20180919 Ver 1_FINAL - Adaptive Management Plan (AMP) SAW-2017-01509_20210219

Strickland, Bev
From: Browning, Kimberly D CIV USARMY CESAW (USA)
<[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, February 19, 2021 11:47 AM
To: Tugwell, Todd J CIV USARMY CESAW (US); Haywood, Casey M CIV (USA); Davis, Erin B;
Wilson, Travis W.; Bowers, Todd
Cc: Wiesner, Paul; Tsomides, Harry; Cidney Jones; Jake Byers
Subject: [External] FINAL - Adaptive Management Plan (AMP)/ NCDMS Meadow Brook
Mitigation Site/ Yadkin County/ SAW-2017-01509
Attachments: Meadow Brook Site_100024_AMP (FINAL)_2-16-2021.pdf
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as
an attachment to Report Spam.<mailto:[e-mail]>
I RT,
Attached is the final AMP for NCDMS Meadow Brook for your records, and this will be included in the MY2
report this year. The changes appear to have addressed most of our concerns. Thanks for the quick response.
Have a good weekend
Kim
Kim Browning
Mitigation Project Manager, Regulatory Division I U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
-----Original Message -----
From: Wiesner, Paul <[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 20214:11 PM
To: Browning, Kimberly D CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>; Haywood,
Casey M CIV (USA) <[e-mail]>; Davis, Erin B <[e-mail]>; Tugwell,
Todd J CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>
Cc: Tsomides, Harry <[e-mail]>; Jake Byers <[e-mail]>; Cidney Jones
<[e-mail]>
Subject: [Non-DoD Source] FINAL - Adaptive Management Plan (AMP)/ NCDMS Meadow Brook Mitigation
Site/ Yadkin County/ SAW-2017-01509
Good afternoon Casey, Erin, Kim, and Todd;
Please find the final Meadow Brook Site AMP revised per the IRT comments received on 2/12/21. Comment
responses are included in the front of the document as well.
Please let us know if you need anything else.
Cidney, Jake and Harry;

Please make sure to put a copy of the final AMP in the MY2 (2021) report appendices for documentation. The
IRT-DMS credit release meeting is scheduled for May 10-12, 2021. Please be prepared to discuss the
supplemental planting implemented if requested by the IRT at the meeting.
Thanks
Paul Wiesner
Western Regional Supervisor
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality Division of Mitigation Services
828-273-1673 Mobile
[e-mail]
Western DMS Field Office
5 Ravenscroft Drive
Suite 102
Asheville, N.C. 28801
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may
be disclosed to third parties.
-----Original Message -----
From: Browning, Kimberly D CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, February 12, 2021 2:18 PM
To: Jake Byers <[e-mail]>
Cc: Wiesner, Paul <[e-mail]>; Tsomides, Harry <[e-mail]>; Cidney Jones
<[e-mail]>; Tugwell, Todd J CIV USARMY CESAW (US) <[e-mail]>; Davis,
Erin B <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; Bowers, Todd <[e-mail]>;
Wilson, Travis W. <[e-mail]>; Munzer, Olivia <[e-mail]>
Subject: [External] RE: REVISED Adaptive Management Plan Review/ NCDMS Meadow Brook Mitigation Site/
Yadkin County/ SAW-2017-01509
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as
an attachment to Report Spam.<mailto:[e-mail]>
Hi Jake
Attached please find IRT comments received to date. You may proceed with implementing the AMP provided
you address IRT comments.
Thanks and have a good weekend. I'll be back at work Tuesday, Feb 16, if you have any questions.
Thanks
Kim
Kim Browning
Mitigation Project Manager, Regulatory Division I U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
-----Original Message-----

From: Browning, Kimberly D CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2021 1:29 PM
To: Haywood, Casey M CIV (USA) <[e-mail]>; Tugwell, Todd J CIV USARMY CESAW
(USA) <[e-mail]>; Davis, Erin B <[e-mail]>; Casey Haywood
<[e-mail]>; Byron Hamstead <[e-mail]>; Bowers, Todd
<[e-mail]>; Wilson, Travis W. <[e-mail]>; Munzer, Olivia
<[e-mail]>
Cc: Wiesner, Paul <[e-mail]>; Tsomides, Harry <[e-mail]>; Cidney Jones
<[e-mail]>; Jake Byers <[e-mail]>
Subject: REVISED Adaptive Management Plan Review/ NCDMS Meadow Brook Mitigation Site/ Yadkin County/
SAW-2017-01509
Hi All,
EPR has submitted a revised AMP based on comments from a few IRT members (attached). I've already heard
from Todd Bowers and Olivia. I would like to request that when submitting comments on draft mitigation
plans and adaptive management plans that you send your comments to me only and I will compile them all
and forward them to the provider. Hopefully this will help eliminate confusion. The comment deadline is still
February 20, but if I hear from all IRT members interested in commenting sooner, I will forward the comment
memo to DMS/EPR so they can move forward with supplemental planting.
Thanks
Kim
Kim Browning
Mitigation Project Manager, Regulatory Division I U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
-----Original Message -----
From: Haywood, Casey M CIV (USA)<[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, February 05, 2021 2:37 PM
To: Tugwell, Todd J CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>; Browning, Kimberly D CIV
USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>; Davis, Erin B <[e-mail]>;
Casey Haywood <[e-mail]>; Byron Hamstead <[e-mail]>; Twyla
Cheatwood <[e-mail]>; Bowers, Todd <[e-mail]>; Wilson, Travis W.
<[e-mail]>
Cc: Wiesner, Paul <[e-mail]>; Tsomides, Harry <[e-mail]>; Cidney Jones
<[e-mail]>; Jake Byers <[e-mail]>
Subject: Notice of Adaptive Management Plan Review/ NCDMS Meadow Brook Mitigation Site/ Yadkin
County/ SAW-2017-01509
Good afternoon IRT,
The below referenced Adaptive Management Plan review has been requested by NCDMS. A copy of this AMP
is attached. Per Section 332.8(o)(9) of the 2008 Mitigation Rule, this review follows the streamlined review
process, which requires an IRT review period of 15 calendar days from this email notification. Please provide
any comments by 5 PM on February 20, 2021. Comments provided after the 15-day comment deadline may
not be considered.

Given how extensive this re -planting is, please indicate whether you feel it will be necessary to extend
monitoring (currently in MY2).
At the conclusion of this comment period, a copy of all comments will be provided to NCDMS and the NCIRT
along with District Engineer's intent to approve or disapprove this AMP.
15 Day Comment Start: February 05, 2021
15-Day Comment Deadline: February 20, 2021
45-DE Decision: March 22, 2021
Project Information:
Meadow Brook Site
DMS Project # 100024
USACE # SAW-2017-01509
RFP: 16-006993 - Issued 09/16/2016
Institution Date: 05/22/2017 - Full Delivery
Yadkin River Basin
Cataloging Unit 03040101
Yadkin County, North Carolina
Proposed Assets:
3,409.333 SMUs (warm)

FD Provider: EPR - Contact: Cidney Jones, PE & CFM, [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> 919-
388-0787 (office), 925-337-1470 (cell)
NCDEQ - DMS PM: Harry Tsomides; [e-mail]<maiIto: [e-mail]> , (828)
545-7057
The Adaptive Management Plan can be accessed directly on the DMS SharePoint site here:
IRT-DMS SharePoint Page:
Blockedhttps://urldefense.com/v3/_https://ncconnect.sharepoint.com/sites/IRT-
DMS/SitePages/Home.aspx_;!!HYmSToo!NTgWWWZ5wdtXBRZINO_3SBHJi5mLxlclasUvNldTPtzsmOFGFA3KiE
WFNX51CejFTpjT$ <Blockedhttps:Hncconnect.sharepoint.com/sites/IRT-DMS/SitePages/Home.aspx>
Meadow Brook_100024_AMP_Feb. 2021
Blockedhttps://urldefense.com/v3/_https://ncconnect.sharepoint.com/sites/IRT-
DMS/Misc*20Documents/Forms/Allitems.aspx?id=*2Fsites*2FIRT*2DDMS*2FMisc*20Documents*2FMeadow
*20Brook*5F100024*5FAMP*5FFeb*2E*202021*2Epdf&parent=*2Fsites*2FIRT*2DDMS*2FMisc*20Documen
ts_;JSUIJSUIJSUIJSUIJSUIJSUIJQ!!HYmSToo!NTgWWWZ5wdtXBRZINO_3SBHJi5mLxlclasUvNldTPtzsmOFGFA3Ki
EWFNX51CVkyWDs1$ <Blockedhttps://ncconnect.sharepoint.com/sites/IRT-
DMS/Misc%20Documents/Forms/Allitems.aspx?id=%2Fsites%2FIRT%2DDMS%2FMisc%20Documents%2FMea
dow%20Brook%5FlOOO24%5FAMP%5FFeb%2E%202021%2Epdf&pa rent=%2Fsites%2FIRT%2DDMS%2FMisc%2
ODocuments>
Please contact the Mitigation Office if you have any questions.
V/r,
Casey Haywood

Mitigation Specialist, Regulatory Division I U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
3331 Heritage Trade Dr, Ste. 105 1 Wake Forest, NC 27587 1
BUILDING STRONG (r)

�.. ECOSYSTEM
PLANNING &
RESTORATION
February 16, 2021
Kim Browning
Mitigation Project Manager
Department of the Army
CORPS of Engineers
Wilmington District
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403-1343
Ecosystem Planning and Restoration, LLC
1150 S.E. Maynard Road, Suite 140
Cary, NC 27511
Phone: [phone]
www.eprusa.net
Subject: Response to NCDMS Meadow Brook Mitigation Site — NCIRT Comments
during 15 — day Adaptive Management Plan Review
Dear Ms. Browning,
Ecosystem Planning and Restoration (EPR) has reviewed the comments on the Adaptive
Management Plan for Meadow Brook Stream Restoration Project received on 2/12/2021. The
comments have been addressed as described below to create the Final Adaptive Management
Plan for Meadow Brook Stream Restoration Project.
USACE Comments, Kim Browning
1. Based on submitted monitoring data, it appears that vegetation growth has been
negatively affected by excessive site hydrology. The proposed adaptive management
plan includes replanting portions of the site with additional species that are more
adapted to the hydrologic conditions but does not include any modifications to address
the underlying issue. Was the increased hydrology due solely to a few storm events? I
agree that replanting the site should be included as part of the adaptive management
plan. Further, given how extensive the planting is, about 80% of the site, vegetation
monitoring should be extended an additional year, and the resulting data will be
important in assessing the success of the performance of replanted vegetation. If the site
appears to be demonstrating a trajectory for success later in monitoring (MY4 or MY5),
we may eliminate the extra year of monitoring at that time. It would have been beneficial
to include hydrology gauge data and rain gauge data to document the excessive
inundation on site, and to include species mortality rates. Additionally, please indicate
the percentage of each species to be planted. The Corps supports moving forward with
the supplemental planting.
o In the pre -construction site conditions, the site contained 6 acres of
jurisdictional wetlands with several more acres of drained hydric soils.
Restoration activities included raising the existing stream bed to connect to the
historic floodplain, restoring a meandering riffle pool morphology, and filling
existing drainage ditches. All these activities improved the site wetland hydrology.
The improved site hydrology is also likely due to higher than average rainfall.

Most of the riparian floodplain area is now functioning as a wetland, which is a
positive ecological development.
o EPR hopes to avoid additional vegetation monitoring since these efforts
were initiated so early in the project's post -construction monitoring phase.
However, if required, EPR can conduct vegetation monitoring surveys in
MY8 if the previous year's data do not indicate a trend towards success.
No additional monitoring efforts are proposed.
o Wetland and rain gauge data graphs from MY1 have been included in the
Final AMP.
o The maximum percentage of each species that will be planted is included
in the Revised Vegetation Selection table attached to the Final AMP.
DWR Comments, Erin Davis
DWR appreciates the additional adaptive management plan information provided,
particularly the Revised Vegetation Selection. We are ok with the proposed additional
species and percentages. DWR is glad to see that random plots were incorporated into
the initial monitoring plan, however, we would still like to request 2-3 random transects to
demonstrate survival and diversity in MY3.
o Per a phone conversation with Erin Davis on 2/16/21, the 2-3 random
transects may be omitted from MY3 efforts as the spatial distribution of
fixed and changing random plots are sufficient.
2. DWR understands that it was a wetter than normal year. However, regarding the "very
thick herbaceous vegetation competition'; have you identified which species are
competing most with the planted woody stems? Are the species part of your seed mix or
volunteers? Is this a situation that will influence selection/percentages of seed mix
species on future sites?
o EPR has not identified any single species which competed the most with
the woody planted stems and whether these species were planted or
volunteer. It is clear that soft rush (juncus effusus), which was included in
the original planting plan at 4%, has grown very thick in places. This
species was already present on the site, however, and much of what is
present on the site is likely volunteer growth.
EPA Comments, Todd Bowers
*Note: These comments were addressed in the Revised AMP submitted on 2/11/2021
I have reviewed the Adaptive Management Plan (AMP) for the proposed supplemental
planting of the NCDMS Meadowbrook mitigation site to address the poor sitewide
vegetation performance following the Monitoring Year 1 report of December 2020. In the
MY1 Report, EPR was forthcoming in providing the data pertaining to unexpectedly high
water table levels and vegetation mortality across much of the site following a year of
higher than normal precipitation that produced an abnormally high number of bankfull
events. I understand that sitewide supplemental planting needs to occur and that this
-PROVIDING ECOSYSTEM PLANNING AND RESTORATION SERVICES TO SUPPORT A SUSTAINABLE ENVIRONMENT -

needs to happen as soon as possible to take advantage of the rapidly closing window of
plant dormancy.
With that in mind I offer the following suggestions to facilitate a better understanding of
the corrective action to be undertaken. I recommend adding the wetland indicator status
to the desired 8 species listed on page 2 of the AMP along with a clearer understanding
of where these species will be planted. Since there are two distinct vegetation zones
there should be some delineation between the two in species distribution. Poor
performance was illustrated (vegetation problem area) for the upland areas too, so some
consideration of wet condition tolerances needs to be considered for those areas as
well. I also understand the urgency to address this problem, however the IRT should
have been altered to this back in December so that we could have been a bit more
proactive in addressing EPR's AMP and need to take immediate corrective action. I did
not see the MY1 Report until the AMP was sent out for review so that may have caused
some delay in turnaround for IRT approval. I understand that mortality was not just
linked to wetter than expected conditions but rather that herbaceous vegetation
competition was a contributing factor. If possible, I would like to know species mortality
rates (diff between planted stems and those that survived) so that species with high
mortality can be avoided or likewise those that have done well can be promoted.
o Noted. These comments were addressed in the Revised AMP submitted on
2/11 /2021.
WRC Comments, Olivia Munzer
Comments on the additional species:
1. -Witch hazel is a FACU species. Make sure this species isn't planted in the consistently
wet area. They state that the upland areas did mostly well, so where will they plant this
species, as well as those listed as FAC.
o The upland planting areas account for only around 0.9 acres throughout
the site. In general, these areas did perform better than the riparian wetland
areas but they will still be supplementally planted using the revised upland
planting mix presented in the attachments.
2. - I'd prefer to see something other than tulip poplar on the list since it was originally
planted (105/o) and it will volunteer.
o Tulip poplar is a successful native species that will likely thrive in the
difficult site conditions. It is preferred that Tulip poplar will remain as part
of the AMP.
Comments on the 2018 planting plan — I realize I am late to comment on this, but for next
time and to note on other projects:
1. - Remove cereal rye from temporary seeding. It is allelopathic.
2. - Add more pollinator species to the seed mix
3. - Riverbank wild -rye only occurs in mountains
4. - Switchgrass not commonly found in that part of the state
(https.Ilauth 1. dpr. ncparks. gov/flora/species—account. php)
5. - Festuca ovina var. duriuscala — it is an introduced species
-PROVIDING ECOSYSTEM PLANNING AND RESTORATION SERVICES TO SUPPORTA SUSTAINABLE ENVIRONMENT -

6. - Tall Fescue and Kentucky bluegrass as they can be invasive
(https.11www. invasive. org/species/grasses. cfm).
7. - Although persimmon can be found in a variety of habitats, it doesn't seem appropriate
for riparian wetland. It is most commonly found in dry to mesic forests and edges.
o Thank you for the comments on the 2018 planting plan. These will be taken
into consideration on future projects. Note that there are several reasons
that these species are included, and these can be discussed at a later date
as needed.
If you have any questions, please contact me at 925-337-1470 or via email at cjones(ab_eprusa.net.
Sincerely,
Cidney Jones, PE & CFM
-PROVIDING ECOSYSTEM PLANNING AND RESTORATION SERVICES TO SUPPORTA SUSTAINABLE ENVIRONMENT -

Ecosystem Planning and Restoration, LLC
ECOSYSTEM 1150 SE Maynard Road, Suite 140
PLANNING & Cary, NC 27511
RESTORATION Phone: [phone]
Ira www.eprusa.net
Adaptive Management Plan for Meadow Brook Stream Restoration Project
Revised February 16, 2021
The Meadow Brook Stream Restoration Project (Project, Site) is a DMS Full -Delivery located in Yadkin
County, NC. The site is currently in MY2 (2021). Riparian herbaceous vegetation that was established
after construction appears to be flourishing throughout the Site. Additionally, no invasive species were
noted within the conservation easement. All restored streams meet the success criteria as established in
the Final approved Mitigation Plan (2018). The site has withstood multiple storm events in MY1 and has
held up extremely well. EPR is proposing to conduct supplemental planting across a portion of the site
in early 2021 during dormant season.
Riparian vegetation monitoring evaluates the growth and development of planted and volunteer
vegetation across the Site. Six (6) permanent vegetation monitoring plots were established across the
Site. The individual trees within each permanent plot were flagged and identified to facilitate repeat
monitoring each year. In addition to the 6 permanent plots, 6 randomly placed vegetation plots are
established each year and the location of these plots is recorded using a GPS. All vegetation plot
locations for MY1 are shown in the current conditions plan view (CCPV; Attached).
The vegetation performance criteria, as established in the Final approved Mitigation Plan (2018), are
listed below:
• Vegetation success criteria of 320 native stems/acre in Year 3, 260 native stems/acre in Year 4
and 210 native stems/acre in Year 7.
• Trees must average 7 feet in height at Year 5, and 10 feet in height at Year 7.
• Any single species can only account for 50% of the required stems per monitoring plot.
Data from MY1 is summarized in the table on the following page, Tables 6 and 7 from the MY1 Report
are also provided in the attachments.
11Page

Ira. ECOSYSTEMPLANNING PLANNING &
RESTORATION
Ecosystem Planning and Restoration, LLC
1150 SE Maynard Road, Suite 140
Cary, NC 27511
Veg Plot ID
MY1 Stem
Count
MY1
Stems/AC
Dominant Species
Composition (%)
VPF-1
8
324
25
VPF-2
21
850
18
VPF-3
5
202
29
VPF-4
9
364
22
VPF-5
13
526
31
VPF-6
3
121
67
VPR-7
1
40
100
VPR-8
6
243
33
VPR-9
8
324
25
VPR-10
3
121
67
VPR-11
4
162
50
VPR-12
11
445
36
Phone: [phone]
www.eprusa.net
As indicated by the low planted stem count numbers found in many vegetation plots, much of the
planted areas are not meeting the performance criteria. Six out of twelve of the riparian plots are
already below the interim success criteria for density in year 3 and three more plots (shown in yellow)
are not expected to meet the interim success criteria. Table 5 in Appendix A of the MY1 Report indicates
that 8.80 acres of the 11.2-acre easement (78.6%) can be described as low stem density areas. The CCPV
provided in the attachments shows the vegetation problem areas.
The high woody species mortality documented in the MY1 Report is likely due to 2 reasons:
1. Very thick herbaceous vegetation competition
Very wet conditions (refer to site groundwater monitoring attachment)
Supplemental planting efforts are currently being planned to re -plant certain areas of the site where
mortality is high so that the site will meet the interim success criteria. This will include re -planting the
available species included in the Final approved Mitigation Plan (2018) which were generally based on
species suggested by Schafale and Weakly (1990) for Piedmont/Low Mountain Alluvial Forest and
Schafale (2012) for Piedmont Alluvial Forest. The planting plan and planting zones from the plan set are
provided in the attachments. Also, as part of these efforts, the planting contractor has
suggested/requested using some additional native species that were not originally proposed in the Final
approved Mitigation Plan (2018). The contractor is confident that these species will improve
success. The additional species are listed in the table on the following page and revised vegetation plan
tables are provided in the attachments.
2 1 P a g e

Ira. ECOSYSTEMPLANNING PLANNING &
RESTORATION
Ecosystem Planning and Restoration, LLC
1150 SE Maynard Road, Suite 140
Cary, NC 27511
Phone: [phone]
www.eprusa.net
Cephalanthus occidentalis
OBL
Buttonbush
Physocarpus opulifolius
FACW
Nine Bark
Alnus serrulate
OBL
Tag Alder
Hamamelis virginiana
FACU
Witch hazel
Quercus michauxii
FACW
Swamp chestnut oak
Liriodendron tulipirera
FACU
Tulip poplar
Lindera benzoin
FAC
Spicebush
Carpinus caroliniana
FAC
American Hornbeam
Planting zones will loosely follow the zones shown in the Plans (Zone 1 along the streambanks, Zone 2 in
the riparian wetlands, and Zone 3 in the Uplands). However within Zone 2, the FACW and OBL species
listed in the table above will also be planted within areas of consistent standing water identified in the
field. Also, approved species included in Zone 1 will be planted in these areas. The upland zone shown
in the original planting plan generally did well and only accounts for 0.9 acres of planting. Individual
species will be selected and planted per specific site conditions under the supervision of a qualified
planting contractor. The maximum percent any species will encompass is provided in the revised
vegetation plan in the Attachments. Green Ash will continue to be limited to 5% and the proposed
diverse list will help ensure that no species is dominant.
EPR is making every effort to address the vegetation issues reported above in MY2 (2021) with more wet
tolerant species. As it is very early in the monitoring, EPR does not believe that additional monitoring is
warranted at this time.
3 1 P a g e

Ira. ECOSYSTEMPLANNING PLANNING &
RESTORATION
Attachments
Ecosystem Planning and Restoration, LLC
1150 SE Maynard Road, Suite 140
Cary, NC 27511
Phone: [phone]
www.eprusa.net
for the
Adaptive Management Plan for Meadow Stream Restoration Project
1. Current Condition Plan View (CCPV) — Figures 2, 2A — 2C from Final Monitoring Year 1 Report
(Dec 2020)
2. Vegetation Plot Data —Table 6 from Final Monitoring Year 1 Report (Dec 2020)
3. Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Table — Table 7 from Final Monitoring Year 1
Report (Dec 2020)
4. Groundwater and Rain Data from MY1 — from Final Monitoring Year 1 Report (Dec 2020)
5. Annual Rain Data Summary from MY1— from Final Monitoring Year 1 Report (Dec 2020)
6. Revised Vegetation Plan — Created for this AMP
7. Vegetation Selection Plan Sheet — Sealed construction plan set, identical content to Appendix 9
from Final approved Mitigation Plan (2018)
8. Vegetation Plan Sheets — Sealed construction plan set, identical content to Appendix 9 from
Final approved Mitigation Plan (2018)
4 1 P a g e

L f
'j Reach 1 � � t' v
VPF-5g
r -awl
Low planted stem density, dense ,A
herbaceous vegetation growth. / /!
`Culvert f /f
VPF-6 /
Ae
, At;�
d � /
Legend
Top of Bank (ASB) Existing Wetlands Fixed Veg Plot - Unsuccessful Rain Gauge Farm Path ® Vegetation Problem Area
Stream Centerline Q Conservation Easement Fixed Veg Plot - Successful — Fencing ® Unfilled Ditches
Pre -Existing Streams ----- Cross Sections [� Random Veg Plot - Unsuccessful Stream Gauge — Fence Gates ® Filled Ditches
Structures O Photo Points Random Veg Plot - Successful Wetland Gauge NC OneMap Orthoimagery (2018)
0 100 N MEADOW BROOK STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT DMS PROJECT
FEET CURRENT CONDITION PLAN VIEW: ASSET MAP 1C_ ID# 100024
1 inch = 100 feet MY 1: 2020 h{[j9pfjpgSQfVlCf.S DEC 2020
ECOSYSTEM
FIGURE 2A YADKIN COUNTY, NC PLANNING&
ARESTORAIFON

VPF-4
Reach 2
6
Reach 1
Aw�
4
F-2
Low planted stem density, dense
herbaceous vegetation growth.
00
Reach 3
4
VPF-1
­
V
PR-12
j Reach 4 i
43
Legend
Top of Bank (ASB) Existing Wetlands hh, Fixed Veg Plot - Successful Stream Crossing 7-7
* Stream Gauge Vegetation Problem Area
Stream Centerline Q Conservation Easement Random Veg Plot - Unsuccessful Farm Path Unfilled Ditches
Pre -Existing Streams Cross Sections C Random Veg Plot - Successful Wetland Gauge — Fencing Filled Ditches
— Structures 0 Photo Points Reach Breaks — Fence Gates NC Onelvlap Orthoimagery (2018)
0 100 N MEADOW BROOK STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT DMS PROJECT
6iiiiii?!Tn FEET CURRENT CONDITION PLAN VIEW: ASSET MAP 1C_ ID# 100024
1 inch = 100 feet MY 1: 2020 DEC 2020
ECOSYSTEM
FIGURE 2B YADKIN COUNTY, NC PLANNING&
ARESTORAIFON

Table 6. Vegetation Plot Data
Meadow Brook Stream Restoration Project (NCDMS Project No. 100024)
Planted Acreage
11.2
Date of Initial Plant
2020-01-20
Date(s) of Supplemental Plant(s)
#N/A
Date(s) Mowing
#N/A
Date of Current Survey
2020-10-27
Plot size (ACRES)
0.0247
Scientific Name
Common Name
Tree/Shrub
Indicator
Status
Veg Plot 1 F
Veg Plot 2 F
Veg Plot 3 F
Veg Plot 4 F
Veg Plot 5 F
Veg Plot 6 F
Veg Plot 7
R
Veg Plot 8
R
Veg Plot 9
R
Veg Plot 10
R
Veg Plot 11
R
Veg Plot 12
R
Planted
Total
Planted
Total
Planted
Total
Planted
Total
Planted
Total
Planted
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
FACW
2
2
2
2
3
3
2
1
1
1
Celtis laevigata
sugarberry
Tree
FACW
1
1
1
1
Cercis canadensis
eastern redbud
Tree
FACU
3
3
1
1
1 1
Cornus amomum
silky dogwood
Shrub
FACW
4
4
1
1
4
4
1
4
Diospyros virginiana
common persimmon
Tree
FAC
2
2
1
1
2
2
2
2
1
1
2
1
1
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
FACW
2
2
3
3
2
2
1
1
2
2
Species Included in
Liriodendron tulipifera
tuliptree
Tree
FACU
1
1
3
3
2
Approved
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
FACW
3
3
1
1
1
1
2
Mitigation Plan
Quercus alba
white oak
Tree
FACU
1
1
Quercus nigra
water oak
Tree
FAC
1
1
Quercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
FAC
2
Quercus rubra
northern red oak
Tree
FACU
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
Salix nigra
black willow
Tree
OBL
2
2
1
1
1
1
1 1
1
2
2
1
Sambucus canadensis
American black elderberry
Tree
1
1
Ulmus americana
American elm
Tree
FACW
1
1
1
Sum
Performance Standard
8
8
21
21
5
5
9
9
13
13
3
3
1
6
8
3
4
11
Post Mitigation Plan
Acerrubrum
red maple
Tree
FAC
2
2
Species
Alnus serrulata
tag alder
Tree
OBL
1
1
Sum
Proposed Standard
8
8
21
21
5
5
9
9
13
13
3
3
1
6
8
3
4
11
Current Year Stem Count
8
21
5
9
13
3
1
6
8
3
4
11
Stems/Acre
324
850
202
364
526
121
40
243
324
121
162
445
Mitigation Plan
Performance
Species Count
5
8
4
7
7
2
1
5
6
2
3
6
Standard
Dominant Species Composition (%)
25
18
29
22
31
67
100
33
25
67
50
36
Average Plot Height
3
1
1
2
3
6
2
2
3
3
3
2
Invasives
ML 0
0 dw
6m 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1). Bolded species are proposed for the current monitoring year, italicized species are not approved, and a regular font indicates that the species has been approved.
2). The "Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan" section contains only those species that were included in the original approved mitigation plan. The "Post Mitigation Plan Species" section includes species that are being proposed through a mitigation plan addendum for the current monitoring year (bolded) , species that have been
approved in prior monitoring years through a mitigation plan addendum (regular font), and species that are not approved (italicized).
3). The "Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" section is derived only from stems included in the original mitigation plan, whereas the "Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" includes data from mitigation plan approved, post mitigation plan approved, and proposed stems.
Appendix B
Meadow Brook Stream Restoration Project ECOSYSTEM
DMS # 100024 Ar PLANNING &
RESTORATION

Table 7. Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Table
Meadow Brook Stream Restoration Project (NCDMS Project No. 100024)
Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Table
Veg Plot 1 F
Veg Plot 2 F
Veg Plot 3 F
Stems/Ac.
Av. Ht. (ft)
# Species
% Invasives
Stems/Ac.
Av. Ht. (ft)
# Species
% Invasives
Stems/Ac.
Av. Ht. (ft)
# Species % Invasives
Monitoring Year 7
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 1
324
5
0
850
9
0
202
Monitoring Year 0
809
6iL
0
1174
10
0
728
Veg Plot
4 F
Veg Plot
5 F
Veg Plot
6 F
Stems/Ac.
Av. Ht. (ft)
# Species
% Invasives
Stems/Ac.
Av. Ht. (ft)
# Species
% Invasives
Stems/Ac.
Av. Ht. (ft)
# Species
% Invasives
Monitoring Year 7
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 1
364
7
0
526
0
121
2
0
Monitoring Year 0
7
0
728
r 8
1 0
688
3
0
Veg Plot
7 R
Veg Plot
8 R
Veg Plot
9 R
Stems/Ac.
Av. Ht. (ft)
# Species
% Invasives
Stems/Ac.
Av. Ht. (ft)
# Species
% Invasives
Stems/Ac.
Av. Ht. (ft)
# Species
% Invasives
Monitoring Year 7
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 1
0 40
1
0
243
5
0
324
6
0
Monitoring Year 0
Veg Plot 10 R
Veg Plot 11 R
Veg Plot 12 R
Stems/Ac.
Av. Ht. (ft)
# Species
% Invasives
Stems/Ac.
Av. Ht. (ft)
# Species
% Invasives
Stems/Ac.
Av. Ht. (ft)
# Species
% Invasives
Monitoring Year 7
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 1
121
2
0
162
3
0
445
6
Monitoring Year 0
*Each monitoring year represents a different plot for the random vegetation plot "groups". Random plots are denoted with an R, and fixed plots with an F.
Appendix B
ECOSYSTEM
Meadow Brook Stream Restoration Project .. f� RESTORATION
ANNING &
DMS # 100024
1\ ET�RATI`i

Meadow Brook Stream Restoration Project
Year 1 (2020) Groundwater Data
MB GW1
1040 i — 20
Barometric pressure gauge i i
18
1039 data was not available from 16
1/22/2020to 4/7/2020
14
1038 - -
I 12
1037 - - - 10 v
> u
N •I 1 8
w
—— i—
———— —— —— — — — — —— — —— — — ——
———— •— —� — 4
1035 — — -
- 2
1034 0
1/1/2020 1/31/2020 3/1/2020 3/31/2020 4/30/2020 5/30/2020 6/29/2020 7/29/2020 8/28/2020 9/27/2020 10/27/2020 11/26/2020 12/26/2020
Date
Water Level (ft) — — — Ground Elevation (ft) - - - - -12 in. Below Ground — — — Begin Growing Season — — — End Growing Season
Daily Rainfall (in) • 2020 Monthly Rainfall — — — 30th Percentile — — — 70th Percentile
Site Info (Year 1)
Growing Season Information (Year
1- 2020)
Site
Meadow Brook Stream Restoration Project
Site
Meadow Brook Stream Restoration Project
Begin Date
7/16/2019
Gauge ID
MB GW1
End Date
10/28/2020
Serial #
20234983
Total Days of Well Data 470
*Percentile lines in reference to WETS historic monthly rainfall data
Growing Season Start Date
4/4/2020
Growing Season End Date
10/28/2020
Total Growing Season Days
207
NRCS Soil Series
Dan River and Codorus
5.0%
Growing Season (Days)
10
12.5%
Growing Season (Days)
26
Most Consecutive Successful Days Within Growing Season
102
cent of Growing Season with Consecutive Successful Days
49.3%
erage Water Level Elevation During Growing Season (ft)
EA
1036.63
Total Cumulative Successful Days Within Growing Season
202

Meadow Brook Stream Restoration Site
Year 1 (2020) Groundwater Data
f ► L���i�f�a
1044
20
I
1
Barometric pressure gauge
I
I
18
1043
data was not available from
16
1/22/2020 to 4/7/2020
I
'
14
1042
I •
•
I
I
'
12
c
• I
1
�
- - -
-
- - - - - - - -1041
10
v
M
>
ai
•'
'
g
t
c
w
I
'
I
'
—
•
6
1039
1038
'
Ak
'
0
1/1/2020 1/31/2020 3/1/2020 3/31/2020 4/30/2020
5/30/2020 6/29/2020 7/29/2020
8/28/2020 9/27/2020 10/27/2020 11/26/2020 12/26/2020
Date
Water Level (ft) — — — Ground Elevation (ft)
- - - - -12 in. Below Ground
— — — Begin Growing Season — — — End Growing Season
Daily Rainfall (in) • 2020 Monthly Rainfall
— — — 30th Percentile
— — — 70th Percentile
Site Info (Year 1)
Growing Season Information (Year
1- 2020)
Site
Meadow Brook Stream Restoration Site
Site
Meadow Brook Stream Restoration Site
Begin Date
7/23/2019
Gauge ID
MB GW2
End Date
10/28/2020
Serial#
20234986
Total Days of Well Data 497
*Percentile lines in reference to WETS historic monthly rainfall data
Growing Season Start Date
4/4/2020
Growing Season End Date
10/28/2020
Total Growing Season Days
207
NRCS Soil Series
Dan River and Codorus
5.0%
Growing Season (Days)
10
12.5%
Growing Season (Days)
26
Most Consecutive Successful Days Within Growing Season
205
Percent of Growing Season with Consecutive Successful Days
99.0%
Average Water Level Elevation During Growing Season (ft)
1041.23
Total Cumulative Successful Days Within Growing Season
205

Meadow Brook Stream Restoration Project
Figure 3. Monthly Rainfall Data Monitoring
Year 1 - 2020
2020 Monthly Rainfall —30th Percentile 70th Percentile
iiEIIIIII]
12.00
10.00
c
8.00
a
6.00
0
4.00
2.00
Jan-20 Feb-20 Mar-20 Apr-20 May-20 Jun-20 Jul-20 Aug-20 Sep-20 Oct-20 Nov-20 Dec-20
Month
Note: Historic rainfall data from WETS Station: Yadkinville 6 E, NC, 1971-2019. Project rainfall data from HOBO Tipping Bucket Rain Gauge located at the
Meadow Brook Stream Restoration Site, 0.75 miles SE.
Rainfall Summary
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
Annual Precip Total
73.12
-
-
-
-
-
-
WETS 30th Percentile
41.65
-
-
-
-
-
-
WETS 70th Percentile
49.68
-
-
-
-
-
-
Normal
Y
-
-
-
-
-
-
*Note: 2020 rainfall data does not include data from November or December because the gauge was last downloaded in October during MY1 monitoring.

REVISED VEGETATION SELECTION
MEADOW BROOK ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN, FEB 2021
Zone 2 - Riparian Wetlands Vegetation
-Riparian vegetation species shall be planted in the areas designated. The planting density will depend on availability of larger stock.
If bare -root stock are used then supplemental planting will be performed to reach 680 stems/acre. If larger stock are available, high
risk areas will be targeted and a lower density will be installed.
-All species will be planted according to the plans, details, and construction specifications. Not all of the species listed may be
planted. A minimum of 6 species will be planted. Commercial availability may dictate which species and size are actually planted.
Maximum Wetland Indicator
Scientific Name Common Name % by Species Status
Betula nigra River Birch 10% FACW
Sarberry `° FAGW
Diospryos virginiana
Persimmon
10%
FAC
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Green Ash
5%
FACW
Platanus occidentalis
Sycamore
10%
FACW
Quercus nigra
Water Oak
5%
FAC
Quercus phellos
Willow Oak
5%
FAC
U/mus americana
American Elm
5%
FACW
Total
100%
Zone 3 - Upland Vegetation
-Riparian vegetation species shall be planted in the areas designated. The planting density will depend on availability of larger stock
If bare -root stock are used then supplemental planting will be performed to reach 680 stems/acre. If larger stock are available, high
risk areas will be targeted and a lower density will be installed.
-All species will be planted according to the plans, details, and construction specifications. Not all of the species listed may be
planted. A minimum of 6 species will be planted. Commercial availability may dictate which species and size are actually planted.
Scientific Name
Common Name
Maximum
Wetland Indicator
Status
Carya glabra
Pignut Hickory
10%
FACU
Carya tomentosa
Mockernut Hickory
10%
NI
Cercis ^ naden^
Redbud
5%
FACU
Corpus florida
Flowering Dogwood
15%
FACU
Diospyros virginiana
Persimmon
15%
FAC
Ye,F epaea
"
FACU
`astern Red C da
5-0k
FACU
Liriodendron tulipifera
Tulip Poplar
15%
FACU
Seurweed
5011a
UPS
Black Cherry
5040
FACU
Quercus alba
White Oak
5%
FACU
Quercus fa/cata
Southern Red Oak
5%
FACU
Quercus rubra
Northern Red Oak
5%
FACU
NI = No indicator status
Total
100%

VEGETATION SELECTION
Temporary Seeding
Temporary herbaceous seed mixtures for the restoration site shall be planted in all disturbed areas. Temporary seed shall be applied
according to the construction specifications and the information specified below.
Scientific Name Common Name Rate Oates
Secale cereale Cereal Rye Grain 130 Ibslacre September to March (Cool Season)
Urochloa ramosa Browntop Millet 30 Ibslacre April to August (Warm Season)
Total Planting Area for Temporary Seeding 13.5 acres)
Zone 2 - Riparian Wetlands (Permanent Seeding)
This permanent seed mixture shall be planted in all disturbed areas as specified on the plans as Zone 2. This permanent seed rnixhire
shalf be appfied with temporary seed, as defined in the construction specifications. Permanent seed shall be applied at a rate of 25
Ibslacre.
Wetland Indicator
Scientific Name
Common Name
°% by Species
Status
Panicum Vrgatum
Switchgrass
23 %
FAC
Etymus riparius
Riverbank Witdrye
20%
FACW
Panicum dichotomiflorum
Smooth Panicgrass
14%
FACW
Carex vulpinoidea
Fox sedge
12%
OBL
Panicum rigdulum
Redtop Panicgrass
6%
FACW
Dichanthelium clandestinum
Deer -tongue
8%
FAC
8idens frondosa (or adstosa)
Beggars Tick
7°%
FACW
Junes effusus
Soft Rush
4°%
FACW
Persicaria pensylvanice
Pennsylvania smartweed
2°%
FACW
sparganium americanum
American Bur Reed
2%
OBL
Total
100%
Total Planting Area for Permanent Seeding: 10.3 acre(s)
Zone 3 - Uplands (Permanent Seeding)
This permanent seed mixture shall be planted in all disturbed areas as specified on the plans as Zone 3. This permanent seed mixture
shall be applied with temporary seed, as defined in the construction specifications. Permanent seed shall be applied at a rate of 25
Ibslacre.
Wetland Indicator
Scientific Name
Common Name
a% by Species
Status
Elymus virgnicus
Virginia W[drye
15%
FACW
Tripsacum dactyloides
Eastern Gamma Crass
13%
FACW
Agrostis scabra
Rough benlgrass
12%
FAC
Panicum virgatum
Swtchgrass
12%
FAC
Carex vulpinoidea
Fox Sedge
10%
OBL
Tridens flavus
Purple Top
10%
FACU
Schizachyrium scopardum
Little Blue Stem
8%
FACU
Coreopsis lanceolata
Lance -Leaved Tick Seed
5°%
FACU
Elymus hystrix
Sottiebrush Grass
5%
UPL
Sorghastrum nutans
Yellow Indian Grass
5%
FACU
Festuca ovins var. duriuscala Hard Fescue 4% UPL
Rudbeckia hirta Black -Eyed Susan 1 % FACU
Total 100%
Total Planting Area for Permanent Seeding: 0.9 acre(s)
Zone 4 - Areas Outside of Easement Permanent Seeding)
This permanent seed mixture shall be planted in all disturbed areas as specified on the plans as Zone 4. This permanent seed mixture
shall be applied with temporary seed, as defined in the construction specifications. Permanent seed shall be applied at the rate shown
below.
Scientific Name Common Name Rate Oates
Poa pratensis Kentucky Bluegrass 1 Ibil,000 sq.ft.
August -September (Cool Season)
Schadonorus arundioalceus Tall Fescue 5 Ibll,000 sq,ft
Total 616s11.000 sq,ft
Total Planting Area for Permanent Seeding: 3.3 acre(s)
REVISIONS
NO.
❑FSCRIPTION
ENGR
APPROV
DATE
1
DRAFT MITIGATION PLAN
CJ
KLT
3/2/ 1 B
2
FINAL MITIGATION PLAN
CJ
KIT
9/TO/18
3
LAND OUALITY PERMITTING
CJ
KLT
0/24/16
4
CONSfRUC70N PLAN SET
CJ
KLT
1 2/7/ 18
:ZFPARED FOR
NC DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
1652 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEiGH, NC 27699-1652
Zone 1 - Live Staking Stream Banks
Live stakes will be installed along all stabilized bank areas, as indicated on the planting plan sheets, details, and according to the
construction specifications. Live stake all disturbed banks with a single row at a 1,742 live stakes per acre (S' x 5' spacing). Not a8
of the species listed may be planted. Commercial availability may dictate which species are actually planted.
Approx. Number of
Wetland Indicator
Scientific Name
Common Name
% by Species
Stems
Status
Corpus amomum
Silky dogwood
40%
766
FACW
Salix sericea
Silky w )low
30%
575
OBL
Salix nigra
Black willow
20%
383
OBL
Sambucus canadensis
Etdorberry
10%
192
FAG
Total
100%
1916
Total Planting Area for Livestakes 1.1 acre(s)
Zone 2 - Riparian Wetlands Vegetation
Riparian vegetation species (bare -roots) shall be planted in the areas designated on the plans using the species mixture and
percentages listed below. Riparian species shali be planted at an overall density of 680 stems per acre (8' x 8' spacing). Al
species Wit be planted according to the plans, details, and construction specifications. Not all of the species listed may be planted -
a minimum of 6 species will be planted- Commercial availability may dictate which species are actually planted.
Wetland Indicator
Scientific Name
Common Name
% by Species
Status
Bel nigra
River Birch
20%
FACW
CelNs laevigata
Sugarberry
5%
FACW
Diospryos wrg'niaria
Persimmon
10°%
FAC
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Green Ash
10%
FACW
Platanus occidentalis
Sycamore
20°%
FACW
Quercus nigra
Water Oak
10%
FAC
Quercus phellos
Willow Oak
15%
FAC
Ulmus americana
American Elm
10%
FACW
Total 100%
Total Planting Area for Riparian Vegetation F 9.2 acre(s)
Zone 3 - Upland Vegetation
Upland vegetation species (bare -roots) shall be planted in the areas designated on the plans using the species mixture and
percentages listed below. Species shall be planted at an overall density of 680 stems per acre (8' x 8' spacing). All species will
be planted according to the plans, details, and construction specifications. Not all of the species listed may be planted - a
Minimum of 6 species will be planted. Commercial availability may dictate which species are actually planted.
Wetland Indicator
Scientific Name
Common Name
% by Species
Status
Carya g'abra
Pignut Hickory
10°%
FACU
Carya tomentosa
Mockernut Hickory
10°%
NI
Cercis canadensis
Redbud
5°%
FACU
Corns tlorida
Flowering Dogwood
5%
FACU
Diospyros virg'niana
Persim ion
10%
FAC
11ex opaca
American Holly
51%
FACU
Juniperus virgintana
Eastern Red Cedar
5°%
FACU
Liriodendron tulipifera
Tulip Poplar
10%
FACU
Oxydendrum arboreum
Sourwood
5°%
UPL
Primus serotine
Black Cherry
5°%
FACU
Quercus alba
White Oak
10%
FACU
Quercus falcata
Southern Red Oak
10%
FACU
Quercus rubra
Northern Red Oak
10%
FACU
Ni = No Indlwtor status
Total
100%
Total Planting Area for Upland Vegetation F 0.9 acre(s)
MEADOW BROOK
YADKIN COUNTY, NC
IN THE OFFICE OF
ECOSYSTEM
PLANNING &
ria RESTORATION
559 JONES FRANKLIN RD, SUITE 150
RALEIGH, NC 27606
LICENSE # P-1 182
PROJECT # SHEET NO.
082 28
VEGETATION
SELECTION
\`�►11r1A
a g r SEAL
• +ill ? y
affm

REVISIONS
NO.
DESCRIPTION
ENGR,
APPROV
DATE
1
DRAFT MITIGATION PLAN
CJ
KLT
3/2/ 1 $
2
FINAL MITIGATION PLAN
CJ
KLT
9/10/18
3
LAND QUALITY PERMITTING
CJ
KLT
0/24/18
4
CONSTRUCTION PLAN SET
C.1
KLT
12/7/ 18
SWIMMER I ZONE 2 - RIPARIAN WETLANDS
ZONE3-UPLAND
l I ZONE .4-AREAS OUTSIDE EASEMENT (PERMANENT SEEDING)
REPAIRED FOR'
.
NC DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
1652 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH. NC 27699-1652
MEADOW BROOK
YADKIN COUNTY, NC
PREPARED IN THE OFFICE OF:
ECOSYSTEM
PLANNING &
RESTORATION
559JONES FRANKLIN RD. SUITE 150
RALFIGH. NC 27606
LICENSE # P-1 182
PROJECT # SHEET NO. ,
082 12
VEGETATION
PLAN
m
Iu
Iu
In
w
z
J
S
U
t-
Q
2
40 20 0 40 80
SCALE (Fn
.o111III!, ////,
0 2
a SEAL
0 3187
i C' ' • �G'fiV�� •.5 �

REVISIONS III
NO.
DESCRIPTION
ENGR
JAPPROV
DATE
1
DRAFT MITIGATION PLAN
CJ
KLT
3/2/ 18
2
FINAL MITIGATION PLAN
CJ
KLT
9/4O/18
3
LAND OUALITY PERMITTING
CJ
KLT
t 0/24/18
4
CONSTRUCTION PLAN SET
CJ
KLT
1 2/7/ 18
NC DEPARTMENTOF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
1 652 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH, NC 27699-1 652
MEADOW BROOK
YADKIN COUNTY, NC
PREPARED IN THE OFFICE OF:
rAECOSYSTEM
PLANNING &
0
RESTORATION
559 JONES FRANKLIN RD, SUITE 150
RALEIGH, NC 27606
LICENSE # P-1 182
PROJECT # SHEET NO
3
JN
�11'I'Irtl^rrl//
-%PR
O.kU}ECTs•.eNG [
o��s�o• �2
SEAL
43187
i C' '• NGIEV�� •'•
, i I , ,