The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20110720 Ver 1_Revised UT2 Year 2 Monitoring Report_20121228Research Triangle Park, NC Post office Box 14005 Reseach Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709 2905 Meridian Parkway Durham, North Carolina 27713 800.733 -5646 919. 287 -4262 919.361 -2269 Fax EcoEngineering A division of The John R. McAdams Company, Inc. December 19, 2012 iI�C�C�7dC�p EDEC 2 8 �ui2 ! DENR Ms. Katie Merritt Environmental Compliance Specialist & Nutrient Offset Coordinator Wetlands & Stormwater Branch NCDENR - DWQ Archdale Building 512 N. Salisbury Street Raleigh, North Carolina 27603 Re: Forrest Creek UT -2 Bank Parcel Year 2 Monitoring Report Response to Monitoring Year 2 Report Comments EBX -11020 Following your December 13, 2012 e -mail, please find our responses to your review comments on the project listed above. Our response comments are in bold. 1. Please correct the statement on "target density" throughout the report to state that target density "is a minimum of 320 planted trees per acre ". This is consistent with the Falls UMBI. JRM Response: The second sentence of the first paragraph under Section 2.0 has been revised as follows: "Success will be defined as the survival of a minimum density of 320 planted trees per acre after five (5) years." There are no other references to target density within the report. 2. The data on the vegetation plot data in Appendix C is 10/17/12, but does this represent when the data was collected or when the data was entered into CVS? Please clarify the date when vegetation data was collected within Section 2.0 of the report. JRM Response: October 17, 2012 is the date in which field data was collected for each vegetation plot (see Appendix D). The electronic data and tables were also generated on October 17, 2012. A statement has been inserted as the fourth sentence within Section 2, which states "Monitoring Year 2 field activities were conducted on October 17, 2012." www.ecoengr.com I Design Services Focused On Client Success c EcoEngineering A division of The John R. McAdams Company, Inc. Ms. Katie Merritt Response to Monitoring Year 2 Report Comments December 19, 2012 Forrest Creek UT -2 Bank Parcel Page 2 of 3 ,V 3. Table 2- °� - the data recorded in the "Number of Different Species" row is inconsistent with the number of species actually recorded in each column. Please correct as needed. - The Notes section of Table 2 states that Eco Engineering was / to identify any "unknown" species during Year 1. Please explain if this was done and correct as needed. JRM Response: The "Number of Different Species" on Table 2 was inadvertently not adjusted for Monitoring Year 2 since the data was the same value as in Monitoring Year 1. This has been corrected. Also, within the Notes section of Table 2 the following note has been revised to: *Applicable only to AS BUILT. Due the lack of leaf out conditions on the majority of the planted stems and on site changes to plant composition associated with local nursery unavailability, the majority of the planted species within the monitoring plots were identified as "Unknown" and their location and size dimensions were recorded. Unknown species were identified during the Monitoring Year 1 period; and therefore, there is no data for unknown species for Monitoring Year 1 and proceeding Monitoring Years." In addition, within the Notes section of Table 2, a second note has been added as follows: "2) "Not Listed" Species Type are species which are not listed as preferred species to be planted within riparian buffers according to the NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources - Ecosystem Enhancement Program Guidelines for Riparian Buffer Restoration (October, 2004). Therefore the data for each of these "Not Listed" were not quantified for Table 2 of Monitoring Year 2, although they were inadvertently done so in previous monitoring years. The data for these "Not Listed" species were still recorded in the individual Vegetation Monitoring Data Forms." The values within Table 2 have been adjusted based on the "Number of Different Species" and the two notes which have been either added or edited. In addition, the values have been adjusted within Section 2 of the Monitoring Year 2 report where appropriate. EBX -1 1020 EcoEngineering A division of The John R McAdams Company, Inc Ms Katie Merritt Response to Monitoring Year 2 Report Comments December 19, 2012 Forrest Creek UT -2 Bank Parcel Page 3 of 3 4 Volunteer Trees <10cm shall not be counted since the Level I1 protocol for reporting vegetation says that volunteer species <10 cm should be ignored. Response Needed - Please change the height class from 0 -50cm to 10 -50cm on this report and all future reports - Please modify all of the data accordingly (DWQ is unable to approve of the data without knowing how many of the trees counted in this height class were <10 cm) Any trees <10 cm shall be removed from the data and all numbers recalculated and provided to DWQ JRM Response: Level II protocol was followed for reporting vegetation in which trees less than 10cm were not counted; however, it was an oversight in the data sheets and the parameter of 0 -50cm was not changed to accurately reflect the monitoring exercises conducted in the field. Therefore, the 0 -50cm parameter has been changed to 10 -50cm. The data retrieved in the field is still valid. It is our intent to reflect in future monitoring reports the 10 -50cm parameter. Consideration of this response is greatly appreciated A revised report is provided If you should have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at (919) 361 -5000 Sincerely, EcoEngineering A division of The John R. McAdams Company -Inc. '��CIZIIZ George Buchholz, REM, PWS Environmental Scientist cc Tommy Cousins, Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC Enclosure EBx -I 1 020 FORREST CREEK UT -2 BANK PARCEL ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA MONITORING YEAR 2 REPORT DWQ # 2011 -0720 December 19, 2012 DEC 2 8 , Table of Contents 10 Introduction . .......... .. . . ...... ...............2 1 1 Project Location and Description 2 12 Project Goals and Objectives.. 2 2 0 Vegetation Condition and Comparison .. ..... 3 3 0 Methodology ...... 3 3.1 Vegetation Monitoring Plots.. ... .. 3 3 2 Photo Stations 3 4 0 References .4 Appendix A: Site Mans Figure 1 Site Location Map Figure 2 • Monitoring Year 1 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 ' [AEcoEngineering A division of The John R McAdams Company, Inc 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Project Location and Description Located off of Edmund Latta Road, dust northwest of its intersection with Phelps Road in Orange County, North Carolina (Figure 1), is the proposed nutrient mitigation bank currently known as the Forrest Creek UT -2 Bank Parcel (Bank Parcel). This 5 71 acre Bank Parcel (1 31 acres of nutrient offset restoration area) is currently approved by the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) for use as a nutrient mitigation bank. The Bank Parcel is located on three (3) tracts of land in Orange County, North Carolina (Orange County Parcel Identification Numbers 9877207721, 9877520417, and 9876493633). More specifically, the Bank Parcel is located in the northwestern corner of Parcel Number 9876493633, southeastern corner of Parcel Number 9877207721, and in the southwestern corner of Parcel Number 9877520417. The proposed Bank Parcel is located within the Neuse River Basin, inside of the Upper Falls Lake Watershed (8 -digit USGS HUC 03020201). Stormwater runoff from this site drains into an unnamed tributary of Forrest Creek (Stream Index #27- 2- 21 -2 -2). According to the N C Division of Water Quality Basmwide Information Management System (BIMS), Forrest Creek is classified as WS -II (Water Supply II), HQW (High Quality Waters), and NSW (Nutrient Sensitive Waters) in this location The nutrient offset restoration area within the Bank Parcel consists of 131 acres (Figure 2) The purpose of this Bank Parcel is to improve water quality within the Neuse River Basin and Falls Lake watersheds by providing off -site mitigation for both existing and proposed development requiring nutrient offsets The Bank Parcel will provide 2,977 63 lbs /acre of nitrogen and 191 78 lbs /acre of phosphorous nutrient offset credit This Bank Parcel has been established under the terms and conditions of the Forrest Creek Riparian Buffer Mitigation Bank (Bank) made and entered into by Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC (EBX), acting as the Bank Sponsor, and DWQ 1.2 Project Goals and Objectives The goals of this nutrient offset mitigation project are to- To improve the overall water quality and aquatic habitat in and around the unnamed tributary of Forrest 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 tributary of Forrest Creek and associated Neuse River Riparian Buffer, as well as other riparian areas along Forrest Creek. 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 chemical methods - By establishing a conservation easement to provide long -term protection for the Bank Parcel - By donation of the conservation easement and all of its interests, in perpetuity, to an accredited or approved land trust or stewardship program. 2 AftoEngineering A division of The John R McAdams Company, Inc 2.0 Vegetation Condition and Comparison Current stem counts (i a stem is defined as single living tree species) were calculated using vegetation plot monitoring data Success will be defined as the survival of a minimum density of 320 planted trees per acre after five (5) years As for Monitoring Year 2, the Bank Parcel had four (4) plots encompassing 0 0988 acres, containing 80 planted stems, which yielded a density of 809 planted stems per acre Monitoring Year 2 field activities were conducted on October 17, 2012 When examining both planted and volunteer stems, the four (4) plots contain 92 planted and volunteer stems, which yielded a density of 931 trees per acre including planted and volunteer species The planted vegetation survival threshold was met for all of the vegetation plots. In addition, the planted and volunteer vegetation survival threshold was met for all of the vegetation plots Summary tables of the data collected are provided in Appendix B. 3.0 Methodology 3.1 Vegetation Monitoring Plots Baseline vegetation monitoring was conducted in accordance to CVS -EEP Protocol for Recording Ve etg ation (CVS -EEP, v4.2) All monitoring methodologies follow the most current templates and guidelines provided by EEP (EEP, 2010, EEP, 2011) All four (4) vegetation plots installed by EcoEngineering were located in Monitoring Year 2 Table 1 (Appendix B) provides a success summary for each vegetation monitoring plot. Based on the vegetation monitoring, all four (4) vegetation monitoring plots were above the five (5) year monitoring period requirement 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 seven (7) photo stations installed by EcoEngineering were located in Monitoring Year 1 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 1 Exhibit (Appendix A, Figure 2) Photographs for the photo stations are located in Appendix E 3 EcoEngineering A division of The John R McAdams Company Inc 4.0 References EcoEngineering — A division of The John R McAdams Company, Inc May 2011 Forrest Creek UT -2 Proposed Nutrient Offset Restoration Area — Bank Parcel Development Package EcoEngmeenng — A division of The John R McAdams Company, Inc June 2011 Forrest Creek UT -2 Proposed Nutrient Offset Restoration Area — As -Built Report Lee Michael T., Peet Robert K., Roberts Steven D, and Wentworth Thomas R, 2008. CVS -EEP Protocol for Recordinz Vuetatzon Level Version 4 2 North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) October 2004 Guidelines for Riparian Bu, ffer Restoration Available at internet site http• / /www nceep net/news /reports /buffers pdf North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) January 15, 2010 Procedural Guidance and Content Requirements for EEP Monitoring Reports North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) November 7, 2011 Monitoring Requirements and Performance Standards for Stream andlor Wetland Mitigation 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 [jEcoEngineering A division of 7hc John R McAdams Company, Inc APPENDIX A Site Maps [JEcoEngineering A division ofThc John R McAdams Companv Inc w. f.6L J a- I +•- s -_•..s b% •.�A /i� � � , I a , } � 1- •o % 4r`e %rfj c) ORREST CREEK UT -2 ryti USGS 7.5 MINUTE "CALDWELL, NC" QUADRANGLE, 1968; 36.1435655N, 79.0943321-W �o• EBX- 11020 V CREEK UT -2 IC �m` EX1 AB1020X. D WG A d Aam alU labs It MaAda Cosprry, I=. �_ ,. = 2,000' BANK PARCEL ........ FIGURE 1. SPIN LOCATION MAP• In °An: 11 -06 -12 MANC E [� TTN7V- NARM rARATMU M w w d wmmi . a n►u ' Mwnawa...yr..r.....Iw.. �.: caw P1O1Cf 10- EBX -11020 „,�.,�. EBX11020 —SWX d �: 1' = 200' °' ays: 11 -06 -2012 FO CREEK UT-2 BANK PARCEL FIGURE 2. MONrMRING YEAR 1 F GMrr ORANGE COUNTY NORM CAROIMA AEcoEngineerin g AAw of7ujoiaRMrAdauaG�mpo my. lac. �„ . .Z,�„flWAL � � �� n&73&6M ..�.a..ue X� -c-® APPENDIX B Vegetation Assessment Data [jEcoEngineering A division of The John R McAdams Company, Inc Table 1. Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary Table Forrest Creek UT -2; Orange County, NC Monitoring Year 2: October 17, 2012 EcoEngineering Project #: EBX -11020 PLANTED STEMS PER ACRE Vegetation Plot ID Vegetation Threshold Met ?* Tract Mean 1 Yes 100% 2 Yes 3 Yes 4 Yes * Target density is a minimum of 320 trees per acre at the end of the five (5) year monitoring period according to the "Forrest Creek UT -2 Proposed Nutrient Offset Restoration Area, Bank Parcel Development Packap-e ", May, 2011 PLANTED & VOLUNTEER STEMS PER ACRE Vegetation Plot ID Vegetation Threshold Met ?* Tract Mean 1 Yes 100% 2 Yes 3 Yes 4 Yes * Target density is a minimum of 320 trees per acre at the end of the five (5) year monitoring period according to the "Forrest Creek UT -2 Proposed Nutrient Offset Restoration Area, Bank Parcel Development Package ", May, 2011 Table 2. Stem Count Total and Planted Species by Vegation Plot Forrest Creek UT -2; Orange County, NC Monitoring Year 2: October 17, 2012 EcoEngineering Project #: EBX -11020 Bank Parcel 131 acres CURRENT PLOT DATA (MY -2, OCTOBER, 2012) ANNUAL MEANS Scientific Name Common Name Species Type VP -I VP -2 VP -3 VP -4 MV -2 (October, 2012) MY -1 (October, 2011) AS BUILT (June, 2011) PL NT PL NT PL NT PL NT Carya tomentosa mockernut hickory Tree 1 1 14 2 Cercis canadensis eastern redbud Tree 5 9 1 2 1 5 1 21 27 27 Diospyros virginiana persimmon Tree 1 1 2 17 15 Juniperus virginiana red cedar Tree I 1 1 10 Plantanus occidnetalis sycamore Tree 6 6 10 5 27 30 31 Quercus phellos willow oak Tree 3 6 14 3 26 24 24 Ulmus americana ** American elm Tree 1 1 2 2 2 Unknown* Tree 67 Quercus phellos willow oak Tree 1 I Acer rubrum red maple Not Listed Ltguidambar styraciva sweet gum Not Listed 12 Ulmus americana American elm Tree 6 3 2 11 6 Planted Stem Count Total 15 24 26 15 80 115 178 Natural Stem Count Total 7 3 0 2 12 18 Size of Vegetation Plot (Acres) 00247 00247 00247 00247 00988 00988 00988 Number of Different Species 7 3 8 24 31 21 Planted Stems Per Acre L890 971 1052 607 �. 809 1163 1801 Planted and Volunteer Stems Per Acre 1093 1052 688 931 Notes 1) Quantities for "Stems Per Acre" reported for Monitoring Year 1 was for "Planted and Volunter Stems Per Acre" only 2) "Not Listed" Species Type are species which are not listed as preferred species to be planted within riparian buffers according to the NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources - Ecosystem Enhancement Program Guidelines for Riparian Buffer Restoration (October, 2004) Therefore the data for each of these "Not Listed" were not quantified for Table 2 of Monitoring Year 2, although they were inadvertently done so in previous monitoring years The data for these "Not Listed" species were still recorded in the individual Vegetation Monitoring Data Forms PL= Planted Species NT = Natural/Volunteer Species *Applicable only to AS BUILT Due the lack of leaf out conditions on the majority of the planted stems and on site changes to plant composition associated with local nursery unavailability, the majority of the planted species within the monitoring plots were identified as "Unknown" and their location and size dimensions were recorded Unknown species were identified during the Monitoring Year 1 period, and therefore, there is no data for unknown species for Monitoring Year 1 and proceeding Monitoring Years * *An Ulmus americana was surveyed as part of the As Built even though it is not a species which was planted Although the Ulmus americana stems are natural /volunteer stems which was already present at the time of monitoring, it was determined that these specific stems would continued to be monitored during the monitoring years Table 3. Planted Species Comparison by Vegation Plot Forrest Creek UT -2; Orange County, NC Monitoring Year 2: October 17, 2012 EcoEngineering Project #: EBX -11020 Note The difference between planted stems from the As Built and Monitoring Year 2 is due to species which were deemed "missing" or "dead" at the time of monitoring One possible explanation for "missing" species is due to thick herbaceous growth obscurring the species from identification during Monitoring Year 2 Therefore, it is possdbe "missing" species could grow larger than the herbaceous layer and allow for their identification and measurment 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 VP -1 VP -2 VP-3 VP-4 orm Year 2 Planted Stem Count Total 15 24 26 15 As Built Planted Stem Count Total Ed 42 57 51 28 Planted Stem Difference from As Bud -27 -33 -25 -13 Sunvabdi Rate % per Monitoring Plo 36% 42% 51% 54% Note The difference between planted stems from the As Built and Monitoring Year 2 is due to species which were deemed "missing" or "dead" at the time of monitoring One possible explanation for "missing" species is due to thick herbaceous growth obscurring the species from identification during Monitoring Year 2 Therefore, it is possdbe "missing" species could grow larger than the herbaceous layer and allow for their identification and measurment 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 [jEcoEngineering A division of The John R McAdams Company Inc VE6 PLOT Is AT Op FAGIN& 328'NW. VE6 PLOT 2: AT Op FAGIN6 328•NW. PROJECT N0. EBX-11020 MENAME° EBX1102OX.DWG � CREEK UT -2 BANK PARCEL VEGETATION PLO'T'S ORANGE COUNTY. NORTH CAROI24A AEcoEngineering AdivWmafMwJohaRMeAdmCompoy ,Inc. BNGINBER9 • PLANNBlL9 • SURVSYOR.4 • ffiQYIt10N1(ENTAL a SCAM: AS SH 01MN ' UK "A" ►.f.," �`,.`H�` CA DATE: 11-06-2012 vw PLOT 3t AT OA FAGINB 304% VW PLOT 4: 0.0 FAGIN6 326'NK rROrecr xo. E8X -11020 FORREST CREEK UT -2 AEcoEngineering M.121AME: EBX11020X.DWG wdivisimo t71be Job nR.Ku+e�m.campmy taw BANK PARCEL p soot: BNGiNS0i9 • PLANNERS • SURYSYOFB • iYtiVII1DN1�lYAI AS SHOWN VEGETATION PLOTS "'''�'�""'` w DATE: uhf fraYiu ►nt+q. it.w. xc tmo 11 -06 -2012 ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA APPENDIX D Vegetation Monitoring Data Sheets [jEcoEngineering A division of The John R McAdams Company, Inc APPENDIX E Photo Stations FF-B]EcoEngineering A division of The John R McAdams Company Inc Site Forrest Creek UT -2 (EBX- 11020) Page 1 ing Year MY -2 Date 10/17/2012 Area Veg Plot No X -axis Plot Location 1 34 N CURRENT MONITORING YEAR DATA A 30' east of stream X Y ddh Height DBH 1 MY1 (October, 2011 Scientific Name ddh Height Notes Ma ID Scientific Name mon Name Source meter meter mm cm cm V1 o mm cm 1 Unknown B 1 9 08 M missm missing 2 Cercis canadensis rn redbud B 1 8 22 921 70 3 7 38 59 Insect 3 Plantanus occidentalis ore B 1 2 31 M missing missing 4 Querus hellos oak B 26 39 1090 6800 3 missing missing 5 Plantanus occidentalis sycamore B 23 48 M 1257 49 6 Plantanus occidentalis sycamore Imockernut B 08 43 955 75 3 1579 68 7 Unknown B 16 58 M missing missing 6 Plantanus occidentalis ore B 16 70 M 1084 42 9 Plantanus occidentalis ore B 04 80 M 865 29 10 Ca rya tomentosa ernut hicko B 1 0 99 M 575 47 11 Cercis canadensis rn redbud B 27 98 M 621 46 12 Ulmus amencana ican elm B 15 76 950 57 3 899 23 13 Ca rya tomentosa rnut hicko B 27. 80 M 1235 58 14 Querus phellos willow oak B 34 61 900 74 3 598 51 15 Plantanus occidentalis sycamore B 44 50 1540 104 3 919 60 16 Plantanus occidentalis sycamore B 4 0 33 2200 105 3 1504 59 17 Diospyros var miana persimmon B 38 09 M 875 17 16 DIOSDyros vir iniana persimmon B 34 23 M 9 25 17 19 Plantanus occidentalis sycamore B 53 23 21 94 162 0 571 3 1252 86 20 Unknown B 62 28 M missing missing 21 Unknown B 85 1 0 M dead dead 22 Plantanus occidentalis sycamore B 79 31 2232 125 3 1572 61 23 Unknown B 93 27 M missing missing 24 Plantanus occidentalis sycamore B 99 35 21 58 151 0 385 3 1110 68 25 Dios ros vu miana mon B 84 43 M 594 61 26 Dios ros vir miana persimmon Wre B 92 47 M missing missing 27 Dios ros vir miana persimmon B 71 49 M missing missing 28 Querus hellos ak B 69 64 595 52 3 556 45 29 Ca rya tomentosa rnut hickory B 99 82 M 445 55 30 Cercis canadensis redbud B 96 93 618 60 3 591 53 31 Ceras canadensis redbud B 86 81 790 82 3 763 62 Insect 32 Unknown B 72 83 M missing missing 33 Cercis canadensis redbud B 66 93 M 622 52 34 Cercis canadensis eastern r edbud B 54 81 925 53 3 909 61 35 Cercis canadensis eastern redbud B 451 97 566 62 2 569 57 Deer 36 Querus hellos willow oak B 44 83 M missing missing 37 Jum eras wr red cedar B 4 5 6 5 M missing missing 38 Jum eras vir "na red cedar B 55 65 M missm missm 39 Juni eras vir red cedar B 80 70 M missm missin 40 Juni eras vu red cedar B 95 65 1 M Idead Idead is = Dare root vigor 3 = good condition, 2 = surviving and likely to survive next year M = Missing 1 = almost surviving and not likely to survive next year 0 = stem was identified but determined to be dead CURRENT MONITORING YEAR DATA VOLUNTEER HEIGHT CLASSES cm Scientific Name 10 -50 50 -100 > 100 Li uidambar styraciflua 5 3 2 Ulmus americans 6 Quercus phellos 1 t Site Forrest Creek UT-2 (EBX-1 1020) Page 2 Date MY-2 Area 10/17/2012 Vag Plot No 1 X-axis 34'N 10 19 100 05 0,0 05 1 328 NW z 0 0 p X-AXIS Denotes "Missing" Stem maybe missing because of thick herbaceous layer and therefore not visible at the time of monitoring Stem should be searched for at location during subsequent Monitoring Years because the stem may grow above herbaceous layer Denotes "Dead" Stem should still be searched for at location during subsequent Monitoring Years because the roots of the stem may survive and therefore re-sprout in subsequent Monitoring Years w pJah, i�&E-FINm�:Cin ME ME in C4O=CCo�V MME®RME61 1.09 MAIN . . . . . . MrO!MM MMIMMMMLI RVION on 0 on 100 05 0,0 05 1 328 NW z 0 0 p X-AXIS Denotes "Missing" Stem maybe missing because of thick herbaceous layer and therefore not visible at the time of monitoring Stem should be searched for at location during subsequent Monitoring Years because the stem may grow above herbaceous layer Denotes "Dead" Stem should still be searched for at location during subsequent Monitoring Years because the roots of the stem may survive and therefore re-sprout in subsequent Monitoring Years Site Forrest Creek UT -2 (EBX- 11020) Page 1 N nng Year MY -2 Date 10/17/2012 Area Veg Plot No X -axis Plot Location 2 34N CURRENT MONITORING YEAR DATA App 25' east of stream X Y ddh Height DBH MY1 (October, 2011 Scientific Name ddh Height Notes Map ID Scientific Name Common Name Source meter meter mm cm cm Vigor mm cm 1 Diospyros wr miana persimmon B 1 6 02 1058 59 3 785 28 2 Querus phellos willow oak B 20 1 6 M 419 34 3 Querus phellos willow oak B 1 2 24 290 37 3 225 12 4 Unknown B 26 32 M dead dead 5 Plantanus occidentalis sycamore B 1 3 34 2078 181 3 1274 97 6 Plantanus occidentalis sycamore B 02 37 1422 132 3 1091 66 7 Unknown B T6 42 M dead dead 8 Unknown B 1 2 44 M missing missing 9 Cercis canadensis eastern redbud B 01 53 610 74 3 613 51 10 Cercis canadensis eastern redbud B 1 5 56 609 70 3 623 66 11 Cercis canadensis eastern redbud B 09 66 730 42 3 747 42 12 Cercis canadensis eastern redbud B 1 7 81 558 58 3 935 58 13 Ca rya tomentosa mockemut hickory B 05 821 M 572 63 14 Querus phellos willow oak B 07 96 M 583 63 15 Unknown B 22 87 M dead dead 16 Cercis canadensis eastern redbud B 97 95 725 52 3 885 46 17 Plantanus occidentalis sycamore B 93 77 2149 185 056 3 1698 103 18 Querus phellos willow oak B 79 78 965 100 3 756 64 19 Unknown B 71 69 M missing missing 20 Ca a tomentosa mockernut hickory B 64 76 M 750 69 21 Unknown B 69 89 M dead dead 22 Cercis canadensis eastern redbud B 79 99 1000 72 3 915 73 23 Diospyros vir miana persimmon B 57 951 M 1093 35 24 Diospyros vir lniana persimmon B 52 81 M 885 15 25 Diospyros wr lniana ersimmon B 55 71 M 1556. 22 26 Diospyros vir iniana persimmon B 42 6 5 M 435 27 27 Plantanus occidentalis sycamore B 32 81 1340 95 3 1278 68 28.Carya tomentosa mockernut hickory B 46 93 M 1052 62 29 Diospyros vir imana persimmon B 28 65 M 475 55 30 Querus phellos willow oak B 97 01 262 24 3 385 33 Res rout 31 Plantanus occidentalis sycamore B 88 011 2548 188 0 996 3 1259 91 Res rout 32 Ca rya tomentosa mockernut hickory B 75 00 250 25 2 625 62 Deer 33 Cercis canadensis eastern redbud B 61 00 560 46 2 422 49 Insect 34 Querus phellos willow oak B 45 00 580 58 3 431. 31 35-Carya tomentosa mockemut hickory B 29 01 M 445 18 36 Unknown B 37 1 8 M missing missing 37 Querus phellos willow oak B 52 1 6 768 73 3 615 64 38 Diospyros vlr iniana persimmon B 65 1 7 M 879 44 39 Ca rya tomentosa mockernut hickory B 95 29 M dead dead 40 Ca rya tomentosa mockernut hickory B 87 30 M 432 12 41 Cercis canadensis eastern redbud B 76 30 1039 70 3 1081 75 Insect 42 Cercis canadensis eastern redbud B 61 33 M 875 63 43 Ca rya tomentosa mockernut hickory B 43 30 M 898 63 44 Ca rya tomentosa mockemut hickory B 95 47 M 1090 42 45 Unknown B 82 47 M dead dead 46 Plantanus occidentals, sycamore B 65 49 M dead dead 47 Unknown B 60 40 M missing missing 48 Plantanus occidentalis sycamore B 51 48 1570 141 0 385 3 887 74 49 Unknown B 44 41 M missing missing 50 Querus phellos willow oak B 34 51 1025 110 3 637 64 51 Unknown B 49 60 M missing missing 52 Unknown B 84 60 M dead dead 53 Cercis canadensis eastern redbud B 71 60 1 85 25 2 473 47 Res rout 54 Unknown IB 56 60 M dead dead 55 Junl eras vir iniana red cedar B 1 5 951 M miss) missin 56 Jum eras wr iniana red cedar B 30 951 44401 148 0 375 3 3586 123 57 Jum eras wr miana I red cedar IB 1 401 951 M Imissing Imissing B = bare root M = Missing Vigor 3 = good condition, 2 = Surviving and likely to survive next year 1 = almost surviving and not likely to survive next year 0 = stem was identified but determined to be dead CURRENT MONITORING YEAR DATA VOLUNTEER SPECIES 4EIGHT CLASSES cm Scientific Name 10 -50 50 -100 > 100 Ulmus amencana 3 Site Forrest Creek UT-2 (EBX-1 1020) Page 2 Date MY-2 Area 10/17/2012 Veg Plot No 2 X-axis 34*N U 1 154 0,0 05 0 328NW D t) I a to lu X-AXIS Denotes "Missing" Stem may be missing because of thick herbaceous layer and therefore not visible at the time of monitoring Stem should be searched for at location during subsequent Monitoring Years because the stem may grow above herbaceous layer Denotes "Dead" Stem should still be searched for at location during subsequent Monitoring Years because the roots of the stem may survive and therefore re-sprout In subsequent Monitoring Years I 0 N moll MORE 011 some "M —11 rwIM,!i I NMOPIM SOME MMMM MMOM RMOMEMEME MOOMMEM 104MRIAMSPIRM MIMM-0 ��Q�ir��t��lal�� .i�`��a�fr��i "1 N,--M. tp�;01610- MR-010 Ed MR N OMENS M 9 MOMMOMMOMMONERRAMMOMEM ER09 or MM (a 12 0 ERSIMMINIEFFINIOIN44; 1 154 0,0 05 0 328NW D t) I a to lu X-AXIS Denotes "Missing" Stem may be missing because of thick herbaceous layer and therefore not visible at the time of monitoring Stem should be searched for at location during subsequent Monitoring Years because the stem may grow above herbaceous layer Denotes "Dead" Stem should still be searched for at location during subsequent Monitoring Years because the roots of the stem may survive and therefore re-sprout In subsequent Monitoring Years I Site Forrest Creek UT -2 (EBX- 11020) Page 1 ing Year MY -2 Date 10/17/2012 Area Veg Plot No X -axis Plot Location 3 14 N CURRENT MONITORING YEAR DATA App 25' east of stream X Y ddh Height DBH MY1 (October 2011 ddh Hel ht Notes Ma ID Scientific Name Common Name Source meter meter mm cm cm Vi or mm cm 1 Ca rya tomentosa mockemut hickory B 91 01 M 1062 63 2 Unknown B 75 01 M dead dead 3 Diospyros vir imana persimmon B 60 00 M 1051 41 4 Unknown B 44 00 M dead dead 5 Querus phellos willow oak B 04 09 1535. 160 0 375 3 637 64 6.Diospyros vir miana persimmon B 20 1 0 M 1593 58 7 Unknown B 34 1 0 M dead dead 8 Querus phellos willow oak B 51 1 0 1472 105 3 825 59 9 Querus phellos willow oak B 66 1 0 1350 105 3 881 71 10 Querus phellos willow oak B 81 09 1350 107 3 11 25 81 11 Unknown B 98 10 M missing missing 12 Plantanus occidentalis sycamore B 93 1 8 1513. 102 3 1071 69 13 Plantanus occidentalis sycamore B 80 1 8 1671 98 3 925 59 14 Unknown B 61 21 M missing missing 15 Plantanus occidentalis sycamore B 43 1 9 11 68 75 3 1255 119 16 Diospyros vir imana persimmon B 24 1 9 M 585 45 17 Plantanus occidentalis sycamore B 1 2 1 9 21 75 150 0 485 3 920 98 18 Querus phellos willow oak B 14 28 1005 95 3 929 55 19.DiosDvros wr miana persimmon B 29 29 M 565 44 20 Plantanus occidentalis sycamore B 44 30 19851 146 0 495 3 1265 117 21 Querus phellos willow oak B 58 30 359 40 3 missing missing Insect/Res rout 22 Cercis canadensis eastern redbud B 72 28 510 351 3 1 5 76 38 Insect 23 Unknown B 89 28 M missing missing 24 Plantanus occidentalis sycamore B 100 36 1675 95 3 1558 71 25 Plantanus occidentalis sycamore B 74 38 1545 90 3 1699 75 Insect 26 Plantanus occidentalis sycamore B 1 4 38 2049 156 0 491 3 1557 102 27 Plantanus occidentalis sycamore B 03 45 2459 161 055 3 1245 92 28 Ca rya tomentosa mockemut hickory B 1 211 45 M 401 28 29 Querus phellos willow oak B 1 381 4 5 1520 110 3 1385 87 30 Querus phellos willow oak B 50 45 1320 126 3 731 63 31 Plantanus occidentalis sycamore B 66 44 M 1569 63 32 Ceras canadensis eastern redbud B 82 43 M 421 28 33 Ceras canadensis eastern redbud B 48 43 M missing missing 34 Unknown B 43 53 M missing missing 35 Querus phellos willow oak B 1 8 57 1166. 110 3 755 62 36 Unknown B 25 69 M dead dead 37 Querus phellos willow oak B 56 68 1330 103 3 892 73 38 Querus phellos willow oak B 68 68 691 75 3 445 48 39 Querus phellos willow oak B 85 66 11 75 93 3 missing missing 40 Cercis canadensis eastern redbud B 81 77 1 55 15 3 52 Res rout 41 Dios ros vir imana persimmon B 58 80 M missing 42 Querus hellos willow oak B 41 84 530. 92 3 60 43 Dios ros vir iniana persimmon B 1 5 81 M N12 44 44 Dios ros vu iniana persimmon B 10 90 M missing missing 45 Plantanus occidentalis sycamore B 32 89 1840 135 3 96 Insect 46 Unknown B 5 3 9 0 M missin 47 Unknown B 88 83 M missing missing 48 Querus phellos willow oak B 99 88 11 80 115 3 748 64 49 Juni erus vir miana red cedar B 95 65 M missing missing 50 Juni erus vir iniana red cedar B 12 95 M missin missm 51 Juni erus vir iniana red cedar B 951 701 M Imissing missing B = bare root M = Missing Vigor 3 = good condition, 2 = surviving and likely to survive next year 1 = almost surviving and not likely to survive next year to be dead Site Forrest Creek UT-2 (EBX-1 1020) Page 2 Date MY-2 Area 10/17/2012 Vag Plot No 3 X -axis 14'N 1 ( 1 05 0,0 05 MENOM NexNEVIE Omm Q■ ��: =ate: ■_�� 9103 M M 8 - 0 52--al 0 OEM M 0 M 0 SOMM 0 2 INS on 010021- 0 VIM M I OR O (:t5/ 111tC:V f a W IV X-AXIS Denotes "Missing" Stem may be missing because of thick herbaceous layer and therefore not visible at the time of monitoring Stem should be searched for at location during subsequent Monitoring Years because the stem may grow above herbaceous layer Denotes "Dead" Stem should still be searched for at location during subsequent Monitoring Years because the roots of the stem may survive and therefore re-sprout in subsequent Monitoring Years Site Forrest Creek UT -2 (EBX- 11020) Page 1 .ing Year MY -2 Date Area Veg Plot No X -axis Plot Location 10/17/2012 4 32 N CURRENT MONITORING YEAR DATA App 25' east of stream X F Y ddh Hei ht DBH MY1 (October, 2011 Scientific Name ddh Height Notes Map ID Scientific Name Common Name Source meter meter mm cm cm Vigor mm cm 1 Unknown B 98 06 M missing missing 2 Ca rya tomentosa mockemut hickory B 79 04 M 625 60 3 Unknown B 66 04 M missing missing 4 Unknown B 39 03 M missing missing 5 Unknown B 24 04 M dead dead 6 Ceras canadensis eastern redbud B 09 04 8471 49 2 890 54 Deer 7 Ceras canadensis eastern redbud B 03 21 12051 82 2 1232 89 Insect 8 Unknown B 1 7 20 M missing missing 9 Plantanus occdentalis sycamore B 29 22 2622 182 0 719 3 1255 88 10 Quercus phellos willow oak B 41 22 860 72 3 568 60 11 Quercus phellos willow oak B 59 22 11 90 99 3 742 72 12 Quercus phellos willow oak B 74 22 705 64 3 618 60 13 Ceras canadensis eastern redbud B 39 39 1024 68 2 1579 72 Deer 14 Plantanus occdentalis sycamore B 22 39 21 55 145 0 352 3 1735 119 Insect 15 Ceras canadensis eastern redbud B 06 36 845 64 3 806 62 Insect 16 Ceras canadensis eastern redbud B 49 42 865 70 2 1063 52 Deer 17 Unknown B 69 44 M missing missing 18 Plantanus ocadentalis sycamore B 96 41 1850 99 3 1405 44 19 Plantanus occdentalis sycamore B 81 38 11 70 94 3 636 68 Insect 20 Unknown B 92 57 M missing missing 21 Dios ros vir imanana Dersimmon B 53 56 M 593 49 22 Plantanus occdentalis sycamore B 20 56 1666 115 3 1078 88 23 Ceras canadensis eastern redbud B 03 56 M 941 59 24 Diospyros vir lnlanana persimmon B 20 91 350 22 2 415 32 25 Ulmus amencana American elm B 67 96 2009 182 035 3 1410 130 26 Unknown B 90 99 M missing missin 27 Unknown B 98 85 M dead dead 28 Plantanus occdentalis !sycamore IB 1 951 69 M Imissing missing B = bare root Vigor 3 = g00d Condition, 2 = surviving and likely to Survive next year M = Missing 1 = almost surviving and not likely to survive next year 0 = stem was identified but determined to be dead CURRENT MONITORING YEAR DATA VOLUNTEER HEIGHT CLASSES cm Scientific Name 10 -50 150-1001 > 100 Ll uidambar styraciflua 2 1 Ulmus amencana 2 Site Forrest Creek UT-2 (EBX-1 1020) Page 2 Date MY•2 Area 10/17/2012 Veg Plot No 4 X-a)as 32'N V 10 05 0,0 U 5 0 326 NW 0 0 0 f 0 V lu X-AXIS )enotes "Missing" Stem maybe missing because of thick herbaceous layer and therefore not visible a] ie time of monitoring Stem should be searched for at location during subsequent Monitoring Years ,ecause the stem may grow above herbaceous layer )enotes "Dead" Stem should still be searched for at location during subsequent Monitoring Years ecause the roots of the stem may survive and therefore re-sprout in subsequent Monitoring Years mss 59, MEMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM palm mmmm R-MMO MOUMMMOM p0q N.M. ZrOMMIRMEREM rOMEREENSEEMOO-0, Offismo%-01 10 05 0,0 U 5 0 326 NW 0 0 0 f 0 V lu X-AXIS )enotes "Missing" Stem maybe missing because of thick herbaceous layer and therefore not visible a] ie time of monitoring Stem should be searched for at location during subsequent Monitoring Years ,ecause the stem may grow above herbaceous layer )enotes "Dead" Stem should still be searched for at location during subsequent Monitoring Years ecause the roots of the stem may survive and therefore re-sprout in subsequent Monitoring Years APPENDIX E Photo Stations [JEcoEngineering A drvrsion of The John R. McAdams Company, Inc .; jv ' , 1 ` PHOTO STATION 51 VIEW FAGIN& 54• NORTH. PHOTO STATION bw VIEN FACINS 54• NORTH. rnaecr no. E8X -11020 FORREST CREEK UT AEcoEngineering nL"'k*E: EBX11020X. D WG BANK PARCEL A division of Dw Jolo R I VWA CAM"". lnc. ENGINEERS • FIAti MS • SURVEYORS- ENVaiOd MEMAL e SCAM AS SHOWN RC RESEAH TRIANGLE PARK • CBARI.( M PHOTO STATIONS DAM ORANGE COUNTY. NORTH CAROLINA »os M.W. P..►..-, �U Kc K. °0o-"'d1°•'^ '�°"®""�°®' ""°" �.: c"ow -.�o PHOTO STATION 'L VIEW FAGINS 56' NORTHEAST. PROTECT N0. EBX —, t O2O FORREST CREEK UT- SCALE : EBX„ SHOWN NWG BANK PARCEL s`A�e: AS SHOWN DATE: PHO`M STATIONS 11-06-2012 ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA 2 ® EcoEngineering A division of Y3e John R. McAdwat Compsny, Inc. immu - PuNNERS • 8ugygYM- INVOOMMOTAL RESEARCH TRIANG12 IM -COAK40M m 1lerYiu Euksy. Mr R am M73S-". ,mgjohumwdsa� • Nuw w !dW