20100408 Ver 1_Year 2 Monitoring Report_20121128

1� -oL�og
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
909 Capability Drive, Suite 3100
Raleigh, NC 27606
919 - 829 -9909 — PH
919- 829 -9913 — FAX
10055 Red Run Boulevard, Suite 130
Owings Mills, MD 21117
410 - 356 -5159 — PH
410- 356 -5822 — FAX
604 Greene Street, Suite 100
Camden, SC 29020
8034324890 — PH
410 - 356 -5822 — FAX
137'% Main Street, Suite 210
Oak Hill, WV 25901
3044654300 — PH
3044654302 — FAX
TO: Division of Water Quality
DATE:
November 26, 2012
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1650
ATTN: Katie Merritt
RE: Rudolph Buffer Mitigation Site
Year 2 Monitoring Report
We are sending via: El Overnight E Regular Mail ❑ Pick -Up Hand Delivered
The following items: ❑ Correspondence ❑ Plans ❑ Specifications Other as listed below:
COPIES
DATE
NO.
DESCRIPTION
1
11/26/12
Year 2
Year 2 Monitoring Report for Rudolph Site
These are transmitted as checked below:
Q For Approval ❑ As Requested
- For Your Use ❑ For Review and Comment
REMARKS:
❑ Approved as Submitted
E] Approved as Noted
Please find enclosed a copy of the Rudolph Buffer Mitigat
Please call me if you have any questions 919- 608 -5876.
Thank you,
Cara Nelson
COPY TO: Martin Hovis SIGNED:
❑ Returned for Corrections
❑ For Your Signature

Rudolph Buffer Mitigation Site
Annual Vegetation Monitoring Report
2012 Growing Season
Year 2 Monitoring Report
Prepared by:
Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC
909 Capability Drive, Suite 3100
Raleigh, NC 27606
Monitoring Field Work by:
NCSU Water Quality Group
Campus Box 7637
Raleigh, NC 27695
November 2012 0
NOV
- ,H Ot►AItT Y
,.._..- -

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Summary .......................................................................... ............................... 1
2.0 Introduction ..................................................................... ............................... 1
3.0 Vegetation Monitoring .................................................... ............................... 2
3.1 Success Criteria ...................................................... ............................... 2
3.2 Description of Species and Monitoring Protocol . ............................... 3
3.3 Results of Vegetation Monitoring ......................... ............................... 3
3.4 Vegetation Observations ........................................ ............................... 5
3.5 Conclusions ............................................................. ............................... 5
Appendix A Site Photos

Rudolph Mitigation Site
Annual Monitoring Report for 2012 (Year 2)
1.0 SUMMARY
The Rudolph Buffer/Nutrient Offset Site is located in southeast Johnston County, NC on the
boundary with Wayne County, approximately eight miles west of Goldsboro, NC on Buckleberry
Road (SR 2541). The site is located in the Neuse River Basin within the USGS HUC 03020201
and North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) sub -basin 03- 04 -02.
The site is on an old floodplain terrace between Moccasin Creek and Raccoon Swamp. The site
drains into Moccasin Creek before flowing approximately 2.25 miles into the Neuse River.
Natural drainage patterns throughout the watershed have been altered by cultivation and
dredging of the channels. The site is comprised of two parcels, the Worley Tract and the
Kornegay Tract, totaling 116.9 acres. The proposed easement, including proposed Neuse riparian
buffer mitigation and nutrient uptake, encompasses 44.63 acres.
Within the proposed mitigation area, the channels drain surface water and groundwater from the
surrounding row crop agriculture. The primary land use in the project vicinity is woodlands and
corn production. Within the proposed conservation easement the primary land use is agricultural
row crops; specifically corn production. There are also several small areas of bottomland
hardwood trees and Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) pine plantation. The bottomland
hardwoods about the downstream end of the drainage channels, but do not extend the full 200
feet from the top of bank. These areas are an assemblage of mature and successional trees.
Beaver impoundments are flooding some of these areas. The CRP land is planted in successional
pine trees, and will be removed from the CRP program prior to placement of the conservation
easement. The maintained channel banks contain typical disturbed herbaceous species including
soft rush (Juncus effuses), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), narrowleaf cattail (Typha
angustifolia), woolgrass (Scirpus cyperinus), sedges (Carex sp.), and fescue (Festuca sp.).
The monitoring results for 2012 (Year 2) documented an average of 400 surviving stems per acre
and an average survival rate of 89 %. The site is on track to achieve the final vegetative success
criteria of 320 live planted stems per acre at the end of Year 5.
2.0 INTRODUCTION
A total of 44.63 acres of riparian area, including Neuse riparian buffers were restored on the
Rudolph Mitigation Site. As specified in the Restoration Plan, the Rudolph Buffer/Nutrient
Offset Site was planted with appropriate native species within the protected Neuse riparian
buffer easement. The species selected consisted of native species observed in the surrounding
forest and species know to occur in similar environments. The Neuse riparian buffer area was
planted in bare root tree seedlings to achieve an initial density of 680 planted stems per acre. The
objective of reforesting the buffer and riparian areas adjacent to channels is to provide water
quality and habitat functions within the sensitive Neuse River watershed.

PLANTING PLAN
Revegetation of the site included planting bare root trees and controlling invasive species
growth. The target communities were Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp (Blackwater Subtype)
along the channels grading to Bottomland Hardwood Forest downstream, and Mesic Mixed
Hardwood Forest on the drier upslope. The communities were as defined by Schafale and
Weakely (1990). The planting plan consisted of two planting zones. Zone 1 occupies the wetter,
lower landscape areas, and Zone 2 occupies the drier, higher landscape areas. Near - channel areas
are in the lower landscape areas. The initial planting of bare root trees occurred in February
2011. Tree species specified for planting on the Rudolph Site are shown in Table 1.
Table 1. Tree Species Planted in 2011
Scientific Name
Common Name
FAC Status
Zone 1 wet conditions
Betula nigra
River Birch
FACW
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Green Ash
FACW
Po ulus hetero h lla
Swamp Cottonwood
OBL
uercus 1 rata
Overcup Oak
OBL
uercus hellos
Willow Oak
FACW-
Salix caroliniana
Coastal Plain Willow
OBL
Taxodium distichum
Bald cypress
OBL
Zone 2 mesic conditions
Platanus occidentalis
American Sycamore
FACW-
uercus lauri olia
Laurel Oak
FACW-
uercus shumardii
Shumard Oak
FACW-
uercus michauxii
Swamp Chestnut Oak
FACW-
uercus nigra
Water Oak
FAC
uercus pagoda
Cherrybark Oak
FAC+
uercus phellos
Willow Oak
FACW-
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Green Ash
FACW
3.0 VEGETATION MONITORING
3.1 Success Criteria
Neuse riparian buffer vegetative success criteria are based upon the density and growth of target
tree species as shown in Table 1. Vegetative success criteria will be based upon guidelines set
forth in the Guidelines for Riparian Buffer Restoration prepared by the North Carolina
Ecosystem Enhancement Program and will be defined as a success rate equivalent to 320 live
planted stems per acre at the end of the 5 -year monitoring period.
2

3.2 Description of Species and Monitoring Protocol
The following monitoring protocol was designed to predict vegetative survivability and response
to different management treatments. Forty -eight plots in 8 different blocks were established on
the Rudolph Buffer Mitigation Site, to monitor approximately 5% of the site. Sampled vegetation
monitoring plots were 15mx15m. The blocks were established within the Neuse riparian buffer
site to represent the range of conditions that exist on the site. The blocks and plots were
randomly located and randomly oriented within the buffer area. Plots were planted with a subset
of tree species to specifically measure tree growth response (height and diameter) to different
management techniques applied to the site including mowing, herbicide, fertilizer, mowing and
fertilizer, herbicide and fertilizer, and an untreated control. The five species studied included B.
nigra (Beni), F. pennsylvanica (Free), P. occidentalis (Ploc), Q. michauxii (Qumi), and T.
distichum (Tadi).
Plot construction involved using PVC pipe at each of the four corners to clearly and permanently
establish the area that was to be sampled. Four PVC pipes ten feet tall were placed at each corner
of the blocks to facilitate visual location of site throughout the five -year monitoring period. All
of the planted stems inside the plot were flagged with surveyor flagging to help in locating them
in the future.
3.3 Results of Vegetation Monitoring
The following tables present stem counts for each of the monitoring plots. Each planted tree
species is identified across the top row, and each plot is identified down the left column. The
number of surviving stems within each plot is identified in the corresponding species data
column.
Table 2.2012 Vegetation Monitoring Plot Species Composition
Block-
Plot
Beni
Frpe
Ploc
Qumi
Tadi
Total
Stem per acre
1 -1
5
5
5
5
4
24
432.4324
1 -2
5
5
5
5
5
25
450.4504
1 -3
5
1 5
5
5
1 5
25
450.4504
1 -4
4
5
5
5
5
24
432.4324
1 -5
5
5
5
5
5
25
450.4504
1 -6
5
5
5
5
5
25
450.4504
2 -1
2
4
3
3
0
12
216.2167
2 -2
3
1 5
3
4
2
17
306.3070
2 -3
2
5
3
3
4
17
306.3070
2 -4
3
5
5
2
5
20
360.3603
2 -5
5
4
5
4
4
22
396.3973
2 -6
3
5
4
5
4
21
378.3783
3 -1 1
5
5
5
2
5
22
396.3973
3 -2
5
5
5
4
5
24
432.4324
3 -3
5
5
5
5
4
24
432.4324
3 -4
5
5 1
5
5
5
25
450.4504
3

3 -5
3
4
4
4
4
19
342.3431
3 -6
3
5
5
5
5
23
414.0414
4 -1
3
5
2
3
2
15
270.2708
4 -2
5
5
5
3
0
18
324.3251
4 -3
3
4
2
5
1
15
270.2708
4 -4
5
5
5
4
4
23
414.0414
4 -5
5
4
5
4
5
23
414.0414
4 -6
3
5
4
5
3
20
360.3603
5 -1
4
5
5
4
5
23
414.0414
5 -2
5
5
4
4
5
23
414.0414
5 -3
5
5
5
2
5
22
396.3973
5 -4
4
5
5
2
5
21
378.3783
5 -5
5
5
5
4
4
23
414.0414
5 -6
5
4
5
4
5
23
414.0414
6 -1
5
4
3
3
5
20
360.3603
6 -2
5
5
5
5
5
25
450.4504
6 -3
5
5
5
5
5
25
450.4504
6 -4
5
4
5
5
5
24
432.4324
6 -5
5
5
5
5
1 5
25
450.4504
6 -6
5
5
5
4
5
24
432.4324
7 -1
5
5
5
5
5
25
450.4504
7 -2
5
5
5
3
5
23
414.0414
7 -3
5
5
5
4
5
24
432.4324
7 -4
5
5
5
5
5
25
450.4504
7 -5
5
5
5
5
5
25
450.4504
7 -6
5
5
5
5
5
25
450.4504
8 -1
5
5
5
4
5
24
432.4324
8 -2
5
5
5
5
5
25
450.4504
8 -3
5
5
5
2
5
22
396.3973
8 -4
5
5
3
4
4
21
378.3783
8 -5
3
5
4
3
4
19
342.3431
8 -6
4
4
5
4
5
22
396.3973
Total
212
231
219
196
208
1066
-
Average Stems /Acre: 400.0882
Percent Survival of Planted Stems: 891/6
Volunteer species will also be monitored throughout the five -year monitoring period. Below is a
table of the most commonly found woody volunteer species.
4

Table 3. Volunteers within the Neuse riparian buffer Area
ID
Specie
Common Name
FAC Status
A
Li uidambar styraciflua
Sweet um
FAC+
B
Acer rubrum
Red Maple
FAC
C
Pinus taeda
Loblolly Pine
FAC
Not many volunteer woody species were observed in the vegetation plots. This site was
previously an active pasture and the grasses were quick to recover, forming dense ground cover.
3.4 Vegetation Observations
Fields continued to be largely populated with successional weeds especially dogfennel
(Eupatorium capillifolium) and pigweed (Amaranthus spp.). These weeds appeared to have little
if any impact on planted species survival. There was greater mortality in Block 2 this year which
was likely due to dryness in that particular area of the planted field. Ditches were predominately
lined with rushes, (Juncus spp.), and sedges (Carex spp.). Any threatening weedy vegetation
found in the future will be documented and discussed in the monitoring reports.
3.5 Conclusions
The 2012 vegetation monitoring data reflects that the overall site is on a trajectory to achieve the
final vegetative success criteria of 320 surviving planted stems per acre by the end of Year 5. At
present there are no invasive species issues to be addressed.

,.
Block 1- Rudolph Site Vegetation
Plot 1.
Plot 3.
Plot 5.
Plot 2.
Plot 4.
Plot 6.

Block 2- Rudolph Site Vegetation
Plot 1.
Plot 3.
Plot 5.
Plot 2.
Plot 4.
Plot 6.

}
aN�

- I 1
Block 5- Rudolph Site Vegetation
Plot 1.
Plot 3.
Plot 5.
Plot 2.
Plot 4.
Plot 6.

4" �`'+4
� C v

7.

�.'t
INI`�(
t
a
s
<
c
tii

'1, 0 q- C)�- E�- \(a
TIE JOHN R WADAMS COMPANY; INC.
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
To: Ms. Katie Merritt
NCDENR -DWQ
512 N. Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27603
Re: Carl Lloyd
I am sending you the following item(s):
Date: November 9, 2012
** FEDERAL EXPRESS **
Job No.: MAM -09010
COPIES
DATE
NO.
DESCRIPTION
1
Monitoring Year 3 Report
These are transmitted as checked below:
❑ As requested ❑ For your use
® For approval ❑
❑ For review and comment ❑
Remarks: On behalf of the Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC (EBX), EcoEn ineering is submitting 1
hardcopies of the Carl Lloyd Monitoring Year 3 Report.
Copy to:
Signed :�_ __
George Buchholz
FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY
® Copy Letter of Transmittal Only to File
❑ Copy Entire Document to File
ENGINEERS - PLANNERS - SURVEYORS - ENVIRONM
RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK - CHARLOTTE
800 - 733 -5646 - ww%vjohnnncadams.com

CARL LLOYD BANK PARCEL
ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
YEAR 3 MONITORING REPORT
DWQ Project Number: 09- 0858v2
November 7, 2012
Do
QV i 3 2012

Table of Contents
1.0
Introduction ............................................................................................... ............................... 2
1.1 Project Location and Description .......................................................... ..............................2
1.2 Project Goals and Objectives ................................................................. ..............................2
2.0
Vegetation Condition and Comparison ..................................................... ..............................2
3.0
Methodology ............................................................................................... ..............................3
3.1 Vegetation Monitoring Plots .................................................................. ..............................3
3.2 Photo Stations ....................................................................................... ............................... 3
4.0
References .................................................................................................. ..............................4
Appendix
A: Site Maps
Figure 1: Site Location Map
Figure 2: Monitoring Year 2 Exhibit
Appendix
B: Vegetation Assessment Data
Table 1: Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary
Table 2: Stem Count Total and Planted Species by Vegetation Plot
Table 3: Planted Species Comparison by Vegetation Plot
Appendix
C: Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos
Appendix
D: Vegetation Monitoring Plot Data Sheets
Appendix
E: Photo Stations
' [JEcoEngineering
A division of The John R McAdams Company, Inc

1.0 Introduction
LI Project Location and Description
Located at the southwest quadrant of the intersection of Holly Creek Lane and Old Greensboro
Road (SR 1005) in Orange County, North Carolina (Appendix A. Figure 1 — Site Location
Map) is the Carl Lloyd Bank Parcel (Bank Parcel) which is a nutrient mitigation bank. The
purpose of this Bank Parcel is to improve water quality within the B. Everett Jordan Lake
watershed by providing off -site mitigation for development (both existing and proposed) which
require nutrient offsets. This Bank Parcel is not intended to function for mitigation of buffer
impacts. It will only be used for nutrient offsets.
The Bank Parcel is located within the Upper New Hope Arm of the B. Everett Jordan Lake
watershed, inside of 14 -digit USGS HUC 03030002060070. Stormwater runoff from this site
drains into two unnamed tributaries of Neville Creek (Stream Index #16- 41- 2- 2- 1 -(1)), which
drains into University Lake approximately three (3) miles downstream. According to the N.C.
Division of Water Quality Basinwide Information Management System (BIMS), Neville Creek is
classified as WS -II; HQW, NSW in this location. The overall tract, which consists of two (2)
parcels, is approximately 74 acres with a riparian buffer restoration area of 10.84 acres
(Appendix A. Figure 2 — Monitoring Year 1 Exhibit).
This Bank Parcel has been established under the terms and conditions of the Cape Fear Basin
Riparian Buffer and Nutrient Mitigation Umbrella Bank (Bank) made and entered into by Mid -
Atlantic Mitigation, LLC (MAM), acting as the Bank Sponsor, and the North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources - Division of Water Quality (DWQ).
1.2 Project Goals and Objectives
The goals of this nutrient mitigation project are to:
To improve the overall water quality and aquatic habitat in and around the unnamed
tributaries of Neville Creek by reducing sediment into the streams caused by
agricultural influences.
To improve the richness and diversity of the plant species within the conservation
easement.
To provide perpetual protection for the unnamed tributaries of Neville Creek and
associated riparian and upland buffers.
These goals will be met through the following objectives:
By establishing a native plant community to match the endemic plant species at the
Bank Parcel.
By reducing the quantities of exotic invasive species at the Bank Parcel through
mechanical and chemical methods:
By establishing a conservation easement to provide long -term protection for the Bank
Parcel.
2.0 Vegetation Condition and Comparison
Current stem counts were calculated using vegetation plot monitoring data. Final stem count
criteria are 320 trees per acre at the end of the five (5) year monitoring (Carl Lloyd Bank Parcel -
Bank Parcel Development Package, 2009). As for Monitoring Year 3, the Bank Parcel had 9
plots encompassing 0.2224 acres, containing 312 planted and volunteer stems, which yielded a
2 [E—I]EcoEngineering
A di iston of The John R McAdams Company, Inc

density of 1,403 trees per acre including planted and volunteer species. Vegetation survival
threshold was met for each of the plots except for Vegetation Plot 1. Summary tables of the data
collected are provided in Appendix B. ,
Within the Bank Parcel, Chinese lespedeza (Lespedeza cuneata), which is an exotic /invasive
species was observed at the time of the field investigations. Approximately 2.75 acres of the
Bank Parcel contains Chinese lespedeza. The extent of exotic /invasive species is depicted in the
Monitoring Year 2 Exhibit (Appendix A, Figure 2).
During Monitoring Year 3 field investigations, it was determined that Vegetation Plot 1 did not
meet the vegetation survival threshold of 320 trees per acre. Therefore, re- planting within the
area of Vegetation Plot will occur sometime between the months of November, 2012 and April,
2013.
3.0 Methodology
3.1 Vegetation Monitoring Plots
All monitoring methodologies follow the most current templates and guidelines provided by EEP
(EEP, 2006; EEP, 2009). All nine (9) vegetation plots installed by EcoEngineering were located
in Monitoring Year 3. Baseline vegetation monitoring was conducted in accordance to CVS-
EEP Protocol for Recording Ve etg ation (CVS -EEP, v4.2). Table 1 (Appendix B) provides a
success summary for each vegetation monitoring plot which the target density is a minimum of
320 trees per acre at the end of the five (5) year monitoring period. Table 2 (Appendix B)
provides a stem count total and planted stem total by each individual vegetation plot. Table 3
(Appendix B) provides a summary of only planted stem counts as compared to planted stem
counts of the As Built.
Vegetation monitoring plots were photographed and are located in Appendix C. Vegetation
Monitoring Plot Data Sheets are provided in Appendix D. Each Vegetation Monitoring Plot
Data Sheet provides measurements, location, and vigor of each planted species within a
respective vegetation monitoring plot.
3.2 Photo Stations
Photo documentation is essential to monitoring the success the Bank Parcel. Photos provide a
visual assessment of the vegetation conditions. All 19 photo stations installed by
EcoEngineering were located in Monitoring Year 3. Photographs were taken at high resolution
using an Olympus FE -115 5.0 megapixel digital camera. The locations of the photo stations are
depicted in the Monitoring Year 3 Exhibit (Appendix A, Figure 2). Photographs for the photo
stations are located in Appendix E.
EcoEngineering
A division of The John R McAdams Company, Inc

4.0 References
EcoEngineering — A division of The John R. McAdams Company, Inc. August, 2009. Carl Lloyd
Bank Parcel — Bank Parcel Development Package.
Lee Michael T., Peet Robert K., Roberts Steven D., and Wentworth Thomas R., 2008. CVS -EEP
Protocol for Recording Vegetation Level 1 -2 Plot Sampling Only. Version 4.2
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) 2004. Guidelines for Riparian
Buffer Restoration. Available at internet site:
http: / /www.nceep .net/news /reports/buffers.pdf. Accessed August 2009.
Schafale MP and AS Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North
Carolina: Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of
Parks and Recreation, Department of Environment and Natural Resources. Raleigh,
North Carolina.
4 [-4]EcoEngineering
A division of The John R McAdams Company, Inc

APPENDIX A
Site Maps
[JEcoEngineering
A division of The John R McAdams Company, Inc

a
or
GARL LLYOD BANK PARGEL,
IL
r
• N,
kolo
r
4.
r
r
U565,15 MINUTE, QUADRANGLE, "WHITE GRO55, NG "; Ici68 (PHOTOREVISED Ig55);
35bcl76762 °N, 7cl.14G8090 -N
'ROJECT NO. MAM -09010
CARL LLYOD
[JEcoEngineering
Fa'o"HE:
o MAM09010X.DWG
BANK PARCEL
A division of The Jahn R NkAdm Compmy, Inc.
> scare:
4 AS SHOWN
FIGURE 1. SI'Z'E LOCATION MAP
SNGIIiE�13 • PI ANN&RS • SURVSYQt3 • ffiI9IADN1uiTAL
IMSEAECE TPJANGLF PAW - C9AMAYM
cn nnre: 11 -05 -2012
ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
""a732- SM° -� ®�� Y': C-M
ato

4 fb •
N I NOW OR FORMERLY
0 1 CHRISTOPHER FRANCIS SMOLLEN &
LESLIE 0. SMOLLEN
0000 X00 ��\ D PB 85, PG 278
'�j PG 17
� / "�'\ I DETAIL 58627120
L1 Lt 117
`
..X
NOW FORMERLY I �:: "' CO E A ATION
WILLIAM J. CALLAHAN & I `� EASEM T 3
154,730 s ft
JUNE POINEAU CALLAHAN 3.55 acres
DB 934, PG 498 I CONSERVATION
PIN: 9758428104 t :•;;;; `� EASEMENT 1 I
397,187 sq. ft.
• 9,12 acres I ` n4
E21 •�j••; ' .. BUFFER
' :. LESPEDEZA CUNEAT RESTORATION
1,'•::::':::::: ENCROACHMENT AREA 5
NOW OR FORMERLY
LESPEDEZR&VJNEQKTIZ & SONIA GONZALEZ
ENCROACHMENT DB 3034, PG 430
PIN: 9758710467
BUFFER
RESTORATION
AREA 6
4,290 sq. ft.
0.10 acres
NOW OR FORMERLY t,.. 73,789 sq. ft. �YPe \
ALSTON VANESSA I 5e 1.69 acres Ltl
DB 2209, PG 253 P512� .E59 %�s :�.�,,5, i; : Et21 E' `\ E 7 130 PSi
7F:.. ?� \
l PIN: 9758416824 I F r EXISTING ,
_.1 �� S� q,Q�t��y: I 50' ACCESS ! .
E37 EASEMENT
E38 PB 48, PG 60 `
Qs D�F9�91j'P FS 00 A� r "f `:.::. E39 f� 1 1 \ !ir ::.:.
op
BLESSING DRIVE W�fes �':.. �• E1
50' PRIVATE ACCESS I "�`' 1 • • • • .►f* 1 t
EASEMENT
PB 60, PG 117
NOW OR FORMERLY
SHAWN W. GOINS, SR. &
LISA A. GOINS
DB 1892, PG 450
PIN: 9758415690
NOW OR FORMERLY
EDWARD &BACHMANN
DB 4529, PG 429
PIN: 9758512364
NOW OR FORMERLY
CALVIN MELLOTT
DB 2329, PG 281
PIN: 9757498340/
GENERAL NOTES
1. THIS IS A SURVEY OF AN EXISTING PARCEL(S)
OF LAND. THIS IS A VEG PLOT SURVEY.
2. PROPERTY LINES WERE TAKEN FROM
REFERENCES SHOWN HEREON AND ORIENTATED
TO NC GRID NAD 83 USING GPS METHOD.
3. ALL DISTANCES ARE HORIZONTAL GROUND
DISTANCES.
4. AREA BY COORDINATE GEOMETRY.
5. REFERENCES: DB 3683, PG 299; PB 29, PG
14; PB 32, PG 40; PB 51, PG 162; PB 53,
PG 19; PB 56, PG 153; PB 60, PG 117; PB
74, PG 194; PB 85, PG 17; PB 88, PG 105
OF THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTRY.
PIN: 9758524286; 9758507824;
9758524288; 9758808891
8. UTILITY STATEMENT
THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN HAVE
BEEN LOCATED FROM FIELD SURVEY
INFORMATION AND EXISTING DRAWINGS. THE
SURVEYOR MAKES NO GUARANTEE THAT THE
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN COMPRISE ALL
SUCH UTILITIES IN THE AREA, EITHER IN
SERVICE OR ABANDONED. THE SURVEYOR
FURTHER DOES NOT WARRANT THAT THE
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN ARE IN THE
EXACT LOCATION INDICATED ALTHOUGH HE
DOES CERTIFY THAT THEY ARE LOCATED AS
ACCURATELY AS POSSIBLE FROM INFORMATION
AVAILABLE. THE SURVEYOR HAS NOT
PHYSICALLY LOCATED THE UNDERGROUND
UTILITIES.
7. NO GRID MONUMENTS FOUND WITHIN 2000' OF
SITE.
EXISTING
30' DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
PB 48, PG 60
BUFFER
RESTORATION
ww AREA 7
9,464 sq. ft.
1�7*� / 0.22 acres
i PS19
:::: INITIAL ACCESS
... EASEMENT TO
1� CONSERVATION
4 EASEMENT 1 AND 2 \�
S,2 44 fs : E92 I \
E45 LI E
Fs. • A.' L188 E
E47 I
39
49 48
\
scax° "
1 =250'
E1o1
ESPEDEZA CUNEATA
ENCROACHMENT
P •
LESPEDEZA
CUNEATA �
�'o�
I I
ENCROACHMENT
RESTORATION
�m�,
AREA 3
I I
BUFFER PS8
RESTORATION
104,154 sq, ft.
I
AREA 4 WeXY c �'; m
2.39 acres `
vrax li% .
23,422 sq. ft. o,•vra
I
_
0.54 acres i " :�
NOW OR FORMERLY
I
V
MARK J. WEHRMAN I
CONSERVATION �. °:.1�.
ERUNDA Z. WEHRMAN
I
EASEMENT 2 cp
DB 1624, PG 43
S6
I
196,910 sq. ft. o
PB 56, PG 153 I
4.52 acres PS 170 W
VP4X PIN: 9758606891
a _..
L178 ....
E75
J y`
m ` I
r.
L176 1\ ...1..
I
I
L175 E7E 2
EXISTING
3D' DRAINAGE I
fj E7
EASEMENT
I
s E
r /B 48, PG 60 I
I
� \
\
I
I
I
`
I
NOW OR FORMERLY
I
GERALD W. FERNALD do
L FERNALD
IMARJORIE
DB 770, PG 204
PB 51, PG 182 2
`
I PIN: 9758607107
NOW OR FORMERLY
I
CARL BRADY LLOYD, ETAL
TRACT 3
DB 397, PG 615
PB 51, 182
I
PIN: 9757575 98584
CCNWWA710 EASEMENTS ARE NCILSIVE OF THE AREAS NOTED AS BUFFER RESTORATION AREAS.
CONSERVATION EASEMENT 1
BUFFER RESTORATION AREA 1
BUFFER RESTORATION AREA 2
CONSERVATION EASEMENT 1 AREA RO AlMNG
CONSERVATION EASEIINNT 2
BUFFET! FESTORA71ON AREA 3
BUFFET! TIE 110RAT10N AREA 4
CONSERVATION EASEMENT 2 AREA REMAINING
CONSERVAMON EASEMENT 3
BUFFER RESTORATION AREA 5
BUFR R RESTORATION AREA 6
SUFFER RESTORATION AREA 7
CONSERVATION EASEMENT 3 AREA REMANMNG
307,157 SM FT. — &12 ACRES
167,144 SQ, FT. — &84 ACRES
80.570 SM FT. — 2.06 ACRES
140,473 SM FT. — &22 ACRES
196,910 SQ, FT. — 4,52 ACRES
101.154 SQ, FT. — 230 ACRES
23.422 9Q. FT. — 0.54 ACRES
69,334 SQ. FT. — 1.50 ACRES
151.730 906 FT - 655 ACRES
73.780 911 FT. — 1.69 ACRES
4490 906 FT. - 0610 ACRES
9,464 911 FT. — 622 ACRES
67,187 34 FT. — 1.54 ACRES
FIGURE 2. MONPORING YEAR 3 FAIT
Pmm'cr No. MAM -09010
MAM0901
scax° "
1 =250'
rA
DATZ: 11 -05 -2012
LEGEND
0 EXISTING IRON PIPE
0 IRON PIPE SET
■ EXISTING CONCRETE MONUMENT
CALCULATED POINT
cOi UTILITY POLE
a PHOTO STATION GRAPHIC SCALE
VPA VEG PLOT
4
250 0 125 500
INVASIVE / EXOTIC
SPECIES POPULATION
LLOYD PROPERTY
CONSERVATION EASEMENT PHOTO STATION & VEG PLOT
CHAPEL H LL TOWNSHIP, ORANGE COM Y NORTH CAMMA
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 000 ft.
®THE JOHN R. McADAMS
COMPANY, INC.
II49819M • PE.1QI1 - SUNVETM • >QIYIFID141111 M
�NCHi111191 usRM. CRAILOtra
m umom p 14, nE&M ttc mnl
tno na�ea.wwwjdmmmmimnmm -H. Ma 0-M

APPENDIX B
Vegetation Assessment Data
F4-]EcoEngineering
A dmum of Tlic John R McAdams Company, hk

Table 1. Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary Table
Carl Lloyd Bank Parcel; Orange County, NC
Monitoring Year 3: October 17, 2012
EcoEngineering Project #: MAM -09010
PLANTED & VOLUNTEER STEMS PER ACRE
Buffer Restoration
Area
Vegetation
Plot ID
Vegetation Threshold
Met?*
Tract Mean
1
1
No
89%
1
2
Yes
3
3
Yes
3
4
Yes
4
5
Yes
2
6
Yes
2
7
Yes
5
8
Yes
7
9
Yes
*Target density is a minimum of 320 trees per acre at the end of the five (5) year monitoring period according
to the "Carl Lloyd Bank Parcel - Bank Parcel Development Package ", August, 2009.

Table 2. Stem Count Total and Planted Species by Vegation Plot
Carl Lloyd Bank Parcel; Orange County, NC
Monitoring Year 3: October 17, 2012
Bank Parcel 10 84 acres
tcotn Ineerin
Nro ect v: MAM -09070
CURRENT
PLOT
DATA MY-3 October 2012
ANNUAL
MEANS
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
VP -1
PL NT
VP -2
PL NT
VP-3
PL NT
VP-4
PL NT
VP -5
PL NT
Vp-6
PL NT
VP -7
PL NT
VP-8
PL NT
VP -9
PL NT
MY -3
(October, 2012 )
MY -2
(October, 2011
MY -1
(October, 2010)
AS BUILT
(May, 2010)
Aronia arbutifolia
red chokecherry
Shrub
0
0
5
18
Betula m ra
river birch
Tree
1
1
1
4
1
8
10
8
11
Carpinus carokniana
ironwood
Small Tree
2
2
2
1
13
20
14
16
24
Fraxmus pennmAvanica
green ash
Tree
1
1
2
1
5
3
3
4
4
2
2
28
23
26
16
Linodendron tuli ifera
tulip poplar
Tree
1
1
2
2
2
6
M nca cenfera
wax myrtle
Shrub
0
0
10
14
Plantanus ocadnetalis
sycamore
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
5
4
4
4
Prunus serotina
cherry
Tree
1
1
2
5
5
11
Quercus alba
white oak
Tree
1
4
1
1
7
8
11
12
Quercus launfolia
laurel oak
Tree
1
1
1
0
2
Quercus I rata
overcup oak
Tree
0
0
0
1
Quercus michauxii
swamp chestnut oak
Tree
0
0
0
1
Quercus ni ra
water oak
Tree
1
1
5
1
3
Quercus pagodafolia
the ark oak
Tree
2
1
1
4
4
4
6
Quercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
5
6
2
2
1
16
7
10
8
Quercus rubra
red oak
Tree
1
1
1
1
2
2
8
6
11
14
Li wdambar stvraciflua
sweet aurn
Not Listed
1
0
234
223
Juniperus virginiana
red cedar
Small Tree
1
1
2
1
1
Ulmus amencana
American elm
Tree
2
11
24
14
23
72
30
12
6
194
57
49
Acer rubrum
red maple
Not Listed
0
64
65
Rhus co allma
winged sumac
Shrub
0
0
64
Ca rya tomentosa
shagbark hickory
Tree
1
2
6
2
11
2
1
Nyssa s Ivatica
black um
Tree
2
2
Quercus stellate
post oak
Tree
1
1
Parses borboma I
red bay
Small Tree
0
0
3
Planted
Stem Count Total
3
11
10
5
16
4
9
9
5
72
91
95
Natural
Stem Count Total
3
21
25
14
29
72
31
22 1
23
240
445
424
Size of Vegetation Plot Acres
0 0247 1
0 0247 1
0 0247
00247
00247
00247
00247
00247
00247
02224
02224
02224
Number of Different Species
5
10
7
6
10
4
7
7
5
61
79
78
Planted & Volunteer Stems Per Acre
243
1295
1416
769
1821
3076
1619
1255
1133
1403
2410
2334
1) The following "Species Types" were not recorded "Shrub" & "Not Listed"
2) PL = Planted Species
3) NT = Natural/Volunteer Species

Table 3. Planted Species Comparison by Vegation Plot
Carl Lloyd Bank Parcel; Orange County, NC
Monitoring Year 3: October 17, 2012
- EcoEngineerinq Proiect #: MAM -09010
VP -1
VP -2 VP -3
VP-4
VP -5
VP -6
VP -7
VP -8
VP -9
ear 3 Planted Stem Count Total 3
11 10
5
16
4
9
9
5
EMonitoring
Built Planted Stem Count Total 14
13 22
16
17
20
12
19
18
d Stem Difference from As Built -11
-2 -12
-11
-1
-16
-3
-10
-13
it Rate % per Monitoring Plot 21%
85% 45%
31%
94%
20%
75%
47%
28%
Note: The difference between planted stems from the As Built and Monitoring Year 3 is due to species which were deemed "missing" or "dead" in previous monitoring years. One possible
explanation for "missing" species is due to thick herbaceous growth obscuring the species from identification during previous and current monitoring years. Therefore, it is possible
"missing" species could grow larger than the herbaceous growth and allow for their identification and measurement in subsequent monitoring years. In addition, species which were
deemed "dead" could survive in subsequent years because the species may have gone dormant at the time of monitoring while the roots of the species are surviving below ground.
Therefore, in subsequent years the species could grow under more favorable conditions.

APPENDIX C
Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos
[jEcoEngineedng
A dmsmn of The Jahn R McAdams Company, hM

VE6 PLOT 1: WITHIN AREA I AT OA FA0I146 2'16 °W.
VE6 PLOT 2: WITHIN AREA I AT Op PAGIN6 266 °W.
N°. MAM -09010
CARL LLOYD
EcoEngineering
en exaxe: MAM09010X.DWG
BANK PARCEL
A division of The John R McAdmu Compmy, I�
>
Y
SCAM
As sHOwry
VEGETATION PLOTS
EfiGINSttfft3 • PIANNSRS • SORYSYORS • SNVIIdONI�NTAL
F
.ATE: 11 -05 -2012
ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NO -M4446. � � w..: c�

VE6 PLOT 5: WITHIN AREA 5 AT Op FAGIN6 206.5.
VE6 PLOT 4: WITHIN AREA 5 AT Op FAGIN6 216 °5W.
°JECT N °. MAM -09010
IM
CARL LLOYD
AEcoEngineering �
IR
F EN"`E:MAM09010X.DW
BANK PARCEL
A d:viaion of John R McAdams Compan,, Inc.
ca�.E:
AS SHOWN
VEGETATION PLOTS
S -
ENGINffit5 • FIANNERS • 3UIiVSYORS • SNVIIaDN1�NTAL
�E�HT� °� •
ATE:
11 -05 -2012
ORANGE COUNTY. NORTH CAROL NA
2W5 I�idian Party, DarE•m � 2T717
eoo-�ssse,e•..,.,.p�,a®a�' "" X 10

No.
MAM -09010
E" ""E:
T07ECT
M AM
09010X.
DWG
:
AS SHOWN
TE:
11-
05 -g01?

VE& PLOT "I: WITHIN AREA 2 AT Op FACING 90 °E.
VES PLOT 8: WITHIN AREA 5 AT Op FACING 106 -E.
RDJECT No. MAM -09010 C
CARL LLOYD g
gftoEngineerin-1 9

VE6 PLOT 9. WITHIN AREA 7 AT OHO FACIN& 176.5.
rRaECr xo. MAM -09010
C e RT LLOYD
�
�HExA>�: M AM 09 010 X. D WG
t/1 �j \L/ j,/t,/
BANK PARCEL
kiEcoEngineedng
A diviam of 73e John R McAd�on Campy, Irc,
IV
SCALE:
A SHOWN
VEGETATnON PLOPS
SNGIIiT�S • PI.APilim • SURVEYM • BRV> iAL
RESEARCH TRGAGIE PAM • CHAVIDM
DATE:
11 -05 -2012
ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROIINA
z .,.> Zl7I3
°0D-73"M•w* cm•Umw ea: {-M /

APPENDIX D
Vegetation Monitoring Data Sheets
g [jEcoEngineering
A dmsion of The John R. McAdams Company, Inc,

Site. Carl Lloyd Bank Site
Page 1
Monitoring Year
Date
Area
Veg Plot No
X-axis
MY -3
10/12/2012
1
1
314NW
CURRENT
MONITORING YEAR DATA
MY -2 SEPT, 2011
50-1001
> 100
X
Y
ddh
millimeter
Height
centimeter
DBH
cm
Vi or
2
Hei ht
DBH
Notes
Ma ID
Scientific Name
Common Name
Source
meter
meter
Nddh
ter
centimeter
cm
1
Betula m ra
river birch
B
0 3
0 3
M
7.89
41
2
Prunus serotina
black cher
C
3 2
0 3
M
3
M nca cenfera
wax myrtle
B
57
031
5
85
3
432
73
4
Plantanus occidnetalis
sycamore
C
87
04
1201
154
05
2
1 1084
163
0 435
stress
5
Fraxmus pennsylvanica
qreen ash
C
86
34
122
12
3
929
67
6
M nca cenfera
wax myrtle
B
61
34
M
missing
7
Quercus rubra
red oak
C
31
31
M
missing
8
Quercus rubra
red oak
B
04
2.8
-
M
missing
9
Arorna arbutifolia
red chokeberry
C
0.4
58
M
1549
86
10
Quercus alba
white oak
B
31
61
M
missing
11
Quercus alba
white oak
C
61
6.7
1192
131
3
91
91
'12
M nca cenfera
wax myrtle
B
8.7
67
1795
150
0 225
3
12.5
102
13
Arorna arbutifolia
red chokeberry
C
751
92
1
M
4.26
39
14
M rica cenfera Iwax
myrtle
IB 1
421
891
M
missing
C = containerized Vigor 3 = good condition, 2 = surviving and likely to survive next year
B = bare root 1 = almost surviving and not likely to survive next year
M = Missinq
CURRENT MONITORING YEAR DATA VOLUNTEER
SPECIES
HEIGHT CLASSES cm
Scientific Name
0 -50
50-1001
> 100
Ulmus amencana
2
Li uidambar styraciflua
2
6
Juni erus vir irnana
1
Pmus taeda
1

Site. Carl Lloyd Bank Site
age 2
Date 10/12/2012
Area 1
Veg Plot No 1
X -axis 314NW
10
c
f
7
E
E
4
L
MMMww"MR6
MMM
MMMErAMMMMM
MMMMMMMMMM
M
WORM
M
MM
M
Rol
M
'01""'
MMMMMMMMMM
MMMMMMMMMM
Mu
("
Mr, =1
M
K(OM
I
MMM
MMMMMMMMMM
MMMMMMMMMM
cme)MMMI-MIMMMMMMI
1
0.5(
0,0 05
I Z 3 4 b b
X -AXIS
Odenotes missing
ff
6 9 l0

Site: Carl Lloyd Bank Site
Page: 1
Monitoring Year:
Date:
Area:
Veg Plot No.:
X -axis:
MY -3
10/12/2012
1
2
302NW
CURRENT MONITORING YEAR
DATA
MY -2 SEPT, 2011
50-1001
X
Y
ddh
Height
DBH
cm
Vigor
ddh
Height
Notes
Map ID
Scientific Name
Common Name
Source
meter
meter
millimeter
centimeter
millimeter
centimeter
1
Quercus rubra
red oak
C
06
0.3
8.65
65
1
3
615
51
2
Quercus phellos
willow oak
C
3.5
0.4
22.05
160
0 485
3
12.78
103
3
Quercus a odafolia
cherrybark oak
C
6.3
0.4
8.5
62
3
619
62
4
Prunus serotina
black cherry
C
7.6
051
1821
111
3
1 1591
112
5
Quercus pagodafolia
the bark oak
C
9.2
2.91
6.66
80
2
5.71
60
stress
6
Quercus phellos
willow oak
B
6.3
2.8
23.29
150
0 337
3
16.35
93
7
Quercus pagodafolia
cherrybark oak
C
2.7
2.7
M
missing
8
Car inus caroliniana
ironwood
B
0
2.6
M
598
59
9
Liriodendron tuli ifera
tulip poplar
C
1.3
5.4
8.3
52
3
7.43
31
insect
10
Quercus phellos
willow oak
C
3.8
54
11.5
0.335
3
7.72
74
11
Liriodendron tuli ifera
tuli o lar
C
6 6
5.4
M
missin
12
Betula ni ra
river birch
C
9.4
5.4
13.29
d142
3
4 43
31
13
Quercus hellos
willow oak
C
3.7
9.8
16.38
0 451
3
15.62
135
14
Quercus hellos
willow oak
C
3.9
3 4
13.1
0.365
3
found this year
C = containerized Vigor. 3 = good condition, 2 = surviving and likely to survive next year
B = bare root 1 = almost surviving and not likely to survive next year
M = Missing
CURRENT MONITORING YEAR DATA VOLUNTEER
SPECIES
HEIGHT CLASSES cm
Scientific Name
0 -50
50-1001
> 100
Ulmus americana
1
91
1
Acer rubrum
8
121
1
N ssa s Ivatica
2
Juni erus vir iniana
1
Li uidambar st raciflua
2
5
Quercus phellos
1
2
3
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
1
NOTES: Lespedeza cuneata within plot

Site
Carl Lloyd Bank Site
age
2
Date
10/12/2012
Area
1
Veg Plot No.
2
X -axis
302NW
V
i
E
e
C
1
05
0,0
MMMM"Gj,MMMMMM
MMMMMMMMMM
MMMMMMMMMM
MMMMMMMMMM
MMMICOMMMMMM
MMMMMMMMMM
UO
MMMMMMMMM
X -AXIS
Odenotes missing
f
d v 1U

Site: Carl Lloyd Bank Site
Page: 1
Monitoring Year: MY -3
Date- 10/16/2012
Area 3
Veg Plot No.: 3
X -axis.
156SE
CURRENT MONITORING YEAR
DATA
MY -2 SEPT, 2011
50 -100
X
Y
ddh
Height
DBH
cm
Vi or
ddh
Height
Notes
Map ID
Scientific Name
Common Namc
Source
meter
meter
millimeter
centimeter
millimeter
centimeter
1
Quercus alba
white oak
B
0.5
0.4
12
40
3
20.88
33
insect
2
Car inus caroliniana
ironwood
C
31
0.4
11.83
90
3
6.18
47
3
Quercus alba
white oak
B
5.9
0.4
3.7
41
2
2.88
43
stree
4
Aronia arbutifolia
red chokeberry
C
8.6
0.41
M
missing
5
Quercus alba
white oak
B
7.6
1.2
13.65
90
3
8.88
55
6
Quercus alba
white oak
B
4.9
1.5
M
missing
7
Quercus alba
white oak
B
2.2
1.6
19.65
98
3
12.61
86
8
Quercus rubra
red oak
B
0.5
3.3
M
missing
9
Aronia arbutifolia
red chokeberry
C
1 3.5
3.2
378
28
3
missinq
insect/deer
10
Car inus caroliniana
ironwood
C
6.1
311
M
missing
11
Car inus caroliniana
ironwood
C
10
7.4
2.3
51
3
6.21
62
res rout
12
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
C
8.8
62
12.2
68
3
10.98
59
13
Car inus caroliniana
ironwood
C
7.6
7.6
M
5.91
53
14
Aronia arbutifolia
red chokeberry
B
5.5
6.2
M
1 6.31
37
15
Car inus caroliniana
ironwood
C
4.6
7.6
M
missin
16
Betula nicira
river birch
B
3
6.21
M
missing
17
Car inus caroliniana
ironwood
C
1 6
7.7
M
missing
18
Aronia arbutifolia
red chokeberry
C
0.3
6.2
M
missing
19
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
C
0.7
9.1
11.95
55
3
126
64
deer
20
Betula ni ra
river birch
113
1 3.5
9
6.98
68
3
1 5.89
30
21
lQuercus rubra
red oak
113
1 61
9
2.13
421
1 3
1 9.45
33
res rout
22
Quercus pagodafolia
cherrybark oak
IC
1 941
91
1
1 M
Imissing
C = containerized Vigor: 3 = good condition, 2 = surviving and likely to survive next year
B = bare root 1 = almost surviving and not likely to survive next year
M = Missing
CURRENT MONITORING YEAR DATA VOLUNTEER
SPECIES
HEIGHT CLASSES cm
Scientific Name
0 -50
50 -100
> 100
Pinus taeda
15
2
Ulmus amencana
11
13
Ca rya tomentosa
1
Li wdambar styraciflua
3
2
NOTES- Lespedeza cuneata within plot

Site Cad Lloyd Bank Site
ige 2
.iate 10/16/2012
Area 3
Veg Plot No 3
X-axis 156SE
0 4 J z 1 ub
X-AXIS
0 denotes missing
10
r 5
0,0
\(!5
ir
OEM
=1
MD-
MMOOMMERIM
EM
��w�i��iQiiMiii�
MMMMEMOMMOM
no-MM
"(00
MMMMMMMMMMM
MOMMMMIOMEMM
11110-0
007-MM
M
on,
MMOMMOKIMMM031
0 4 J z 1 ub
X-AXIS
0 denotes missing
10
r 5
0,0
\(!5

Site: Carl Lloyd Bank Site
Page: 1
Monitoring Year: MY -3
Date: 10/16/2012
Area: 3
Veg Plot No: 4
X -axis:
162SE
CURRENT MONITORING YEAR
DATA
MY -2 SEPT, 2011
50 -100
X
Y
ddh
Height
DBH
cm
Vi or
ddh
Height
Notes
Map ID
Scientific Name
Common Name
Source
meter
meter
millimeter
centimeter
millimeter
centimeter
1
M rica cerifera
wax myrtle
B
1.7
0.6
2195
160
3
17.78
102
2
Liriodendron tuli ifera
tulip poplar
C
4.5
06
5.3
25
3
565
43
stress
3
Betula ni ra
river birch
B
1 7.3
0.5
1025
120
3
1 6.35
76
,
4
Betula ni ra
river birch
B
9.9
0.51
M
2.69
25
5
M rica cerifera
wax myrtle
B
9
3.1
M
missing
6
Quercus pagodafolia
cherrybark oak
C
6
3.4
5.05
48
3
565
43
7
Fraxinus enns Ivanica
green ash
C
36
2.1
5.5
42
3
556
35
insect
8
M rica cerifera
wax myrtle
B
2.5
3.5
134
121
3
6.15
57
9
Plantanus occidnetalis
sycamore
C
6.9
41
6901
60
3
5.99
49
10
Quercus alba
white oak
B
81
59
M
lmissing
11
Aronia arbutifolia
red chokeberry
C
5.1
6
4.96
40
3
missing
12
Quercus alba
white oak
B
2.5
6.1
M
597
32
13
M rica cerifera
wax myrtle
B
03
8.7
8.4
105
3
2.79
28
14
Quercus michaux-
wamp chestnut oak
C
3.2
8.7
1
M
missing
15
M rica cerifera
wax myrtle
B
6 2
8.61
34.51
1861
0.4951
3
15611
102
16
Aronia arbutifolia
red chokeberry 1C
1
8.91
8.51
1
1
M
missin
C = containerized Viqor• 3 = good condition. 2 = survivino
and likely
to survive next vear
B = bare root 1 = almost surviving and not likely to survive next year
M = Missing
CURRENT MONITORING YEAR DATA VOLUNTEER
SPECIES
HEIGHT CLASSES cm
Scientific Name
0 -50
50 -100
> 100
Ulmus americana
5
9
Pinus taeda
5
NOTES: Lespedeza cuneata within plot

'-te Carl Lloyd Bank Site
je 2
.jate 10/16/2012
Area 3
Vag Plot No 4
X-axis 162SE
MMMM-
KIOMMv6MM==-=MzIMj
MMMMMMMMMMM
ME-Imimmiff
MwMazM
MMMMM
IIE
v t$ 1 0 0 4
X-AXIS
0 denotes missing
10
2
I
1 05 0,0

Site: Carl Lloyd Bank Site
Page: 1
Monitoring Year: MY -3
Date: 10/16/2012
Area: 4
Veg Plot No.: 5
X -axis:
160S
CURRENT MONITORING YEAR
DATA
MY -2 SEPT, 2011
50-1001
X
Y
ddh
Height
DBH
cm
Vi or
ddh
Height
Notes
Map ID
Scientific Name
Common Name
Source
meter
meter
millimeter
centimeter
millimeter
centimeter
1
Car inus caroliniana
ironwood
C
0.5
06
10.19
75
3
8.08
61
2
Betula ni ra
river birch
C
3.2
0.6
M
missing
3
Quercus alba
white oak
C
6.1
06,
10.01
94
3
1 6.18
52
4
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
C
8.9
0.5
16.32
87
3
15.75
85
5
Prunus serotina
black cherry
C
9.9
3.4
M
missing
6
Quercus rubra
red oak
C
8.5
4.3
M
missing
7
Quercus laurifolia
laurel oak
B
7.3
35
M
missing
33
8
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
C
5.1
4.9
M
missing
62
9
Betula rn ra
river birch
B
4.5
3.3
10.49
181
3
1 17.69
92
10
Car anus caroliniana
ironwood
C
1.6
3.2
11.75
45
3
9.29
62
11
Aronia arbutifolia
red chokeberry
C
0.4
4.6
2.4
40
2
245
35
stress
12
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
C
69
6.2
11.9
80
3
7.56
56
13
Plantanus occidnetalis
sycamore
C
8.8
8.8
9.89
78
3
8.01
75
14
Fraxinus enns Ivanica
qreen ash
C
7.1
9.91
9.651
51
3
1084
41
15
Betula ni ra
river birch
B
5.5
8.5
13.45
13-4F---
34
3
1 13.99
117
16
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
C
2.8
8.6
9.751
62
3
1 8.95
54
17
Betula rn ra
aver birch
113
0.3
E8.7
n w)l
QA1
C = containerized Vigor- 3 = good condition, 2 = surviving and likely to survive next year
B = bare root 1 = almost surviving and not likely to survive next year
M = Missing
CURRENT MONITORING YEAR DATA VOLUNTEER
SPECIES
HEIGHT CLASSES cm
Scientific Name
0 -50
50-1001
> 100
Ca rya tomentosa
1
1
Li wdambar styracilflua
16
25
15
Acer rubrum
13
3
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
1
2
Ulmus americana
18
5
Plantanus occidentalis
1

Site. Carl Lloyd Bank Site
'age: 2
Date: 10/16/2012
Area: 4
Veg Plot No. 5
X -axis 160S
10
f
e
1
0.5
0,0
f
MMM_
MM&I'MMMMMMM
MMMMMMMMMIwjM
MMMMMMWCDMMM
Cos
MmuelmrGIMMMME
MMMMMMMMMM
MMM-M-MMMMMM
MMM-GOOMMMMI&OM
i c o
Odenotes missing
w J o 1 6 U I
X -AXIS

Site: Carl Lloyd Bank Site
Page: 1
Monitoring Year:
Date:
Area:
Veg Plot No.:
X -axis:
MY -3
10/16/2012
2
6
124SE
CURRENT MONITORING YEAR
DATA
MY -2 OCT, 2011
50 -100
X
Y
ddh
Height
DBH
cm
Vi or
ddh
Height
DBH
Notes
Map ID
Scientific Name
Common Name
Source
meter
meter
millimeter
centimeter
millimeter
centimeter
cm
1
Quercus rubra
red oak
C
0.7
0.1
M
4.41
51
2
Betula ni ra
river birch
C
1.6
0
7
104
3
8.85
87
vine
3
Prunus serotina
black cherry
C
4.2
0.4
M
Imissing
4
Prunus serotina
black cherry
C
1 6.9
0.91
M
missing
5
Betula rn ra
river birch
C
9.8
1
M
3.88
47
6
Quercus phellos
willow oak
C
9.2
2.5
M
missing
7
Quercus phellos
willow oak
B
8.9
3.8
M
missing
8
Fraxinus enns Ivarnca
green ash
C
7.6
2.9
M
missing
9
Quercus ni ra
water oak
B
4.9
3.8
M
missing
10
Prunus serotina
black cherry
C
1 2.2
2.21
M
missing
11
Car inus caroliniana
ironwood
C
0.2
4.6
M
11 01
92
12
Aronia arbutifolia
red chokeberry
C
56
53
M
missing
13
M rica cerifera
wax myrtle
B
84
59
15.4
179
3
10.75
64
14
Quercus rubra
red oak
C
9.8
5.7
6.79
65
3
5.55
38
15
Car inus caroliniana
ironwood
C
10
5.8
M
8.74
84
16
M rica cerifera
wax myrtle
B
8.4
8.41
1495
180
3
8.89
89
17
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
B
6
8.4
M
missin
18
M rica cerifera
wax myrtle
B
2.7
7.8
20.25
194
3
911
120
19
Quercus hellos
willow oak
C
1.5
8.7
13.4
162
3
8.79
109
20
Quercus hellos
willow oak
B
0.4
7.3
28.05
231
3
17.45
180
0 58
C = containerized Vigor: 3 = good condition, 2 = surviving and likely to survive next year
B = bare root 1 = almost surviving and not likely to survive next year
M = Missing
CURRENT MONITORING YEAR DATA VOLUNTEER
SPECIES
HEIGHT CLASSES cm
Scientific Name
0 -50
50 -100
> 100
Ulmus americana
28
41
3
Rhus co allina
21
25
12
Li uidambar st raciflua
1 72
60
40
Acer rubrum
48
40
25

Site Carl Lloyd Bank Site
'age.
2
Date
10/16/2012
Area
2
Veg Plot No
6
X -axis
124SE
10
c
E
i
E
4
MMMMMMMMMM
=MM.MMK4=)M=M
MMUMMMMMM.Irm
I
MMMMMMMMU
Wce"
v on
M
W(e-3 0
M
mm�
1
05.
0,0 5
80E
f
I G 3
Odenotes missing
4 O O / 8 U lU
X-AXIS

Site, Carl Lloyd Bank Site
Page- 1
Monitoring Year
Date:
Area
Veg Plot No..
X-axis-
MY-3
-axis
MY -3
10/16/2012
2
7
138SE
CURRENT
MONITORING YEAR DATA
MY -2 OCT, 2011
50-1001
X
Y
ddh
millimeter
Height
centimeter
DBH
cm
Vi or
ddh
Height
Notes
Map ID
Scientific Name
Common Name
Source
meter
meter
millimeter
centimeter
1
Quercus phellos
willow oak
B
08
03
1195
135
3
92
73
2
Aronia arbutifolia
red chokeberry
C
36
06
5.05
68
3
315
39
3
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
B
1 71
06
1178
75
2
1 1109
80
stress
4
Quercus alba
white oak
C
9.8
06
445
40
3
445
36
insect
5
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
C
0
351
118
82
3
1075
82
6
Car anus caroliniana
ironwood
C
2.9
3.6
M
missing
7
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
qreen ash
B
58
36
149
59
2
1303
67
insect
8
Quercus rubra
red oak
C
89
37
555
63
3
6.87
23
9
Quercus rubra
red oak
C
81
68
351
271
1
3 Imissinq
10
Quercus hellos
willow oak
B
49
6.8
1318
160
0371
3
missin
11
A
Aroma arbutifolia
red chokeber
C
1 9
67!
722
112
3
10711
103
insect
12
Quercus pagodafolia Icherrybark
oak
C
421
991
11.9
100
1
3 1
9271
68
L, = containerized Vigor 3 = good condition, 2 = surviving and likely to survive next year
B = bare root 1 = almost surviving and not likely to survive next year
M = Missinq
CURRENT MONITORING YEAR DATA VOLUNTEER
SPECIES
HEIGHT CLASSES cm
Scientific Name
0 -50
50-1001
> 100
Quercus stellata
1
Li udambar styraciflua
25
38
Acer rubrum
21
29
Ulmus amencana
9
21

Site Carl Lloyd Bank Site
'age
2
Date
10/16/2012
Area
2
Veg Plot No
7
X -axis
138SE
V
c
E
i
E
1
I
I
I
I
12 1
I
- ---- I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
- - - - -- ---------------
-------
i
------- f- - - - ---
I
------- i- - - - - --
I
------- i- - - - - --
I
---- -- + ---------------
I
-------
I
- -- ---- t- - - - - --
I
------- +- - - - - --
I
-- -- --- f- -- - ---
1
---- --- F- - -- ---
I
--- -- -- ±- - -- - --
I
- - -- --- - -- - - --
I
------- i- -- - - --
I
------- i- -- -- --
I
I 1
---- - --k_(-
-- ---- �- - - - - --
I
---- -- 4- - - - - --
f
------- F- -- - - --
I
------- ±- - - - ---
I
-- ----- f- - -- - --
I
i
------- i- - - - - --
I
----- --F-- - - ---
I 11
- --- ---t --
I
-- ----- f- - - - - --
I
------- i- - -- - --
I
- - - - -- ---------------
I
-------
I
------- t- --- - --
9 I
--- t- - - - - --
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
---- -- -h-- - - - --
I
I
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I
I
---- --- f- - - ----
I
I
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I
I
- ------ i- - - - - --
I
I
--- --- f - - - - --
I
I
- - - - -- F--- - ---
I
I
------- F- - - - - --
I
I
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I
I
------- i- - -----
I
I
5 ---- h- - - - - --
I
I
---- ---- - - - - --
I
! 6
---- - - -f --
I
I
-- --- i- - - - - --
I
I
-- -- --- i---------------
I
I 7 I
--- ------- h- - - - ---
I I
I
------ -f- - - - - --
I
I 8
----- --f - --
I
I
------- f- - - - - --
I
-- ----- h- -- - - --
--- ---- f- - - - - --
--- -- -- f- - - - - --
------- i-------
------- i- - - -- --
-- ---- + - - - - --
- -- ---- h- - - - - --
------- F- - --- --
------- f- - - - - --
- --- --- f- - - - - --
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
- - - - -- 1 I
I
2
I
I
I 3 I
I
1 4
05
0,0 05
e
i G 3 4 b b
X -AXIS
Odenotes missing
6 9 10

Site: Carl Lloyd Bank Site
Page- 1
Monitoring Year.
Date:
Area:
Veg Plot No.:
X -axis:
MY -3
10/16/2012
5
8
152SE
CURRENT MONITORING YEAR
DATA
MY -2 SEPT, 2011
0 -50
X
Y
ddh
Height
DBH
cm
Vi or
ddh
Height
Notes
Map ID
Scientific Name
Common Name
Source
meter
meter
millimeter
centimeter
millimeter
centimeter
1
Quercus phellos
willow oak
B
0.4
0.2
10.25
119
3
6.38
71
2
Betula ni ra
river birch
B
3.1
03
M
missing
3
Plantanus occidnetalis
sycamore
C
5.9
04,
8.65
78
3
6.3
66
4
Car inus caroliniana
ironwood
C
8.7
0.3
M
missing
5
Car inus caroliniana
ironwood
C
10
2.7
M
missing
6
M rica cerifera
wax myrtle
B
8.1
2.8
M
10
58
7
Liriodendron tuli ifera
tulip poplar
C
5.7
1.5
M
missing
8
Quercus ni ra
water oak
C
4.6
27
14.85
115
3
7.7
58
9
Aronia arbutifolia
red chokeberry
C
1 1.9
2.81
M
Imissing
10
M rica cerifera
wax myrtle
B
0.7
5.8
M
missin
11
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
C
3.4
5.8
86
55
3
6.19
41
12
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
C
52
6.1
12.2
95
3
10.9
60
13
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
B
6.1
6.2
10
74
3
9.43
56
14
Fraxinus enns lvanica
green ash
B
8
6.3
7.18
73
3
585
34
15
Car inus caroliniana
ironwood
C
9.3
57
851
50
3
275
33
16
Car inus caroliniana
ironwood
C
8.1
8.9
5.21
52
3
4.28
54
17
M rica cerifera
wax myrtle
B
5.3
88
M
missing
18
Car inus caroliniana
ironwood ic
2.5
8.7
M
4.6
61
19
Car inus caroliniana
ironwood Ic
02
8.7
M
missing
C = containerized Vigor: 3 = good condition, 2 = surviving and likely to survive next year
B = bare root 1 = almost surviving and not likely to survive next year
M = Missinq
CURRENT MONITORING YEAR DATA VOLUNTEER
HEIGHT
CLASSES cm
Scientific Name
0 -50
50 -100
> 100
Ulmus americana
8
4
Ca rya tomentosa
3
3
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
1
3
Li wdambar styraciflua
3
2

Site Carl Lloyd Bank Site
age 2
Date* 10/16/2012
Area 5
Vag Plot No. 8
X -axis 152SE
10
E
i
E
F
4
L
1
05
0,0 05
Odenotes missing
f 106E
X -AXIS
1 6 w iu
13

Site: Carl Lloyd Bank Site
Page: 1
Monitoring Year:
Date:
Area:
Veg Plot No..
X -axis.
MY -3
10/17/2012
7
9
130SE
CURRENT MONITORING YEAR DATA
MY -2 SEPT, 2011
Scientific Name
X
meter
Y
meter
ddh
millimeter
Height
centimeter
DBH
cm
Vigor
ddh
Height
Notes
Ma ID
Scientific Name
Common Name
Source
millimeter
centimeter
1
Fraxinus enns Ivanica
reen ash
B
0.4
03
6.68
45
Car inus caroliniana
3
missing
1
insect
2
Car inus caroliniana
ironwood
C
2.9
0.5
M
missing
3
Aronia arbutifolia
red chokeberry
C
1 4.9
09
M
missing
4
Linodendron tuli ifera
tulip poplar
C
6.2
0.5
M
Imissing
5
Quercus phellos
willow oak
B
8.9
2.8
M
missing
6
Aronia arbutifolia
red chokeberry
C
7
3.3
M
missing
7
Quercus laurifolia
laurel oak
B
5.3
3.3
M
missing
8
Car inus caroliniana
ironwood
C
34
3.4
M
missing
9
Linodendron tuli ifera
tulip poplar
C
1.5
39
M
missing
10
Quercus I rata
overcup oak
B
03
2.31
1 M
missing
11
Quercus rubra
red oak
B
22
5
5.28
26
3
missing
12
Car inus caroliniana
ironwood
C
31
6.1
M
missing
13
Quercus ni ra
water oak
B
49
6.4
M
missing
14
Aronia arbutifolia
red chokeberry
C
7
6.1
M
missing
15
Quercus rubra
red oak
C
1 8.6
4.5
555
58
3
3.12
26
16
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
B
9
8.31
7.18
53
3
6.32
41
17
Quercus ni ra
water oak
B
43
8.9
M
265
48
18
Car inus caroliniana
ironwood
C
1.2
8
6.95
54
3
6.31
73
C = containerized Vigor: 3 = good condition, 2 = surviving and likely to survive next year
B = bare root 1 = almost surviving and not likely to survive next year
M = Missing
CURRENT MONITORING YEAR DATA VOLUNTEER
HEIGHT
CLASSES cm
Scientific Name
0 -50
50 -100
> 100
Ulmus americana
5
1
Li uidambar st raciflua
7
3
Ca rya tomentoss
2
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
2
Acer rubrum
111
1
Car inus caroliniana
131
1
NOTES: Lespedeza cuneata within plot

,de Carl Lloyd Bank Site
ge 2
oate 10/17/2012
Area 7
Veg Plot No 9
X-axis 130SE
I u to 0 1 0 0 14 a z I u D
X-AXIS
0 denotes missing
10
1
05
0,0
1'�1765
��
■iQ��:
=SAC
::
161
M
ff
=ems
��m�■�v
= =�
I u to 0 1 0 0 14 a z I u D
X-AXIS
0 denotes missing
10
1
05
0,0
1'�1765

APPENDIX E
Photo Stations
9
FEJ]EcoEngineering
A division of7Le John R McAdams Company, Inc.

PHOTO STATION I: VIEW WITHIN NORTHNESTERN SECTION OF BUFFER
RESTORATION AREA I PAGING 184 05.
PHOTO STATION 2: VIEW WITHIN CENTRAL SECTION OF BUFFER RESTORATION
AREA I FACING IWS.
PROJECT NO. MAM -09010
CARL LLOYD
BANK PARCEL
PHOTO STATIONS
ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROI M
AftoEngineenng
A dmucn of The John R McAd� Cody, Inc.
on:
9
FILE""E: MAM 09 010 X. D WG
t7
9
scA1E:
AS SHOWN
SNGIIiT�S • PLANNERS • SIIIiYSYO1tS • TSN91)�il�PilL
eoa sP' °�' 11C M13
---�own • 1� lk- C-6M
m
°ATE: 11 -05 -2012

PHOTO STATION 3: VIEW WITHIN SOUTHEASTERN SECTION OF BUFFER
RESTORATION AREA I FACING 270 0W.
PHOTO STATION 4: VIEW WITHIN NORTHWESTERN SECTION OF BUFFER
RESTORATION AREA 3 FACING IQ8 95.
ECT no. MAM -09010
CART , T ,T ,l )M
CARL
"AmE:MAM09010X.DWG
`+/ i/j/`/ 1 L
BANK PARCEL
[JEcoEngineering
A chvmon of 7be John R McAd®s Compmy, Inc.
AS SHOWN
1�NSU��s • i'lerlxffis' SOSVaYa�s' Evv>1�ril�rlTeL
PHOTO STATIONS
RnMEH TRUNGIB An • CHARLO M
En
�: 11 -05 -2012
ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
ZM P.A.", D h- � m„
°0o-73a-%0•— •I Is.: c-4m

PHOTO STATION 5: VIEW WITHIN CA NTRAL SECTION OF BUFFER RESTORATION
AREA 3 FACING MOOS.
PHOTO STATION 6: VIEN WITHIN SOUTHEASTERN SECTION OF BUFFER
RESTORATION AREA 3 FACING 320'NW.
ROJECr NO. MAM -09010
CARL LLOYD
AEcoEngineering`
K
FIE"A"E'MAM09010X.DWG
BANK PARCEL
M hs•
A drv:AN
d
scALE: A S SHOWN
PHOTO STATIONS
-ER UNIE,
SftGINE�is • PLANNERS � SoRtE7QS � SliY�xl�iTeL
E S -SU VZ
�^ =�-
In
DATE:
11 -05 -2012
ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
2906 91Qii� n�.v. kr ! Z?713

PHOTO STATION 1: VIEW WITHIN NORTHWESTERN SECTION OF BUFFER
RESTORATION AREA 4 FACING 144 09E.
PHOTO STATION 8: VIEW WITHIN CENTRAL SECTION OF BUFFER RESTORATION
AREA 4 FACING 122 0E.
PROJECT xo. MAM -09010
C � ?J LLOYD
FaEN "E:MAM09010X.DWG
Vl �1<L/
BANK PARCEL
®4 A ��
d
SCALE:
AS SHOWN
���.�A.
URMOM
SB38AHC8,u PukE . Du.CH.BI.M3
No-mw" .- :h+� -1: X.: C-M i
PHOTO STATIONS
ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
[/]
C
DATE: 11 —05 -2012

PHOTO STATION q: VIEW HITHIN SOUTHEASTERN SECTION OF BUFFER
RESTORATION AREA 4 FAGIN6 352 0N.
PHOTO STATION 10: VIEW WITHIN SOUTHEASTERN SECTION OF BUFFER
RESTORATION AREA 2 FAGIN6 356 °N.
No. MAM -09010
CARL LLOYD
'MAM09010X.DW
r.MDATM
BANK PARCEL
A division of The Joh n R McAdams Company, Inc,
" '"'''
ENGRIliM- PI.ANNIB - SURVEYOILS - 0iVIIlDI�iVM L
PHOTO STATIONS
RESEARCH TRIANGLE PAR% • CELARL07TS
11 -05 -2012
ORANGE COUNTY, NOR I-I CAROLINA
„�;&,a P,�,a,,� M„
NO- 737- 56/L.� �.Li x,., C-M A

PHOTO STATION II: VIEW WITHIN CENTRAL SECTION OF BUFFER RESTORATION
AREA 2 FAGI146 3480N.
PHOTO STATION 12: VIEW WITHIN NORTHWESTERN SECTION OF BUFFER
RESTORATION AREA 2 FAGIN6 13805E.
ROJECf No. MAM -09010
CARL LLOYD
MK PARCEL
[JEcoEngineerin g -I
A division of The John R McAdams Company, Inc.
FIi.EN""' M AM 09010X. DWG
d 5C"U:
AS SHOWN
PHO'T'O STATIONS
K,G�. PI. . sIJ,��. �,YIEMA .
RESEARCH TRUNCLE PARK- C"ARLOM
°' n ATE: 11 -05 -2012
ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
noo-�swe•� —jo P � "� �: C -OM

PHOTO STATION 15: VIEW WITHIN NORTHWESTERN SECTION OF BUFFER
RESTORATION AREA 5 FACING 140 05E.
PHOTO STATION 14: VIEW WITHIN CENTRAL SECTION OF BUFFER
RESTORATION AREA 5 FACING 104 0E.
PROJECT No. MAM -09010 CARL LLOYD jEcoEngineering
F"'NANE1 M AM 09010X. DWG
BANK PARCEL A division of The JoLm R McAdams COSY, Inc.
SCALE: ENGINEM • PLANNERS • SURMORS • ENVENDNWMTAL
AS SHOWN PHOTO STATIONS RESEARCH TRLANGIE PABC • CHARLOTTE
TE
HATE: 11 -05 -2012 NO43S- 5W- k".,�..�p 1; Lid: c-M
ORANGE COUNTY. NORTH CAROIdNA �

PHOTO STATION 15: MEW WITHIN SOUTHEASTERN SECTION OF BUFFER
RESTORATION AREA 5 FACIN6 318 °NW.
PHOTO STATION 16: VIEK WITHIN NORTHWESTERN SECTION OF BUFFER
RESTORATION AREA 6 FACING 152 05E.
ROJECT NO.
MAM -09010
CARL LLOYD
AEcoEngineering
TF aENAxE:MAM0 9010X.DWG
BANK PARCEL
A dlnma° of Te John R McAd®tY, �.
CALE:
AS SHOWN
pH01'O STATIONS
ENGMM?S • PLANNM • SURVEYORS • ERE NNMAL
RESEARCH TRUNCLa FARx . cRARLO'rrE
ATE: 11-05-2012
ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
� • ^m-��® � � C-4m /

PHOTO STATION h: MEN WITHIN SOUTHEASTERN SECTION OF BUFFER
RESTORATION AREA b FACIN6 330 °NW.
PHOTO STATION 18: VIEW WITHIN NORTHWESTERN SECTION OF BUFFER
RESTORATION AREA 'l FACING 13b °SE.
xoJeccr xo. MAM -09010
CARL LLOYD
�
0 04
F"ENA"E'MAM0901 OX. DWG
BANK PARCEL
AEcoEngineering
A division of Tae John R a I
d
sc�:
AS SHOWN
PHOTO STATIONS
OW - E
Excn�s. • svxvs�roxs .�
NK L
e Twsxc� rwnu • caeca vrre
En
DATE:
11 -05 -2012
ORANGE COUNW, NORM CAROIM&
ZM „m-;w P,�,, Durham ,C M13
°W733 -N "• •'k� No.. C-M

d
a
cil
RESTORATION AREA 'I PAGIN6 306 °NK
NO. MAM -09010
FILENAME: M AM 09010X. C
scmx: AS SHOWN
DATE: 11 -05 -2012
CARL LLOYD ® EcoEngineering
A &vimn of lbe John R hkAdm Camay, Inc.
BANK PARCEL K,GRUMM...A.
RESKARCH PHOTO STATIONS��• CHARLOrrK
2sos rma.. Fotvy , Dwbm ac m17
ORANGE COUNTY. NORM CAROUNA 8W • --Rim • Li� Y�, c-M A