20080942 Ver 1_Year 2 Monitoring Report_20100901

f
1
(q -09y Z
Powell Property Wetland and Stream Mitigation Project
Bertie County, NC
2010 Annual Monitoring Report
Year 2
NCEEP Project Number D06065 -B
Chowan River Basin
USGS Catalog Unit 03010203
Submitted to
NCDENR/Ecosystem Enhancement Program
2728 Capital Blvd.
Raleigh, NC 27604
Date: August, 2010
Monitoring:
Albemarle Restorations, LLC
P. O. Box 176
Fairfield, NC 27826
C
n
�oc�`ypNN

Table of Contents
ExecutiveSummary ................................................ ...............................
1
I. Project Background .............................................. ...............................
2
1.0
Project Objectives ................................ ...............................
2
2.0
Project Structure, Restoration Type and Approach .........................
2
3.0
Location and Setting .......................... :.................................
3
4.0
Project History and Background ................ ...............................
5
5.0
Monitoring Plan View ............................ ...............................
6
II. Project Condition and Monitoring Results ................... ...............................
9
1.0
Vegetation Assessment .......................... ...............................
9
1.1
Vegetation Discussion and Problem Areas .... ...............................
9
2.0
Wetland Assessment ............................. ...............................
10
2.1 Wetland Discussion and Problem Areas ....... ............................... 10
2.15 Flow ............................................... ............................... 11
2.2 Wetland Problem Areas Plan View (Integrated) ........................... 15
3.0 Project Success Discussion ........................ .............................15
III. Methodology Section ......................................... ............................... 16
List of Tables
Table ES -1. Project Success Summary ........................... ............................... 1
Table I. Project Restoration Components ....................... ............................... 3
Table II. Project Activity and Reporting History ................ ............................... 5
Table III. Project Contacts ......................................... ............................... 5
Table IV. Project Background ..................................... ............................... 6
Table V. Species for Each Community Type ................... ............................... 9
Table VI. Wetland Criteria Attainment by Community Type .. .............................15
Table C -1 Hydrologic Monitoring Results .............. .... .... Appendix A
................. ..
List of Figures
Figure 1. Composite Vicinity Map ................................. ............................... 4
Figure 2. Monitoring Plan View: Gauges and Vegetation Plots .............................. 7
Figure 3. Monitoring Plan View: Soils, Contours and Plant Communities .................. 8
Figure F1. Water Flow at Gauges 2, 5 & 9 ...................... ............................... 12
Figure 4. Composite Vegetation and Wetland Problem Areas Plan View ......Appendix D
Appendices
Appendix A
Vegetation Data and Site Photos
Appendix B
Geomorphologic Raw Data — N/A
Appendix C
Hydrologic Data Tables
Appendix D
Integrated Problem Area Plan Views
ii

Executive Summary
The Powell Property Wetland and Stream Mitigation Site is a headwater riverine wetland and
stream mitigation project located southeast of Powellsville, in Bertie County, North Carolina. It
was constructed by Albemarle Restorations, LLC, under contract with EEP to provide 48.4 acres
of riverine wetland mitigation credits and 3,310 linear feet of stream mitigation credits in the
Chowan River Basin. Construction activities, in accordance with the approved restoration plan,
began in June of 2008, and were completed in January of 2009. Tree and shrub planting on the
project site occurred immediately afterward in January of 2009. An emergent wetland seed
mixture was sown shortly afterward.
Ten water level monitoring gauges are located at varying elevations throughout the riverine
wetland and stream valley areas of the site to measure surface and subsurface water elevations.
Two additional gauges are located in the headwater stream reference area to help monitor flow
and water level within the reference stream system. Of the ten gauges deployed across the
project site, eight indicated successful wetland hydrology by showing water levels within 12
inches of the ground surface for a minimum of 5% of the growing season. The two gauges that
did not show successful hydrology were both located in the riverine wetland areas of the project.
Through July 31 there was a cumulative rainfall deficit of .75 inches, though it was sporadic in
nature with April being an unusually dry month. It is anticipated that wetland hydrology will
continue to equilibrate as soil structure develops and precipitation patterns normalize. Two
separate flow events are documented during the first half of the 2010 growing season.
A total of ten vegetation monitoring plots are located on the site, seven in the riverine wetland
areas and three more situated to monitor the swamp run vegetation. One plot is entirely within
the boundaries of the swamp run and two more are located so as to share both land forms,
making a total of ten plots. Each plot is a l Om X l Om square, as recommended by the CVS -EEP
protocol for recording vegetation sampling. All ten plots met the third year survival success
criterion which is a minimum of 320 stems per acre.
Table ES -1 shows the levels of success attained by each of the water level monitoring gauges
and the vegetation plots. The success criterion for hydrology is maintained groundwater levels
within 12 inches of the soil surface for 5% to 8% of the growing season (12 to 19 consecutive
days). Table C -1 in Appendix C has a detailed breakdown of hydrologic success. The success
criterion for the vegetation plots at this point in monitoring is the third year level of survival (320
stems per acre):
Table ES -1. Project Success Summary
Powell Property Wetland Mitigation Project
Albemarle Restorations, LLC
2010 Monitoring -Year 2 of 5
Percent
Success
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Success
Year 1
Gauges
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
N
N
Y
Y
Y
70%
Veg. Plots
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
100%
Gauges
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
Y
Y
Y
80%
Year 2
V. Plots
Y
Y
I Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
I Y
I Y
Y
100%
Powell Property Wetland Mitigation Project
Albemarle Restorations, LLC
2010 Monitoring -Year 2 of 5

I. Proieet Background
1.0 Project Objectives
The goal of the Powell Property Mitigation Project was to create a riverine wetland system
typically found in the middle to upper reaches of first or zero order tributary systems. The
project is to serve as compensation for wetland loss in the Chowan River Basin. The restoration
plan was developed and implemented to eliminate pattern drainage and restore topography and
hydrology that more closely resembled that of similar undisturbed land. Construction resulted in
the development of a broad, branched, frequently flooded swamp run following a historical path
as evidenced by archived aerial photographs and signature topography. Subsequent planting was
designed to restore a wetland forest ecosystem that is typically found in the immediate area
characteristic of similar soils, topography and hydrology.
Ecological benefits of the restored riparian headwater system and its associated riverine wetlands
are the following:
1. Water quality improvements, including nutrient, toxicant and sediment retention and
reduction, increasing dissolved oxygen levels, as well as reducing excessive algae
growth, and reducing surface water temperatures in receiving waters by providing
permanent shading in the form of a shrub /scrub and forested headwater wetland system.
2. Wildlife habitat enhancement by adding to the existing adjacent forested areas creating a
continuous travel corridor between habitat blocks and providing a wide range of habitat
areas (open water, emergent, shrub /scrub and forested) for amphibians, reptiles, birds,
insects and mammals.
3. Flood flow attenuation during storm events which reduces sedimentation and erosion
downstream, and improves long term water quality within the Chowan River.
4. Passive outdoor recreation and educational opportunities for the landowner and the
surrounding community.
2.0 Project Structure, Restoration Type, and Approach
Table I lists the estimated wetland acreage to be restored on the Powell Property. The mitigation
plan provides for the restoration of 48.4 acres of riverine wetlands and 3,310 linear feet of stream
(swamp run) restoration. Prior to construction, the easement area was used entirely for row crop
agriculture, primarily soy beans, corn, cotton and tobacco. The agricultural fields were drained
by several ditches that traversed the site and one main drainage ditch that emptied into
Quioccosin Swamp. Construction was done in accordance with the approved restoration plan
and completed in January of 2009. Native tree and shrub species were planted in January of 2009
and the resulting riverine system is designed to emulate natural swamp run systems found within
the Chowan River Basin.
Powell Property Wetland Mitigation Project 2
Albemarle Restorations, LLC
2010 Monitoring - Year 2 of 5

Table I. Project Restoration Components
Powell Wetland and Stream Miti ation Site/EEP #D06065 -B
Post
Pre - Existing
Construction
Acres/Linear
Acres/ Linear
Credit Ratio
Total
Restoration Type
Feet
Feet
Restoration : WMU
WMU's /SMU's
Riverine Wetland
0.0 acres
48.4 acres
1:1
48.4 WMUs
Stream
(Swamp Run)
0.0 linear feet
3,310 linear feet
1:1
3,310 SMUs
3.0 Location and Setting
The Powell Property Mitigation Site is located in Bertie County, just north of Buzzard's
Crossroads on Meadow Road (approximately 4.6 miles southeast of Powellsville). The easement
area is situated on the eastern portion of the Powell farm and adds contiguous swamp run and
forested wetlands to Quioccosin Swamp which flows to the Wiccacon River, a tributary of the
Chowan River. The surrounding area is primarily forest and agricultural land with residential
properties as a minor component.
Figure 1 is a location map for the project site. Directions to the site are as follows: from
Powellsville (Hwy. 42), travel south on Sally
Luther Brown Rd., then right on Meadow Rd.
this intersection, on the right.
Powell Property Wetland Mitigation Project 3
Albemarle Restorations, LLC
2010 Monitoring -Year 2 of 5
Freeman Rd., turn left on Dilday Rd., right on
Access to the site is approximately 2 miles from

r
DILQAY , b
cti
or-
lip
Q lr h + RD
CRy.�
�/{[� ^ rJT/ /\ A� ..Rosemead
i � 1
6 t
o
o
CrwSreads
i Whites
. i [- rt�srv�tia
bd4w Exam DeLorme, S Naxth Carolina las i G62etteer
yri�ht De.orne, Yarmouth, Ka .f1
VICINITY MA9
E RESTORArlONS, LL,
14 AN11 R 310#f A71014
f.F.AM RrSTORAT +ON,
.i IF' IAH1'Al r f,f Pt',:JM1 1 1'. - -. I'...••`.
' 1 '
Powell Property Wetland Mitigation Project 4
Albemarle Restorations, LLC
2010 Monitoring - Year 2 of 5

4.0 Project History and Background
Table II provides the history of data collection and actual completion of various milestones of
the Powell Property Wetland Mitigation Site.
Table H. Project Activity and Reporting History
Powell Wetland and Stream Mitigation Pro ' ect /EEP #D06065 -B
Activity or Report
Data Collection
Complete
Actual Completion
or Delivery
Restoration Plan
January 2008
May 2008
Final Desi -90%
January 2008
May 2008
Construction
N/A
January 2009
Temporary S & E mix applied to entire project area
N/A
January 2009
Permanent seed mix applied to entire project area
N/A
January 2009
Containerized and Bare Root Planting
N/A
January 2009
Mitigation Plan/As -built
Aril 2009
June 2009
Year I monitoring
September 2009
March 2010
Year 2 monitoring
August 2010
August 2010
Year 3 monitoring
Seed mix sources
Ernst Conservation Seeds, LLP, Meadville, PA
Year 4 monitoring
Arbor en, Blenheim, SC, Native Roots, Clinton, NC
Monitoring Performers
Year 5 monitoring
Wetland and Vegetation POC
P. O. Box 176
Points of contact for the various phases of the Powell Project are provided in Table III.
Table III. Project Contacts
Powell Wetland and Stream Mitigation Site/EEP #D06065 -B
Designer
Ecotone, Inc. (Scott McGill 410 - 692 -7500)
Primary Project design POC
1204 Baldwin Mill Road
Jarrettsville, MD 21804
Construction Contractor
Armstrong, Inc. (Tink Armstrong 252- 943 -2082)
Construction contractor POC
P. O. Box 96
25852 US Hwy 64
Pante o, NC 27860
Planting Contractor
Carolina Silvics, Inc.
Planting contractor POC
908 Indian Trail Road
Edenton, NC 27932
M -Mar aret McKinney (252 -482 -8491)
Seeding Contractor
Armstrong, Inc. (Tink Armstrong 252- 943 -2082)
Seed planting contractor POC
P. O. Box 96
25852 US Hwy 64
Pante o, NC 27860
Seed mix sources
Ernst Conservation Seeds, LLP, Meadville, PA
Nursery stock suppliers
Arbor en, Blenheim, SC, Native Roots, Clinton, NC
Monitoring Performers
Woods, Water and Wildlife, Inc. (Ashby Brown 757- 651 -3162)
Wetland and Vegetation POC
P. O. Box 176
Fairfield, NC 27826
Powell Property Wetland Mitigation Project 5
Albemarle Restorations, LLC
2010 Monitoring -Year 2 of 5

Project background information for the Powell project is provided in Table IV.
Table IV. Project Background
Powell Wetland and Stream Mitigation Site/EEP #D06065 -B
Project County
Bertie County
Drainage Area
Approximately 871 Acres
Drainage impervious cover estimate %
0
Physiographic Region
Coastal Plain
Ecore ion
8.3.5 Southeastern Plains
Ros en Classification of As -built
N/A
Cowardin Classification
PSS, PFO
Dominant Soil Types
Goldsboro, Lynchburg
Reference site ID
Quioccosin Swam
USGS HUC for Project and Reference
03010203
NCDWQ Sub -basin for Project and Reference
03 -01 -01
NCDWQ classification for Project and Reference
C
Any portion of any project segment 303d listed?
No
Any portion of any project segment upstream of a 303d listed segment?
Yes, Wiccacon River
Reasons for 303d listing or stressor?
Non -Point Source
% of project easement fenced
None
5.0 Monitoring Plan View
A total of ten water level monitoring gauges are installed across the site. These gauges are
suspended in two -inch pvc pipe that is set from two to four feet vertically in the ground. The
gauges have been located to assess the groundwater levels throughout the year at various
elevations and topographies within the site. Two more gauges are installed in an offsite riverine
wetland area to serve as references for a naturally functioning riverine wetland and headwater
swamp run. In addition, there is a rain gauge onsite to capture and record precipitation.
Vegetation monitoring is accomplished by surveying the ten permanent sampling plots. The plots
are ten meters square and are situated to give an accurate sample of the planted and natural
woody vegetation in both the riverine and swamp run communities. For each site, the data
recorded matches that required of the CVS -EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation, v 4.0, 2006,
level 1 -2.
Figures 2 and 3 provide plan views of the site showing the location of all monitoring features
including gauges, sampling plots and the rain gauge as well as the vegetative communities.
Powell Property Wetland Mitigation Project 6
Albemarle Restorations, LLC
2010 Monitoring - Year 2 of 5

tal ►(A �L ria •6►[6[[[MM
V�il10 )Nl�(�V AIpl17? �A I "OLLrmavaGJ_99aaw aLSM� N
S fNMS 014 4 511m 1�711d�JWW WN DS N0LLVk4CLLS321 oN V-10M
C)Q( S,t1►NMb'8b 511MNOIId7UIWQNV11�141 377 'SIVDT.T.VYoT.S.7y.TT"w797b' `5
Z Tr% WWI Mod
� :A6 03Ntld 3iid
\ l Is �\ \
LLJ
\ v J
r \ I
CD
OZ co
ICyiJ ` t O
o (7 tV Q N
LU ail — — ~ p Z LU W
o, _> Lu
o z o w
r i • ''' 7 rJ ' O Z Q
LL J (�
fix\ �C .•i 3. 'S / l� W�
LU
5g. `_ \ •\ M� •` Wit. ';,'�; •`• • /1 � J/ !
�, by9x L - �* •yam' : f s
RL
LU
CD
uj
of
Ln
f i 13 gyp••
O /I �\ bra ^ \� ' +' Imo. •{ \- .!/ •�•+ `• �`
Z w �'��7
o ice' .1 r Lu o~C C.7 p
p
1 i
L9 CD
cV f p 1 4 F
F-
LU C.7 L9 p / i•:: i
EL
LLJ —1
� rf 3'r.'.' •� .
• 6K V%
LOD
pop
r /mil / v�1 •/• •�i• •sue.• -•' •eit! •� j, '� Z� �/
LOD
r W D —L� (�\ f -�� '� r
— LOD LW •L13 L13D �I LD
N \ ( I
pp w
J ca oz -
I
z ° g `�' j Q
g z
LLJ
0 oc g i- g a z •" p
w =Z a
I
m 9 o ¢ Z Zp +r'0 > z w Z L7M D
LP cn LU C3
'W X: jE p o
o Q ¢ L9 8a Q U w cn cn a aC w r. `!
` I
I
I
N I -cc
Ix
tu
3 !V❑ [w7
: * L
I y >
9 I I

9- S9090a :# IDVdINOa d33 �*�e�ri� •cmzo-eeefznz M
� lO� �` 11e8LZJN']T111MJ1tl!1 133r1n�anOJeor '_ I
srouw[ .N ©ISVaa aiva t1NI1021tq HI210N 'ALNfIOO 3LLi138 Wa4sm' NOILYUG15aawvakLLO W
SNOISI/a11 s,nws OI£�£ :slINn NonviuIW Wtgas �"'a 'raouvacusaaoNV -uati+
OIOZ Advn2193d sd1WM v8 t, :slINfl NOIiV9IlIW ONVl13M D77 'SIVOLT.V'90TS7?l.7'7?IVJV49V
E 3,dnE)i3 J1IEMO'dd II3MOd U
:A9 03MVd3Nd LL
/
O
\ \ \ I v (\ 21 L!i
Lu
rj \� 1 l \ ti o4\ �, Q o e Y z z N N
°d o 3 U
V)
co LU
LLJ
Ln
LL
ss
J �, t y9, `, '• • ti' °:`• l •• �\ ••tix •:`- j( //� /�,(�'�f���� ••tic. -.
•:1 x t
•.•• .�
_____ .� rtirr.• 1. •+ ��•'- _ ^., i�
1 I I 'gyp :•; ; K.J
Ly
Pk
Ldo , � c•'� �. •,�'•' ;rye." •'."• -; - :. ., \•. .``//
LW lm
[!7 O J I
Z W
w p O (/
ZQ Q W J Off
Z = W W
LLJ ce
J _ I
W �y
cp � m
Z
Lu
dC-
x � u��
LU
J ` I
I I

II. Project Condition and Monitorine Results
1.0 Vegetation Assessment
The vegetation success criterion was developed in accordance with the CVS -EEP protocol. The
Powell project was designed to include both riverine and bottomland hardwood plant
communities. The project was planted with a mixture of tree and shrub species that would
resemble that of naturally occurring swamp runs and adjacent riverine wetlands in the local area.
The run and area immediately adjacent were planted heavily with cypress, willow and tupelo.
The riverine wetland zone beyond the swamp run is populated by a broader mix of native
hydrophytic tree and shrub species. The species mix was based on the vegetation noted at the
reference site and all species are classified from FAC to OBL (Table V). The site was planted at
a rate of 600 stems per acre in January of 2009.
Table V. Species by Community Type
Powell Wetland and Stream Mitigation Project/EEP #D06065 -B
Total Forested Wetland 55.9 Acres
Common Name Scientific Name Wetland Indicator Status
Trees
Bald Cypress
Taxodium distichum
OBL
Water tupelo
N ssa a uatica
OBL
Swamp Black Gum
N ssa biflora
FAC
Willow Oak
Quercus phellos
FACW-
Swamp White Oak
Quercus bicolor
FACW+
Pin Oak
Quercus palustris
FACW
Water Oak
Quercus nigra
FAC
Swamp Chestnut Oak
Quercus michauxii
FACW -
Shrubs
Sta gerbush
L onia mariana
FAC
Tag Alder
Alnus serrulata
FACW+
Hi hbush Blueberry
Vaccinium corymbosurn
FACW
Sweet Pepperbush
Clethra alnifolia
FACW
Virginia Sweets ire
Itea vir inica
FACW+
Button Bush
Ce halanthus occidentalis
OBL
Swamp Bay
Persea palustris
FACW
Inkberry
Ilex glabra
FACW
Wax Myrtle
Myrica cerifera
FAC+
Black Willow
Salix nigra
OBL
Sweetbay Magnolia
Magnolia vir iniana
FACW+
1.1 Vegetation Discussion and Problem Areas
All ten plots met the Year 3 success criterion of a minimum of 320 stems per acre. Over the
entire project, the survival rate averaged 429 live stems per acre. Mortality between 2009 and
2010 was light; most of the lost stems appeared to be those that were so weak in 2009 as to be
unidentifiable. Survival continues to be more than adequate to ensure a well stocked, diverse
community and the overall growth rate and health of the stand is good.
Powell Property Wetland Mitigation Project 9
Albemarle Restorations, LLC
2010 Monitoring -Year 2 of 5

2.0 Wetland Assessment
The hydrologic success criterion for any gauge is to achieve a minimum of 12 to 19 consecutive
days where the groundwater level is within 12 inches of the soil surface during the growing
season. This represents 5% to 8% of the growing season which for this site runs from March 22
to November 8, a period of 231 days (WETS Table for Lewiston, NC).
Three of the ten monitoring gauges deployed across the site are located at or near the center of
the swamp runs in order to assist with documenting flow (gauges 2, 5 and 9). The other seven
gauges are installed in the riverine portion of the project, some in a perpendicular pattern to the
swamp runs to assist in documenting flow and to assess hydrology in the riverine wetlands. A
rain gauge is also kept onsite and its data are compared to that collected at the NOAA cooperator
sites in Murfreesboro and Lewiston, NC. To further monitor the affect of seasonal and annual
variations in precipitation in restored wetlands, hydrologic success of the site was assessed in
relation to the reference wetland site where two more monitoring gauges are installed (gauge 11
as a riverine wetland reference and & gauge 12 as a swamp run reference).
2.1 Wetland Discussion and Problem Areas
Rainfall from late March through July was close to normal in 2010, but episodic in nature with
extended periods of rainfall drought in the interim. Rainfall during the month of April, which is a
critical month for hydrology success, totaled only .97 inches, well below the long -term average
of 3 inches. Despite that deficit, and as a result of ample rainfall in March, five of the riverine
wetland gauges met hydrologic success as did the three located in the swamp runs. Two of the
gauges in the riverine wetlands failed to meet hydrologic success at 5% of the growing season
(12 days). While rainfall in May was 1.59 inches above normal, a cumulative deficit for the
months of June and July of 5.4 inches will make recharge of groundwater levels slow unless
autumn precipitation is above normal.
Wetland hydrology should continue to develop across the site as the soils are able to equilibrate
and build structure but the areas surrounding Gauges 6 and 7 in the riverine wetlands continue to
be a source of concern. Soil compaction is believed to be the cause of poor hydrology in these
spots so subsoiling is scheduled to be done in late summer of 2010. The areas will be replanted
in early 2011 and additional monitoring gauges will be installed to help pinpoint any remaining
problem areas.
The three gauges located within the swamp runs showed successful hydrology in 2010 as would
be expected considering early season rainfall amounts. Gauges 2, 5 and 9 are set in the swamp
runs as is Reference Gauge 11. All show similar patterns of prolonged above - ground water
levels after a period of heavy rainfall in March, followed by gradual runoff.
Powell Property Wetland Mitigation Project 10
Albemarle Restorations, LLC
2010 Monitoring -Year 2 of 5

2.15 Flow
Refer to Figure F1 which is a composite chart for gauges 2, 5 & 9, for the following discussion
of evidence of flow within the .swamp runs. Figure F1 is a composite chart showing a brief
period of flow as a result of a single rainfall event in late March that produced nearly three
inches of rain. As a result of this single heavy rain event, the water levels at Gauges 2, 5 and 9
immediately rose to .46 ft, .62 ft. and 1.2 ft. (respectively) above the ground surface. Given their
positions in the landscape, Gauge 2 being farthest upstream will naturally show the fastest
drainage. The water level surrounding this gauge drops from its high point of .46 feet back to
ground surface in a matter of eleven days. Conversely, Gauge 9, being in the position farthest
downstream and closest to the outfall end, will naturally collect the greatest amount of water in a
any rainfall event and will be the slowest to drain, having to endure the total of the upstream
flow. At its peak height on March 29, the water level at Gauge 9 was 1.2 feet above the ground
surface and required twenty days to return to ground level. Gauge 5 measured a peak water level
of .62 feet which required thirteen days to return to ground level. The data from these three
gauges, taken in their entirety, show perfect evidence of water flowing through the -project site.
By comparison, Reference Gauge 11, which is in the center of the reference swamp run, showed
water levels above ground for a total of 31 days after the rainfall on March 29. Since this gauge
is situated in a channelized run (and consequently set below the surrounding ground level), it will
require a longer period to indicate complete drainage, yet offers a sound comparison _to the
behavior of Gauge 9.
Another, less impressive flow event occurred in mid -May after a series of smaller rainfall events.
During the period from May 13 to May 19, a total of 5.03 inches of rain fell onsite, _but _coming
on the heels of a particularly droughty period in April and early May, this precipitation produced
only minor flow through the site. Total rainfall for the month of April was a mere .97 inches.
Consequently, the groundwater levels had to be recharged before any flow could occur thus
limiting the duration of_flow.
It must also be noted that flow begins at the very upper reaches of the project site particularly
when rainfall is heavy or frequent enough to cause drainage from the upstream watershed onto
the project. Video and visual documentation during the winter of 2009 -2010 show excellent
diffuse flow at the upper boundary of the site where drainage water enters the site. The water
quickly disperses and floods the upper reaches of the project as evidenced by the data shown in
the charts for Gauges 1 through 4 which are located across the upstream portion of the project.
As a result, the Powell project serves as a fully functioning connector in the Quioccosin Swamp
watershed.
Powell Property Wetland Mitigation Project 11
Albemarle Restorations, LLC
2010 Monitoring -Year 2 of 5

C)
o 'o
CD � � o
o x' n
oro S �
a
kA �.
m
o'
o.
N
.o
01
0 LOZ /OZ /£
0 L OZ /LZ /£
0 60Z/£ /ti
G) 0
0)0)
m m MOZ /007
CD N
0 OZ /L M7
jj�
0
v 06OZ /VZ /b
C
in
CD
°—' m
0 LOZ4 /5
O
7
rn
0 OZ/8/5
N
C
CD
01
0.
0 OZ /5l/S
O L OZ/ZZ /5
0 L OZ /6Z/5
Water Level Relative to Ground Surface (feet)
o O O
N N O v
Ln O C11 Cn CT —•
O O -• N N W W
CJi Cn U1 , CJ1
Daily Rainfall Events (inches)
_L
n O
A
to O
TI 5' -n
� C
3 = �
Dto -n
.o w
3 Cn
CL Q(a
I
I I
I
I
i
rn
M
- - -
0.
CC) -
C C
to Q
CD CD
?
3.
(Q
(T N
Cn
CD
,.
N
_
o
CD --
CD
tv �
CD
fu
-
O
3
�
C1
O
(q
CD
to
n
CD
i
J
7
O O -• N N W W
CJi Cn U1 , CJ1
Daily Rainfall Events (inches)
_L
n O
A
to O
TI 5' -n
� C
3 = �
Dto -n
.o w
3 Cn
CL Q(a

2.2 Wetland Monitorine Plan View ,(dnteerated)
Figure 4 in Appendix D provides an overview of the areas where hydrology is still developing
around Gauges 6 and 7. These will be the areas targeted for subsoiling and replanting in an
attempt to accelerate hydrologic development.
Table V1. Hydrology and Vegetation Criteria Success by Plot
Powell Wetland and Stream Mitigation Pro ' ect /EEP #D06065 -B
Gauge
Hydrology Success
Met
Hydrology
Mean
Vegetation Plot
Vegetation Success
Met
Vegetation
Mean
1
Y
80%
I
Y
100%
2
Y
2
Y
3
Y
3
Y
4
Y
4
Y
5
Y
5
Y
7
N
7
Y
8
Y
8
Y
9
Y
9
Y
10
Y
10
Y
11 (Ref)*
Y
12 (Ref)*
Y
* Gauges 11 & 12 are reference gauges.and not included in the hydrology mean
3.0 Project Success Discussion
After the second year of monitoring and a season of erratic rainfall, the wetland hydrology on the
majority of the Powell project shows indications of successful restoration. Specifically, the
hydrology within the swamp run has been restored and the project is functioning like a natural
riparian headwater system. Flow of water across the site was successfully measured and
documented on at least two separate occasions in 2010.
The reference gauges are measuring very similar above- and below - ground water patterns at the
reference site as those measured on the project, confirming that the site is beginning _to function
like a natural system. Overall tree survival is good; growth in the first year was good due to site
maintenance and adequate rainfall.
Listed below are the field indicators from the approved mitigation plan that are to be used _to help
substantiate flow. Those shown in blue were observed and/or video or photo documented in
2010.
0 A natural line impressed on the bank
• _Shelving
0 Changes in soil characteristics
Powell Property Wetland Mitigation Project 13
Albemarle- Restorations, LLC
2010 Monitoring - Year 2 of 5

0 Destruction of terrestrial vegetation
• Presence of litter and debris
• Wracking
• Vegetation matted down or absent
S Sediment sorting
• Leaf litter disturbed or washed-away
• Scour
• Deposition
-• Bed and bank formation
• Water staining
• Change in plant community
High water marks on bank vegetation were noted and photographed during December of 2009
after heavy rainfall. Matted vegetation was noted and photographed in April of 2010, the
remnants of winter flooding. Further evidence of flow is deposition of small detritus after flow
events as well as some scouring in the mid portion -of _the_project.
III. Methodology Section
Year 2 monitoring for the Powell project occurred in August of 2010. Monitoring and vegetation
sampling procedures were established in the mitigation plan for this project .and no deviations
were made.
Powell Property Wetland Mitigation Project 14
Albemarle Restorations, LLC
2010 Monitoring - Year 2 of 5

Appendix A
Vegetation Data Tables
Site Photos

1. Vegetation Data Tables
Table 1. Proiect Metadata
Report Prepared By 77Ashby
Brown
Date Prepared
8/18/2010 18:27
DESCRIPTION OF WORKSHEETS IN THIS
DOCUMENT—
Vigor b Spp
Frequency distribution of vigor classes listed by species.
Damage by Spp
Damage values tallied by e for each species.
Damage by Plot
Damage values tallied by e for each plot.
ALL Stems by Plot and spp
A matrix of the count of total living stems of each species (planted and
natural volunteers combined) for each plot; dead and missing stems are
excluded.
PROJECT SUMMARY—
Project Code Code
D06065B
Project Name
Powell
Description
Powell wetland and stream mitigation
River Basin
Chowan
Sampled Plots
10

Table 2. Vegetation Vigor by Species
Table 3. Vegetation Damage by Species
Species
4
3
2
1
0
Missing
Unknown
1
Alnus serrulata
1
6
6
Itea vir inica
22
19
Ce halanthus occidentalis
3
3
6
5
1
Persea palustris
1
Itea vir inica
3
10
7
6
6
2
Quercus michauxii
N ssa biflora
8
2
3
1
22
1 1
Persea palustris
5
5
1
Taxodium distichum
1
27
5
Quercus bicolor
3
3
9
9
Vaccinium corymbosum
1
1
Quercus michauxii
3
2
2
110 1
9
1
Quercus phellos
14
5
2
1
Salix nigra
2
3
Taxodium distichum
15
13
3
1
Vaccinium corymbosum
1
Unknown
1 2
1
1
5
TOT:
12
1 46
42
18
13
Table 3. Vegetation Damage by Species
Table 4_ Vegetation Damage by Pint
Species
All Damage
Categories
no damage)
Site Too
Dry
Alnus serrulata
I
1
1
Ce halanthus occidentalis
6
6
Itea vir inica
22
19
3
N ssa biflora
6
5
1
Persea palustris
1
1
1
Quercus bicolor
6
6
Quercus michauxii
8
8
Quercus phellos
22
22
Salix nigra
5
5
1
Taxodium distichum
32
27
5
TOT:
Unknown
9
9
9
Vaccinium corymbosum
1
1
TOT:
12
119
110 1
9
Table 4_ Vegetation Damage by Pint
Plot
All Damage
Categories
no damage)
Site Too Dr
D06065B -AB -0001- ear:2
14
13
1
D06065B -AB -0002- ear:2
10
10
D06065B -AB -0003- ear:2
12
12
D06065B -AB -0004- ear:2
11
6
5
D06065B -AB -0005- ear:2
10
9
1
D06065B -AB -0006- ear:2
12
12
D06065B -AB -0007- ear:2
9
9
D06065B -AB -0008- ear:2
17
17
D06065B -AB -0009- ear:2
11
10
1
D06065B -AB- 0010- year:2
13
12
1
TOT:
10
119
110
9

Table 5. Stem Count by Plot and Species
Project Total Average Stems /Acre: 429
Table 6. Problem Areas
Plot
Species
Total
Planted
Stems
#
plots
avg#
stems
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Alnus serrulata
1
1
l
1
Cephalanthus
occidentalis
6
2
3
3
3
Itea vir inica
20
6
3.33
3
2
2
5
1
7
N ssa biflora
5
3
1.67
2
2
1
Quercus bicolor
6
3
2
1
3
2
Quercus michauxii
7
3
2.33
1
2
4
Quercus phellos
21
5
4.2
7
4
5
4
1
Salix nigra
5
1
5
5
Taxodium distichum
31
6
5.17
2
7
5
2
9
6
Unknown
4
2
2
3
1
Totals:
106
10
13
9
10
11
10
10
8
16
9
10
Average Stems /Acre
526
364
405
445
405
405
324
647
364
405
Project Total Average Stems /Acre: 429
Table 6. Problem Areas
Feature/Issue
Gauge
Probable Cause
Inadequate
Hydrology
6 and 7
Soil Compaction

Infl
Remaining evidence of substantial flow event in late March -early April.
low.

1�
•
Further evidence of flow in March/April. This photo is from center of
main run and shows matted vegetation and some Utter deposition
<
110
2CI il
X08 43A

Trees
,owth.

Table C -1
Longest Consecutive Successful Hydrologic Period
in Days and Success at 5% and 8% of Gro ing Season
Gau a
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Da vs
5% 8%
Days
5%
8%
Day
5%
8%
Days
5% 8%
Days
5%
8%
1
14 Y N
18 Y N
I
i
i
2
34 Y Y
25 Y Y
3
15 Y N
17 Y N
4
4 N N
15 Y N
5
35 Y Y
34 Y Y
6
4 N N
7 N N
7
7 N N
4 N N
8
39 Y Y
38 Y Y
9
24 Y Y
39 Y Y
10
14 Y N
28 Y Y
11 (Ref)
53 Y Y
38 Y Y
12 Re
39 Y Y
36 Y Y
5% of growing season is 12 days, 8% is 19 days
Hydrology is deemed successful if longest consecutive hydrologic
period meets minimum of 5% of the growing season
Figure P -1
2010 Reference Precipitation
10
5
u
D
°— 0 Normal Preciptiation
0
1z Actual Precipitation
J
•a 1 Cumulative Deficit
Z
d
L
a
-10
-15
Total precipitation from January 1, 2010 through July 31, 2010 was near normal (.75" deficit)
though April was a particularly
dry month (only .97 "). Precipitation in July was also well below
normal (only 1.18 ").
i
I
I
r
I
i
I
i
I
I
I
i
i
dry month (only .97 "). Precipitation in July was also well below
normal (only 1.18 ").

Appendix B
Geomorphologic Raw Data
Not used in this report

Appendix C
Hydrologic Data Tables

Y
m
io
c
m
m
m
0
I
B
c
rn
M
m
0
U
m
CD
obi
I
ID
O
m
OLOZ /L/L
0 LOZ /9/ L
OLOZ/ M
0 LOZ/ZZ/L
0 LOZ/6Z/L
0 LOZ /9 /Z
0 LOZ/Z L2
0 LOZ /6 L2
0 WZ /9Z/Z
0 LOZ /5/£
0 LOZ/Z L/£
0LOZ/ W
0 L OZ /9Z/£
0 LOZ /Z /ti
O LOZ /63,
O LOZ /907
0 LOZ /£Z /b
O LOZ /0£ /t
o OZ/L/9
O LOZ /i7L /9
OLOZ/LZ /S
0 LOZ /9Z /5
0 LOZ/1/9
OLOZ44W9 -
O LOZ/9 L/9
O LOZ/5Z /9
0 LOZ /Z /L
0 L OZ /6 /L
O L OZ/9 L/L
0 LOZ /£Z /L
O LOZ /0£ /L
0 WZ /9/9
Water Level Relative to Ground Surface (feet)
W N L O -+
O O N N W W
Rainfall Events (inches)
.D
0
c0
3
O
O
Q
I7
0)
C
c�
N
N
w
00
w
ao
w
w
�
n
cc
I
CO
m
0
i
O O N N W W
Rainfall Events (inches)
.D
0
c0
3
O
O
Q
I7
0)
C
c�
N
N
w
00
w
ao
w

4_
D.
m
M
CD
c
m
R
m
d
0
3
I
c
m
cD
m
O
v
CD
OLOZ/L/L
0 LOZ /9 /L
0 LOZ/S L/L
0 LOZ /ZZ/ L
0 LOZ /6Z/ L
0 L OZ /S/Z
0 LOZ /Z L/Z
0 LOZ /6 L2
0 WZ /9Z/Z
0 L OZ /S /£
0 LOZ /Z L/£
0 LOZ/6 L/£
0 LOZ /9Z /£
0 LOZ /Z /t,
0 LOZ /6 /t?
0 LOZ /9 01
0 LOZ /£Z /17
0 LOZ /0£ /ti
0 L OZ /L/9
0L0ZA L/9
OLOZ/LZ /9
0 LOZ/9Z /9
0 L OZ /V /9
0LOZ /L L/9
0 LOZ/9 L/9
0 LOZ /SZ /9
0 LOZIZ/L
0 WZ /6 /L
O L OZ /9 L/L
O LOZ /£Z /L
0 L OZ/0£ /L
0 WZ /9/9
Water Level Relative to Ground Surface (feet)
N o
O O N N W (�
U1 CJ7 U1 Cf1
Rainfall Events (inches)
m
O
7
O
cc
t7
c
ca
N
N
N
W
00
CA)
rn
{
N
CL
a
,
0
ac
0
i
ID
W
—r—
- - - - - --
CL
i
`c
a
O O N N W (�
U1 CJ7 U1 Cf1
Rainfall Events (inches)
m
O
7
O
cc
t7
c
ca
N
N
N
W
00
CA)
rn

CD
0)
c
m
m
m
0
c
m
m
m
0
w
O
N
m
m
m
Water Level Relative to Ground Surface (feet)
W N � O -►
OLOZ /L/L
0 L OZ /9/ L
O LOZ/S L/L
0 LOZ/ZZ/ L
0 LOZ/6Z/ L
0 LOZ/9/Z
0 LOZ /Z L/Z
OLOZ/6L /Z
0 LOZ /9Z /Z
0 L OZ /9 /£
0 LOZ /Z L/£
0 LOZ /6 L/£
0 WZ /9Z/£
0 WZ /Z /V
0 LOZ /6 /ti
OLOZ /9L /7
W OLOZ /£Z /17
0 LOZ/0£ /ti
0 LOZ /L/9
0 LOZ 117 L/9
0 LOZ/ LZ /9
0 LOZ /9Z /S
0 LOZ /b /9
0 LOZ/ L L/9
0 WZ /9 L/9
0 LOZ /9Z /9
0 LOZ /Z /L
0 L OZ /6 /L
0 L OZ /9 L/L
0 LOZ /£Z /L
0 LOZ/0£ /L
0 LOZ /9/9
I
0
O O
Ut CJ� CJ� Cn
Rainfall Events (inches)
.0
O
CD
O
O
to
c
to
cD
CA)
N
N
W
00
W
M
vn
I-_-�

U
Cn
n
m
M
m
v
0
I I
a m
m
Q.
m
m
d
a■
uA
m
m
m
0 LOZ/L/L
OL Me/ L
OLOMM
0 LOZ/ZZ/ L
0 LOZ /6Z/ L
0 LOZ /5 /Z
0 LOZ /Z L/Z
OLOZ/61,/Z
0 LOZ /9Z /Z
0 LOZ /9 /£
0 LOZ /Z L/£
0 LOZ/6 L/£
0 L OZ /9Z /£
0 LOZ/Z/?
0 WZ /6 /b
0LOZ/907
0 LOZ/£Z /b
0 LOZ/0£ /ti
0 WZ /L/5
0 LOZ /K/5
OLOZ/LZ /5
0 LOZ/8Z /9
0 LOZ /ti /9
0 LOZ/ L L/9
0 LOZ /8 L/9
0 LOZ /SZ /9
0 L OZ/Z /L
0 WZ /6 /L
0 LOZ/9 L/L
0 LOZ /£Z /L
0 LOZ /0£ /L
0 LOZ /9/8
Water Level Relative to Ground Surface (feet)
W N L O -+
O O -+ N N W W
N W
Rainfall Events (inches)
O
CD
3
O
O
to
0
w
C
to
CD
N
N
W
00
W
CO
CD
i
- - --
of
0
,*
s►
o
�
m
m
3
rr
O O -+ N N W W
N W
Rainfall Events (inches)
O
CD
3
O
O
to
0
w
C
to
CD
N
N
W
00
W
CO
CD

CI
G
m
CD
c
m
m
M
d
0
M
I o
m
c
m
CL
M
d
0
I
O
m
r:
m
m
0
m
w
0 LOZ/ L/ L
O LOZ /8/ L
OLOZ /SL /L
O L OZ/ZZ/ L
0 LOZ /6Z/ L
0 LOZ /S /Z
0 LOZ /Z L/Z
0 LOZ /6 L/Z
0 WZ /9Z /Z
0 LOZ /S /£
0 LOZ /Z L/£
OLOZ/6L /£
0 WZ /9Z /£
0 LOZ/Z /t,
O 6OZ/6/,
0 WZ/9 AI
0 LOZ/£Z /t,
O L OZ/0MI
O LOZ /L/S
O LOZ /K /S
O L OZ/ L Z/S
O LOZ /8Z /S
O LOZ /17/9
0 1,0Z/L L/9
0 LOZ /8 L/9
0 LOZ /SZ /9
0 WZ/Z/L
O L OZ /6 /L
O LOZ /9 L/L
O LOZ /£Z /L
OLOZ/0£ /L -
0 LOZ /9/8
Water Level Relative to Ground Surface (feet)
N � O �
Rainfall Events (inches)
0
CD
3
0
Q
c
tm
cD
w
N
N
w
w
a�
V
f
I
I
I
v
A
3
0
q
W
m
w
N
A
0
_
m
c.
w
Rainfall Events (inches)
0
CD
3
0
Q
c
tm
cD
w
N
N
w
w
a�
V

0 LOZ/ L/ L
0 L OZ /8/ L
0 OZZ/991/L
O LOZ/ZZ/ L
0 LOZ/6Z/ L
0 LOz /9 /z
OLOZ /ZL /Z
m
OLOZ /6L/Z
0 LOZ /9Z /Z
CO
0 Wz /9 /£
m
OLOZ /ZL/£
CD
m 0 LOZ/6 L/£
m
s
o Loz /9z/£
O LOZ/Z /v
I 01OZ/6 /1,
0 LOZ /9 M?
c�
OLOU£z /17
OLOZ/0£ /V
m 0Loz /L/9
cn
m OLOZ /K /9
o LOZ/LZ /9
0 WZ /8Z/9
0 WZ/7 /9
0 OLOZ/LL /9
N
OLOZ/8L /9
X 0 LOZ /9Z/9
m OLOZ /Z /L
0 WZ /6 /L
0 LOZ/9 L/L
0WVML
0 LOZ /0£ /L
0 LOZ /9/8
Water Level Relative to Ground Surface (feet)
w N - o
J
Pillr
F
O O N N W W
Rainfall Events (inches)
O
CD
O
2.
M.
to
I7
c
to
CD
N
N
W
CD
W
CD
v ao

co
c
m
m
m
m
I
.2
m
O
3
I
O
3
rU).
m
m
3
N
v
d
0 LOZ/ L/ L
0 L OZ /8/ L
OLOZ /S1,/L
0 LOZ /ZZ/ L
0 L OZ /6Z/ L
0 LOZ /S/Z
0 LOZ/Z 1,/Z
0 LOZ /6 L2
0 L OZ /9Z /Z
0 LOZ /S /£
0 LOZ/Z L/£
OLOZ/61,/£
0 L OZ /9Z /£
0 LOZ /Z/ti
0 LOZ/6/,
0 LOZ/91,/1
0 LOZ/£Z /V
0 LOZ/0£/ti
0 L OZ /L/S
0 LOZ /b US
0 LOZ/ LZ /S
0 LOZ/8Z /9
0 LOUD /9
0 LOZ/ L L/9
OLOZ /81,/9
0 L OZ /SZ /9
0 LOZ /Z /L
0 LOZ /6 /L
0 LOZ/9 L/L
O LOZ /£Z /L
O L OZ/0£ /L
O LOZ/9/8
Water Level Relative to Ground Surface (feet)
w N L o
O O s N N W W
CT CTi (fl (,T1
Rainfall Events (inches)
-v
0
3
r-9.
0
cQ
U3
c�
V
N
N
W
CO
w
m
m
.r
I
�
Ir
I
O O s N N W W
CT CTi (fl (,T1
Rainfall Events (inches)
-v
0
3
r-9.
0
cQ
U3
c�
V
N
N
W
CO
w
m
m
.r

r
Water Level Relative to Ground Surface (feet)
W N -� O N
OLOZ /L/L
0 602181 L
0602/56/6
0 L OZ /ZZ/ L
0 LOZ/6Z/6
I 0 LOZ /5/Z
0 LOZ /2 L/Z
OLOZ/6L /Z
OLOZ /92/2
07
C 0 LOZ /5 /£
M4
m O LOZ/Z L/£
m
iD OLOZ/6L/£
o OLOZ /9Z /£
0
0 LOZ /Z /V
I 0 LOZ /6/t7
OLOZ/9L/trr
O LOZ1£Z /V
CD
c
m OLOZ /0£ /b
CL
m 0 LOZ /L15
m
m OLOZ /K /5
O
OLOZ /LZ /5
I 0 LOZ /82/5
0 LOZ /V /9
OLOZ/LL/9
m 0 LOZ /9 L/9
T. OLOZ/SZ /9
°' 0LOZ /Z /L
0 LOZ /6/L
O LOZ19 L/L
0 LOZ /£Z /L
0 LOZ/0£ /L
0 LOZ /9/8
I--
I �
i Q
I — � All-
3
1,
_ CO
O
-- - cc
O
m
O
3
O O N N W W
Rainfall Events (inches)
O
cD
3
O
rt
O
cQ
c
cn
m
00
N
N
W
00
W
V
O

Y
9-
E1
m
N
0)
c
m
M
m
0
3
I
c
m
m
R)
0
3
I
0
3
N
m
m
m
v
m
OLOZ /L/L
0 LOZ /8/ L
O LOZ/5 L/L
0 L OZ/ZZ/ L
0 L OZ /6Z/ L
0 LOZ /52
0 LOZ/Z L/Z
0 LOZ /6 L2
0 L OZ /9Z /Z
0 LOZ /5/£
0 LOZ/Z L/£
0 LOZ/6 L/£
0 LOZ /9Z /£
0 LOZ /Z /t7
0 L OZ/6/,
0 L OZ /9 L/ti
0 L0Z /£Z /b
0 LOZ/0£ /b
0 [OZ /L /5
0 LOZ /14/9
0 LOZ/LZ /5
0 LOZ /8Z/9
0 LOZ /17/9
0 LOZ /L L/9
0 LOZ /8 L/9
0 LOZ /9Z/9
0 LOZ /Z /L
0 WZ /6 /L
0 LOZ /9 L/L
0 LOZ /£Z /L
0 LOZ /0£ /L
O L OZ/9/8
Water Level Relative to Ground Surface (feet)
W N - O N
O O N N W (q
CP CJl U1 (T1
Rainfall Events (inches)
0
0
3
O
7
O
3
C
c0
m
co
N
N
W
CO
W
v
i
i
I s
w
3
CL
ca
ar
CO)
m
0
m
I
CO
w
EP
m
7
im
I
-
O O N N W (q
CP CJl U1 (T1
Rainfall Events (inches)
0
0
3
O
7
O
3
C
c0
m
co
N
N
W
CO
W
v

Y
Water Level Relative to Ground Surface (feet)
W N - O N
0 LOZ/ L/ L
0 L OZ /9/ L
O LOM L/L
0 LOZ /ZZ/ L
0 LOZ /6Z/L
I 0 L OZ /5 /Z
0 LOZ/Z L/Z
m OLOZ/6L/Z
m OLOZ /9Z/Z
a, 0 L OZ /9 /£
m
m OLOZ/ZL /£
m
CD OLOZ/6U£
o O L OZ /9Z /£
0
0 LOZ/Z /b
I0 L OZ /6/ti
v OLOZ /9L/t,
OLOZ /£Z /ti
r CD
OLOZ /0£ /b
m 0LOZ /L/5
m
_m OLOZA419
O
OLOZ /LZ /9
I 0 LOZ /9Z /5
0 LOZ/t7 /9
0 L OZ/ L L/9
m 0 LOZ /8 L/9
T. O LOZ /9Z/9
°1 0 L OZ/Z /L
0 LOZ /6 /L
0 LOZ /9 L/L
0 LOZ /£Z /L
0 LOZ/0£ /L
0 LOZ /9/9
N
O O N N W W
Ul CTl C n U7
Rainfall Events (inches)
O
cD
O
O
Q
17
a)
C
to
CD
0
N
N
W
00
W
V
N

m
c
m
m
m
m
m
0
I
c
�i
m
CD
m
0
I
O
m
RE
m
0LOZ/L/L
O LOZ /8 /L
0 LOZ /S L/L
0 LOZ /ZZ/ L
0 L OZ /6Z/ L
0 LOZ /S /Z
0 LOZ/Z L/Z
0 LOZ /6 L/Z
O LOZ /9Z /Z
0 LOZ /S /£
0 L OZ/Z L/£
0 LOZ/6 L/£
0 LOZ /9Z /E
0 LOZ /Z /17
0 L OZ/6/,
v OLOZ /9L/t,
0 LOZ /EZ /tr
0 LOZ/0£/7
0 LOZ /L/S
0 LOZ/1 L/S
0 LOZ/LZ /S
0 LOZ /8Z /S
0 LOZ /ti /9
0WZ /L L/9
0 LOZ/8 L/9
0 LOZ /SZ /9
0 LOZ /Z /L
0 LOZ /6 /L
0 LOZ /9 L/L
0 LOZ /EZ /L
0 LOZ/OE /L
0 WZ /9/8
Water Level Relative to Ground Surface (feet)
N - O N W
O O N N W W
CJ1 (J1 (J1 CJ1
Rainfall Events (inches)
O
O
O
O O
c�
N
N
0
0
0
w
rn
_IMIFPAdw'�
O O N N W W
CJ1 (J1 (J1 CJ1
Rainfall Events (inches)
O
O
O
O O
c�
N
N
0
0
0
w
rn

O
cD
3
O
X
CD
� c
n CO
<D (D
N
N
N
O
0
w
Water
Level Relative to
Ground Surface
(feet)
N
O
-• N
OLOZ /L/L
0 LOZ /9/ L
O LOZ /9 M
--
O LOZ/ZZ/ L
0 L OZ/6Z/ L
O LOZ /9 /Z
_
I
0 LOZ/Z L/Z
w
CD
OLOMUZ
OLOZ /9Z /Z
A
CO
c
m
A
W
OLOZ /5/£
OLOZ/ZL /£
°'
�
m
OLOZ /6L /£
m
R
OLOZ /9Z /£
-
OLOZ /Z /17
- - - --
-- - -.
-
/6 /17
-
- --
IOLOZ
(D
c
a
M
d OLOZ /9LA7
m O LOZ /£Z /t7
OLOZ/0£/7
0LOZ /L 19
-- - --
-- -- --
jr
- - --
m
OLOZ /b L/5
OLOZ /LZ /5
O LOZ /8Z/5
s
— - --
- --
m
I
0LOZ /b /9
-
0
OLOZ /LL /9
CD
OLOML /9
_
T.
5
OLOZ /9Z /9
--
°1
0 LOZ/Z/L
OLOZ 16 1L
-
—
0 LOZ /9 L/L
0 LOZ /£Z /L
0 LOZ /0£ /L
-
0 LOZ /9/9
O
O
U1
CT1
N N
(J1
W W
()1
Rainfall Events
(inches)
O
cD
3
O
X
CD
� c
n CO
<D (D
N
N
N
O
0
w

Appendix D
Problem Areas Plan View (Integrated)

w
ox
ILL
lk
/ y.� �` \\ .\' +•. v+'1 1•. C;�• \ +\ ';bra•;' � ,
�� 9111 \ \t _ - - -- '''!•�:••,.• .,�• '• . fi. .'� •• ,+ �
�� 1111 h. •' / tgr ••: —
1 1 • • d yam` �..i ` � � T'._ _ •-l's _ � -�� ^ 1
1111 + •/ • / rf:'• •�.9.? .
" _ 1 111 \ `\ 'f% ✓ •r: yY I• •
, ((yyyy t 1 )Iy '�` <I �: '• • 1xP' :� '-'may — �• �
/�yt / 1 1 `2' Ilgl .rl�b% >�Y �t'•••��-• •Ai. . \',• .G'. '�!/''
A
�Ldb t® � LUD•
LOD
LaD
C
Lf7 Z W �\ I
Z
C¢-) Z Z - -
Q a6 ¢ Z w t-- m
0 oC zf
W' W tz
0 W O G. Z lil => Q
w O c� m m V] a a( �c~n �00
u1 C%7 X �j W W
�..� o- W Q Q W cn En Lu tC ❑C a m U d V =
LL)-_
J I i i I I :r••.•.t r•�••: � ` I
J ` I
I /
I ..
b
Ln
N
9-590904 :# - D*INOJ d33
/
VNM IV3 HRON ALNnoD 3I1a38
Sd1WS OI£/£ :SIINn N011V9I. IW WV3W
t
�1��
ffiH! 6 — . WID -F.EE :T.S2i
w
Y311JLtlsBja%Il m
\0µ\onroas�a�r3ais
' \IXltld0J53tl 0 \tl113M
:NOEVa
/SN011"O1S321311IM-497V
OIOZ HNN
Sd1WM b•Sb ;S1INn NOLLVDLLIW ONV113M
377
_
f 3sf19Ij
A.1.b3d0ad �13MOd
w
:,a agdVdMd
"�\
7;l
cv
7u
Q
�
Z J
Ln
LU
\
E
'�
'n
o
w
w p L7
z Ln
` \ /
w
41
\
0
W
a J
w
ox
ILL
lk
/ y.� �` \\ .\' +•. v+'1 1•. C;�• \ +\ ';bra•;' � ,
�� 9111 \ \t _ - - -- '''!•�:••,.• .,�• '• . fi. .'� •• ,+ �
�� 1111 h. •' / tgr ••: —
1 1 • • d yam` �..i ` � � T'._ _ •-l's _ � -�� ^ 1
1111 + •/ • / rf:'• •�.9.? .
" _ 1 111 \ `\ 'f% ✓ •r: yY I• •
, ((yyyy t 1 )Iy '�` <I �: '• • 1xP' :� '-'may — �• �
/�yt / 1 1 `2' Ilgl .rl�b% >�Y �t'•••��-• •Ai. . \',• .G'. '�!/''
A
�Ldb t® � LUD•
LOD
LaD
C
Lf7 Z W �\ I
Z
C¢-) Z Z - -
Q a6 ¢ Z w t-- m
0 oC zf
W' W tz
0 W O G. Z lil => Q
w O c� m m V] a a( �c~n �00
u1 C%7 X �j W W
�..� o- W Q Q W cn En Lu tC ❑C a m U d V =
LL)-_
J I i i I I :r••.•.t r•�••: � ` I
J ` I
I /
I ..
b
Ln
N