20170921 Ver 1_Year 2 Monitoring Report_2020 (Buffer)_20210125

ID#* 20170921 Version* 1
Select Reviewer:*
Katie Merritt
Initial Review Completed Date 01/25/2021
Mitigation Project Submittal - 1/25/2021
Is this a Prospectus, Technical Proposal or a New Site?* O Yes a No
Type of Mitigation Project:*
r Stream r Wetlands rJ Buffer r Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name:*
Lindsay Crocker
Project Information
..................................................................................................................................................................
ID#:* 20170921
Existing 1W
Project Type: F DMS r Mitigation Bank
Project Name: Major Hill
County: Alamance
Document Information
Email Address:*
[e-mail]
Version: * 1
Existing Version
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Monitoring Report
File Upload: MajorHill_100015_MY2_BUFFER _2020.pdf 2.75MB
Rease upload only one R7F of the complete file that needs to be subrritted...
Signature
Print Name:* Lindsay Crocker
Signature:*

RIPARIAN BUFFER MY2 (2020) MONITORING REPORT
MAJOR HILL MITIGATION SITE
Alamance County, North Carolina
DMS Project ID No. 100015
Full Delivery Contract No. 7193
USACE Action ID No. SAW-2017-01472
DWR No. 17-0921
RFP No. 16-006990
Cape Fear River Basin — Haw River Arm
Cataloging Unit 03030002
Prepared for:
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
1652 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27699-1652
January 2021
This project with conforms with the North Carolina consolidated buffer mitigation rule 15A
NCAC 02B . 0295, effective November 1, 2015 and the Jordan Lake Buffer Protection Rule (15A
NCAC 02B . 0267 & 15A NCAC 02B .0268)

Table of Contents
1.0
MITIGATION PROJECT SUMMARY.......................................................................................1
2.0
REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS.........................................................................................2
3.0
RIPARIAN RESTORATION, ENHANCEMENT, & PRESERVATION PLAN.....................2
3.1 Riparian Area Restoration Activities ....................................................................................... 2
3.1.1 Site Preparation ........................................................................................................... 2
3.1.2 Planting ....................................................................................................................... 4
3.2 Riparian Buffer Enhancement via Cattle Exclusion Activities................................................4
3.3 Riparian Buffer Preservation Activities................................................................................... 5
3.4 Marsh Treatment Area ............................................................................................................. 5
4.0
ANNUAL MONITORING............................................................................................................. 5
4.1 Monitoring------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5
4.2 Performance Standards------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 6
4.3 Results and Discussion------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 6
4.4 Maintenance and Management------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 7
5.0
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................9
Tables
Table 1. Buffer Project Attributes ................................................................................................................. 1
Table 2. Buffer Project Areas and Assets----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3
Table 3. Planted Bare Root Woody Vegetation--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4
Table 4. Riparian Buffer Monitoring------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 5
Table 5. Riparian Buffer Vegetation Totals-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7
Table 6. Total Stems by Plot and Species----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8
Attachments
Attachment 1
Figure A. Riparian Buffer Asset Map
Figure B. Riparian Buffer Planting Map
MY2 (2020) Riparian Buffer Monitoring Report (Project No. 10001 S) Appendix F: Table of Contents
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina January 2021

1.0 MITIGATION PROJECT SUMMARY
The Major Hill Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site (hereafter referred to as the "Site") encompasses 16.7
acres along warm water, unnamed tributaries to Pine Hill Branch. The Site is located approximately 3.5
miles southeast of Snow Camp and 6 miles north of Silk Hope in southern Alamance County near the
Chatham County line. Project attributes are included in the following table.
Table 1. Buffer Project Attributes
Project Name
Major Hill
Hydrologic Unit Code
3030002050050
River Basin
Cape Fear
Geographic Location (Lat, Long)
35.873206,-79.360906
Site Protection Instrument (DB, PG)
(2789, 896), (2514, 756), (3143, 270), (3150, 920)
Total Credits (BMU)
402,837
Types of Credits
Riparian Buffer Restoration, Enhancement, & Preservation
Mitigation Plan Date
Apr-18
Initial Planting Date
Dec 2018-Jan 2019
Baseline Report Date
Mar-19
MY I Report Date
Nov-19
MY2 Report Date
Jan-21
MY3 Report Date
MY4 Report Date
MY5 Report Date
The Site drainage area is primarily composed of pasture, forest, agriculture land, and sparse residential
property. Impervious surfaces account for less than five percent of the upstream land surface.
Prior to construction, Site land use consisted of pasture, hayfields, disturbed forest, and agricultural land
used for livestock grazing and hay production. Livestock had unrestricted access to Site streams, and stream
banks were eroded vertically and laterally and received extensive sediment and nutrient inputs. Riparian
zones in the upper reaches of UT 1 were primarily composed of herbaceous vegetation that was sparse and
disturbed due to livestock grazing, bush hogging, and regular land -management activities. The downstream
reaches of UT 1 and all of UT 3 were primarily wooded with livestock disturbance to stream channels. UT
2 was the lone tributary not subject to continuous, unrestricted livestock access. Riparian areas immediately
adjacent to UT 2 were forested with a fence to protect this area from livestock access.
The riparian areas were restored in concurrence with the Major Hill Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
(NC DMS Project ID 10015, SAW-2017-01472) and involved restoring riparian buffers adjacent to restored
streams to help reduce non -point source contaminant discharges to downstream waters in the Haw River
sub -watershed of Jordan Lake. All riparian areas were assessed by DWR (Katie Merritt and Sue
Homewood) during an onsite visit February 2&, 2018 to determine viability for buffer mitigation.
The Site is protected with a permanent conservation easement. Riparian restoration, enhancement, and
preservation area widths adjacent to restored streams extend out to a maximum of 200 feet from the top of
MY2 (2020) Riparian Buffer Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Appendix F: Page I
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina January 2021

stream banks with a minimum width of 50 from the top of banks. Riparian buffer enhancement and
preservation credits generated on this Site are allowed pursuant to 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o). No riparian
restoration areas that are less than 20 feet wide from Top of Banks are used to generate riparian buffer
credit.
Riparian buffer mitigation credit was not generated in areas that are generating wetland mitigation credit.
2.0 REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS
Credit determination for this Site follows the North Carolina consolidated buffer mitigation rule 15A
NCAC 02B .0295, effective November 1, 2015 (see Table 2 on the following page and Figure A,
Attachment 1).
3.0 RIPARIAN RESTORATION, ENHANCEMENT, & PRESERVATION PLAN
This Site was also proposed as a stream and wetland mitigation project; therefore, restoration of riparian
areas was accomplished through the goals and methods outlined by the Major Hill Stream and Wetland
Mitigation Plan. All applicable federal, state, and local documentation, permits, and/or authorizations were
acquired as part of implementing the above -mentioned mitigation plan.
Primary goals focused on 1) improving water quality, 2) enhancing flood attenuation and hydrology, 3)
improving aquatic resources, and 4) restoring riparian habitat. Completed mitigation provides floodplain
connectivity, floodplain resistance, stream stability, sediment transport, surface and subsurface storage and
retention, in -stream habitat, riparian habitat and structure, thermal regulation, floodplain biogeochemical
processing, and pollutant filtration as well as remove sources of pollutants. The riparian area will be restored
through the revegetation of native plant communities.
3.1 Riparian Area Restoration Activities
3.1.1 Site Preparation
Soil grading occurred during stream restoration activities. Topsoils were stockpiled during construction
activities and spread on the soil surface once critical subgrade was established. The replaced topsoil will
serve as a viable growing medium for community restoration to provide nutrients and aid in the survival of
planted species.
Farm Pond Removal
To complete the stream and wetland restoration activities and subsequent riparian buffer restoration, the
removal of a small farm pond, —0.58 acres occurred. Stream, wetland and riparian area restoration within
the abandoned pond included 1) notching the dam to dewater; 2) removal of the dam to the elevation of the
adjacent floodplain; 3) excavating sediment that is unsuitable for channel bank construction; 4) backfilling
areas of sediment removed with soil suitable for channel construction (as necessary); 5) excavation of the
design channel, 6) stabilization of the channel with coir matting, seed, and mulch; and 7) installation of
structures.
MY2 (2020) Riparian Buffer Monitoring Report (Project No. 10001 S) Appendix F: Page 2
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina January 2021

Table 2. Buffer Project Areas and Assets
RIPARUN BUFFER (15A NCAC
02B.0295)
Initial
%
Final
Riparian
Convertible to
Location
Jurisdictional
Restoration
Reach ID/
Buffer
Creditable
Credit
Full
Credit
Buffer
Nutrient
Streams
Type
Component
Width (ft)
Area (st)*
Ratio
Credit
Ratio
Credits
Offset (Yes or
x•1
x•1
No
Rural
Subject &
Nonsubject
Restoration
1
0-100
213,290
1
100%
1.00000
213,290.000
Yes
Rural
Subject &
Restoration
2
101-200
40,976
1
33%
3.03030
13,522.094
Yes
Nonsubject
Rural
Subject
Enhancement
3
0-100
341,433
2
100%
2.00000
170,716.500
No
SUBTOTALS
595,699
397,528.594
Location Jurisdictional Restoration
Streams I Type
Rural Nonsubject Preservation
Rural Nonsubject Preservation
Initial
Credit
Ratio
u
Credit
Final
Credit
Ratio
Riparian
Buffer
Credits
5 100% 5.00000 5,122.800
5 33% 15.15152 185.724
5,308._524
402,837.117
*Area eligible for preservation may be no more than 25% of total area, where total area is back -calculated with the equation R+E10.75.
*Buffers must be at minimum 20' wide for riparian buffer credit, buffers must be 50' wide for nutrient offset credit
*When preservation areas exceed the total eligible preservation area, select the areas with the best credit ratios as the creditable areas.
ELIGIBLE
PRESERVATION AREA
198,566
Reach ID/
Component
Buffer
Width (ft)
Creditable
Area (st)*
4
0-100
25,614
5
101-200
2,814
SUBTOTALS
28,428
TOTALS
624,127
If Converted to
Nutrient Offset
Nutrient
Offset: N
Ohs)
Nutrient
Offset: P
Ohs)
11129.775
716.842
2138.186
137.715
0.000
0.000
13,267.960
854.558
MY2 (2020) Riparian Buffer Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Appendix F: page 3
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina January 2021

3.1.2 Planting
Bare -root seedlings within the Piedmont Alluvial and Dry-Mesic Oak -Hickory Forests will be planted at a
density of approximately 680 stems per acre on 8-foot centers. Species in the stream -side assemblage and
Marsh Wetland Treatment Areas were planted at a density of approximately 2720 stems per acre on 4-foot
centers. The following table summarizes planted bare root stems within the Site.
Table 3. Planted Bare Root Woody Vegetation
Species
Piedmont/Low
Mountain
Alluvial Forest
Dry-Mesic
Oak/Hickory
Forest
Marsh
Treatment
Wetland
Streamside
Assemblage
Total
Acres
1.1
5.5
0.01
1.5
8.11
Alnus serrulata
5
20
25
Asimina triloba
200
200
Betula nigra
100
200
300
Carpinus caroliniana
600
600
Cephalanthus
occidentalis
5
20
25
Cercis canadensis
500
500
Cornus amomum
95
5
800
900
Diospyros virginiana
450
450
Fraxinus americana
100
100
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
150
750
900
Liriodendron tulipifera
75
75
Nyssa sylvatia
600
600
Platanus occidentalis
120
780
900
Quercus nigra
110
790
500
1,400
Quercus phellos
100
700
400
1,200
Salix nigra*
400*
400
Sambucus canadensis
11
14
25
TOTALS
750
3,740
26
4,084
8,600
Stems/Acre
682
680
2600
2722
1060
*Live stakes of Salix nigra were planted; all other planted species were planted as bare root plants.
3.2 Riparian Buffer Enhancement via Cattle Exclusion Activities
Riparian buffer enhancement included permanently protecting existing riparian buffer from livestock via
exclusionary fencing, cutting, clearing, filling, grading, and any similar activities that would affect the
functionality of the riparian buffer. These areas are defined primarily as disturbed mixed hardwoods. Buffer
credits sought in the enhancement area are allowed under 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(6). The enhancement
MY2 (2020) Riparian Buffer Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Appendix F: page 4
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina January 2021

area extends a maximum of 200 feet from the top of the bank with a minimum width of 20 from top of
banks.
A small portion of UT-3 is generating riparian buffer enhancement credit from only one side of the stream.
Prior to construction, cattle had access to the entire area; however, the only access point was from the
pasture on the northern side of the stream, the Parcel owned by Mr. Lamm. Once fencing was installed to
prevent cattle access from Mr. Lamm's parcel to the stream, cattle will no longer be able to access the south
side of the stream. This action will result in compliance with 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(6), which states
that the permanent exclusion of grazing livestock must be done such that the livestock are fenced out of the
stream and its adjacent buffer. The southern parcel, which is not apart of the conservation easement, is
owned by the Caviness family and is a single-family home. Cattle will not be grazing within their parcel
post construction.
3.3 Riparian Buffer Preservation Activities
Riparian buffer preservation includes permanently protecting existing riparian buffers from cutting,
clearing, filling, grading, and any similar activities that would affect the functionality of the riparian buffer.
Areas specified for Preservation at the Site, in accordance with 15A NCAC 02B .0295, are defined primarily
as mixed hardwoods, with the number of high -value species above 200 per acre. They are areas where
livestock were fenced out prior to construction with little or no historical livestock access.
3.4 Marsh Treatment Area
A marsh treatment area was constructed to intercept surface waters draining through agricultural
areas before discharging into UT1. The marsh treatment area is excluded from credit calculations.
4.0 ANNUAL MONITORING
4.1 Monitoring
Eight vegetation monitoring plots (10-meter by 10-meter) were installed within the Site as per guidelines
established in CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation, Version 4.2 (Lee et al. 2008); this covers 3.4%
of the area generating riparian buffer restoration credit. Vegetation monitoring will occur annually in the
fall (between September and November), prior to the loss of leaves for a period of five monitoring years
following planting. Parameters to be monitored include species composition and species density. Visual
observations of the percent cover of shrub and herbaceous species will also be documented by photograph.
In addition, inspections for beaver and other potential nuisance species will occur throughout the course of
the monitoring period.
The following table outlines riparian buffer monitoring for this project; monitoring parameter descriptions
follow.
Table 4. Riparian Buffer Monitoring
Required
Parameter
Quantity
Frequency
Notes
Eight (8) plots
Vegetation will be monitored for five years or until
Yes
Vegetation
located across all
Annual
performance standards are met. Visual monitoring of the
restored buffer
site will be done all five years. Analysis of vegetation
zones.
will be recorded using level 2 CVS Monitoring protocol.
Yes
Project
NA
Annual
Locations of fence damage, vegetation damage, boundary
Boundary
encroachments, etc. will be mapped.
MY2 (2020) Riparian Buffer Monitoring Report (Project No. 10001 S) Appendix F: page S
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina January 2021

4.2 Performance Standards
Performance standards were established to verify that the vegetation component supports community
elements necessary for forest development and the maintenance of diffuse flow through the riparian buffer
in accordance with North Carolina Division of Water Resources Administrative Code 15A NCAC
0213.0295 (Mitigation Program Requirements for Protection and Maintenance of Riparian Buffers).
Performance standards are dependent upon the density and growth of at least four native hardwood tree
species where no one species is greater than 50% of the stems. After five years of monitoring, an average
density of 260 woody stems per acre, including planted shrubs (silky dogwood and blueberry), must be
surviving, and diffuse flow maintained. 15A NCAC 02b .0295 (2)(E) dictates that monitoring for planted
stems would also include the health of planted stems. Level 2 CVS monitoring protocol requires the vigor,
a determinant of health, of a monitored stem be recorded. If requested, RS will make available during the
monitoring years, planted stem health, e.g. vigor.
4.3 Results and Discussion
In early January 2020, a winter -time visual assessment of the site was performed, and it was determined
that although Year 1 (2019) vegetation data, including random transects, showed a high density of trees, a
light supplemental planting would help ensure the long-term success in several areas. On January 31, 2020,
three areas that visually exhibited low stem density and/or poor vigor were supplementally planted (Figure
2, Appendix B). During the supplemental planting effort approximately 370 stems were planted across
1.20 acres (approximately 300 stems per acre). As the planting was designated for visual purposes and was
not an effort to increase stem density data, no stems were planted within permanent vegetation plots. The
following table lists species included in the supplemental planting list. Preparation included the application
of 100 lbs of lime, 50 lbs of fertilizer, and 3 lbs of seed to stabilize bare areas (see Figure A for planting
areas).
Supplemental Planting Species List
Species
Number of Stems
Tag Alder Alnus serrulata
20
Chinka in Castanea umila
20
Hackbe (Celtis occidentalis)
50
Hawthorn (Cratae us marshallii)
20
Crab Apple Malus an usti olia
50
Red Mulberry (Morus rubra)
100
Sycamore Platanus occidentalis
50
Shumard Oak ( uercus shumardii)
50
Total
370
Based on the number of stems counted, average densities were measured at 467 hardwood tree stems per
acre (excluding livestakes, shrubs, pines, and vines) at year 2 (2020). In addition, all plots, including 3
temporary transects within the supplemental planting areas, met success criteria. The following Table 5
summarizes riparian buffer success criteria and Table 6 summarizes all permanent vegetation plot data by
species, plot, and year. Vegetation plot photographs are included in Appendix B of the Major Hill Stream
and Wetland Mitigation Site Year 2 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report.
MY2 (2020) Riparian Buffer Monitoring Report (Project No. 10001 S) Appendix F: page 6
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina January 2021

Table 5. Riparian Buffer Vegetation Totals
Plot #
Success Criteria Met?
MY 2 (2020)
Planted Stems/Ac
MY 2 (2020)
All Stems/Ac
1
Yes
202
323
2
Yes
323
323
3
Yes
364
364
4
Yes
242
283
5
Yes
323
323
6
Yes
485
485
7
Yes
445
445
8
Yes
647
647
T-1
Yes
--
567
T-2
Yes
--
364
T-3
Yes
--
1012
Average Planted
Stems/Acre
Yes
379
467
4.4 Maintenance and Management
No maintenance or management activities are currently planned for the coming year, and no remedial action
activities are necessary at this time.
MY2 (2020) Riparian Buffer Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Appendix F: page 7
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina January 2021

Table 6. Total Stems by Plot and Species
Project Code 17.009. Project Name: Major Hill
Current Plot Data (MY2 2020)
Annual Means
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
17.009-01-0001
17.009-01-0002
17.009-01-0003
17.009-01-0004
17.009-01-0005
17.009-01-0006
17.009-01-0007
17.009-01-0008
MY2 (2020)
MY1 (2019)*
MYO (2019)
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Acer rubrum
red maple
Tree
3
Asimina triloba
pawpaw
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
7
7
7
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
4
4
4
6
6
6
9
9
9
Carpinus caroliniana
American hornbeam
Tree
1
1
1
3
3
3
4
4
4
2
2
2
10
10
10
14
14
14
5
5
5
Cercis canadensis
eastern redbud
Tree
2
2
2
3
3
3
5
5
5
8
8
8
14
14
14
Cornus amomum
silky dogwood
Shrub
I
1
1
21
2
21
1
1
1
Diospyros virginiana
common persimmon
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
4
4
9
9
10
9
9
9
5
5
5
Fraxinus
ash
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
11
1
Fraxinus americana
white ash
Tree
3
3
3
2
2
2
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
2
2
4
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
5
8
4
4
4
3
3
3
Liquidambar styraciflua
sweetgum
Tree
I
I
I
1
1
2
Liriodendron tulipifera
tuliptree
Tree
1
1
1
11
1
1
11
1
1
5
5
5
Nyssa sylvatica
blackgum
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
4
4
4
10
10
10
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
5
5
5
7
7
8
7
7
7
Quercus
oak
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
23
23
23
Quercus nigra
water oak
Tree
2
2
2
4
4
4
2
2
2
3
3
3
1
1
1
12
12
12
20
20
20
10
10
10
Quercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
2
2
2
1
1
1
2
21
2
4
4
4
3
31
12
12
12
16
161
16
18
18
18
Unknown
Shrub or Tree
6
6
6
Stem count
size (ares)
size (ACRES)
Species counti
Stems per ACREI
5
5
8
8
8
8
9
9
9
6�6W
8
8
8
12
12
12
11
11
11
16
16
16
75
75
79
103
103
109
129
129
129
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
8
8
8
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.20
0.20
0.20
41
41
51
51
51
5
5
51
5
51
51
5
51
1323.71
51
51
61
61
61
61
61
61
71
7
71
141
141
141
151
15
171
161
161
16
202.31
202.31
323.71323.71
323.7
323.7
364.2
364.21
364.2
242.8
242.8
283.3
323.7
323.7
485.6
485.6
485.6
445.2
445.2
445.2
647.5
647.5
647.5
379.4
379.4
399.E
5211
5211
551.4
652.6
652.6
652.E
*The increases in stem counts of species such as Carpinus caroliniana, Diospyros virginiana, and Quercus nigra are due to mis-identification during MYO (dormant season) monitoring and/or refinement in identification during MY1 monitoring.
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
Pnol-S = Planted excluding livestakes
P-all = Planting including livestakes
T = All planted and natural recruits including livestakes
T includes natural recruits

5.0 REFERENCES
Jordan Lake Water Supply Watershed Buffer Rules 15A NCAC 02B .0267, 15A NCAC 02B .0268, and
15A NCAC 02B .0295
Lee, M.T., R.K. Peet, S.D. Roberts, and T.R. Wentworth. 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording
Vegetation, Level 1-2 Plot Version 4.2. Ecosystem Enhancement Program, North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources.
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina:
Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and
Recreation, N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. Raleigh, North
Carolina.
MY2 (2020) Riparian Buffer Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Appendix F: page 9
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina January 2021

ATTACHMENT 1
Figure A. Riparian Buffer Asset Map
Figure B. Riparian Buffer Planting Map
MY2 (2020)) Riparian Buffer Monitoring Report (Project No. 10001 S)
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site
Alamance County, North Carolina
Appendix F: Page 10
Restoration Systems, LLC
January 2021

Legend
\
\\
Easement
/- 1
tl
N
- New Fencing Installed for Cattle Exclusion
- \ \
I\— — ---
1
- Existing Fencing Left in Place for Cattle Exclusion
-(
Fencing Removed/Reworked for Cattle Exclusion
1
I 8 I l
Stream AsbuiltTOB-TOB
1 I t
® Marsh Treatment Area
Plot Ongins
1 1 \ 1 • �=
CVS Plots Meeting Success Criteria MY2
Vegetation Transects Meeting Success Criteria MY2
l �r
Supplemental Planting Area
Wetland Restoration
1 7
- Wetland Enhancement
Riparian Buffer Mitigation Type
?
TOB - 100 ft. Restoration (1:1)-213,290 sq ft
` 6 \ -
i,,
' 101 ft. - 200 ft. Restoration (1:1 but 33 k credit per Rule)-40,976 sq ft
TOB - 100 ft. Enhancement (2:1 Cattle Ex. per Rule) - 341,433 sq ft
I! \ \ \ \ \
TOB - 100 ft. Preservation (Non -Subject Stream 5:1) - 25,614 sq ft
�Ir� V yV � I • ,
101 ft. - 200 ft. Preservation (Non -Subject Stream 5:1 and 33 % Credit per Rule)
- 2,814 sq ft
A A V A
Non Credit Generating (Less than 20 ft.)
\
TOB to 50 feet
----
100foot line
L — 150 foot line
200foot line
�—
-I
11 �I1
I
No credit is being
generated within the /�2 1 I
/ 1
Marsh Treatment Area.
I
I'
,A 1 1
i � A
Ila
10
A .
\
A <
1
v 1
� l
This area is located
outside of the vi%
easement and is
11T=3
not generating credit.
0 70 140 280 420 560
— i,--- —---' ,' Feet
FIGURE
Axiom Environmental
Riparian Buffer Asset Map
CLF
Date:
218 snow Ave
' Raleigh, NC 27607
Ma or HIII Miti ation Site
1 g
Jan 2021
�l [phone]
Alamanee County, North Carolina
Project:
Aylnm PrMmnmRnmi, ln-.
17-009

Legend
Easement
Stream As built TOB-TOB
Stream Side Assemblage = 1.5 ac
Piedmont/Low Mountain Alluvial Forest = 1.1 ac
Dry-Mesic Oak Hickory Forest = 5.5 ac
Marsh Treatment Wetland = 0.01 ac
si '
r-
Axiom Environmental
218 Snow Ave
Raleigh, NC 27607
[phone]
Axiom Fmimnm�nmi, ir.
— ' r
� h
f '
r�
AE
r
4
A.
AV
w
0 70 140 280 420 560
Feet
Riparian Buffer Planting Map
Major Hill Mitigation Site
Alamance County, North Carolina
Dwn. By: FIGURE
KRJ
Date:
Feb 2019
Project:
17-009