The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20070989 Ver 1_Restoration Plan_20070604RESTORA TION PLAN LITTLE LICK CREEK AT THE CROSSINGS GOLF CLUB RESTORATION PROJECT Durham County, North Carolina Project ID No. 050650501 - Prepared for: r ,~ ~.C OSy1tC111 NCDENR-Ecosystem Enhancement Program 2728 Capital Boulevard, Suite 1 H 103 Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 May 14, 2007 4 •Z007 JUN pENK- vVAit A~No '=w~+c~+ yS AMD S7pR. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 Project lD No. OS06SU>01 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, 1~urham County, North Carolina RESTt)RAT1C)N PLAN Prepared by: IATE P. KO ~ ASSOC S, C Consulting Engineers Ko & Associates, P.C. 1011 Schaub Drive, Suite 202 Raleigh, North Carolina 27606 919.851.6066 919.851.6846 (fax) R. Kevin Williams, PE, PLS, CPESC, CPSWQ Project Engineer/Manager KO ePc ASSOCIATES, P. C. Page ~ C077S2f1/f17~ ~lljy'lpt U'8 Little lick C'reel< Restorati~~n I'rt~ject~ I)urh~im C'uut~h~, Nort(1 ('arolina RF~,STORr1II0~ PLt~N TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................. I 1.0 PROJECT SITE LOCATION .......................................................................................... 1 1.1 DIRECTIONS TO PROJECT SITE ...................................................................................... I 1.2 USGS HYDROLOGIC UNIT CODE AND NCDWQ RIVER BASIN DESIGNATION ............. 1 I.3 PROJECT VICINITY MAP ............................................................................................. .. 1 2.0 WATERSHED CHARACTERIZATION ........................................................................ 3 2.1 DRAINAGE AREA ....................................................................................................... .. 3 2.2 SURFACE WATER CLASSIFICATION/WATER DUALITY ............................................... .. 3 2.3 PHYSIOGRAPHY, GEOLOGY, AND SOILS ..................................................................... .. 3 2.4 HISTORICAL LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT TRENDS ................................................ .. 4 2.5 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES ................................................................. .. 5 2.6 CULTURAL RESOURCES :....................................................... 6 2 7 ..................................... POTENTIAL CONSTRAIN .. . TS ......................................................................................... .. 6 2.7.1 Property Ownership and Boundary ................................................................... .. 7 2.7.2 Project Access ................................................................................................... .. 8 2.7.3 Utilities .............................................................................................................. ..8 2.7.4 FEMA/Hydrologic Trespass ............................................................................. .. 8 3.0 PROJECT SITE STREAMS (EXISTING CONDITIONSI ........................................... .. 9 3.1 CHANNEL CLASSIFICATION ........................................................................................ .. 9 3.2 DISCHARGE ................................................................................................................ ..9 3.3 CHANNEL MORPHOLOGY ........................................................................................... .. 9 3.4 CHANNEL STABILITY ASSESSMENT ............................................................................ .. 9 3.5 BANKFULL VERIFICATION ......................................................................................... 10 3.6 VEGETATION .............................................................................................................. 10 4.0 REFERENCE STREAMS .............................................................................................. 13 4.1 WATERSHED CHARACTERIZATION ............................................................................. 13 4.2 CHANNEL CLASSIFICATION ........................................................................................ 13 4.3 DISCHARGE ................................................................................................................ 13 4.4 CHANNEL MORPHOLOGY ........................................................................................... 14 4.5 CHANNEL STABILITY ASSESSMENT ............................................................................ 14 4.6 BANKFULL VERIFICATION ......................................................................................... 14 4.7 REFERENCE FOREST ECOSYSTEM ............................................................................... 15 5.0 PROJECT SITE WETLANDS (EXISTING CONDITIONS) :...................................... 16 5.1 JURISDICTIONAL WETLANDS ...................................................................................... 16 5.2 HYDROLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS ........................................................................... 16 5.3 SOIL CHARACTERISTICS ............................................................................................. 16 5.4 PLANT COMMUNITY CHARACTERIZATION ................................................................. I7 KO cP~ ASSOCIATES, P.G Pagc ii Co»suhi»~> Engineer e Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN 6.0 6.1 PROJECT SITE RESTORATION PLAN ...................................................................... RESTORATION PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ...................................................... 18 18 6.1.1 Designed Channel Classification ...................................................................... 19 6.1.2 Stream Restoration Activities ........................................................................... 19 6.1.3 In-stream Structures .......................................................................................... 22 6.1.4 Target Buffer Communities .............................................................................. 22 6.2 SEDIMENT TRANSPORT ANALYSIS ............................................................................. 23 6.3 HEC-RAS ANALYSIS ................................................................................................ 24 6.3.1 Bankfull Discharge Analysis ............................................................................ 25 6.3.2 No-Rise ............................................................................................................. 26 6.3.3 Hydrologic Trespass ......................................................................................... 26 6.4 STORMWATER BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ........................................................ 27 6.4.1 Narrative of Site-Specific Stormwater Concerns .............................................. 27 6.4.2 Device Description and Application ................................................................. 27 6.5 WETLAND RESTORATION/HYDROLOGICAL MODIFICATIONS ..................................... 29 6.6 SOIL RESTORATION ............... ................................................................................... 30 6.6.1 Floodplain Soil Scarification ............................................................................ 30 6.7 NATURAL PLANT COMMUNITY RESTORATION ........................................................... 6.7.1 Planting Plan ..................................................................................................... 30 33 6.7.2 Neuse River Buffers .......................................................................................... 35 6.7.3 Golf Course Maintenance Guidelines ............................................................... 6.7.4 Invasive Species Management .......................................................................... 35 36 7.0 PERFORMANCE CRITERIA ....................................................................................... 36 7.1 STREAMS ................................................................................................................... 36 7.1.1 Stream Success Criteria .................................................................................... 37 7.2 7.1.2 Stream Contingency .......................................................................................... HYDROLOGY .............................................................................................................. 37 38 7.2.1 Hydrology Success Criteria .............................................................................. 38 73 7.2.2 Hydrology Contingency ........:..................:........................................................ STORMWATER MANAGEMENT DEVICES ..................................................................... 39 39 7.3.1 Stormwater Wetland Monitoring and Maintenance .......................................... 39 7.4 VEGETATION .............................................................................................................. 7.4.1 Vegetation Success Criteria .............................................................................. 39 40 7.4.2 Vegetation Contingency .................................................................................... 40 7.S 8.0 SCHEDULING AND REPORTING ................................................................................... REFERENCES ............................................................................................................... 4O 42 KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. pale ~~~ a Cunsullin ~ En ~ineers ~ b Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN List of Tables Table 1. Project Restoration Structures and Objectives ................................................................. 4 Table 2. Drainage Areas ................................................................................................................ 5 Table 3. USDA Soils Mapped within the Project .......................................................................... 6 Table 4. Land Use of Watershed .................................................................................................... 6 Table 5. Federally Protected Species for Durham County ............................................................ 7 Table 6. Design Constraints ........................................................................................................... 9 Table 7. Little Lick Creek Morphological Stream Characteristics .............................................. 13 Table 8. Reference Forest Ecosystem .......................................................................................... 17 Table 9. Stormwater Wetland Summary ...................................................................................... 30 Table 10. Planting Plan ................................................................................................................ 36 Table 1 1. Project Scheduling and Reporting ............................................................................... 43 List of Figures Figure 1 Restoration Site Vicinity Map Figure 2 Restoration Site Watershed Map Figure 3 Restoration Site Soil Survey Map Figure 4 Restoration Site Hydrological Features Map Figure 5 Reference Site Vicinity Map Figure 6 Reference Site Watershed Map Figure 7 Reference Site Soil Survey Map Figure 8 Reference Site Vegetative Communities Map List of Sheets Sheets 1-IA Restoration Site Existing Stream Conditions Sheets 2-2A Restoration Site Proposed Stream Conditions Sheets 3-3A Longitudinal Profiles Sheets 4-4A Planting Plan Sheet 5-SA Existing Neuse Buffers Sheet 6-6A Proposed Neuse Buffers a KO & ASSOCIATES, P.C. Page iv Consulting Engineers Project 1D No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN Appendices Appendix A. Restoration Site Photographs Appendix B. Restoration Site USACE Routine Wetland Determination Data Forms I 1. Wetland Forms Location Map 2. Wetland Forms Appendix C. Restoration Site NCDWQ Stream Classification Form 1 L Stream Form Location Map 2. Stream Form Appendix D. Restoration Site Concurrence Letters L US Fish and Wildlife Letter 2. NCSHPO Letter Appendix E. Reference Site Photographs Appendix F. Reference Site NCDWQ Stream Classification Forms Appendix G. HEC-RAS Analysis Appendix H. BMP Supporting Documentation Appendix I. Ko Curve Supporting Documentation Appendix J. Sediment Loss Documentation 1 KO & ASSOCIATES, P.C. pagc v a Cunsnllin ~ En inecrs ~ x 1 Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) is currently developing stream restoration plans for the Little Lick Creek at The Crossings Golf Club (Project) located east of the City of Durham, in Durham County. The Project is located at The Crossings Golf Club north of Highway 98. The Project is located in United States Geological Survey (USGS) Hydrologic Unit (HU) and Targeted Local Watershed 03020201050020 (North Carolina Division of Water Quality [NCDWQ] Subbasin 03-04-01) of the Neuse River Basin and will service the USGS 8- ' digit HU 03020201. This document details planned stream restoration activities on the Project. A conservation easement, approximately 16-acres, will be placed on the Project to incorporate all restoration activities. The Project contains Little Lick Creek, riparian buffer, riparian wetlands, floodplain, and upland slopes. The Project watershed, including the Project, is characterized primarily by urban development associated with the City of Durham, the golf course, residential and business development, disturbed forest, and agricultural and forest lands that are continually being converted to development. Adjacent urban land uses, which include the removal of riparian vegetation, impervious surfaces, and rerouting of stream channels for the development of a golf course, has resulted in degraded water quality, a loss of aquatic habitat, reduced nutrient and sediment retention, and unstable channel characteristics (mass wasting of channel banks, tree loss into channels, sediment loading, and the loss of bed form diversity). The primary goals and objects of this project include: • The EEP and the project stakeholders completed the Little Lick Creek Local Watershed Plan (LWP) in December 2006, which identified stream repair projects and developed strategies to help meet the Neuse River Basin nutrient loading requirements. This Project was identified from the LWP and was the only opportunity which met EEP project mitigation criteria and had a landowner willing to participate in the program. • Reducing sediment input to Little Lick Creek by restoring a stable dimension, pattern, and profile, and establishing a vegetated stream bank and floodplain forest. Stream bank and floodplain forest vegetation species were selected by studying a Reference Forest Ecosystem and reviewing species listed in Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina: Third Approximation (Schafale and Weakley 1990). These species will mimic a Piedmont Alluvial Forest. • Promote floodwater attenuation and decrease floodwater levels by excavating a floodplain bench at the bankfull discharge elevation, and increasing roughness in the floodplain by establishing a vegetated riparian buffer. • Improving aquatic habitat by enhancing stream bed variability (riffle-pool sequence), and introducing woody debris in the form of rootwads, log vanes, and log sills. A riffle-pool sequence and woody debris structures provide places for forage, cover and reproduction for aquatic fauna and in some instances flora. a KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. Executive Summary Page I Consultin~,~ En~~ineers Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN • Improve terrestrial habitat by restoring a forested riparian corridor through a golf course which had dissected the floodplain into pockets of maintained open area, and small woodlands. This corridor will provide a diversity of habitats such as mature forest, early successional forest, riparian wetlands and uplands. • Reduce nonpoint source pollution associated with urban land uses (i.e. golf course, roadways, residential communities) by providing a vegetative buffer adjacent to streams to treat surface runoff. Virtually all research that has been conducted on vegetated riparian buffer strips shows a substantial decrease in pollutants such as nitrate-nitrogen, phosphorous, chloride, ammonium, and sedimentation. • Improve water quality by restoring riparian wetlands in abandoned sections of Little Lick Creek and implementing BMPs for stormwater runoff that will retain sediments and nutrients. Project restoration efforts will result in the following: • Restoration of approximately 2960 linear feet of Little Lick Creek to its historic position in the valley. The existing channel alignment measures 3805 liner feet (minus 308 feet that is not being restored), but has been rerouted along holes 16 and 17, which substantially increased the natural channel's length. • 0.82 acres of riverine wetlands will be impacted due to the restoration of Little Lick Creek. • Restoration of approximately 1.4 acres of riverine wetlands. • There are currently 10.0 acres of buffers within the 50 foot riparian corridor of Little Lick Creek. Of the 10.0 acres there are 4.63 acres of forest which meet vegetation requirements of Neuse River Buffers. The remaining 4.51 acres of grass, and 0.86 acres of maintained sewer easement, do not meet vegetation requirements of Neuse River Buffers. These buffers will be impacted by the relocation of Little Lick Creek. • The relocation and reforestation of Little Lick Creek's riparian corridor will result in a total of 6.55 acres of riparian corridor within 50 feet of Little Lick Creek. Of the 6.55 acres there are 3.88 acres of forest and 1.36 acres of shrub/low lying vegetation which will be considered Neuse River Buffers. The remaining area of 0.53 acres of maintained grass, and 0.78 acres of maintained sewer easement, will not meet vegetation requirements of Neuse River Buffers. • A total of 6.9 acres of stream banks, floodplains, upland slopes and BMPs will be reforested within the project limits. This document represents a detailed restoration plan summarizing activities proposed within the Project. The plan includes: 1) descriptions of existing conditions, 2) reference stream and forest studies, 3) restoration plans, and 4) Project monitoring and success criteria. Upon approval of this plan by EEP, engineering construction plans will be prepared and activities implemented as outlined. Proposed restoration activities may be modified during the civil design stage due to constraints such as access issues, sediment-erosion control measures, drainage needs (floodway constraints), or other design considerations. Executive Summary a KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. page 11 Consnlling Engineers Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN 1.0 PROJECT SITE LOCATION: Little Lick Creek at The Crossings Golf Club Restoration Project (Project) is located east of the City of Durham, in Durham County. The Project is located at The Crossings Golf Club north of Highway 98 and includes a reach of Little Lick Creek (Figure 1). The Latitude and Longitude of the mid point of the proposed channel is 35.985138921° N and 78.812509735° W (WGS 84 datum), and the mid point of the largest proposed wetland is 35.987057717° N and 78.808943541° W ' (WGS 84 datum). Approximately 2656 linear feet of stream and 1.4 acres of riparian wetlands are to be restored at the Project. A total of 1.53 acres of riparian wetlands will be preserved. ' Additionally, Neuse River Riparian Buffers will be restored on the Project. Table 1 describes the Project restoration structures and objectives. 1.1 Directions to Project Site: From Raleigh, North Carolina take US Highway 70 west towards Durham. Turn right on Mineral Springs Road and travel ' approximately 2.6 miles to Wake Forest Highway (Highway 98). Turn right on Highway 98 and travel approximately 0.3 miles. Turn left into The Crossings Golf Club. ~' 1.2 USGS Hydrologic Unit Code and NCDWQ River Basin Designation: The Little Lick Creek Restoration Project is located in Durham County, North Carolina within United States Geological Survey (USGS) Hydrologic Unit (HU) and Targeted Local Watershed 03020201050020 (North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) Subbasin 03-04-01) of the Neuse River Basin and will service the USGS 8-digit HU 03020202 (NCWRP 2003). NCDWQ Subbasin 03-04-01 of the Neuse River Basin originates northwest of the City of Durham in Person and Orange Counties and empties into the Pamlico Sound. The upper 22 miles of the river's main stem are impounded by Falls Lake Reservoir dam just north of Raleigh (NCDWQ 2006a). 1.3 Proieet Vicinity Mau: The project vicinity is depicted on Figure 1. u a KO 8c ASSOCIATES, P. C. Consulting Engineers Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN Table 1. Project Restoration Structures and Objectives Proiect ID No. 050650501 (i,ittle i,ick Creek RPCtnratinn PrniPrtl Restoration Existing Designed Segment/ Station Range Restoration Priority Linear Linear Comment Reach ID TYPe Approach Footage/ Footage/ Acrea a Acrea e 10+00 - 17+88 Restoration II 1,018 788 Restored stream length will reconnect the stream with an Little Lick 17+g8 - 20+96 --- --- 30g ___ abandoned alignment. Creek 20+96 - 33+67 Restoration II 1,569 1,271 Location of existing alignment can be traced 33+67 - 39+64 Restoration II 1,390 597 back to 1996 construction of olf course. Designed acreage signifies Riparian ___ Restoration --- 2 35 1 4 all wetlands within Wetland . . abandoned channel sections which will be restored. Designed acreage is total acres to be preserved after Riparain ___ Preservation --- 2 35 1 53 all impacts are totaled. Wetland . . There are a total of 0.82 acres of impacts to riparian wetlands on-site. These areas are currently Forest Restoration --- 4.63 3.52 either forested or sparsely vegetated with grass or low densit trees. These areas are currently in grass. The golf course Grass --- --- 4.51 0.53 restricted the restoration plan from planting trees or shrubs in these areas. Grass will be planted in the Sewer --- --- 0.86 0.78 existing sewer easement. The sewer easement will not Neuse River allow for shrubs or trees. Buffers These areas are currently B~, sparsely vegetated with Stormwater Creation --- ---- 0.14 grass or low density trees Wetland and will have species planted with nitrogen and toxin u take ca abilities. . Shrubs are to be planted in play over areas through the fairways of the golf course. Shrub Restoration --- --- 1.36 These areas are currently planted in grass. No trees are allowed in the play over areas. a KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. 2 Consnllrng EnKineet s Project ID No. 050650.501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN 2.0 WATERSHED CHARACTERIZATION 2.1 Drainage Area: Little Lick Creek has a watershed area of approximately 4160 acres (6.5 square miles) at the downstream most point of the Project (Table 2 and Figure 2). Onsite elevations range from a high of 285 feet National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) at the upstream extent of the Project to a low of approximately 272 feet NGVD at the downstream extent of the Project, as obtained from field surveys. t ~~ Table 2. Drainage Areas PrniPrt iil Nn (1S(l~Sf1Sf11 (i,ittle i,ick (reek Rectnratinn Prniectl Draina a Area Reach Acres S uare Mile(s) Little Lick Creek 4160 6.5 2.2 Surface Water Classification/Water Quality: Little Lick Creek has been assigned Stream Index Number 27-9-(0.5), a Best Usage Classification of WS-IV NSW, and is considered impaired for its intended uses (NCDWQ 2002, NCDWQ 2006b). WS-IV water supply waters are sources of potable water where a WS-I, II, or III classification is not feasible. These waters are also protected for Class C uses. WS-IV waters are generally in moderately to highly developed watersheds or Protected Areas, and involve no categorical restrictions on discharges. Class C waters are suitable for aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation, and agriculture. Secondary recreation includes wading, boating, and other uses involving human body contact with water where such activities take place in an infrequent, unorganized, or incidental manner. NSW (nutrient sensitive waters) is a supplemental classification intended for waters needing additional nutrient management due to their being subject to excessive growth of microscopic or macroscopic vegetation. Little Lick Creek is listed on the draft 2006 and final 2004 303d lists for a standard violation of low dissolved oxygen resulting from construction activities and impaired biological integrity from urban runoff/storm sewers (NCDWQ 2006c, 2006d) 2.3 Physiography, Geology, and Soils: The Project is located within the Piedmont of North Carolina in the Triassic Basins ecoregion. The Triassic Basins ecoregion is characterized by dissected, irregular plains and some low rounded hills and ridges with low to moderate gradient sandy or clayey bottomed streams. This ecoregion tends to have wider floodplains relative to other Piedmont ecoregions (Griffith 2002). KO 8c ASSOCIATES, P. C. a v s rltin > En >ineers C n r ~, ~, ~~ Project iD No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN Soils that occur within the Project, according to the Soid Survey of Durham County, North Carolina are depicted in Figure 3 and described in Table 3 (USDA 1976). Table 3. USDA Soils Mapped within the Project Proiect ID No. 050650501 (i,ittle ),irk ('rPPk RPCtnratinn Prniprfl Soil Series Famil - -~ Descri tion Altavista Aquic Consists of nearly level and gently sloping, moderately well drained soils on (A1B) Hapludults low stream terraces. Depth to the seasonal high water table occurs at a roximatel 2.5 feet. Chewacla Fluvaquentic This series consists of very deep, somewhat poorly drained, moderately (Ch) Dystrudepts Permeable on floodplains. Depth to the seasonal high water table occurs at 0.5 to 2 feet. Creedmore Aquic Consists of gently sloping and moderately well drained soils on uplands. CrC) Ha ludults De th to seasonal hi h water table is a roximatel 1 %2 feet. White Store Vertic Consists of nearly level to moderately steep, moderately well drained soils on (WsE) Ha ludal s u lands. De th to the seasonal hi h water table is a proximate) 1 % feet. ..~a~~ ~ - ~~yu,~~ ~~,~~, ~,rass n - uunnyunc sous, wnrcn may con[am nyanc sore mclusrons 2.4 Historical Land Use and Development Trends: Land use within the Project watershed is characterized primarily by urban development associated with the City of Durham, the golf course, residential and business development, disturbed forest, impervious surfaces, and agricultural and forest lands that are continually being converted to development (Table 4 and Figure 2). Adjacent urban land uses, which include the removal of riparian vegetation, impervious surfaces, and rerouting of stream channels, has resulted in degraded water quality, a loss of aquatic habitat, reduced nutrient and sediment retention, and unstable channel characteristics (mass wasting of channel banks, tree loss into channels, sediment loading, and the loss of bed form diversity). Table 4. Land Use of Watershed Proiect iD Nn_ 050650501 (i,;ttlP i,i~k (''rPPlr Ractnra+inn Prninn+l Land Use Acrea a Percenta e Urban Land 2580 62 A ricultural Land 120 3 Forest Land 1460 35 TOTAL 4160 100 a KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. 4 Consrrlling Engineers Project 1D No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN i 2.5 Threatened and Endangered Species: Species with a Federal classification of Endangered or Threatened are protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The term "Endangered species" is defined as "any species which is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range," and the term "Threatened species" is defined as "any species which is likely to become an Endangered specles within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range" (16 U.S.C. 1532). Based on the most recently updated county-by-county database of federally listed species in North Carolina as posted by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) at http://nc-es.fws.gov/es/countyfr.html, three federally protected 1 species are listed for Durham County. Table 5 lists the federally protected species for Durham County and indicates if potential habitat exists within the Project for each. Table 5. Federally Protected Species for Durham County Proiect ID No. 050650501 (Little Lick Creek Restoration Proiectl 1 t Habitat Present Common Name Scientific Name Status* j Biological Conclusion Within Pro ect Vertebrates May Affect, Not Bald eagle Haliaeetus Threatened Yes Likely to Adversely leucocephalus Effect Vascular Plants Smooth coneflower Echinacea laevi ata Endan ered No No Effect Michaux's sumac Rhus michauxii Endan ered** No No Effect *Endangered = a taxon "in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range' ; 'threatened = a taxon "likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range". **Historic record =this species was last observed in the county more than 50 years ago. Potential foraging habitat may occur for the bald eagle approximately 3 miles downstream of the Project on Falls Lake and on ponds in the 180-acre parcel that contains the Project. In addition, large pines occur within the Project study area providing potential nesting habitat for bald eagle. However, no nests were observed within Project trees during field investigations and no known documented occurrences of bald eagle occur within 3 miles of the Project according to the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP). Therefore, this Project may affect, but is not likely to adversely effect bald eagle. No potential habitat is located in the Project for smooth coneflower or Michaux's sumac. In addition, no known occurrences for either species are documented by NCNHP within 3 miles of the Project; therefore, this Project will have no effect on smooth coneflower or Michaux's sumac. a KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. 5 Consullin~ En~,~ineers I~ Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN USFWS representative Pete Benjamin concurred with the above findings in a letter dated September 16, 2006 (Appendix D). No designated units of Critical Habitat are listed as occurring in Durham County 2.6 Cultural Resources: Pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for compliance with Section 106 (36 CFR Part 800) comments were received for the Project from the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (NCSHPO). No known archaeological sites or structures of historical or architectural importance are present within the proposed Project area as indicated by NCSHPO Representative Peter Sandbeck in a letter dated June 7, 2006 (Appendix D). 2.7 Potential Constraints: The presence of conditions or characteristics that have the potential to hinder restoration activities at the Project were evaluated. The evaluation focused primarily on the presence of hazardous materials, utilities and restrictive easements, rare/threatened/endangered species or critical habitats, wetlands and streams, and the potential for hydrologic trespass. Existing information regarding constraints was acquired and reviewed. In addition, any Project conditions that have the potential to restrict the restoration design and implementation were documented during the field investigation. The primary Project constraint was the golf course. Little Lick Creek flows through the course's fairways, near greens and tee boxes, and under golf cart path bridges. The channel has been designed and positioned to meet the golf courses' objectives of playability while still achieving the required stream restoration goals. Other constraints included a sanitary sewer outfall, fiber optic line, adjacent subdivision property boundaries, numerous pipe drainages that outlet stormwater from the adjacent neighborhood and roads to Little Lick Creek throughout the Project, and existing ponds and wetlands. Each constraint was considered during channel design and are listed in Table 6. Coordination with the City of Durham, Department of Water Management required the amount and depth of excavation within the sanitary sewer easement be minimized to protect existing sewer lines. The City of Durham also requested that no tree or shrub planting occur within the sewer easement. The City of Durham routinely mows the sewer easements for maintenance and inspection purposes. a KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. 6 Consnlling En~~ineer~ Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN L~ t Table 6. Design Constraints Proiect il) Nn_ OS(1F5(1501 (i.ittle i.ick ('.reek Restoration Proiectl Location Design Constraint Number of Constraints in Project Area Beginning Third of Golf cart brid e crossin s 1 Project Golf course fairwa crossin 1 Trees ad'acent to Golf course fairwa 5-6 Golf course #11 Green 1 Golf course #12 Tee Box 1 Fiber o tic line 1 Sanitar sewer line and easement alon left side 1 Mature wooded forest 1 Middle Third of Project Mature wooded forest 1 Sanita sewer line and easement alon left side 1 Golf cart brid e crossin s 3 Golf course fairwa crossin s 2 Golf course #14 Green 1 Golf course #16 Tee Box 1 Golf course and and dam 1 Subdivision ro ert boundaries alon ri ht hand side 4 Stormwater draina e i es or swales 2 Ending Third of Project Tie to abandoned relic channel 1 Sanitar sewer line and easement alon left side 1 Stormwater draina e i es or swales 6 Wetland areas 17 Sanita sewer line and easement crossin 1 Subdivision ro ert boundaries alon ri ht hand side 3 Golf cart brid e crossin 1 Golf course fairwa crossin 1 2.7.1 Property Ownership and Boundar The Project is located on a parcel of land within Durham County, identified as Parcel-ID 167130. A permanent conservation easement totaling approximately 16 acres will encompass Project restoration activities. The goal of the easement was to obtain an area with a minimum width of 50 feet from the top of each bank ' through the entire project. However, because the project is located in a golf course, with constraints as noted above, some areas of the easement totaled less than 50 feet from top of proposed bank. These areas were minimal in size/length. Numerous areas totaled much larger than 50 feet from top of bank for easement areas. Approximately 2.9 acres of the proposed easement area will result in reforestation of a previously non-forested area. I~ KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. ~ a Consultin En ineers x x Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN 2.7.2 Project Access The Project is located at The Crossings Golf Club near the City of Durham. A transportation plan, including the location of access routes and staging areas will be designed to minimize Project disturbance to the maximum extent feasible. The number of transportation access points into the floodplain will be maximized to 2.7.3 Utilities avoid traversing long distances through the Project interior. optic lines will be minimized as a result of restoration activities. A sanitary sewer main and a fiber optic line are present within the Project; however, coordination has been initiated so that disturbance to the sewer and fiber 2.7.4 FEMA/Hydrolo~ic Trespass The HEC-RAS analysis indicates that the restoration design will result in a no-rise in the 100-year floodplain water surface elevations outside of the Project area. RAS Analysis). The results of this analysis affirm that hydrologic trespass to adjacent properties will not occur. The HEC-RAS is discussed in more detail in Section 5.3 (HEC- 1 a KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. ~ Consnllrng Engineers Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN i ' 3.0 PROJECT SITE STREAMS (EXISTING CONDITIONS): Little Lick Creek is proposed for restoration at the Project (Figure 4 and Sheets 1 through 1B). Current conditions have resulted in degraded water quality, a loss of aquatic habitat, reduced nutrient and sediment retention, and unstable channel characteristics (mass wasting of channel banks, tree loss into channels, sediment loading, and the loss of bed form diversity) at the Project. Restoration of the channel will restore riffle-pool morphology, aid in energy dissipation, increase aquatic habitat, stabilize channel banks, and substantially decrease the amount of sediments currently being lost from channel banks. ' 3.1 Channel Classification: Stream geometry and substrate data have been evaluated to classify existing stream conditions, utilizing fluvial geomorphic principles (Rosgen 1996). Table 7 provides a summary of measured stream geometry attributes under existing conditions (considered to be unstable) in addition to stable stream attributes (reference and proposed). Data collected during a Rosgen Level II survey were used to classify Little Lick Creek as an unstable CS type channel that is transitioning towards a GS-type channel. G-type channels typically display low entrenchment ratios, low width- to-depth ratios, and a low sinuosity. The second descriptor, 5, indicates that channel materials are dominated by sand. These conditions, as shown on Little Lick Creek, lead to higher shear stresses on channel banks and bed and typically an over abundance of stream power, which leads to channel degradation. Evidence of channel degradation can be seen in the existing conditions photographs (Appendix A). The primary cause of degradation stems from urbanization of the watershed and routine maintenance of channel banks. 3.2 Discharge: Little Lick Creek, at the point of surveys, has a drainage area of 6.2 square miles and a bankfull discharge of 55.0 cubic feet per second. 3.3 Channel Morphology: Channel cross-sections were measured on the existing stream. The Morphological Stream Characteristics Table 7 includes a summary of dimension, profile, and pattern data for the stream. 3.4 Channel Stability Assessment: A visual assessment accompanied by a morphological assessment using data collected during a Rosgen Level II survey was used to determine channel stability. These data, which can be found in Table 7 (Morphological Stream Table) and in Appendices A and B (Project Site Photographs and Project Site NCDWQ Stream Classification Forms), confirmed that the channel attributes do not fall within acceptable ranges for a stable channel as evidenced by mass wasting of channel banks, tree loss into the channel, elevated sinuosity, absence of a repetitive sequence of riffle and pools, and a lack of riparian vegetation on stream banks. t ~ KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. q a Consullin ~ En ineers ~, x Project ID No. 050650501 C.ittle Lick Creek Restoration Project, Du--ham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN Excess sedimentation within and outside of the channel's banks, bankfull indicators within the channel banks (i.e. an incised channel), severely eroded meander bends, and trees falling into the channel banks are evidence that Little Lick Creek is degrading and experiencing an excess amount of energy during high flows. If the bankfull discharge were at the existing top of bank, the above indicators of degradation probably would not be as evident. A sediment loss assessment was completed to quantify degradation occurring within the Project. Steps taken to quantify sediment loss included completing a Bank Height Erodibility Index (BEHI) and Near Bank Stress (NBS) on channel banks within the Project. The analysis was limited to fairway areas of the golf course and did not take into account sediment loss within wooded areas. These data were correlated with the North Carolina Streambank Erodibility curve (Jessup, A.G, et. Al. 2004) to determine total sediment loss. The assessment revealed that approximately 400 tons of sediment per year is being lost from channel banks due to erosion (Appendix J). 3.5 Bankfull Verification: The bankfull discharge on Little Lick Creek is estimated to be 55 cubic feet per second. The bankfull discharge was estimated by two methods. The first method included identifying numerous bankfull indicators throughout the Project. Additionally, two permanent cross-sections were established directly upstream of the Project's beginning point. Cross-sectional dimensions were measured and velocity measurements taken using a FP 201 Global Flow Probe during peak flows to estimate bankfull flow velocity, and in turn, bankfull discharge. The second method included comparing on-site data with existing hydraulic geometry rating curves. Existing curves were deemed irrelevant for streams within the vicinity of the Project after reviewing data obtained on-site and from other streams in the area. Therefore, a regional hydrologic geometry rating curve of the Triassic Basins was created using stable streams in the vicinity of the Project as references. Information regarding this curve is discussed further in Section 6.3.1. These data correlated closely with data obtained on-site. 3.6 Vegetation: Five plant communities are currently present at the Project: 1) urban/disturbed land, 2) Piedmont Alluvial Forest, 3) wet woodlands, 4) wet herbaceous assemblage, and 5) low bank stream-side assemblage. Urban/disturbed land contains the golf course fairways and greens that are continually maintained by mowing and the application of fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides. a KO ~ ASSOCIATES, P. C. ~ 0 Cunsulling Engineers ~'' ~ Project ID No. 050650501 I ittl~~ t ic(: (~iLirk R~°:;t~~rat~~m 1'r~,~~~L°t. t)tn~l~an7 County, North Carolina It ESTORA"hION PLAN Table 7. Little Lick Creek Morphological Stream Characteristics Project ID No. 050650501 (Little Lick Creek Restoration Project) Morphological Characteristics of Little Lick Creek Restoration Plan: Little Lick Creek Stream Restoration County: Durham County, NC Design by: RVSlRKW Checked by: RKW ITEM Existin Conditions Pro sed Conditions Reference Reach LOCATION Little Lick Creek"" Little Lick Creek UT Led e Creek STREAM TYPE E5-+G5 C5 C5 DRAINAGE AREA, Ac - Sq Mi 3968 Ac - 6.20 S Mi 3968 Ac - 6.20 S Mi 2415 Ac - 3.77 S Mi BANKFULL WIDTH (Wb~), ft 16.7 ft 24.0 ft 14.7 ft BANKFULL MEAN DEPTH (do~)~ ft 2.43 ft 1.71 ft 1.25 ft WIDTH/DEPTH RATIO (Wea/dna) 6.9 14.0 11.7 BANKFULL X-SECTION AREA (Abp), ft2 40.6 ftZ 41.1 ft2 18.3 ft2 BANKFULL MEAN VELOCITY, fps 1.3 f s 1.4 f s 1.2 f s BANKFULL DISCHARGE, cfs 53.0 cfs 55.0 cfs 22.3 cfs BANKFULL MAX DEPTH (dmax)~ ft 3.21 ft 2.40 ft 2.70 ft WIDTH Flood-Prone Area (WrPa), ft 49.5 ft 120.00 ft 63.0 ft ENTRENCHMENT RATIO (ER) 3.0 5.0 4.3 MEANDER LENGTH (Lm), ft 125 -465 ft 192.0 - 288.0 ft 134.0 - 140.0 ft RATIO OF Lm TO Wba 7.5 - 27.8 8.0 - 12.0 9.1 - 9.6 RADIUS OF CURVATURE, ft 15 - 98 ft 48.0 - 96.0 ft 14.9 -22.2 ft RATIO OF Rc TO Wb~ 0.9 - 5.9 2.0 - 4.0 1.0 - 1.5 BELT WIDTH, ft 127.00 - 221.00 ft 48.0 - 144.0 ft 48.0 - 55.0 ft MEANDER WIDTH RATIO 7.59 - 13.21 ft 2.0 - 6.0 3.3 - 3.8 SINUOSITY (K) 1.65 1.23 1.26 VALLEY SLOPE, fUft 0.0000 ft/ft 0.0009 fUft 0.0028 ft/ft AVERAGE SLOPE (S), ft/ft 0.0000 ft/ft 0.0003 ft!ft 0.0005 ft/ft POOL SLOPE, ft/ft 0.0003 ft!ft 0.0001 ft/ft 0.0000 ft/ft RATIO OF POOL SLOPE TO AVERAGE SLOPE 123.1 0.4 D:D - D.0 MAX POOL DEPTH, ft 4.59 ft 4.29 ft 2.67 ft RATIO OF POOL DEPTH TO AVERAGE BANKFULL DEPTH 1.9 2.5 2.1 POOL WIDTH, ft 17.7 ft 27.60 ft 13.56 ft e RATIO OF POOL WIDTH TO BANKFULL WIDTH 1.1 1.15 0.93 POOL TO POOL SPACING, ft 1.34 - 188.95 ft 24.0 - 144.0 ft 12.0 - 72.0 ft RATIO OF POOL TO POOL SPACING TO BANKFULL WIDTH 0.08 - 11.29 ft 1.0 - 6.0 0.8 - 4.9 "Existing Conditions data was taken along a reach of Little Lick. Data, such as stream and valley slopes, does not corrospond to the entire length of Little Lick Creek inside of the Project Area. KO ~ ASSOCIATES, P. C. 1 1 ~. (l17S1!/1lIJ,Q ~,77~~!/lC'C /'S Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN Piedmont Alluvial Forest is scattered throughout the Project adjacent to Little Lick Creek and within wet bottoms. This community is characterized by mature forest with a rich diversity of species. The canopy layer consists of sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), pignut hickory (Carya glabra), shagbark hickory (Carya ovata), American beech (Fagus grandifolia), mockernut hickory (Carya alba), southern sugar maple (Ater barbatum), willow oak (Quercus phellos), white ash (Fraxinus americana), black walnut (Juglans nigra), loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), and river birch (Betula nigra). The subcanopy consists of ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana), winged elm (Ulmus alata), swamp chestnut oak (Quercus michauxii), flowering dogwood (Corms florida), eastern red cedar (Juniperus virginiana), and northern red oak (Quercus rubra). The understory consists of species listed above as well as mulberry (Morus sp.), red bud (Cercis canadensis), American hazelnut (Corylus americana), American witchhazel (Hamamelis virginiana), painted buckeye (Aesculus sylvatica), pawpaw (Asimina triloba), elderberry (Sambucus canadensis), box elder (Ater negundo), slippery elm (Ulmus rubra), blackhaw (Viburnum prunifolium), downy arrowwood (Viburnum rafinesquianum), red maple (Ater rubrum), and sycamore (Platanus occidentalis). Wet woodlands are located below the pond and consist of young trees up to approximately 8 inches in diameter. The community is dominated by green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica) and also consists of slippery elm, red maple, black willow (Salix nigra), buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis), blackhaw, loblolly pine, sweetgum, silky dogwood (Corms amomum), eastern baccharis (Baccharis halimifolia), willow oak, strawberry bush (Euonymus americanus), swamp rose (Rosa palustris), greenbrier (Smilax rotundifolia), Virginia creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia), and poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans). A wet herbaceous assemblage is located adjacent to the pond and consists primarily of emergent and early successional vegetation. Species include common rush (Juncus effusus), climbing hempvine (Mikania scandens), black willow, false nettle (Boehmeria cylindrica), tearthumb (Polygonum sagittatum), sedge species (Carex spp.), jewelweed (Impatiens capensis), Virginia buttonweed (Diodia virginiana), small carpgrass (Arthraxon hispidus), bedstraw (Galium sp.), dwarf St. Johnswort (Hypericum mutilum), cardinal flower (Lobelia cardinalis), common cattail (Typha latifolia), spikerush (Eleocharis sp.), marsh seedbox (Ludwigia palustris), tag alder (Alms serrulata), woolgrass (Scirpus cyperinus), flat sedge species (Cyperus spp.), microstegium (Microstegium vimineum), goldenrod (Solidago sp.), crimsoneyed rosemallow (Hibiscus moscheutos), rosepink (Sabatia angularis), bearded beggarticks (Bidens aristosa), and beaksedge (Rhynchospora sp.). a KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. ~ 2 Consulting Engineers 1 Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick C reek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN The low bank/stream-side assemblage is located on the banks of Little Lick Creek and within the abandoned channel and includes sycamore, red maple, winged elm, box elder, tag alder, m~crostegium, false nettle, Vasey's grass (Paspalum urvallea), lateflowering thoroughwort (Eupatorium serotinum), Asiatic dayflower (Commelina communis), devils darning needles (Clematis virginiana), eastern gamagrass (Tripsacum dactyloides), jewelweed, giant cane (Arundinaria gigantea), climbing hempvine, Virginia buttonweed, common rush, polygonum (Polygonum sp.), barnyard grass (Echinochloa crus-galli), bristlegrass (Setaria sp.), dog fennel (Eupatorium capillifolium), and primerose willow (Ludwigia sp.). 4.0 REFERENCE STREAMS: One stream, the Unnamed Tributary to Ledge Creek, was ' surveyed and used as a reference reach for the design of Little Lick Creek. Distinct bankfull variables were identifiable in the UT to Ledge Creek and pattern/profile characteristics appear to have not been degraded, allowing for assistance with proposed ' design characteristics. The UT to Ledge Creek reference site vicinity, watershed, and soils are depicted in Figures 5 through 7. Photographs for the reference reaches can be found in Appendix E. The UT to Ledge Creek was specifically used as a reference stream because it is a low slope, C-type channel, dominated by sand, located in the Falls Lake Watershed in the Triassic Basins which displayed similar discharge characteristics when compared with the regional curve that was created for this project. All of these parameters matched the desired conditions of the Little Lick project. 1 4.1 Watershed Characterization: Land use within the UT to Ledge Creek's watershed can be characterized as rural in nature with the majority of lands ' historically being utilized for agriculture or woodlands. However, there is strong evidence in the form of industrial buildings, subdivisions, and other forms of impervious areas to suggest that the watershed is experiencing a shift from rural ' to a more urban land use. 4.2 Channel Classification: The UT to Ledge Creek is characterized as a C-type stream, with a moderate sinuosity (1.26) and sand-dominated substrate (Table 7). C-type streams are characterized as moderately entrenched (entrenchment ratios higher than 2.2) streams with high width-to-depth ratios (typically 12 (+/- 2) and higher), that display riffle-pool complexes. 4.3 Discharge: The UT to Ledge Creek reference reach has a drainage area of 3.77 ' square miles and a bankfull discharge of 22.3 cubic feet per second (Table 7). 1 ' a KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. l 3 Consu!ling Engineers Project ID No. 050650501 Little l._ick (.'reek Restoration Project, Durham Cow~ty, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN 4.4 Channel Morphology: Channel cross-sections and stream profiles were measured along the UT to Ledge Creek. Surveys included a plan form analysis, bed material evaluation, and buffer assessment. The reaches are transporting their sediment supply while maintaining their dimension, pattern, and profile. The Table of Morphological Stream Characteristics (Table 7) include a summary of dimension, profile, and pattern data for each reference reach to assist with the establishment of reconstruction parameters. The channel streambed material is dominated by sand-sized particles. 4.5 Channel Stability Assessment: A visual assessment accompanied by a morphological assessment using data collected during a Rosgen Level II survey was used to determine channel stability. These data, which can be found in Table 7 (Morphological Stream Table) and in Appendices D and E (Reference Site Photographs and Reference Site NCDWQ Stream Classification Form), confirmed that the channels fell within acceptable ranges for a stable reference channel. Major components for stability include determining if the channel is conveying its discharge and sediment load without aggrading or degrading. Evidence that a channel does not fit this criteria includes bank degradation, channel incision, channel widening, channel aggradation, massive amounts of sediment loading within and/or outside of the channel banks, channel armoring, and generally speaking no vegetation on the channel's banks. 4.6 Bankfull Verification: Onsite data was compared with Hydraulic Geometry Relationships for Rural North Carolina Coastal Plain Streams (Piedmont Regional Curve) (Doll et al. 2006) to verify the Bankfull discharge. The Bankfull discharge estimated for the UT to Ledge Creek did not fall within a range of confidence when compared with the Rural Piedmont Regional Curve. A regional curve, which will be referred to as the Ko Curve, was completed for this project. The Ko Curve is detailed later in this document in Section 6.3.1 (Bankfull Discharge) and Appendix I. Data from the Ko Curve seems to verify the estimated Bankfull discharge for the UT to Ledge Creek reference reach. The estimated Bankfull discharge for the UT to Ledge Creek was calculated to be 22.3 cubic feet per second. The Ko Curve estimates Bankfull to be 35.2 cubic feet per second for the UT to Ledge Creek, which closely compares to data obtained from onsite. a KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. 14 Consulting En~~ineers u i, i i i 1 1 1 Project ID No. 050650501 1_,ittle Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN 4.7 Reference Forest Ecosystem: According to Mitigation Site Classification (MIST) guidelines (USEPA 1990), a Reference Forest Ecosystem (RFE) must be established for restoration sites. RFEs are forested areas where data is gathered to use in modeling restoration efforts in relation to soils and vegetation. RFEs should be ecologically stable climax communities and should represent possible historical (predisturbance) conditions of the restoration site. Data describing plant community composition and structure are collected at the RFEs and subsequently applied as reference data for design of the restoration Project planting scheme. The RFE for this project is located at the Project within areas of mature Piedmont Alluvial Forest, which contain a rich diversity of species. Tree and shrub species identified within the reference forest are identified in Table 8 and Figure 8 and will be used, in addition to other relevant species to supplement community descriptions. ' Table 8. Reference Forest Ecosystem Project ID No. 050650501 (Little Lick Creek Restoration Project) 1 u [1 1 Piedmont Alluvial Forest Wet Bottoms, Flood lains, and Slo es Cano S ecies Understor S ecies Acer barbatum Aesculus s lvatica Acer ne undo Asimina triloba Betula ni ra Car inus caroliniana Ca a alba Cercis canadensis Ca a cordi ormis Corpus orida Ca a labra Cor lus americana Ca a ovata Mopus s . Fa us randi olia Sambucus canadensis Fraxinus americana Fraxinus enns lvanica Ju laps ni ra Li uidambar s raci ua Liriodendron tuli i era Platanus occidentalis uercus michauxii uercus hellos uercus rubra Ulmus alata Ulmus rubra ' a KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. 15 Consullrng Engineera• L Project lD No. 050650.501 Little Lick Creek Restoration P--o_ject, Du--ham County, North Carolina Rf;STORATION PLAN 5.0 PROJECT SITE WETLANDS (EXISTING CONDITIONS): 5.1 Jurisdictional Wetlands: A jurisdictional wetland delineation occurred within the Project study area in February and March 2006. The Project study area was evaluated using the three-parameter approach (hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, and hydrology) as outlined in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987). Nineteen jurisdictional wetlands were delineated within the boundaries of the Project (Sheets 1 through 1 A). The delineation was verified by USACE representative Eric Alsemeyer on March 9, 2006. Routine Wetland Determination Data Forms can be found in Appendix B. 5.2 Hydrological Characteristics: Of the nineteen jurisdictional Project wetlands, thirteen are riparian/riverine wetlands and six are nonriparian/nonriverine wetlands. Riparian wetlands within the Project receive hydrological inputs from periodic overbank flooding of the adjacent stream, groundwater migration into the Project, upland/stormwater runoff, and direct precipitation. Hydrology of the nonriparian wetlands within the Project is primarily driven by precipitation with additional inputs from upland/stormwater runoff. 5.3 Soil Characteristics: Wetland soils within the Project consist primarily of Wehadkee soil inclusions within the Chewacla mapping unit (Figure 3). Wehadkee soils are classified as fine-loamy, mixed, active, nonacid, thermic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts. Atypical profile for the Wehadkee series is as follows (USDA 2000). Ap 0-8 inches grayish brown (1 OYR 5/2) fine sandy loam Bg 1 8-17 inches dark gray (1 OYR 4/ 1) loam with common medium prominent strong brown (7.SYR 5/6) soft masses of iron accumulation Bg2 17-40 inches gray (1 OYR 6/1) sandy clay loam with common medium prominent strong brown (7.SYR 5/6) soft masses of iron accumulation Cg 40-50 inches gray (1 OYR 6/ 1) sandy loam with common medium grayish brown (lOYR 5/2) iron depletions and prominent strong brown (7.SYR 5/6) soft masses of iron accumulation a KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. 16 Consullin~,> End>ineers ~' i ~I L~ 1 1 1 Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN ' S.4 Plant Community Characterization: Project wetlands are characterized as palustrine as defined by Cowardin et al. (1979), and as identified on National Wetlands Inventory mapping. Palustrine systems include all nontidal wetlands ' dominated by trees, shrubs, persistent emergents, emergent mosses, and all such wetlands that occur in tidal areas where salinity due to ocean-derived salts is below 0.5 percent. Wetlands within the Project study area vary in vegetative composition, depending in part on hydrologic regime and site-specific disturbances. Two wetland types were identified within the Project: 1) palustrine, forested (15 of 19 Project wetlands); and 2) palustrine, emergent (4 of 19 Project wetlands). Palustrine forested (PFO) -Vegetation within this palustrine, forested wetland type varies throughout the Project, but in all occurrences is dominated by species ' including sweetgum, loblolly pine, musclewood, river birch, and red maple. Because these wetlands are generally found within the floodplains of streams and surface waters, the hydrologic regimes range from saturated along higher ' topographic features of the floodplains to seasonally flooded adjacent to stream channels. Wildlife habitat values in these systems are considered high due to vegetation diversity and aquatic affiliation, which offer vital components (food, ' water, and cover). Palustrine emergent (PEM) -Palustrine, emergent areas are identified as jurisdictional wetlands vegetated with emergent vegetation that is present for most of the growing season. Vegetation within this wetland type is generally limited to erect, rooted, herbaceous hydrophytes (excluding mosses and lichens). The ' wetlands are small in area, with persistent vegetation and hydrologic regimes ranging from saturated to seasonally flooded. Typical species include common cattail, woolgrass, and soft rush. 1 1 KO c~c ASSOCIATES, P. C. 1 ~ a ons d i > n >) • rs C r l n~, E ~,r rce Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick ('rock Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN 6.0 PROJECT SITE RESTORATION PLAN 6.1 Restoration Project Goals and Objectives: The EEP and the project stakeholders completed the Little Lick Creek Local Watershed Plan (LWP) in December 2006. The management strategies identified for the Little Lick Creek watershed included stream repair, riparian buffer restoration and stormwater retrofits. The LWP identified stream repair projects and developed strategies to help meet the Neuse River Basin nutrient loading requirements. The LWP recommended 24 stream repair projects, 18 riparian restoration projects and 71 stormwater retrofit opportunities. Of the project opportunities that the LWP identified, Little Lick Creek at the Crossings Golf Club includes the three management strategies identified for the watershed. This project was identified from the Little Lick Creek Local Watershed Plan and was the only opportunity which met EEP project mitigation criteria and had a willing landowner. The golf course owner and staff have been actively involved in the LWP process and expressed a willingness to donate the conservation easement and participate in this stream and buffer mitigation and stormwater BMP project. This stream restoration plan focuses on reducing sedimentation input from channel banks, improving water quality, decreasing floodwater levels, restoring aquatic and riparian habitat, and implementing best management practices (BMPs) for stormwater quality. The plan involves: • Reducing nonpoint source pollution associated with urban land uses by providing a vegetative buffer adjacent to streams to treat surface runoff. • Reestablishing stream stability and the capacity to transport watershed flows and sediment loads by restoring a stable dimension, pattern, and profile. Consequently, this will reduce sedimentation within onsite and downstream receiving waters. • Promoting floodwater attenuation through: a) excavation of a floodplain at the bankfull discharge stage of flow, b) increasing storage capacity for floodwaters within the Project, and c) revegetating Project floodplains to increase frictional resistance on floodwaters crossing Project floodplains. • Improving water quality by restoring riparian wetlands in abandoned sections of Little Lick Creek and implementing BMPs for stormwater runoff. • Improving aquatic habitat by enhancing stream bed variability, and introducing woody debris in the form of rootwads, log vanes, and log sills. • Providing wildlife habitat, including a forested riparian corridor, within an area highly dissected by urban land uses. The primary goals of this restoration plan include: 1) construction of a stable, riffle-pool stream channel, 2) enhancement of water quality functions in the Project and downstream watersheds, 3) creation of a natural vegetation buffer a KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. ~ K Cunsulling En~,~ineers ii I' L~' [] `J '~~ U I ~ l~ Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN ' along restored stream channels, 4) establishment of BMPs and riparian wetlands for stormwater quality in the Project, and 5) restoration of wildlife functions associated with a riparian corridor/stable stream. The proposed restoration plan, depicted on Sheets 2 through 2A, is expected to restore 2656 linear feet of Little Lick Creek. Components of this plan may be modified based on construction or access constraints. Primary activities proposed at the Project include: 1) stream restoration, 2) BMPs for stormwater quality, 3) wetland restoration, 4) soil scarification, and 5) plant community restoration. ' 6.1.1 Designed Channel Classification Little Lick Creek is designed as a C5 type channel, and will be constructed as a Priority II restoration. The design channel has a moderate width-to-depth ratio of ' 14 and a moderately high entrenchment ratio averaging approximately 2.5 throughout the project. The channel is somewhat sinuous as evidenced by a 1.35 sinuosity. A floodplain will be excavated at the bankfull elevation to allow ' bankfull and higher flows to dissipate their energy. Table 7 depicts all designed morphologic variables for the Little Lick Creek. Sheets 2 through 2A depict proposed conditions and Sheets 3 through 3A depict longitudinal profiles. 6.1.2 Stream Restoration Activities The stream will be constructed partially on new location and partially in place. The existing channel will be abandoned and filled in many areas; however, ' numerous sections of the existing channel will be left open to revert to riparian wetlands. Primary activities that will take place during channel restoration include: 1) channel and floodplain bench excavation, 2) installation of channel plugs, 3) backfilling of the abandoned channel, and 4) installation of in-stream structures. ' An erosion control plan and construction transportation plan are expected to be developed during the next phase of this project. Erosion control will be performed locally throughout the Project and will be incorporated into ' construction sequencing. Exposed surficial soils at the Project are unconsolidated, alluvial sediments, which do not revegetate rapidly after disturbance. Therefore, seeding with appropriate grasses and immediate planting with disturbance-adapted shrubs will be employed following the earth-moving process. ' a KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. 1 q Consuliin~; Enkincers Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN A transportation plan, including the location of access routes and staging areas will be designed to minimize Project disturbance to the maximum extent feasible. The number of transportation access points into the floodplain will be maximized to avoid traversing long distances through the Project interior. Design Channel Location ' Project and agency constraints dictated where the design channel could be located onsite. The following is a brief description of considerations that went into the ' location of the design channel. Sheets 2 through 2B should be referenced for the following narrative. Channel Station 10+00 through 17+88 This section of the design channel, 788 linear feet, begins upstream of the golf cart bridge crossing on Hole 11 and spans east to the treeline. This section was ' designed as a new location for Little Lick Creek. The channel was relocated away (south) from the green on Hole 11 as much as possible to allow for as close to a 50 foot easement buffer as possible. Channel Station 17+88 through 20+96 This reach of Little Lick Creek, 308 linear feet, flows through a wooded section of the Project. No channel or bank work will be completed on this section of Little Lick Creek at the request of the DWQ. DWQ determined that this section ' of the channel was a typical stable Triassic Basin ecoregion channel. Ko & Associates believes that this reach of Little Lick Creek is not stable and does not concur with the opinion of DWQ that the reach is stable. Little Lick Creek is incised through this reach, to the point that the bankfull elevation is at or below the rooting depth of vegetation that is currently on the channel banks. ' Most vegetation that is on the channel banks is composed of mature (> 50 years old) trees. Many trees have fallen into/across the channel, have slumped into the channel, or have root failure to the point that the trees are leaning at an angle over ' the channel Ko & Associates believes that the potential for bank failure through this reach following restoration activities up and downstream will remain high. Channel Station 20+96 through 33+67 This section of the design channel, 1271 linear feet, was set on a new location. A large majority of this channel section flows through fairways where the existing ' channel displays extreme bank failure. Some portions of the channel flow through wooded sections. The reasons for designing a channel on new location through these wooded sections are described below. , a KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. 211 ' Consulting Engineers Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN Station 24+90 through 27+15 is located in a wooded section. However, the design channel was required to be relocated here so that the design channel could flow under the golf cart bridge on Hole 16 at a perpendicular angle. Station 30+45 through 33+67 is also located in a wooded section of the Project. Little Lick Creek was relocated along the fairways of Holes 16 and 17 out of its natural valley location when the golf course was built. A large portion of Little Lick Creek was left open and not filled in, in a wooded area between Holes 16 and 17. The restoration plan calls for the design channel to flow through this ' abandoned section of Little Lick Creek. However, to do so the design channel must be relocated through a portion of woodlands (Station 30+45 through 33+67). Channel Station 33+67 through 39+64 This section of the design channel, 597 linear feet, has been relocated into the abandoned section of Little Lick Creek (as described above). The pattern of the abandoned section of Little Lick Creek will be utilized; however, a stable dimension and profile were designed for this section because the existing abandoned channel has experienced a significant amount of fill from detritus and ' sediments from floodplain flows. Channel and Fooodplain Bench Grading ' The channel and corresponding floodplain will be excavated along the alignment as shown in Sheets 2 through 2A. Material excavated during grading of the channel and floodplain will be stockpiled immediately adjacent to channel ' segments to be abandoned and backfilled. These segments will be backfilled after the stream diversion is completed. ' Spoil material may be placed to stabilize temporary access roads and to minimize compaction of the underlying floodplain. However, all spoil will be removed from floodplain surfaces upon completion of construction activities. Preliminary ' earthwork estimates indicate that the Project will result in 19,500 cubic yards of waste material. The Crossings Golf Course indicated that they would like to keep all waste material from the Project. ' Channel Plugs Impermeable plugs will be installed along abandoned channel segments. The ' plugs will consist of low-permeability materials or hardened structures designed to be of sufficient strength to withstand the erosive energy of surface flow events across the Project. Dense clays may be imported from off-site or existing ' material, compacted within the channel, may be suitable for plug construction. The plug will be of sufficient width and depth to form an imbedded overlap in the existing banks and channel bed. ' a KO 8c ASSOCIATES, P. C. 21 Consrdting Engineers Project (D No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORA'i'lON PLAN Channel Backfilling After impermeable plugs are installed, the abandoned channel will be backfilled. Backfilling will be performed primarily by pushing stockpiled materials into the channel. The channel will be filled to the extent that onsite material is available and compacted to maximize microtopographic variability, including ruts, ephemeral pools, and hummocks in the vicinity of the backfilled channel. Wetland Impacts The proposed alignment of Little Lick Creek and proposed BMP's are expected to impact 0.82 acres of existing riparian wetlands onsite. It is expected that these impacts will be mitigated for by restoring 1.4 acres of riparian wetlands onsite as the result of restoration activities. Justification for Wetland Impacts Project restoration activities will provide a functional uplift from existing conditions. Current conditions have resulted in degraded water quality, a loss of aquatic habitat, reduced nutrient and sediment retention, and unstable channel characteristics (mass wasting of channel banks, tree loss into channels, sediment loading, and the loss of bed form diversity) at the Project. Restoration of the channel will restore riffle-pool morphology, aid in energy dissipation, and increase aquatic habitat. Incorporation of BMPs at the Project will improve sediment and nutrient retention, treat nonpoint source pollution within stormwater runoff, and provide additional terrestrial and aquatic habitat. All wetlands that are proposed to be impacted within the project limits were deemed Low Quality by John Dorney of the DWQ during a field review meeting on November 28, 2006. 6.1.3 In-stream Structures Stream restoration using Natural Channel Design techniques, typically involves the use of in-stream structures for bank stabilization, grade control, and habitat improvement. Primary activities designed to achieve these objectives may include the installation of log vanes, log sills, log cross-vanes, root wads, and other log type structures. 6.1.4 Target Buffer Communities Restoration of floodplain forest and stream-side habitat allows for development and expansion of characteristic species across the landscape. Community associations that will be utilized to develop primary plant community associations include: 1) Piedmont Alluvial Forest, 2) stream-side assemblage, 3) riparian wetland, 4) low growth shrub community, and 5) stormwater BMP wetland assemblage. This is discussed in more detail in Section 5.6 (Natural Plant Community Restoration). a KO 8c ASSOCIATES, P. G 22 Consnllrng En~•ineers 1 1 1 J Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN 6.2 Sediment Transport Analysis: One of the primary goals of this Project is to construct a stable channel that will transport its sediment and flow such that, over time, the stream system neither aggrades nor degrades. This stability is achieved when the sediment input to the design reach equals the sediment output. One of the primary functions of determining the capacity of the channel to transport its sediment load is stream power. Below is a discussion of both sediment concentration and stream power and their relation to stability in the design. Sediment Concentration The Engelund-Hansen function was used to analyze sediment transport capacity through the designed channel. The basic principal of the Engelund-Hansen function is to determine if sediment input to the design stream equals the sediment output from the design stream. If sediment input equals or is adequately close to sediment output then the channel is considered a stable channel in equilibrium. Below is the Engelund-Hansen function: g=0.535D~~ZS3~ZVQ/d r where; g =sediment discharge (lbs/s) D =water depth (ft) S =channel slope (ft/ft) V =average velocity (ft/s) Q =discharge (cubic ft/s) d =median particle diameter of stream bed material (ft) A stable reference reach at an offsite location had to be used for sediment input calculations since the existing stream channel is unstable. The reference reach (UT to Ledge Creek) was characterized by the same stream type and had a similar slope, compared to the design channel, so that accurate comparisons could be made. Astable reference reach can be used because the sediment input is in balance with sediment output over geologic time. In most cases, the bankfull discharge of a reference reach is different from that of the design reach so, instead of using sediment discharge (lbs/s) for the comparison, sediment concentration (lbs/ft3.) is used in the analysis because the function of discharge is set equal per cubic foot (ft3). KO c4c ASSOCIATES, P. C. a ~,. C nst hrng Engineers 23 Project lD No. 050650501 Little lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN Below is the equation for sediment concentration: SC = g/Q where; SC =sediment concentration (lbs/ft3) g =sediment discharge (lbs/s) Q =discharge (ft3/s) The sediment concentration input and output for the UT to Ledge Creek is in equilibrium and is equal to 0.008 lbs/ft3. The sediment output for the proposed design of Little Lick Creek is 0.007 lbs/ft3. The proposed design sediment output is similar to those of the stable reference reach; therefore, the design channel is considered stable and in equilibrium. Stream Power A stream power analysis was used as a tool to study the capacity of the design channel to transport its sediment load. An analysis of reference stream power and proposed conditions stream power were completed to determine if the restoration design stream power will adequately convey its sediment load at the bankfull discharge. The UT to Ledge Creek has a unit stream power of 0.04 lbs/ft s. As previously stated, the UT to Ledge Creek is a stable channel that is in equilibrium and adequately conveys it sediment load, so it can be assumed that the UT to Ledge Creek's unit stream power is adequate to transport its sediment load. The Little Lick Creek design displays a unit stream power of 0.05 lbs/ft s which corresponds closely to the UT to Ledge Creek unit stream power. Using the UT to Ledge Creek as a reference, it was determined that the Little Lick Creek design has an adequate capacity to transport its sediment load at the bankfull discharge. 6.3 HEC-RAS Analysis: Given that the Project involves modifications to a stream channel, it is important to analyze the effect of these changes on flood elevations. Floodwater elevations were analyzed using HEC-RAS. HEC-RAS is a software package designed to perform one-dimensional, steady flow, analysis of water surface profiles for a network of natural and constructed channels. HEC-RAS uses two equations, energy and/or momentum, depending upon the water surface profile. The model is based on the energy equation. The energy losses are evaluated by friction (Manning's equation) and contraction/expansion (coefficient multiplied by the change in velocity head). The momentum equation is used in situations where the water surface profile rapidly varies, such as a KO 8c ASSOCIATES, P.C. 24 Consubing En~~ineera 1 i J u Project lD No. 050650501 [.,ittle Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN ' hydraulic jumps and stream junctions. The 100-year discharges were taken from the FEMA Flood Study. Backwater analysis was performed for the existing and proposed conditions for both bankfull and 100-year discharges. In addition to steady flow data, geometric data is also required to run HEC-RAS. Geometric data consists of establishing the connectivity of the river system, which includes cross-section data, reach lengths, energy loss coefficients (friction losses, contraction, and expansion losses), and stream junction information. 6.3.1 Bankfull Discharge Analysis The methodology used to evaluate the hydrologic analysis required the evaluation ' of the existing stream's bankfull elevation and corresponding bankfull area. Data was collected to determine channel cross-sectional area, slope, and Manning's n. This data was used to determine bankfull discharge for Little Lick Creek. Additionally, this data was compared with Hydraulic Geometry Relationships for Rural North Carolina Coastal Plain Streams [regional curve] (Doll et al. 2006) to verify onsite bankfull indicators. The data collected from onsite did not fall within a level of confidence that was acceptable when compared with Hydraulic Geometry Relationships for Rural North Carolina Coastal Plain Streams. A search for stable channels within the Triassic Basin, and within the northern Falls Lake watershed was conducted. Data was taken from three sites which were deemed stable with bankfull indicators easily discernable. Ko used the data collected from these three streams to create a hydraulic geometry relationship curve for sand bed, low slope, Triassic Basin streams in the northern Falls Lake watershed (Ko Curve). Data collected from Little Lick Creek closely related to data produced from the Ko Curve. Below is the power function regression equation for bankfull discharge created from the Ko Curve: Qbkf = 11.466x°°'8441; (RZ = 0.90) Supporting data, including pictures and regression curves for the Ko Curve can be found in Appendix I. 1 The bankfull discharge for the Site was determined to be 55 cubic feet per second. Hydrologic Engineering Center's River Analysis System (HEC-RAS Version 3.0.1, see Section 6.3.2 [No-Rise]) was used to evaluate how the discharge flows within the proposed channel geometry. This evaluation verifies that the proposed plan, dimension, and profile would adequately convey the discharge at the bankfull stage, the point where water begins to overflow onto the floodplaln. KO ~c ASSOCIATES, P. C. 2 5 a Sr . ,. Cun t llrng En~rneers Project 1 D No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN 6.3.2 No-Rise A HEC-RAS analysis has been prepared and completed on both the existing and proposed conditions of the restored channel(s). The resulting data output has been analyzed to determine if the design channel is adequately conveying its bankfull discharge, and to determine if a rise, fall, or no-rise in water surface elevations during the 100-year flood event has occurred. The City of Durham requested that a "No-Rise" Certification be prepared and submitted to them for review and approval. The 100-year flood elevations will not be increased due to the proposed greater flow area. The proposed channel will remain within the effective floodway limits. The Effective HEC-RAS Model was obtained from the City of Durham on May 18, 2006. The Effective FIS (Flood Insurance Study) was prepared using HEC- RAS 3.0.1 in 2006. The current version of HEC-RAS, 3.1.3, is available for use; however, the models used in this "No-Rise" analysis were produced using HEC- RAS 3.0.1 for ease in comparing model results with the Effective FIS data. Inconsistencies were found between HEC-RAS 3.1.3 and 3.0.1 when comparing the output results, and it was determined that version 3.0.1 would be utilized for the "No-Rise" analysis for consistency and comparative reasons. The 100 and 100-year floodway elevations from the Duplicate Effective model were compared with those in the Fooodway Data Table within the effective FIS report. It was found that the flood elevations are within 0.1 foot of each other, which is within acceptable limits. Twenty-nine (29) geometric cross-sections were modeled along the length of the existing and proposed channels, with 14 of those sections falling within the site limits. Three models, Duplicate Effective, Existing Conditions, and the Proposed Conditions model, were developed and executed to determine the water surface elevations for the 10, 50, 100, future 100, 500, and 100-year floodway events. The 100-year discharge varied between 7518 cubic feet per second and 6985 cubic feet per second along the Project reach. The analysis indicates that the proposed channel geometry will not increase the 100-year flood elevations within the Project area. In fact, the analysis indicates that the 100-year water surface elevations will be reduced slightly along the Project length. Results are located within the HEC-RAS Summary Table in Appendix G. 6.3.3 Hydrologic Trespass Hydrologic trespass includes any issue which may affect hydrology outside of the property boundaries on which the project is located. These issues were reviewed for this Project. All onsite modifications will not affect offsite hydrology. a KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. 26 Consnllin~,~ En~~inee~~ LJ' Project [D No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN 6.4 Stormwater Best Management Practices: The implementation of best management practices (BMPs) at selected sites throughout the Project will provide benefits, such as, ~mprovmg water quality and providing attenuation of stormwater flows. The BMP's utilized in the Project will: ^ Reduce nonpoint source pollution associated with urban land uses by providing basins to treat surface runoff. ^ Promote floodwater attenuation by increasing storage capacity for Stormwater flows. ' Increase habitat for terrestrial and aquatic species. ^ Improve sediment and nutrient retention including nitrogen and phosphorous. 1 Appendix H details design computations for each proposed BMP and the estimated Nitrogen, Phosphorous, and Sediment loads leaving the Project for existing land use, the project design without implementing BMPs and the project ~' design with implementing BMPs. 6.4.1 Narrative of Site-Specific Stormwater Concerns ' Land use within the Project watershed is primarily characterized by urban development. Throughout the Project, there are numerous storm system outfalls that discharge directly into Little Lick Creek. The outfalls convey stormwater runoff including sediments and nutrients from adjacent residential neighborhoods and roadway drainage to the Project. The inclusion of stormwater wetlands will be incorporated into the Project to improve water quality and attenuate stormwater. The locations of these stormwater wetlands can be seen on Sheets 2, 2a, 4, and 4a. 6.4.2 Device Description and Application Stormwater Wetland The proposed Stormwater wetlands will be constructed to mimic a natural riparian wetland in an effort to mitigate urban impacts on water quality and quantity (see Detail of Stormwater Wetland below). The stormwater wetland will also effectively reduce peak runoff rates and stabilize flow to the adjacent stream. The stormwater wetland will support emergent and riparian vegetation and provide temporary storage, forming an ideal environment for the removal of many pollutants, TSS, nutrients, heavy metal, toxic organic pollutants, and petroleum products. Pollutants within the wetlands are transformed by plants and microbes, ' immobilized in sediments, and released in reduced concentrations in the outflow. The Stormwater wetland vegetation incorporates nitrogen fixing and known excellent toxin uptake plant species. Details of Stormwater wetland vegetation can be found in Section 6.7 (Natural Plant Community Restoration). ',~ ~ KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. 2 ~ a , Consullini, Engineers Project 1 D No. 05065050 I Little Lick Crcek Restoration Project, Durham Cow~ty, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN Table 9. Stormwater Wetland S»mmarv Stormwater Wetland ID & Drainage Required Required Nitrogen Phosphorus Sediment Location Area (Ac) Treatment Treatment Reduction Reduction Reduction Volume (ct~ Surface (lb/yr) (Ib/yr) (ton/yr) Area st) BMP Adjacent to Green 13 1 17.87 12,840 17,120 30 4.3 0.80 BMP Adjacent to Green 16 2 9.63 6,830 9,1 10 17 2.4 0.48 BMP Adjacent to Fairway 17 3A 9.35 10,250 13,670 ---._....-----..._..--------------_- BMP -....._....._ ----- ----- 47 6.6 1.26 Adjacent to Fairway 17 3B 9.35 10,250 13,670 Total 94 13.3 2.54 DETAIL OF STORMWATER WETLAND Stormwater Extended l)e0ention Wetaand Fran Design or Stomtwafer thtetlarM Systems, ScfiueJer, 1992 _ `~'.~.~ - :^ .~.,,'~, Mix ED Ltmit ~ \ ~ . ED VYQt1en0 Zone _ _ , , ~ ~/'Q~~ _ 6 ,. . ~. . - ., ~. Pond Buller 10 Alelers Mininxrr~ Stormwater BMP Maintenance The Crossings Golf Course has agreed to provide maintenance for the BMPs so that efficient sediment and nutrient removal is continued. A maintenance guideline manual will be provided to The Crossings Golf Course by EEP. Maintenance guidelines are as follows (NCDWQ 2005): a KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. 2 ~ CoruullinG EnKinee~ ~ Project 1D No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RES"TORATION PLAN ^ Wetland should be inspected annually after a rain event, and after all large (mean annual or greater) storm events to ensure the basin is operating as designed. At a m~mmum the following items should be corrected if observed. o Clogging of the outlet or very rapid water release o Appearance of invasive species or a monoculture o Erosion on the wetland banks or at the inlet/outlet 1 o Sediment accumulation o Damage to, or blockage of, the emergency spil]way o Woody vegetation in the embankment or dam 1 ^ Sediment should only be selectively removed; sediment removal disturbs stable vegetation cover and disrupts flow paths through the wetland. ' 6.5 Wetland Restoration/Hydrological Modifications Under existing conditions, the historic channel of Little Lick Creek has been abandoned and directed into a channel excavated through the golf course. As part of the stream restoration activities, Little Lick Creek will be restored and realigned through the valley. Stream flows will be diverted from the existing channel to the historic channel. The existing channel will be abandoned and filled in many areas; however, numerous sections of the existing channel will be left open to revert to riparian wetlands. These restored wetlands will act as meander scroll wetlands commonly found adjacent to stream channels. There are numerous meander scroll wetlands found on-site, mainly in the mature wooded portion of the site between Holes 16 and 17. One of these wetlands was identified as a High Quality wetland by John Dorney of the DWQ during an on-site meeting on November 28, 2006 (this wetland is not impacted by construction of the project). The high quality meander scroll wetland was studied to determine the restoration ' approach to for the proposed meander scroll wetlands. The restored meander scorll wetlands will be set to an elevation below the bankfull flow to allow the retention of fine sediments and water during above bankfull flows. The wetlands will be riparian in nature, receiving overbank flooding from Little Lick Creek. Additional hydrological inputs for the wetlands include upland stormwater runoff, groundwater migration, and precipitation. ' Primary hydrology for the meander scroll wetlands will be driven by overbank flow from bankfull and higher flows from Little Lick Creek. Little Lick Creek ' experiences numerous above bankfull events during the year because of the "flashy" nature of its watershed (highly urbanized). The elevation of the restored meander scroll wetlands at its highest point will be set at the proposed bankfull elevation of Little Lick Creek so that bankfull and higher flows will be KO & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 29 a s 'r . Con ulhn~, Engrnec ~ Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN intercepted and stored in the restored meander scroll wetlands. The depth of the wetlands will be set a minimum of 2.0 feet below the bankfull elevation so as to ensure water storage from high flow events. This proposed depth corresponds to the average depths from the High Quality meander scroll wetland previously described. Wetland plants will be incorporated into the restored riparian wetlands. The specific planting plan is discussed in Section 6.7 (Natural Plant Community , Restoration). 6.6 Soil Restoration ' Soil grading will occur during Project stream restoration activities. Topsoils will be stockpiled during construction activities and spread on the soil surface once grading activities have been completed. The replaced topsoil will serve as a viable growing medium for community restoration to provide nutrients and aid in the survival of planted species. Preliminary earthwork estimates indicate that the project will result in 19,500 cubic yards of waste material, much of which would be considered topsoil. The Crossings Golf Course indicated that they would like to keep all waste material from the Project. 6.6.1 Floodplain Soil Scarification Microtopography and differential drainage rates within localized floodplain areas represent important components of floodplain functions. Reference forests in the region exhibit complex surface microtopography. Efforts to advance the development of characteristic surface microtopography will be implemented. In areas where soil surfaces have been compacted, ripping or scarification will be performed. After construction, the soil surface is expected to exhibit complex microtopography ranging to 1 foot in vertical asymmetry. Subsequently, plant community restoration will be initiated. 6.7 Natural Plant Community Restoration: Restoration of floodplain forest and stream-side habitat allows for development and expansion of characteristic species across the landscape. Ecotonal changes between community types contribute to diversity and provide secondary benefits, such as enhanced feeding and nesting opportunities for mammals, birds, amphibians, and other wildlife. , ' Reference Forest Ecosystem (RFE) data, onsite observations, and community descriptions from Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina (Schafale and Weakley 1990) were used to develop the primary plant community associations that will be promoted during community restoration activities. Community associations that will be utilized to develop primary plant community a KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. 3 0 Consulting Engineers Project ID No. OSOfi50501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN associations include: 1) Piedmont Alluvial Forest, 2) Stream-side Assemblage, 3) Riparian Wetland, 4) Restricted Maintenance Area (Low Growth Shrub Community, and 5) Stormwater BMP Wetland Assemblage (Sheets 4 through 4A). Planting elements are listed below. Piedmont Alluvial Forest 1. River birch (Betula nigra) 2. Slippery elm (Ulmus rubra) 3. Winged elm (Ulmus alata) 4. Sugar maple (Ater barbatum) 5. Bitternut hickory (Carya cordiformis) 6. Shagbark hickory (Carya ovata) 7. Willow oak (Quercus phellos) 8. Green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica) 9. Ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana) 10. American hazelnut (Corylus americana) 11. Painted buckeye (Aesculus sylvatica) Stream-Side Assemblage 1. Black willow (Salix nigra) 2. Silky dogwood (Corms amomum) 3. Buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis) 4. Elderberry (Sambucus canadensis) 5. Tag alder (Alms serrulata) 6. Common rush (Juncus effuses) Riparian Wetland L American elm (Ulmus americana) 2. Swamp chestnut oak (Quercus michauxii) 3. Willow oak (Quercus phellos) 4. Overcup oak (Quercus lyrata) 5. Green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica) 6. Silky dogwood (Corpus amomum) 7. Black willow (Salix nigra) 8. Deciduous holly (Ilex decidua) 9. Duck potato (Sagittaria latifolia) 10. Arrowhead (Sagittaria lancifolia) 11. Spatterdock (Nuphar polysepalum) 12. Pickerelweed (narrowleaf) (Pontederaa lancafolia) 13. Pickerelweed (broadleaf (Pontederia latifolia) 1 ' a KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. ~ l Consnlling Engineers Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN Restricted Maintenance Area (Low Growth Shrub Community) 1. Spicebush (Lindera benzoin) 2. Mountain laurel (Kalmia latifolia) 3. Virginia sweetspire (Itea virginica) 4. American hazelnut (Corylus americana) 5. Inkberry (Ilex glabra) 6. Blackhaw (Viburnum prunifolium) 7. Arrowwood (Viburnum dentatum) 8. Highbush blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum) 9. Lowbush blueberry (Vaccinium angustifolium) 10. American beautyberry (Callicarpa americana) 1 1. Strawberrybush (Euonymus americana) Stormwater BMP Wetland Assemblage ' 1. Duck potato (Sagittaria latifolia) 2. Arrowhead (Sagittaria lancifolia) 3. Spatterdock (Nuphar polysepalum) 4. Pickerelweed (narrowleaf) (Pontederia lancifolia) 5. Pickerelweed (broadleaf) (Pontederia latifolia) 6. Overcup oak (Quercus lyrata) 7. Bald cypress (Taxodium distichum) 8. Arrow arum (Peltandra virginica) 9. Lizard's tail (Saururus cernuus) 10. Rush (Juncus effuses) 11. Buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis) 12. Elderberry (Sambucus canadensis) 13. Tag alder (Alms serrulata) Stream-side trees and shrubs include species with high value for sediment stabilization, rapid growth rate, and the ability to withstand hydraulic forces associated with bankfull flow and overbank flood events. Stream-side trees and shrubs will be planted within 15 feet of the channel throughout the meander belt- width. Shrub elements will be planted along the reconstructed stream banks, concentrated along outer bends. Piedmont Alluvial Forest is targeted for the majority of the Project outside of the 15-feet immediately adjacent to the restored stream channels. The Restricted Maintenance Area (Low Growth Shrub Community) is targeted for areas within the Project that require continuation of play. Species were chosen based on their growth habit as shrubs that are tolerant of partial to full sun and low to moderate moisture regimes. a KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. 3 2 ' Consullrng Engineers Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN The Riparian Wetland is a forested community targeted for the restored riparian wetlands. The Stormwater BMP Wetland Assemblage is targeted for the stormwater wetlands throughout the Project. Species have been selected based on the expected/designed hydrological conditions. In addition, close consideration was given to incorporate plants with the ability to fix nitrogen (tag alder) or with excellent toxin uptake capabilities (NCDWQ 2005). 6.7.1 Planting Plan Species selected for planting will be dependent upon availability of local seedling sources. Bare-root seedlings of tree species will be planted within specified map ' areas at a density of approximately 680 stems per acre on 8-foot centers. Shrub species will be planted in the Stream-side Assemblage and Stormwater BMP Wetland Assemblage at a density of 2720 stems per acre (4-foot centers). All other planting zones will be planted at a density of 680 stems per acre (8-foot centers). The emergent herbaceous vegetation seed mix outlined above for application in the stormwater BMP wetland will be applied within 14 days of construction completion at rates specified per manufacturer guidelines. Soils may be scarified ' to a half-inch prior to seeding to aid in more rapid germination. Table 10 depicts the total number of stems and species distribution within each ' vegetation association, with the exception of the emergent seed mix outlined above. Approximately 2.9 acres of the proposed easement area will result in reforestation of a previously non-forested area. Planting will be performed between December 1 and March 15 to allow plants to stabilize during the dormant period and set root during the spring season. ' , KO 8c ASSOCIATES, P. C. ~ ~ a osri n ors C n r It ng E g-nec Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN Table 10. Planting Plan Vegetation Association Piedmont Alluvial Forest Stream-side Assemblage Riparian Wetland Low Growth Shrub Community Stormwater BMP Wetland Assemblage TOTAL Area (acres) 1.34 Acres 1.17 Acres 1.40 Acres 1.50 Acres 1.46 Acres 6.9 Acres Species Number planted* (% of total) Number planted** (% of total) Number planted* (% of total) Number planted (% of total) Number planted* (% of total) Number planted Betula nigra _ 91 (10) 91 Ulmus rubra 91 (10) ~ 91 Ulmus alata 91 (l0) gl Acer barbatum 91 (l 0) 91 Carya cordiformis 91 (10) 91 Carya ovata 91 (10) 91 Quercus phellos 91 (10) _ 95 (10) _ _ 186 Fraxinus pennsylvanica 91 (10) 95 (] 0) 186 Carpinus caroliniana 91 (10) 91 Corylzrs americana 46 (5) 46 Aesculus sylvatica 46 (5) 46 Salix nigra 478 (15) ~ ~~~~ ~~~ 478 Corpus amomzrm 478 (15) 95 (10) _ 573 Cephalanthus occidentalis 637 (20) 637 Sambucus canadensis 478 (15) 4'7g Alnus serrulata 478 (] 5) 4'7g Juncus effuses 637 (20) 637 Ulmus americana 95 (] 0) _ _ 95 Quercus michauxii 95 (10) 95 Quercus lyrata 95 (10) 95 Ilex decidua 95 (10) 95 Sagittaria latifolia 95 (] 0) 198 (20) 294 Sagittaria lancifolla 48 (5) 198 (20) 246 Nuphar polysepalum 48 (5) 198 (20) 246 Pontederia lancifolia 48 (5) 198 (20) 246 Pontederia latifolia _ 48 (5) 198 (20) 246 Lindera benzoin 153 (15) 153 Kalmia latifolia 51 (5) 51 Itea virginica 102 (]0) 102 Corylus americana 51 (5) 51 Ilex gdabra _ ] 02 (10) 102 viburnum prunifolium 102 (10) 102 Viburnum dentahrm 102 (] 0) 102 Vaccinium corymbosum 102 (10) 102 Vaccinium angustifolium 153 (15) ] 53 Callicarpa americana 51 (5) 51 Euonymus americana 51 (5) 51 TOTAL 911 (100) 3,7 84 (100) 953 (100) 1,01 S (100) 991 (] 00) 7,057 rtantea at a aensiry of b2SU stems/acre (~ ~-Toot centers). ** Planted at a density of 2720 stems/acre (~ 4-foot centers). a KO & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 34 Consulting Engineers Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN 6.7.2 Neuse River Buffers Neuse River Buffers will be both impacted and restored during construction of the proposed stream and BMPs. The existing buffer on-site encompasses ' approximately 4.63 acres of forested buffer and 4.51 acres of maintained grass buffer (Sheet 5, and Sa). The relocation of Little Lick Creek to its historic location in the valley will decrease existing stream length and in turn decrease the total amount of riparian buffer on-site. However, a vegetated riparian buffer will be established along both the left and right banks of Little Lick Creek throughout the Project, which currently does not display riparian vegetated species through much of its existing alignment. As a result the total buffer area following construction will encompass approximately 6.55 acres (Sheet 6, and 6a). Of this area, approximately 3.88 acres will encompass forestlands, 1.36 acres will encompass shrub/low lying vegetation, 0.78 acres will encompass an existing sewer easement, and 0.53 acres will remain as maintained grass. It is expected that a total of 1.92 acres will be restored to areas which previously did not exhibit Neuse River Riparian Buffers. 6.7.3 Golf Course Maintenance Guidelines Maintenance guidelines for the vegetation associated with the stream restoration will be established to allow for vegetation maintenance and management by The Crossings Golf Course within the State of North Carolina easement. These maintenance guidelines cover areas to be labeled as "Restricted Maintenance Area (Low Growth Shrub Community)" in the construction drawings for this Project. As part of the recorded conservation easement, an exhibit entitled "Restricted '~ Maintenance Area" will clearly depict, by survey, the location of the play-over areas. The exhibit will address allowed maintenance activities of the "Restricted Maintenance Area (Low Growth Shrub Community)" vegetation. Vegetation is to be maintained m its current state with no new areas of maintenance expanded in the easement without written permission from EEP. Any expansion of or change in the location of tee boxes, greens, sand traps, fairways, or other similar features within the easement will require written ' permission from EEP. Vegetation within the "Restricted Maintenance Area (Low Growth Shrub Community)" will be maintained to a height not lower than 12 inches above the surface elevation of the adjacent fairway. Vegetation should be managed manually (by hand with clippers, weed eaters, or similar devices to be approved by EEP) without the use of heavy machinery or chemicals. No other equipment will be allowed, including but not limited to sprayers, tractors, trucks, excavators, lawn mowers, or backhoes. KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. 3 5 a Consullrng Engineers Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN The "Restricted Maintenance Area (Low Growth Shrub Community)" may be irrigated with "clean" water, which should not contain any chemicals such as fertilizers, herbicides, insecticides and other chemicals used in golf course management and maintenance. Any trees that are hazardous to the course may be removed with prior approval from EEP. Hazardous trees include dead or dying trees that have the potential to fall on a structure or damage irrigation lines. No other trees or vegetation may be "cut" or removed from the easement without prior written approval from EEP. Nonnative (exotic) vegetation may also be managed with prior written approval from EEP. Consultation and prior approval from the EEP will be required for any activities which are not covered under these guidelines for areas located within the State of North Carolina easement. 6.7.4 Invasive Species Management Noxious species will be identified and controlled so that none become dominant or alter the desired community structure of the Project. If noxious plants are identified as a problem within the Project, aspecies-specific control plan will be developed for approval by EEP prior to implementation. During the five-year monitoring period, where necessary, undesirable plant or animal species will be removed, treated, or otherwise managed by means of physical removal, use of herbicides, live trapping, confining wires, or nets. All vegetation removal from the Project shall be done by mechanical means only unless EEP has first authorized the use of herbicides or algaecides for the control of plants in or immediately adjacent to the Project. 7.0 PERFORMANCE CRITERIA: Monitoring of Project restoration efforts will be performed until success criteria are fulfilled. Monitoring is proposed for the stream channel, stormwater management devices, wetlands, and vegetation. In general, the restoration success criteria, and required remediation actions, are based on Appendix II of the Stream Mitigation Guidelines (USAGE et al. 2003). 7.1 Streams: The restored stream reaches are proposed to be monitored for geometric activity. Annual fall monitoring will include development of channel cross-sections on riffles and pools and a water surface profile of the channel. The data will be presented in graphic and tabular format. Data to be presented will include: 1) cross-sectional area, 2) bankfull width, 3) average depth, 4) maximum depth, 5) width-to-depth ratio, 6) meander wavelength, 7) belt-width, 8) water surface slope, and 9) sinuosity. The stream will subsequently be classified a KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. 3 6 Consullin~,~ Engineers Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN according to stream geometry and substrate (Rosgen 1996). Significant changes in channel morphology will be tracked and reported by comparing data in each successive monitoring year. A photographic record that will include preconstruction and post construction pictures has been initiated with current Project photographs (Appendix A). 1 e 7.1.1 Stream Success Criteria Success criteria for stream restoration will include: 1) successful classification of the reach as a functioning stream system (Rosgen 1996), and 2) channel variables indicative of a stable stream system. The channel configuration will be measured on an annual basis in order to track changes in channel geometry, profile, or substrate. These data will be utilized to determine the success in restoring stream channel stability. Specifically, the width-to-depth ratio should characterize an E-type or borderline E-/C-type channel, bank-height ratios indicative of a stable or moderately unstable channel, and minimal changes in cross-sectional area, channel width, and/or bank erosion along the monitoring reach. In addition, channel abandonment and/or shoot cutoffs must not occur and sinuosity values must remain at approximately 1.2 (thalweg distance/straight-line distance) for Little Lick Creek. The field indicator of bankfull will be described in each monitoring year and indicated on a representative channel cross-section figure. If the stream channel is down-cutting or the channel width is enlarging due to bank erosion, additional bank or slope stabilization methods will be employed. Visual assessment of in-stream structures will be conducted to determine if failure has occurred. Failure of a structure may be indicated by collapse of the structure, undermining of the structure, abandonment of the channel around the structure, and/or stream flow beneath the structure. 7.1.2 Stream Contin~ency In the event that stream success criteria are not fulfilled, a mechanism for contingency will be implemented. Stream contingency may include, but may not be limited to: 1) structure repair and/or installation, 2) repair of dimension, pattern, and/or profile variables, and 3) bank stabilization. The method of contingency is expected to be dependent upon stream variables that are not in compliance with success criteria. Primary concerns, which may jeopardize stream success include: 1) structure failure, 2) headcut migration through the Project, and/or 3) bank erosion. i ~ KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. Consul-in n r g E ginee s 37 Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN Structure Failure In the event that structures are compromised, the affected structure will be repaired, maintained, or replaced. Once the structure is repaired or replaced, it must function to stabilize adjacent stream banks and/or maintain grade control within the channel. Structures which remain intact, but exhibit flow around, beneath, or through the header/footer pilings will be repaired by excavating a trench on the upstream side of the structure and reinstalling filter fabric in front of the pilings. Structures which have been compromised, resulting in shifting or collapse of header/footer pilings, will be removed and replaced with a structure suitable for Project flows. Headcut Migration Through the Project In the event that a headcut occurs within the Project (identified visually or through measurements [i.e. bank-height ratios exceeding 1.4]), provisions for impeding headcut migration and repairing damage caused by the headcut will be implemented. Headcut migration may be impeded through the installation of in- stream grade control structures (log sill and/or log cross-vane weir) and/or restoring stream geometry variables until channel stability is achieved. Channel repairs to stream geometry may include channel backfill with coarse material and stabilizing the material with erosion control matting, vegetative transplants, and/or willow stakes. Bank Erosion In the event that severe bank erosion occurs at the Project resulting in elevated width-to-depth ratios, contingency measures to reduce bank erosion and width-to- depth ratio will be implemented. Bank erosion contingency measures may include the installation of log weirs and/or other bank stabilization measures. If the resultant bank erosion induces shoot cutoffs or channel abandonment, a channel may be excavated which will reduce shear stress to stable values. 7.2 Hydrolo~y: Groundwater monitoring gauge(s) will be installed within the Project and on a reference site to monitor groundwater hydrology. Hydrological sampling will continue throughout the growing season at intervals necessary to satisfy the hydrology success criteria within each design unit (USEPA 1990). 7.2.1 Hydrolo~y Success Criteria Hydrologic success criteria will be based upon regulatory guidelines and information obtained from the reference wetland. Target hydrological characteristics include saturation or inundation for at least 5 to 12.5 percent of the growing season or show similar monitoring results to the reference wetland. a KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. 3 g Constdfing Engineers Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN 7.2.2 Hydrology Contingency Hydrological contingency will require consultation with hydrologists and regulatory agencies if wetland hydrology criteria are not achieved. Floodplain surface modifications represent a likely mechanism to increase the floodplain area in support of jurisdictional wetlands. Recommendations for contingency to establish wetland hydrology will be implemented and monitored until Hydrology Success Criteria are achieved. 7.3 Stormwater Management Devices Stormwater BMP devices will be monitored and maintained periodically, as necessary, to ensure the life of the devices. The Crossings Golf Course has agreed to provide maintenance for the BMPs so that efficient sediment and nutrient removal is continued. A maintenance guideline manual will be provided to the Crossings Golf Course by EEP. As part of the recorded conservation easement, an exhibit entitled "Stormwater BMP Maintenance" will clearly depict the location of stormwater BMPs and will include the maintenance guideline manual. 7.3.1 Stormwater Wetland Monitoring and Maintenance Plant coverage within the Stormwater wetland should be assessed and documented each growing season. If a minimum of 70 percent coverage is not achieved after ' the second growing season, supplemental planting should be completed. Plant coverage of 90 to 95 percent is desirable. Maintenance guidelines are as follows (NCDWQ 2005): 1 ^ Wetland should be ins ected annuall after a rain event, and after all lar e P Y g (mean annual or greater) storm events to ensure the basin is operating as designed. At a minimum the following items should be corrected if observed. o Clogging of the outlet or very rapid water release ' o Appearance of invasive species or a monoculture o Erosion on the wetland banks or at the inlet/outlet o Sediment accumulation o Damage to, or blockage of, the emergency spillway o Woody vegetation in the embankment or dam ^ Sediment should only be selectively removed; sediment removal disturbs stable vegetation cover and disrupts flow paths through the wetland. 7.4 Vegetation: Restoration monitoring procedures for vegetation will monitor plant survival and species diversity. After planting has been completed in winter or early spring, an initial evaluation will be performed to verify planting methods and to determine initial species composition and density. Supplemental planting and additional modifications will be implemented, if necessary. A photographic record of plant growth will be included in each annual monitoring report. ' ~ KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. a ,. CunsultinR En~rneers 39 Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN During the first year, vegetation will receive a cursory, visual evaluation on a periodic basis to ascertain the degree of overtopping of planted elements by nuisance species. Subsequently, quantitative sampling of vegetation will be performed between June 1 and September 30, after each growing season, until the vegetation success criteria are achieved. During quantitative vegetation sampling in early fall of the first year, up to 15 sample plots (10 meters by 10 meters) will be randomly placed within the Project; however, best professional judgment may be necessary to establish vegetative monitoring plots upon completion of construction activities. In each sample plot, vegetation parameters to be monitored include species composition and species density. 7.4.1 Vegetation Success Criteria Success criteria have been established to verify that the vegetation component supports community elements necessary for forest development. Success criteria are dependent upon the density and growth of characteristic forest species. Additional success criteria are dependent upon density and growth of "Character Tree Species." Character Tree Species include planted species along with species identified through visual inventory of an approved reference (relatively undisturbed) forest community used to orient the project design. All canopy tree species planted and identified in the reference forest will be utilized to define "Character Tree Species" as termed in the success criteria. An average density of 320 stems per acre of Character Tree Species must be surviving in the first three monitoring years. Subsequently, 290 Character Tree Species per acre must be surviving in year 4 and 260 Character Tree Species per acre in year 5. 7.4.2 Vegetation Contin~ency If vegetation success criteria are not achieved based on average density calculations from combined plots over the entire restoration area, supplemental planting may be performed with tree species approved by regulatory agencies. Supplemental planting will be performed as needed until achievement of vegetation success criteria. 7.5 Scheduling and Reporting: A tentative phasing schedule for the proposed Project is presented below. Certain tasks may be dependant on seasonal conditions. a KO & ASSOCIATES, P. G 40 Cvns-dtrng Engineers 1 1 1 1 1 Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN Table 11. Project Scheduling and Reporting Proiect ID No. 050650501 (Little Lick (',reek Rest~ratinn Prniectl Task Descri tion Date of Scheduled Com letion Restoration Plan Finalized Ma 14, 2007 Submission of Final Desi n October 15, 2007 Permittin Initiated November 19, 2007 Advertise for Bidders Februar 18, 2008 Bid O enin March 28, 2008 Be in Construction November 3, 2008 End Construction Februar 2009 Pre are As-built Miti ation Plan and Miti ation Plan A ri12009 First Year Monitorin Re ort December 2009 Second Year Monitorin Re ort December 2010 Third Year Monitorin Re ort December 2011 Fourth Year Monitorin Re ort December 2012 Fifth Year Monitoring Report December 2013 ' ~ KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. 4 l a Consultin g Engrneers Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN 8.0 REFERENCES Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Goblet, and E.T. Laroe. 1979. Classification of Wetland and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. Doll, B.A., A.D. Dobbins, J. Spooner, D.R. Clinton, and D.A. Bidelspach. 2006. Hydraulic Geometry Relationships for Rural North Carolina Coastal Plain Streams. Raleigh, North Carolina. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1. United States Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. Griffith, G.E. 2002. Ecoregions of North and South Carolina. Reston Virginia. United States Geological Society (map scale 1:1,500,000). Jessup, A.G., et. Al. Abstracts of Papers and Personal Communication. North Carolina SRI Southeastern Region Conference on Stream Restoration. Winston Salem, NC. North Carolina Stream Restoration Institute, Raleigh, NC. 2004. Page 63. Manning, R. 1891. On the Flow of Water in Open Channels and Pipes. Transactions of the Institution of Civil Engineers of Ireland. 20, 161-20. North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2002. Neuse River Basinwide Water Quality Plan (online). Available: http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/basinwide/Neuse/2002/plan.htm [February 26, 2007]. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh, North Carolina. North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2005. Updated Draft Manual of Stormwater Best Management Practices.. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh, North Carolina. North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2006a. Neuse River Basinwide Assessment (online). Available: http://www.esb.enr.state.nc.us/Basinwide/Neuse06BasinReportFinal.pdf [February 26, 2007]. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh, North Carolina. a KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. 42 Consulting Engineers Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2006b. North Carolina Waterbody Reports (online). Available: http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/bims/reports/reportsWB.html [February 26, 2007]. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh, North Carolina. North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2006c. Final North Carolina Water Quality Assessment and Impaired Waters List (2004 Integrated 305(b) and 303(d) Report) (online). Available: http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/tmdl/documents/2004IRCategories4-7.PDF [February 26, 2007]. ' North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh, North Carolina. North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2006d. Draft North Carolina Water Quality Assessment and Impaired Waters List (2006 Integrated 305(b) and 303(d) ' Report). Public Review (online). Available: http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/tmdl/documents/2006303dListPublicReviewDraft.pdf [February 26, 2007]. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh, North Carolina. North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP). 2003. Neuse River Basin Watershed Restoration Plan (online). Available: http://www.nceep.net/services/restplans/neuse_2003.pdf [February 26, 2007]. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh, North Carolina. Rosgen D. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology. Pagosa Springs, Colorado. 1 Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina: Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. Raleigh, North Carolina. United States Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE), United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), and North Carolina Division of Water Quality ' (NCDWQ). 2003. Stream Mitigation Guidelines. State of North Carolina. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1976. Soil Survey of Durham County, North Carolina. United State Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. ~,~ '._~ i ~ KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. 43 a ~, ConsulJrnJ, Engrneers Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2000. Official Series Description, Wehadkee Series (online). Available: http://www2.ftw.nres.usda.gov/osd/dat/W/WEHADKEE.html [March 8, 2007]. United State Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. a KO & ASSOCIATES, P. G 44 Consulting Engineers 1 1 Durham County North Carolina _. PROJECT A,RF.A 2507 ,- -~ 2 519 2507 ~ ~- ' `, 1815 2523 '2521 ~ / 2528 -~ ` ~ 25 ,5 2527 1814 ~ ' \~ ~\ 2516 \ 2530 _ I ~ j ~ ( 2525 ~ ~--r~ ~ / ~~ `~ ~-' ~, 2 5 2 6 ~- `~ ~ ~ ; ~ " ,' 2538 ~ 2523 ~ - / ` _ ~ _ ' ~ ~- / ~ ' ,,_ ~ J / ~ J ~ i _ 1847 ~ 98 1815 --------- PROJECT AREA 0 1000 2000 I I I I I FEET rY '~ Vicinity Map ~ 1 ~~~~~~ l C~ 1~ Little Lick Creek Restoration Plan `~ Durham County, North Carolina ~ KO ~ ASSOCIATES, P.C. Consulting Engineers 1011 SCHAUB DR., SUITE #202 BALE/GH, K.C. 27606 Date: 3/15~U7 Figure: 1 (979) 851-6066 r~ 7 1'~,'OS~SteI11 / KO ~ ASSOCIATES, P.C. Consulting Engineers 1011 SCHAUB DR., SUITE #202 RALEIGH, N.C. 27606 (919) 851-6066 Watershed Topo Map Little Lick Creek Restoration Plan Durham County, North Carolina llate: 3~1S~D7 ~ Figure: 2 I 0 500 1000 I I I I I FEET ,.,.~ / KO ~ ASSOCIATES, P.C. Consulting Engineers /011 SCHAUB DR., SUITE #202 RALEIGH, N. C. 27606 (9/9) 851-6066 LEGEND Symbol Name Ch - Chewacla and Wehadkee - Project Area Soil Survey Map Little Lick Creek Restoration Plan Durham County, North Carolina llate: 3i15~07 I Figure: 3 ^ 1 "'gym if ` ~~ ` ''~~~~~~ .• ;~~~''~'.: ,;~~ . , -~ y ~ ~.-~~~ ~ ~~- ~ ~ ~ ~, 8.46 ~`" _ ~ J T ~,, ~ ~ .,~ ~ ,! ~: 512 2 , , ~ ' ~\ - '-~ ~ _ ,1 -.~ V , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I'~ / ~' i 250- ~' ~ ~ ~ v, f I {, ~ 1 ~ ` 'z- ~ 5 8 _ ~ sus' '' ~ ~~;` '' ~ `~`~ \'T .4~ 5 ~ ~~`'_'~ ~ ` ~ j •4814.. •" ~ 530 ~~ ~` 2516 ~_: ,J~ ~ _ r, ' 252 ( - ~ " , , , ~-- ~~ ~ ~ ~ ,... ~ r 53 8 _. , 2 5 2 3 ~ ~ Lick _ ~ c~ $@ _ ~~+ ~, ,. ~ ,~ 'r J / , - ~ _ ~ ~~ `may'^~~~ '~'/,- ~ ~ r- -~ ~-i ~ ~ _._,~ 0 1000 2000 I I FEET Hydrological ~~ 7 l~cc~sysrc~l, Features Map Little Lick Creek Restoration Plan / KO ~ ASSOCIATES. P.C. Durham County, North Carolina Consulting Engineers 1011 SCHAUB DR., SUITE #202 RALEIGH, IQ. C. 27606 DatC: 3~~7 Figure: 4 (9/9) 851-6066 Wake /Granville Counties North Carolina 0 1000 2000 I ~ I ~ I FEET REFERENCE SITE --- 1724 ~ ~; \ ~~~ J - ~~, ,~ ,--~, I~--" ~ ~~ 1728 ,, ~~ ~, , '~ ,' _- ---- ~- isol ~ I ~~ ~~~ I \ \ 1` _ J ~ '~ \1 r 7 1' ~C()S~~tCi l l / KO ~ ASSOCIATES, P.C. Consulting Engineers 1011 SCHAUB DR., SUITE #202 RALEIGH, N. C. 27606 (919) 851-6066 --~,;~ ~ _ ~c ~ , / \ ~, ~ ~ ~~ I ~~ Reference Site Vicinity Map Little Lick Creek Restoration Plan Durham County, North Carolina Date: 3i15~07 Figure: 5 _ ,) ~ ;~, ,\ 7 ~~ - - / ~~ - - ~ ~ /~ ~,_ , ~~~,__ ' -~ ;~ i ;, ~~ ~ 1 ~ - (~7ranville Go>y~ty Wake County ~ 1 s o 1 -;- , ~~ -, ~ ~ ,; ~l REFERENCE ; SITE ~' ~-~ ~. \ \ ' 7103. t _ REFERENCE .15 t. ~• - ~ SITE ; ,7~4 ~ _ . ., ~ - - 1103 - 7102 - ~` - ~ ~ .. ,' 1724 1 1 ~8 t ` 50 ..~ • 15 ~•:: '~i7as -, ~ i- ..1728 17 85 ~ ~ ' ~ I .' ~ - 24 . q~ 1102. ~-.. '' ~ ... -.. _ ,724 i . - i ~ ~ 1 a3 1r27 _ ~ ~ -}723 1722 . ~ -. ~ . . ' ~' 71725 ~ Grxm'ille Couory I . 15 1726 ~ - ~_ __Y ' ~ ~r- ~ fake County t .t ~ 4J~V' ('~u-~.ty ~~~ ~~..ww~~ ~r_ ~ 1901 ~' ~ -1951 ~ 1901 .. .. ,f ' / ~ .~ ~ - l- c,- . :1- `~~ .._ ~ i-: - 1900 a 1 ~ ~~ ' ~ ~Q . 1900 _ / . ' 02 ct~a. ~~ ., ~ ~7 1907 'r: , I 1 • - t 1903 "' i - ~.:': 0 2000 4000 l~ltltltl FFZrT Wake /Granville LEGEND Counties Watershed North Carolina -'--- Project Area r ~ Reference Site 7 Watershed Topo l~c.~c~s stclll Y Map Little Lick Creek Restor tion Pl ~ KO ~ ASSOCIATES, P.C. a an nurham County, North Carolina Consulting Engineers 1011 SCHAUB DR., SUITE #202 RALEIGH, N. C. 27606 Date: ~~7 Figure: 6 (919) 851-6066 I 0 500 1000 I ~ I ~ I FEET r~ ',C'OS~StE'Ill ~ KO ~ ASSOCIATES, P.C. Consulting Engineers 1011 SCHAUB DR., SUITE #202 RALEIGH, N. C. 27606 (919) 851-6066 LEGEND Symbol Name PnD - Pinkston ChA - Chewacla and Wehadkee ~~. - Project Area Reference Site Soil Survey Map Little Lick Creek Restoration Plan Durham County, North Carolina Date: 3~15~07 Figure: 7 LL ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ . N ` ~~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q ~ O ~ O ~ N ~ cn _ c ~ ~ n. ~ ~ ~ 4 O Q -6 O ~ ~ y.~ . - ~ Q ~ ~ o ~ O S U ~' m O J ~ ~ ,~. ~ ° ~ a' ' ~_ ~ e.~. r, ` t ~ a ' .. ~ d ~ ~' c S E . T " ~ a ~~-° .- . ;,• .- °w ~ ~ e, ~ - r~; i cu C1.. J ~ o' Ct. ~ Q ~ A ~ m o m ma m a~m~ ~ ~' .. O ~ O N ~ ~ E E U .Q ip 01 i o ~~ ~~ _ C co to Q m Q ~ ¢ Q ~~ • * ~ ~~ - ia ~ ~ „ ~ CC CI> o ~ ~' i ' ~ o y. ~ (~ o a L a , ~ ~ ~ ¢ . a W ~ ~ r ^ ~ ~~ y ~, ~ ~ ~ Z Z m , ~ a a m N u~ m - ~ ~ H ~ Q Q m ~ ~„ ~ i - _ ~ 4 - ~ o E v .~~ 4 , a ~ # .. - U ~ W O ~ ~, _ ` s ~ W ~~ Q m W z ~ ~ m ma.c ~-o O W m ~ ~ `~' ca c ~ O ~ rn i ~ ~ ~ .c y U ~ ~~~~~ ~~ _ A _ Q y ~, . ~~~ ~~y~a`U ¢ ~ '~ d ~ WU _ J o ¢ `0U ~ ag`~~ ~- V ~ W J O ~ ~ ~ ~ Q m ~ ~ ca ~ - .. ~ <: u i ~" ~ H LL J o c ~ W a a ~ Ec~n"cc"iEa c-~ N ~ ti m n m ~ a ~ ~ v ~ ~ o>E c ~ ` c~~ m m c ~ _ ~ c~' - A ~ r ~ ~ ~co ~ ~ Q caaa m a c ~ v m ~ - ~ a J ~ 4 .y af..' _ _O 3F ~ ~ ~ ~a°m Emm ° ~~ ~ ~ ~ r1 v~ m . m ~ ° ~ ~~° o'~ . . a o,c m~ ~o ~ .moc~~~mma, E Q¢ m U m U U ~ U ~ ~~ 0 ~; '° ~I oU - ~O = ~3~ 0 ~ J - mm ~ H Z O Q W n ~ Q W 3 ~ N ~ U' a N ~- ~ ~j ~ ND ~ 2 Q ~ a J w 1 r 1 a K~ ~ ASS~C,~1TGSr ~'~, PRO1ECi REFERENCE NO. SHEEP ND. L LITTLE LICK Sheet lA Consulting Engineers iau siuu~~e nx. sent ~za: xauicu,vc, Want PRDIECI ENGINEER (419)&I-fi06fi EXISTING CONDITIONS 75 0 150 ~'~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ' ~~ ~ SCALE ~ ~\ ~ ~ '~, m _ - ~ - ~ ~- ~! mL. ~ I,1 l '1 N 1 ? I 11 \ ~ ~ 11 \ j 0 \ Y1 i~ ~ o~ ~~, A ~. m ~ ~ _. ~ ~ s,c 1 m ~ ~-s xr °~~ ` n ~ I rll 4~ a _ o ~ ~' ~ o ~ // ! ice'-' ~~_ -= ~i ~~,~~ V~ ~ Ru`~~ L~~ ~_~ ( II it 1 ~eaJ/ ~ ;y ~~ i ~ ~ ~~ GOLF CART PATH ~ '~ ~ ~_ ~ ~~Yi ~ ~ __ _ i ~ I `J ~~ // Euxwav ~ ~~_-. _ ~ Q ~ ~ // . ~" ~~ 666 ,- , ~ ~~~ ~o ~ ~> ~ iii / ~ °~ ©~~~ a~a° ° ~ ° ~° ~ ~~ l~~l ~ ~1 !i ,~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ °o o ` .~ ~2 . ~'~ % % / ~ 4~ o a ° '~ oQ ~ ~ 1l ~~ ~ ~~_-__-___~~ ~~ s/~ / fl V ~~ G SA~TARY SEWER LINE ~ ~x~~~ ~~ - /L, ~-_ I, \ ~_ ~ ~ ~ 1, ~Ji ~.J / ~ ~j/ 6p ©d ~ ~ %/~~~ ~ LITTLE LICK CRE ~.~~ ~~~ ~~ ,~ i ~~ -~ ~~ ~ \\ ~ G ~~ \~ ~© -, ~~ ~ a ~J ~ w °\ m / ~ / Q~ ©~~ ~~ ~I j / ~ ~ ~ ~~~ f I a ~, , _ __ ~~ ~ v ~ ~ ~ ~~~o°~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~~ ~% ~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ j" ©a /~ ¢S 6 11 C' ~~ 1~ d sam iR/.P / ~ ~~ A_~ ~ d ~ °o ~ ~ ~~ ,'~ / ~ ©o a c ~ LEGEND ~.' ~ ~ ~P ~, ~ e I ,. ~ -T6- TOP OF BANK RESTORATION PUNS a a LITfIE LICK CREEK i ~E °c m WETLAND BOUNDARY `°°"° OURHAM a~' °` RVS N" Mi as a, a° RKW Yld91 PROPOSED CONDITIONS KO & ASSO IA ES, P C. Consulting Engineers mu s~amro uxscm ~nz xwucu, n~.c.eium I°~91 954M1046 75 0 150 SCALE T REFERENCE NO. SHEET N0. LITfLEIICK SheetP PROTECT ENGINEER 1 N N y U J m a RETAIN GOLF ~ PROPOSED CART BRIgGE BANKFULL ~ FIBER OPTIC TELEPHONE ~~ i PROPOSED EASEMENT ~~ n 2 N~ ~' ~~ 0~ ;dPOSeD a ~NKFULL ~ O~ ~~ Nm D~ ~~t~ MINE , , ... N `~ ..~~`~ ~ a ~~~ ~l Q ~ 20 ~ \~ b~ I, ~ RESTORATION PIANS LITTLE LICK CREEK `°°~` DURHAM RVS RKW °"° 12dtI7 iro p ACCO~T~r~per n, r, PRO1ECi REFERENCE N0. SMEET N0. PROPOSED CONDITIONS a 1~ lC t1~7Jg 1 g.'CO Ili 1TT`E "`K Shee'2A Consultin F,n meers imi ymuua ux.,s~x~r: znr aur~cu, n.c. nenb PA~IFCT ENGINEER IY19]"SIfiP56 yi / V ~~ ~ ~ i ~~~ -- ~ - 75 0 150 ~'~ ~( / _ _ _ SCALE d a r a Y m 4 a ~\. ~ ~~~ i ~~ 1 ~ ~ ,~-, \ - 1 \ I 0 - / a ~, PROPOSED ~FA51-~~iENT ~ - L ~ 6~ '' ~ ~ _~ ~ PROPOSED EASEMENT ~~ ~~~ ~~q~ ~~~ ~ ~a 6- L ~_ -~_-~__ a n ~~ BMP 3 _ _ I m ~-----_~_ 1 a ~_. N ,5 9'PU C _e_. '~ ~3 ___.~ Ep .. _..:: " a - .... --~ BMP © ~ `~~ ~ _ ~^~ \"~ PE ,~~"~, __ . ~ i i ~ o -P~~~~ EASEMENT J ~~~/~ / ~~~~ Q© d (i¢ i // r~ueur ~ ~ ~~ ~ GOLF CART PATH '~!~ ~,rr ~ ~ , ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ PERTDy/Q REgU E~IVT ~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~~~~~~ ~b ~+ Q /~ ~ ~\~ ~' F (n j ~ Fa~~r ~ ~ J ~~~ J l % I ~ e3 / V7~ IXCAVATION LIMITS j / ~ ~ II ~ ~~~ / ~ % / / ~ / j ~ ~.~ ®~~= ' `~~St~fARY SEWER Llt~ ~ ~ / ~_~~~ ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ /~J/ /I F"r""r /~ ~ "~ PROPOSEC I '~T N ~r ~ --- '/~~ l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ a TH WEG i eox ~ ,~ RETAIN GOLF ~ CART BRIDGE .__ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -- ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~ ~~~~ ~~'JEND STREAM RESTORATION PROJECT STA 39+64 ~~ FIIR"pY ' ©/ ,, ~ ~' ~ ~~ ~ /~~y ~~~ L`~~~- ~~ ~ RELI~OCHANN~L NED ~ BMF . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~ I aa,rvnruu RELOCATED J SANITARY p ~~$EWER LINE 9 RETAIN GOLF \ ~,~ CART BRIDGE ~ a ~`~ ~ F3 r 0 o'~ , ~; ~0'~~~ ~ ~~ ~y ~ ~ O,~p~ ~~~ 4sF~ \ ~2 LEGEND \ ~Vcr ' ~` NlETLAND BOUNDARY `~ J / \ ~~ i 11 l ~a~,r su+o iwv /~ \~~ BMF pp \ E~ ~ ~ Q ~4 O ~ ~ r0 Q ~AA ~~ A, \\ RoW DIRECTOt N I i PROPOSEp ~r RESTORATION PLANS LO'fLE LION CREEK `~'"" DURHAM RYS RKW ~"~` 32691 ; 4 a y w J 0 J n A a I . ~. r. Yi. -~ -; - - - -- -- _ _ _ . _ _~_ .- --- - - .- - - -- - - - - { - - t ~ I i I I n ~~ ,; ~,~ i ~, ~, ~, ^ m q ~, Q h ~ a y i ~ ~ ~ o n ~ ~ r __ o N. t ~ _ _. 1 }___ N _ . i ~ ~ ~ ... f -- - - t-._ _~ -- -- 1fK }'Z3 6 $A, KFUCL DE ~_ TIE ~ i , : ~ m __ ~~ __ : ~__. f ~ ~ ~ ~ n , ~ 4 I -- F -_- ~ ~i i .. .. 4.G.,. I I w -~ h _ ~~ . ".~ 1 f i- - ~ i ~r i 1 }~ I. ~. ~ J f~ -- 4 ,r• I ~- ~~ i - - ._ _ ~ ..e _._ -- - - . . . L T _ ; ~ ,,. + ~ - I- 4 1 I 1 T +J~ { ~. ~ ~ r . .. _. _ __ ._-. i , i ~~ h i ~, ~ t k .. , ~ ojj''~~ ~ ~r 4- _. ri ~~- ' 4 ~ .. ~ -i. 1 I ~ i ~~. i I : +. ._ ~. ' f ~, '' _- !, ~ -_ _. - _ f , __ ~ - {- _ _ _ C 22 _23 24 ,26 25 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 m a Y U J m N N J N C A d PLANTING PLAN xo & Assn ~ ~s, P . Consulting Engineers me su~ue un, scm. •ana wuracu, n.c. zvoi~e triv~ esu~ubn 75 0 150 SCALE PAOJEC7 REFERENCE N0. SHEET N0. IIITLE LICK Sheel4 PROJECT ENGINEER RESTORATION PIANS LITfIE LICK CREEK `"'"° DURHAM RVS RKW ~"~ 51WJ PLANTING ~~~ al\0 ~ AOSOUIHILSN P.C, PROIECiREFERENCENO SHEET NO. (' LITTLE LICK Sheet 4A Consulting Engineers aaaea eNCiNEEa ~~~~ ~a~~N ~,k.w~~~N ~~a «ti.~,eA.~.e.:,n~A 1919~A51-fAW6 ~~ ~' ~ '~~~ ~ _ ~_ 75 0 150 ~~~ ___ . SCALE _._ __ N -' I ~ i I z /' ~~ ~ 1 '% T \ G t A ~ 1 I 1 ~ C / O ~ 1 PROPOSED SAS ENT w \ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~, i ~ T - ,_ ~. r- ~~ ~''~ ~~, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ : PROPOSED EASEMENT/ ~' ~~ ;~; a 7 t - -_.- _ BMP ~ _ n ___y __ fi 1r e nas ' - x ..... _. - -. r.. N-.---.~ I ~~~ __- _~ ~~~ b ~ ~ ~~~ ~~,~~__-,,~ BMP a ~,, ~ ~ ~~ A. ~i ~, - '~ ~~~~ 1~ ~ ~~ \~ -PIt~PITSE~ EASEMENT / ~~V~ ~ `~` dQ~ r l~/' / ~ ~ `" ,, 1 /. FNAMAY II__ _ / ~ ` / I '~ ~~ A /~~- ~~ ~ i,'l~ I 0~ ~ // / ~ ~ q ~S / a~, iii ~' ~ '~' ~ `~Q `~ o ~ ° o ° ° '~ r , o Q. N~~ ;% i~ ~~ / ~~ ca © a ~ l ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ 2 ""` jai-<---~ _ ~ ,~ ~r-- _r ~., ~ l v ~ 1 /~ . 1 ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ FNaNAr PROPOSE ! ~ E}~ t ~ BA KFULL I " ~ •~ / / ~ ' ~~ ~ /~ ~~ ~ ~ ROPOSED EASEME ~ ~ / ~ ,~ ~ ~ BMP ~~ ro ~; o ~ ~ III e; 4 FNAMAY ";~ Y LEGEND l~ g~ ~~~ ~~ ~. j I' ~ ~A ,~ ~,:~~ Q d ~ ~~ ~ i ~ /'?~/^ STREAM-SIDE ASSEMBIAGE ~ / ~, ~( © ~y~ ~~ ~ j ~~~ i ~4- / g j J ~~E/// ~ ~ '-, m ~ PIEDMONT ALLUVIAL ~ / 0'~ ~ ~~ ~ d BMP ~ a FOREST T..` ` ' O ^' ~ i o ~ ~`~~~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ RIPARIAN WETLAND 0 ~ / t ~; ~ Ch. ~~ ~ sAAO iRAA '~ ~ m ~ RESTRICTED MAINTENANCE AREA ~ 9f ~ ~ / ~ ~, a (LOW GROWTH SHRUB COMMUNITY ~ ~1. % ~ ~ ~ ~/~ A J ~ ~ ' ~' 00~ - ~ ~ 0~ ~ 4 © Q RESTORATION MANS 0 ~ ~ STORMWATER BMP `,~ / ~ ~ ~ // d LITfIE LICK CREEK e WETLAND ASSEMBLAGE \ / `°""° DURHAM O~ F. \ / / BAA ~ I /, o ~ - / _. ~} N®n RVS ~' ~! ~o ., RKW ~" 51W7 m ~i r a Y U J at N J C A d EXISTING NEUSE BUFFERS KO & ASSOCIATES, P.C. Consulting Engineers you sc~uwe uxsmn~; •sm xniriai,ncvunn ~G197 BSIfiOli~ 75 0 150 :T REFERENCE N0. SHEET N0. LITTLE LICK SheelS PROJECT ENGINEER LEGEND T9- TOP OF BANK WETLAND BOUNDARY WOODED AREA WITHIN BUFFER GRASS AREA WITHIN BUFFER ® SEWER EASEMENT WITHIN BUFFER RESTORATION PIANS LITTLE LICK CREEK t0"~` DURHAM RYS ~ ~~ s~w~ EXISTING NEUSE BUFFERS aKQ a ACCOr'Ari ~e' n, n' PRO1ECi REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO. n (C t100 I~LYI J L l~ IITTIE LICK SheeI SA Consulting Engineers inu s~awi~s ux., e~~m, •1m xit.irni. rv.c nsou PROIECi ENGINEER I C Ot a N a Y c a 0 LEGEND TB- TOP OF BANK WETLAND BOUNDARY WOODED AREA WITHIN BUFFER GRASS AREA WITHIN BUFFER SEWER EASEMENT WITHIN BUFFER ~~ HAM ~ RKW PROPOSED NEUSE BUFFERS in a Y U J V X J C 0 d 0 ~_ aKQ Q~ AC~C~o/~IATT~C~' n/~, PROJECT REFPAENCP NO. 1 IlG t100 l1t1ILD 11^ piTIELCN Consulting Engineers inu smin~v ux,s~'n'e 7m iuuaru,nc.a~ann P0.0JPCT ~siv~ eswan 75 0 150 SCALE ~~ 2 ~- N~ ~~ ,l 02 ~~, k ~ ~O \~. N N~\b a -IS ~if1 emu, ~ N ~,. G+ ~~ rL ~ 20 SHEET N0. Sheet 6 LEGEND -TB- TOP OF BANK WETLAND BOUNDARY WOODED AREA WITHIN BUFFER SHRUB AREA WITHIN BUFFER GRASS AREA WITHIN BUFFER SEWER EASEMENT WITHIN ® BUFFER STORMWATER BMP WETLAND D ASSEMBLAGE WITHIN BUFFER STORMWATER BMP D WETLAND ASSEMBLAGE RESTORATION vu,Ns IITfLE BCK CREEK `°°"" Dl1RHAM ~~ RV$ RKW ~~~`. YIY01 m co "a v m Y J 0 0 LEGEND re- TOP OF BANK WETLAND BOUNDARY WOODED AREA WITHIN BUFFER SHRUB AREA WITHIN BUFFER GRASS AREA WITHIN BUFFER SEWER EASEMENT WITHIN BUFFER STORMWATER 8MP WETLA D ASSEMBLAGE WITHIN BUI STORMWATER BMP WETLAND ASSEMBLAGE PROPOSED NEUSE BUFFERS a TIO 9. AC~C~O/~~A I'r Ca' II.(~ PROIELT REFERENCE N0. SHEET N( 1~ (% H00 1i4Y1LJ C li. lI1TlF LICK Sheef 6A Cansulting[Engineers aou scrwre ux, sore. 'am wurrcx, n.c. nano PROIEGI ENGINEER PIANS :REEK ' DURHAM RKW `"" 511A7 Project IU No. 0.50650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN 0 L i C APPENDIX A LITTLE LICK CREEK SITE PHOTOGRAPHS EXISTING CONDITIONS ' a KO 8c ASSOCIATES, P. C. Cunsuilin~,~ 6ngincus 1 ~°!,~j~ct ID No. OSOb50501 i ~:~tl,~ i 1~._ j t ~. ~ I',~_'~i~~i ~i•;' ~ ii^.;~°, t !!Ui ~ ~I~l (~OUllty, NOTC~I C~1PO~lllc1 RHSTORAT[nN PLAN L Existing Little Lick Creek Top of Study Reach near Green for Hole 11 Existing Little Lick Creek with Sand Deposited within Channel a KO & ASSOC'/AYES. P. C. (~onstrllin,~ Err,Lin~us APPENDIX A Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Resturatirn~ Project, Durham County, North C'arulina RF~:STORAT[ON PLAN Little Lick Creek with Abandoned Sewer Manhole Historic Channel of Little Lick Creek in Fairway of Hole 17 a KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. C'atctdlini L)~,~incci.~ APPENDIX A Project [ D No. 050650501 Little Liclc Ci-eek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN Relocated Section of Little Lick Creek Along the Fairway of Hole 16. Mass Wasting Along Outside Meander Bend Along the Fairway of Hole 14 a KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. Consrdlint L•'r;Linea-, APPENDIX A Project I D No. 0506SUi01 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Caroliil~~j RESTORATION PL 0'~; . j ~ s; L ~._,,z ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ . ,. ~ ~ „.~ ; '~ ~ i ~ ~ i ~ .1.. : , ' ,n ~ ~~~. ,y~.~pp~~ ~y , ,~ i ~~'y`jy;'`~~,-y {} -rte ~ 1 ;fit 'h _ ~ yS ~"4`_ 1yY ~~.. ,; ~ ~_ _ ~t ~' l ~ i ,t ~ { - til£.f l '~ ~ LE?.T '` .f .. , 1S'~`-3 Y ` .",J - . J ~ \ ~ ` y ~ ` y~~~ y~ t _ {~iF ~ ~ ~ +a `.. Existing vegetated buffer along Little Lick Creek. Tortuous Meander of Little Lick Creek on Fairway of Hole 16. a KO & ASSOC/AYES, P. C. C'on.crrlrus; Ent;inrrr.+' APPENDIX A Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Diarhain County, North Carolina RESTORATION P[.AN APPENDIX B RESTORATION SITE USACE ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORMS 1. Wetland Forms Location Map 2. Wetland Forms a KO ~ ASSOCIATES, P. C. Consulting En~,•ineers i'Ii>i~'~i 1J) :~'e~~. 1i~'i)ti_~li~~iij Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN Pro}ect Boundary Surface Wate! Jurisdictional Wetland - Jurisdictional Stream -Relic Stream Channc! • Data Form Location _ .. Gi f rsir 1 I ll~ t•r-~ 4 1l,~; ~v1 .,:..a . Vg::.: 1'lYJ C.w IrhrN -.nj4 :a! •w ut sfq !lsrt'wst U.aa/ r+,yo . , .,w>, +iwwsar~~,..a w. ~...r fo.~.~c ,dµ~,eti ~.•.rarr e q.~s t~~ra r w •.., •~~gw.KU ~µs~ a KO ~ ASSOCIATES, P. C. Cun.~rdlirri,~ L:7r~irnu~.v APPENDIX B Cr.t)UTINF Wl'1'LANt~ DI:'1'F~k<N11NA"flC)N F~C1A'7 r,c1 t~7viloneic Tl~l;,,t~sv~nn hAa~Yeiall B~urdtx [i17 ProjectlSite: The C'rossinas Date: 2l7/200G ApplicantlOwne,-: F"l~C' L'ounty: uurhan~ Investigator: Environmental 5erviccs. Inc. (I~~SO State: I~FC Do normal circumstances exist on the site? ~ Yes No Community ID: Forested Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation.)'? ^Yes ^~ No Transect 1D: JA 7 Is the area a potential problem area (If needed, explain}'? Plot ID: Upland ^Yes ~ No DOMINANT' S"I'RATIJM CNDICATOR DOMINAN"I' STRA'1'LIM INDICATOR PLANT SPECIES PLANT SPECIES ] . American beech tree FACU 7. swcetgum tree FAC+ Fagzrs grandifolia Liquidambar stvraci~lua 2. ironwood tree FAC $. #N/A #N/A Carpbzus carnliniana #N/A 3. loblolly pine tree FAC 9. #N/A #N/A Pines taeda #N/~I 4. Japanese honeysuckle vine FAC- 10. #N/A #N/A Lonicera japonica #N/~I 5. sugar maple shrub FACU- 11. #N/A #N/A ~cer sacchm•un: #N/~ 6. greenbrier vine - 12. #N/A #N/A Snzrlax sp. #N/.4 Percent of dominant species that are OI3L, FACW, or FAC (Excluding FAC-): >40% Remarks #N/A uvnnn~ nr_v ^ RECORDED DATA (DESCRIBE IN REMARKS}: WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDlCA"TORS Primary Indicators: ^ Stream, Lake, or'I'ide Gauge ^ Inundated ^ Aeria] Photographs ^ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches ^ Other ^ Water Marks ^ Drift lines NO RECORDED DATA AVAILABLE ^ Sediment Deposits ^ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands FIELD OBSERVATIONS Secondary Indicators {2 or more required): ^ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches Depth of Surface Water: 0 ^Water-Stained Leaves ^ Loca] Soil Survey Data Depth to Free Water in Pit: 1 G" ^FAC-Neutral Test ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) Depth to Saturated Soil: 16" Remarks: The hydrologic criterion has not been met. Wetland Forms Little Lick Stream Restoration Appendix B Page 1 of 28 MAP UN["1' NAME, (Serifs a3xi l'h<~sc}: ;Vla{Sped as Chc~~~acla Wchadi:ee Series 13R,~lNAta'c' CL,F~SS; tionif~+-h•at poei•ly dr,iined TAXONOMY {SUI3C;ltOU'P}: FEuva uentic Distroehrepts/Typic f'Luva vents FILLD OE3SI~.R~/A'I"IONS: CanEirm Mapped'Type'.> ^ Yes ^ N0 PROFILE DESCRIPTION Depth (inches) Horizon Matrix Color (Mansell Moist) MoCCic Color {Mansell Moist) Moltle AbundancelContrast Texture, Concretions, Structure, etc. 0-16 14YR 4/3 clay loam 16-18 1 OYR b/3 cl a}, HYDRIC SUIL 1NDICA"1`ORS: ^ Histosol ^ Concretions ^ Histic Epipedon ^ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils ^ Reducing Conditions ^ Aquic Moisture Regime ^ Suliidic Udor ^ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils ^ Listing on National 1-[ydric Soils List ^ Listed on State or Local Ilydric Soils List ^ Gleyed or Low Chroma ^ Color ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: The hydric soil criterion has not been met. WETLAND DETERMINATION 1:Iydrophytic Vegetation Present? ^ Yes ~ No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? ^ Yes ~ No Wetland Hydrology Present'? ^ Yes ^ No Hydric Soil Present? ^ Yes ~ No Remarks: Data point is not ,jurisdictional. Wetland Forms Little Lick Stream Restoration Appendix B Page 2 of 28 U~~.T;1 i~(}1:1vI C;F~U"lI7VL L~%E'I~LATdtt C31~~1'[~121~4[N./~`(~It?N (i9R7 Ct~. «Ir°tlanri~ il~elincalinn'viannsll F3~1i I/1 W }_ f Project/Site: The Crossings Daie: 2/7/2006 Applicant/Owner: ITiP Couni~-: Dmfiam Investigator: Environmental Services, Inc. (ESl} State: NC` Do nonual circumstances exist on the site? ~ Yes No Community ID: Forested Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation}'? ^Yes 0 No Transect ID: JA 7 Is the area a potential problem area (If needed, explain)'? Plot ID: Wetland ^Yes ~ No VEGE`I'A'FION DOMINANT STRATUM TNDICATOR DOMINANT STRATUM INDICATOR PLANT SPECIES PLANT SPECIES I. red maple tree FAC 7. #N/A #N/A Acer rubrwaa #JV/A 2. #N/A #N/A $. #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 3. #N/A #N/A 9. #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 4. #N/A #N/A l0. #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 5. #N/A #N/A I1. #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 6. #N/A #N/A 12. #N/A #NlA #N/,A #N/A Percent of dominant species that arc OBL, FACW, or FAC (Excluding FAC-): 100% Remarks The hydrophytic vegetation criterion has been met. E-IYDROLOGY ^ RECORDED DATA (DESCRIBE IN REMARKS}: WE`1'LAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS Primary Indicators: ^ Stream, Lakc, or Tide Gauge ~ Inundated ^ Aerial Photographs ~ Saturated in 1lpper l2 Inches ^ Other ^ Water Marks ^ Drift Lines NO RECORDED DATA AVAILABLE ^ Sediment Deposits ^ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands FIELD OBSERVATIONS Secondary [ndicators (2 or more required): ^~ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches Depth of Surface Water: 0 ^Watcr-Stained Leaves ^ Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Free Water in Pit: 4" ^FAC-Neutral Test ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) Depth to Saturated Soil; 0" Remarks: "Che hydrologic criterion has been met. Wetland Forms Little Lick Stream Restoration Appendix B Page 3 of 28 i 1 M/'.1' UN1`l ~+AM1 ~ (SeCtC;S and Phase). Mapped as Che4vdcla Wc(~adkec Series l~R/~iN~~C7E CLASS: ~aEneevhitt pCSUrly dranlcEi TAX[?NOM'Y {SUBGROUP): Fluvaguentic Disfrc~chre is/Ty is Fluva uenfs Fll~L,D OBSI;1tVATIONS: Coitiirm i~Iapped Typo`' ^ Yes ^1 Nt' PROFILE DESCRIPTION Depth (inches} Horizon Mau•ix Color (Mansell Moist) Mottle Color (Mansell Moist) Mottle AhundancelContrast Textw~e, Concretions, Structure, ete. 0_g lOYR 4/2 clay 8-14 l OYR 4/3 l OYR 5/6 common/distinct clay 14-18 IOYR 4/1 IOYR 5/6 common/distinct sandy loam I IYDRiC SOIL INDICATORS: ^ Histosoi ^ Concretions ^ 1listic Epipcdon ^ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils ^ Reducing Conditions ^ Aquic Moisture Regime ^ Sulfidic Odor ^ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils ^ Listing on National Elydric Soils list ^ l.,isted on State or Local l lydric Soils List ~ Gleyed or Low Chroma ^ Color ^ Other (Explain in Remarks} Remarks: The hydric soil a•iterion has been met. l.rrV T\i~Tr.`T]T A77~1 n•i'1tlAT YV L 1 i.Kl V U lJl. I Ll~lvil t ~ n< <li r~ 1-lydrophytic Vegetation Present'? ~ Yes ^ No is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? ~ Yes ^ No Wetland I-lyd~•ology Present? Q Yes ^ No Hydric Soil Present'? Q Yes ^ No Remarks: Data point is •jurisdictional. Wetland Forms Little Lick Stream Restoration Appendix B Page 4 of 28 [ZC)ll"I~1Ni? Vs-r:~fL.ANI=) C7 F_~[~cId1~J1NA~11(tN t 1987 CE Wetlands L)clineation Manual) 13C'%I}, ~''y Fi. ' I'rojectlSite: "1"i,e Crossings Date: 2/6/2006 ApplicantlOwi~er: FEP County: Durham Investigator: Environmental Services, Inc. (ESl) State: NC.' Do normal circumstances exist on the site? ~ Yes No Community 1D: forested Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation}? ^1'es ~ No Transect ID: JB16/BC26 Is the area a potential problem area (If needed, explain)? Plot LD: Wetland ^Yes 0 No VF,CiF,'1'A'f ION DOMINANT STRATUM INDICATOR DOMINANT STRATUM INDICATOR PLANT SPECIES PLANT SPECIES I. swcetgum tree PAC+ 7. #N/A #N/A Ligzridazzzbnr styraciflun #N/A 2. river birch tree FACW 8. #N/A #N/A Betula nigra #N/~4 3. Japanese honeysuckle vine FAC- 9. #N/A #N/A Lazicera japonica #N/A 4. iromvood tree FAC 30. #N/A #N/A Cnrpinzrs caroliniazsa #N/A 5. pin oak tree FACW 11. #N/A #N/A Quercus palush~is +iN/.4 6. #N/A #N/A 12. #N/A #N!A #N/~2 #N/~1 Percent of dominant species that arc OBL, FACW, or PAC (Excluding FAC-}: 80% Remarks The hydrophytic vegetation criterion has been met. >-IYIIR(1T ClC7Y ^ RECORDED DATA (DESCRIBE IN REMARKS}: WETLAND IIYDROL,OGY INDICATORS Primary Indicators: ^ Stream, Lake, or Tidc Gauge ^ Inundated ^ Aerial Photographs ~ Saturated in Upper 12 inches ^ Other ^ Water Marks ^ Drift Lines NO RECORDED DATA AVAILABLE ^ Sediment Deposits ^ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands P[ELD OBSERVATIONS Secondary Indicators {2 or more required}: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper i2 inches Depth of Surface Water: 0 ^Water-Stained Leaves ^ Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Free Water in Pit: 10" ^FAC-Neutral Test ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) Depth to Saturated Soil: 0" Remarks: The hydrologic criterion has been met. Wetland Forms Little Lick Stream Restoration Appendix B Page 5 of 28 SC)If S MAP LJNI"T 7~A~~1 (5eri~s and Phase): ~ Mapped as Chewaela VJehadkee Series ~~~-~~ 131ZAlNA(~L CC.,ASS: _ s<>rne~~;hat poorly dr~!ined _~ TAXONOMY (SLIT3GROtJP): Fluva uentie Dist-~~chrepts/'I'~, ie Fluva uents FIELD OT3Sll:VATfONS: Confirm Mapped T'ype'? ^ Yes C No PROFILE DESCRIPTfON Depth (inches) Horizon Matrix Color (Munsell Moist) Mottle Color (1Vlunsetl Moist) Mottle Abundance/Contrast 'Texture, Concretions. Structure, etc. 0_g lOYR 5/2 1 UYR 6/4 common/distinct clay loam g_lp IOYR 5/2 lOYR 5/1 common/distinct clay loam 10-18 lOYR 5/1 clay loam HYDRIC SO{L INDICATORS: ^ Histosol ^ Concretions ^ I-Iistie Epipedon ^ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils ^ Reducing Conditions ^ Aguic Moisture Regime ^ Sulftdic Odor ^ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils ^ Listing on National Hydric Soils List ^ Listed on State or Local Hydric Soils List Q Gleyed or Low Chroma ^ Color ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: "1'he hydric soil crite!~ion has been met. WP,`I'LAND DETERMINA"i'ION i ~~~ Hydrophytic Vegetation Prescnt'? 0 Yes [~ No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland'? (~ Yes ^ Na Wetland Hydrology Present? ~ Yes ^ No Hydric Soil Present? 0 Yes ^ No Remarks: Data point is jurisdictional. Wetland Forms Little Lick Stream Restoration Appendix B Page 6 of 28 ~Pt'l~:a } r~,~,~1 1:~~i_~rl.~l~: ~~r iG Ar~r> it€~.€~~azr~~l~r.a~rlo?~ (1487 ['I-'. thie~ilaiails I)eline,~lion Manuall i.~1,1 z> :~E} Project/Site: 'I'lrc Crossings [)site: 2l6/200(1 ~- Applicant/Owner; EEP County: Durham Invcstigata-: Environmental Services, Inc. (ESI) State: NC Do normal cu•cumstances exist on the site? ~ Yes No Community ID: forested Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? ^Yes [~ No 'Iransect ID: JBtb/BC26 Is the area a potential problem area (If needed, explain)'? Plot ID: Upland ^Yes ~ No v~r.1=~eTrnrv DOMINANT STRATUM INDICATOR DOMINANT STRATUM INDICATOR PLANT SPECIES PLANT SPECIF.,S 1. giant cane herb FACW 7. #N/A #N/A Arundirzaria giganlea #N/A 2. red maple tree PAC 8. #N/.A #N/A Acer rubrum #A~/A 3. Japanese honeysuckle vine FAG 9. #N/A #N/A Lonicera japonica #N/A 4, #N/A #N/A I0. #N/A #N/A #N/A #A~/A 5. #N/A #N/A ] 1. #N/A #N/A 4N/A ~'N/A G. #N/A #N/A 1.2. #N/A #N/A #A'/A #N/A Percent of dominant species that arc OBL, PACW, or FAC {Excluding FAC-): 67% Remarks 'Ihe hydrophyiic vegetation criterion has been met. r.rvnizn~ nnv ^ RECORDED DA'T'A (DESCRIBE IN REMAR]{S}: WETLAND I-IYDROLOGY INDICATORS Primary Indicators ^ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge ^ [nundated ^ Aerial Photographs ^ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches ^ Other ^ Water Marks ^ Drift Lines 0 NO RECORDED DATA AVAILABLE ^ Sediment Deposits [] Drainage Patterns in Wetlands PIEhD OBSERVA"PIONS Secondary Indicators {2 or more required): ^ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches Depth of Surface Water: 0 ^Water-Stained Leaves ^ Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Free Water in Pit: > l S" ^FAC-Neutral Test ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) Depth to Saturated Soil: >18" Remarks: The hydrologic criterion has not been met. Wetland Forms Little Lick Stream Restoration Appendix B Page 7 of 28 C(ltT S . __.- MhP t~1Nl"1" NI~Mr: (4eries arul Pl3ase): Mapped as Chc«acla Wehadke~- Series I~RAIi~AftF, C'L.<~5~: ~6Sile~4~i7at poorly d~-aut2d TAXONOMY (SUBGROt)P): F'luva uet~tic Distrochre is/7` is Fluvaquettts FIELD O~SERVA'1'IE}NS: Confirm Mappeci'I'ype'? ^ Yes ^ No PROFILE DESCRIPTION Depth (inches) Horizon Matrix Color (Mansell Moist) Mottle Color (Mansell Moist) Mottle Abundance/Contrast Texture, Concretions, Structure, etc. 0_g lOYR 4/3 IOYR 5/G common/distinct clay loam g_12 1 OYR 4/2 IOYR 6/b common/distinct clay loam 12-18 lOYR 4/2 lOYR 5/6 common/distinct clay loam I-1YDR1C SOIL INDICATORS: ^ Ilistosol ^ Concretions ^ Histic Epipedon ^ 1(igh Organic Content in Surface layer in Sandy Soils ^ Reducing Conditions ^ Aquic Moisture Regime ^ Sulfidic Odor ^ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils ^ Listing on National Hydric Soils List ^ Listed on Siate or Local Hydric Soils List ^ Gleyed or Low Chroma ^ Color ^ Other (Explain in Remarks} Rema3•]cs: The hydric soil criterion has not been met, WETLAND DETERMINA'1°lON 1•Iydrophytic Vegetation Present'? ~ Yes [~ No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wctiand`? ^ Yes ~ No Wetland Hydrology Present? ^ Yes ~ No Hydric Soil Present'? ^ Yes ^~ No Remarks: Data point is not jurisdictional. Wetland Forms Little Lick Stream Restoration Appendix B Page 8 of 28 I_~.h I"ii FC7R~i €~C)U"I'iNE; ti~rl°['I~A?~I_) I3I:"I'tl2i'~dh?~TIC)N (1987 ~`T? W~ tl:~wic l~r~lin~°:u-inn 11llannall E3I?;JC tJI' ProjectlSitc: The Crossings Date: 2/7/2006 Applicant/Owner: EEP County: Dtn•ham investigator: Environmental Services, Inc. (ESI} State: NC Do normal circumstances exist a~ tl~e site? ~ Yes No Community ID: Forested Is the site signit7cantly disturbed (atypical situation)? ^Yes ~ No Transect ID: BD13/JC9 Is the area a potential problem area (If needed, explain}? Plot ID: Upland ^Yes [~ No VEGETATION DOMINANT STRATUM INDICATOR DOMINANT STRATUM INDICATOR PLANT SPECIES PLANT SPF;CIES 1. red maple tree FAC 7. #N/A #N/A Acer rubvum #N/A 2. loblolly pine tree FAC 8. #N/A #N/A Pinus taeda #N/q 3. blackbeny vine - 9. #N/A #N/A Rubxrs sp. 7N/A 4. giant cane herb FACW I0. #N/A #N/A Arundinaria gigantea #.V/A 5. 3apanese honeysuckle vine FAC- 11. #N/A #N/A Lonicera,japonica #N/A 6. #N!A #N/.A I2. #N/A #N/A #N/.4 #N/,~ Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC {Excluding FAC-): >75% Remarks The hydrophytic vegetation criterion has been met. HYDROLOGY ^ RECORDED DATA (DESCRIBE IN REMARKS): WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS Primary Indicators: ^ Strewn, Lakc, or Tidc Gauge ^ Inundated ^ Aerial Photographs ^ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches ^ Othes• ^ Water Marks ^ Drift Lines NO RECORDED DATA AVAILABLE ^ Sediment Deposits ^ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands FIELD OBSERVATIONS Secondary [ndicators (2 or more required): ^ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth of Surface Water. 0 ^WaterStained Leaves ^ Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Free Water in Pit: >18" ^FAC-Neutral Test ^ Other (Explain in Remarks} Depth to Saturated Soil: >I8" Remarks: The hydrologic criterion has not been met. Wetland Forms Little Lick Stream Restoration Appendix B Page 9 of 28 n J J 0 >~nt~~ _,_._.~,_.~._.~.~~..._~~.-M MAP UM`l' NAME, (Series aid Pir<3sc}. Mapped as Che~vac[a ~~v'ehadl<ee Series ~e_ _ .-.~... _ .~ 1:7IZAIN ~CxL CL,/`.SS: 1o[nc•~ath~rt pa~~rly drained TAXONOMY (SLIBC3ROlJP}: I'luvaquentic Distrochrepts/Ty is 1=luvaquents I'It;LD OBSERVATIONS: Confirn3 Mapped Type'? ^ Yes ^ No PROFILI/ DESCRIPTION Depth (inches) Horizon Matrix Color (Mansell Moist) Mottle Color {Mansell Moist) Mottle Abundance/Contrast 'I'e~ture, Concretions, Structure, etc. 0-1 S lOYR 5l3 clay loam IS-lg lOYR 6/2 10YR t/6 commonldistinct clay loam I~YDRIC SOIL INDICATORS: ^ Histosol ^ Concretions ^ llistic Epipedon ^ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils ^ Reducing Conditions ^ Aquic Moisture Regime ^ Sulfidic Odor ^ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils ^ Listing on National Hydric Soils List ^ Listed on State or Local Hydric Soils List ^ Gleyed or Low Chroma ^ Color ^ Other (l;xplain in Remarks) Remarks: `l"he hydric soil criterion has not been met. n ril~Tl~Il l\ASTI A'1"7 (~T~1 W L'.l LHJV V vc t l=',tttvtttvt~ i wtv Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? ~ Yes ^ No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? ^ Yes^ No Wetland Hydrology Present? ^ Yes ^~ No I-{ydric Soil Present'? ^ Yes ^~ No Remarks: Data point is notjurisdictional. Wetland Forms Little Lick Stream Restoration Appendix B Page 10 of 28 i)i'~'[~"t FO1:Pv1 1~C)UT1NT'. WI~,l'I.r~PJC3 L3L'"I~EI:1vliNit"I~1C?N (1~)R7 Cf-_ ~~letlnnd=; T)~linctition Manuall I~DiJC~ lx,l,,.l_ ProjectlSite: I~he Crossings Date: 2/7/200( ApplicantJO~~mer: EEP County: Durham Investigator: Environmental Services, Inc. (ESI) State: NC Do normal circumstances exist on the site? ~ Yes No Community ID: Forested Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? ^Yes ^ No Transect ID: BD13/.1C~ Is the area a potential problem area {If needed, explain)'? Plot ID: Wetland ^Yes QNo i/F(:FTATTnTJ DOMINANT STRATUM. INDICATOR DOMINANT STRATUM INDICATOR PLANT SPECIES PLANT SPECIES 1, river birch tree FACW 7. #N/A #N/A Betula nigra #N/A 2. soft rush herb FACW+ g. #N/A #N/A Jw~cus effuses #NiA 3. giant cane herb FACW 9. #N/A #N/A Ara~ndirzaria gigantea #N/A 4. Japanese honeysuckle vine PAC- [0. #N/A #N/A Gonicera,japorrica !*N/A 5. red maple tree FAC l 1. #N/A #N/A Acer rube°um kN/A 6. greenbrier vine - 12. #N/A #N/A Smilax ,sp. #N/A Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (Excluding FAC-): >80% Remarks The hydrophytic vegetation criterion has been met. T-TVnnnr nrv ^ RECORDED DATA (DE5CR[BE IN REMARKS): WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS Primary Indicators: ^ Sircarn, Lake, or Title Gauge ^~ Inundated ^ Aerial Photographs ^ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches ^ Other ^ Water Marks ^ Drift Lines ^ NO RECORDED DATA AVAILABLE ^ Sediment Deposits ^ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands FIELD OBSERVATIONS Secondary Indicators {2 or more required): 0 Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches Depth of Surface Water: 0 ^Water-Stained Leaves ^ Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Free Water in Pit: 0 ^RAC-Neutral Test ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 Remarks: The hydrologic criterion has been met. Wetland Forms Little Lick Stream Restoration Appendix B Page 11 of 28 ?1L~ 1 1 1 MCI' T_1rIT MIAMI (Seri ti and Phan); Mapped as Ch~,~~acla VJchadkee Series ~~~~~ I)IZAIN,1<tl: Ci,ASS; somes~.~taat pocx'I}~ drained "f-AXONOMY (S1113CiRO11P). Fluvaquentic ©istrochre ts1T ~ is Flu~~a uents FIELCI OBSERVA"PIONS: Confirm Mappcd'I'ype? ^ Ycs [~ No I'KOFiLE DESCRIPTION Depol (inches) Horizon Matrix Color (Munsell Moist) Mottle Color (is4imsell Moist} Mottle Abundance/Contrast "1"exture, Concretions, Structure, etc. 0_~ ]OYR 5/2 IOYR 5/6 common/distinct clay ~_]g lOYR 6/I ]OYR 5/6 commonldistinct clay HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS: ^ Ilistosot ^ Concretions ^ Histie Epipedon ^ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils ^ Reducing Conditions ^ Aquic Moisture Regime ^ Sultidic Odor ^ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils ^ Listing on National Hydric Soils List ^ Listed on State or Local Hydric Soils List ^~ Glcyed or Low Chroma ^ Color ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: The hydric soil criterion has been met. ' WETLAND DETI;KMINATION 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Hydrophytic Vegetation Present'? ~ Yes [] No ]s this Sampling Point Within a Wetland'? ~ Yes ^ No Wetland I-Iydrology Present'? [Q Yes ^ No I-Iydric Soil Present? ~ Yes ^ No Remarks: Data point is jurisdictional. Appendix B Wetland Forms Little Lick Stream Restoration Page 12 of 28 C)-1C/~, i}CZ~~ RC?U~i~iidI~ ~uf;7'i.=, ]`d;> Ol:l~(:1~`~il~li~1T1C)N rl9R7 !'i~ V'efLin~f~: ] e~~lin~~,;iticrn M~3nn~i11 `E ~'i lt' Project/Site: ~fhe Crossings Date: 2/7/2006 Applicant/Owner: 16P County: Durham [nvestigator: Environmental Services, Inc. (ESI) State: NC Do normal circwnsta~ues exist on the site? ~ Yes No Community ID: Forested Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? ^ Yes ~ No 'I'ransect ID: 13E 4 Is the area a potential problem area (If needed, explain)? Plot 1D: Upland ^Yes ~ No ~~vr~rn-rin~.i DOMINANT STRATUM INDICATOR DOMINANT STRATUM INDICATOR PIsANT SPECIES PLANT SPECIES 1. sugar maple tree FACU- 7. #N/A #N/A Acer saccharum #N/`I 2. Japanese honeysuckle vine FAC- 8. #N/A #N/A Lazicera japonica #N/R 3. blackberry vine - 9. #N/A #N/A Rubus sp. #N/A 4, wax myrtle shrub FAC+ ] 0. #N/A #N/A A9yrica cerrfera #~'~'/R 5. #N/A #N/A 11. #N/A #N/A #N/A #NiA (,. #N/A #N/A 12. #N/A #N/A #EN/A #N/A Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (F,xcluding FAC-): >33% Remarks The hydrophytic vegetation criterion has not been met uvr~nn~ nw ^ RECORDED DATA (DESCRlI3E IN REMARKS): WETLAND 1]YDROLOGY INDICATORS Primary Indicators: ^ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge ^ Inundated ^ Aerial Photographs ^ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches ^ Other ^ Water Marks ^ Drift Lines NO RECORDED DATA AVA[1.,A13LE ^ Sediment Deposits [] Drainage Patterns in Wetlands FIELD O(3SERVATIONS Secondary Indicators (2 or more required): ^ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches Depth of Surface Water: 0 ^Water-Stained Leaves ^ Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Free Water in Pit: >18" ^FAC-Neutral 'l'est ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) Depth to Saturated Soil: >18" Remarks: The hydrolobic criterion has not been met. Wetland Forms Little Lick Stream Restoration Appendix B Page 13 of 28 u 1 J 1 I 1 MAP CIN1`r NAML (Series and hhasc): ~~ ~ Mapped as Chewa~ela ~Vehadkee Series DIZ/rll~slCr1: C€.ASS: 5unle~~a~z~t p«or l~~ ch-aitt~~l -TAXONOMY {SlJI3GRO~JP): ~luvaquentic Distrochrepts/Ty ie Fluvaquertts FIELD 013SERZ'A'l'IE)NS_ Confirm Mapped "T'ype'? ^ Yes 0 No PROFILE DESCRIPTION Depth (inches) T~orizon Matrix Color (Munscll Moist) Mottle Color (Munsell Moist) Mottle Abundance/Contrast 'T'exture, Concretions, St3-ucture, etc. 0-i8 IOYR 4J3 clay loam I-IYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS: ^ I-[istosol ^ Concretions ^ Histic Epipedon ^ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils ^ Reducing Conditions ^ Aguic Moisture Regime ^ Sulfidic Odor ^ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils ^ Listing on National Hydric Soils List ^ Listed on State or Local Hydric Soils List ^ G[cyed or Low Chroma ^ Color ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: The hydrie soil criterion has not: heen rnet. YY t:.l LlliVL Vl.~~ii~i viai~~~aiv~• 1lydrophytic Vegetation Present? ^ Yes ~ No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? ^ Yes ~ No Wetland I-lydrology Present? ^ Yes Q No Hydric Soil Present? ^ Yes ~ No Remarks: Data point is not jurisdictional, Wetland Forms Little Lick Stream Restoration Appendix B Page 14 of 28 17 ~47 /~ F'(?l~ti RC)~1f17~}? Varl-;l~I,ANI> [)f;~I~IRMINA"I 1C)N ~ 19R'7 C'F \U~,il.~n~Ic T3cline;tfinn Mar~u~ill E ; ~: 5'< ~'JF:'I~ Project/site: Che Crossings I)atc: 2/7/?006 ApplicanUChvner: Eh;P Chanty: Durham Investigator: Environmental Services, Inc. (F;SI) State: NC Do nannal circumstances exist on the site'? ~ Yes No Community ID: emergent Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)'? ^Yes ^ No Transcct 1D: BE 4 Is the area a potential problem area {If needed, explain)? Plot Ill: Wetland ^Yes 0 No vrr:r."reTtnn DOMINANT STRATUM INDICATOR DOMINANT S'T'RATUM INDICA"fOR PLANT SPECIES PLANT SPECIES 1. soft rush herb FACW+ 7. #N/A #N/A ,luncus efjusus #N/A 2. woos grass herb OBL 8. #N/A #N/A Scirpus cyperinus #N/~4 3. sweetgum shrub FAC+ 9. #N/A #N/A liquidai~¢bar slyrac~ua #N/A 4. Japanese honeysuckle vine FAC- IQ #N/A #N!A Lonicera japonica #Aj/~ 5. #N/A #N/A 1 i. #N/A #N/A #N/~ #N/A G. #N/A #N/A t?. #N/A #N/A #N/~1 #N/A Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (Excluding FAG}: 75% Remarks The hydrophytic vegetation criterion has been met. uvnrrnt nr:v ^ RECORDED DATA {DESCRIBE IN REMARKS): WETLAND i-IYDROLOGY INDICATORS Primary Indicators: ^ Stream, f.,ake, or't'ide Gauge ^ Inundated ^ Aerial Photographs ~ Saturated in Upper 12 lnches ^ Other ^ Water Marks ^ Drill Lines NO RECORDED DATA AVAII,AI31.E ^ Sediment Deposits ^ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands F[ELD OBSERVATIONS Secondary Indicators (2 or more required): ^ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 lnches Depth of Surface Water: 0 ^ Water-Stained heaves ^ Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Free Water in Pit: 1" ^FAC-Neutral 'Test ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) Depth to Saturated Soil: 0" Remarks: The hydrologic criterion has been met. Wetland Forms Little Lick Stream Restoration Appendix B Page 15 of 28 SC}lt S MAl'~[T'~I1I NA~II (5c~-ic 5 inci PhaSC}~. - ~- Mapped as Chc~i~acla V4 ehadkcc 5~rres ~. ~ DIZA1NhCJ~; C;1,~155: ~ somc~e~hr3t poorly drained 1'A~'t7NOMY (SIJBGRO~iP}: Fluvaquentic Distrochre is/Ty is Fluva uents FIEL}~ C3}3SFitVATIC)NS: ('anttrn~ Mapped"1'vpe? ^ S'es ^ No PROPiLE DESCRII'°l"lON Depth (inches) Horizon Matrix Color {Munsell Moist) Mottle Color (Munscll Moist) Mottle AbundancelContrast Texture, Concretions, Structure, etc. p_g~~ lOYR 5/1 clay loam 1-IYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS: ^ Ilistosol ^ Concretions ^ Histic F.',pipedon ^ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils ^ Reducing Conditions ^ Aquic Moisture Regime ^ Sulfidic Odor ^ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils ^ Listing on National }lydric Soils List ^ Listed on State or Local I-lydric Soils List ~ Gleyed or Low C.hrama ^ Color ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: The hydric soil criterion has been met. 8+ inches was inpenetrable WETLAND DG"fF:RMINATION L~~ 1-Iydrophytic Vegetation Present? 0 Yes ^ No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? ~ Yes ^ No Wetland Hydrology Present'? 0 Yes ^ No Hydric Soil Present? ~ Yes ^ No Remarks: Data point is jw-isdictional. Wetland Forms Little Lick Stream Restoration Appendix B Page 16 of 28 t~f~T;:I~'E)RP<~I IZt}E.I'I'INE OF,~>='IL,1?~D L)F,'I~F:I2MIN.y"1~}f)N (14€7 C'F? ~t7ctianrls t>eiinea#inn M;ii~~uil~ (J1' Pro,jcctlSite: The Crossings Date: ?/7/2006 Applicant/Owner: EEP County: Durharn hivestigator: Environmental Services, Inc. (ESI) State: NC Do normal circumstances exist on tl3e site? ~ Ycs Na Conununiry ID: Forested Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? ^Yes ^~ No Transect ID: BF17/JEIO Is the area a potential problem area (If needed, explain)? Plot ID: Upland ^Yes 0 No VEGETATION DOMINANT STRATUM INDICA"fOR DOMINANT STRATUM INDICATOR PL,AN'I' Si'ECIES PLANT SPECIES 1. soiR rush herb FACW+ 7. #N/A #N/A Juncus effusus #N,'fI 2. iobloily pine tree FAC S. #N/A #N/A Pinus taeda #~~/,q 3. Japanese honeysuckle vine FAC- 9. #N/A #N/A Lnnicera japonica #N/,4 4. winged elm tree FACU+ 10. #N/A #N/A Ulmus atata #~t/,~ 5. #N/A #N/A 11. #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/~t 6. ~INLA #N/A l2. #N!.A i#NIA #N/4 #N/A Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or PAC (Exctuding FAC-): 50'% Remarks The hydrophytic vegetation criterion has been met. HYDROLOGY ^ RECORDED DATA (DESCRIBE IN REMARKS): WE`fLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS Primary Indicators: ^ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge ^ Inundated ^ Aerial Photographs ^ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches ^ Other ^ Water Marks ^ Drift Lines NO RECORDED DA'CA AVAILABLE ^ Sediment Deposits ^ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands FIELD OBSERVATIONS Secondary Indicators (2 or more required): ^ Oxidized Roar Channels in Upper 12 Inches Depth of Surface Water: 0 ^Water-Stained Leaves ^ Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Free Water in Pit: >18" ^FAC-Neutral'I'est ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) Depth to Saturated Soil: > 18" Remarks: The hydrologic criterion has not been met. Wetland Forms Little Lick Stream Restoration Appendix B Page 17 of 28 M.~I' L!NI'I' NA1v1L (~ci-lcs ~sul Ph<+se}: ~ Mapped aS C'hc4Vticla Wehadkee ~t;2'leti DRAIT~At~[. CL~1~S: ~LSln~f-v1~HF po0rly~ drr~IfzCd TAXt)NOMY (S[~E3CsIZOUP): Fluva+auentic Distroclu~e is/Ty is Fluvaquents l~'I1~I,D OI3SLItVA'CIONS: Confsnn Mapped ~'ype? ^ Yes [~] No PROFILE DESCRIP'T'ION Depth (ia~ches) Horizon. Mairix Color (Munsell Moist) Motile Color (Munsell Moist} Motile Abundance/Contrast 'T'exture, Concretions, Structure, etc. p_Ig I OYR 5/4 7.SR 4/b Gammon/distinct sandy clay loam Gley16/10 common/distinct I-IYDRIC SOIL INDICA"TORS: ^ tiistosol ^ Concretions ^ Histic Epipedon ^ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils ^ Reducing Conditions ^ Aquic Moisture Regime ^ Sullidic Odor ^ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils ^ Listing on National Hydric Soils l,,ist ^ Listed on State or Local Hydric Soils List ^ Gleyed or Low Chroma ^ Color ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: The hydric soil criterion has not been met. ' WETLANB DF"fFRMINATION 1-lydrophytic Vegetation Present? ~ Yes ^ No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? ^ Yes ^~ No Wetland Ilydrology Prescnt'? ^ Yes ^~ No Hydric Soi] Present? ^ ~'es ^ No Remarks: Data point is not jurisdictional. Wetland Forms Little Lick Stream Restoration Appendix B Page 18 of 28 17;1 f~i F(_)~zP~ iZi3l.I"CINC? ~t%[;l'f~;'~ND 1)1~TERivlil~r~`[lE?N (1987 ('P W~~Il~inde i)elinc;jt-ion Manuall F3E ?.f1 Gb' F';T Project/Sits: "I'he Crossings Date: 2/7/2006 ApplicanUOwncr: 1;1~~P Cou~riy: Durham Investigator: Environmental Services, Inc. (LS[) Staie: NC Do normal circumstances exist on the site? ~ Yes No Commwiity ID: Forested Is the site signiftca~itly disturbed (atypical situation}? ^Yes [~ No Transect ID: BF17/JE10 Is the area a potential problem area (If needed, explain)? Plot ID: Wetland ^ Yes ~ No vFnFTe~einri DOMINANT STRATUM INDICATOR DOMINAN"1' STRA"fUM INDICATOR PI.,AN"C SPECIES PLANT SPECIES 1. loblolly pine tree FAC 7. #N/A #N/A Pinus taeda #~r/A 2. ironwood tree FAC S. #N!A #N/A Car inns carolaniana #N/A 3. sweetgum tree FAC+ 9. #N/A #N/A Liyuidambar styraciflua #A'/A 4. Japanese honeysuckle vine FAC- 10. #N/A #N/A Gonicera,japonica #N/A 5. #N/A #N/A t 1. #N/A #N/A #N/,4 #N/A G. #N!A #N/.~ 12. #N/A #N/A #N/A #Ar/A Percent of dominant species that are OBL, PAC W, or FAC (Excluding FAC-): 75% Remarks The hydroph~nic vegetation criterion has been met. uvr~nni nnv ^ Rt;CORDED DATA (DESCRII3E IN REMARKS): WET[,AND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS Primary Indicators: ^ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge ^ Inundated ^ Aerial Photographs ~ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches ^ Other ^ Water Marks ^ Drift Lines NO RF,CORDED DATA AVAILABLE ^ Sediment Deposits ^ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands FIELD OBSERVATIONS Secondary Indicators (2 or more required}: ^ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches Depth ot'Surfacc Water; 0 ^ WaterStained Leaves ^ Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Free Water in Pit: 4" ^PAC-Neutral Test ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) Depth to Saturated Soil: 0" Remarks: The hydrologic criterion has been met. Wetland Forms Little Lick Stream Restoration Appendix B Page 19 of 28 1 ~~>II.S 1 iV1AP IJNI'I" N.~1ML (Series aruJ Phase): Mapped as Chcwacla Wehadl<ee Series •• _, DRAINA<iF: C'I~ASS~~~~~ o€newhat poorly drained 'TAXONOMY (SU13<iItOTJI'): Fluva ueniic- Distroclu'epts/7~~ is Fluva cents i~ITLU OBSP,RVATIONS: Confirm Mapped "Type'? ^ Yes ^ No PROFILE DESCRIPTION Depth (inches) Horizon Matrix Color (Mansell Moisi) Mottle Color (Mansell Moist) Mottle AbundancelCon€rast "Texture, Caicretions, Structure, etc. 0-18 1 OYR 6/l sandy clay loam HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS: ^ Flistosol ^ Concretions ^ Histic Epipedon ^ high Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils ^ Reducing Conditions ^ Aquic Moisture Regime ^ Sulfidic Odor ^ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils ^ Listing on National I-lydric Soils List ^ Listed on State or Local llydric Soils List ^~ Gleyed or Low Chrotna ^ Color ^ Other (Explain in Remarks} Remarks: Thr hydric soil criterion has heen met. WETLAND DETERMINA"1"ION i Hydrophytic Vegetation Present'? ~ Yes ^ No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? ~ Yes ^ No Wetland I-Iydrology Present? ~ Yes ^ No Ilydric Soil Present? ^~ Yes ^ No Remarks: Data point is,jurisdietionai. Wetland Forms Little Lick Stream Restoration Appendix B Page 20 of 28 D,1"I'Pa FE)1Z_ivl R(~tITINF; G~~3;'T~LANI~ DF3'1'EltM1NA`I'1C)N i 14R7 ('R V:'~~flanclc ~)rlineatirn~ tvtannall lI) YF WI,.I. ProjcctlSite: ['he Crossings Date: 2/7/2006 Applicant/Owner: f:F.P County: Durham 1nve5tigator; EnV~irOnmi'iltal ~'+el'VICCS, lI3C. (E.SI) Stag: NC 170 ^ol'inal Cll'CUnl5tanCCS eXISt On the Slte:~ J Yes NO COmn]iln3ty ll~; hOrested Is the site significantl}~ disturbed (atypical situation}'? ^Yes ~ No Transect ID: JD2 Is the area a potential problem area (If needed, explain}? Plot 1D: Wetland ^Yes [~] No VAC.~TATTnN DOMINANT S"['RATUM INDICATOR DOMINANT STRA"I'LIM INDICATOR PLANT SPECIES PLANT SPECIE S 1, red maple tree FAC 7. #NIA #N/A Acer rubrum #N/A 2. sweetgum tree FAC-- 8. #N/A #N/A Liquidambar stvracihua ?~N/A 3, river birch tree FACW 9. #N/A #N/A Betuda nigra #N/A 4. Japanese honeysuckle vine FAC- 10. #N/A #N/A Lonicera,japonica #N/,4 5. blackberry vine - 11. #N/A #N/A ]zubus sp. #N/A ~, #N/A #N/A 12. #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (Excluding FAC-): >75% Remarks #N/A uvnRnT nr;v ^ RECORDED DATA {DESCRIBE IN REMARKS): WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS Primacy Indicators: ^ Scream, Lake, or 'T'ide Gaut;e ^ Inundated ^ Aerial Photographs ^~ Saturated in Upper i2 inches ^ Other ^ Water Marks ^ Drift Lines NO RECORDED DATA AVAILABLE ^ Sediment Deposits ^ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands FIELD OBSERVATIONS Secondary Indicators {2 or more required}: ^ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches Depth of Sur#ace Water: 0 ^Water-Stained Leaves ^ [..ocal Soil Survey Data Depth to Free Water in PiC: 1" ^PAC-Neutral Test ^ Other {Explain in Remarks) Depth to Saturated Soil: 0" Remarks: The hydrologic criterion has been met. Wetland Forms Little Lick Stream Restoration Appendix B Page 21 of 28 `sC?ll 5 D ~,._.~ MAl'~~Ct~'l'h NAMF. {Series and Ph•1se}: _ Ivtapped i}s Chewacla Wchadkee Scrics - ~ E3RATNACs~; CLAMS: s~trtewh~lt poorl}' ~~tain~ci ~~~~~-- TAXONOMY (StJBGROC)P); I; 1tlV3Cl11el1t1C DIStI'OC11rE tS~Ty lC rlllVagtlents FII:Li] OBSERVATE(}NS. Confit~n Mapped Type ^ YcS ^ NO PROI`'ILE DESCR(P`I'TON Depth (inches) I-lorizon Matrix Color (Mansell Moist) Mottle Color (Mansell Moist) Mottle Abundance/Contrast Texture, Concretions, Structure, etc. p_g I OYR 5/2 l OYR 5/4 common/distinct clay loam g_Ig IOYR 511 clay loam HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS: ^ Histosol ^ Concretions ^ I-listic Epipedon ^ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils ^ Reducing Conditions ^ Aquic Moisture Regime ^ Sulfidic Odor ^ Organic Streaking in Sandy Sails ^ Listing on National Hydric Soils List ^ Listed nn State or Local Hydric Soils List Q Gleyed or Low Chroma ^ Color ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: 'Che hydric Soil criterion has b~cn stet: ' WETLAND DETERMINA`I~ION r-~ i 1 Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? ~ Yes ^ No is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? ~ Yes ^ No Wetland Hydrology Present? ^~ Yes ^ No I-Iydric Soil Present'? 0 Yes ^ No Remarks: Data point is jurisdictional. Wetland Forms Little Lick Stream Restoration Appendix B Page 22 of 28 lirA~i~~1 FC~1:.~t ROU'I'fNi~ VVf;[ LP:i~.)13 [)I;fl:_E:Mlir!A'1-1~)N I14t7 C`t~ ~nlrtlnrxl~ 1)~~lincatlinn Manu~if) I[~ Yt UP I'rojectlSitc: The Crossings Datd: 2/7/'?U06 ApplicanUOwner; EE.P Counh~: Durham Investigator: Environmental Services, Inc. (ESI) Siate: NC Do normal circumstances exist on the. site? ~ Yes ~ No Community ID: Forested Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? ^Ycs^ No 'I'ransect ID: .ID2 Is the area a potential problem area (If needed, explain)'? Plot ID: Upland ^ Ycs ~ No DOMINANT STRATUM INDICATOR DOMINANT S"1'RATUM INDICATOR PLANT 5PF,C[ES PLANT SPECIES 1. blackberry vine - 7. #N/A #N/A Rubus sp. #N/A 2. Japanese honeysuckle vine PAC- 8. #N/A #N/A L onicera, japonica #N/A 3. sweetgum tree FAC+ 9. #N/A #N/A Liguidambar styraciJlua #N//I 4, loblolly pine tree FAC 10. #N/A #N/A f'inus iaeda #~~/~ 5. American beech tree PACU 1 I. #N/A #N/A Fagus grandifolia #N/,9 G. #N/A #N/A I2. #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FAC W, or PAC (Excluding FAC-): >50% Remarks "I'he hydrophytic vegetation criterion has been met. i.rvnarn nnv ^ RECORDED DATA (DESCRIBE IN REMARKS}: WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS Primary Indicators: ^ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge ^ Inundated ^ Aerial Photographs ^ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches ^ Other ^ Water Marks ^ Drift Lines 0 NO RECORDED DATA AVAILABLE ^ Sediment Deposits ^ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands FIELD OBSERVATIONS Secondary Indicators (2 or more required): ^ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches Depth of Surface Water: 0 ^Water-Stained Leaves ^ Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Free Water in Pit: >18" ^FAC-Neutral Test ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) Depth to Saturated Soil: >l8" Remarks: The hydrologic criterion has not been met. Wetland Forms Little Lick Stream Restoration Appendix B Page 23 of 28 S(}11.4 'MAP t)1vI'1~ NAMl3 (Series aid Phase): Mapped as Che«~acla Wehadkee Se:~7es 131~lkINAt#L CLASS; ___.._ s<?n~tie~~~h~at poorly drained TAXONOMY (SClI'3C;ROiJP): Fluva uentic Distrochre is/'I' ie FIuva uettts FIELD OBSF,RVA1'1C.)NS: C:'ontirm Mapped Type'? ^ Yes [~ No PROFILE DLSCRIPTION Depth (inches) Horizon Matrix Color (]Vlunsell Moist) Mottle Color (Mansell Moist) Mottle Abundance/Contrast 't'exture, Concretions, Structure, etc. 0-8 IOYR 5/4 sandy loam 8-12 lOYR 4/4 lOYR 4/6 common/faint sandy clay loam 12-1$ lOYR 4/2 clay loam HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS: ^ Histosol ^ Concretions ^ Histic Epipedon ^ High Organic Conicnt in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils ^ Reducing Conditions ^ Aquic Moisture Regime ^ Sullidic Odor ^ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils ^ Listing on National Hydric Soils List ^ Listed on State or Local Hydric Soils List ^ Gleyed or Low Chrome ^ Color ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) IRcmarks: The hydric soil criterion has not been met. WETLAND DE"TERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present'? ~ Yes 0 No is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? ^ Yes ^J No Wetland Hydrology Present? ^ Yes ^~ No hydric Soil Present? ^ Yes Q No Remarks: Data point is notjurisdictional. Wetland Forms Little Lick Stream Restoration Appendix B Page 24 of 28 DA[~i~ IY)P1~~1~ YI IZC}IJ'1'Ii~[~. l~e1ls'['LANIII)ETEI:MINA"i'IC)iv ~R1I~'T' (ly$7 C'f: Wetlands Delineation Manual) Pro-jectlSite: The Crossings Date: 2/7/200G ~~~ Applicant/Owner: EEI' Couniy: Durham Investigator: Environmental Services, Inc. (ESI) State: NC Do normal circumstances exist nn the site? ~ Yes No Community ID: Forested is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation}? ^Yes 0 No Transect 1D: YIS Is the area a potential problem area {If needed; explain)? Plot 1D: Wetland ^Yes 0 No VEGETATION DOMINANT1" STRA"I'UM INDICATOR DOMINANT STRATUM INDICATOR PLANT SPECIES PLANT SPECIES 1. red maple tree FAC 7. #N/A #N/A Acer~ rubrum #N/~1 2. black willow tree 013E S. #N/A #N/A Salix nigf-a #N/A 3. greenbrier vine - 9. #N/A #N/A Smilax sp. #N/A 4. #N/A #N/A ] 0. #N/A #N/A #N/~t #N/A 5. #N/A #N/A 11. #N/A #N/A 6. #N/A #N; A I2. #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A Percent of dominant species that are OBE, FACW, ot• FAC (Excluding FAC-}: <100% Remarks The hydrophytic vegetation criterion has been met. FTYI7RCN.f1C:V ^ RECORDED DATA {DESCRIBE IN REMARKS): WE"1'LAND HYDROLOGY INDICA'T'ORS Primary Indicators: ^ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge ~ Inundated ^ Aerial Photographs ~ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches ^ Other ^ Water Marks ^ Dritt Lines NO RECORDED DATA AVAILABLE ^ Sediment Deposits ^ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands FIELD OBSERVATIONS Secondary Indicators {2 or more required}: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches Depth of Surface Water: 4" ^ WaterStained Leaves ^ Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Free Water in Pit: 0" ^FAC-Neutral Test ^ Other {Explain in Remarks} Depth to Saturated Soil: 0" Remarks: The hydrologic criterion has been met. Wetland Forms Little Lick Stream Restoration Appendix B Page 25 of 28 ~;C)II ~i Mi1P UNI"T, TJAMi? (Series and Phase): ~ Mapped as Che~~~acla Wehadl<ee Series ~ DRAINAGI~ CLASS: ~~~"~somew}~at poorly drau~ed~ --_~ TAXONOMY (SLIBGROIJI'}: Plnva uentie- Distrachre is/T ~ is Piuvacluents F'ILLD OBST;RVATIQNS: Cone€rtn Mapped "T'ype'? ^ Yes ^ No PROFI.L.E DESCRIPTION Depth (inches) I-Iorizon Matrix Color {Munsell Moist) Motile Color (Munsell Moist) Mottle Abundance/Contrast 'T'exture, Concretions, Structure, etc. 0-4" lOYR 4/! lOYR 5/8 common/faint sandy clay loam 4_g" lOYR S/1 sand g_lg~~ lOYR 4/1 lOYR S/8 common/faint sandy clay loam HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS: ^ Histosoi ^ Concretions ^ Histic Epipedon ^ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils ^ Reducing Conditions ^ Aquic Moisture Regime ^ SulfdicOdor ^ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils ^ Listing on National Hydric Soils List ^ Listed on State or Local Hydric Soils List ~ Gleyed or Low Chroma ^ Color ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: The hydric soil criterion has been met. ' WI~"I"1 AND DETERMINATION 1 1 Hydrophytic Vegetation Present`? Q Yes ^ No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? ~ Yes ^ No Wetland Hydrology Present? ~ Yes ^ No I-Iydric Soil Present'? ~ Yes ^ No Remarks: Data point is-jurisdictional. Wetland Forms Little Lick Stream Restoration Appendix B Page 26 of 28 L)A'1 ~~~. FOR_~ Yi RC)1J'I~INI'. ~VL'I~E:ItND I)F['F1ZIWtIN,1T1CtN ~JP (1987 C'I ~,%ctlands Delineation lvtanuai) ProjectlSite: "fhe Crossh7gs Dale: 217/2006 ApplicanUOwner: I~I~P County; Durham Investigator: Enviromnental Services, Inc. (ESl) State: NC Do normal circumstances exist on the site? ~ Ycs No Community 1D: Forested Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? ^Yes ~ No Transect ID: YIS Ts the area a potential problem area (lf needed, explain)? Plot ID: Upland ^Yes Q No VEGETATION DOMINANT STRATUM INDICA'T'OR DOMINANT STRATUM INDICATOR PLANT SPECIES PLAN1" SPECIES 1. dogfennel herb FACU 7. #N/A #N/A Eupaloriunz captllifoliurzt #N/fI 2. blackberry vine - 8. #N/A #N/A Rubus sp. l;N/~ 3. red maple shrub FAC 9. #N/A #N/A Acer rubrunt #N/A 4. #N/A #N/A 10. #N/A #N/A #N/.9 #N/.~ 5. #N/A #N/A i l . #N/A #N/A #N/.9 #Ar/A 6. #N/.~ #N!A 12. #N/A #NIA #N/~I i#N/A Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (F,xcluding FAC-): >50% Remarks The hydroph~~tic vegetation criterion has been met. I IYDROLOGY ^ RECORDED DATA (DESCRIBE 1N REMARKS): WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDiCA"/`ORS Primary Indicators: ^ Stream, Lake, or 'fide Gauge ^ Inundated ^ Aerial Photographs ^ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches ^ Other ^ Water Marks ^ Drifi Lines NO RF.',CORDED DATA AVAIL,A[3LF. ^ Sediment Deposits ^ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands FIEi.,I) OBSERVATIONS Secondary Indicators (2 or more required): ^ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper I2 Inches Depth of Surface Water: 0 ^ WaterStained Leaves ^ Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Free Water in Pit: > 18" ^ PAC-Neutra] 'l'est ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) Depth to Saturated Soil: >18" i Remarks: The hydrologic criterion has not been met. Wetland Forms Little Lick Stream Restoration Appendix B Page 27 of 28 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 MAP UNIT N/eME (Series ~irtd Phase): Mapped as C:hz~~~acla W~hadkee Ser's~s L}I2A1NAC3t: CLASS: sonie~~P~at poorly drained TAXONOMY (SUBGROUP}: P'luvaquentic Distrocltrepts/T is Fluva uents FIELD OBSE~I:~ATIONS: Confirm Mapped Type? ^ Yes^ No 1'ROPILf; DESCRIPTION Depth (inches) ltorizon Matrix Color (Munsell Moist) Mottle Color (Munseil Moist) Mottle Abundance/Contrast `texture, Concretions, Structure, etc. 0_lp++ 2.SY 6/4 lOYR 5/8 common/disticnt sand ]0-18'+ 2.SY 5/3 sandy clay HYDRIC SOIL 1NDICA"FORS: ^ Histosol ^ Concretions ^ Histic Epipedon ^ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils ^ Reducing Conditions ^ Aquic Moisture Regime ^ Sultidic Odor ^ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils ^ Listing on National Hydric Soils List ^ Listed on State or Local Hydric Soils List ^ Gleyed or Law Chroma ^ Color ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: The hydric soil criterion has not been met.. W c, l L.tuvu uL:, i i.niv~ii vex s ivi. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? C1 Yes ^ No 1s this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? ^ Yes ~ No Weiland Hydrology Present? ^ Yes ~ No Hydric Soil Present? ^ Yes ~ No Remarks: Data point is not.}urisdictional. Wetland Forms Little Lick Stream Restoration Appendix B Page 28 of 28 Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN APPENDIX C ' RESTORATION SITE NCDWQ STREAM CLASSIFICATION FORM 1. Stream Form Location Map 2. Stream Form 0 0 ' a KO c& ASSOCIATES, P. C. Conszrlfing En~~ineers l '#i'•E, i I:'1, ; t~Ci~ ~'L,'~(i_ ~,?11~_iIl d'{i~j+.:i' €)l;i~t~_iYl', ~ OUllty, NOI•L~l <<1C0~1t1~1 IZ E:STORATION PLAN f a KO ~ ASSOCIATES, P. C. C•unsullini En•Limu•a APPENDIX C Project l0 No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RES~I"ORATION PLAN Noflh [::arWtna UNiEron Or Water UUB~ty - 5lteem IdE+nllflwtlon Form, sale ?"ITt2Dt~ f'r+ged f he Cro3sings Evaluator: ["SI Srte: Lithe txk Cret4c Total poirrta: StnxaeerrerJe~ur+rrfn•mrrlrnrr ~ County: Durham ..r ,. ~rrsuxr 3 t I atitvde~ 3~• `151 ° N t~ns,~ud~ -~g,gt3~° W Other A. t3eom subtotal = t 7 :~ ~~ ~ " k 1•. Continuous bad and bank 0 0 O 1 0 2 a 3 2, gqt~~ 0 0 ~/ 0 2 O 3 3. In•Channel SEruclure; tittle se uence 0 0 O 1 () 2 O 3 4. Soil texture or stream substrate sortin 0 0 O 1 a 2 0 3 5. Adivelrolic flood lain 0 0 O 1 Q 2 0 3 6. Itional bars or benches 0 0 01 0 2 O 3 7. Braided dtanrtet 0 0 O 1 O 2 0 3 B. Recent aNwial its O O 01 0 2 0 3 8'. Natural levees 0 0 01 0 2 0 3 10. Fteadwts O o 01 0 2 0 3 11. Grade controls O O O 0.5 01 0 1.5 12. Natural vat and drama O O O 0 5 O 1 d 1.5 13. Second a greeter order channel on ~q USGS or NR or other documented evidence. O No = 0 O Yes n 3 sv+msa~ vfr~ w~ na rswq sw an.wuti n n~.a~ B H1fAfAIAQV 411t]IOt~ = 9 14. Groundwater fkswtdiscfiar O O 01 0 2 0 3 an ?4 s srnce ran, ~ a r m - d or season O 0 O t O 2 0 3 ,o ~~fl~~ 4 t~ O 1 0 0 5 O o t7. Sediment on lasts U O O 0.5 O 1 O 1 5 t8. is debris lines or "les (wrack lines} O 0 ~ 0.5 O 1 O 1.5 19. H ~ aces redbxo features resent? O No m 0 Q Yes = 1.5 C. Bloloar subtotal = 9 20•. Flbroua roots m channel 0 3 0 2 O 1 O t) 21•. Rooted lasts in channel O 3 O 2 O 1 O 0 22. C h OO 00.5 01 01.5 23. Bivalves U O O 1 O 2 O 3 24. Frsh 0 0 0 0.5 O 1 O 1.5 25. A ibians 0 0 0 0.5 O 1 O 1.5 28. Macrobenthos note divers' and abundanoo) O 0 O 0.5 ~ 1 O 1.5 27. FNamentous al ae: on O O O 0.5 O 1 O 1.5 28. Iron oxidizln becterialtun us O 0 O 0.5 O 1 0 1, 5 29'. Wetland plants in atroambed O FAC O FACW O 06L Q SAV Q Other 0.5 0.75 1.5 2.0 0 "t OTR N 11 fOPIl T Tt f•!•iY'P R 9Q•fU;MY• Itfl TJ IWiNf 1!1 RV p'~NaK~ Ci l~Ji~L ~:(NgIH"O pOUT~ a KO & ASSOCIATES P C . , . C l ' arsa Jin~; InJ;itreers APPENDIX C , Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN APPENDIX D ' RESTORATION SITE CONCURRENCE LETTERS 1. US Fish and Wildlife Letter 2. NCSHPO Letter KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. a Cunsullin ~ En •ineers ~ ~ 1 F15[~1 ANI7 Wr1LDLfFE SCRVICE Raleigh Field Office Posf Office Box 33726 Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726 September 19, 2006 Jeff Harbour Environmental Services, Inc. 524 S. New Hope Road Raleigh, NC 27b10 Dear Mr. Harbour: Thank you for your August 17, 2006 letter regarding the proposed Ecosystem Enhancement Program project at The Crossings Golf Course adjacent to and north of NC 98 in Durham, Durham County, North Carolina. This letter provides the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (Service} response pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) (Act). Based on the information provided, the Service concurs with your determination of may affect, but not likely to adversely affect the federally threatened bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus). We believe that the requirements of section 7(a}(2) of the Act have been satisfied. We remind you that obligations under section 7 consultation must be reconsidered i£ (1) new information reveals impacts of this identified action that may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner not previously considered; {2) this action is subsequently modified in a manner that was not considered in this review; or, (3) a new species is listed or critical habitat determined that maybe affected by the identif ed action. Thank you for the opportunity to review this project. If you have any questions or comments regarding our respon;e; ~lPa.se coi?ta~,t T\/lr Tl. alP W. Ci,ifiPr of this off ce at {919} 856^ ~'?0, Ext. 18 or Dale_Suiter@fws.gov. Sincerel , /t~'"~' r~ P e Benjamin ' Field Supervisor cc: Kristie Corson, Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699 ' APPENDIX D 4P~ SEAT ~,- ~Mnii ~1% sue' Wert `~~~ North Carolina Department of Cukturak Resources State Historic Preservation Of£ce Pctcr B. Sandbccl:, r\dmini,trator \'Iichacl F. I~asley, Grnetnor Lisbeth C. Iicans, Sccrctarn ~cffrcy ~. Cro~l~, Deputy Scerctarf~ ~une 7, 2006 Scott Seibel Environmental Se>_-vices, Inc. 524 Soutll New Hope Road Raleigh, NC 27610 Office of ;lrclu~~cs at~d hlist'ory I~it•ision of [listorical Rc,owccs Davad Brook, Director 0 Re: The Crossings Golf Course Property Stream Restoration Feasibility Study, Durham County, ER 06-71.3 Dear 1\1r. Seibel: Thank you for your letter of March 3, 2006, concerning the above project. We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources that would be affected by the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed. Tlne above colrllnents are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the Advisory Council on Historic Prese>_vation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR Part 800. Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above colnlnent, please contact Renee Gledhill-Farley, environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the above-referenced t~:acking number. Sincerely, ~ ~,~ b~ l~ Peter Sandbeck Location Maeling Address ADMINISTRATION SQ7 N. Blount Street, Raleigh NC 4617 b1ai1 Sen ice Ccntcr, Raleigh NC 27G'1°14017 RESTORATION 515 N. Blount Street, Raleigh NC 4617 Mal Sen ice Ccntcr, Raleigh NC 27G')}4617 SURV$Y & PLANNING 515 N_ Blount Street, IZ<ileigh, NC 4117 Maii ticn-ice Ccntcr, Raleigh NC 276994(,17 APPENDIX D Te lephone JFax (919}7.33-47(,3/733-RG59 (919)731654 i/ 7 3 54801 (')19)73 ~-6545/ 7 1 54801 Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN IX E APPEND 1 REFERENCE SITE PHOTOGRAPHS 1 e KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. C`onsulling Engincu•s ~ ~ Project lD No. 050650501 ,i~' 1 ;, i ~ ~ _~ ~;.,,,!~,~ ~~~~;;; a'r ~;:~, I ~~_~, ;~;, {_~ounty, NorCh Carolina €' 1:STOIZATION PLAN UT Ledge Creek -Looking Upstream Triassic Basin Ecoregion within the Neuse River Basin UT Ledge Creek -Looking Upstream Triassic Basin Ecoregion within the Neuse River Basin f a KO & ASSOC'lATES, P. C'. Consullin~ Gniin~rre APPENDIX E Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Ih~rharn County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN 1 APPENDIX F 1 REFERENCE SITE NCDWQ STREAM CLASSIFICATION FORMS 1 r~ J I'~ ~~' 1 a KO 8c ASSOCIATES, P. C. Consulling Engineers 1 North Carolina Division of Water Quality -Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1 Date: ~~ 1~7 ~iF~z Project: ~ " ~~, ~'~~<,,; ~.,f C~°` K Latitude: j~,~ ~~~ .~~-"~~. ~ i'{ Evaluator: 1~'~~ Site: ~~ ,~~ ~_~~(,~~ '~r,-~ Longitude: -~~'~~ ~,~, 1 /~ ~3~~" Total Points: tom'{,e a:!,':e .~+~~ Other /' ' Stream is at least intermittent (~"~! ~' County: V~G~(G e.g. Quad Name: ( (~'C'J/1`i~i~~- i/ 2 19 or erennial if =' 30 r /~ j Qu r'W ~ A. Geomor holo Subtotal = ~~~ ~) Absent Weak Moderate Strong 1a. Continuous bed and bank 0 1 2 3 2. Sinuosity 0 1 2 3 3. In-channel structure: riffle-pool sequence 0 1 2 3 4. Soil texture or stream substrate sorting 0 1 2 3 5. Active/relic floodplain 0 1 2 3 6. Depositional bars or benches 0 1 2 7. Braided channel 0 1 2 3 8. Recent alluvial deposits 0 1 2 9 8 Natural levees 0 1 3 10. Headcuts 0 1 2 3 11. Grade controls 0 0.5 1 1.5 12. Natural valley or drainageway 0 0.5 1 1. 13. Second or greater order channel on existin USGS or NRCS map or other documented evidence. No = 0 Yes = 3 ° Man-made ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual R Nvrlrnlnnv tG~ ~htntal c i~ ~ .~ 1 14. Groundwater flow/discharge 0 1 2 15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or Water in channel - d or rowin season 0 1 2 3~ 16. Leaflitter 1.5 1 0.5 0 17. Sediment on plants or debris 0 0.5 1.5 18. Organic debris fines or piles (Wrack lines) 0 0.5 1 1.5 19. Hydric soils (redoximorphic features) present? No = 0 es = 1.5 C_ f3ioloav (Subtotal = ~-~-, ~ 1 20 . Fibrous roots in channel 2 1 0 21 . Rooted plants in channel 3 2 1 0 22. Crayfish 0.5 1 1.5 23. Bivalves 1 2 3 24. Fish 0 0.5 1 1. 25. Amphibians 0 0.5 1.5 26. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 0 0.5 1 1.5 27. Filamentous algae; periphyton 0 1 2 3 28. Iron oxidizing bacteria/fungus. 0 0.5 1.5 29 . Wetland plants in streambed FAC = 0.5; FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 SAV = 2.0; Other = 0 "Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants, Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants. Sketch: Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes.) APPENDIX F 1 APPENDIX G HEC-RAS ANALYSIS a KO 8c ASSOCIATES, P.C. Consulting Engineers Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN ~~ oa N ti ~ N M i W J m H Q U W N t~ O) J 1 1 1 1 m Q N 0 N M ' N O 0 c 0 N M M N O ~ 7 O O r 0 0 ~ V r N N l n O M V M O N 0 0 _ N~~ 0 N c 0 0 M r ~ ~ N p N M j A p r V ~ ~ N~ 0 r~ p 0 (0 ~j ~ O D p c.Nj c p O p W~- > LL N t n t n O N d O O O ~ N O V O O O p 0 ~- 0 M ~ O p 0 ~ 0 ~O N O p ~- M q~ p 00 m 0 ~ V ~ O~~ ~ V~ O V 7 N ~~ O ~~ U. X O p ' ' 1 Z W W w ~° N J LL a W MNM 0 0 0 0 0 0 MMN7 ~f1 0 0 0 0 0 0 N V 7NN r 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~N~OtD N 0 0 0 0 0 0 00NMOO ~ ~ O ~ 0 0 NO(O M.-O M M N M N N OMNNN ~ V M N M N N (ONON ~f1 V N N N N ~ O O N ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n- .... U ~ M ~ ~ ~ O N ~ V ~ o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ Z U O ~ H O Q W Q M r O W N ~ N M r O~ N 7 0 7 0~ N o~ m Obi 7 0 W r o ~ N MOON ~ Nr o cO O H O cr0 ~ ~ o N N M O O m o~ ~ O r ~~ c0 O UQ O ~ LL o ~v oicnraicoo N O ~coro ~ovuirico N ENO cocfl ~N N r 0 N ~ Ooioi,~oo N N N N ~ _ ~ro~cri r O (O ~~ O oirioc~cyico r N V O O rNrN _ or~Nricri ~ D M O O O~OrNrN vc~ic•iooio M r s N O ~ (O r 0 O ~~{{OMNOO N O O ~0 00 0 0 0~ V IO Ln N(0 ~ CDN M ~O ~ ~~ ~ MM c0 0 ~~ ~ O~O ~ ~~ .- ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ W~ fn ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ d O J W W lncDN OMN M N r 0 0 (0 O W ~N N~0 N M V O t D N rNMMNM ~ N N M N V Nr~OM O O~ v N r M N r c} O V O O~ v M r M NOONN N N (0 (D N O~ 0 Ncnr (O~ N O~ V O O V N~ONCnr r M M N 0 a Q ~> OO~NMM N 0 0 0 0 0 NOOO~N N N 0 0 0 0 rN000~ N N N 0 0 0 rN000 ~ N N N O rn 0 Nr 00000 N N N N N O u~NrNN ~ N N N N N V cn corrN N N N N N N N ~~0 (o r N N N N N N Z N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N U d ~ QQ M(O ~11N p (O V N O V -pNM ON ON(O N ~ O rNpMM r 00 ~ r cOOM~M M COOMOr(O V 07 pNCO x0000 W ~NNp~1 V M~NO~N OO ~~ ~~OON 0?NO W (~ U > LL Nr ONN O O O p 0 0 . O O O p 0 0 O O O p 0 0 O O O p 0 0 O~~ p M ~ ~ N ~ p ~ ~ ~ M ~ O ~ ~ N~ O r o Z n ~ O ' W ~ W ~ ~ Z W O LL C ~ W N Q O N 0 0 0 0 0 N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N M N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q M M M N 0 0 0 0 0 0 V M M M M 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ (O (O r r r O O O O O O Q F W ~ C O r a 0 r (O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 OJ O ~ 0 0 0 0 ~ N (n ? Q 0 0 p 0 0 0 0 p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LL .... > UZ (7 v m J ~ M ~ ~ ~ W O J ~ O (r0 V ~ m o 0 0 ~ o ~ a o ~ 0 0 O Q Z_ D ~ m ~ ~ ~ w ~ w ~ m z O D ~} N O ~ O a r N N ~ N N O 0 M M r O ~ ~O ~ D O M z ~ O N O N M O M ~ N N N V O M N ~j N V 0 N (o m N~ O N 0 N M ~ ~ O 0 R 0 F ¢ Vj r 0 (0 7 M ~ 0 ~ M~ O 0 O O M x 0 0 M ~- Q ~ d M ~ OY~NONN N O ~j ~j7 r N O rN ~MN M r 0 N Z ~NO~j r' O r o N ~j~N~M M N r O N ~jNO v r v O r rN LL N N ONO M 1 [) V O cor ~ rN V ODM N r~ N~ (0 N ~O (0 r N O ~ ~~~~00 ~~~~j00 ~ V In ~f1~N(o ~ ~ ~ M~O~(O N ~ ~ ~ ~O~ ~MM ~ r ~ ~N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ r r Q V U Z J NN W Q N rMN MM MNr SON ~ V NNO Nc070r M OcO r'-vO NCO V ~~? ~MOOON ~ C07 N r M NrNNMO ~ (O lO~NM 00(OOMN cO OODNNr NNUON MO d' Nr V ~ N V rNrN N 0~~10~ (0 M M(Or r ~ j Q 00 N MM N O O O O O OJ000 N N N O O O O x00000 N N N O O O r aD000 N N N O O O (Or~000 N N N N N O V ~~O raD aO N N N N N N ~(O raD 00 ~ N N N N N V N N N N N N N N N N N > U N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N W Z 01 ~ l~ r N O ~ ~ V ~p O O O O ~ O O O W L H ~ ~ O W lL J LL Q rN r TMOO~ rco Oc0 (000(0 _ ~~OM N N V 0 V N O rN0 ON 00(DON Ln O cox N ONNOOM O O _ 1n InN N (OMr 00 V O Nr0 N NNOOr ~ O X000 V ~ ~(0 ~f)0N O W W Q W ~ LL M N N O OCONONM N O r v V O ~.j ~j V r }} N ONCV ~MN M r 0 N 110NO~jN O r o N cj0 ~jNM O r ~ rNO~jON ~ O~ fl O rN MrO~ON V OJ ~ O cor ~ rN M ~ODM O a 0 M 0 0~ r N N ICJ ~n CO r F ~ O W OOln00 ~ OOONOO r 7 to l0 ~(DN ~ ~ ~ M~~~cO c0 ~ ~ r ~ ~MM ~ r r ~N r ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ r N ~ ~ r U ~ d J W W N W ~ V N ~ MNr~0c0 NN~00 V NN V O rM ONO~(ON (D 00 (0 V O ~ NNONN N r' (O~MN M O u7 ~0 (ON ~rcn lON V ~!'I SON NO~O NOO(0MN M V NOOU7 InON~ONr Mr rug CO .-c0 c0~N r Q 0 Q j ~ OO~NMM N00000 OOOOr-~ N NN0000 ra0000~ NNN000 r N000 ~ NODN000 (O x0]000 NNNNNO V ~0 (O raD 00 OO OD OON W W ~~~~00 N N O~O~O ~ N N N N N N Q U N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Z rrNNaOr ' N rrNN°0r N~ 0 N rrNaoaOr N~ 0 N rrNwCOr N~ 0 N rrNNaOr N l n N rrNNaOr N N N rr~NNr N~ 0 0 rrNN°D~ N~ 0 0 O N l ( ) N O~ n u] 0 ~ McOr r~ N O~ 0 l n 0 ~ MNr r~ N O~ u] 0 ~ M(orr~ N 0~ 0 1 n 0 ~ MNr r ~ N O S u') 0~ Mc0 r r° N O l O l n 0 ~ MNrr~ N O u D ~ 0 ~ McOrr~ N O~ O l n MN r r° O 000000 cn~nv>u~cn~ rrrrrr rrrrr r NNNNNN NNNNNN NNNNNm nrrrrr U 00000}}0 ~ oioioioioioi m m~ m rn a ~~~~~ vv~~rnrn N N N N ~i~~i~~i~i cMOCMOCMOCMOCMOm coo cooc°oc°oc°oc0o rnrnrnrnrnrn W 10 rn0000rn i NNNNNN M NNNNNN N N NNNNNN rrrrrr cooNNCO CO Nco coNNN in ~n cn cn in 'n (/I N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N T 3 ~ T ~ ~ T 3 ~ T ~ ? T ~ j T ~ j T ~ j N ~ ~ ~ ~ L T T ~' w ~ ~ ~ TT T~ w a > T ~'~w ~ T T ~' ~. _ y TT Tpw ~ J. >. T~ w TT TQw ~ T T ~' pw O 0 0 0 0 T p 0 0 0 0 T . 0 0 0 0 T . ~ 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 O TO p 0 0 0 0 O a0 0 0 0 0 O TO 0 0 0 0 O TO O O N r, j ' N O O r l0 ~ >+ ~ ~ O O ~ ~ ~ j, ~ 1f0 . ~ NO r j, 0' to r. ~ r j, 0' lC1 ~ ~ r j, 0' l0 ~ ~ r T p i(J ~ ~ `- T O In ~ 0 O ~ p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 ~ O ~ O O ~ O ~ O ~ O O ~ O O APPENDIX G V 0 01 a w m F Q U U U W 2 a~i Y N _1 CI W ^ ~ ON W O V N r~00~ M rp O ~ O ~ V OEM Or(O V NN N(O MN tC] l!) CO~7p.--M MO)N OmN U x O g N~ o N M ~ N~ o N M N v~ M V N r v N o ~ N Z W F- W ~ W y LL J W ~ O (O N O ~ O O r N ~ N N N N 7 M ~ Q J r (O V 7 Q Q ~ N N ~ N ~ r- N N .- N ~ ~- N N ~ N '- ~ N ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a v ~ m m v in M ~ o co W co ~ ~ o 0 0 0 0 0 Z v O ~ ~ ~ Z J ^_ M O N M r O O) N (P ~ V N O ~ N m O O Nr M r O) N cn r ~ m V N m O M NMN~ON O W > > M~ V Q V m m V ln~m~ 0 NO)m~ NO ~ ( ~ ~ ~ O l[') NO () Q d cnr ~NM MOJ ~{ N N r~mN ~1nN V (O O V ~m0 NORM NN r (Or~N NNCO N ~ ~CJ ~N NN (O N 7 E ~N(D N 0~ O ~ r r~ M 0) M r r~ m m ~ M (O ~ N m ~ N N~ V V ~ N N~~~ ~ N N~ 7 7 W ~ ~~ '- ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ r d O J W W O V OMO cOOrN(TN OJN O)N N NNN NIt~N N N NMNm N N ~N -N r r r 000(0 N ~~ N r ~ ^ ~ Mm0 ~O (DN NOm V ~~ ANN V ~O NNN (P W . ~ a ~ Q NM ~~O (Or NNNNNN NM InNr NNNNN NM ~n cor NNNNN M ~(OO o~N~NNN (~ ~M ~(DN NN~NNN M NNN eoN~NNN U Z N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N ^ N N N N N N N N N N N N [D W U >O > 00(P MN O M ~ ~ ~~ ONN NO r M O p r t D NthOr u0] N MOO W OCO~{ CO N M ~ r) p ~ O ~ Nm r r ~ N M 0 ~ 0 ~ Q O ~ (O V O O V (J a O ~ ~ N o N N 1 ~ ~~ o N N ~j N O ~~ r N V( V O ~ ~ N V N O S W •-- N (O 0 4 Y F ~ ~ ~ ~ Q W Z > cn ~ o' u. ~ J N w ~ Noorrnrn Q F N~rnNrnN rnrcovvM 01Nru~N ~ O ~ rnr rco~n~n O a ~n~nvvvv Q N (n ^ ~ ~ ~ O O O W ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O W O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 X ~~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 w ~ Z W W a m m J p~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ OF ~ cOD W O W O O O W O O O v O O ~ j ^ ^ ~ U m m Z O ^ O O~ ~~ N Q O m O D u~ u~ O N~ N O~ 01 V~ ~ N M Q N N r 0 0 .r- N N ~ ~ O) 7 ~ d ri of vioor~ (P NOS ~N a oi o cvoNOi Oc00 ~O (O viv coo r ~ M ~~ co co ,~v m (P ~N N m d vi oi~~vi~ mNN N(n Norio ri ri O)Mr ~N Z O ~nr r ~mm F- CO raO~Qlm ~ V (000 OM V ~N u~ H OM~ ~ln In ~ NNE V V U Z J U U N N o r 1 n O ~ ~rrM 0 7 C A r In~~NrN } O V r M 7000ONN N r N O c 0 NN(n V ~O M r M r M N W N7 V 0 N O V O Orr~~O) ~ ~ ^ r M N ~ 3 ~ N~~~ W ar0 ~~NN W N W ~~~~ W ~N~N W N W ~~ W S W O~~a W a O~ W U Z N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N m ~ ~ In ~ ~1 ~ ~ ~ O N ~ O O O O O O W = H U ~ ~ W W J W W ^ j (A N01 Or ON(O~ON (OMN ~ rNO~M~ Mm m ~ ~O MO)~O)CO ~M(O 00 N (OO~C V COMM 07 (O.-~~NN ~ V NCO (O r~0)00 ~ ~ d M M Mm N CDOO~O (O ONO ~N N ln0 ~ r N~ In OCO rN ~(AN V NOS u7 r ~ (DN~N 01 N O NN r-~M ~Nm O rco M I mN(00 N ~ ~ O Or N~rnrn c~ rN~(n 01 r-R~~NO ~ M7~ ~ ~ ~M V ~ ~~ .--NN ~ V V d J W W rv r Ny m c O N N r N M M MrO~ (O N N r N M ~MNO) V ~ r- ~ N C O N N ~NM(D ~ M m 0~~ 0 ~ 00 V O)N W M O) m V~ O O M NNNN ~ r r M M 0 ^ Q N Ntn CO r N N N N N N u)u)(Or N N N N N N ~cn cor N N N N N NM l()tD r N N N N N N M inNr N N N N N NMI ANN N N CO N N N > O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Z rN~n~nNM rNU~cnNM rNininNM rNCncnNM nNincnNM rNCncnNM rNV>~N~" 0 rNCncnNM O O N N N N r 0 ~~cOO COOm~ N y N N N r O ~NCOO COOm~ N7 N N N r O V ~cOO CO00Ni~ yN N N N r O M~(OD COOm ~ N Ny N N r O ~N(00 (OOm~ N N N N r 0 ~~NN~~ N N N N r ~~(00 (000 N y Ny N N r NCO COOm~ O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ r- ~ ~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 u0 ~~ M~~ Z (O (ONNNN ~ V V V ~O lnlnln In (O (O (O CO CD (O N N N MMMMM M - - - N W NNNN C V'7 V V 7 rr r r r r NNNNNN v vv vv MMMMMM U W NNNNNN ~~~~~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N NN ~~ ~~~~ • . . ~~ ~ n n n n n n o o o ~~ ° vvvvvv vvv ~ 'vv vvvvvv Cn N N N N N N i i i i i N N N N N N i i N N N N N N c ~ i c c i N N N N N N v i v i v ~ n i N N N N N N N N N N N N v N N N N N N N N N N N N T ~ N T N N T ~ N T N N T O7 ~ T ~ N T ~ N T m N a ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ v ~ ~ ~ ~ T T ~'0w ~ >. >. Taw ~ T T ~'~ w ~ >. >. TO~ O ~ T T ~`0 ~ ~ ~>. TO~.~- ~ >+T ~'0w L T T ~'~~.~- 0 0 0~ O 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 O . - 0 0 0 O T 0 0 0 0 O T O O O G= O T O 0 0 0 O O T O 0 0 0 O O T O ~ O T O r j~ ' ~ X 0 0 T O ~ j, O O ~~ O T O ~ j, O' 1n ~~ O O ~ j, O' ~ ~~ O O ~ j, O' ~ ~~ O ~ j~ O N ~~ ~ j, O' ~ ~~ ~ j. ~ ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Oc' O`-' O~ O`" O~ Oe' O~ O~ I APPENDIX G v o ' N N a 1 1 1 ~~ o~ N r~ N I u W Q Q r U W Y N U J J ii 1 Ire I m W' N ~_ > ~ r N O M ~ W O O M N ~ M~ O W r r O M O N r O 0 e- ~ ~? O p O r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 () .X O N q Oj p N N ~~ ~ p N N N ~ N p N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z w F W ~ W y J lL W rn r c0 7 M N rn W r u7 V _ W ~O V O A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O n O N e' ~ ~ e' ~ `- ~ ` ~ " ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a v v ~ ~ ~i ~n cWO r W rn m N W ~ ~`p O O O O O O O O ~ Z v O J F Z J O W O mNr V to ClnO W m lOM r (0 m W d10v r O _ N OOr W I I (O O c0 ~0 W N W ~~ Nr OV N ~ O (0 7 MM W V NOrN O ~ r r~MO~ W ~I7 ~ N 0 M x0000 M r 0 0 r N MQ)M O ON WOWa1 O () Q ~ d O V I~ M ~~ M 0 O N ~~ W O ~ ~ W N O O O M W O~ j W N M M N O (O 0~ j r N N N W M M W N 0~ 0 ~ v r W N O O r LL~ W~ 0 W N 7 O W W N~[ 7 W Q N( 0 N M O V W~ O N N E M M O W M M O N N~ W 0 ~~ N W W I~ r r r W ~ N 1f7 e- ~n 000~0 W (O tO d' W W M V ~tD ~.- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.- ~ ~ ~ a O J cO W W (OO~ON W tIJ r v v 0 0 00 N W O V N W I~ M~ 0 0~ (0O W 0Mr O W W O ~ W rrMO W M M W W V M m V W r W V 0 ~ W W M N r V'V r N r r W M~ MW W000 0 M N '- W C rOWOW r M W r V C 0 ~ a ~ 0 > M V ~(O W m W W W W W M W W eo W~~ W W NM ~f7 W ao W W~ W W O~ NM V W W W W W~ O~NM W W W W~~ W OO~NN r r W W W W W W 000 r r r W W W W r W 4700 r r r r W W U Q N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Z O > W V 0 0 0 N N W W W r (0 ~ O O V V N W r M W (0 ~ O V W N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W U (~ .n 0 ~ p ~ r- N p 0 0 O ~ ~ N p 0 0 O ~ V W N 0 0 0 (0 W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~° z , Z m W W LL .C W O W~~ «'7 V V O O O O O o F W W ~O R V 7 M 0 0 0 0 0 O O ~ ~ ~ e- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O .N W (n Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U w w F Z m m U J 0 ~ ~ ~ V cW0 O r W 0 ~ 0 cN0 W 1 ~ O W O O O W O Q. O O O O v ~ ~ a rL ? O D ~ N ~ ~ m ~ m Z W O Q x 0 0 r N M O u ~ 0 0 ~ = F r (0 ~ CJ c} W r l 0 MOW r 4) M r o r 4) ~ N~ W~ 0 N r O~ N ~ = F C O V M M (0 V N O r N ~ r r ~ M 0 ~ W _ M r 0 W 0 `7 r~ 0 O r N Q 7 Q 7 M O O N W O W 0 O H ~ O ~N W (O Q O M W M 0 W N N(OOWN O M W O W N Q O O W 0 rN W ENO ~ ~ f N~0 W ON(0 O d r M W 0 0 a 0 0 M r O M M N r~0 M gj ~ r W ~ ~ W V 0 W N r M M ~ N N a ~ W 7 W W~ r M M N N W N0~ V r W N W O 0 0 r In (01n W N W W W ~ W M O O N M M V Z o O r O N N~ M M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W n r i r r W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O O O~ ~ ~ W W Q W W W~ ~ .- Z aWD W r 0 N W N W 0 W (0 ~ N r U M V W~ r M 0~~ ~ ~ r ~~ N 0 V W N r r ~ N r r r M 0 W M M W W 7 M 0 U ~ W r W v 0 W W M N r V V r N r r W M~ M (0 W 0 0 0 0 M N ~ W V r In W O W r M W r~~ 0 ~ O j Q (") ~(O (O ao W~ W W W M In W (D m W~ W W W NM ln~ m W W~ W W O NM W m W W~~ O NM W m W W~~ W m0 NN r r W m W W CO W m00 r r r W W oo (Or W m00 r r r r W W > U N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N W Z m ~ ~ v cCOO r m rn ~ ~`p O O O O O O O O W U H U ~ W l L J lL W O M M 0 W V W MMO W r V N O N N W NO~j~ O r W O M O~ 0 W (0 0 7 A N~ 0 ~~ Nr O V N ~ O _ c D V M M (O y,N OrN O ~ r r~MO~ W ~ ~ N O M r0 W 0 M r LL'7 O r N 0 0 M O O N W O W 0 O W Q ~ d O O M V r W W M W OO 0r W O O 0Mr0 V M(OMO~ W MWO WN ~ V 0~if7r W O W 0 rN LO V W14 ~nr W ~[7 W N471n~o v r W N _ rtO CO to W N l0 W W N~0 W N W W MOO O W O ~ ~ O N N W M M -W O N N~ M M ~~W~ O M W r cor~r~irr M M ~ N N ~~'r7~ M M ~ N N ~~'~7~ O O rnrnrnu7~ coc~cocmm N M M ~ V ~~W~ Q ~. ~ U d W W M~ rM(ON O W N N W 00N ~4 (0 0~ W A N r In lnM0~0 N r r N N r r r M0 W M M W W V c `7 0 ~ W r W v0 (0 W M N r CC r N r r (0 M~ M W W 000 0 M N ~ W V rv7 WOW r M W r~ 0 0 ~ 0 Q j ~ NM V In (O (O W W WWW MC ~7 (0 (0 a0W WW W W NMd' W K7 ~W W WW O NM~ V WaDW W W O NM~~ WcoWW W Q70 NN rrWmWW (0 W m00 rrrW Wao (Or W 6100 rrrrWW Q U N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Z rW~r7u'7WM rWir7u7WM rW~nir7WM rW~r7inWM rW~n~nWM rWU'7~nWM rWU7u'7WM rWU'7~nWM O O N W W r ~ N Nmm N Nm 1\ O I~OO N N~ yN~ {{m 41 (OO N N N mm[OO .y V m~(OO N~ aNa N m~(OO i a i (O V a ~~0 (0 W 0~ 0 ( ~~CO W 0~ ~}} ~ 0C O M~ W C00~ ~ ~}} O)C (`')~(0 W 0~ ~ ~ ~ln W N0~ ~~ W W 0~ y l`J ~C7 W W 0~ (~~ W W 0~ O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 W~ (7 ~ 0~~ (7 (V N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N V 7 V V' 7 V ~~~ 7 C V Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 r r r r r n 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 V V 7 7~ (0 W CO (0 W W M M M M M M N N N N N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r r r r r r N N N N N N r r r r r r ~ ~ N N N N N N vvvvvv r r r r r r W W W (O (O ( O W W W W W W W ~~~~ y y~ (OO CC O O ((OO ((DD ((O0 ~~~~~~ W W W W W W M M M M M M ~ V V R V~ c`~ M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M N N N N N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N '~ T ' T T T ~ T ~ T ~ T ~ T ` 3 ~ ~ 3~ - ~ 3~ ~ ' 3 ~ 3 ' ~ 3 ' ~ 3 ~~ 3 ~~ ~o ~ T T ~' ~ w o ~ ~ ~ T Q w o ~ T > T a w v ~ T >. ~' 0 w o ~ T >. ~' ~ w 4 L T T T ~~ ~ T T ~' O w ~ T T T ~ w O 0 0 0 O . . 0 0 0 O T . 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 O T O 0 0 0 O T 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 O TO 0 0 0 O O TO ~~O TO j, ' 0 ~~O O r j, ~ 0 ENO TO r j, ' W O ~ W O r j, O' ~ O ~~O r j, O' u'7 r. W O TO r ~, p N ~ WO r ). p i[7 ~~ ~ j, 0' ~ O O O 0 O O O 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O~ O`- O~ O~ O~ O~ O~ O~ APPENDIX G V M N a ~~ oa ~~ W CO H K Q Q U W 2 Y a°~i U J N J o, ^ ~ w'~, a 000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 0 Uw Z ~ 000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 00000 000000 W F ~ ~ W y W 0 d J (n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ a > 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ o> uNi c°o m °rn rn m °o ~, ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z U O 5 H ~ p Z J O W ^ ~ MMCO MQ) ~Md 00 NCO lOMM l0 (p lOn N ~Md (0 (~ (p W ~OCO~NN (p ~D1 ~ W 00 V MOlnO OO Mn OlON00~ n O ~ O~oJO W ~ r(0 d ~ N On m O d NO MO W d 00 W 0(00 N~ V ~~ W OM(D~ N N Nd~mO MNU00~0 f~ dMrO O p W O M M ~ d d~~~ O r, ~ 0 0~~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0~~ 0 ~~ O~ 0 0 d C O O M O d N W rn in O O W ~ (04)N d I~ W r NN r d)'7 Md N.-tD I~ N 1~(OMd41 O (O f~ mr ~~(Od O 0)MN Nf~ d -- m(O Q)OO COO (00.--~LOh I~MlO ~00N ~ 0_ (n ^ U Q ^^~~ori oro ~c^o~~~a~i ~ ~^~~~m . d N ~ M00 ~~~n rc°~m W O~CO (O QJd ~~~~~~ f~ (0O t00(0 rN--~~~~~ MN N N 1~ M ~~~~ °~~ Z N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N r N N N N N N N ^ W U~ a 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000 zn o 000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 w ~ ^ F- ~ W ~ J ~ lL ^ !~ (n ^ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ^ Q' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 lL U Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z Z W o1 ~ COD W ~ m Q m O p m O 0 0 0 0 0 O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Z ~ O F ^ j M M W O M O ~MdOU~(O ~ M M O I[ J O ~ I~NOMd n ~ (D I S O (0 O) ~O(OON N (0 N m W N aDdM~l00 0 0) M I S ~ION~O~ I~ O ~ ~N W ~oJ ~ r 0 ~N N~ ISO Z 0_ (ONd d C00~~ W d Mt O NM OOaO COO 00d M1~ ~ d ^~~ (00)M f~ ~ M(00.-N (Od N ON d OD70 ~ In r O d01~ a0 r (04) d M O ~ O O C p d V~ O N O (0 f~ 0 0 0~~ 0 0 0~~ ~ 0 0~ 0.- ~~ O~ 0 0 ~ ~ m 0~ O J ~ Z F w W ~ ^ (OmNd 1~ W 1~ NNI~Q)d MdN CO 1~ Nip cOMd W Od(D I~ D)I~ ~ W CDdCD~ mMNN I~ d .-d N~MtO D7 (00)00 (00 Nmtp (O D1d COO X010 f~ I~CD CONOCD f~MIO SOON MN NN f~ M X U Q ~~~a^o ai o~ ^cronarom of n^~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~n~r°~~ ~~~~~ °~ Z N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N n N N N N N N W N W N ~ D) t0 W ~ m m O W L O O O O O O ~ ~ H U ~ ~ W LL J W W ^ j M M N M Q) ~M~ NCO 10 M M l0 (0 ~01~ N pMd (0 I~ (0 m ~OCOpNN CO W O) N OD W ~Mp100 O m M I~ ~NN~O~ r O .- ~N 00 ~0J .- r (0 ~N N~ ISO) p W O 0_ O (ON d ~ d ~Od CONd d ~ Mi000NM 00 W 4000 ~IJ CO I~ d (V W d ~MI~ ~ d ~ ~ W (O QJM 1~ ~ M(OO~N (Od Cn ON d Om0 l0 ~ 1~ O Ot~cO ~ ~ (OO dM 0 O H ~ a ~~0~ ~ O 000 ~ 000~~ ~00~0 ~~ ~00 d ~ ~~O U J N 0_ W W ^ O W Nd I~00 I~ NN f~O~d Md N ~ tDh N I~COMdm Od (0~m~ i0 W (D~ (0~ (nMN N f~ ~ ~dN ~M m(p QJ W (00 W Q)(p OO~d (00~ ~ ~ n I~ (O CO COOCO I~MU~LnON MN NN ISM 0 ~ ~ Q nnm~oni o~ ^cm~mo~im ^~cro^~o~i ~~~~~~ n~~~~° ° O d n~~~ ~~~~~~ ^ Z N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N r~ N N N N N N r - N N N N N N N N N N N N O r00O ~00~ N N 00 W~ n N~0 ~a0~ N N W aD l~ d OddM^ I~ O h f~ ' d Od dC~j^ I~ O I~ I~ dOdd ~n h O f~ f~ M n dOdd ~r I~ O I~ I~ M r d Od d ~^ I~ O f~ I~ M M~(000070 7 V 010)cD~ M IOOOa1~ l 00 O)(O ~4 d CO W W ~ N 61 (D (D~~ dCONN'-' N m0(O ~~ d (D 00 a0~N O(OO~~ V c0 aD a0 ~N Q)(O (p L0 W d (O aON~ N p d d d d d V d d d d d d ~~~~~~ d d d d '7 d d d d d V d d d d 'V d d M M M M M M Z U 00 W N N W N t0 10 ~ M to 10 N N N N N N O (O (O (0 CO (O W W aD aD W OD ~ n r n~ ~000~0 (D (0 CO CO (O O r r r n n~ N N N N N N MMM ~ ~ M (O CO O (O (0 (O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w Cn 000000 N n O)D)4)O)O)D) D70)D1m Q)m W Nc0 W W W C 7 C j 0000 W aO W 00 ~aMO W NNM~ N00~ W W O0 NNNNN ~.--~ r ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~.- ~-~~~ r ~~ ~ ~~ ~ >` m ~ ~ ~. m ~ >+ m ~ T ~ ~ T m ~ T ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ T >. ~` OO w o ~ ~ T T ~' O w a ~ ~ T T ~` O w ~ ~ ~ T T ~` O w ~ ~ >' O~ ~ > > '30 ~ ~ T T >` O w ~ ~ T >` O: ~ > O O O O e-WO~`TO O O O O c O ~O 7.0 O 0 0 0 O O 1.0 O O O O c O O TO . . O O O c O O > O O O O c O O 7 . 0 0 0 O T r T ~ Ln ~ r j~ Q C0 ~~ r j, ~ to ~~ ~ T ~ to ~~ . ~ T O~ TW .0 ~ j~ 0' to ~~O O ~ T O~ O O ~ p~ p~ ~ O O O O O O O p APPENDIX G Project 1 D No. 050650501 Little l..ick Creek Restoration Project, Durham County, North Carolina KE~STORATION PLAN i ' APPENDIX H BMP SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION I ' a KO ~ ASSOCIATES, P. C. Cuns:rlfing Engineers 1 1 1 1 1 LITTLE LICK CREEK STREAM RESTORATION Stormwater Wetland BMP#1 Soil H drolo is Grou s % of Site Area St Group A 0.00°!0 ormwater Wetland #1 Group B D;oD°J° adjacent to Green 13 Group C 45A0% Group D 55.OD% Precipitation= 1A0 „„,, , ,„„ ~„~~, Proposed Land Use Area (ft2) CN S R/O Pervious Areas Row Crops p A Soil 67 4.9 0.0 B Soils 78 2.8 0.0 C SOUS 0 85 1.8 0.0 D Soils 0 89 1.2 0.0 Pasture p A Soil 49 10.4 0.0 B Soils 69 4.5 0.0 C Soils 0 79 2.7 0.0 D Soils 0 84 1.9 0.0 Forest 283,176 A Soil 36 17.8 0.0 B Soils 60 6.7 0.0 C Soils 127,429 73 3.7 181.7 D Soils 155,747 79 2.7 910.6 Wetland p A Soil 36 17.8 0.0 B Soil 60 6.7 0.0 C Soils D 73 3.7 0.0 D Soils 0 79 2.7 0.0 Meadow 0 A Soil 30 23.3 0.0 B Soils 58 7.2 0.0 C Soils 0 71 4.1 0.0 D Soils 0 78 2.8 0.0 Lawn 308,405 A Soil 39 15.6 0.0 B Soils 61 6.4 0.0 C Soils 138,782 74 3.5 268.2 D Soils 169,623 80 2.5 1177.9 Im ervious Areas Residential & Li ht Industrial Rooftops 38,551 98.0 0.2 2540.9 Drivewa s & Parkin Lots 38,551 98.0 0.2 2540.9 Other Impervious Area 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Road 77,101 98.0 0.2 5081.6 Sidewalk 0 ` 98.0 0.2 0.0 Commercial & Heav Industrial Rooftops 0 ' 98.0 0.2 0.0 Parkin Lots 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Other Impervious Area 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Road 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Sidewalk 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Storm Water Mana ement Facilities PondNVetland Surface Area 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Permeable Pavement 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Green Roof 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 All Other BMPs except Forested Buffer 32,50D 77.3 2.9 137.7 Site Totals: 778284.00 SF 17.87 Ac Weighted Curve Number 81.04 Volume to Treat 12,840 CF APPENDIX H 3/13/2007 Sheet 1 of 5 LITTLE LICK CREEK STREAM RESTORATION Stormwater Wetland BMP#1 Curve Numbers (assuming fair condition) R ational C's Pervious Areas slope < 2°/ lope 2%-6 slope > 6% Row Crops A Soils 67 0.20 0.25 0.30 B Soils 78 0.26 0.30 0.34 C Soils 85 0.30 0.35 0.40 D Soils 89 0.35 0.40 0.45 Pasture A Soils 49 0.07 0.12 0.17 B Soils 69 0.13 0.20 0.27 C Soils 79 0.19 0.26 0.33 D Soils 84 0.22 0.32 0.42 Forest A Soils 36 0.07 0.10 0.13 B Soils 60 0.10 0.13 0.16 C Soils 73 0.12 0.15 0.18 D Soils 79 0.14 0.18 0.22 Wetland A Soils 36 0.07 0.10 0.13 B Soils 60 0.10 0.13 0.16 C Soils 73 0.12 0.15 0.18 D Soils 79 0.14 0.18 0.22 Meadow A Soils 30 0.07 0.10 0.14 B Soils 58 0.11 0.14 0.17 C Soils 71 0.17 0.20 0.23 D Soils 78 0.21 0.24 0.27 Lawn A Soils 39 0.15 0.20 0.25 B Soils 61 0.20 0.25 0.30 C Soils 74 0.25 0.30 0.35 D Soils 80 0.28 0.35 0.42 Impervious Areas Residential & Li ht Industrial Roofto s 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Drivewa s & Parkin Lots 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Other Im ervious Area 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Road 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Sidewalk 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Commercial & Heav Industrial Roofto s 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Parkin Lots 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Other Im ervious Area 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Road 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Sidewalk 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Storm Water Mana ement Facilities PondlWetland Surface Area 98 0.95 0.95 0.95 Permeable Pavement 98 0.95 0.95 0.95 Green Roof 98 0.95 0.95 0.95 All Other BMPs (except Forested Buffer) A Soils 39 0.15 0.20 0.25 B Soils 61 0.20 0.25 0.30 C Soils 74 0.25 0.30 0.35 D Soils 80 0.28 0.35 0.42 APPENDIX I-I 3/13/2007 Sheet 2 of 5 , LITTLE LICK CREEK STREAM RESTORATION Stormwater Wetland BMP#1 Design of Stormwater Wetlands Bill Hunt Method August 2006 Workshop Calculate Surface Area Volume to Treat = 12,840 CF Allowable Depth = 9 inches Surface Area = 17119.34 SF 0.39 Ac Deep Water Zone 18-36" depth 1s% of sA 2568 Square Feet Shallow Water 3-4" Depth so% of sA 8560 Square Feet Shallow Land Wet Only When Raining 35% of SA 5992 Square Feet Forebay Design Required Forebay Surface Area is 15% of SA 15% of SA 2568 Square Feet APPENDIX H 3/13/2007 Sheet 3 of 5 LITTLE LICK CREEK STREAM RESTORATION Model Output Upper Neuse Site Evaluation Tool -Site Performance Analysis Little Lick Creek Durham County, NC Stormwater Wetland BMP#1 Land Use Summary Total Site Area (acres) 17.86694215 Pre-development impervious percentage 19.8% Post-development impervious percentage 19.8% Annual Hydrology Summary Existing Design Design Landuse without BMPs with BMPs Annual Surface Runoff (inches/yr) 9.20 9.20 8.28 Annual Infiltration (incheslyr) 3.14 3.11 3.11 Annual Pollutant Load and Target Summary Total Site Annual Load Existing Design Design t fit Meets Landuse without BMPs - with BMPs Goal? Total Nitrogen (Iblyr) 78 80 48 Total Phosphorus (Iblyr) 12.8 13.1 8.5 Sediment (ton/yr) 0.94 0.94 0.14 0.14 Yes Nitrogen Load Phosphorus Load Sediment Load 90 _ _ _ 14.0 __ 1.00 _ --- -- - 80 70 - - _ 12.0 0.80 60 10.0 50 8.0 0.60 40 30 6.0 0.40 20 4.0 - 0.20 10 _ 2.0 0 0.0 -- 0.00 Areal Loading Rates Existing Design Design Landuse without BMPs with BMPs Total Nitrogen (Ib/aclyr) 4.38 4.47 2.68 Total Phosphorus (Iblac/yr) 0.71 0.73 0.47 Sediment (ton/aclyr) 0.053 0.053 0.008 Site is located in Urban Residential Nutrient Zone TN loading rate is below the buy-down range of 3.6 to 6 Ib/ac/yr Meets Target Goal? 6.00 Yes 1.33 Yes Nitrogen Rate Phosphorus Rate Sediment Rate 7.00 - ------._ 1.40 ---- 0.060 __----.-_.-._.___._.a__.r Target 6.00 1.20 0.050 5.00 1.00 0.040 4.00 0.80 0.030 - 3.00 - 0.60 2.00 -~ 0.40 ~ 0.020 -- 1.00 0.20 0.010 0 00 ~ 0 00 . 0.00 . 0 APPENDIX H 3/13/2007 Sheet 4 of 5 LITTLE LICK CREEK STREAM RESTORATION Model Output Storm Event Runoff Volume and Target Summary Runoff Volume (ac-ft) Existing Design BMP Storage Landuse without BMPs Volume No storm events selected Storm Event Storm Event Storm Event Storm Event Not Selected Not Selected Not Selected Not Selected Peak Flow and Hydrograph Summary Estimated Peak Flows, Rational and SCS Unit Hvdrograph Methods Existing Landuse Design without BMPs Rational Unit Hvd Rational Unit Hvd 1-yr 24-hr storm (cfs) 22.89 36.04 23.27 36.04 Comparison of SCS peak to Design with BMPs Design Design Source Meets Target without BMPs with BMPs ~ Goal . 1-yr 24-hr storm (cfs) 36.04 15.50 User-defined 36.04 Yes 40 , _. __. _ .__ __ ~~- 1-yr 24-hr storm _____. 30 Post, no BMPs Existing 20 _ Post, with BMPs 10 - 0 6:00 AM 9:00 AM 12.00 PM 3:00 PM 6:00 PM 9:00 PM 12:00 AM 3:00 AM APPENDIX H 3/13/2007 Sheet 5 of 5 LITTLE LICK CREEK STREAM RESTORATION Stormwater Wetland BMP#2 Soil H drolo is Grou s % of Site Area Stormwater Wetland #2 Group A 0.00% Group B o:oo~i° adjacent to Green 16 Group C 88:00% Group D 12.00% Precipitation= 1.00 d U E t L Proposed Land Use n ry se an Area (ft2) CN S RIO Pervious Areas Row Crops 0 A Soil 67 4.9 0.0 B Soils 78 2.8 0.0 C Soils 0 85 1.8 0.0 D Soils 0 89 1.2 0.0 Pasture 0 A Soil 49 10.4 0.0 B Soils 69 4.5 0.0 C Soils 0 79 2.7 0.0 D Soils 0 84 1.9 0.0 Forest 164,877 A Soil 36 17.8 0.0 B Soils 60 6.7 0.0 C Soils 145,092 73 3.7 206.9 D Soils 19,785 79 2.7 115.7 Wetland 0 A Soil 36 17.8 0.0 B SOUS 60 8.7 0.0 C SOUS 0 73 3.7 0.0 D Soils 0 79 2.7 0.0 Meadow 0 A Soil 30 23.3 0.0 B Soils 58 7.2 0.0 C Soils 0 71 4.1 0.0 D Soils 0 78 2.8 0.0 Lawn 144,489 A Soil 39 15.6 0.0 B SOUS 61 6.4 0.0 C Soils 127,150 74 3.5 245.8 D Soils 17,339 80 2.5 120.4 Impervious Areas Residential & Li ht Industrial Roofto s 23,152 98.0 0.2 1525.9 Drivewa s & Parkin Lots 23,152 98.0 0.2 1525.9 Other Impervious Area 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Road 46,305 98.0 0.2 3051.9 Sidewalk 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Commercial & Heavy Industrial Rooftops 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Parking Lots 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Other Impervious Area 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Road 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Sidewalk 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Storm Water Mana ement Facilities PondlWetland Surface Area 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Permeable Pavement 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Green Roof 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 All Other BMPs except Forested Buffer 17,0 74.7 3.4 41.1 Site Totals: 419475.00 SF 9.63 Ac Weighted Curve Number 79.47 Volume to Treat 6,834 CF APPENDIX H 3/13/2007 Sheet 1 of 5 ' 1 LITTLE LICK CREEK STREAM RESTORATION Model Output Storm Event Runoff Volume and Target Summary Runoff Volume (ac-ft) Existing Design BMP Storage Landuse without BMPs Volume No storm events selected Storm Event Storm Event Storm Event Storm Event Not Selected Not Selected Not Selected Not Selected Peak Flow and Hydrograph Summary Estimated Peak Flows. Rational and SCS Unit Hvdropraph Methods Existing Landuse Design without BMPs Rational Unit Hvd Rational Unit Hvd 1-yr 24-hr storm (cfs) 22.89 36.04 23.27 36.04 Comparison of SCS peak to Design with BMPs Design Design Source Target Meets without BMPs with BMPs Goal? 1-yr 24-hr storm (cfs) 36.04 15.50 User-defined 36.04 Yes 40 1-yr 24-hr storm 30 Post, no BMPs Existing U 20 _ Post, with BMPs 10 _ 0 6:00 AM 9:00 AM 12:00 PM 3:00 PM 6:00 PM 9:00 PM 12:00 AM 3:00 AM APPENDIX H 3/13/2007 Sheet 5 of 5 LITTLE LICK CREEK STREAM RESTORATION Stormwater Wetland BMP#2 Curve Numbers (assuming fair condition) R ational C's Pervious Areas slope < 2°/ lope 2%-6 slope > 6% Row Crops A Soils 67 0.20 0.25 0.30 B Soils 78 0.26 0.30 0.34 C Soils 85 0.30 0.35 0.40 D Soils 89 0.35 0.40 0.45 Pasture A Soils 49 0.07 0.12 0.17 B Soils 69 0.13 0.20 0.27 C Soils 79 0.19 0.26 0.33 D Soils 84 0.22 0.32 0.42 Forest A Soils 36 0.07 0.10 0.13 B Soils 60 0.10 0.13 0.16 C Soils 73 0.12 0.15 0.18 D Soils 79 0.14 0.18 0.22 Wetland A Soils 36 0.07 0.10 0.13 B Soils 60 0.10 0.13 0.16 C Soils 73 0.12 0.15 0.18 D Soils 79 0.14 0.18 0.22 Meadow A Soils 30 0.07 0.10 0.14 B Soils 58 0.11 0.14 0.17 C Soils 71 0.17 0.20 0.23 D Soils 78 0.21 0.24 0.27 Lawn A Soils 39 0.15 0.20 0.25 B Soils 61 0.20 0.25 0.30 C Soils 74 0.25 0.30 0.35 D Soils 80 0.28 0.35 0.42 Impervious Areas Residential & Li ht Industrial Roofto s 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Drivewa s & Parkin Lots 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Other Im ervious Area 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Road 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Sidewalk 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Commercial & Heav Industrial Roofto s 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Parkin Lots 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Other Im ervious Area 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Road 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Sidewalk 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Storm Water Mana ement Facilities PondlWetland Surface Area 98 0.95 0.95 0.95 Permeable Pavement 98 0.95 0.95 0.95 Green Roof 98 0.95 0.95 0.95 All Other BMPs (except Forested Buffer) A Soils 39 0.15 0.20 0.25 B Soils 61 0.20 0.25 0.30 C Soils 74 0.25 0.30 0.35 D Soils 80 0.28 0.35 0.42 APPENDIX H sip si2oo7 Sheet 2 of 5 LITTLE LICK CREEK STREAM RESTORATION Stormwater Wetland BMP#2 Design of Stormwater Wetlands Bill Hunt Method August 2006 Workst Calculate Surface Area Volume to Treat = 6,834 CF Allowable Depth = 9 inches Surface Area = 9111.49 SF 0.21 Ac Deep Water Zone 18-3s° depth 15% of SA 1367 Square Feet Shallow Water 3-4° depth ! 50% of sA 4556 Square Feet Shallow Land wet only when Raining 35% of SA 3189 Square Feet Forebay Design Required Forebay Surface Area is 15% of SA 15°/a of Sa 1367 Square Feet APPENDIX H 3/13/2007 Sheet 3 of 5 0 LITTLE LICK CREEK STREAM RESTORATION Model Output Upper Neuse Site Evaluation Tool -Site Performance Analysis Little Lick Creek Durham County, NC Stormwater Wetland BMP#2 Land Use Summary Total Site Area (acres) 9.629820937 Pre-development impervious percentage 22.1% Post-development impervious percentage 22.1% Annual Hydrology Summary Existing Design Design Landuse without BMPs with BMPs Annual Surface Runoff (incheslyr) 10.02 10.02 9.01 Annual Infiltration (inches/yr) 4.01 3.96 3.96 Annua l Pollutant Load and Target Su mmary Total Site Annual Load Existing Design Design Target Meets Landuse without BMPs with BMPs Goal? Total Nitrogen (Ib/yr) 44 45 27 Total Phosphorus (Ib/yr) 7.2 7.3 4.8 Sediment (tonlyr) 0.56 0.56 0.08 0.08 Yes Nitrogen Load Phosphorus Load Sediment Load 50 _ 8.0 -. 0.60 __ - 40 7.0 - 0.50 6.0 30 - 5.0 0.40 4.0 0.30 20 3.0 0.20 - -- 10 2 0 0.10 Target 1.0 O- - - 0.0 - -- 0.00 Areal Loading Rates Existing Design Design Meets Landuse without BMPs with BMPs Target Goal? Total Nitrogen (Ib/ac/yr) 4.59 4.68 2.81 6.00 Yes Total Phosphorus (Ib/aclyr) 0.74 0.76 0.49 t ',s Yes Sediment (ton/aclyr) 0.058 0.058 0.008 Site is located in Urban Residential Nutrient Zone TN loading rate is below the buy-down range of 3.6 to 6 Ib/aclyr Nitrogen Rate Phosphorus Rate Sediment Rate 7.00 , 1.40 _ 0.070 6.00 1.20 - 0.060 5.00 1.00 0.050 4.00 0.80 i 0.040 3.00 0.60 I 0.030 2.00 0.40 0.020 1.00 0.20 ~, 0.010 - 0.00 0.00 0.000 - ' APPENDIX H 3/13/2007 Sheet 4 of 5 LITTLE LICK CREEK STREAM RESTORATION Model Output Storm Event Runoff Volume and Target Summary Runoff Volume lac-ft) Existing Design BMP Storage Landuse without BMPs Volume No storm events selected Storm Event Storm Event Storm Event Storm Event Not Selected Not Selected Not Selected Not Selected Peak Flow and Hydrograph Summary Estimated Peak Flows, Rational and SCS Unit Hydrograph Methods Existing Landuse Design without BMPs Rational Unit Hyd Rational Unit Hyd 1-yr 24-hr storm (cfs) 12.45 18.38 12.65 18.38 Comparison of SCS peak to Design Design with BMPs Design Source Meets Tarc et without BMPs with BMPs Goal? 1-yr 24-hr storm (cfs) - 18.38 15.50 User-defined 18.38 Yes ~ 20 _ _ __ 1-Yr 24-hr storm - -Post, no BMPs 15 Existing w ~ p _ _ _ -Post, with BMPs 5 - - _ - - 0 6.00 AM 9.00 AM 12:00 PM 3.00 PM 6'.00 PM 9'.00 PM 12:00 AM 3'.00 AM 1 t AP('~NDtX [-~ 3/13/2007 Sheet 5 of 5 LITTLE LICK CREEK STREAM RESTORATION Stormwater Wetland BMP#3A Soil H drolo is Grou s % of Site Area Stormwater Wetland #3A Group A OAO"/° Group B OAO°/° adjacent to Fairway 17 Group C 17.00% Group D 83.00% Precipitation= 1.00 __~ ~ ~__ ~_~_. Proposed Land Use "~~"" `~J~ `~"~ y Area (ft2) CN S R/O Pervious Areas Row Crops 0 A Soll 67 4.9 0.0 B Soils `' 78 2.8 0.0 C Soils 0 85 1.8 0.0 D Soils 0 89 L2 0.0 Pasture 0 A Soil 49 10.4 0.0 B SOUS 69 4.5 0.0 C Soils 0' 79 2.7 0.0 D Soils 0 84 1.9 0.0 Forest 33,000 A Soil 36 17.8 0.0 B Soils 60 6.7 0.0 C SOUS 5,610 73 3.7 8.0 D Soils 27,390 79 2.7 160.1 Wetland 0 A Soil 36 17.8 0.0 B Soils 60 6.7 0.0 C Soil 0 73 3.7 0.0 D Soils 0 79 2.7 0.0 Meadow 0 A Soll 30 23.3 0.0 B Soils 58 7.2 0.0 C Solis 0 71 4.1 0.0 D Soils 0 78 2.8 0.0 Lawn 226,71 S A Soil 39 15.6 0.0 B Soils 61 6.4 0.0 C Soils 38,542 74 3.5 74.5 D Soils 188,173 80 2.5 1306.8 Impervious Areas Residential & Li ht Industrial Rooftops 47,184 98.0 0.2 3109.8 Drivewa s 8~ Parkin Lots 47,186 98.0 0.2 3110.0 Other Im ervious Area 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Road 36,200 98.0 0.2 2385.9 Sidewalk 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Commercial & Heav Industrial Roofto s 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Parkin Lots -0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Other Impervious Area 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Road 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Sidewalk 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Storm Water Mana ement Facilities Pond/Wetland Surface Area 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Permeable Pavement 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Green Roof 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 All Other BMPs exce t Forested Buffer 17,000 79.0 2.7 99.0 Site Totals: 407285.00 SF 9.35 Ac Weighted Curve Number 85.00 Volume to Treat 10,254 CF APPENDIX H 3/13/2007 Sheet 1 of 8 LITTLE LICK CREEK STREAM RESTORATION Stormwater Wetland BMP#3A Curve Numbers (assuming fair condition) Rational C's Pervious Areas slope < 2°/ lope 2%-6 slope > 6% Row Crops A Soils 67 0.20 0.25 0.30 B Soils 78 0.26 0.30 0.34 C Soils 85 0.30 0.35 0.40 D Soils 89 0.35 0.40 0.45 Pasture A Soils 49 0.07 0.12 0.17 B Soils 69 0.13 0.20 0.27 C Soils 79 0.19 0.26 0.33 D Soils 84 0.22 0.32 0.42 Forest A Soils 36 0.07 0.10 0.13 B Soils 60 0.10 0.13 0.16 C Soils 73 0.12 0.15 0.18 D Soils 79 0.14 0.18 0.22 Wetland A Soils 36 0.07 0.10 0.13 B Soils 60 0.10 0.13 0.16 C Soils 73 0.12 0.15 0.18 D Soils 79 0.14 0.18 0.22 Meadow A Soils 30 0.07 0.10 0.14 B Soils 58 0.11 0.14 0.17 C Soils 71 0.17 0.20 0.23 D Soils 78 0.21 0.24 0.27 Lawn A Soils 39 0.15 0.20 0.25 B Soils 61 0.20 0.25 0.30 C Soils 74 0.25 0.30 0.35 D Soils 80 0.28 0.35 0.42 Impervious Areas Residential & Li ht Industrial Rooftops 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Drivewa s & Parkin Lots 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Other Im ervious Area 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Road 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Sidewalk 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Commercial & Heav Industrial Rooftops 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Parkin Lots 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Other Impervious Area 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Road 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Sidewalk 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Storm Water Mana ement Facilities Pond/Wetland Surface Area 98 0.95 0.95 0.95 Permeable Pavement 98 0.95 0.95 0.95 Green Roof 98 0.95 0.95 0.95 All Other BMPs (except Forested Buffer) A Soils 39 0.15 0.20 0.25 B Soils 61 0.20 0.25 0.30 C Soils 74 0.25 0.30 0.35 D Soils 80 0.28 0.35 0.42 r U ~I APPENDIX H 3/13/2007 Sheet 2 of 8 , 1 1 1 LITTLE LICK CREEK STREAM RESTORATION Stormwater Wetland BMP#3A Design of Stormwater Wetlands Bill Hunt Method August 2006 Workshop Calculate Surface Area Volume to Treat = 10,254 CF Allowable Depth = 9 inches Surface Area = 13672.19 SF 0.31 Ac Deep Water Zone 18-36" Depth 15% of SA 2051 Square Feet Shallow Water 3-4° Depth : 50% of SA 6836 Square Feet Shallow Land Wet Only When Raining ` 35% of SA 4785 Square Feet Forebay Design Required Forebay Surface Area is 15% of SA 15% of sA: 2051 Square- Feet APPENDIX H 3/13/2007 Sheet 3 of 8 LITTLE LICK CREEK STREAM RESTORATION Stormwater Wetland BMP#3B Soil H drolo is Grou s % of Site Area Stormwater Wetl d #3B Group A 0.00% an Group B o.oo°i° adjacent to Fairway 17 Group C 17.00% Group D 83.00% Precipitation= 1.00 __~ ~ ~__ ~_~__ Proposed Land Use ~~ ' Area (ft2) CN S R/O Pervious Areas Row Crops 0 A Soil 67 4.9 0.0 B Soils 78 2.8 0.0 C Soils 0 85 1.8 0.0 D Soils 0 89 1.2 0.0 Pasture 0 A Soil 49 10.4 0.0 B Soils 69 4.5 0.0 C Soils 0 79 2.7 0.0 D Soils 0 84 1.9 0.0 Forest 33,000 A Soil 36 17.8 0.0 B SOUS 60 6.7 0.0 C Soils 5,610 73 3.7 8.0 D Soils 27,390 79 2.7 160.1 Wetland 0 A Soil 36 17.8 0.0 B Soils 60 6.7 0.0 C Soils 0 73 3.7 0.0 D Soils 0 79 2.7 0.0 Meadow 0 A Soil 30 23.3 0.0 B SoIIS 58 7.2 0.0 C Soils 0 71 4.1 0.0 D Soils 0 78 2.8 0.0 Lawn 226,715 A Soil 39 15.6 0.0 B Soils 61 6.4 0.0 C Soils 38,542 74 3.5 74.5 D Soils 188,173 80 2.5 1306.8 Im ervious Areas Residential & Li ht Industrial Rooftops 47,186 98.0 0.2 3110.0 Drivewa s 8~ Parkin Lots 47,186 98.0 0.2 3110.0 Other Impervious Area 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Road 36,200 98.0 0.2 2385.9 Sidewalk 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Commercial & Heav Industrial Rooftops 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Parkin Lots 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Other Impervious Area 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Road 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Sidewalk 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Storm Water Mana ement Facilities Pond/Wetland Surface Area 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Permeable Pavement 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 Green Roof 0 98.0 0.2 0.0 All Other BMPs except Forested Buffer 17,000 79.0 2.7 99.0 Site Totals: 407287.00 SF 9.35 Ac Weighted Curve Number 85.00 Volume to Treat 10,254 CF L ~, I'i ~. APPENDIX H 3/13/2007 Sheet 4 of 8 ' 1 u LITTLE LICK CREEK STREAM RESTORATION Stormwater Wetland BMP#3B Curve Numbers (assuming fair condition) Rational C's Pervious Areas slope < 2°/ lope 2%-6 slope > 6% Row Crops A Soils 67 0.20 0.25 0.30 B Soils 78 0.26 0.30 0.34 C Soils 85 0.30 0.35 0.40 D Soils 89 0.35 0.40 0.45 Pasture A Soils 49 0.07 0.12 0.17 B Soils 69 0.13 0.20 0.27 C Soils 79 0.19 0.26 0.33 D Soils 84 0.22 0.32 0.42 Forest A Soils 36 0.07 0.10 0.13 B Soils 60 0.10 0.13 0.16 C Soils 73 0.12 0.15 0.18 D Soils 79 0.14 0.18 0.22 Wetland A Soils 36 0.07 0.10 0.13 B Soils 60 0.10 0.13 0.16 C Soils 73 0.12 0.15 0.18 D Soils 79 0.14 0.18 0.22 Meadow A Soils 30 0.07 0.10 0.14 B Soils 58 0.11 0.14 0.17 C Soils 71 0.17 0.20 0.23 D Soils 78 0.21 0.24 0.27 Lawn A Soils 39 0.15 0.20 0.25 B Soils 61 0.20 0.25 0.30 C Soils 74 0.25 0.30 0.35 D Soils 80 0.28 0.35 0.42 Im ervious Areas Residential & Li ht Industrial Roofto s 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Drivewa s & Parkin Lots 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Other Im ervious Area 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Road 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Sidewalk 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Commercial 8 Heav Industrial Roofto s 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Parkin Lots 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Other Im ervious Area 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Road 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Sidewalk 98 0.94 0.95 0.96 Storm Wafer Mana ement Facilities Pond/Wetland Surface Area 98 0.95 0.95 0.95 Permeable Pavement 98 0.95 0.95 0.95 Green Roof 98 0.95 0.95 0.95 All Other BMPs (except Forested Buffer) A Soils 39 0.15 0.20 0.25 B Soils 61 0.20 0.25 0.30 C Soils 74 0.25 0.30 0.35 D Soils 80 0.28 0.35 0.42 APPENDIX H 3/13/2007 Sheet 5 of 8 LITTLE LICK CREEK STREAM RESTORATION Stormwater Wetland BMP#3B Design of Stormwater Wetlands Bill Hunt Method August 2006 Worksl Calculate Surface Area Volume to Treat = 10,254 CF Allowable Depth = 9 inches Surface Area = 13672.36 SF 0.31 Ac Deep Water Zone 1s-36" ~eptn 15% of sA 2051 Square Feet Shallow Water 3-4" depth 50% of SA 6836 Square Feet Shallow Land Wet Only When Raining 35% of SA 4785 Square Feet Forebay Design Required Forebay Surface Area is 15% of SA 15% of SA 2051 Square Feet APPENDIX H 3/13/2007 Sheet 6 of 8 LITTLE LICK CREEK STREAM RESTORATION Model Output Upper Neuse Site Evaluation Tool -Site Performance Analysis Little Lick Creek Durham County, NC Stormwater Wetland BMP#3 Land Use Summary Total Site Area (acres) 18,7 Pre-development impervious percentage 32.1% Post-development impervious percentage 32.1% Annual Hydrology Summary Existing Design Design Landuse without BMPs with BMPs Annual Surface Runoff (incheslyr) 13.63 13.63 12.27 Annual Infiltration (inches/yr) 1.99 1.96 1.96 Annual Pollutant Load and Target Summary Total Site Annual Load Existing Design Design Target Meets Landuse without BMPs with BMPs Goal? Total Nitrogen (Ib/yr) 121 123 74 Total Phosphorus (Ib/yr) 19.6 20.0 13.0 Sediment (ton/yr) 1.48 1.47 0.22 0.22 Yes Nitrogen Load Phosphorus Load Sediment Load 140 -_. ._..----_r~ _ _ __- 25.0 ----. __--- _._...__._ 1.60 _ ___ 120 20.0 - - 1.40 100 1.20 80 15.0 - 1.00 60 10.0 0.80 0.60 40 20 5.0 _ 0.40 argel 0.20 0 0.0 0.00 - Areal Loading Rates Existing Design Design Landuse without BMPs with BMPs Total Nitrogen (Ib/ac/yr) 6.49 6.59 3.95 Total Phosphorus (Ib/ac/yr) 1.05 1.07 0.69 Sediment (ton/ac/yr) 0.079 0.079 0.012 Site is located in Urban Residential Nutrient Zone TN loading rate is within the buy-down range of 3.6 to 6 Ib/ac/yr Meets Target Goal? 6.00 Yes 1.33 Yes Nitrogen Rate Phosphorus Rate Sediment Rate 00 _ - 1.40 - 0.090 -_ - - ----- ~.00 1.20 0.080 ..00 1.00 0.070 0.060 ,00 0.80 _ 0.050 00 0.60 I 0.040 00 0.40 0.030 - 0.020 00 - 0.20 ~ 0.010 .00 - 0.00 0.000 -~ APPEN~(X H 3/13/2007 Sheet 7 of 8 LITTLE LICK CREEK STREAM RESTORATION Model Output Storm Event Runoff Volume and Target Summary Runoff Volume (ac-ft) Existing Design BMP Storage Landuse without BMPs Volume No storm events selected Storm Event Storm Event Storm Event Storm Event Not Selected Not Selected Not Selected Not Selected Peak Flow and Hydrograph Summary Estimated Peak Flows. Rational and SCS Unit Hydrograph Methods Existing Landuse Design without BMPs Rational Unit Hvd Rational Unit Hvd 1-yr 24-hr storm (cfs) 32.72 46.25 33.13 46.25 Comparison of SCS peak to Design with BMPs Design Design Source Target Meets without BMPs with BMPs Goal? 1-yr 24-hr storm (cfs) 46.25 15.50 User-defined 46.25 Yes ~~ - __ - _ _ 1-yr 24-hr storm -._ ~._ 40 Post, no BMPs 30 Existing y Post, with BMPs " 20 - 10 -- - 0 6.00 AM 9:00 AM 12.00 PM 3:00 PM 6:00 PM 9.00 PM 12:00 AM 3:00 AM i i I(' L~ APPENDIX H 3/13/2007 Sheet 8 of 8 , Project ID No. 050650501 Little Lick Creek Resroration Project, Durham County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN APPENDIX I t KO CURVE SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION ~i ~I r~ I 0 I'~ KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. Constdling Engincu•s i~ 1 1 UT Ledge Creek Triassic Basin Ecoregion within the Neuse River Basin DA=2.91 SM, ABKF=20.6sf, WBKF=16.4ft, DBKF=1.3ft, QBFK=18.1 cfs Ledge Creek Triassic Basin Ecoregion within the Neuse River Basin DA=20.06SM, ABKF=93.3sf, WBKF=36.6ft, DBKF=2.5ft, QBFK=163.3cfs a KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C'. (~onsullrni l.r{Lrnur~.~ 0 APPENDIX I Project I D No. O5065USp 1 ittlc Lick C'reel< Restoration Project, Ihirham ('oui~ty_ North ('arolina RE5 I (_)IZ:1 Il(~N PLAN O O O W ~O ^V'I r~' W V L V W L ca ~ ~ •N V ~ .~ m O V = .N ~ ~ ~ co ~ 'i Ri H m O O o a .~ 0 0 a6aeyas!Q Iln~~ue8 APPENDIX I •~ L 0 V V ~ W = L 'N Q M~ ~ W ~ ~~ N •~ Ur ~ °x ~ o m °? ~~ ~. o m ~ ii ~ N ~ ~ II ~ U ~' Z 0 0 0 U O L ^ LL O . ~ L 0 m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ E ~ ~ J J ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ U U U cn .~ Y - c c N U N~ U U U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c~ ~ U o~ c c ~ ~ J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o a~~U~~ U~ ~U oUU ZF- JZYZZ I I N c t9 d o Q r- m a~ ca c .~ L 0 y 0 ~S eaat~ Iln~~iUe9 APPEND[X 1 O O O W /~ •~ V L ~ •i•+ V W 'N ~ ,v W C •/V~/ v ~L ~ M l~ 4~daa Iln~~lUe9 O O c co L ~ Q r ~ .~ 0 APPENDIX I O O O }~ •Tl1 L ~ V V ~ W ~ __ m ~ V ~ •N ~ N ~ •~ m ~"' l~ 4~p!M Iln~~lu~8 O O C d o ~ a~ ca c .~ D T APPENDIX I Project ID No. OSOb50501 Little C.ick Creek Restoration Project, Dur}~am County, North Carolina RESTORATION PLAN 7 APPENDIX J SEDIMENT LOSS DOCUMENTATION ' a KO & ASSOCIATES, P. C. CwuuilinK En~~inccrs 1 ~'roject 1D No. 050650501 !f~ a ~._' ~~~. ~~! a;;is~i ~'i,~lti`~. i f~Ui ~~ tlll ('UUntV. N(lI'[11 Carolill~~ Example of Mass Wasting and Sediment Loss along Little Lick Creek At Green #11 Picture taken August 2, 2005 Example of Mass Wasting and Sediment Loss along Little Lick Creek At Green #11 Picture taken February 22, 2007 ' a KO & ASSOC'IATF.S, P. C. Cunsnllin,L l:r;t~rnrrrc ' APPENDIX J n i~ 1 1 Little Lick Creek: Sediment Loss Along Banks in Fairways Stream: Little Lick Total Bank Len the 3393' Stream T e: C 5 Observers: RVS/RKW Date: 1/9/2007 Gra h Used: North Carolina BEHI NBS Erosion Rate (ft/yr) Length of Bank (ft) Bank Height (ft) Erosion Sub- total (ft3/yr) Tons/yr/ft 1 HIGH MODERATE 0.17 44 5.9 44 0.05 2 VERY HIGH EXTREME 1.4 52 5.9 430 0.40 3 HIGH MODERATE 0.17 54 5.9 54 0.05 4 VERY HIGH EXTREME 1.4 37 5.9 306 0.40 5 HIGH MODERATE 0.17 52 5.9 52 0.05 6 VERY HIGH EXTREME 1.4 125 5.9 1033 0.40 7 HIGH MODERATE 0.17 43 5.9 43 0.05 8 HIGH MODERATE 0.17 49 5.9 49 0.05 9 VERY HIGH EXTREME 1.4 51 5.9 421 0.40 10 VERY HIGH EXTREME 1.4 48 5.9 396 0.40 11 HIGH MODERATE 0.17 92 5.9 92 0.05 12 VERY HIGH EXTREME 1.4 110 5.9 909 0.40 13 HIGH MODERATE 0.17 55 5.9 55 0.05 14 VERY HIGH EXTREME 1.4 120 5.9 991 0.40 15 HIGH MODERATE 0.17 143 5.9 143 0.05 16 VERY HIGH EXTREME 1.4 80 5.9 661 0.40 17 HIGH MODERATE 0.17 144 5.9 144 0.05 18 HIGH MODERATE 0.17 78 5.9 78 0.05 19 VERY HIGH EXTREME 1.4 114 5.9 942 0.40 20 HIGH MODERATE 0.17 61 5.9 61 0.05 21 VERY HIGH EXTREME 1.4 126 5.9 1041 0.40 22 MODERATE MODERATE 0.04 1650 7.5 495 0.01 23 MODERATE MODERATE 0.04 65 7.5 20 0.01 I. Sum erosion sub-totals for each BEHI/NBS combination Total Erosion (ft3/yr) 8460 II. Divide total erosion (ft3 by 27 ft3/yd3 Total Erosion (yd3/yr) 313 III. Multiply total erosion (y ) by 1.3 (conversion of yd3 to tons for average material type) Total Erosion (tons/yr) 407 IV. Divide tons/yr by total length of bank Tons/yr/ft 0.12 APPENDIX J