'AiNnoo smiNw9vO 'aU03NOO ?c9
S1SLIN310S • S-NNVld • SN33NION3 m Q z z O
31lS NOliVHOlS38 -W
?N 30 S31'ADOSSV -Y !S
siviA o-idA?ne o2 W
MU 030 NVId NOIIVOI11Vtl HEM 03-LiMenS v ^? a m vw=i
z
w
W
Y
CO) -, ¢ w
om O z oZ LLI
LL U9 Z'w
Poo
oc)wzw
W fn¢¢QQ aaHW
cm cnz-j
?- IlA
U
( L
?? l 11i n f
U
z
0
?wp /
?Z(1)
p0v)
XUQ r/sl
-ww I 1 / /
OZQ O \ % /G ( U QwZ
WZ2 QH ` / QWOC7
zxp:
Z
<F- z z ?waY O0¢?O
JU
akW WZyw \ ?aWofa
Q l
IWfn z°w? W?Zwo
Z1yW \ p
Wm Ulrz
O2a QY
W
?? l\ V W
IU ZjUZQ6
Xp ZI1160W
U w(DW2 Q
?ZUWOU
Qo
, JV
U r.., ? ? W
L). ,
U
03
?z
J
WO Z Z F- 0
\
I U) U Z
W
Z?W > ¢=w?W v? /w
wWJi OpZU I U
Z ¢
QUA ILltl?ZWW \
wo? V OwwQO
Z?W _ UYZwF-(7
W a- of F
QJH r ¢WF
> \ p > In O
?ui0 zzo > C?
w0_z \ JW¢Z}
(/)W(J J?OIrWpf11 L
pow ¢oozw y
O
\
U) C?Z'
' z
p
a
Z>
gwo
WWT
000 L)
w
?I UWW
O'Y
?v
0o
i w? ?
i \ JcZ,W w
?N >Qr-
\ Jw
FUW
z U)
ILU -LLW
?