20020459 Ver 1_Mitigation Information_20120413

CLAYHILL FARMS
EEP Project Number .00018
FDP Contract Number -none
USACE Action ID Number - Unknown
DWQ 404 Number - Unknown
TIP No. R -2105 WM
CLOSE OUT REPORT
STREAM AND WETLAND PROJECT
Setting & Classification
General Location
1 mile north of the
NCDOT
town of Kuhns
Basin
White Oak
Physiographic Region
Coastal Plain
Ecore ion
Carolina Flatwoods
USGS 14 -digit HU
03020106010060
01- oq5?
Project Performers
Source Agency
NCDOT
Designer
NCDOT
Monitoring Firm
Axiom Environmental
Property Interest Holder
NCDOT
Wetland Classification Riparian Nonriverine Headwater Forest
Nonriparian Hardwood Flat
Nonriparian Pine Flat
Mixed Mesic Hardwood Forest
Riparian Nonriverine Bottomland Harwood Forest
Thermal Regime warm
Overall Proiect Activities and Timeline
Milestone
Date
Mitigation Plan
September 2005
Final Design 90%
2006
Site Construction
2006
Planting
2006
Monitoring Year 1
March 2006 -March 2007
Monitoring Year 2
March — November 2007
Monitoring Year 3
March — November 2008
Monitoring (Ye az 4
March — November 2009
Monitoring Year 5
March — November 2010
March 2012
Clayhill Farm Page 1 of 20

Clayhill Farms
WE11a no a 51ream WgaUon
Plan R.—I
Clayhill Faun Page 4 of 20
M O a T A a
l �
a�u
Sole on Insa1 Map
1 5o0.00o
�
J
�Iw R.Irp.RrR CwIYr «
m.awewmrlaw
.l�Arn��tcnl
.. nnn lyRwL.�RCaruRn - ^ -�
�ial.w R�ilwwnao prr•cI.L Rarl ' -, I 0 0.2S O.S 1
1.5 2
w wrnnr.aw w«e.awr MWs
tAB,00D
a a
R'R
SITE LOCATION
CLAYHILL FARMS RESTORATION SITE
EEP ProOd Number .0001 S
TIP R -2105 M
W
ur
- 1
1
Al
_
Jonas County. Norm Carolina
Clayhill Farms
WE11a no a 51ream WgaUon
Plan R.—I
Clayhill Faun Page 4 of 20

Crawan _... _. .
NAY
Cisyhill Farms
car.a va�maa
wauana a scream Mm9alpn
Plan Repon
Flyun 3
�
Solis Map
rosYn NaUOnN Forabl
Oral—
'
lgggb
— _anari.rtl�
Farllays
fulrl
�, 01YN 'Ip VM
(!tl bngl
frwr19a1TYP awNaw
•
Gain se+a.rwrl
- NPs ban e�TMiK
�Iyavnrobanwuro
Gawon
F
MGM
\ �
t +SW
0 yA 1000
1
laaw an—: rc
Ck&*M Famis
Wetland a Stream M ftal -, ort
Plan Rep
Figure 10
Waliand Delineation Map
Lail"
— caNaa.raa.a
— awroa
IYy
)� inwa
- hnabFaaa
® 4aNisa+rWiwMy
1Yr �
ORNMOSYY
e.aalleeralwa-
u0rr
1•aa06
•"
100 1000
r..�aataa�rak•
u)pgaE NmvW.FC
4iariD
w'FD N!5
Figure A2, Clayhill Farms Mitigation Site NCWAM Wetland Classification
Clayhill Farm Page 5 of 20

I
w
T
m
v

0
N
W
O
r
N
m
m
d
I
R
a
Uf'
U

Stem Counts for Planted Species Arranged by Plot
Cla hill Farms EP Pro'ect Number .00018
Species*
Year 5
(2010) Totals
Year 4
2009 Totals
Year 3
2008 Totals
Year 2
200 Totals
Year 1
2006 Totals
Betula nigra
6
6
6
6
3
Fraxinuspenmylvanica
24
24
22
20
7
Fraximcs s.
1
1
1
4
1
N ssa bi ora
21
IS
15
9
9
N ssa s .
33
37
36
32
16
Pinus palusMs
13
13
13
13
13
Pinus taeda
1
November 12, 2009
November 12, 2009
-
Pinus s.
8
9
9
9
9
uercus lyrata
40
43
42
39
41
uercus nigra
2
1
4
1 6
5
uercus pagoda
5
6
6
6
5
uereus phellos
1
1
1
1
uercus sr).
-
0
1
2010.
Taxodium distichum
12
12
10
10
6
Total Planted Stems
166
168
166
155
116
Total Planted Stems/Acre
672
680
672
628
470
* Planted stems were not documented during planting making it difficult to determine planted trees from naturally recanted trees.
Therefore, the number of "planted" species was based on the experience and judgment of the monitoring team, and counts for
planted species may be influenced by naturally recruited stems.
Verification of Bankfull Events
Cla hill Farms EP Project Number .00018
Date of Data
Date of Occurrence
Method
Photo (if
Collection
available
Total of 4.74 inches of rain documented by the onsite
September 1, 2006
September 1, 2006
rain gauge over a two-day period from August 31 (4.06
inches ) to September 1 2006 0.68 inches).
Total of 4.0 inches of rain documented by the onsite
August 13, 2008
August 13, 2008
rain gauge over a seven -day period from August 7 -13,
2008.
Total of 6.6 inches of rain documented at a nearby rain
August 14, 2009
August 14, 2009
station* over a four -day period from August 11 -14,
--
2009.
November 12, 2009
November 12, 2009
Visual observations of bankfull as the result of
1 -2
Tropical Storm Ida
Visual observations of overbank event including wrack
lines and sediment deposition resulting from a 1.9
February 10, 2010
February 5, 2010
inch* rainfall event on February 5, 2010 that occurred
3
after numerous rainfall events, within the 3 weeks
prior, that totaled 5.26 inches.
Total of 15 inches of rain documented at a nearby rain
October 28, 2010
September 27, 2010
station* over a five -day period from September 26-30,
--
2010.
*Reported at the Chenypomt Airport (KNKI) weather station (Weather Underground 1UIU)
Clayhill Farm Page 8 of 20

Summary of Groundwater Gauge Results for Years 1 through 5
Clayhill Farms (EEP Project Number .00018)
Success Criteria Achieved/Max Consecutive Days During Growing Season
Gauge
(Percentage)
Year 1 (2006)
Year 2 (2007)
Year 3 (2008)
Year 4 (2009)
Year 5 (2010)
Yes/34 days
Yes/79 days
Yes/94 days
Yes/118 days
Yes/45 days
GW 1
(14.0 percent)
32.6 percent)
38.8 percent)
48.8 percent)
(18.6 percent)
Yes/68 days
Yes/50 days
Yes/91 days
Yes /80 days
Yes/34 days
GW2
(28.1 percent)
20.7 percent)
37.6 percent)
33.1 percent)
(14.0 percent)
Yes/81 days
Yes/78 days
Yes/93 days
Yes/118 days
Yes/44 days
GW3
(33.5 percent)
32.3 percent)
38.4 percent)
48.8 percent)
(18.2 percent)
Yes/81 days
Yes/17 days
Yes/91 days
Yes/80 days
Yes/40 days
GW4
(33.5 percent)
31.8 percent)
37.6 percent)
33.1 percent)
(16.5 percent)
Yes/66 days
Yes/50 days
Yes/91 days
Yes/79 days
Yes/36 days
GW5
(27.3 percent)
20.7 percent)
37.6 percent)
32.6 rcent)
(14.9 percent)
Yes/37 days
No/23 days
Yes/88 days
Yes /48 days
Yes/31 days
GW6
(15.3 percent)
9.5 percent)
36.4 percent)
19.8 percent)
(12.8 percent)
Yes/69 days
Yes/50 days
Yes/90 days
Yes/80 days
Yes/33 days
GW7
(28.5 percent)
20.7 percent)
37.2 percent)
33.1 percent)
(13.6 percent)
Yes/68 days
Yes/50 days
Yes/89 days
Yes/67 days
Yes/35 days
GW8
(28.1 percent)
20.7 percent)
36.8 percent)
27.7 percent)
(14.5 percent)
Yes/38 days
No /24 days
Yes/89 days
Yes/60 days
Yes/41 days
GW9
(15.7 percent)
9.9 percent)
36.8 percent)
24.8 percent)
(16.9 percent)
Non days
No /5 days
No /14 days
No /12 days
No /10 days
GW 10
(2.9 percent)
2.1 percent)
5.8 percent)
5.0 percent)
(4.1 percent)
No/2 days
No /1 day
No /4 days
No /3 days
No /3 days
GW l l
(0.8 percent)
0.4 percent)
1.7 percent)
1.2 percent)
(1.2 percent)
No /5 days
No /5 days
No /8 days
No /8 days
No /3 days
GW 12
2.1 percent)
2.1 percent)
3.3 percent)
3.3 percent)
1.2 percent)
No /6 days
No /1 day
No /9 day
No/7 days
No /6 days
GW 13
(2.5 percent)
0.4 percent)
3.7 percent)
2.9 percent)
(2.5 percent)
No /18 days
No /14 days
Yes/54 days
Yes/44 days
No /30 days
GW 14
(7.4 percent)
5.8 rcent)
(22.3 percent)
18.2 percent)
(12.4 percent)
No/24 days
No /14 days
Yes/74 days
Yes/44 days
No/28 days
GW 15
(9.9 percent)
5.8 percent)
30.6 percent)
18.2 percent)
(11.6 percent)
No /0 days
No/2 days
No /9 day
No /9 day
Non days
GW 16
(0 percent)
(0.8 percent)
3.7 percent)
3.7 percent)
(2.9 percent)
No /7 days
No /3 days
No /13 days
No /11 days
No /6 days
GW 17
2.9 percent)
1.2 percent)
5.4 percent)
4.5 percent)
2.5 percent)
No /5 days
No/2 days
No /15 days
Yes/66 days
Yes/31 days
GW 18
2.1 percent)
0.8 percent)
6.2 percent)
27.3 percent)
12.8 pe rcent
No /6 days
No /4 days
Non days
No /8 days
No /10 days
GW 19
2.5 percent)
1.7 percent)
2.9 percent)
3.3 percent)
4.1 percent)
No /11 days
No /17 days
No /10 days
No /11 days
No /6 days
GW20
(4.5 percent)
7.0 percent)
4.1 percent)
(4.5 percent)
(2.5 percent)
Clayhill Farm Page 9 of 20

S Ti
R A x
.0
eo
O
O
YI
Lam.
(sa43u!) uoitev.dlMd
L
o
2
2 2
O
OdA
0.
I
m
rm
N
f"
2-
In
N
N
0
m
cs
N.4
f"
m
LA
w
Go
C4
v
N
4
m
L
o
2
2 2
O
OdA
0.
I

EEP Recommendations and Conclusions
Vegetation: Results from vegetation surveys exceeded success criteria based on planted stems alone with
an average of 470, 628, 672, 680, and 672 planted stems per acre present in years 1 through 5,
respectively. Dominant species identified at the Site were overcup oak (Quercus lyrata), tupelo species
( Nyssa Mora and Nyssa sp.), and green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica). Nine out of the ten individual
vegetation plots were above success criteria based on planted stems alone. Vegetation plot 9 had no
planted stems per acre remaining; however, when including natural recruits of pine (Pinus sp.), willow
oak (Quercus phellos), wax myrtle (Morelia cerifera), and red maple (Acer rubrum) the stem count was
above 2500 stems per acre. Photographs for year 5 (2010) monitoring are included on page 13. Based on
these results, Site vegetation should be considered successful.
Wetlands: Twenty gauges were maintained and monitored throughout the five year monitoring period.
Groundwater hydrology within 12 inches of the soil surface occurred for greater than 12.5 percent of the
growing season at Gauges GW1 -GW9 for all monitoring years with the exception of GW6 and GW9 in
Year 2 (2007). Hydrology at GW6 and GW9 in 2007 was just below success criteria with 9.5 and 9.9
percent consecutive inundation /saturation, respectively; however, 2007 was an extremely dry year as
indicated by climatic and drought data included in Figures A4 -A5 on page 10. Rain fall for 2007 totaled
16 inches below the mean 30 -year historic rainfall data (NOAA 2004). In all other years GW6 and GW9
were well -above success criteria; Gauges GW 1 -GW9 should be considered successful.
The remainder of the gauges were saturated or inundated for less than 12.5 percent of the growing season
(Gauges GW 10- GW20). These gauges are located within the lower half/southeastern portion of the Site
near the restored stream channel. A jurisdictional wetland delineation was completed within this area of
the Site, which consisted of approximately 75 acres in order to revise Wetland Mitigation Units as
depicted on Figure A6 on page 7. Information on the delineation is included in Appendix C.
Streams: Based on visual stream observations, the channel geometry compares favorably with the
emulated, stable E/C type stream reaches as set forth in the detailed mitigation plan. The current
monitoring observations demonstrate that dimension, pattern, and profile were stable over the course of
the five -year monitoring period.
Contineencies
Vegetation and Wetlands: One vegetation problem area was documented within the Site and is depicted
on Figure A3b (page 6). The area consists of poor planted stem survival/bare area adjacent to the restored
stream; photographs of this area are included on page 14. Poor survival most likely resulted from soil
infertility. A portion of this area is located within the restored wetlands; however, wetland credits are not
being generated within the bare area.
Wetlands: Gauges in the southeastern portion of the Site did not meet the defined success criteria;
therefore, a jurisdictional delineation was completed within this approximately 75 acre area. Results of
the delineation were used to revise Wetland Mitigation Units as depicted on Figure A6 on page 7.
Streams: Two stream areas of concern were noted The first is related to a bare area that encompasses
approximately 248 linear feet of stream. The second is a stressed cross -vane (stream photo point 12)
resulting from a lack of footers. However, the bed and banks up and downstream of both areas are stable
and are not anticipated to cause any problems. Photographs of each are included on page 14.
Clayhill Farm Page 11 of 20

PRE- During and Post CONSTRUCTION PICTURES
Clayhill Fawn Page 12 of 20

MUSE
2003 Precoustruction Aerials
Fann Page 13 of 20

2010 (Year 5) Postconstruction Aerials
Clayhill Farm Page 14 of 20

Clayhill Farms
Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photographs
Year 5 (2010) Annual Monitoring (Pictures Taken July 2010)
Claylilll Farm Page 15 of 20

Clayhill Farms
Stream Monitoring Fixed- Station Photographs
Year 5 (2010) Annual Monitoring (Pictures Taken October 2010)
Problem Area Photo 1: Bare area
fi_
-- -z• -
- 1, w__ 0
Clayhill Farm Page 16 of 20

APPENDIX A — Watershed Planning Summary
The Clayhill Farms project, located in White Oak 03201006, is not located in an EEP watershed planning
area (i.e. Targeted Local Watershed or Local Watershed Planning area).
Claylull Farm Page 17 of 20

APPENDIX B — Land Ownership and Protection
SITE PROTECTION INSTRUMENT
The land required for the construction, management, and stewardship of this mitigation project includes a
portion of the following parcel.
Landowner
County
Site
Deed Book
Acreage
Protection
and Page
protected
Instrument
Number
NC Dept. of
Transportation
Jones
Fee Simple
DB251 P163
176 (deed)
(2 parcels)
DB251 P167
179 (deed)
This project is owned by the NC Department of Transportation ( NCDOT) in fee simple.
LONG -TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN
NCDOT will determine the long -term steward of this parcel.
Clayhill Farm Page 18 of 20

APPENDIX C — Jurisdictional Determinations and Permits
Prior to Site construction jurisdictional wetland boundaries were delineated in March and May 1999 and
were subsequently reviewed by Mike Bell of the United States Army Corps of Engineers. These wetlands
were primarily proposed for wetland preservation credits, and were located north of the preconstruction
channel with a small area south of the preconstruction channel in the western portion of the Site (see
Figure 10 on page 5).
The remainder of the area south of the preconstruction channel was proposed for wetland restoration by
filling agricultural ditches, removing field crowns, and planting vegetation. Groundwater hydrology was
successful throughout the monitoring period at Gauges GW 1 -GW9 located in the southwest portion of the
Site, south of the intermittent stream restoration reach. These areas were heavily ditched prior to
construction.
The remainder of the gauges, Gauges GW 10 -GW20 located within the lower half/southeastern portion of
the Site were not successful. A jurisdictional wetland delineation was completed within this area of the
Site in December 2011, which consisted of approximately 75 acres in order to revise Wetland Mitigation
Units. A total of 9.26 acres of Nonriparian Wetland Restoration and 0.92 acres of Riparian Wetland
Preservation were delineated as depicted on Figure A6 on page 7. Dataforms for the delineation are
available upon request.
Claylrill Farm Page 19 of 20

Y
U. O tO
O
L IW— G
N
A = M
E
Z
d
'p C
CL
O y (o c
m m o
?1 a d a
«. w > �
W'd—'U
sruoydsoyd ON
UBBOJ3IN ON
l�tl �vne
Wve+iS 1"1
(Us) AIuO les"O
wB�>"N JBu�e
UOgS01�
ysJeW leis
Uo
ysJey�
0
UORMGswd A
A
co
UBUBdUUON N
co
4uewe3ueyu3
ueueduuoN
uoPeGio
UeueduuoN
CD
UO138JO35Ba N
M
O
(o
N
T
uoueduuoN
�
N
OJ
D
T
M
O
N
� UJ
ION O
r r
C
O O
A
O
O
N
O
O
N
M
N
O
O
A
U)
M
O
O
O
V
V
(D
N
U)
O
V
T
A
E(0
V
U)
CA
m
ZmCAm
N
ma'm
O`
a
H H
H
CL
a
X000
:
o
nUUp
Z Z
Z
2
rn O
M
—
C
in
O
O
O
r
,
O
IV
Q
O 00
0
W
N r
N
U
N
C
«N.
r 0
0
E
g a
r 0
C
F
L
`
R
a
w
cco
0 o
c
o o
a
�
H
LL
C
f0
w
O
J
A
co t7
U
y
m
Z
c
a
a3i
c
0
c
w
N
co
co N
W
CEi
tL'