The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20190157 Ver 1_Year 0 Monitoring Report_2021_20210622Mitigation Project Information Upload ID#* 20190157 Select Reviewer:* Version* 1 Erin Davis Initial Review Completed Date 06/22/2021 Mitigation Project Submittal - 6/22/2021 Is this a Prospectus, Technical Proposal or a New Site?* r Yes r No Type of Mitigation Project:* rJ Stream r Wetlands fJ Buffer r Nutrient Offset (Select all that apply) Project Contact Information Contact Name:* Jeremiah Dow Project Information ID#:* 20190157 Existing ID## Project Type: C' DMS r Mitigation Bank Project Name: Perry Hill Mitigation Site County: Orange Document Information .................................................................................................................................................................. Mitigation Document Type:* Mitigation As -Built Plans File Upload: Signature Print Name:* Signature:* Email Address:* jeremiah.dow@ncdenr.gov Version: *1 Existing Version PerryHi ll_100093_MY0_2021. pdf 23.92MB Rease upload only one R7Fof the complete file that needs to be submitted... Jeremiah Dow BASELINE MONITORING DOCUMENT AND AS-BUILT BASELINE REPORT FINAL PERRY HILL MITIGATION SITE Orange County, NC NCDEQ Contract No. 7744 DMS Project Number 100093 USACE Action ID No. 2019-00125 DWR Project No. 2019-0157 Data Collection Period: March - April 2021 Draft Submission Date: May 28, 2021 Final Submission Date: June 18, 2021 PREPARED FOR: NC Department of Environmental Quality Division of Mitigation Services 1652 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (P) 843.277.6221 • 497 Bramson Court, Suite 104 • Mount Pleasant, SC 29464 June 18, 2021 Mr. Jeremiah Dow Project Manager NCDEQ- Division of Mitigation Services 217 West Jones Street, Suite 3000A Raleigh, NC 27603 Subject: Comment-Response Letter Task 6 Draft As-built Baseline Report Perry Hill Mitigation Site, DMS ID# 100093 Neuse River Basin – CU# 03020201, Orange County, North Carolina Contract No. 7744 Dear Mr. Dow: On June 14, 2021, Wildlands Engineering received comments from the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) regarding the Draft As-Built Baseline Report dated May 28, 2021. The following letter documents DMS feedback and Wildlands’ corresponding responses and revisions to the As-Built Report. 1. Table 7c for Perry Branch Reach 4 shows a design bankfull discharge of 35.5 cfs and the monitoring baseline discharge reports a range of 48.3 to 56.4 cfs. Likewise, Table 7f for UT2 Reach 2 shows a design discharge of 8.2 cfs and a monitoring baseline of 20.7 cfs. Please discuss the differences between design and baseline discharge observed for these two reaches. Response: Variations in the computed as-built and design discharge for Perry Branch Reach 4 and UT2 R2 are within expected tolerances and are a result of slight deviations between constructed and design conditions. More specifically, for Perry Branch Reach 4 the constructed channel side slope is slightly flatter (e.g., 3.5:1 compared to 3:1) than the design concept. This deviation results in a slight increase in the cross-sectional area for this reach and corresponding increase in discharge. Similar to Perry Branch Reach 4, variations in the computed as-built and design discharge for UT2 R2 are within expected tolerances and are a result of slight deviations between constructed and design conditions. For UT2 R2, the constructed riffle depth is slightly deeper than design, resulting in a larger cross-sectional area and computed bankfull discharge. Wildlands noted an increase in substrate size along these reaches, mitigating the risk of channel degradation due to a slightly higher discharge and shear stress. Wildlands revisited the sediment transport analysis and the results indicate that the reported as-built bankfull discharge will not adversely impact the stability of the channel. Channel degradation is not anticipated. DMS’ comment has been addressed in Section 5.2 of the Final As-Built Baseline Report. Page 2 2. The following spatial data issues were identified, please review and revise: a. Perry Branch Reach 3 does not connect with Perry Branch Reach 2 – Crossing. b. The feature for UT3 extends past the confluence of UT3 and overlaps with Perry Branch Reach 3. c. UT 2 Reach 2 extends past the confluence of Perry Branch Reach 3 (e.g. snapping likely wasn’t used). Response: Wildlands addressed the items identified above. The revised length of UT3 is reflected in Tables 1 and 4, enclosed. Updated features (e.g., alignments) are included in a geodatabase with this submittal. Thank you for your review and providing comments on this submittal. If you have any further questions, please contact me at 843.277.6221 or djohnson@ wildlandseng.com. Sincerely, Daniel Johnson, MBA, PE, PH PREPARED BY: Wildlands Engineering, Inc. 312 West Millbrook Road, Suite 225 Raleigh, NC 27609 Jason Lorch jlorch@wildlandseng.com Phone: (919) 851-9986 Perry Hill Mitigation Site Baseline Monitoring Document and As-Built Baseline Report-FINAL i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands) implemented a full delivery project at the Perry Hill Mitigation Site (Site) for the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality Division of Mitigation Services (DMS). The Site is located approximately three miles northwest of the City of Hillsborough in Orange County, NC (Figure 1). A total of 5,401 linear feet (LF) of perennial and intermittent streams were restored and enhanced. The Site is expected to generate 4,042.400 stream credits. The Site is located in the Neuse River Basin 8-Digit Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03020201 and within NC Division of Water Resources (DWR) Subbasin 03-04-01. The Site contains Perry Branch, three unnamed tributaries (UT1, UT2, and UT3) and two ephemeral channels (EC1 and EC3) which flow directly to Corporation Lake, a water supply reservoir on the Eno River. The Eno River is classified as Water Supply Waters (WS-II) and Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW). The 26.88-acre Site is protected with a permanent conservation easement. The Site is located within a DMS Targeted Local Watershed for the Neuse River Basin HUC 03020201030020 as well as within the Eno River watershed planning area as discussed in the 2018 Eno River Watershed Improvement Plan (ERWIP). The ERWIP lists primary objectives of identifying and prioritizing water quality improvement projects, stormwater control measures, and stream restoration opportunities (City of Durham, 2018). The 2009 Neuse River Basinwide Water Quality Plan lists major stressors in Subbasin 03-04-01 to be total suspended solids, nutrients, and chlorophyll α (NCDENR, 2009). The 2010 Neuse River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP) highlights the importance of riparian buffers for stream restoration projects (Breeding, 2010). The project will contribute to achieving goals for the watershed discussed in the RBRP and provide ecological benefits within the Neuse River Basin. While benefits such as habitat improvement and geomorphic stability are limited to the Site, others, such as reduced pollutant and sediment loading, have farther reaching effects. The project goals established in the Mitigation Plan (Wildlands, 2020) were completed with careful consideration of goals and objectives described in the local watershed planning documents. The project goals established include: • Exclude livestock (i.e. cattle) from project streams and adjacent riparian areas; • Improve the stability of stream channels; • Improve instream habitat; • Reconnect channels with floodplains; • Restore and enhance native floodplain vegetation; and • Permanently protect the Site from harmful uses. Site construction and planting were completed in March and April 2021. As-built surveys were conducted in March and April 2021. The Site has been built as designed, with a few exceptions due to field conditions, and is expected to meet the upcoming monitoring year’s performance criteria. Adjustments made during construction and specific changes are detailed in Section 5.1. Baseline (MY0) profiles and cross-section dimensions closely match the design parameters. Minor shifts in stream features as compared to design as illustrated in the as-built drawings are due to differences in design projections (international feet) versus the construction model (US survey feet). These differences were minimal and did not result in any major deviations from design to constructed or as-built stream lengths. Cross-section widths and pool depths occasionally deviate from the design parameters but fall within a normal range of variability for natural streams. Perry Hill Mitigation Site Baseline Monitoring Document and As-Built Baseline Report-FINAL ii PERRY HILL MITIGATION SITE Baseline Monitoring Document and As-Built Baseline Report TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1: PROJECT GOALS, BACKGROUND, AND ATTRIBUTES ........................................................1-1 1.1 Project Location and Setting ...................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Project Goals and Objectives ..................................................................................................... 1-1 1.3 Project Structure, Restoration Type, and Approach .................................................................. 1-2 1.3.1 Project Structure ................................................................................................................ 1-3 1.3.2 Restoration Type and Approach ........................................................................................ 1-3 1.4 Project History, Contacts, and Attribute Data ........................................................................... 1-3 Section 2: PERFORMANCE STANDARDS .........................................................................................2-1 2.1 Stream ........................................................................................................................................ 2-1 2.1.1 Dimension .......................................................................................................................... 2-1 2.1.2 Pattern and Profile ............................................................................................................. 2-1 2.1.3 Substrate ............................................................................................................................ 2-1 2.1.4 Photo Documentation ........................................................................................................ 2-1 2.1.5 Hydrology Documentation ................................................................................................. 2-2 2.2 Vegetation .................................................................................................................................. 2-2 2.3 Visual Assessment ...................................................................................................................... 2-2 2.4 Schedule and Reporting ............................................................................................................. 2-2 Section 3: MONITORING PLAN ......................................................................................................3-1 3.1 Stream ........................................................................................................................................ 3-1 3.1.1 Dimension .......................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1.2 Pattern and Profile ............................................................................................................. 3-1 3.1.3 Substrate ............................................................................................................................ 3-1 3.1.4 Photo Documentation ........................................................................................................ 3-1 3.1.5 Hydrology Documentation ................................................................................................. 3-1 3.2 Vegetation .................................................................................................................................. 3-2 3.3 Visual Assessment ...................................................................................................................... 3-2 Section 4: MAINTENANCE AND CONTINGENCY PLAN .....................................................................4-1 4.1 Stream ........................................................................................................................................ 4-1 4.2 Vegetation .................................................................................................................................. 4-1 4.3 Site Boundary ............................................................................................................................. 4-1 Section 5: AS-BUILT CONDITION (BASELINE) ..................................................................................5-1 5.1 As-Built/Record Drawings .......................................................................................................... 5-1 5.1.1 Perry Branch Reach 1 ......................................................................................................... 5-1 5.1.2 Perry Branch Reach 2 ......................................................................................................... 5-1 5.1.3 Perry Branch Reach 3 ......................................................................................................... 5-1 5.1.4 Perry Branch Reach 4 ......................................................................................................... 5-1 5.1.5 UT1 Reach 1 ....................................................................................................................... 5-1 5.1.6 UT1 Reach 2 ....................................................................................................................... 5-1 5.1.7 UT2 Reach 1 ....................................................................................................................... 5-1 5.1.8 UT2 Reach 2 ....................................................................................................................... 5-2 5.1.9 UT3 ..................................................................................................................................... 5-2 5.2 Baseline Data Assessment ......................................................................................................... 5-2 5.2.1 Morphological State of the Channel .................................................................................. 5-2 5.2.2 Hydrology ........................................................................................................................... 5-2 5.2.3 Vegetation .......................................................................................................................... 5-3 Section 6: REFERENCES .................................................................................................................6-1 Perry Hill Mitigation Site Baseline Monitoring Document and As-Built Baseline Report-FINAL iii TABLES Table 1: Mitigation Goals and Objectives – Perry Hill Mitigation Site ....................................................... 1-2 Table 2: Restoration Type and Approach Per Reach – Perry Hill Mitigation Site ...................................... 1-3 APPENDICES Appendix 1 General Figures and Tables Figure 1 Project Vicinity Map Figure 2 Project Component/Asset Map Table 1 Mitigation Assets and Components Table 2 Project Activity and Reporting History Table 3 Project Contact Table Table 4 Project Information and Attributes Table 5a Monitoring Component Summary (Restoration Reaches) Table 5b Monitoring Component Summary (Enhancement Reaches) Appendix 2 Visual Assessment Data Figure 3 Monitoring Plan View Map Key Figure 3a-b Monitoring Plan View Map Stream Photographs Vegetation Plot Photographs Appendix 3 Vegetation Plot Data Table 6a Fixed Plots: Planted and Total Stem Counts Table 6b Random Plots: Planted and Total Stem Counts Appendix 4 Morphological Summary Data and Plots Table 7a-f Baseline Stream Data Summary Table 8 Morphology and Hydraulic Summary (Dimensional Parameters – Cross-Section) Longitudinal Profile Plots Cross-Section Plots Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots Appendix 5 Record Drawings Appendix 6 Buffer Baseline Monitoring Report Perry Hill Mitigation Site Baseline Monitoring Document and As-Built Baseline Report-FINAL 1-1 Section 1: PROJECT GOALS, BACKGROUND, AND ATTRIBUTES 1.1 Project Location and Setting The Perry Hill Mitigation Site (Site) is located in Orange County approximately three miles northwest of Hillsborough, NC (Figures 1 and 2). Traveling west from Raleigh/Durham, NC, take I-40 W/I-85 S to exit 161 for US-70 Connector N. Take a right at the bottom of the ramp and continue onto US-70 E (1.0 mile) via US-70 Connector N. Continue on US-70 E (1.9 miles) before taking a left onto Faucette Mill Road. Continue (1.9 miles) and take a right onto Frank Perry Road. Destination will be on left (0.5 miles). A conservation easement was recorded on 26.88 acres of the property. The Site is located within the Falls Lake Water Supply Watershed, which is within the Neuse River Basin. Both the Neuse River and Falls Lake have been designated as Nutrient Sensitive Water (NSW). The Site is within HUC 03020201030020 and is located within the Neuse River Targeted Local Watershed (Figure 1) as identified in the 2010 Neuse River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP) (Breeding, 2010). This document highlights the importance of riparian buffers for stream restoration projects. Riparian buffers immobilize and retain nutrients and suspended sediment. The RBRP also supports the Falls Lake watershed plan. The Falls Lake water supply is downstream of the Site and is classified as WS-IV and NSW. The Site is located in the Carolina Slate Belt of the Piedmont Physiographic Province. The Piedmont Province is characterized by gently rolling, well rounded hills with long low ridges and elevations ranging from 300-1500 feet above sea level. The Site topography and relief are typical for the region. The Carolina Slate Belt consists of heated and deformed volcanic and sedimentary rocks. The area is called “Slate Belt” because of the slaty cleavage of many of the surficial rocks. The region’s geology also includes coarse-grained intrusive granites. Aerial photographs from 1938 to present depict the majority of the Site stream reaches in a cleared condition indicating the Site had been managed for pasture and/or for crop production. Between 1950 and 1955, two ponds were constructed on the Site including one within the headwaters of Perry Branch Reach 1 and the other an offline pond adjacent to Perry Branch Reach 4, within the lower portion of the watershed. Table 4 in Appendix 1 and Tables 7a-f in Appendix 4 present additional information on pre- restoration conditions. 1.2 Project Goals and Objectives The project is intended to provide numerous ecological benefits within the Neuse River Basin. While benefits such as habitat improvement and geomorphic stability are limited to the Site, others, such as reduced pollutant and sediment loading, have farther reaching effects. The mitigation goals and objectives for the Site are expected to result in improvements to water quality and ecological processes (Table 1). These goals were established and completed with careful consideration of goals and objectives described in multiple watershed planning documents and to meet the DMS mitigation needs while maximizing the ecological and water quality uplift within the watershed. Perry Hill Mitigation Site Baseline Monitoring Document and As-Built Baseline Report-FINAL 1-2 Table 1: Mitigation Goals and Objectives – Perry Hill Mitigation Site Goal Objective Expected Outcomes Exclude livestock (i.e.cattle) from project streams and adjacent riparian areas. Exclude livestock from streams and riparian areas by installing fencing around project area and/or removing livestock from the Site. Reduce and control sediment inputs; reduce and manage nutrient inputs; contribute to protection of or improvement to a Water Supply Waterbody. Improve the stability of stream channels. Restore and enhance stream channels that will maintain a stable pattern and profile considering the hydrologic and sediment inputs to the system, the landscape setting, and the watershed conditions. Reduce sediment inputs; contribute to protection of or improvement to a Water Supply Waterbody. Improve instream habitat. Install habitat features such as constructed riffles, cover logs, and brush toes on restored/enhanced streams. Add woody materials to channel beds. Construct pools of varying depth. Improve aquatic communities in project streams. Reconnect channels with floodplains. Reconstruct stream channels with appropriate bankfull dimensions and depth relative to the existing floodplain. Reduce and control sediment inputs; reduce and manage nutrient inputs; contribute to protection of or improvement to a Water Supply Waterbody. Restore and enhance native floodplain vegetation. Convert active livestock pasture to forested riparian buffers along all Site streams. Protect and enhance existing forested riparian buffers. Treat invasive species during monitoring period to permit establishment of native plantings. Reduce sediment inputs; provide a canopy to shade streams and reduce thermal loadings; contribute to protection of or improvement to a Water Supply Waterbody. Permanently protect Site from harmful uses. Establish a conservation easement on the Site. Ensure that development and agricultural uses that would damage the Site or reduce the benefits of the project are prevented. 1.3 Project Structure, Restoration Type, and Approach The Mitigation Plan was approved in July 2020. Construction activities were completed by Main Stream Earthwork, Inc. in March 2021. IPW Construction Group, LLC completed the baseline as-built survey and Bruton Natural Systems, Inc. completed planting in April 2021. Refer to Appendix 1 for detailed project activity, history, contact information, and watershed/Site background information. Perry Hill Mitigation Site Baseline Monitoring Document and As-Built Baseline Report-FINAL 1-3 1.3.1 Project Structure The project is expected to generate 4,042.400 stream credits. Refer to Figure 2, Project Component/Asset Map for the stream restoration feature exhibits and Table 1 in Appendix 1 for the project component and mitigation credit information for the Site. 1.3.2 Restoration Type and Approach The Site streams were restored to the appropriate type based on the surrounding landscape, climate, and natural vegetation communities with strong consideration given to existing watershed conditions. The project consists of the stream restoration and enhancement activities as described below (Table 2) and illustrated in Figure 2. Table 2: Restoration Type and Approach Per Reach – Perry Hill Mitigation Site Stream Reach Primary Stressors/Impairments Treatment Approach Restoration Activity Perry Branch R1 Livestock Access, Headcut, Channelization Restoration – Priority 1 Plan, Pattern, Profile, Fencing, Planting R2 Livestock Access, Bank Erosion Enhancement Level II Grade Control, Fencing, Planting R3 Bank Erosion, Incision, Livestock Access, Lack of Riparian Vegetation Restoration – Priority 1 Bank Stabilization, Fencing, Planting R4 Bank Erosion, Incision, Livestock Access, Lack of Riparian Vegetation Restoration – Priority 1 Plan, Pattern, Profile, Replace Fencing, Planting UT1 R1 Livestock Access, Bank Erosion, Lack of Riparian Vegetation, Culvert, Incised, Headcut Restoration – Priority 1 Plan, Pattern, Profile, Fencing, Planting R2 Livestock Access, Bank Erosion, Lack of Riparian Vegetation Restoration – Priority 1 Plan, Pattern, Profile, Fencing, Planting UT2 R1 Livestock Access, Bank Erosion, Sedimentation Enhancement Level II Bank Stabilization, Fencing, Planting R2 Livestock Access, Deficient Riparian Vegetation, Headcuts, Moderate Incision Enhancement Level I Constructed Riffles, Bank Stabilization, Fencing, Planting UT3 Livestock Access, Bank Erosion Enhancement Level II Bank Stabilization, Fencing, Planting The design approach for this Site employed a combination of analog and analytical approaches for stream restoration. Reference reaches were identified to serve as an acceptable range for design parameters. Channels were sized based on design discharge hydrologic analysis. Designs were then verified and/or modified based on a sediment transport analysis. This approach has been used on many successful Piedmont and Slate Belt restoration projects (e.g., Underwood, Foust, Holman Mill, Maney Farm, and Agony Acres Mitigation Sites) and is appropriate for the goals and objectives for this Site. The morphologic design parameters are shown in Appendix 4, Tables 7a-f for the restoration and enhancement I reaches, and fall within the ranges specified for C4, B4, and C4b streams (Rosgen, 1996). 1.4 Project History, Contacts, and Attribute Data The Site was restored by Wildlands through a full delivery contract with DMS. Tables 2, 3, and 4 in Appendix 1 provide detailed information regarding the project activity and reporting history, project contacts, and project information and attributes. Perry Hill Mitigation Site Baseline Monitoring Document and As-Built Baseline Report-FINAL 2-1 Section 2: PERFORMANCE STANDARDS The stream performance standards for the project will follow approved standards presented in the Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Updated in October 2016 by the North Carolina Interagency Review Team (NCIRT). Annual monitoring and semi-annual site visits will be conducted by qualified personnel to assess the condition of the project. Specific performance standard components as presented in Section 2.1 for stream morphology, hydrology, and vegetation will be evaluated throughout the seven-year post-construction monitoring. 2.1 Stream 2.1.1 Dimension Riffle cross-sections on the restoration reaches should be stable and should show little change in bankfull area, maximum depth ratio, and width-to-depth ratio. Per DMS guidance, bank height ratios shall not exceed 1.2 and entrenchment ratios shall be at least 2.2 for restored C channels and no less than 1.4 for B channels to be considered stable. All riffle cross-sections should fall within the parameters defined for channels of the design stream type. If any changes do occur, these changes will be evaluated to assess whether the stream channel is showing signs of instability. Indicators of instability include a vertically incising thalweg or eroding channel banks. Changes in the channel that indicate a movement toward stability or enhanced habitat include a decrease in the width-to-depth ratio in meandering channels or an increase in pool depth. Remedial action would not be taken if channel changes indicate a movement toward stability. 2.1.2 Pattern and Profile Longitudinal profile surveys will not be conducted during the seven-year monitoring period unless other indicators during the annual monitoring indicate a trend toward vertical and lateral instability. If a longitudinal profile is deemed necessary, monitoring will follow standards as described in the NCIRT Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update (2016) and the 2003 USACE and DWR Stream Mitigation Guidance for the necessary reaches. Visual assessments and photo documentation should indicate that streams are stable and do not indicate a trend toward vertical or lateral instability. A longitudinal profile was conducted as part of the as-built survey to provide a baseline for comparison should it become necessary to perform longitudinal profile surveys later during monitoring and to insure accordance with design plans. 2.1.3 Substrate Channel substrate materials will be sampled in the five restoration reaches (Perry Branch Reach 1, 3, and 4 and UT1 Reach 1 and 2) and the one enhancement I reach (UT2 Reach 2) using the reach-wide pebble count method. Reaches should show maintenance of coarser substrate in the riffles than in the pools. Riffle cross-section pebble counts were conducted during as-built baseline monitoring and will not be conducted during annual monitoring unless observations indicate a trend toward finer substrate and a comparison is needed. 2.1.4 Photo Documentation Photographs should illustrate the Site’s vegetation and morphological stability on an annual basis. Cross- section photos should demonstrate no excessive erosion or degradation of the banks. Longitudinal photos should indicate the absence of persistent mid-channel bars or vertical incision. Grade control structures should remain stable. Deposition of sediment on the bank side of vane arms is preferable. Maintenance of scour pools on the channel side of vane arms is expected. Perry Hill Mitigation Site Baseline Monitoring Document and As-Built Baseline Report-FINAL 2-2 2.1.5 Hydrology Documentation The occurrence of bankfull events will be documented throughout the seven-year monitoring period. Stream monitoring will continue until performance standards in the form of four bankfull events in separate years have been documented. In addition, the restored intermittent channels (UT1 and UT2 Reach 2) will be gaged to document at least 30 consecutive days of flow annually. 2.2 Vegetation Vegetative performance for riparian buffers associated with the stream restoration component of the project (buffer widths 0 – 50 feet) will be in accordance with the Stream Mitigation Guidelines issued October 2016 by the NCIRT. The success criteria are an interim survival rate of 320 planted stems per acre at the end of monitoring year 3 (MY3), 260 stems per acre at the end of monitoring year 5 (MY5), and a final vegetation survival rate of 210 stems per acre at the end of monitoring year 7 (MY7). Trees should also average 7 feet in height at MY5 and 10 feet in height at MY7. No one species shall account for more than 50% of the required number of stems within any vegetation plot at the end of MY7. The extent of invasive species coverage will be monitored and treated as necessary throughout the required monitoring period. 2.3 Visual Assessment Visual assessments should support the specific performance standards for each metric as described above. 2.4 Schedule and Reporting Monitoring reports will be prepared in the fall of each year of monitoring and submitted to DMS. Based on the DMS Annual Monitoring Report Template (June 2017), the monitoring reports will include the following: • Project background which includes project objectives, project structure, restoration type and approach, location and setting, history and background; • Monitoring Current Condition Plan View (CCPV) maps with major project elements noted such as grade control structures, vegetation plots, permanent cross-sections, and crest gages; • Photographs showing views of the restored Site taken from fixed point stations; • Assessment of the stability of the Site based on the cross-sections; • Vegetative data as described above including the establishment of any undesirable plant species; • A description of damage by animals or vandalism; and • Maintenance issues and recommended remediation measures will be detailed and documented. Perry Hill Mitigation Site Baseline Monitoring Document and As-Built Baseline Report-FINAL 3-1 Section 3: MONITORING PLAN Monitoring will consist of collecting morphological, hydrologic, and vegetative data to assess the project performance based on the restoration goals and objectives for seven years or until performance criteria have been met. The performance of the project will be assessed using measurements of the stream channel’s dimension, substrate composition, permanent photographs, surface water hydrology, and vegetation. Any areas identified as high priority problems, such as streambank instability, aggradation/degradation or lack of vegetation establishment will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Any problem areas will be visually noted and remedial actions will be discussed with DMS staff to determine a plan of action. If maintenance is required, a remedial action plan will be included in the annual monitoring report. 3.1 Stream Geomorphic assessments will follow guidelines outlined in the Stream Channel Reference Sites: An Illustrated Guide to Field Techniques (Harrelson et al., 1994), methodologies utilized in the Rosgen stream assessment and classification document (Rosgen, 1994 and 1996), and in the Stream Restoration: A Natural Channel Design Handbook (Doll et al, 2003). Refer to Figure 3 in Appendix 2 and Record Drawings in Appendix 5 for monitoring locations discussed below. 3.1.1 Dimension A total of 11 cross-sections were installed along the stream restoration and enhancement I reaches. Two cross-sections were installed per 1,000 linear feet of stream restoration work. Each cross-section was permanently marked with rebar to establish its location. Cross-section surveys include points measured at all breaks in slope; including top of bank, bankfull, edge of water, and thalweg to monitor any deviations in dimension. Annual cross-section surveys will be conducted in MY1, MY2, MY3, MY5, and MY7. Photographs will be taken annually of the cross-sections looking upstream and downstream. 3.1.2 Pattern and Profile Longitudinal profile surveys will not be conducted during the seven-year monitoring period unless other indicators during the annual monitoring indicate a trend toward vertical and/or lateral instability. Stream pattern and profile will be visually assessed as described below in Section 3.3. 3.1.3 Substrate A reach-wide pebble count will be performed in the five restoration reaches (Perry Branch Reach 1, 3, and 4 and UT1 Reach 1 and 2) and the one enhancement I reach (UT2 Reach 2) during monitoring years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7 for classification purposes and to show that riffle substrate remains coarser than pools. 3.1.4 Photo Documentation A total of 19 permanent photograph reference points were established along the stream reaches after construction. Permanent markers were established so that the same locations and view directions on the Site are photographed annually. Longitudinal stream photographs will be taken looking upstream and downstream once a year to visually document stability. Cross-sectional photos will be taken at each permanent cross-section looking upstream and downstream. The photograph will document the same view annually. 3.1.5 Hydrology Documentation Four automated crest gages and two automated flow gages were installed on Site. Crest gages were installed in surveyed riffle cross-sections on Perry Branch Reach 1, Perry Branch Reach 4, UT1 Reach 2, Perry Hill Mitigation Site Baseline Monitoring Document and As-Built Baseline Report-FINAL 3-2 and UT2 Reach 2 (cross-sections 1, 4, 9, and 10). Flow gages were installed on UT1 Reach 1 and UT2 Reach 2. Gage data will be downloaded quarterly to document the occurrence of bankfull events and baseflow on the restoration and enhancement I intermittent channels. 3.2 Vegetation Planted woody vegetation will be monitored in accordance with the guidelines and procedures developed by the Carolina Vegetation Survey-EEP Level 2 Protocol (Lee et al., 2008). A total of 12 standard 10-meter by 10-meter vegetation plots and 2 non-standard 5-meter by 20-meter vegetation plots were established within the project easement area (12 fixed and 2 random). Vegetation plots were randomly established throughout the planted area within the conservation easement boundaries. Fixed vegetation plot corners have been marked and are recoverable either through field identification or with the use of a GPS unit. Reference photographs were taken from the origin looking diagonally across the plot to the opposite corner during the baseline monitoring in April 2021. Subsequent annual assessments will capture the same reference photograph locations. Planted woody stems will be marked annually; as needed, based off a known origin so they can be found in subsequent monitoring years. A new center point will arbitrarily be chosen each year within the conservation easement planted areas for the two random vegetation plots. Trees within a 100 square meter area will be measured and assessed as described below. Species composition, density, and survival rates will be evaluated on an annual basis by plot and for the entire Site. Individual plot data will be documented and will include height, density, vigor, damage (if any), and survival. Survival rates will be determined from the difference between the baseline year’s planted stems and the current year’s living planted stems. Vegetation surveys will be conducted during monitoring years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7. 3.3 Visual Assessment Visual assessments will be performed at the Site on a semi-annual basis during the seven-year monitoring period. Problem areas will be noted such as channel instability (i.e. lateral and/or vertical instability, in-stream structure failure/instability and/or piping, or headcuts), vegetation health (i.e. low stem density, vegetation mortality, invasive species, or encroachment), beaver activity, or livestock access. Areas of concern will be mapped and accompanied by a written description in the annual report. Problem areas will be re-evaluated during each subsequent visual assessment. Should remedial actions be required, recommendations will be provided in the annual monitoring report. Perry Hill Mitigation Site Baseline Monitoring Document and As-Built Baseline Report-FINAL 4-1 Section 4: MAINTENANCE AND CONTINGENCY PLAN Wildlands will perform maintenance as needed at the Site. A physical inspection of the Site shall be conducted a minimum of once per year throughout the post-construction monitoring period until performance standards are met. These site inspections may identify components and features that require routine maintenance. Routine maintenance should be expected most often in the first two years following construction and may include one or more of the following components. 4.1 Stream Stream problem areas will be mapped and included in the CCPV as part of the annual stream assessment. Stream problems areas may include bank erosion, structure failure, beaver dams, aggradation/degradation, etc. Routine channel maintenance and repair activities may include chinking of in-stream structures to prevent piping, securing loose coir matting, and supplemental installations of live stakes and other target vegetation along the channel. Areas where stormwater runoff flows into the channel may also require maintenance to prevent bank failures and headcutting. 4.2 Vegetation Vegetation shall be maintained to ensure the health and vigor of the targeted community. Vegetative problem areas will be mapped and included in the CCPV as part of the annual vegetation assessment. Vegetation problem areas may include planted vegetation not meeting performance criteria, persistent invasive species, barren areas with little to no herbaceous cover, or grass suffocation/crowding of planted stems. Routine vegetation maintenance and repair activities may include supplemental planting, pruning, mulching, and fertilizing. Exotic invasive plant species shall be controlled by mechanical and/or chemical methods. Any vegetation control requiring herbicide application will be performed in accordance with NC Department of Agriculture rules and regulations. 4.3 Site Boundary Site boundary issues will be mapped and included in the CCPV as part of the annual visual assessment. Site boundaries shall be identified in the field to ensure clear distinction between the Site and adjacent properties. Boundaries are marked with conservation easement signs attached to posts. Boundary markers disturbed, damaged, or destroyed will be repaired and/or replaced on an as needed basis. Perry Hill Mitigation Site Baseline Monitoring Document and As-Built Baseline Report-FINAL 5-1 Section 5: AS-BUILT CONDITION (BASELINE) The Site construction was completed in March 2021 and as-built surveys were completed in April 2021. The survey included developing an as-built topographic surface; as well as surveying the as-built channel centerlines, top of banks, structures, and cross-sections. For comparison purposes, baseline monitoring divided the assessment reaches in the same way they were established for design parameters: Perry Branch Reaches 1-4, UT1 Reaches 1-2, UT2 Reaches 1-2, and UT3. Minor shifts in stream features as compared to design as illustrated in the as-built drawings are due to differences in the projections utilized for design (international feet) versus the construction model (US survey feet). These differences were minimal and did not result in any major deviations from design to as-built. 5.1 As-Built/Record Drawings The sealed half-size set of record drawings include the post-construction survey, alignments, structures, and monitoring features (Appendix 5). These include redlines for any significant field adjustments made during construction that differ from the design plans. Where needed, adjustments were made during construction based on field evaluation and are listed below. 5.1.1 Perry Branch Reach 1 • No significant changes made. 5.1.2 Perry Branch Reach 2 • Station 103+70 floodplain log sill supplemented with rock to stabilize bank at wetland outlet. • Station 106+80 pool not installed due to stability needed upstream of culvert. 5.1.3 Perry Branch Reach 3 • No significant changes made. 5.1.4 Perry Branch Reach 4 • Station 122+90 floodplain log sill location adjusted in the field to provide improved bank stabilization from concentrated runoff. • Station 127+58 log sill not installed due to bedrock in channel. • Station 132+75 vernal pool not installed due to sufficient material on site to fill existing channel. 5.1.5 UT1 Reach 1 • Above station 200+00 lunker log replaced with base layer of larger riprap separated with filter fabric and topped with ABC stone at 3:1 slope to promote drainage and prevent erosion upstream. • Floodplain sills along UT1 not installed due to adequate floodplain stability and to decrease floodplain grading. 5.1.6 UT1 Reach 2 • Floodplain sills along UT1 not installed due to adequate floodplain stability and to decrease floodplain grading. 5.1.7 UT2 Reach 1 • Station 301+45 vegetated soil lift replaced with brush toe due to available materials on-site. Perry Hill Mitigation Site Baseline Monitoring Document and As-Built Baseline Report-FINAL 5-2 5.1.8 UT2 Reach 2 • Station 302+45 riffle not installed to avoid damaging adjacent tree roots. • Station 311+57 log sill not installed to avoid damaging tree roots adjacent to channel. 5.1.9 UT3 • No significant changes made. 5.2 Baseline Data Assessment Baseline monitoring (MY0) was conducted between March and April 2021. The first annual monitoring assessment (MY1) will be completed in late 2021. The streams will be monitored for a total of seven years, with the final monitoring activities concluding in 2027. The close-out for the Site will be conducted in 2028 given the performance criteria have been met. 5.2.1 Morphological State of the Channel Refer to Appendix 2 for stream photographs and Appendix 4 for summary data tables and morphological plots. Profile The MY0 longitudinal profiles closely match the design profiles for the Site. On the design profiles, pools and riffles were depicted as straight lines with consistent slopes. The as-built surveyed profiles are not as consistent in slope due to natural deposition and scour. Pool and riffle depths and slopes are expected to be maintained near design parameter values. Dimension The MY0 channel dimensions are within an acceptable range of the design parameters. The channels are expected to maintain dimensions of C4, C4b, or B4 Rosgen type channels. Summary data and cross- section plots of each project reach are included in Appendix 4. Minor variations in cross sectional area were noted for Perry Branch Reach 4 (Cross-Sections 4 and 7) and UT2 Reach 2 (Cross-Section 10). On Perry Branch Reach 4, the right channel sideslopes were closer to 3.5:1 as opposed to the design slope of 3:1. This results in a larger cross-sectional area. For UT2 Reach 2, the top width of the channel was larger than the design width (~1.7 ft) and the max riffle depth was approximately 0.5’ deeper than the design depth. In both of these reaches these deviations result in an increase in bankfull discharge from the design discharge. Pattern No major changes to design alignments were made during construction and therefore the as-built pattern closely matches the design, with the exception of minor deviations due to projection differences, as previously discussed. Sediment Transport As-built shear stress and velocities are comparable to the results presented in the mitigation plan (design) for most reaches. However, the computed as-built shear stress and velocities indicate minor differences for Perry Branch Reach 4 and UT2 Reach 2 and a higher computed discharge. Wildland also documented an overall increase in substrate particle size for these reaches (Appendix 4). Despite these differences, the as-built shear stress calculated for the constructed channels are within an allowable range. As such, the baseline monitoring results indicate these reaches are not at risk of degradation. 5.2.2 Hydrology Flow and crest gages were installed during March 2021. Wildlands will introduce flow and crest gage data in the MY1 Report. Perry Hill Mitigation Site Baseline Monitoring Document and As-Built Baseline Report-FINAL 5-3 5.2.3 Vegetation The MY0 vegetation survey was completed in April 2021. The MY0 planted density is 570 stems per acre which exceeds the MY3 interim stem density requirement of 320 planted stems per acre. Vegetation plot photographs are included in Appendix 2 and summary data for each plot are included in Tables 6a and 6b in Appendix 3. Perry Hill Mitigation Site Baseline Monitoring Document and As-Built Baseline Report-FINAL 6-1 Section 6: REFERENCES Breeding, R. 2010. Neuse River Basin Restoration Priorities. North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program. City of Durham. 2018. Eno River Watershed Improvement Plan. Durham, NC. Doll, B.A., Grabow, G.L., Hall, K.A., Halley, J., Harman, W.A., Jennings, G.D., and Wise, D.E. 2003. Stream Restoration A Natural Channel Design Handbook. Harrelson, Cheryl C; Rawlins, C.L.; Potyondy, John P. 1994. Stream Channel Reference Sites: An Illustrated Guide to Field Technique. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-245. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 61 p. Lee, M.T., Peet, R.K., Roberts, S.D., & Wentworth, T.R. 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation Version 4.2. Accessed at: http://cvs.bio.unc.edu/protocol/cvs-eep-protocol-v4.2-lev1-2.pdf North Carolina Division of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR). 2009. Neuse River Basinwide Water Quality Plan. Raleigh, NC North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (DMS), June 2017. Annual Monitoring Report Template. Raleigh, NC. North Carolina Interagency Review Team. 2016. Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update. Accessed at: https://saw-reg.usace.army.mil/PN/2016/Wilmington-District- Mitigation-Update.pdf Rosgen, D. L. 1994. A classification of natural rivers. Catena 22:169-199. Rosgen, D.L. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Pagosa Springs, CO: Wildland Hydrology Books. United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2003. Stream Mitigation Guidelines. USACE, NCDENR- DWQ, USEPA, NCWRC. United States Geological Survey (USGS), 1998. North Carolina Geology. Accessed at: http://www.geology.enr.state.nc.us/usgs/carolina.htm Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (2020). Perry Hill Mitigation Site - Mitigation Plan. North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS), Raleigh, NC. APPENDIX 1. General Figures and Tables Figure 1. Project Vicinity Map Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 10093 Monitoring Year 0 - 2021 0302020103003003020201030020 03030002060110 03020201020020 03030002030070 03030002050030 03020201030010 03030002050010 03020201020010 03030002060100 03030002060070 03020201030040 03030002050060 03020201010020 03030002030080 03010104061030 Orange County, NC 0 21 Miles 2017 Aerial Photography The subject project site is an environmental restoration site of the NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) and is encompassed by a recorded conservation easement, but is bordered by land under private ownership. Accessing the site may require traversing areas near or along the easement boundary and therefore access by the general public is not permitted. Access by authorized personnel of state and federal agencies or their designees/contractors involved in the development, oversight, and stewardship of the restoration site is permitted within the terms and timeframes of their defined roles. Any intended site visitation or activity by any person outside of these previously sanctioned roles and activites requires prior coordination with DMS. Project Location County Boundary Hydrologic Unit Code (14-Digit) Targeted Local Watershed Directions: Traveling West on I-40W/I-85S from Raleigh/Durham, follow I-40W/I-85S to exit 161 for US-70 Connector N. Take a right at the bottom of the ramp and continue onto US-70E (1.0 mile) via US-70 Connector N. Continue on US-70E (1.9 miles) before taking a left onto Faucette Mill Rd. Continue (1.9 miles) and take a right onto Frank Perry Road. Destination will be on left (0.5 miles). ¹ @ @ @ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ [ [ [ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[!P !P !P !P !P !5 !5 Perry BranchUT3UT2 UT1 EC3 EC1 Reach 1 Reach 2 Reach 3 Reach 4 Reach 1 Reach 2 Reach 1 Reach 2 Figure 2. Project Component/Asset Map Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 0 – 2021 Orange County, NC 0 200 400 Feet ¹ Project Location Conservation Easement Internal Crossing Existing Wetland Stream Restoration Stream Enhancement I Stream Enhancement II No Credit Project Stream No Credit Ephemeral Channel @ @ @ @ @ No Credit Headwater Conveyance Non-Project Stream [[Fence Existing Utility Easement Existing Utility Line !5 Existing Utility Pole !P Reach Break 2017 Aerial Photography DMS Project No. 100093 Reach ID Existing Footage Mitigation Plan Footage Mitigation Category Restoration Level Priority Level Mitigation Ratio (X:1) Project Credits As-Built Footage Comments Perry Branch Reach 1 326 321 Warm R P1 1.0 321.000 323 Full Channel Restoration, Planted Buffer, Livestock Exclusion Perry Branch Reach 2 417 364 Warm EII N/A 3.5 104.000 362 Grade Control Structures, Invasive Control, Planted Buffer, Livestock Exclusion Internal Crossing N/A 60 N/A N/A N/A 0.0 N/A 60 Culvert Crossing Perry Branch Reach 3 732 691 Warm R P1 1.0 691.000 694 Full Channel Restoration, Planted Buffer, Livestock Exclusion 592 654 Warm R P1 1.0 654.000 662 Full Channel Restoration, Planted Buffer, Livestock Exclusion N/A 60 N/A N/A N/A 0.0 N/A 60 Culvert Crossing 1,469 1,284 Warm R P1 1.0 1,284.000 1,297 Full Channel Restoration, Planted Buffer, Livestock Exclusion UT1 Reach 1 388 285 Warm R P1 1.5 190.000 285 Full Channel Restoration, Planted Buffer, Livestock Exclusion UT1 Reach 2 213 291 Warm R P1 1.5 194.000 293 Full Channel Restoration, Planted Buffer, Livestock Exclusion UT2 Reach 1 226 221 Warm EII N/A 2.5 88.400 223 Bank Stabilization, Planted Buffer, Livestock Exclusion UT2 Reach 2 974 947 Warm EI N/A 2.5 378.800 941 Grade Control Structures, Bank Stabilization, Planted Buffer, Livestock Exclusion UT3 357 343 Warm EII N/A 2.5 137.200 319 Grade Control Structures, Bank Stabilization, Planted Buffer, Livestock Exclusion Warm Cool Cold Riverine Non-Riverine Restoration 3,334.000 Enhancement I 378.800 Enhancement II 329.600 Preservation Re-Establishment Rehabilitation Enhancement Creation Total 4,042.400 Restoration Level Riparian WetlandStream Non-Riparian Wetland Coastal Marsh PROJECT CREDITS Table 1. Mitigation Assets and Components Perry Hill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 0 - 2021 PROJECT COMPONENTS STREAMS Perry Branch Reach 4 DMS Project No. 100093 DMS Project No. 100093 Soils ripped to a depth of 15‐18 inches March‐April 2021 April 2021 Bare Roots 1Seed and mulch is added as each section of construction is completed. 497 Bramson Ct, Suite 104 Mt. Pleasant, SC 29464 Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2021 Reidsville, NC 27320 631 Camp Dan Valley Rd Planting Contractor Seed Mix Sources December 2026 Perry Hill Mitigation Site 2027Year 7 Monitoring Main Stream Earthwork, Inc. Table 3. Project Contact Table 2027Stream Survey Vegetation Survey December 2027 Baseline Monitoring Document (Year 0)Stream Survey December 2023 December 2024 2025 December 2025 Year 1 Monitoring Year 5 Monitoring Stream Survey Stream Survey 2023 2022 2021 December 20212021 Stream Survey Vegetation Survey Final Design ‐ Construction Plans September 2020 Year 2 Monitoring Year 3 Monitoring April 2021 September 2020 Bare root and live stake plantings for reach/segments April 2021 April 2021 Permanent seed mix applied to reach/segments 1 March 2021 March 2021 Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History Activity or Report Data Collection Complete Completion or Scheduled Delivery Mitigation Plan July 2020 July 2020 Perry Hill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2021 631 Camp Dan Valley Rd Main Stream Earthwork, Inc. P.O. Box 1197 Seeding Contractor March 2021 Temporary S&E mix applied to entire project area 1 March 2021 March 2021 Construction January‐March 2021 Reidsville, NC 27320 919.851.9986 Jason Lorch Nursery Stock Suppliers Monitoring Performers Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Monitoring, POC Bruton Natural Systems, IncLive Stakes Bruton Natural Systems, Inc 843.277.6221 Designer Geoff Smith, PE Green Resources Fremont, NC 27830 Construction Contractor 2024 Vegetation Survey Stream Survey Vegetation Survey Colfax, NC 27235 2026 Year 4 Monitoring Year 6 Monitoring 2025 Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Vegetation Survey March 2021 May 2021 December 20222022 2023 Vegetation Survey Lansing, NC 28643 Dykes and Sons Nursery and Greenhouse 825 Maude Etter Rd McMinnville, TN 37110 5204 Highgreen Court 797 Helton Creek Rd Foggy Mountain Nursery DMS Project No.100093 Perry Branch Reach 1 Perry Branch Reach 2 Perry Branch Reach 3 Perry Branch Reach 4 UT1 Reach 1 UT1 Reach 2 UT2 Reach 1 UT2 Reach 2 UT3 323 362 694 1,959 285 293 223 941 319 Unconfined Unconfined Moderately Confined Moderately Confined Confined to Moderately Confined Moderately Confined Confined Moderately Confined Unconfined 58 66 117 175 9 10 15 23 20 34.00 ------------27.25 ---26.50 22.00 G4c C4 G4c F4 E6b F4b C6 E4 C4 C4 C4 C4 C4 B4 C4b C6 C4 C4 III V IV III/IV III/IV III/IV V III/IV III/V Applicable Resolved Yes Yes Yes Yes N/A N/A Yes Yes Yes Yes N/A N/A N/A Yes N/A N/A Supporting Documentation Morphological Description (stream type) - Pre-Restoration NCDWR Stream Identification Score PROJECT INFORMATION Perry Hill Mitigation SiteProject Name Orange CountyCounty 36° 06’ 25.81” N, 79° 07’ 46.66” WProject Coordinates (latitude and longitude) FEMA Classification Waters of the United States - Section 401 Endangered Species Act Division of Land Quality (Dam Safety) Regulation IntermittentPerennial WS-II/HQW/NSW None REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS 26.88 20.53 Project Area (acres) Planted Acreage (acres of woody stems planted) Carolina Slate Belt of the Piedmont Physiographic Province Neuse River PROJECT WATERSHED SUMMARY INFORMATION Table 4. Project Information and Attributes 03020201 03020201030020 03-04-01 174 <1% Physiographic Province River Basin USGS Hydrologic Unit 8-digit USGS Hydrologic Unit 14-digit Project Drainiage Area (acres) Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area CGIA Land Use Classification REACH SUMMARY INFORMATION Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA)/Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) USACE Nationwide Permit No. 27 and DWQ 401 Water Quality Certification No. 4134. Length of Reach (linear feet) - Post-Restoration NCDWR Water Quality Classification Waters of the United States - Section 404 Historic Preservation Act Perry Hill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 0 - 2021 Evolutionary Trend (Simon's Model) - Pre-Restoration Parameters Morphological Description (stream type) - Post-Restoration Valley Confinement (confined, moderately confined, unconfined) Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral Drainage Area (acres) 68% managed herbaceous cover/pasture, 22% forested, 5% shrub, 3% grassland/herbaceous, 2% residential area, <1% impervious DWR Sub-basin (---): Data was not provided N/A Per the Perry Hill Mitigation Site Self-Certification Letter dated April 16, 2019; the US Fish and Wildlife Service does "concur with the "no effect" or "not likely to adversely affect" determinations for proposed and listed species and proposed and designated critical habitat; the "may affect" determination for Northern long-eared bat; and/or the "no Eagle Act permit required" determinations for eagles. Correspondence from SHPO on April 2, 2019 stated they were aware of "no historic resources which would be affected by the project." N/A N/A N/AEssential Fisheries Habitat FEMA Floodplain Compliance Table 5a. Monitoring Component Summary (Restoration Reaches)Perry Hill Mitigation SiteDMS Project No. 100093Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2021Perry Branch Reach 1Perry Branch Reach 3Perry Branch Reach 4UT1 Reach 1UT1 Reach 2Riffle Cross‐Sections11211Pool Cross‐Sections01200PatternPatternN/AProfileLongitudinal ProfileYear 0 (Unless Required)SubstrateReachwide Pebble Count11111Year 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7HydrologyTransducer: Crest Gage (CG) or Flow Gage (FG)1 CG 1 FG 1 CGQuarterlyVegetationCVS Level 2 Vegetation PlotsYear 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7Visual AssessmentSemi‐AnnualExotic and Nuisance VegetationSemi‐AnnualProject BoundarySemi‐ AnnualReference PhotosPhotographsAnnualTable 5b. Monitoring Component Summary (Enhancement Reaches)Perry Hill Mitigation SiteDMS Project No. 100093Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2021Perry Branch Reach 2UT2 Reach 1UT2 Reach 2UT3Riffle Cross‐SectionsN/AN/A1N/APool Cross‐SectionsN/AN/A1N/APatternPatternN/AProfileLongitudinal ProfileN/ASubstrateReachwide Pebble CountN/AN/A1N/AYear 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7HydrologyTransducer: Crest Gage (CG) or Flow Gage (FG)N/AN/A1 FG / 1 CGN/AQuarterlyVegetationCVS Level 2 Vegetation PlotsYear 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7Visual AssessmentSemi‐AnnualExotic and Nuisance VegetationSemi‐AnnualProject BoundarySemi‐ AnnualReference PhotosPhotographsAnnual7ParameterMonitoring FeatureQuantity / Length by ReachFrequencyDimensionYear 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7N/AYesN/A2 FixedQuantity / Length by ReachN/AN/A1 CG10 Fixed, 2 RandomYesFrequencyParameterMonitoring FeatureDimensionYear 1, 2, 3, 5, and 712 APPENDIX 2. Visual Assessment Data @ @ @ @ !P !P !P !P !P !A !A !A !A !A !A !A [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ [ [ [ [ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[$8 $8$8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF !5 !5 Perry BranchUT1 UT2 EC3 UT3 Perry BranchEC1 Reach 1 Reach 2 Reach 2 Reach 1 Reach 3 Reach 4 Reach 4 Reach 2 Reach 1 Figure 3a Figure 3b Orange County, NC 0 300150 Feet Project Location Conservation Easement Existing Wetland Internal Crossing Fixed Vegetation Plot Random Vegetation Plot Stream Restoration Stream Enhancement I Stream Enhancement II No Credit Project Stream No Credit Ephemeral Channel @ @ @ @ @ No Credit Headwater Conveyance Non-Project Stream Cross-Section [[Fence Existing Utility Easement Existing Utility Line !5 Existing Utility Pole !A Crest Gage !A Flow Gage !A Barotroll GF Photo Point !P Reach Break $8 Gate Figure 3. Monitoring Plan View Map Key Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 0 - 2021¹ 2017 Aerial Photography !P !P !P !P !A !A !A !A [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[$8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF UT2 EC3 UT3 Perry BranchReach 1 Reach 2 Reach 2 Reach 1 Reach 3 XS 1 XS2 XS3XS10XS11 PP3 PP5 PP4 PP1 PP18 PP17 PP16 PP15 PP14 PP19 PP2 310+00 308+00 306+00 304+00 302+00 300+00 402+00 400+00 114+00 112+00 110+00 108+00 106+00 104+00 102+00 100+00 1 3 2 11 13 12 Orange County, NC 0 15075 Feet Project Location Conservation Easement Existing Wetland Internal Crossing Fixed Vegetation Plot Random Vegetation Plot Stream Restoration Stream Enhancement I Stream Enhancement II No Credit Project Stream No Credit Ephemeral Channel @ @ @ @ @ No Credit Headwater Conveyance Non-Project Stream [[Fence Top of Bank Structure Cross-Section (XS) !A Crest Gage !A Flow Gage !A Barotroll GF Photo Point (PP) !P Reach Break $8 Gate Figure 3a. Monitoring Plan View Map Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 0 - 2021¹ 2017 Aerial Photography @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ !P !P !A !A !A [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ [ [ [ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[$8 $8 $8 $8 $8 GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF !5 Perry BranchUT1 EC1 Reach 4 Reach 4 Reach 2 Reach 1 X S 4 XS5 XS7XS6 XS8 XS9 PP9 PP8 PP7 PP6 PP11 PP10 PP13 PP12 205+00 204+00 203+00 202+00 200+00 134+00 132+00 130+00 128+00 126+00 124+00 122+00 120+00 118+00 116+00 135+81 5 6 8 9 7 4 3 2 10 14 Orange County, NC Project Location Conservation Easement Existing Wetland Internal Crossing Fixed Vegetation Plot Random Vegetation Plot Stream Restoration Stream Enhancement I Stream Enhancement II No Credit Project Stream No Credit Ephemeral Channel @ @ @ @ @ No Credit Headwater Conveyance Non-Project Stream Top of Bank Structure Cross-Section (XS) [[Fence Existing Utility Easement Existing Utility Line !5 Existing Utility Pole !A Crest Gage !A Flow Gage GF Photo Point (PP) !P Reach Break $8 Gate Figure 3b. Monitoring Plan View Map Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 0 - 2021 2017 Aerial Photography 0 15075 Feet ¹ STREAM PHOTOGRAPHS Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix 2: Visual Assessment Data – Stream Photographs PHOTO POINT 1 Perry Branch R1 – upstream (04/08/2021) PHOTO POINT 1 Perry Branch R1 – downstream (04/08/2021) PHOTO POINT 2 Perry Branch R2 – upstream (04/08/2021) PHOTO POINT 2 Perry Branch R2 – downstream (04/08/2021) PHOTO POINT 3 Perry Branch R3 – upstream (04/08/2021) PHOTO POINT 3 Perry Branch R3 – downstream (04/08/2021) Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix 2: Visual Assessment Data – Stream Photographs PHOTO POINT 4 Perry Branch R3 – upstream (04/08/2021) PHOTO POINT 4 Perry Branch R3 – downstream (04/08/2021) PHOTO POINT 5 Perry Branch R3 – upstream (04/08/2021) PHOTO POINT 5 Perry Branch R3 – downstream (04/08/2021) PHOTO POINT 6 Perry Branch R4 – upstream (04/08/2021) PHOTO POINT 6 Perry Branch R4 – downstream (04/08/2021) Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix 2: Visual Assessment Data – Stream Photographs PHOTO POINT 7 Perry Branch R4 – upstream (04/08/2021) PHOTO POINT 7 Perry Branch R4 – downstream (04/08/2021) PHOTO POINT 8 Perry Branch R4 – upstream (04/08/2021) PHOTO POINT 8 Perry Branch R4 – downstream (04/08/2021) PHOTO POINT 9 Perry Branch R4 – upstream (04/08/2021) PHOTO POINT 9 Perry Branch R4 – downstream (04/08/2021) Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix 2: Visual Assessment Data – Stream Photographs PHOTO POINT 10 Perry Branch R4 – upstream (04/08/2021) PHOTO POINT 10 Perry Branch R4 – downstream (04/08/2021) PHOTO POINT 11 Perry Branch R4 – upstream (04/08/2021) PHOTO POINT 11 Perry Branch R4 – downstream (04/08/2021) PHOTO POINT 12 UT1 R1 – upstream (04/08/2021) PHOTO POINT 12 UT1 R1 – downstream (04/08/2021) Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix 2: Visual Assessment Data – Stream Photographs PHOTO POINT 13 UT1 R2 – upstream (04/08/2021) PHOTO POINT 13 UT1 R2 – downstream (04/08/2021) PHOTO POINT 14 UT2 R1 – upstream (04/08/2021) PHOTO POINT 14 UT2 R1 – downstream (04/08/2021) PHOTO POINT 15 UT2 R2 – upstream (04/08/2021) PHOTO POINT 15 UT2 R2 – downstream (04/08/2021) Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix 2: Visual Assessment Data – Stream Photographs PHOTO POINT 16 UT2 R2 – upstream (04/08/2021) PHOTO POINT 16 UT2 R2 – downstream (04/08/2021) PHOTO POINT 17 UT2 R2 – upstream (04/08/2021) PHOTO POINT 17 UT2 R2 – downstream (04/08/2021) PHOTO POINT 18 UT3 – upstream (04/08/2021) PHOTO POINT 18 UT3 – downstream (04/08/2021) Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix 2: Visual Assessment Data – Stream Photographs PHOTO POINT 19 UT3 – upstream (04/08/2021) PHOTO POINT 19 UT3 – downstream (04/08/2021) VEGETATION PLOT PHOTOGRAPHS Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix 2: Visual Assessment Data – Vegetation Plot Photographs FIXED VEG PLOT 1 (04/06/2021) FIXED VEG PLOT 2 (04/06/2021) FIXED VEG PLOT 3 (04/06/2021) FIXED VEG PLOT 4 (04/08/2021) FIXED VEG PLOT 5 (04/08/2021) FIXED VEG PLOT 6 (04/06/2021) Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix 2: Visual Assessment Data – Vegetation Plot Photographs FIXED VEG PLOT 7 (04/06/2021) FIXED VEG PLOT 8 (04/06/2021) FIXED VEG PLOT 9 (04/06/2021) FIXED VEG PLOT 10 (04/06/2021) FIXED VEG PLOT 11 (04/06/2021) FIXED VEG PLOT 12 (04/06/2021) Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix 2: Visual Assessment Data – Vegetation Plot Photographs RANDOM VEG PLOT 13 (04/06/2021) RANDOM VEG PLOT 14 (04/06/2021) APPENDIX 3. Vegetation Plot Data Table 6a. Fixed Plots: Planted and Total Stem Counts Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 0 - 2021 PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T Acer floridanum Southern Sugar Maple Tree 1 1 1 Acer negundo Boxelder Tree 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 Asimina triloba Common Pawpaw Shrub Tree 2 2 2 Betula nigra River Birch Tree 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 2 2 2 Cornus amomum Silky Dogwood Shrub Tree 2 2 2 Diospyros virginiana American Persimmon Tree 2 2 2 1 1 1 Nyssa sylvatica Black Gum Tree Platanus occidentalis Sycamore Tree 2 2 2 4 4 4 1 1 1 3 3 3 2 2 2 Populus deltoides Eastern Cottonwood Tree 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 Quercus alba White Oak Tree Quercus lyrata Overcup Oak Tree 2 2 2 2 2 2 Quercus pagoda Cherrybark Oak Tree 4 4 4 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 Quercus phellos Willow Oak Tree 1 1 1 Quercus rubra Northern Red Oak Tree 2 2 2 Ulmus alata Winged Elm Tree Ulmus americana American Elm Tree 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 Viburnum prunifolium Blackhaw Viburnum Shrub Tree 1 1 1 15 15 15 12 12 12 12 12 12 15 15 15 12 12 12 6 6 6 6 6 6 8 8 8 6 6 6 9 9 9 607 607 607 486 486 486 486 486 486 607 607 607 486 486 486 Color for Density Exceeds requirements by 10% Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10% Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10% Fails to meet requirements by more than 10% Volunteer species included in total PnoLS - Planted Stems Excluding Live Stakes P-all - All Planted Stems T - All Woody Stems Stems per ACRE 1 0.02 1 0.02 Species count 1 0.02 Stem count size (ares) size (ACRES) 1 0.02 1 0.02 Scientific Name Common Name Species Type VP 1 VP 2 VP 3 VP 4 VP 5 Current Plot Data (MY0 2021) Table 6a. Fixed Plots: Planted and Total Stem Counts Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 0 - 2021 Acer floridanum Southern Sugar Maple Tree Acer negundo Boxelder Tree Asimina triloba Common Pawpaw Shrub Tree Betula nigra River Birch Tree Cornus amomum Silky Dogwood Shrub Tree Diospyros virginiana American Persimmon Tree Nyssa sylvatica Black Gum Tree Platanus occidentalis Sycamore Tree Populus deltoides Eastern Cottonwood Tree Quercus alba White Oak Tree Quercus lyrata Overcup Oak Tree Quercus pagoda Cherrybark Oak Tree Quercus phellos Willow Oak Tree Quercus rubra Northern Red Oak Tree Ulmus alata Winged Elm Tree Ulmus americana American Elm Tree Viburnum prunifolium Blackhaw Viburnum Shrub Tree Color for Density Exceeds requirements by 10% Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10% Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10% Fails to meet requirements by more than 10% Volunteer species included in total PnoLS - Planted Stems Excluding Live Stakes P-all - All Planted Stems T - All Woody Stems Stems per ACRE Species count Stem count size (ares) size (ACRES) Scientific Name Common Name Species Type PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 1 3 3 3 2 2 2 3 3 3 1 1 1 3 3 3 1 1 1 2 2 2 6 6 6 3 3 3 2 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 17 17 17 12 12 12 18 18 18 13 13 13 16 16 16 6 6 6 9 9 9 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 688 688 688 486 486 486 728 728 728 526 526 526 647 647 647 1 0.02 1 0.02 1 0.02 1 0.02 1 0.02 VP 7 VP 8 VP 9 VP 10VP 6 Current Plot Data (MY0 2021) Table 6a. Fixed Plots: Planted and Total Stem Counts Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 0 - 2021 Acer floridanum Southern Sugar Maple Tree Acer negundo Boxelder Tree Asimina triloba Common Pawpaw Shrub Tree Betula nigra River Birch Tree Cornus amomum Silky Dogwood Shrub Tree Diospyros virginiana American Persimmon Tree Nyssa sylvatica Black Gum Tree Platanus occidentalis Sycamore Tree Populus deltoides Eastern Cottonwood Tree Quercus alba White Oak Tree Quercus lyrata Overcup Oak Tree Quercus pagoda Cherrybark Oak Tree Quercus phellos Willow Oak Tree Quercus rubra Northern Red Oak Tree Ulmus alata Winged Elm Tree Ulmus americana American Elm Tree Viburnum prunifolium Blackhaw Viburnum Shrub Tree Color for Density Exceeds requirements by 10% Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10% Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10% Fails to meet requirements by more than 10% Volunteer species included in total PnoLS - Planted Stems Excluding Live Stakes P-all - All Planted Stems T - All Woody Stems Stems per ACRE Species count Stem count size (ares) size (ACRES) Scientific Name Common Name Species Type PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T 1 1 1 1 1 1 16 16 16 2 2 2 8 8 8 2 2 2 3 3 3 30 30 30 2 2 2 4 4 4 2 2 2 16 16 16 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 36 36 36 1 1 1 10 10 10 2 2 2 2 2 2 7 7 7 1 1 1 17 17 17 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 6 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 12 12 12 3 3 3 15 15 15 15 15 15 172 172 172 7 7 7 8 8 8 17 17 17 607 607 607 607 607 607 580 580 580 1 0.02 12 0.30 1 0.02 Annual Means MY0 (2021)VP 11 VP 12 Current Plot Data (MY0 2021) Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 0 - 2021 Te Total Te Total Te Total Acer negundo Boxelder Tree 1 1 1 1 2 2 Betula nigra River Birch Tree 2 2 2 2 4 4 Cornus amomum Silky Dogwood Shrub Tree 2 2 2 2 Diospyros virginiana Persimmon Tree 2 2 2 2 Platanus occidentalis Sycamore Tree 3 3 1 1 4 4 Populus deltoides Eastern Cottonwood Tree 1 1 1 1 Quercus lyrata Overcup Oak Tree 2 2 2 2 Quercus pagoda Cherrybark Oak Tree 1 1 2 2 3 3 Quercus rubra Northern Red Oak Tree 1 1 1 1 Ulmus americana American Elm Tree 3 3 1 1 4 4 14 14 11 11 25 25 8 8 8 8 10 10 567 567 445 445 506 506 Color for Density Exceeds requirements by 10% Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10% Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10% Fails to meet requirements by more than 10% Te - Number of stems including exotic species Total - Number of stems excluding exotic species Table 6b. Random Plots: Planted and Total Stem Counts Species count Stems per ACRE VP 13 VP 14 Scientific Name Common Name Species Type Stem count size (ares) size (ACRES) 1 0.02 0.02 Annual Means MY0 (2021) 2 0.05 Current Plot Data (MY0 2021) 1 APPENDIX 4. Morphological Summary Data and Plots Table 7a. Baseline Stream Data Summary Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2021 Perry Branch Reach 1 Parameter Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min Max Max Min n Bankfull Width (ft) 2.7 2.9 2.9 3.1 2 1 Floodprone Width (ft)44442 1 Bankfull Mean Depth 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.6 2 1 Bankfull Max Depth 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.8 2 1 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)1.1 1.6 1.6 2.0 2 1 Width/Depth Ratio 5.2 6.0 6.0 6.8 2 1 Entrenchment Ratio 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.4 2 1 Bank Height Ratio 2.1 2.4 2.4 2.7 2 1.0 1.1 1 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs) 2.8 4.4 4.4 5.9 2 1 Sinuosity Watersurface Slope (ft/ft) Other Table 7b. Baseline Stream Data Summary Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2021 Perry Branch Reach 3 Parameter Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min Max Min Max n Bankfull Width (ft) 5.3 5.7 5.7 6.1 2 1 Floodprone Width (ft) 11.0 12.5 12.5 14.0 2 1 Bankfull Mean Depth 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.7 2 1 Bankfull Max Depth 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.8 2 1 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)3.4 3.5 3.5 3.6 2 1 Width/Depth Ratio 8.7 8.8 8.8 8.8 2 1 Entrenchment Ratio 2.1 2.2 2.2 2.2 2 1 Bank Height Ratio 1.9 2.1 2.1 2.3 2 1.0 1.1 1 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs) 9.1 9.7 9.7 10.2 2 1 Sinuosity Watersurface Slope (ft/ft) Other Table 7c. Baseline Stream Data Summary Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2021 Perry Branch Reach 4 Parameter Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min Max Min Max n Bankfull Width (ft) 5.7 6.7 6.0 9.3 4 13.0 13.1 2 Floodprone Width (ft) 9 12 12 17 4 125 175 2 Bankfull Mean Depth 0.6 0.8 0.8 1.0 4 1.0 1.1 2 Bankfull Max Depth 0.9 1.2 1.2 1.4 4 1.8 1.9 2 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)4.0 5.1 5.2 5.9 4 12.8 14.1 2 Width/Depth Ratio 6.3 9.2 7.9 14.6 4 12.1 13.1 2 Entrenchment Ratio 1.4 1.9 1.8 2.7 4 9.6 13.5 1 Bank Height Ratio 1.2 2.2 2.3 3.0 4 1.0 1.1 2 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs) 10.8 15.1 14.4 20.7 4 48.3 56.4 2 Sinuosity Watersurface Slope (ft/ft) Other ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 35.5 1.11 1.14 1.15 0.0109 0.0111 0.0110 10.8 1.0 33 46 48 F4 C4 C4 11.4 123 0.9 1.4 10.1 12.9 PRE‐EXISTING CONDITIONS DESIGN MONITORING BASELINE (MY0) Perry Branch Reach 4 Perry Branch Reach 4 Perry Branch Reach 4 9.1 1.0 11.0 100 0.6 1.2 6.3 19.2 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 1.15 1.12 1.12 0.0155 35 46 0.0135 0.0130 32 G4c C4 C4 25.1 17.9 156 0.8 1.2 7.2 12.8 16.3 Perry Branch Reach 3 Perry Branch Reach 3 Perry Branch Reach 3 ‐‐‐ G4c 9.6 22.0 Perry Branch Reach 1 0.0129 61 PRE‐EXISTING CONDITIONS DESIGN MONITORING BASELINE (MY0) 12.8 7.6 ‐‐‐ 0.0127 Perry Branch Reach 1 0.0128 ‐‐‐ Perry Branch Reach 1 PRE‐EXISTING CONDITIONS DESIGN 1.16 39 C4 1.13 MONITORING BASELINE (MY0) 1.10 8.0 29 0.6 1.0 5.0 36 C4 14.9 8.7 1.0 9.2 80 0.7 1.4 6.8 12.6 Table 7d. Baseline Stream Data Summary Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2021 UT1 Reach 1 Parameter Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min Max Min Max n Bankfull Width (ft) 1.7 1.7 1 1 Floodprone Width (ft) 6.0 6.0 1 1 Bankfull Mean Depth 0.8 0.8 1 1 Bankfull Max Depth 1.1 1.1 1 1 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)1.4 1.4 1 1 Width/Depth Ratio 2.1 2.1 1 1 Entrenchment Ratio 3.3 3.3 1 1 Bank Height Ratio 1.9 1.9 1 1.0 1.1 1 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs) 7.5 7.5 1 1 Sinuosity Watersurface Slope (ft/ft) Other Table 7e. Baseline Stream Data Summary Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2021 UT1 Reach 2 Parameter Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min Max Max Min n Bankfull Width (ft) 3.7 4.6 4.6 5.4 2 1 Floodprone Width (ft)78892 1 Bankfull Mean Depth 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 2 1 Bankfull Max Depth 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.7 2 1 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)1.4 1.5 1.5 1.6 2 1 Width/Depth Ratio 9.3 14.0 14.0 18.7 2 1 Entrenchment Ratio 1.6 1.8 1.8 2.0 2 1 Bank Height Ratio 2.6 2.8 2.8 3.0 2 1.0 1.1 1 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs) 3.2 3.5 3.5 3.7 2 Sinuosity Watersurface Slope (ft/ft) Other Table 7f. Baseline Stream Data Summary Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2021 UT2 Reach 2 Parameter Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min Max Min Max n Bankfull Width (ft) 3.2 3.8 4.0 4.0 3 1 Floodprone Width (ft) 20 44 42 69 3 1 Bankfull Mean Depth 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.8 3 1 Bankfull Max Depth 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.2 3 1 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)2.0 2.7 2.7 3.0 3 1 Width/Depth Ratio 5.0 5.4 5.2 5.9 3 1 Entrenchment Ratio 6.2 11.3 10.3 17.3 3 1 Bank Height Ratio 1.2 1.4 1.3 1.6 3 1.0 1.1 1 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs) 6.2 8.7 9.0 10.9 3 1 Sinuosity Watersurface Slope (ft/ft) Other 0.0187 0.0177 0.0179 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ E4 C4 C4 8.2 20.7 1.13 1.11 1.11 7.3 13.0 1.0 52 37 51 0.7 1.2 2.7 5.4 13.2 10.8 6.0 7.7 44 100 0.5 0.7 PRE‐EXISTING CONDITIONS DESIGN MONITORING BASELINE (MY0) UT2 Reach 2 UT2 Reach 2 UT2 Reach 2 0.0204 0.0221 0.0233 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ F4b C4b C4b 7.6 11.0 1.14 1.15 1.14 18.8 27.2 1.0 22 51 48 0.8 0.8 2.9 3.2 12.5 13.0 6.0 6.4 113 175 0.5 0.5 MONITORING BASELINE (MY0) PRE‐EXISTING CONDITIONS DESIGN MONITORING BASELINE (MY0) UT1 Reach 2 UT1 Reach 2 UT1 Reach 2 B4 1.8 5.8 50 0.4 0.8 2.5 UT1 Reach 1 1.04 0.0473 0.0522 0.0508 13.2 8.7 1.0 111 94 B4 6 0.8 1.4 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 9.4 1.04 11.7 1.06 PRE‐EXISTING CONDITIONS DESIGN 0.6 2.5 14.32.1 UT1 Reach 1 UT1 Reach 1 1.7 1.1 6.0 11 0.4 1.9 7.5 22 E6b 3.3 DMS Project No. 100093Dimension and SubstrateBase MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7Bankfull Elevation (ft)650.73637.59637.17Low Bank Elevation (ft)650.73637.59637.17Bankfull Width (ft)9.211.012.6Floodprone Width (ft)80100N/ABankfull Mean Depth (ft)0.70.61.3Bankfull Max Depth (ft)1.41.22.7Bankfull Cross‐Sectional Area (ft2)6.86.316.3Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio12.619.29.7Entrenchment Ratio18.79.1N/ABankfull Bank Height Ratio21.01.0N/ADimension and SubstrateBase MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7Bankfull Elevation (ft)634.12633.73621.17620.89Low Bank Elevation (ft)634.12633.73621.17620.89Bankfull Width (ft)13.017.217.313.1Floodprone Width (ft)175N/AN/A125Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)1.01.71.51.1Bankfull Max Depth (ft)1.83.42.81.9Bankfull Cross‐Sectional Area (ft2)12.828.626.114.1Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio13.110.311.412.1Entrenchment Ratio113.5N/AN/A9.6Bankfull Bank Height Ratio21.0N/AN/A1.0Dimension and SubstrateBase MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7Bankfull Elevation (ft)626.30618.63641.54640.51Low Bank Elevation (ft)626.30618.63641.54640.51Bankfull Width (ft)5.86.47.713.7Floodprone Width (ft)50175100N/ABankfull Mean Depth (ft)0.40.50.71.1Bankfull Max Depth (ft)0.80.81.23.0Bankfull Cross‐Sectional Area (ft2)2.53.25.415.0Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio13.213.010.812.6Entrenchment Ratio18.727.213.0N/ABankfull Bank Height Ratio21.01.01.0N/A1Entrenchment Ratio is calculated using the method specified in the Industry Technical Work Group Memorandum.2Bank Height Ratio is calculated using the method specified in the Industry Technical Work Group Memorandum.*Morphological survey and analysis not required for MY4 and MY6.Perry Branch Reach 3UT1 Reach 2Cross‐Section 9 (Riffle) Cross‐Section 10 (Riffle) Cross‐Section 11 (Pool)Cross‐Section 7 (Riffle)Perry Branch Reach 4UT2 Reach 2Cross‐Section 8 (Riffle)UT1 Reach 1Cross‐Section 4 (Riffle) Cross‐Section 5 (Pool) Cross‐Section 6 (Pool)Table 8. Morphology and Hydraulic Summary (Dimensional Parameters ‐ Cross‐Section)Perry Hill Mitigation SiteMonitoring Year 0 ‐ 2021Cross‐Section 1 (Riffle)Cross‐Section 2 (Riffle)Cross‐Section 3 (Pool)Perry Branch Reach 1 DMS Project No. 100093Longitudinal Profile PlotsPerry Hill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2021Perry Branch Reach 1 (STA 100+00 to 103+21)XS‐164564764965165365565710000 10050 10100 10150 10200 10250 10300 10350Elevation (feet)Station (feet)TW (MY0‐3/2021)WSF (MY0‐3/2021)LBKF/LTOB (MY0‐3/2021)RBKF/RTOB (MY0‐3/2021)STRUCTURE (MY0‐3/2021) DMS Project No. 100093Longitudinal Profile PlotsPerry Hill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2021Perry Branch Reach 3 (STA 107+45 to 112+00)Perry Branch Reach 3/4 (STA 112+00 to 117+00)63363563763964164364564710700 10750 10800 10850 10900 10950 11000 11050 11100 11150 11200Elevation (feet)Station (feet)TW (MY0‐3/2021)WSF (MY0‐3/2021)LBKF/LTOB (MY0‐3/2021)RBKF/RTOB (MY0‐3/2021)STRUCTURE (MY0‐3/2021)XS‐2XS‐3XS‐4XS‐5Begin Perry Branch Reach 46296316336356376391120011250113001135011400114501150011550116001165011700Elevation (feet)Station (feet)TW (MY0‐3/2021)WSF (MY0‐3/2021)LBKF/LTOB (MY0‐3/2021)RBKF/RTOB (MY0‐3/2021)STRUCTURE (MY0‐3/2021) DMS Project No. 100093Longitudinal Profile PlotsPerry Hill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2021Perry Branch Reach 4 (STA 117+00 to 122+00)Perry Branch Reach 4 (STA 122+00 to 127+00)Easement Break6256276296316336351170011750118001185011900119501200012050121001215012200Elevation (feet)Station (feet)TW (MY0‐3/2021)WSF (MY0‐3/2021)LBKF/LTOB (MY0‐3/2021)RBKF/RTOB (MY0‐3/2021)STRUCTURE (MY0‐3/2021)62062262462662863012200 12250 12300 12350 12400 12450 12500 12550 12600 12650 12700Elevation (feet)Station (feet)TW (MY0‐3/2021)WSF (MY0‐3/2021)LBKF/LTOB (MY0‐3/2021)RBKF/RTOB (MY0‐3/2021)STRUCTURE (MY0‐3/2021) DMS Project No. 100093Longitudinal Profile PlotsPerry Hill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2021Perry Branch Reach 4 (STA 127+00 to 132+00)Perry Branch Reach 4 (STA 132+00 to 135+81)XS‐6XS‐761561761962162362512700 12750 12800 12850 12900 12950 13000 13050 13100 13150 13200Elevation (feet)Station (feet)TW (MY0‐3/2021)WSF (MY0‐3/2021)LBKF/LTOB (MY0‐3/2021)RBKF/RTOB (MY0‐3/2021)STRUCTURE (MY0‐3/2021)60961161361561761913200 13250 13300 13350 13400 13450 13500 13550 13600 13650 13700Elevation (feet)Station (feet)TW (MY0‐3/2021)WSF (MY0‐3/2021)LBKF/LTOB (MY0‐3/2021)RBKF/RTOB (MY0‐3/2021)STRUCTURE (MY0‐3/2021) DMS Project No. 100093Longitudinal Profile PlotsPerry Hill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2021UT1 Reach 1 (STA 200+00 to 202+85)UT1 Reach 2 (STA 202+85 to 205+76)XS‐862062262462662863063263463663820000 20050 20100 20150 20200 20250 20300Elevation (feet)Station (feet)TW (MY0‐3/2021)WSF (MY0‐3/2021)LBKF/LTOB (MY0‐3/2021)RBKF/RTOB (MY0‐3/2021)STRUCTURE (MY0‐3/2021)XS‐961261461661862062220250 20300 20350 20400 20450 20500 20550 20600Elevation (feet)Station (feet)TW (MY0‐3/2021)WSF (MY0‐3/2021)LBKF/LTOB (MY0‐3/2021)RBKF/RTOB (MY0‐3/2021)STRUCTURE (MY0‐3/2021) DMS Project No. 100093Longitudinal Profile PlotsPerry Hill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2021UT2 Reach 2 (STA 302+21 to 307+00)UT2 Reach 2 (STA 307+00 to 311+68)64264464664865065230200 30250 30300 30350 30400 30450 30500 30550 30600 30650 30700Elevation (feet)Station (feet)TW (MY0‐3/2021)WSF (MY0‐3/2021)LBKF/LTOB (MY0‐3/2021)RBKF/RTOB (MY0‐3/2021)STRUCTURE (MY0‐3/2021)XS‐10XS‐1163463663864064264430700 30750 30800 30850 30900 30950 31000 31050 31100 31150 31200Elevation (feet)Station (feet)TW (MY0‐3/2021)WSF (MY0‐3/2021)LBKF/LTOB (MY0‐3/2021)RBKF/RTOB (MY0‐3/2021)STRUCTURE (MY0‐3/2021) Bankfull Dimensions6.8 x‐section area (ft.sq.)9.2 width (ft)0.7 mean depth (ft)1.4 max depth (ft) 10.0 wetted perimeter (ft)0.7 hydraulic radius (ft)12.6 width‐depth ratio80.0 W flood prone area (ft)8.7 entrenchment ratio1.0 low bank height ratioSurvey Date: 3/2021Field Crew: IPW Construction GroupView DownstreamCross‐Section 1 ‐ Perry Branch Reach 1Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2021Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093Cross‐Section Plots6496506516526530 102030405060Elevation (ft)Width (ft)102+40 RiffleMY0 (3/2021)BankfullFloodprone Area Bankfull Dimensions6.3 x‐section area (ft.sq.)11.0 width (ft)0.6 mean depth (ft)1.2 max depth (ft) 11.5 wetted perimeter (ft)0.5 hydraulic radius (ft)19.2 width‐depth ratio100.0 W flood prone area (ft)9.1 entrenchment ratio1.0 low bank height ratioSurvey Date: 3/2021Field Crew: IPW Construction GroupView DownstreamCross‐Section 2 ‐ Perry Branch Reach 3Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2021Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093Cross‐Section Plots6366376386396400 102030405060Elevation (ft)Width (ft)112+30 RiffleMY0 (3/2021)BankfullFloodprone Area Bankfull Dimensions16.3 x‐section area (ft.sq.)12.6 width (ft)1.3 mean depth (ft)2.7 max depth (ft) 14.1 wetted perimeter (ft)1.2 hydraulic radius (ft)9.7 width‐depth ratioSurvey Date: 3/2021Field Crew: IPW Construction GroupView DownstreamCross‐Section 3 ‐ Perry Branch Reach 3Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2021Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093Cross‐Section Plots6346356366376386396400 102030405060Elevation (ft)Width (ft)112+58 PoolMY0 (3/2021)Bankfull Bankfull Dimensions12.8 x‐section area (ft.sq.)13.0 width (ft)1.0 mean depth (ft)1.8 max depth (ft) 13.6 wetted perimeter (ft)0.9 hydraulic radius (ft)13.1 width‐depth ratio175.0 W flood prone area (ft)13.5 entrenchment ratio1.0 low bank height ratioSurvey Date: 3/2021Field Crew: IPW Construction GroupPerry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093Cross‐Section PlotsCross‐Section 4 ‐ Perry Branch Reach 4Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2021View Downstream6326336346356366370 1020304050607080Elevation (ft)Width (ft)116+61 RiffleMY0 (3/2021)BankfullFloodprone Area Bankfull Dimensions28.6 x‐section area (ft.sq.)17.2 width (ft)1.7 mean depth (ft)3.4 max depth (ft) 19.0 wetted perimeter (ft)1.5 hydraulic radius (ft)10.3 width‐depth ratioSurvey Date: 3/2021Field Crew: IPW Construction GroupView DownstreamCross‐Section 5 ‐ Perry Branch Reach 4Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2021Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093Cross‐Section Plots6306316326336346356360 1020304050607080Elevation (ft)Width (ft)116+97 PoolMY0 (3/2021)Bankfull Bankfull Dimensions26.1 x‐section area (ft.sq.)17.3 width (ft)1.5 mean depth (ft)2.8 max depth (ft) 18.6 wetted perimeter (ft)1.4 hydraulic radius (ft)11.4 width‐depth ratioSurvey Date: 3/2021Field Crew: IPW Construction GroupView DownstreamCross‐Section 6 ‐ Perry Branch Reach 4Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2021Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093Cross‐Section Plots6186196206216226236246250 1020304050607080Elevation (ft)Width (ft)129+06 PoolMY0 (3/2021)Bankfull Bankfull Dimensions14.1 x‐section area (ft.sq.)13.1 width (ft)1.1 mean depth (ft)1.9 max depth (ft) 13.7 wetted perimeter (ft)1.0 hydraulic radius (ft)12.1 width‐depth ratio125.0 W flood prone area (ft)9.6 entrenchment ratio1.0 low bank height ratioSurvey Date: 3/2021Field Crew: IPW Construction GroupView DownstreamCross‐Section 7 ‐ Perry Branch Reach 4Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2021Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093Cross‐Section Plots6186196206216226236240 102030405060Elevation (ft)Width (ft)129+45 RiffleMY0 (3/2021)BankfullFloodprone Area Bankfull Dimensions2.5 x‐section area (ft.sq.)5.8 width (ft)0.4 mean depth (ft)0.8 max depth (ft) 6.0 wetted perimeter (ft)0.4 hydraulic radius (ft)13.2 width‐depth ratio50.0 W flood prone area (ft)8.7 entrenchment ratio1.0 low bank height ratioSurvey Date: 3/2021Field Crew: IPW Construction GroupPerry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093Cross‐Section PlotsCross‐Section 8 ‐ UT1 Reach 1Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2021View Downstream6256266276286290 1020304050Elevation (ft)Width (ft)201+86 RiffleMY0 (3/2021)BankfullFloodprone Area Bankfull Dimensions3.2 x‐section area (ft.sq.)6.4 width (ft)0.5 mean depth (ft)0.8 max depth (ft) 6.7 wetted perimeter (ft)0.5 hydraulic radius (ft)13.0 width‐depth ratio175.0 W flood prone area (ft)27.2 entrenchment ratio1.0 low bank height ratioSurvey Date: 3/2021Field Crew: IPW Construction GroupView DownstreamCross‐Section 9 ‐ UT1 Reach 2Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2021Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093Cross‐Section Plots6176186196200 102030Elevation (ft)Width (ft)204+02 RiffleMY0 (3/2021)BankfullFloodprone Area Bankfull Dimensions5.4 x‐section area (ft.sq.)7.7 width (ft)0.7 mean depth (ft)1.2 max depth (ft) 8.1 wetted perimeter (ft)0.7 hydraulic radius (ft)10.8 width‐depth ratio100.0 W flood prone area (ft)13.0 entrenchment ratio1.0 low bank height ratioSurvey Date: 3/2021Field Crew: IPW Construction GroupView DownstreamCross‐Section 10 ‐ UT2 Reach 2Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2021Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093Cross‐Section Plots6406416426436440 102030405060Elevation (ft)Width (ft)309+05 RiffleMY0 (3/2021)BankfullFloodprone Area Bankfull Dimensions15.0 x‐section area (ft.sq.)13.7 width (ft)1.1 mean depth (ft)3.0 max depth (ft) 16.0 wetted perimeter (ft)0.9 hydraulic radius (ft)12.6 width‐depth ratioSurvey Date: 3/2021Field Crew: IPW Construction GroupView DownstreamCross‐Section 11 ‐ UT2 Reach 2Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2021Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093Cross‐Section Plots6376386396406416420 10203040Elevation (ft)Width (ft)309+45 PoolMY0 (3/2021)Bankfull Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots min max Riffle Pool Total Class Percentage Percent Cumulative SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 11 21 32 32 32 Reach Summary Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 0 - 2021 Perry B R1, Reachwide Particle Class Diameter (mm)Particle Count Very fine 0.062 0.125 3 3 3 35 Fine 0.125 0.250 1 1 1 36 Medium 0.25 0.50 3 3 3 39 Coarse 0.5 1.0 1 1 1 40 Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 40SAND Very Fine 2.0 2.8 40 Very Fine 2.8 4.0 40 Fine 4.0 5.6 1 1 2 2 42 Fine 5.6 8.0 3 3 3 45 Medium 8.0 11.0 5 5 5 50 Medium 11.0 16.0 2 3 5 5 55 Coarse 16.0 22.6 3 5 8 8 63 Coarse 22.6 32 5 4 9 9 72 Very Coarse 32 45 3 1 4 4 76 Very Coarse 45 64 6 1 7 7 83GRAVEL Small 64 90 6 6 6 89 Small 90 128 3 1 4 4 93 Large 128 180 1 1 1 94 Large 180 256 5 5 5 99 Small 256 362 1 1 1 100 Small 362 512 100 Medium 512 1024 100 Large/Very Large 1024 2048 100 BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 100 50 50 100 100 100 D16 = D35 = D50 = D84 = D95 = D100 = 362.0 Channel materials (mm) Silt/Clay 0.13 11.0 67.7 193.1COBBLEBOULDERTotal Reachwide 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Individual Class PercentParticle Class Size (mm) Individual Class Percent MY0-04/2021 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000Percent Cumulative (%)Particle Class Size (mm) Pebble Count Particle Distribution MY0-04/2021 Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock Perry B R1, Reachwide Perry B R1, Reachwide Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots min max Riffle Pool Total Class Percentage Percent Cumulative SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 4 19 23 23 23 Reach Summary Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 0 - 2021 Perry B R3, Reachwide Particle Class Diameter (mm)Particle Count Very fine 0.062 0.125 23 Fine 0.125 0.250 1 1 1 24 Medium 0.25 0.50 4 4 4 28 Coarse 0.5 1.0 1 1 2 2 30 Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 2 3 5 5 35SAND Very Fine 2.0 2.8 35 Very Fine 2.8 4.0 35 Fine 4.0 5.6 1 2 3 3 38 Fine 5.6 8.0 1 3 4 4 42 Medium 8.0 11.0 1 2 3 3 45 Medium 11.0 16.0 4 4 4 49 Coarse 16.0 22.6 1 4 5 5 54 Coarse 22.6 32 2 2 2 56 Very Coarse 32 45 4 4 8 8 64 Very Coarse 45 64 4 3 7 7 71GRAVEL Small 64 90 5 5 5 76 Small 90 128 10 10 10 86 Large 128 180 7 7 7 93 Large 180 256 5 5 5 98COBBLE Small 256 362 2 2 2 100 Small 362 512 100 Medium 512 1024 100 Large/Very Large 1024 2048 100 BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 100 50 50 100 100 100 D16 = D35 = D50 = D84 = D95 = D100 = 362.0 Channel materials (mm) Silt/Clay 2.00 17.1 119.3 207.2BOULDERTotal Reachwide 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Individual Class PercentParticle Class Size (mm) Individual Class Percent MY0-04/2021 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000Percent Cumulative (%)Particle Class Size (mm) Pebble Count Particle Distribution MY0-04/2021 Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock Perry B R3, Reachwide Perry B R3, Reachwide Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots min max Riffle Pool Total Class Percentage Percent Cumulative SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 3 24 27 27 27 Reach Summary Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 0 - 2021 Perry B R4, Reachwide Particle Class Diameter (mm)Particle Count Very fine 0.062 0.125 27 Fine 0.125 0.250 1 3 4 4 31 Medium 0.25 0.50 4 7 11 11 42 Coarse 0.5 1.0 1 1 1 43 Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 1 1 1 44SAND Very Fine 2.0 2.8 2 2 2 46 Very Fine 2.8 4.0 1 1 2 2 48 Fine 4.0 5.6 1 1 1 49 Fine 5.6 8.0 1 1 1 50 Medium 8.0 11.0 50 Medium 11.0 16.0 3 2 5 5 55 Coarse 16.0 22.6 2 3 5 5 60 Coarse 22.6 32 1 1 1 61 Very Coarse 32 45 5 2 7 7 68 Very Coarse 45 64 4 2 6 6 74GRAVEL Small 64 90 5 5 5 79 Small 90 128 6 6 6 85 Large 128 180 5 5 5 90 Large 180 256 6 6 6 96COBBLE Small 256 362 4 4 4 100 Small 362 512 100 Medium 512 1024 100 Large/Very Large 1024 2048 100 BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 100 50 50 100 100 100 D16 = D35 = D50 = D84 = D95 = D100 = 362.0 Channel materials (mm) Silt/Clay 0.32 8.0 120.7 241.4BOULDERTotal Reachwide 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Individual Class PercentParticle Class Size (mm) Individual Class Percent MY0-04/2021 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000Percent Cumulative (%)Particle Class Size (mm) Pebble Count Particle Distribution MY0-04/2021 Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock Perry B R4, Reachwide Perry B R4, Reachwide Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots min max Riffle Pool Total Class Percentage Percent Cumulative SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 12 12 12 12 Reach Summary Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 0 - 2021 UT1 R1, Reachwide Particle Class Diameter (mm)Particle Count Very fine 0.062 0.125 12 Fine 0.125 0.250 12 Medium 0.25 0.50 12 Coarse 0.5 1.0 4 4 4 16 Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 1 4 5 5 21SAND Very Fine 2.0 2.8 2 2 4 4 25 Very Fine 2.8 4.0 2 2 2 27 Fine 4.0 5.6 4 4 4 31 Fine 5.6 8.0 5 5 5 36 Medium 8.0 11.0 6 1 7 7 43 Medium 11.0 16.0 5 2 7 7 50 Coarse 16.0 22.6 9 1 10 10 60 Coarse 22.6 32 11 2 13 13 73 Very Coarse 32 45 4 2 6 6 79 Very Coarse 45 64 5 5 10 10 89GRAVEL Small 64 90 5 1 6 6 95 Small 90 128 1 1 1 96 Large 128 180 1 2 3 3 99 Large 180 256 1 1 1 100COBBLE Small 256 362 100 Small 362 512 100 Medium 512 1024 100 Large/Very Large 1024 2048 100 BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 100 60 40 100 100 100 D16 = D35 = D50 = D84 = D95 = D100 = 256.0 Channel materials (mm) 1.00 7.45 16.0 53.7 90.0BOULDERTotal Reachwide 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Individual Class PercentParticle Class Size (mm) Individual Class Percent MY0-04/2021 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000Percent Cumulative (%)Particle Class Size (mm) Pebble Count Particle Distribution MY0-04/2021 Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock UT1 R1, Reachwide UT1 R1, Reachwide Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots min max Riffle Pool Total Class Percentage Percent Cumulative SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 2 20 22 22 22 Reach Summary Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 0 - 2021 UT1 R2, Reachwide Particle Class Diameter (mm)Particle Count Very fine 0.062 0.125 22 Fine 0.125 0.250 2 2 2 24 Medium 0.25 0.50 24 Coarse 0.5 1.0 8 8 8 32 Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 2 2 2 34SAND Very Fine 2.0 2.8 2 2 2 36 Very Fine 2.8 4.0 1 2 3 3 39 Fine 4.0 5.6 3 3 3 42 Fine 5.6 8.0 4 3 7 7 49 Medium 8.0 11.0 3 1 4 4 53 Medium 11.0 16.0 4 1 5 5 58 Coarse 16.0 22.6 7 1 8 8 66 Coarse 22.6 32 7 1 8 8 74 Very Coarse 32 45 5 2 7 7 81 Very Coarse 45 64 7 1 8 8 89GRAVEL Small 64 90 2 1 3 3 92 Small 90 128 4 1 5 5 97 Large 128 180 1 2 3 3 100 Large 180 256 100COBBLE Small 256 362 100 Small 362 512 100 Medium 512 1024 100 Large/Very Large 1024 2048 100 BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 100 50 50 100 100 100 D16 = D35 = D50 = D84 = D95 = D100 = 180.0 Channel materials (mm) Silt/Clay 2.37 8.7 51.4 111.2BOULDERTotal Reachwide 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Individual Class PercentParticle Class Size (mm) Individual Class Percent MY0-04/2021 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000Percent Cumulative (%)Particle Class Size (mm) Pebble Count Particle Distribution MY0-04/2021 Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock UT1 R2, Reachwide UT1 R2, Reachwide Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots min max Riffle Pool Total Class Percentage Percent Cumulative SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 9 23 32 31 31 Reach Summary Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 0 - 2021 UT2 R2, Reachwide Particle Class Diameter (mm)Particle Count Very fine 0.062 0.125 31 Fine 0.125 0.250 1 3 4 4 35 Medium 0.25 0.50 1 1 2 2 37 Coarse 0.5 1.0 8 8 8 45 Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 1 1 1 46SAND Very Fine 2.0 2.8 46 Very Fine 2.8 4.0 46 Fine 4.0 5.6 5 5 5 51 Fine 5.6 8.0 2 3 5 5 56 Medium 8.0 11.0 1 1 1 57 Medium 11.0 16.0 2 3 5 5 62 Coarse 16.0 22.6 3 1 4 4 66 Coarse 22.6 32 5 1 6 6 72 Very Coarse 32 45 4 1 5 5 76 Very Coarse 45 64 5 5 5 81GRAVEL Small 64 90 7 7 7 88 Small 90 128 6 6 6 94 Large 128 180 4 4 4 98 Large 180 256 98COBBLE Small 256 362 98 Small 362 512 98 Medium 512 1024 98 Large/Very Large 1024 2048 98 BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 2 2 2 100 50 52 102 100 100 D16 = D35 = D50 = D84 = D95 = D100 = >2048 Channel materials (mm) Silt/Clay 0.24 5.2 72.9 138.2BOULDERTotal Reachwide 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Individual Class PercentParticle Class Size (mm) Individual Class Percent MY0-04/2021 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000Percent Cumulative (%)Particle Class Size (mm) Pebble Count Particle Distribution MY0-04/2021 Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock UT2 R2, Reachwide UT2 R2, Reachwide Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots min max Class Percentage Percent Cumulative SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 14 14 14 Very fine 0.062 0.125 14 Fine 0.125 0.250 14 Medium 0.25 0.50 3 3 17 Coarse 0.5 1.0 17 Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 4 4 21 Very Fine 2.0 2.8 21 Very Fine 2.8 4.0 21 Fine 4.0 5.6 21 Fine 5.6 8.0 4 4 25 Medium 8.0 11.0 5 5 30 Medium 11.0 16.0 8 8 38 Coarse 16.0 22.6 7 7 45 Coarse 22.6 32 10 10 55 Very Coarse 32 45 8 8 63 Very Coarse 45 64 16 16 79 Small 64 90 7 7 86 Small 90 128 4 4 90 Large 128 180 6 6 96 Large 180 256 3 3 99 Small 256 362 1 1 100 Small 362 512 100 Medium 512 1024 100 Large/Very Large 1024 2048 100 BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 100 100 100 100 D16 = D35 = D50 = D84 = D95 = D100 = Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 0 - 2021 Perry B R1, Cross-Section 1 Particle Class Diameter (mm) Cross-Section 1 Summary SANDGRAVELRiffle 100- Count COBBLEBOULDERTotal 362.0 Channel materials (mm) 0.40 13.90 26.9 81.6 170.1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Individual Class PercentParticle Class Size (mm) Individual Class Percent MY0-04/2021 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000Percent Cumulative (%)Particle Class Size (mm) Pebble Count Particle Distribution MY0-04/2021 Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock Perry B R1, Cross-Section 1 Perry B R1, Cross-Section 1 Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots min max Class Percentage Percent Cumulative SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 9 9 9 Very fine 0.062 0.125 9 Fine 0.125 0.250 9 Medium 0.25 0.50 1 1 10 Coarse 0.5 1.0 3 3 13 Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 2 2 15 Very Fine 2.0 2.8 15 Very Fine 2.8 4.0 15 Fine 4.0 5.6 2 2 17 Fine 5.6 8.0 3 3 20 Medium 8.0 11.0 2 2 22 Medium 11.0 16.0 3 3 25 Coarse 16.0 22.6 6 6 31 Coarse 22.6 32 8 8 39 Very Coarse 32 45 6 6 45 Very Coarse 45 64 14 14 59 Small 64 90 14 14 73 Small 90 128 10 10 83 Large 128 180 11 11 94 Large 180 256 6 6 100 Small 256 362 100 Small 362 512 100 Medium 512 1024 100 Large/Very Large 1024 2048 100 BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 100 100 100 100 D16 = D35 = D50 = D84 = D95 = D100 = Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 0 - 2021 Perry B R3, Cross-Section 2 Particle Class Diameter (mm) Cross-Section 2 Summary SANDGRAVELRiffle 100- Count COBBLEBOULDERTotal 256.0 Channel materials (mm) 4.73 26.89 51.0 132.0 190.9 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Individual Class PercentParticle Class Size (mm) Individual Class Percent MY0-04/2021 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000Percent Cumulative (%)Particle Class Size (mm) Pebble Count Particle Distribution MY0-04/2021 Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock Perry B R3, Cross-Section 2 Perry B R3, Cross-Section 2 Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots min max Class Percentage Percent Cumulative SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 16 16 16 Very fine 0.062 0.125 16 Fine 0.125 0.250 3 3 19 Medium 0.25 0.50 2 2 21 Coarse 0.5 1.0 4 4 25 Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 1 1 26 Very Fine 2.0 2.8 1 1 27 Very Fine 2.8 4.0 7 7 34 Fine 4.0 5.6 6 6 40 Fine 5.6 8.0 6 6 46 Medium 8.0 11.0 8 8 54 Medium 11.0 16.0 10 10 64 Coarse 16.0 22.6 5 5 69 Coarse 22.6 32 3 3 72 Very Coarse 32 45 9 9 81 Very Coarse 45 64 6 6 87 Small 64 90 3 3 90 Small 90 128 4 4 94 Large 128 180 1 1 95 Large 180 256 95 Small 256 362 3 3 98 Small 362 512 2 2 100 Medium 512 1024 100 Large/Very Large 1024 2048 100 BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 100 100 100 100 D16 = D35 = D50 = D84 = D95 = D100 = Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 0 - 2021 Perry B R4, Cross-Section 4 Particle Class Diameter (mm) Cross-Section 4 Summary SANDGRAVELRiffle 100- Count COBBLEBOULDERTotal 512.0 Channel materials (mm) Silt/Clay 4.23 9.4 53.7 180.0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Individual Class PercentParticle Class Size (mm) Individual Class Percent MY0-04/2021 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000Percent Cumulative (%)Particle Class Size (mm) Pebble Count Particle Distribution MY0-04/2021 Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock Perry B R4, Cross-Section 4 Perry B R4, Cross-Section 4 Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots min max Class Percentage Percent Cumulative SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 4 4 4 Very fine 0.062 0.125 4 Fine 0.125 0.250 2 2 5 Medium 0.25 0.50 7 6 12 Coarse 0.5 1.0 5 5 16 Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 3 3 19 Very Fine 2.0 2.8 1 1 20 Very Fine 2.8 4.0 3 3 23 Fine 4.0 5.6 4 4 26 Fine 5.6 8.0 2 2 28 Medium 8.0 11.0 2 2 30 Medium 11.0 16.0 5 5 34 Coarse 16.0 22.6 11 10 44 Coarse 22.6 32 10 9 53 Very Coarse 32 45 10 9 62 Very Coarse 45 64 18 16 78 Small 64 90 11 10 88 Small 90 128 8 7 95 Large 128 180 2 2 97 Large 180 256 2 2 99 Small 256 362 1 1 100 Small 362 512 100 Medium 512 1024 100 Large/Very Large 1024 2048 100 BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 100 111 100 100 D16 = D35 = D50 = D84 = D95 = D100 = Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 0 - 2021 Perry B R4, Cross-Section 7 Particle Class Diameter (mm) Cross-Section 7 Summary SANDGRAVELRiffle 100- Count COBBLEBOULDERTotal 362.0 Channel materials (mm) 0.97 16.43 28.3 77.7 124.9 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Individual Class PercentParticle Class Size (mm) Individual Class Percent MY0-04/2021 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000Percent Cumulative (%)Particle Class Size (mm) Pebble Count Particle Distribution MY0-04/2021 Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock Perry B R4, Cross-Section 7 Perry B R4, Cross-Section 7 Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots min max Class Percentage Percent Cumulative SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 20 19 19 Very fine 0.062 0.125 19 Fine 0.125 0.250 7 7 26 Medium 0.25 0.50 4 4 30 Coarse 0.5 1.0 4 4 34 Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 1 1 35 Very Fine 2.0 2.8 35 Very Fine 2.8 4.0 35 Fine 4.0 5.6 3 3 38 Fine 5.6 8.0 5 5 42 Medium 8.0 11.0 6 6 48 Medium 11.0 16.0 4 4 52 Coarse 16.0 22.6 7 7 59 Coarse 22.6 32 6 6 64 Very Coarse 32 45 8 8 72 Very Coarse 45 64 9 9 81 Small 64 90 4 4 85 Small 90 128 3 3 88 Large 128 180 6 6 93 Large 180 256 4 4 97 Small 256 362 3 3 100 Small 362 512 100 Medium 512 1024 100 Large/Very Large 1024 2048 100 BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 100 104 100 100 D16 = D35 = D50 = D84 = D95 = D100 = Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 0 - 2021 UT1 R1, Cross-Section 8 Particle Class Diameter (mm) Cross-Section 8 Summary SANDGRAVELRiffle 100- Count COBBLEBOULDERTotal 362.0 Channel materials (mm) Silt/Clay 4.18 13.3 85.2 210.9 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Individual Class PercentParticle Class Size (mm) Individual Class Percent MY0-04/2021 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000Percent Cumulative (%)Particle Class Size (mm) Pebble Count Particle Distribution MY0-04/2021 Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock UT1 R1, Cross-Section 8 UT1 R1, Cross-Section 8 Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots min max Class Percentage Percent Cumulative SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 10 10 10 Very fine 0.062 0.125 10 Fine 0.125 0.250 5 5 15 Medium 0.25 0.50 15 Coarse 0.5 1.0 4 4 19 Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 4 4 23 Very Fine 2.0 2.8 5 5 28 Very Fine 2.8 4.0 28 Fine 4.0 5.6 1 1 29 Fine 5.6 8.0 3 3 32 Medium 8.0 11.0 8 8 40 Medium 11.0 16.0 9 9 49 Coarse 16.0 22.6 8 8 57 Coarse 22.6 32 11 11 68 Very Coarse 32 45 11 11 79 Very Coarse 45 64 8 8 87 Small 64 90 4 4 91 Small 90 128 4 4 95 Large 128 180 1 1 96 Large 180 256 2 2 98 Small 256 362 2 2 100 Small 362 512 100 Medium 512 1024 100 Large/Very Large 1024 2048 100 BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 100 100 100 100 D16 = D35 = D50 = D84 = D95 = D100 = Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 0 - 2021 UT1 R2, Cross-Section 9 Particle Class Diameter (mm) Cross-Section 9 Summary SANDGRAVELRiffle 100- Count COBBLEBOULDERTotal 362.0 Channel materials (mm) 0.59 9.01 16.7 56.1 128.0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Individual Class PercentParticle Class Size (mm) Individual Class Percent MY0-04/2021 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000Percent Cumulative (%)Particle Class Size (mm) Pebble Count Particle Distribution MY0-04/2021 Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock UT1 R2, Cross-Section 9 UT1 R2, Cross-Section 9 Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots min max Class Percentage Percent Cumulative SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 16 16 16 Very fine 0.062 0.125 16 Fine 0.125 0.250 16 Medium 0.25 0.50 1 1 17 Coarse 0.5 1.0 3 3 20 Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 6 6 26 Very Fine 2.0 2.8 26 Very Fine 2.8 4.0 26 Fine 4.0 5.6 1 1 27 Fine 5.6 8.0 6 6 33 Medium 8.0 11.0 2 2 35 Medium 11.0 16.0 4 4 39 Coarse 16.0 22.6 5 5 44 Coarse 22.6 32 9 9 53 Very Coarse 32 45 11 11 64 Very Coarse 45 64 15 15 79 Small 64 90 7 7 86 Small 90 128 10 10 96 Large 128 180 4 4 100 Large 180 256 100 Small 256 362 100 Small 362 512 100 Medium 512 1024 100 Large/Very Large 1024 2048 100 BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 100 100 100 100 D16 = D35 = D50 = D84 = D95 = D100 = Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 0 - 2021 UT2 R2, Cross-Section 10 Particle Class Diameter (mm) Cross-Section 10 Summary SANDGRAVELRiffle 100- Count COBBLEBOULDERTotal 180.0 Channel materials (mm) Silt/Clay 11.00 28.5 81.6 123.6 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Individual Class PercentParticle Class Size (mm) Individual Class Percent MY0-04/2021 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000Percent Cumulative (%)Particle Class Size (mm) Pebble Count Particle Distribution MY0-04/2021 Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock UT2 R2, Cross-Section 10 UT2 R2, Cross-Section 10 APPENDIX 5. Record Drawings Perry Hill Mitigation Site As-BuiltOrange County, North CarolinaforNCDEQDivision of Mitigation ServicesTitle Sheet0.1General Notes and Legend0.2Project Overview0.3Stream Plan and Profile1.1-1.15Planting Tables2.0-2.1Planting Plan2.2-2.7Sheet IndexProject DirectoryEngineering:Wildlands Engineering, IncLicense No. F-0831497 Bramson Ct., Suite 104Mount Pleasant, SC 29464Geoff Smith PE843-277-6221Surveying:IPW Construction GroupP.O. Box 40968Charleston, SC 29423M. Hart Weatherford, PE, PLS, CFM843-308-0524 x228Owner:NCDEQDivision of Mitigation Services217 West Jones St. Suite 3000ARaleigh, NC 27603Jeremiah Dow919-707-8976DMS Project No. 100093NCDWR Project No. 2019-0157NCDEQ Contract No. 7744USACE Action ID No. SAW-2019-00125Neuse River Basin HUC 03020201Sheet Checked By: Job Number: Drawn By: Project Engineer: Date:Revisions: 497 Bramson Ct, Suite 104 Mount Pleasant, SC 29464 Tel: 843.277.6221AS-BUILT ANDRECORD DRAWINGSIssued May 28, 2021Orange County, NCSite CoordinatesLatitudeLongitude36° 06' 25.81''N79° 07' 46.66''WVicinity MapNot to Scale005-02123 ABP JCK 0.1 May 28, 2021 Perry Hill Mitigation Site As-Built Hillsborough, North Carolina Title Sheet X:\shared\Projects\005-02180 Perry Hill\Monitoring\Baseline Monitoring - 2021\Plans\02180-AB-Cover and Notes.dwg May 25, 2021 GLS I, M. HART WEATHERFORD, CERTIFY THAT THIS PROJECT WAS COMPLETEDUNDER MY DIRECT AND RESPONSIBLE CHARGE FROM AN ACTUAL SURVEY MADEUNDER MY SUPERVISION; THAT THIS TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY WAS PERFORMEDAT THE 95 PERCENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL TO MEET FEDERAL GEOGRAPHIC DATACOMMITTEE STANDARDS; THAT THIS SURVEY WAS PERFORMED TO MEET THEREQUIREMENTS FOR A TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY TO THE HORIZONTAL ACCURACYOF CLASS A AND THE VERTICAL ACCURACY WHEN APPLICABLE TO CLASS CSTANDARD, AND THAT THE ORIGINAL DATA WAS OBTAINED IN MAR-APR 2021;THAT THE SURVEY WAS COMPLETED ON 22 APR 2021; AND ALL COORDINATESARE BASED ON NAD83 (2011) AND ALL ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NAVD88.WITNESS MY ORIGINAL SIGNATURE, LICENSE NUMBER, AND SEALTHIS 21st DAY OF MAY, 2021. .M. HART WEATHERFORD, P.L.S. L-4515NORTH CAROLINA.RO,+99IONALCP#: 1N:857,156.7820E:1,960,924.0400ELEV.:616.197 CP#: 2N:857,330.0560E:1,961,088.2200ELEV.:618.574 CP#: 3N:857,707.6430E:1,960,866.9740ELEV.:641.443CP#: 4N:857,509.1010E:1,961,289.7010ELEV.:621.530 CP#: 5N:857,774.0350E:1,961,506.1240ELEV.:625.721 CP#: 6N:858,015.9550E:1,961,869.1120ELEV.:632.173 CP#: 7N:858,424.1700E:1,962,125.3000ELEV.:635.671 CP#: 8N:858,769.5720E:1,961,940.8990ELEV.:647.403CP#: 10N:858,588.1560E:1,962,338.6980ELEV.:637.785 CP#: 12N:859,230.0720E:1,962,358.2120ELEV.:649.625 CP#: 13N:859,501.0520E:1,962,132.9090ELEV.:658.118EVELYN J PERRY ETALMARY C.P. BISHOPJUDITH G.P. KADLACTMS: 9865-08-1397DB: 4476 PG: 495PB: 10-E PG: 102MARK FRANKLIN PERRYTMS: 9865-37-2701DB: 2484 PG: 424PB: 89 PG: 156 MARK FRANKLIN PERRYKRISTEN M. PERRYTMS: 9865-27-6712DB: 4522 PG: 30PB: NR PG: NRTHISTLE HILL, LLCC/O GEORGE WINGFIELDTMS: 9865-27-6133DB: 5074 PG: 237PB: 89 PG: 156DOUGLAS T. MOATSANITA E. MOATSTMS: 9865-17-8092DB: 1411 PG: 307PB: 75 PG: 4MARYLAND MICHAEL RAYDEEDRA RAYTMS: 9865-27-0176DB: 1796 PG: 321PB: 58 PG: 182RUBIE R. HECHTTMS: 9865-16-6359DB: 5242 PG: 402PB: 38 PG: 43 JENNIFER L. HECHTTMS: 9865-27-6712DB: 6399 PG: 183PB: 35 PG: 47 WENDY GELLERTPHALA NETTLESTMS: 9865-39-7127DB: 3740 PG: 464PB: 46 PG: 3 PELICO ENTERPRISES LLC.TMS: 9866-20-8388DB: 3251 PG: 540PB: 104 PG: 164 JEFFREY GARLAND CABEJENNIFER T. CABETMS: 9866-10-4911DB: 3955 PG: 56PB: 98 PG: 164ERNEST M. CABE JR.DEWEY A. CABETMS: 9856-90-7369DB: 839 PG: 199PB: NR PG: NR JEAN M. CRAWFORDTMS: 9856-90-7369DB: 226 PG: 756PB: NR PG: NRALONZO BROWN COLEMAN JR.NANCY W. COLEMANTMS: 9855-69-6420DB: 1755 PG: 330PB: 87 PG: 74WALLACE RIVER LLC.TMS: 9855-78-7004DB: 4171 PG: 576PB: NR PG: NRJUSTIN C. HORNEHANNAH M. HORNETMS: 9855-96-0780DB: 5579 PG: 562PB: 111 PG: 29ANIKO REDMANPHILIP A. KRAYSLERTMS: 9855-96-8755DB: 5951 PG: 515PB: 109 PG: 144JACK A. UPCHRUCHTMS: 9856-80-9879DB: 5950 PG: 259PB: NR PG: NREVELYN JEANNE PERRYTMS: 9865-17-5161DB: 672 PG: 157PB: NR PG: NRHillsboroughmight needthis one, notsure how theslope willwork out you can get ridof this proposedlineno need forthis minorcontour move tie off tohere to avoidwetlandstie off 652 toreduce wetlandimpactstie 650 hereneed 646 on thissidesomethinglike this toavoidwetlands if this berm isneeded for bf,extend up a littlethis little bermwon't work. if youneed elevation,we have to impactthe wetlands a bitmore a little choppy.one continuousline should workdeletenot neededclean uprandomdoti think you need awider berm hereisland notneedednot neededlarger bermneedednot neededjust smoothoutnot neededthiscontournotneededdelete proposedgrading in this area.it's spotty and a bitrandom. I've drawnin the contourswhere they shouldroughly goignore this little moundand grade through ittie to existing grade not neededex channel isgone. don'tneed this microgradingjust continuethroughwider 628bermdeletenotneededdeletedeletenot worthsaving thislittle mound not worthsaving thislittle moundcontinue through not worthsaving thislittle mounddeletedeletedeletedeletedeletethe green lines are all funkyhere. the two lines i've put inshould tie off correctlysmooth deletedelete thiscutbacki drew in twooptions here -either tie toexisting grade, orcreate a topobreak. eitherworks double lines here - looks like and extra 639 tying off to the wrong contour contours are doubled up here - I thinksome were poly and others in thecorridor. This needs to be corrected.Elevations TableNumber123456789101112Minimum Elevation-6.000-5.500-5.000-4.500-4.000-3.500-3.000-2.500-2.000-1.500-1.000-0.500Maximum Elevation-5.500-5.000-4.500-4.000-3.500-3.000-2.500-2.000-1.500-1.000-0.5000.000Elevations TableNumber1314151617181920212223Minimum Elevation0.0000.5001.0001.5002.0002.5003.0003.5004.0004.5005.000Maximum Elevation0.5001.0001.5002.0002.5003.0003.5004.0004.5005.0005.500Site Sheet Checked By: Job Number: Drawn By: Project Engineer: Date:Revisions: 497 Bramson Ct, Suite 104 Mount Pleasant, SC 29464 Tel: 843.277.6221Existing Property LineExisting Overhead ElectricExisting Overhead Utility EasementExisting Right-of-WayExisting WetlandExisting Farm RoadExisting Paved RoadDesign Not For CreditDesign Enhancement I ReachDesign Enhancement II ReachDesign Restoration ReachDesign BankfullDesign 5' Major ContourDesign 1' Minor ContourDesign High Tensile FencingDesign Woven Wire FencingDesign GateDesign CulvertDesign Bank GradingDesign Road over CulvertDesign Ford CrossingDesign Riprap ProtectionOHEOHE100R/WPre-Construction FeaturesDesign FeaturesDesign Various Constructed Riffles Per PlansDesign Brush ToeDesign Boulder ToeDesign Vegetated Soil LiftDesign Log SillDesign Rock SillDesign Floodplain SillDesign Lunker LogPerry Hill Mitigation Site As-Built Hillsborough, North Carolina General Notes and Legend 005-02123 ABP JCK 0.2 May 28, 2021 X:\shared\Projects\005-02180 Perry Hill\Monitoring\Baseline Monitoring - 2021\Plans\02180-AB-Cover and Notes.dwg May 25, 2021 GLS OUEOUEConservation EasementInternal Crossing of Conservation EasementLimits of DisturbanceAs-Built Stream AlignmentAs-Built BankfullAs-Built 5' Major ContourAs-Built 1' Minor ContourAs-Built High Tensile FencingAs-Built Woven Wire FencingAs-Built GateAs-Built CulvertAs-Built Road over CulvertAs-Built Ford CrossingAs-Built Riprap Protection100As-Built FeaturesAs-Built Various Constructed Riffles Per PlansAs-Built Brush ToeAs-Built Boulder ToeAs-Built Log SillAs-Built Rock SillAs-Built Floodplain SillAs-Built Lunker LogCECECECE-IXCE-IXPermanent Cross SectionVegetation PlotCrest Gage / Flow GagePhoto Point>>VEGVEGVEGPP-#VP-#XS-#NOTES:1. DEVIATIONS FROM THE DESIGN WILL BE SHOWN IN RED2. BOTH THE AS-BUILT SURVEYED THALWEG ALIGNMENT AND DESIGNCENTERLINE ARE DEPICTED IN THIS PLAN SET.3. THE DESIGN CENTERLINE STATIONING IS USED FOR THE PROFILES ASWELL AS PROJECT CREDIT STATIONING.4. PRECONSTRUCTION TOPOGRAPHY BY IPW CONSTRUCTION GROUPSEPTEMBER 23, 2019.5. BOUNDARY SURVEY BY IPW CONSTRUCTION GROUP JULY 1, 2020.6. AS-BUILT SURVEY APRIL 22, 2021.Monitoring Features10+0010+0010+0010+00LODLOD Sheet Checked By: Job Number: Drawn By: Project Engineer: Date:Revisions: 497 Bramson Ct, Suite 104 Mount Pleasant, SC 29464 Tel: 843.277.62210'125' 250' 375'(HORIZONTAL)NX:\shared\Projects\005-02180 Perry Hill\Monitoring\Baseline Monitoring - 2021\Plans\02180-AB-Cover and Notes.dwg May 25, 2021 005-02123 ABP JCK 0.3 May 28, 2021 Perry Hill Mitigation Site As-Built Hillsborough, North Carolina Project Overview GLS ReachStationingType of MitigationStartEndPB-R1100+00 103+21RestorationPB-R2 103+21 106+85Enhancement IICrossing 106+85 107+45Not for CreditPB-R3 107+45 114+36 RestorationPB-R4114+36 120+90 RestorationCrossing120+90 121+50Not for CreditPB-R4121+50 134+34 RestorationOUE 134+34 135+81Not for CreditUT1-R1200+00 202+85 RestorationUT1-R2 202+85 205+76 RestorationUT2-R1 300+00 302+21Enhancement IIUT2-R2 302+21 311+68Enhancement IUT3 400+00 400+19Not for CreditUT3 400+19 403+62Enhancement IINOTE:1. MINOR SHIFTS IN STREAM FEATURES AS COMPARED TO DESIGN ASILLUSTRATED IN THE AS-BUILT DRAWINGS ARE DUE TO DIFFERENCES IN THEPROJECTIONS UTILIZED FOR DESIGN VERSUS THE CONSTRUCTION MODEL. THESE DIFFERENCES WERE MINIMAL AND DID NOT RESULT IN ANY MAJORDEVIATIONS OR LOSS IN STREAM LENGTH FROM DESIGN TO CONSTRUCTED.R/ W R/WR/WR/WR/ W R/ W R/W R/W R/ W R /W R /W R/ W R/ W R/ W R/ W R/ W R/W R/W R/W R /WR/WOUEOUEOUEOUEOUEOUEOUEOUEOUEOUEOUECE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXFRANK PERRY ROADEVELYN J PERRY ETALMARY C.P. BISHOPJUDITH G.P. KADLACTMS: 9865-08-1397DB: 4476 PG: 495PB: 10-E PG: 102MARK FRANKLIN PERRYTMS: 9865-37-2701DB: 2484 PG: 424PB: 89 PG: 156MARK FRANKLIN PERRYKRISTEN M. PERRYTMS: 9865-27-6712DB: 4522 PG: 30PB: NR PG: NRTHISTLE HILL, LLCC/O GEORGE WINGFIELDTMS: 9865-27-6133DB: 5074 PG: 237PB: 89 PG: 156DOUGLAS T. MOATSANITA E. MOATSTMS: 9865-17-8092DB: 1411 PG: 307PB: 75 PG: 4MARYLAND MICHAEL RAYDEEDRA RAYTMS: 9865-27-0176DB: 1796 PG: 321PB: 58 PG: 182RUBIE R. HECHTTMS: 9865-16-6359DB: 5242 PG: 402PB: 38 PG: 43JENNIFER L. HECHTTMS: 9865-27-6712DB: 6399 PG: 183PB: 35 PG: 47WENDY GELLERTPHALA NETTLESTMS: 9865-39-7127DB: 3740 PG: 464PB: 46 PG: 3R/W WIDTH: 60'OHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOUEOUEOUEOUEOUEOUEOUEOUEOUEOUEOUECECECECECECECECECECECECE CE CE CE CE CE CE CECECECEC E CECECECECECECECECE CE CE CE CE CE CECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECE CE CE CECECE CECECECECECECECECECECE CE CE C E C E C E CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CECECECECECE CE CE CECESH E E T 1 . 2 SHE E T 1 . 1 SH E E T 1 . 3 SH E E T 1 . 4 SH E E T 1 . 5 S H E E T 1 . 6 SHEET 1.7SHEET 1.8 SHEET 1.10SHEET 1.11 SHEET 1.15 SHEET 1.12SHEET 1.13SHEET 1.14SHEET 1.9 PE R R Y B R A N C HUT1UT3 UT2EVELYN JEANNE PERRYTMS: 9865-17-5161DB: 672 PG: 157PB: NR PG: NR403+62400+00205+76200+00205+00135+81100+00 105+00 110+00115+00120+00 125+0 0 130+00135+00 311+6830 0 + 0 0 305+00310 + 0 0 645650655660645650655660100+00100+50101+00101+50102+00102+50103+00103+50104+00DESIGN GRADEAS-BUILT GRADEPRE-CONSTRUCTION GRADE655655655PP-1XS-1 FLOODPLAIN LOG SILLSUPPLEMENTED WITHROCK TO STABILIZE BANKAT WETLAND OUTLET.LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLOD LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLOD LOD LODLODLODLODLODLODLOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LODLODLODLOD LODLODLODLODLODLODLOD LODLO D CECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CECECECECE>>STA. 103+21END PERRY BRANCHREACH 1 (RESTORATION)BEGIN PERRY BRANCHREACH 2 (ENHANCEMENT II)655 650655 CREST GAGE PERRY BRANCH REACH 1STA. 100+00BEGIN PERRY BRANCHREACH 1 (RESTORATION)PERRY BRANCH100+00101+00102+00103+00104+00MATCH LINE - STA 104+00 Sheet Checked By: Job Number: Drawn By: Project Engineer: Date:Revisions: 497 Bramson Ct, Suite 104 Mount Pleasant, SC 29464 Tel: 843.277.62210' 20' 40' 60'(HORIZONTAL)N 0'2'4'6'(VERTICAL)X:\shared\Projects\005-02180 Perry Hill\Monitoring\Baseline Monitoring - 2021\Plans\02180-AB-PerryBranch.dwg May 25, 2021 005-02123 ABP JCK 1.1 May 28, 2021 Sheet IndexPerry Hill Mitigation Site As-Built Hillsborough, North Carolina Perry Branch Reach 1 Stream Plan and Profile1.9GLS 1.11.21.31.41.51.61.71.81.91.101.111.121.131.141.15Pe r r y B r a n c hUT1 UT2UT3 NOTE:1. DEVIATIONS FROM THE DESIGNWILL BE SHOWN IN RED. SheetChecked By:Job Number:Drawn By:Project Engineer:Date:Revisions:497 Bramson Ct, Suite 104Mount Pleasant, SC 29464Tel: 843.277.62210' 20' 40' 60' (HORIZONTAL)N0'2'4'6' (VERTICAL)X:\shared\Projects\005-02180 Perry Hill\Monitoring\Baseline Monitoring - 2021\Plans\02180-AB-PerryBranch.dwgMay 25, 2021005-02123ABPJCK1.2May 28, 2021Sheet Index Perry Hill Mitigation Site As-BuiltHillsborough, North CarolinaPerry Branch Reach 2Stream Plan and ProfileGLS1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.51.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 1.10 1.11 1.12 1.13 1.14 1.15 Perry BranchU T 1 UT 2 UT39/22/2020NOTE:1. DEVIATIONS FROM THE DESIGNWILL BE SHOWN IN RED. 640 645 650 655 640 645 650 655 104+00 104+50 105+00 105+50 106+00 106+50 107+00 107+50 108+00 108+20 AS-BUILT GRADE DESIGN GRADE 38" RISE X 57" SPAN CULVERTINV IN: 643.52' 643.92'INV OUT: 643.13' 643.86' PRE-CONSTRUCTION GRADE PERRY BRANCH 645 PP-3 VP-1VP-1 PP-2 POOL NOT INSTALLEDDUE TO STABILITY NEEDEDUPSTREAM OF CULVERT L O D LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLOD LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLOD LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LOD LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODVEGVEGVEGCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE STA. 107+45END INTERNALEASEMENT BREAKEND PERRY BRANCH REACH 2 (ENHANCEMENT II)BEGIN PERRY BRANCH REACH 3 (RESTORATION) 645645CULVERTCROSSING STA. 106+85BEGIN INTERNALEASEMENT BREAKPERRY BRANCH REACH 2 (ENHANCEMENT II)FARM ROAD 104+00 105+00106+00 107+00 108 + 0 0MATCH LINE - STA 104+00MATCH LINE - STA 108+20 Sheet Checked By: Job Number: Drawn By: Project Engineer: Date:Revisions: 497 Bramson Ct, Suite 104 Mount Pleasant, SC 29464 Tel: 843.277.62210' 20' 40' 60'(HORIZONTAL)N0'2' 4'6'(VERTICAL)X:\shared\Projects\005-02180 Perry Hill\Monitoring\Baseline Monitoring - 2021\Plans\02180-AB-PerryBranch.dwg May 25, 2021 005-02123 ABP JCK 1.3 May 28, 2021 Sheet IndexPerry Hill Mitigation Site As-Built Hillsborough, North Carolina Perry Branch Reach 3 Stream Plan and Profile GLS 1.11.21.31.41.51.61.71.81.91.101.111.121.131.141.15Pe r r y B r a n c hUT1 UT2UT3 NOTE:1. DEVIATIONS FROM THE DESIGNWILL BE SHOWN IN RED.2. AS-BUILT INFORMATION FOR UT3IS ADDRESSED ON SHEET 1.15630635640645630635640645108+20108+50109+00109+50110+00110+50111+00111+50112+00112+50112+80DESIGN GRADEAS-BUILT GRADEPERRY BRANCH640 XS-2XS-3PP-19PP-4VP-1LODLODLODLOD LODLODLODLOD LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLOD LOD LODLODLODLODLODL O D LOD LOD LODL O D LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLOD LOD LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODVEGVEGVEGVEG VEGVEGVEGVEG CECECECECECECECECECE>>>>>640640UT3 VP-13402+00403+00 109+00110+00 111+00112+00113+00MATCH LINE - STA 108+20 MATCH LINE - STA 112+80 Sheet Checked By: Job Number: Drawn By: Project Engineer: Date:Revisions: 497 Bramson Ct, Suite 104 Mount Pleasant, SC 29464 Tel: 843.277.62210' 20' 40' 60'(HORIZONTAL)N0'2' 4'6'(VERTICAL)X:\shared\Projects\005-02180 Perry Hill\Monitoring\Baseline Monitoring - 2021\Plans\02180-AB-PerryBranch.dwg May 25, 2021 005-02123 ABP JCK 1.4 May 28, 2021 Sheet IndexPerry Hill Mitigation Site As-Built Hillsborough, North Carolina Perry Branch Reach 3 & 4 Stream Plan and Profile GLS 1.11.21.31.41.51.61.71.81.91.101.111.121.131.141.15Pe r r y B r a n c hUT1 UT2UT3 NOTE:1. DEVIATIONS FROM THE DESIGNWILL BE SHOWN IN RED.2. AS-BUILT INFORMATION RELATEDTO UT2 IS ADDRESSED ON SHEETS1.12 THROUGH 1.14625630635640625630635640112+80 113+00113+50114+00114+50115+00115+50116+00116+50117+00117+30DESIGN GRADEAS-BUILT GRADEPERRY BRANCHUT2 VP-3XS-4 XS-5PP-5PP-6VP-4VP-2LODLOD LOD LOD LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLOD LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLOD LOD LOD LOD LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLOD LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLOD LODLOD LODLODLODLODLODLODLODVEGVEGVEGVEG VEGVEGVEGVEGVEGVEGCECECECECE CECECE>>>>>>>CREST GAGEPERRY BRANCH REACH 4STA. 114+36END PERRY BRANCHREACH 3 (RESTORATION)BEGIN PERRY BRANCHREACH 4 (RESTORATION)645640635311+00 113+00114+00115+001 1 6 + 0 0 117+00MATCH LINE - STA 112+80 MATCH LINE - STA 117+30 SheetChecked By:Job Number:Drawn By:Project Engineer:Date:Revisions:497 Bramson Ct, Suite 104Mount Pleasant, SC 29464Tel: 843.277.62210' 20' 40' 60' (HORIZONTAL)N0'2'4'6' (VERTICAL)X:\shared\Projects\005-02180 Perry Hill\Monitoring\Baseline Monitoring - 2021\Plans\02180-AB-PerryBranch.dwgMay 25, 2021005-02123ABPJCK1.5May 28, 2021Sheet Index Perry Hill Mitigation Site As-BuiltHillsborough, North CarolinaPerry Branch Reach 4Stream Plan and ProfileGLS1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.51.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 1.10 1.11 1.12 1.13 1.14 1.15 Perry BranchU T 1 UT 2 UT39/22/2020NOTE:1. DEVIATIONS FROM THE DESIGNWILL BE SHOWN IN RED. 620 625 630 635 620 625 630 635 117+30 117+50 118+00 118+50 119+00 119+50 120+00 120+50 121+00 121+50 DESIGN GRADE AS-BUILT GRADE DUAL 38" RISE X 57" SPAN CULVERTSLEFT: INV IN: 628.03' 628.47'INV OUT: 627.59' 627.80'RIGHT: INV IN: 628.03' 628.24'INV OUT: 627.59' 627.44'630630XS-7 VP-5 VP-4 LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LO D LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LODLODLODLODLODLODLOD LODLODLOD LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODVEGVEGVEGVEGVEGVEGVEGVEG CE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE CE CE CE CECECECECECECESTA. 120+90BEGIN INTERNAL EASEMENT BREAKPERRY BRANCH REACH 4 (RESTORATION) STA. 121+50END INTERNALEASEMENT BREAK PERRY BRANCH REACH 4 (RESTORATION) 635 630630640 FARM ROADFLOODPL A I N L O G S I L L L O C A T I O N A D J U S T E D I N THE FIELD T O P R O V I D E I M P R O V E D B A N K STABILIZ A T I O N F R O M C O N C E N T R A T E D R U N O F F . PP-6 PERRY BRANCH117+00 11 8 + 0 0 119+00 120+00121+0 0MATCH LINE - STA 117+30MATCH LINE - STA 121+50 SheetChecked By:Job Number:Drawn By:Project Engineer:Date:Revisions:497 Bramson Ct, Suite 104Mount Pleasant, SC 29464Tel: 843.277.62210' 20' 40' 60' (HORIZONTAL)N0'2'4'6' (VERTICAL)X:\shared\Projects\005-02180 Perry Hill\Monitoring\Baseline Monitoring - 2021\Plans\02180-AB-PerryBranch.dwgMay 25, 2021005-02123ABPJCK1.6May 28, 2021Sheet Index Perry Hill Mitigation Site As-BuiltHillsborough, North CarolinaPerry Branch Reach 4Stream Plan and ProfileGLS1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.51.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 1.10 1.11 1.12 1.13 1.14 1.15 Perry BranchU T 1 UT 2 UT3NOTE:1. DEVIATIONS FROM THE DESIGNWILL BE SHOWN IN RED. 620 625 630 635 620 625 630 635 121+50 122+00 122+50 123+00 123+50 124+00 124+50 125+00 125+30 DESIGN GRADE AS-BUILT GRADE 630630PERRY BRANCH PP-8 VP-6 VP-7LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODVEGVE G VEGVEGVEGVEGVEGV E G V E GCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCECECECECE630 630630630FARM ROADFLOODPLAIN LOG SILL LOCATION ADJUSTED INTHE FIELD TO PROVIDE IMPROVED BANKSTABILIZATION FROM CONCENTRATED RUNOFF. 122+00 123 + 0 0 12 4 + 0 0 125+00MATCH LINE - STA 121+50MATCH LINE - STA 125+30 Sheet Checked By: Job Number: Drawn By: Project Engineer: Date:Revisions: 497 Bramson Ct, Suite 104 Mount Pleasant, SC 29464 Tel: 843.277.62210' 20' 40' 60'(HORIZONTAL)N0'2'4'6'(VERTICAL)X:\shared\Projects\005-02180 Perry Hill\Monitoring\Baseline Monitoring - 2021\Plans\02180-AB-PerryBranch.dwg May 25, 2021 005-02123 ABP JCK 1.7 May 28, 2021 Sheet IndexPerry Hill Mitigation Site As-Built Hillsborough, North Carolina Perry Branch Reach 4 Stream Plan and Profile GLS 1.11.21.31.41.51.61.71.81.91.101.111.121.131.141.15Pe r r y B r a n c hUT1 UT2UT3 NOTE:1. DEVIATIONS FROM THE DESIGNWILL BE SHOWN IN RED.615620625630615620625630125+30 125+50126+00126+50127+00127+50128+00128+50129+00129+50DESIGN GRADEAS-BUILT GRADE625PERRY BRANCHXS-6 XS-7VP-14VP-7LOG SILL NOT INSTALLED DUETO BEDROCK IN CHANNEL.LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLOD LODLODLODLODLO D L O D L O D LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODVEGVEGVEGVE G VEG VEGCECECECECECECE>>>>>625 625625 PP-9125+00126+00127+00128+00129+00MATCH LINE - STA 125+30 MATCH LINE - STA 129+50 Sheet Checked By: Job Number: Drawn By: Project Engineer: Date:Revisions: 497 Bramson Ct, Suite 104 Mount Pleasant, SC 29464 Tel: 843.277.62210' 20' 40' 60'(HORIZONTAL)N0'2' 4'6'(VERTICAL)X:\shared\Projects\005-02180 Perry Hill\Monitoring\Baseline Monitoring - 2021\Plans\02180-AB-PerryBranch.dwg May 25, 2021 005-02123 ABP JCK 1.8 May 28, 2021 Sheet IndexPerry Hill Mitigation Site As-Built Hillsborough, North Carolina Perry Branch Reach 4 Stream Plan and Profile GLS 1.11.21.31.41.51.61.71.81.91.101.111.121.131.141.15Pe r r y B r a n c hUT1 UT2UT3 NOTE:1. DEVIATIONS FROM THE DESIGNWILL BE SHOWN IN RED.2. AS-BUILT INFORMATION RELATEDTO UT1 IS ADDRESSED ON SHEETS1.10 THROUGH 1.11610615620625610615620625129+50130+00130+50131+00131+50132+00132+50133+00133+50133+80DESIGN GRADEAS-BUILT GRADEOUEOUE620620620PERRY BRANCHXS-7 PP-10PP-13XS-9 VP-8VP-9U T 1 LODLODLODLOD LOD LODLODLODLODLODLOD LOD LOD LODLODLODLODLODLOD LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLOD LOD LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODVEGVEGV E G VEG VEGVEGV E G VEGCECECECE>>620620VERNAL POOL NOT INSTALLED DUETO SUFFICIENT MATERIAL ON-SITETO FILL EXISTING CHANNEL.205+00130+00 131+00132+00133+00134+00MATCH LINE - STA 129+50 MATCH LINE - STA 133+80 Sheet Checked By: Job Number: Drawn By: Project Engineer: Date:Revisions: 497 Bramson Ct, Suite 104 Mount Pleasant, SC 29464 Tel: 843.277.6221 X:\shared\Projects\005-02180 Perry Hill\Monitoring\Baseline Monitoring - 2021\Plans\02180-AB-PerryBranch.dwg May 25, 2021 005-02123 ABP JCK 1.9 May 28, 2021 Sheet IndexPerry Hill Mitigation Site As-Built Hillsborough, North Carolina Perry Branch Reach 4 Stream Plan and Profile GLS 1.11.21.31.41.51.61.71.81.91.101.111.121.131.141.15Pe r r y B r a n c hUT1 UT2UT3 0' 20' 40' 60'(HORIZONTAL)N0'2' 4'6'(VERTICAL)NOTE:1. DEVIATIONS FROM THE DESIGNWILL BE SHOWN IN RED.2. AS-BUILT INFORMATION RELATEDTO UT1 IS ADDRESSED ON SHEETS1.10 THROURGH 1.11605610615620605610615620133+80 134+00134+50135+00135+50135+81PROPOSED GRADEAS-BUILT GRADEBEGIN FORD CROSSING END FORD CROSSINGOUEOUEOUEOUEOUEOUEOUEOUEOUEOUEOUEOUE OUEOUEOUEOUEOUEOUEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOUEOUEOUEOUEOUEOUEOUEOUEOUEOUE61 5PP-11PP-13UT1 LODLODLOD LOD LODLODLODLODLODLO D LO D LODLOD LODLODLOD LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODCECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECE615615UT 1 STATION 134+34END OF PERRY BRANCH REACH 4STREAM CREDITPERRY BRANCHEXTERNALFORD CROSSINGSTA. 135+81END PERRY BRANCHREACH 4 (RESTORATION)TIE TO EXISTING THALWEG205+00135+81134+00 1 3 5 + 0 0 MATCH LINE - STA 133+80 Sheet Checked By: Job Number: Drawn By: Project Engineer: Date:Revisions: 497 Bramson Ct, Suite 104 Mount Pleasant, SC 29464 Tel: 843.277.62210' 20' 40' 60'(HORIZONTAL)N 0'2' 4'6'(VERTICAL)X:\shared\Projects\005-02180 Perry Hill\Monitoring\Baseline Monitoring - 2021\Plans\02180-AB-UT1-3.dwg May 25, 2021 005-02123 ABP JCK 1.10 May 28, 2021 Sheet IndexPerry Hill Mitigation Site As-Built Hillsborough, North Carolina UT1 Reach 1 Stream Plan and Profile GLS 1.11.21.31.41.51.61.71.81.91.101.111.121.131.141.15Pe r r y B r a n c hUT1 UT2UT3NOTE:1. DEVIATIONS FROM THE DESIGNWILL BE SHOWN IN RED.620625630635640620625630635640200+00200+50201+00201+50202+00202+50 202+70DESIGN GRADEAS-BUILT GRADEUT1625 630635640LODLODLODLODLOD LOD LODLODLODLODLODLODLOD LODLODLODLODLODLOD LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLOD LOD LOD LOD LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLOD LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODVEGVEGVEGVEG CECECECECECECECECECECECECE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CECECE>>VP-12XS-8 FLOODPLAIN SILLS ALONG UT1 NOT INSTALLEDDUE TO ADEQUATE FLOODPLAIN STABILITYAND TO DECREASE FLOODPLAIN GRADING (TYP.)640640635635630630625FLOW GAGEUT1 REACH 1STA. 200+00BEGIN UT1 REACH 1(RESTORATION)LUNKER LOG REPLACED WITH BASE LAYER OF LARGERRIPRAP SEPERATED WITH FILTER FABRIC AND TOPPEDWITH ABC STONE AT 3:1 SLOPE TO PROMOTEDRAINAGE AND PREVENT EROSION UPSTREAM.640635200+00201+00202+00203+00STA. 202+85END UT1 REACH 1(RESTORATION)BEGIN UT1 REACH 2(RESTORATION)VP-10MATCH LINE - S T A 2 0 2 + 7 0 Sheet Checked By: Job Number: Drawn By: Project Engineer: Date:Revisions: 497 Bramson Ct, Suite 104 Mount Pleasant, SC 29464 Tel: 843.277.6221 N X:\shared\Projects\005-02180 Perry Hill\Monitoring\Baseline Monitoring - 2021\Plans\02180-AB-UT1-3.dwg May 25, 2021 005-02123 ABP JCK 1.11 May 28, 2021 Sheet IndexPerry Hill Mitigation Site As-Built Hillsborough, North Carolina UT1 Reach 2 Stream Plan and Profile GLS 0' 20' 40' 60'(HORIZONTAL)0'2'4' 6'(VERTICAL)1.11.21.31.41.51.61.71.81.91.101.111.121.131.141.15Pe r r y B r a n c hUT1 UT2UT3 NOTE:1. DEVIATIONS FROM THE DESIGNWILL BE SHOWN IN RED.2. AS-BUILT INFORMATION RELATEDTO PERRY BRANCH IS ADDRESSEDON SHEETS 1.1 THROUGH 1.9610615620625630610615620625630202+70203+00203+50204+00204+50205+00205+50 205+76DESIGN GRADEAS-BUILT GRADEOUEOUEOUEOUEPERRY BRANCH625LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLOD LODLODLOD LODLOD LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLOD LOD LODLODLOD LO D LO D CECECECECECECE>XS - 9 PP-11133+00134+00135+00STA. 205+76END UT1 REACH 2(RESTORATION)620615 CREST GAGEUT1 REACH 2FLOODPLAIN SILLS ALONG UT1 NOT INSTALLEDDUE TO ADEQUATE FLOODPLAIN STABILITYAND TO DECREASE FLOODPLAIN GRADING (TYP.)PP-13620 203+00204+00205+00UT1STA. 202+85END UT1 REACH 1(RESTORATION)BEGIN UT1 REACH 2(RESTORATION)MATCH LINE - STA 202+70 Sheet Checked By: Job Number: Drawn By: Project Engineer: Date:Revisions: 497 Bramson Ct, Suite 104 Mount Pleasant, SC 29464 Tel: 843.277.62210' 20' 40' 60'(HORIZONTAL)N 0'2'4'6'(VERTICAL)X:\shared\Projects\005-02180 Perry Hill\Monitoring\Baseline Monitoring - 2021\Plans\02180-AB-UT1-3.dwg May 25, 2021 005-02123 ABP JCK 1.12 May 28, 2021 Sheet IndexPerry Hill Mitigation Site As-Built Hillsborough, North Carolina UT2 Reach 1 Stream Plan and Profile GLS 1.11.21.31.41.51.61.71.81.91.101.111.121.131.141.15Pe r r y B r a n c hUT1 UT2UT3 NOTE:1. DEVIATIONS FROM THE DESIGNWILL BE SHOWN IN RED.645650655660645650655660300+00300+50301+00301+50302+00302+50303+00303+50304+00 304+20DESIGN GRADEPRE-CONSTRUCTION GRADEAS-BUILT GRADEUT2LODLODLODLODLODLODLOD LOD LOD LOD LODLOD LODLODLOD LO D LOD LOD LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLO D LOD LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODVEGVEGVEGVEG CECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECEPP-15PP-14VP-11PP-1565565 0VEGETATED SOIL LIFT REPLACEDWITH BRUSH TOE DUE TOAVAILABLE MATERIALS ON-SITE.FLOW GAGEUT2 REACH 2RIFFLE NOT INSTALLED TO AVOIDDAMAGING ADJACENT TREE ROOTS300+00301+00302 + 0 0 3 03 + 0 0 304+00STA. 302+21END UT2 REACH 1(ENHANCEMENT II)BEGIN UT2 REACH 2(ENHANCEMENT I)STA. 300+00BEGIN UT2 REACH 1(ENHANCEMENT II)MATCH LINE - STA 304+20 Sheet Checked By: Job Number: Drawn By: Project Engineer: Date:Revisions: 497 Bramson Ct, Suite 104 Mount Pleasant, SC 29464 Tel: 843.277.62210' 20' 40' 60'(HORIZONTAL)N 0'2'4'6'(VERTICAL)X:\shared\Projects\005-02180 Perry Hill\Monitoring\Baseline Monitoring - 2021\Plans\02180-AB-UT1-3.dwg May 25, 2021 005-02123 ABP JCK 1.13 May 28, 2021 Sheet IndexPerry Hill Mitigation Site As-Built Hillsborough, North Carolina UT2 Reach 2 Stream Plan and Profile GLS 1.11.21.31.41.51.61.71.81.91.101.111.121.131.141.15Pe r r y B r a n c hUT1 UT2UT3 NOTE:1. DEVIATIONS FROM THE DESIGNWILL BE SHOWN IN RED.640645650655640645650655304+20304+50305+00305+50306+00306+50307+00307+50308+00308+50 308+70DESIGN GRADEPRE-CONSTRUCTION GRADEAS-BUILT GRADEUT2LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LODLODLODLOD LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLOD LOD LODLOD LOD LOD LODLODLODLODVEGVEGVEG VEGVEGCECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECEPP-16PP-15VP-12650FLOW GAGEUT2 REACH 26 4 5650304+00 305+00306+00307+00308+00MATCH LINE - STA 304+20 MATCH LINE - STA 308+ 7 0 Sheet Checked By: Job Number: Drawn By: Project Engineer: Date:Revisions: 497 Bramson Ct, Suite 104 Mount Pleasant, SC 29464 Tel: 843.277.62210' 20' 40' 60'(HORIZONTAL)N 0'2'4' 6'(VERTICAL)X:\shared\Projects\005-02180 Perry Hill\Monitoring\Baseline Monitoring - 2021\Plans\02180-AB-UT1-3.dwg May 25, 2021 005-02123 ABP JCK 1.14 May 28, 2021 Sheet IndexPerry Hill Mitigation Site As-Built Hillsborough, North Carolina UT2 Reach 2 Stream Plan and Profile GLS 1.11.21.31.41.51.61.71.81.91.101.111.121.131.141.15Pe r r y B r a n c hUT1 UT2UT3 NOTE:1. DEVIATIONS FROM THE DESIGNWILL BE SHOWN IN RED.2. AS-BUILT INFORMATION RELATEDTO PERRY BRANCH IS ADDRESSEDON SHEETS 1.1 THROUGH 1.9630635640645630635640645308+70309+00309+50310+00310+50311+00311+50 311+68DESIGN GRADEPRE-CONSTRUCTION GRADEAS-BUILT GRADEPERRY BRANCHUT2LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLOD LODLODLOD LODLOD LOD LODLODLODLOD LODLODLODLODLODLOD LOD LODLODLODLOD LOD L O D LO D L O D LOD LODLODLODLOD L O D LODLOD LOD LOD LOD LO D LODLODVEGVEG VEGVEGVEGVEG CECECECECECECECECECECECECE CECECECECECECECECECE>>>XS-10 VP-3114+0 0 115+ 0 0 XS-11 LOG SILL NOT INSTALLED TOAVOID DAMAGING TREE ROOTSADJACENT TO CHANNEL.VP-2STA. 311+68END UT2 REACH 2(ENHANCEMENT I)FLOW GAGEUT2 REACH 2640 640635 635309+00310+00311+00PP-5PP-17MATCH LINE - STA 308+70 Sheet Checked By: Job Number: Drawn By: Project Engineer: Date:Revisions: 497 Bramson Ct, Suite 104 Mount Pleasant, SC 29464 Tel: 843.277.62210' 20' 40' 60'(HORIZONTAL)N 0'2' 4'6'(VERTICAL)X:\shared\Projects\005-02180 Perry Hill\Monitoring\Baseline Monitoring - 2021\Plans\02180-AB-UT1-3.dwg May 25, 2021 005-02123 ABP JCK 1.15 May 28, 2021 Sheet IndexPerry Hill Mitigation Site As-Built Hillsborough, North Carolina UT3 Stream Plan and Profile GLS 1.11.21.31.41.51.61.71.81.91.101.111.121.131.141.15Pe r r y B r a n c hUT1 UT2UT3 NOTE:1. DEVIATIONS FROM THE DESIGNWILL BE SHOWN IN RED.2. AS-BUILT INFORMATION RELATEDTO PERRY BRANCH IS ADDRESSEDON SHEETS 1.1 THROUGH 1.9635640645650635640645650400+00400+50401+00401+50402+00402+50403+00403+50 403+62DESIGN GRADEPRE-CONSTRUCTION GRADEAS-BUILT GRADEPERRY BRANCHUT3LODLODLOD LODLOD LODLODLODLODLODLODLOD LOD LOD LOD LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLOD LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLOD LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLOD LODLOD LOD L O D LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLOD LOD LODLODLODCECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECE CE CE CEPP-19PP-18PP-4109+00110+00111+00STA. 403+62END UT3(ENHANCEMENT II)640640400+00401+00402+00403+00STA. 400+19BEGIN UT3(ENHANCEMENT II) Sheet Checked By: Job Number: Drawn By: Project Engineer: Date:Revisions: 497 Bramson Ct, Suite 104 Mount Pleasant, SC 29464 Tel: 843.277.6221 X:\shared\Projects\005-02180 Perry Hill\Monitoring\Baseline Monitoring - 2021\Plans\02180-AB-PlantingPlans.dwg May 25, 2021 005-02123 ABP JCK GLS 2.0 May 28, 2021 Perry Hill Mitigation Site As-Built Hillsborough, North Carolina Planting Tables Planting PlanWetland Planting Zone - Non-ForestedBare RootSpeciesCommon NameSpacingMin. Caliper SizeStratum% of StemsWetlandIndicator StatusPlatanus occidentalisSycamore6' x 12' 0.25”-1.0”Canopy15%FACWBetula nigraRiver Birch6' x 12' 0.25”-1.0”Canopy15%FACUQuercus lyrataOvercup Oak6' x 12' 0.25”-1.0” Canopy10%OBLQuercus michauxiiSwamp Chestnut Oak6' x 12' 0.25”-1.0” Canopy13%FACWUlmus americanaAmerican Elm6' x 12' 0.25”-1.0” Canopy10%FACWAcer negundoBoxelder6' x 12' 0.25”-1.0”Subcanopy8%FACCornus amomumSilky Dogwood6' x 12' 0.25”-1.0”Subcanopy7%FACWLive StakesSalix nigraBlack Willow6' x 12' 0.5''-1.5'' Canopy10%OBLSalix sericeaSilky Willow6' x 12' 0.5''-1.5''Subcanopy4%OBLSambucus canadensisElderberry6' x 12' 0.5''-1.5''Subcanopy4%FACWCephalanthus occidentalisButtonbush6' x 12' 0.5''-1.5''Subcanopy4%OBL100%Upland Planting ZoneBare RootSpeciesCommon NameSpacingMin. Caliper SizeStratum% of StemsWetlandIndicator StatusPlatanus occidentalisSycamore6' x 12' 0.25”-1.0” Canopy15%FACWBetula nigraRiver Birch6' x 12' 0.25”-1.0” Canopy20%FACUNyssa sylvaticaBlack Gum6' x 12' 0.25”-1.0” Canopy10%FACQuercus falcataSouthern Red Oak6' x 12' 0.25”-1.0” Canopy5%FACUQuercus rubraNorthern Red Oak6' x 12' 0.25”-1.0” Canopy5%FACUDiospyros virginianaPersimmon6' x 12' 0.25”-1.0” Canopy12%FACQuercus albaWhite Oak6' x 12' 0.25”-1.0” Canopy10%FACUUlmus alataWinged Elm6' x 12' 0.25”-1.0” Canopy10%FACUPopulus deltoidesEastern Cottonwood6' x 12' 0.25”-1.0” Canopy8%FACOxydendrum arboreumSourwood6' x 12' 0.25”-1.0”Subcanopy5%UPL100%Streambank Planting ZoneLive StakesSpeciesCommon NameIndiv. SpacingMin. SizeStratum% of StemsWetlandIndicator StatusCephalanthus occidentalisButtonbush5'0.5”-1.5” cal. Shrub15%OBLCornus amomumSilky Dogwood5'0.5”-1.5” cal. Shrub35%FACWSalix sericeaSilky Willow5'0.5”-1.5” cal. Shrub40%OBLSambucus canadensisElderberry5'0.5”-1.5” cal. Shrub10%FACW100%Herbaceous PlugsJuncus effususCommon Rush2'1.0”- 2.0” plug Herb50%FACWCarex crinitaFringed Sedge2'1.0”- 2.0” plug Herb15%OBLCarex luridaLurid Sedge2'1.0”- 2.0” plug Herb20%OBLScirpus cyperinusWoolgrass2'1.0”- 2.0” plug Herb15%FACW100%Wetland Planting Zone - ForestedBare RootSpeciesCommon NameSpacingMin. Caliper SizeStratum% of StemsWetlandIndicator StatusPlatanus occidentalisSycamore12' x 12' 0.25”-1.0” Canopy10%FACWBetula nigraRiver Birch12' x 12' 0.25”-1.0” Canopy10%FACUQuercus lyrataOvercup Oak12' x 12' 0.25”-1.0” Canopy10%OBLQuercus michauxiiSwamp Chestnut Oak12' x 12' 0.25”-1.0”Canopy10%FACWUlmus americanaAmerican Elm12' x 12' 0.25”-1.0” Canopy7%FACWAcer negundoBoxelder12' x 12' 0.25”-1.0” Canopy7%FACCornus amomumSilky Dogwood12' x 12' 0.25”-1.0”Subcanopy10%FACWViburnum nudumPossumhaw Viburnum12' x 12' 0.25”-1.0”Subcanopy6%FACLive StakesSalix nigraBlack Willow8' x 8' 0.5''-1.5''Canopy10%OBLSalix sericeaSilky Willow8' x 8' 0.5''-1.5''Subcanopy5%OBLSambucus canadensisElderberry8' x 8' 0.5''-1.5''Subcanopy8%FACWCephalanthus occidentalisButtonbush8' x 8' 0.5''-1.5''Subcanopy7%OBL100%Buffer Planting Zone - ForestedBuffer Planting Zone - Non-ForestedUpland Planting ZoneBuffer Planting Zone - Non-ForestedBare RootSpeciesCommon NameSpacingMin. Caliper SizeStratum% of StemsWetlandIndicator StatusPlatanus occidentalisSycamore6' x 12' 0.25”-1.0”Canopy20%FACWBetula nigraRiver Birch6' x 12' 0.25”-1.0”Canopy15%FACUQuercus michauxiiSwamp Chestnut Oak6' x 12' 0.25”-1.0” Canopy10%FACWQuercus phellosWillow Oak6' x 12' 0.25”-1.0” Canopy5%FACQuercus rubraNorthern Red Oak6' x 12' 0.25”-1.0” Canopy5%FACUPopulus deltoidesEastern Cottonwood6' x 12' 0.25”-1.0” Canopy10%FACAcer negundoBoxelder6' x 12' 0.25”-1.0” Canopy10%FACUlmus americanaAmerican Elm6' x 12' 0.25”-1.0” Canopy5%FACWDiospyros viginianaPersimmon6' x 12' 0.25”-1.0” Canopy10%FACAcer floridanumSouthern Sugar Maple6' x 12' 0.25”-1.0” Canopy3%-Asimina trilobaPawpaw6' x 12' 0.25”-1.0”Subcanopy5%FACViburnum prunifoliumBlackhaw Viburnum6' x 12' 0.25”-1.0”Subcanopy2%FACU100%Buffer Planting Zone - ForestedBare RootSpeciesCommon NameSpacingMin. Caliper SizeStratum% of StemsWetlandIndicator StatusQuercus phellosWillow Oak12' x 12' 0.25”-1.0” Canopy10%FACQuercus michauxiiSwamp Chestnut Oak12' x 12' 0.25”-1.0” Canopy5%FACWCeltis laegivataSugarberry12' x 12' 0.25”-1.0” Canopy5%FACWDiospyros viginianaPersimmon12' x 12' 0.25”-1.0” Canopy5%FACUlmus americanaAmerican Elm12' x 12' 0.25”-1.0” Canopy10%FACWFagus grandifoliaAmerican Beech12' x 12' 0.25”-1.0” Canopy10%FACUAsimina trilobaPawpaw12' x 12' 0.25”-1.0”Subcanopy10%FACCornus floridaFlowering Dogwood12' x 12' 0.25”-1.0”Subcanopy10%FACUCarpinus carolinianaIronwood12' x 12' 0.25”-1.0”Subcanopy5%FACCornus amomumSilky Dogwood12' x 12' 0.25”-1.0”Subcanopy10%FACWEuonymus americanusStrawberry Bush12' x 12' 0.25"-1.0"Subcanopy10%FACViburnum dentatumArrowwood Viburnum12' x 12' 0.25”-1.0”Subcanopy10%FAC100%Planting ZonesStreambank Planting ZoneWetland Planting Zone - ForestedWetland Planting Zone - Non-ForestedNotes:·No one bare root species currently proposed for the buffer, wetland, and upland planting zones makes up more than 20% of the species mix. In the event speciessubstitutions are required, the Engineer shall provide substitute species of similar composition and rates to the proposed planting plan.·Buffer planting will occur within the proposed conservation easement.·All non-hatched areas within the proposed conservation easement are currently vegetated and will be planted as needed to achieve the target density if disturbed.·All disturbed areas outside of the conservation easement shall be planted with the Permanent Seeding Outside Easement seed mix.·Vegetative planting zones shall be marked by the Engineer using GPS.·Vegetation planting and replanting should be conducted between November 15 and March 15, unless otherwise noted in the approved Mitigation Plan or remedialaction plan. Sheet Checked By: Job Number: Drawn By: Project Engineer: Date:Revisions: 497 Bramson Ct, Suite 104 Mount Pleasant, SC 29464 Tel: 843.277.6221 X:\shared\Projects\005-02180 Perry Hill\Monitoring\Baseline Monitoring - 2021\Plans\02180-AB-PlantingPlans.dwg May 25, 2021 005-02123 ABP JCK GLS 2.1 May 28, 2021 Perry Hill Mitigation Site As-Built Hillsborough, North Carolina Planting Tables Planting PlanPermanent Seeding Outside EasementApproved DateSpecies NameCommon NameStratumDensity (lbs/acre)WetlandIndicator StatusAll YearFestuca arundinaceaTall FescueHerb40-Temporary SeedingApproved DateSpecies NameCommon NameStratumDensity (lbs/acre)WetlandIndicator StatusAug 15-May 1Secale cerealeRye GrainHerb140-May 1 - Aug 15Setaria italicaGerman MilletHerb50FACUAll YearTrifolium repensWhite CloverHerb5FACUAll YearTrifolium incarnatumCrimson CloverHerb5-Permanent Buffer SeedingPure Live Seed (20 lbs/ acre)Approved DateSpecies NameCommon NameStratumDensity (lbs/acre)WetlandIndicator StatusAll YearPanicum rigidulumRedtop PanicgrassHerb1.0FACWAll YearTridens flavusPurpletopHerb1.0FACUAll YearDichanthelium clandestinumDeertongueHerb3.5FACAll YearElymus virginicusVirginia Wild RyeHerb3.0FACWAll YearElymus ripariusRiverbank Wild RyeHerb1.5FACWAll YearPanicum virgatumSwitchgrassHerb1.0FACAll YearSorghastrum nutansIndiangrassHerb2.5FACUAll YearCarex vulpinoideaFox SedgeHerb1.5OBLAll YearJuncus tenuisPath RushHerb0.2FACAll YearRudbeckia hirtaBlackeyed SusanHerb1.0FACUAll YearCoreopsis lanceolataLanceleaf CoreopsisHerb1.0FACUAll YearChamaecrista fasciculata var.Patridge PeaHerb1.0FACUAll YearHeliopsis helianthoidesOxeye SunflowerHerb0.8FACUAll YearBidens aristosaBur-MarigoldHerb1.0FACWPermanent Wetland SeedingPure Live Seed (20 lbs/ acre)Approved DateSpecies NameCommon NameStratumDensity (lbs/acre)WetlandIndicator StatusAll YearPanicum ancepsBeaked PanicgrassHerb2.0FACAll YearPanicum rigidulumRedtop PanicgrassHerb1.6FACWAll YearAgrostis hyemalisWinter BentgrassHerb1.0FACAll YearElymus virginicusVirginia Wild RyeHerb1.5FACWAll YearElymus ripariusRiverbank Wild RyeHerb2.0FACWAll YearPanicum virgatumSwitchgrassHerb1.0FACAll YearTripsacum dacyloidesEastern GamagrassHerb2.0FACWAll YearCarex luridaLurid SedgeHerb0.4OBLAll YearCarex vulpinoideaFox SedgeHerb4.0OBLAll YearCarex lupulinaHop SedgeHerb0.4OBLAll YearJuncus effususCommon RushHerb1.5FACWAll YearHelianthus angustifoliaSwamp SunflowerHerb1.0FACWAll YearBidens aristosaBur-MarigoldHerb1.6FACWSeed MixesNote: Mix White Clover and Crimson Clover to Rye Grain or German Millet depending on time of year. White Clover and Crimson Cloverrequire a nitrogen inoculant to be added prior to application on Site.Permanent Upland SeedingPure Live Seed (20 lbs/ acre)Approved DateSpecies NameCommon NameStratumDensity (lbs/acre)WetlandIndicator StatusAll YearTridens flavusPurpletopHerb2.0FACUAll YearDichanthelium clandestinumDeertongueHerb4.5FACAll YearPanicum virgatumSwitchgrassHerb1.5FACAll YearSorghastrum nutansIndiangrassHerb3.5FACUAll YearJuncus tenuisPath RushHerb1.0FACAll YearRudbeckia hirtaBlackeyed SusanHerb2.0FACUAll YearCoreopsis lanceolataLanceleaf CoreopsisHerb2.0FACUAll YearChamaecrista fasciculata var.Patridge PeaHerb2.0FACUAll YearHeliopsis helianthoidesOxeye SunflowerHerb1.5FACUNote:·Temporary and permanent seed mixes shall not be required in areas where land disturbance does not occur during construction orwhere chemical treatment to eliminate fescue is limited to the area immediately adjacent to planted trees. A second treatment maybe required at the beginning of year two based on fescue re-establishment and tree growth.·Temporary and permanent seed mixes shall be applied in areas where land disturbing activities take place or where chemicalapplication over a broad area is implemented to eradicate fescue in areas not graded during construction. Where chemicalapplication is used to eradicate fescue over a broad area of undisturbed land, the soil must be ripped and disked to loosencompacted soils. Sheet Checked By: Job Number: Drawn By: Project Engineer: Date:Revisions: 497 Bramson Ct, Suite 104 Mount Pleasant, SC 29464 Tel: 843.277.62210' 40' 80' 120'(HORIZONTAL)NX:\shared\Projects\005-02180 Perry Hill\Monitoring\Baseline Monitoring - 2021\Plans\02180-AB-PlantingPlans.dwg May 25, 2021 005-02123 ABP JCK 2.2 May 28, 2021 Sheet IndexPerry Hill Mitigation Site As-Built Hillsborough, North Carolina Perry Branch DMS Conservation Easement Planting Plan Pe r r y B r a n c h Sheet2.2UT1 UT2 UT3 Sheet2.3Sheet2.4Sheet2.5Sheet2.6Sheet2.7GLS Buffer Planting Zone - ForestedBuffer Planting Zone - Non-ForestedUpland Planting ZonePlanting ZonesStreambank Planting ZoneWetland Planting Zone - ForestedWetland Planting Zone - Non-ForestedCE CE CE CE CE CE CE CECECE CE CECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CECECECECECE CECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXUT 3 PERRY BRANCHVEGVEGVEGVEGVP-1MATCH LINE - STA 111+40 Sheet Checked By: Job Number: Drawn By: Project Engineer: Date:Revisions: 497 Bramson Ct, Suite 104 Mount Pleasant, SC 29464 Tel: 843.277.62210' 40' 80' 120'(HORIZONTAL)NX:\shared\Projects\005-02180 Perry Hill\Monitoring\Baseline Monitoring - 2021\Plans\02180-AB-PlantingPlans.dwg May 25, 2021 005-02123 ABP JCK 2.3 May 28, 2021 Sheet IndexPerry Hill Mitigation Site As-Built Hillsborough, North Carolina Perry Branch DMS Conservation Easement Planting Plan Pe r r y B r a n c h UT1 UT2 UT3 GLS Buffer Planting Zone - Non-ForestedUpland Planting ZonePlanting ZonesStreambank Planting ZoneWetland Planting Zone - ForestedWetland Planting Zone - Non-ForestedSheet2.2Sheet2.3Sheet2.4Sheet2.5Sheet2.6Sheet2.7CECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECE CE CE CE CE CE CE CECECECECECECECECECE-IX CE-IX CE-IX CE-IX CE-IX CE-IX CE-IX CE-IX CE-IX CE-IX UT2 PERRY BRANCHVEGVEGVEGVEG VEGVEGVEGVEG VEGVEGVEGVEG VEG VEG VEGVEGVEG VEGVEGVEGVEGVEGVEGVEGVP-2VP-13VP-3VP-4VP-5VP-6MATCH LINE - STA 111+40 MATCH LINE - STA 123+00 Sheet Checked By: Job Number: Drawn By: Project Engineer: Date:Revisions: 497 Bramson Ct, Suite 104 Mount Pleasant, SC 29464 Tel: 843.277.62210' 40' 80' 120'(HORIZONTAL)NX:\shared\Projects\005-02180 Perry Hill\Monitoring\Baseline Monitoring - 2021\Plans\02180-AB-PlantingPlans.dwg May 25, 2021 005-02123 ABP JCK 2.4 May 28, 2021 Sheet IndexPerry Hill Mitigation Site As-Built Hillsborough, North Carolina Perry Branch DMS Conservation Easement Planting Plan Pe r r y B r a n c h UT1 UT2 UT3 GLS Upland Planting ZonePlanting ZonesStreambank Planting ZoneWetland Planting Zone - Non-ForestedBuffer Planting Zone - Non-ForestedSheet2.2Sheet2.3Sheet2.4Sheet2.5Sheet2.6Sheet2.7CECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECEPERRY BRANCHUT1 VP-8VP-9VP-14VP-7VEGVEGV EG VEG VEGVEGV E G VEGVEGVEGVEGVEGVEGVEGVEGVEGVEG MATCH LINE - STA 123+00 Sheet Checked By: Job Number: Drawn By: Project Engineer: Date:Revisions: 497 Bramson Ct, Suite 104 Mount Pleasant, SC 29464 Tel: 843.277.62210' 40' 80' 120'(HORIZONTAL)N X:\shared\Projects\005-02180 Perry Hill\Monitoring\Baseline Monitoring - 2021\Plans\02180-AB-PlantingPlans.dwg May 25, 2021 005-02123 ABP JCK 2.5 May 28, 2021 Sheet IndexPerry Hill Mitigation Site As-Built Hillsborough, North Carolina UT1 DMS Conservation Easement Planting Plan Pe r r y B r a n c h UT1 UT2 UT3 GLS Planting ZonesStreambank Planting ZoneBuffer Planting Zone - Non-ForestedUpland Planting ZoneSheet2.2Sheet2.3Sheet2.4Sheet2.5Sheet2.6Sheet2.7CECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECE CE CECE CE CE-BCE-BCE-BCE-BCE-BCE-BCE-BCE-BCE-BCE-BCE-BCE-BCE-BCE-BCE-BCE-BCE-BCE-BCE-BCE-BCE-BCE-BCE-BCE-BCE-BCE-BCE-BCE-BCE-BCE-BCE-BCE-BCE-BCE-B CE-BPERRY BRANCHUT1VEGVEGVEGVEG VEGVEGVEGVE G VEGVEGVEGVE GVP-10VP-8VP-9 Sheet Checked By: Job Number: Drawn By: Project Engineer: Date:Revisions: 497 Bramson Ct, Suite 104 Mount Pleasant, SC 29464 Tel: 843.277.62210' 40' 80' 120'(HORIZONTAL)NX:\shared\Projects\005-02180 Perry Hill\Monitoring\Baseline Monitoring - 2021\Plans\02180-AB-PlantingPlans.dwg May 25, 2021 005-02123 ABP JCK 2.6 May 28, 2021 Sheet IndexPerry Hill Mitigation Site As-Built Hillsborough, North Carolina UT2 DMS Conservation Easement Planting Plan Perry BranchUT1 UT2 UT3 GLS Sheet2.2Sheet2.3Sheet2.4Sheet2.5Sheet2.6Sheet2.7Buffer Planting Zone - ForestedBuffer Planting Zone - Non-ForestedUpland Planting ZonePlanting ZonesStreambank Planting ZoneWetland Planting Zone - ForestedWetland Planting Zone - Non-ForestedCECECECECE CE CE CECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECE CE CE CE CE CECECECECECECECECECECE CECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CECECECECECECECECEUT3UT2VEG VEGVEGVEGVEGVEGVEGVEG VEGVEGVEGVEGVP-11VP-12VP-3 Sheet Checked By: Job Number: Drawn By: Project Engineer: Date:Revisions: 497 Bramson Ct, Suite 104 Mount Pleasant, SC 29464 Tel: 843.277.62210' 40' 80' 120'(HORIZONTAL)N X:\shared\Projects\005-02180 Perry Hill\Monitoring\Baseline Monitoring - 2021\Plans\02180-AB-PlantingPlans.dwg May 25, 2021 005-02123 ABP JCK 2.7 May 28, 2021 Sheet IndexPerry Hill Mitigation Site As-Built Hillsborough, North Carolina UT3 DMS Conservation Easement Planting Plan Pe r r y B r a n c h UT1 UT2 UT3 GLS Buffer Planting Zone - ForestedBuffer Planting Zone - Non-ForestedPlanting ZonesStreambank Planting ZoneWetland Planting Zone - ForestedWetland Planting Zone - Non-ForestedSheet2.2Sheet2.3Sheet2.4Sheet2.5Sheet2.6Sheet2.7CECECECECECECECECECECECECE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE C E C E C E CECECECECECECECECECE CE CECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECE CECE CECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXCE-IXPERRY BRANCHUT3UT2VEGVEGVEGV E G VP-1 APPENDIX 6. Buffer Baseline Monitoring Report Buffer Baseline Monitoring Report May 2021 PERRY HILL MITIGATION SITE Orange County, NC NCDEQ Contract No. 7744 DMS ID No. 100093 DWR Project No. 2019-0157 Neuse River Basin HUC 03020201 RFP #: 16-007576 PREPARED FOR: NC Department of Environmental Quality Division of Mitigation Services 1652 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 BUFFER BASELINE MONITORING REPORT PERRY HILL MITIGATION SITE Orange County, NC NCDEQ Contract No. 7744 DMS ID No. 100093 Neuse River Basin HUC 03020201 PREPARED FOR: NC Department of Environmental Quality Division of Mitigation Services 1652 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 PREPARED BY: Wildlands Engineering, Inc. 312 West Millbrook Road, Suite 225 Raleigh, NC 27609 Phone: (919) 851-9986 This Baseline Monitoring Plan has been written in conformance with the requirements of the following: • 15A NCAC 02B .0295 Mitigation Program Requirements for Protection and Maintenance of Riparian Buffers. These documents govern DMS operations and procedures for the delivery of compensatory mitigation. Contributing Staff: Daniel Johnson, Project Manager John Hutton, Principal in Charge Win Taylor, Baseline Monitoring Plan Daniel Taylor, Construction Administrator Tasha King, Monitoring Lead Andrea Eckardt, Lead Quality Assurance Perry Hill Mitigation Site Buffer Baseline Monitoring Report DMS ID No. 100093 Page i May 2021 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Mitigation Project Summary ....................................................................................................1 1.1 Project Goals ................................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Pre-construction Site Conditions .................................................................................................. 1 2.0 Determination of Credits .........................................................................................................2 3.0 Baseline Summary ...................................................................................................................2 3.1 Parcel Preparation ........................................................................................................................ 2 3.2 Riparian Area Restoration Activities ............................................................................................. 2 3.3 Riparian Area Enhancement Activities ......................................................................................... 4 4.0 Annual Monitoring and Performance Criteria ...........................................................................4 4.1 Vegetation .................................................................................................................................... 4 4.2 Overview Photographs ................................................................................................................. 4 4.3 Visual Assessments ....................................................................................................................... 4 4.4 Annual Reporting Performance Criteria ....................................................................................... 4 4.5 Maintenance and Contingency Plans ........................................................................................... 5 5.0 References ..............................................................................................................................6 TABLES Table 1: Tree Species Planted within the Buffer Areas APPENDICES Appendix 6.1 Figures and Tables Figure 1 Project Vicinity Map Figure 2 Service Area Map Figure 3 Project Component/Asset Map Figure 4 Monitoring Plan View Map Table 1 Buffer Project Attributes Table 2 Buffer Project Area and Assets Table 3 Monitoring Components Appendix 6.2 DWR Correspondence NC Division of Water Resources - Site Viability for Buffer Mitigation and Nutrient Offset Letter – April 16, 2019 Appendix 6.3 As-Built Survey Appendix 6.4 Overview Photographs Appendix 6.5 Permit Approvals Appendix 6.6 Vegetation Plot Data Table 4 Planted and Total Stem Counts Vegetation Plot Photographs Perry Hill Mitigation Site Buffer Baseline Monitoring Report DMS ID No. 100093 Page 1 May 2021 1.0 Mitigation Project Summary The Perry Hill Mitigation Site (Site) is a riparian restoration project located in Orange County approximately three miles northwest of Hillsborough, NC (Figure 1). Figure 2 depicts the service area of the Site which includes the Falls Lake watershed in the Neuse river basin. Wildlands recorded a 26.88- acre conservation easement that encompasses portions of Perry Branch, three unnamed tributaries (UT1, UT2, and UT3) and two ephemeral channels (EC1 and EC3) as illustrated in Figure 3. Before construction, most of the Site served as an active cattle pasture, with some forested riparian areas also utilized by cattle. The project is expected to generate 874,590.412 riparian buffer credits. The Site is within Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03020201030020 and North Carolina Department of Water Resources (DWR) Sub-basin 03-04-01. Three unnamed tributaries (UT1, UT2, and UT3) drain to Perry Branch, which drains to Corporation Lake water supply reservoir on the Eno River, and then Falls Lake. Falls Lake is classified as water supply waters (WS-IV) and nutrient sensitive waters (NSW). 1.1 Project Goals The major goals of the riparian restoration project are to provide ecological and water quality enhancements to the Neuse River Watershed within the Falls Lake Water Supply Watershed by creating a functional riparian corridor and restoring the riparian area. The project supports specific goals identified in the 2010 Neuse River Basin Restoration Priorities Plan (RBRP) for the Neuse River Targeted Local Watershed (TLW). This document highlights the importance of riparian buffers for stream restoration projects. Forested riparian areas immobilize and retain nutrients and suspended sediment. The RBRP also supports the Falls Lake watershed plan. Falls Lake is a receiving water supply water body downstream of the Site and is classified as WS-IV and NSW. Specific enhancements to water quality and ecological processes are outlined below: • Exclude cattle from project streams and adjacent riparian areas. – Fencing has been installed around project areas adjacent to cattle pastures. • Restore and enhance native floodplain vegetation. – Planted native tree species in riparian zone where tree growth was insufficient. • Permanently protect the project Site from harmful uses. – Established a conservation easement on the Site. 1.2 Pre-construction Site Conditions The riparian restoration and enhancement project included 16.77 acres of cattle pasture (restoration) and 7.94 acres of riparian forest (enhancement) along Perry Branch, unnamed tributaries, and ephemeral channels that drain into the Neuse River Basin. Prior to construction, the primary degradation to the streams and associated riparian zones were the result of cattle. The difference between the total conservation easement area and the restoration area is associated with areas not included for buffer credit such as stream channels, crossing, etc. Aerial photographs illustrate agricultural activities at the Site over the past 80 plus years. The Site contains one perennial stream Perry Branch; three intermittent streams UT1; UT2; and UT3; and two ephemeral channels EC1 and EC3. The buffer project attributes are listed in Table 1, located in Appendix 6.1. On February 26, 2019, DWR conducted on-site determinations to review features and land use within the project boundary. The resulting DWR site viability letter and map confirming the Site as suitable for riparian buffer mitigation is located in Appendix 6.2. Perry Branch and the three unnamed tributaries are appropriate for buffer mitigation as related to the rules set forth in the Consolidated Buffer Mitigation Perry Hill Mitigation Site Buffer Baseline Monitoring Report DMS ID No. 100093 Page 2 May 2021 Rules (15A NCAC 02B 0.0295 (o)(7)). In addition to buffer restoration on subject streams, per the Consolidated Buffer Mitigation Rules (15A NCAC 02B 0.0295 (o)), alternative mitigation included buffer restoration on ephemeral channels and enhancement via livestock exclusion. 2.0 Determination of Credits The project is expected to generate 874,590.412 riparian buffer credits, through buffer restoration and buffer enhancement via cattle exclusion, per the Consolidated Buffer Mitigation Rules (15A NCAC 02B 0.0295 (o)). There is also potential to convert some buffer credits to nutrient offset credits, dependent on the need. Mitigation credits are presented in Table 2 and illustrated in Figure 3 (Appendix 6.1). Calculations are based upon the as-built survey included in Appendix 6.3. 3.0 Baseline Summary Wildlands restored high quality riparian areas along Perry Branch, three unnamed tributaries, and two ephemeral channels on the Site. The buffer mitigation took place in conjunction with Perry Hill Stream Mitigation. The project design minimized impacts to existing riparian areas at the Site. Figure 3 illustrates the design for the Site. Detailed descriptions of the restoration activity follow in Sections 3.1 through 3.3. Overview site photographs are included in Appendix 6.4. 3.1 Parcel Preparation Prior to stream construction, the Site was cattle pasture, with livestock having access to all streams causing streambank erosion. Onsite streams and riparian buffers at the Site were restored and/or enhanced. The approved permits are included in Appendix 6.5. Wildlands treated invasive plants at the Site to reduce native competition post construction. Additionally, fescue was treated at the Site to mitigate the adverse effects (i.e., direct competition and allelopathic impacts) on planted vegetation. Soil amendments were incorporated on-site prior to planting per the mitigation plan. The contractor ripped soils at the Site to a depth of 12” on a 3’ spacing along haul roads and 6’ spacing for other planted areas to reduce soil compaction prior to planting activities. 3.2 Riparian Area Restoration Activities The revegetation plan for the riparian restoration area included planting bare root trees and live stakes (Table 1) as well as permanent seeding. In total, 13,883 woody stems were planted across the Site. These revegetation efforts were coupled with the select treatment of invasive species to control their population. The species composition planted was selected based on the desired community type, occurrence of species in riparian areas adjacent to the Site, and best professional judgement. Wildlands planted trees at a density sufficient to meet the performance standards outlined in the Rule 15A NCAC 02B .0295 of 260 trees per acre at the end of five years. An appropriate seed mix was applied as necessary to provide temporary ground cover for soil stabilization and reduction of sediment loss during rain events in disturbed areas. This was followed by an appropriate permanent seed mixture.Tree planting was completed in April 2021. Vegetation management and herbicide applications were implemented prior to planting activities to treat non-native, invasive species. Additionally, Wildlands implemented ring spray herbicide treatments at the base of planted bare roots to reduce competition (treat fescue). This practice is designed to encourage tree growth (and reduce tree mortality) and fescue will be re-treated if necessary in MY2. Perry Hill Mitigation Site Buffer Baseline Monitoring Report DMS ID No. 100093 Page 3 May 2021 Table 1: Tree Species Planted within the Buffer Areas Scientific Name Common Name Total Number Planted Acer floridanum Southern sugar maple 265 Acer negundo Boxelder 1,047 Asimina triloba Pawpaw 463 Betula nigra River birch 1,868 Carpinus caroliniana Ironwood 10 Celtis laegivata Sugarberry 10 Cephalanthus occidentalis Buttonbush 248 Cornus ammomum Silky dogwood 1,249 Cornus florida Flowering dogwood 21 Diospyros virginiana Persimmon 1,138 Euonymus americanus Strawberry bush 21 Fagus grandifolia American beech 21 Nyssa sylvatica Black gum 203 Oxydendrum arboretum Sourwood 102 Platanus occidentalis Sycamore 2,210 Populus deltoides Eastern cottonwood 959 Quercus alba White oak 203 Quercus falcata Southern red oak 102 Quercus lyrata Overcup oak 96 Quercus michauxii Swamp chestnut oak 1,014 Quercus phellos Willow oak 463 Quercus rubra Northern red oak 544 Salix nigra Black willow 217 Sambucus canadensis Elderberry 444 Ulmus alata Winged elm 203 Ulmus americana American elm 554 Viburnum dentatum Arrowood viburnum 31 Viburnum prunifolium Blackhaw viburnum 177 Perry Hill Mitigation Site Buffer Baseline Monitoring Report DMS ID No. 100093 Page 4 May 2021 3.3 Riparian Area Enhancement Activities Fencing excludes cattle throughout the entire project as allowed by 15A NCAC 02B .0295(o). Fencing was installed along the exterior boundary, encompassing both this project and the Perry Hill II Mitigation Bank Parcel (Figure 3). The enhancement area is protected in perpetuity via a conservation easement. 4.0 Annual Monitoring and Performance Criteria The performance criteria for the Site follows approved performance criteria presented in the guidance documents outlined in Request for Proposal (RFP) 16-007576 and the Consolidated Buffer Rule (15A NCAC 02B .0295). Annual monitoring and semi-annual site visits will be conducted to assess the condition of the finished project. The riparian restoration project has been assigned specific performance criteria components for vegetation that will be evaluated throughout the five-year post- construction monitoring. An outline of the performance criteria and monitoring components follows. Monitoring components are included in Table 3 and vegetation plot locations are depicted in Figure 4 (Appendix 6.1). 4.1 Vegetation Performance standards for the Site will be based on the health and survival of a minimum density of 260 trees per acre after five years of monitoring, with a minimum of four native hardwood tree or shrub species composition and no one species comprising more than 50 percent of stems. Vigor, species composition, height, and density will be used as indicators of overall health. Desirable volunteer species may be included to meet the success criteria upon DWR approval. The extent of non-native, invasive species coverage will also be monitored and treated as necessary throughout the required five-year monitoring period. Wildlands will monitor impacts of fescue on the targeted plant communities at the Site during the monitoring period. In the event fescue is preventing the establishment of the targeted plant community, Wildlands will prescribe a specific remedial plan of action. Fourteen fixed 100 square meter vegetation monitoring quadrants were installed across the Site to measure the survival of the planted stems (Figure 4) with a mean of 581 stems per acre (Table 4, Appendix 6.6). Vegetation monitoring follows the CVS-EEP Level 2 Protocol for Recording Vegetation (2008). All planted stems were marked with flagging tape and a reference photograph was taken from the southwestern corner of each vegetation plot during vegetation assessments. Each year, trees will be re-marked and plot photos will be taken along with overview photographs of the Site. Appendix 6.6 includes the baseline (MY0) vegetation plot planted and total stem counts, as well as plot photographs. 4.2 Overview Photographs Photographs will be taken within the project area once a year to visually document stability for five years following construction. Baseline overview photographs are included in Appendix 6.4. 4.3 Visual Assessments Visual assessments should support the performance standards for each metric as described above. Visual assessments will be performed within the Site on a semi-annual basis during the five-year monitoring period. Problem areas with vegetative health will be noted (e.g. low stem density, vegetation mortality, invasive species, or encroachment). Areas of concern will be mapped and photographed accompanied by a written description in the annual report. Problem areas will be re-evaluated during each subsequent visual assessment. 4.4 Annual Reporting Performance Criteria Using the Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) Riparian Buffer and Nutrient Offset Buffer Baseline and Annual Monitoring Report Template version 2.0 (2017), monitoring reports will be prepared in the fall of Perry Hill Mitigation Site Buffer Baseline Monitoring Report DMS ID No. 100093 Page 5 May 2021 each monitoring year and submitted to DMS. The monitoring period will extend five years beyond completion of construction or until performance criteria have been met. 4.5 Maintenance and Contingency Plans The conservation easement has been properly and accurately marked by adding witness posts with easement placards along the easement boundary and at every corner. Adaptive management will be performed during the monitoring years to address minor issues as necessary. If during annual monitoring it is determined the project’s ability to achieve performance standards are jeopardized, Wildlands will notify and work with the DMS/DWR to develop contingency plans and remedial actions. Any actions implemented will be designed to achieve the success criteria specified previously and will include a work schedule and updated monitoring criteria (if applicable). Perry Hill Mitigation Site Buffer Baseline Monitoring Report DMS ID No. 100093 Page 6 May 2021 5.0 References Breeding, R. 2010. Neuse River Basin Restoration Priorities. North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program. Accessed at: https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Mitigation%20Services/Watershed_Planning/Neuse_River_Basin/FINAL%2 0RBRP%20Neuse%202010_%2020111207%20CORRECTED.pdf Lee, M.T., Peet, R.K., Roberts, S.D., & Wentworth, T.R. 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation Version 4.2. Accessed at: http://cvs.bio.unc.edu/protocol/cvs-eep-protocol-v4.2-lev1-2.pdf Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), 2011. Web Soil Survey. Accessed at: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/HomePage.htm North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS). 2017. Riparian Buffer and Nutrient Offset Buffer Baseline and Annual Monitoring Report Template version 2.0 Accessed at: https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Mitigation%20Services/Document%20Management%20Library/Guidance% 20and%20Template%20Documents/RB_NO_Base_Mon_Template_2.0_2017_5.pdf North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Water Resources (NCDWR). 2015. 15A NCAC 02B .0295 Mitigation Program Requirements for Protection and Maintenance of Riparian Buffers. Accessed at: http://reports.oah.state.nc.us/ncac/title%2015a%20- %20environmental%20quality/chapter%2002%20- %20environmental%20management/subchapter%20b/15a%20ncac%2002b%20.0295.pdf North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Water Resources (NCDWR). 2011. Surface Water Classifications. Accessed at: https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water- resources/planning/classification-standards/classifications#DWRPrimaryClassification Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (2020). Perry Hill Mitigation Site – Riparian Buffer Mitigation Plan. North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS), Raleigh, NC. APPENDIX 6.1 Figures and Tables Figure 1. Project Vicinity Map Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 0 - 2021 ^_ Orange County, NC 0 10.5 Miles 2017 Aerial Photography Project Location Conservation Easement ^_Perry Hill Mitigation Site Directions: Traveling West on I-40W/I-85S from Raleigh/Durham, follow I-40W/I-85S to exit 161 for US-70 Connector N. Take a right at the bottom of the ramp and continue onto US-70E (1.0 mile) via US-70 Connector N. Continue on US-70E (1.9 miles) before taking a left onto Faucette Mill Rd. Continue (1.9 miles) and take a right onto Frank Perry Road. ¹ Figure 2. Service Area Map Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 0 - 2021 ^_ Upper Falls Lake Watershed Lower Falls Lake Watershed 0 105 Miles County Boundary Service Area - Riparian Buffer Credits (HUC 03020201) Service Area - Nutrient Offset Credits (Falls Lake Watershed) ^_Perry Hill Mitigation Site Orange County, NC ¹ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ [ [ [ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[EC3 UT3UT2 Perry BranchUT1 EC1 Figure 3. Project Component/Asset Map Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 0 - 2021 Orange County, NC 0 200 400 Feet ¹ Project Location Conservation Easement Internal Crossing Project Features Perennial Project Stream Intermittent Project Stream Ephemeral Project Channel No Credit Project Channel Mitigation Approach Buffer Restoration (0'-100') Buffer Restoration (101'-200') Enhancement via Cattle Exclusion (0'-100') Enhancement via Cattle Exclusion (101'-200') No Credit Non-Project Stream [[Fence Existing Utility Easement Existing Treeline 2017 Aerial Photography [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ [ [ [ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[EC3 UT3UT2 Perry BranchUT1 EC1 5 1 6 8 9 7 4 3 2 11 14 13 10 12 Figure 4. Monitoring Plan View Map Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 0 - 2021 Orange County, NC 0 200 400 Feet ¹ Project Location Conservation Easement Internal Crossing Project Features Perennial Project Stream Intermittent Project Stream Ephemeral Project Channel No Credit Project Channel Mitigation Approach Buffer Restoration (0'-100') Buffer Restoration (101'-200') Enhancement via Cattle Exclusion (0'-100') Enhancement via Cattle Exclusion (101'-200') No Credit Vegetation Plot Non-Project Stream [[Fence Existing Utility Easement 2017 Aerial Photography Table 1. Buffer Project AttributesPerry Hill Mitigation SiteMonitoring Year 0 ‐ 2021Project NamePerry Hill Mitigation SiteHydrologic Unit Code03020201030020River BasinNeuseGeographic Location (Lat, Long)36o 06' 25.81" N, 79o 07' 46.66" WSite Protection Instrument (DB/PG)DB6684/PG940‐954Total Credits (BMU) 874,590.412Types of Credits Riparian BufferMitigation Plan DateJuly 2020Initial Planting DateApril 2, 2021Baseline Report DateMay 2021MY1 Report DateDecember 2021MY2 Report DateDecember 2022MY3 Report DateDecember 2023MY4 Report DateDecember 2024MY5 Report DateDecember 2025 Table 2: Buffer Project Area and Assets Perry Hill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 0 ‐2021 Neuse – Upper Falls Lake (03020201) Service Area 19.16394A 297.54099B Credit Type Location Subject Feature Type Mitigation Activity Min‐Max Buffer Width (ft) Feature Name Total Area (sf) Total (Creditable) Area of Buffer Mitigation (sf) Initial Credit Ratio (x:1) % Full Credit Final Credit Ratio (x:1) Convertible to Riparian Buffer? Riparian Buffer Credits Convertible to Nutrient Offset? Delivered Nutrient Offset: N (lbs) * Delivered Nutrient Offset: P (lbs) * Buffer Rural Yes I / P Restoration 0‐100 Perry Branch 408,293 408,293 1 100% 1.00000 Yes 408,293.000 Yes 21,305.269 1,372.224 Buffer Rural Yes I / P Restoration 101‐200 Perry Branch 22,411 22,411 1 33% 3.03030 Yes 7,395.637 Yes 1,169.420 75.320 Buffer Rural Yes I / P Enhancement via Cattle Exclusion 0‐100 Perry Branch 157,953 157,953 2 100% 2.00000 Yes 78,976.500 No — — Buffer Rural Yes I / P Enhancement via Cattle Exclusion 101‐200 Perry Branch 1,903 1,903 2 33% 6.06061 Yes 313.995 No — — Buffer Rural Yes I / P Restoration 0‐100 UT1 92,839 92,839 1 100% 1.00000 Yes 92,839.000 Yes 4,844.447 312.020 Buffer Rural Yes I / P Restoration 101‐200 UT1 2,558 2,558 1 33% 3.03030 Yes 844.141 Yes 133.487 8.598 Buffer Rural No I / P Restoration 0‐100 UT2 58,526 58,526 1 100% 1.00000 Yes 58,526.000 Yes 3,053.947 196.698 Buffer Rural No I / P Restoration 101‐200 UT2 1,007 1,007 1 33% 3.03030 Yes 332.310 Yes 52.529 3.383 Buffer Rural No I / P Enhancement via Cattle Exclusion 0‐100 UT2 124,130 124,130 2 100% 2.00000 Yes 62,065.000 No — — Buffer Rural No I / P Enhancement via Cattle Exclusion 101‐200 UT2 24,834 24,834 2 33% 6.06061 Yes 4,097.607 No — — Buffer Rural No I / P Enhancement via Cattle Exclusion 0‐100 UT3 37,195 37,195 2 100% 2.00000 Yes 18,597.500 No — — Buffer Rural No I / P Enhancement via Cattle Exclusion 101‐200 UT3 24 24 2 33% 6.06061 Yes 3.960 No — — Buffer Rural No Ephemeral Restoration 0‐100 EC1 15,423 15,423 1 100% 1.00000 Yes 15,423.000 Yes 804.795 51.835 Buffer Rural No Ephemeral Restoration 101‐200 EC1 0 0 1 33% 3.03030 Yes — Yes 0.000 0.000 Buffer Rural No Ephemeral Restoration 0‐100 EC3 125,605 125,605 1 100% 1.00000 Yes 125,605.000 Yes 6,554.216 422.142 Buffer Rural No Ephemeral Restoration 101‐200 EC3 3,872 3,872 1 33% 3.03030 Yes 1,277.761 Yes 202.050 13.014 Buffer Project Areas and Assets (Summary) Note A: Nitrogen Nutrient Offset Credit Ratio (sf/credit); Note B: Phosphorus Nutrient Offset Credit Ratio (sf/credit). TOTAL AREA OF BUFFER MITIGATION (TABM)** Mitigation Totals Square Feet Credits Restoration: 730,532 710,535.850 Enhancement: 346,039 164,054.562 Preservation: 0 0.000 Total Riparian Buffer: 1,076,572 874,590.412 TOTAL NUTRIENT OFFSET MITIGATION Mitigation Totals Square Feet Credits Nutrient Offset: Nitrogen: 0 0.000 Phosphorus: 0.000 Table 3. Monitoring ComponentsPerry Hill Mitigation SiteMonitoring Year 0 ‐ 2021VegetationCVS Level 214 PlotsYear 1‐5Visual AssessmentPhotographs and MappingSemi‐AnnualExotic and Nuisance VegetationPhotographs and MappingSemi‐AnnualProject BoundaryPhotographs and MappingSemi‐AnnualReference PhotosUAV Photographs Year 1‐5ParameterMonitoring FeatureFrequencyQuantity APPENDIX 6.2 DWR Correspondence ROY COOPER Governor MICHAEL S. R.EGAN Secretary LINDA CULPEPPER Director John Hutton Wildlands Engineering, Inc 1430 S. Mint St., Suite 104 Charlotte, NC 28203 Subject: NORTH CAROLINA Environmental Quality April 15, 2019 DWR Project # 2019-0157v2 Orange County On -Site Stream Evaluation and Determination for Applicability to the Neuse Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 02B .0233) and Water Quality Standards Project Name: Perry Hill Site Address/Location: 2623 Frank Perry Rd Parcel ID's: N/A Streams Evaluated: UTs to Eno River Field Date: February 26, 2019 DWR Staff: Katie Merritt Determination Type: Buffer: Stream: I/ Neuse (15A NCAC 02B .0233) 1 Ephemeral/Intermittent/Perennial ❑ Tar -Pamlico (15A NCAC 02B .0259) ❑ Catawba (15A NCAC 02B .0243) ❑ Jordan (15A NCAC 02B .0267) (governmental and/or interjurisdictional projects) Determination (where local buffer ordinances apply) f Randleman (15A NCAC 02B .0250) ❑ Goose Creek (15A NCAC 02B .0605-.0608) See the following table and written explanation regarding the stream determinations. i�.enM d E�...Mr uuw,r North C.arollna Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources 517 North Salisbury Street 11617 Mall Service Center 1 Raleigh. North Carolina 27699-1617 919307.9000 Wildlands Engineering, Inc Neuse River Riparian Buffer/Stream Determination DWR Project #2019-0157v2 Page 2 of 3 Feature ID1 Feature Type2 Not Subject Subject Start@ Stop @ Soil Survey USGS Topo Perry Branch P X Easement Boundary Throughout X X EC1 E X Culvert UT1 X UT1 I X DWR Flag Perry Branch X UT2 I X DWR Flag (headcut below wetland) Perry Branch EC3 E X DWR flag UT3 UT3 I X Woodline @ crossing Perry Branch A Off-line pond X See map B Drainage conveyance N/A N/A See map 1 See maps provided showing labeled features 2 Ephemeral (E), Intermittent (I), Perennial (P), Ditch (D) The Division of Water Resources (DWR) received a Request from Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands) for a Stream Buffer Applicability Determination for a potential mitigation site at the location described above. A Landowner Authorization Form was provided by Wildlands for the subject site. On February 26, 2019, DWR staff, along with staff from Wildlands and Division of Mitigation Services conducted a site visit. DWR determined that two (2) features on the site, Perry Branch and one Unnamed Tributary to Perry Branch (UT1) are both streams and are subject to the Neuse River Riparian Buffer Rules and are both located on the most recently published NRCS Soil Survey of Guilford County, North Carolina. There are two (2) other Unnamed Tributaries to Perry Branch, UT2 and UT3, that were determined to be at least intermittent but not subject to the Neuse River Riparian Buffer Rules. There may be other streams or features located on the properties and on the included maps that may be subject to the buffer rules or may be considered jurisdictional according to the US Army Corps of Engineers and subject to the Clean Water Act. This on -site determination shall expire five (5) years from the date of this letter. Landowners or affected parties that dispute a determination made by the DWR may request a determination by the Director. An appeal request must be made within sixty (60) calendar days of the date of this letter to the Director in writing. If sending via US Postal Service: If sending via delivery service (UPS, FedEx, etc.): c/o Karen Higgins DWR — 401 & Buffer Permitting Branch 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Wildlands Engineering, Inc Neuse River Riparian Buffer/Stream Determination DWR Project ##2019-0157v2 Page 3 of 3 c/a Karen Higgins DWR -- 401 & Buffer Permitting Branch 512 N. Salisbury Street Raleigh, NC 27604 This determination is final and binding as detailed above, unless an appeal is requested within sixty (60) days. This determination only addresses the applicability to the buffer rules and does not approve any activity within the buffers. The project may require a Section 404/401 Permit for the proposed activity. Any inquiries regarding applicability to the Clean Water Act should be directed to the US Army Corps of Engineers Raleigh Regulatory Field Office at (919)-554-4884. If you have questions regarding this determination, please feel free to contact Katie Merritt at (919) 707-3637. Sincerely, -Jskum c_1/ Karen Higgins, Supervisor 401 & Buffer Permitting Branch Attachments: Site Map, Topo, Orange County Soil Survey cc: 401 & Buffer Permitting Branch file copy RRO via email- Stephanie Goss Evelyn Perry, Judy Kadlac, Mary Bishop — PO Box 178, Hillsborough, NC 27278 Filename: 2019-0157v2PerryHillStreamCall(Orange) Project Location Proposed Conservation Easement Branch Gil Branch Gtekibil Reach Name Stream Restoration Perry Branch Reach 2 UT1 Subtotal Stream Enhancement I Perry Branch Reach 1 UT2 Reach 2 Subtotal weam Enhancement II Per Branch Reach 3 UT2 Reach 1 % Incision % Erosion 67% 81% 68°% 89% 67% 83% 21% 54% 38% 45% 76% 63% 67% 75% 72% L9 76% 100% ;:.. S ubtotal Site Total 55% 55% 70% 76% OZWILDLANDS ENGINEERING 0 250 500 Feet 1 i 1 1 1 Site Map Perry Hill Mitigation Site Neuse River Basin (03020201) Orange County, NC Li Efland USGS 7.5 Minute Topographical Quadrangle OZWILDLANDS ENC5FNEERING 250 500 Feet I I 0 Project Location Proposed Conservation Easement USGS Site Topographic Map Perry Hill Mitigation Site Neuse River Basin (03020201) Orange County, NC 1977 Soil Survey of Orange County kitsWILDLANDS a 250 500Feet ENGINEERING),\\‘6 \ )6\4\ 1 1 1 1 Project Location � R r Proposed Conservation Easement BRCS 1977 Soils Map Perry Hill Mitigation Site Neuse River Basin (03020201) Orange County, NC ROY COOPER Governor MICHAEL S. REGAN Secretary LINDA CIJLPEPPER Director NORTH CAROLINA Environmental Quality April 16, 2019 John Hutton Wildlands Engineering, Inc 1430 S. Mint St., Suite 104 Charlotte, NC 28203 (via electronic mail: jhuttonra<wildlandsenc.corn) DWR# 2019-0157 Orange County Re: Site Viability for Buffer Mitigation & Nutrient Offset — Perry Hill Site Located near 2623 Frank Perry Rd, Hillsborough Neuse 03020201 Dear Mr. Hutton, On February 25, 2019, Katie Merritt, with the Division of Water Resources (DWR), received a request from Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands) for an onsite mitigation determination near the above -referenced site (Site). The Site is located within the Upper Falls Lake Watershed of the Neuse River Basin in the 8-digit Hydrologic Unit Code. The Site is being proposed as part of a full -delivery nutrient offset, stream and riparian buffer mitigation project for the Division of Mitigation Services (RFP #16-007576). Members of the Interagency Review Team (IRT) and Division of Mitigation Services were also present onsite. At your request, on February 26, 2019, Ms. Merritt performed an onsite assessment of riparian land uses adjacent to streams onsite, which are shown on the attached map labeled "Concept Map". Ms. Merritt's evaluation of the features onsite and their associated mitigation determination for the riparian areas are provided in the table below. This evaluation was made from Top of Bank (TOB) and landward 200' from each feature for buffer mitigation pursuant to i 5A NCAC 02B .0295 (effective November 1, 2015) and for nutrient offset credits pursuant to I5A NCAC 02B .0240. Feature Classification onsite 1ubj !t ta Buffer Riparian Land uses Buffer Credit 2Nutnent Mitigation Type Determination adjacent to Feature Offset w/in riparian areas (0-2001 Viable Viable at Ruie 2,2 73.02 Ibs-N per acre ECI Ephemera! (see map) No Non -forested pasture grazed by cattle Yes Yes Restoration Site per 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(7) Must submit supporting documentation of additional requirements under .0295 (o)(7) to be viable for buffer mitigation. hr_.,1CA.C.ANA E _ North Carolina Orpartment al Envlronmrnial Quality I Division of Water Resources >17 North Salisbury Street 11b1? Mall Setvlce Caner I Raleigh, North Carolina 27b'— -Ihii 919.7U i.9000 Perry Hill Site Wildlands Engineering, Inc. April 16, 2019 Feature Classification onstte 1Subject Riparian Land uses to Feature Buffer 2Nutrient Mitigation Type Determination w/In riparian areas tiladjacent Buffer Ruiz Credit Viable Offset Viable at Z.273.02 f 0-200'J lbs-N per acre UT1 Stream Yes Non -forested pasture grazed by cattle Yes Yes Restoration Site per 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (n) Perry Branch Stream Yes Combination of forested & non -forested pasture grazed by cattle 3AYes Yes (non- forested areas only) Non -forested areas - Restoration Site per 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (n) Forested areas - Enhancement Site per 15A NCAC OZB .0295 (o)(6) if fence is installed =Preservation Site per 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(5) if fence isn't installed. UT2 Intermittent @ DWR flag No Combination of forested & non -forested pasture grazed by cattle 3•4Yes Yes (non- forested areas only) Non -forested areas - Restoration Site per 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(3) Forested areas - Enhancement Site per 1SA NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(6) if fence is installed QPreservation Site per 15A NCAC 028 .0295 (o)(4) if fence isn't installed. EC3 Ephemeral (see map) No Non -forested pasture grazed by cattle 5Yes. Yes Restoration Site per 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(7) Must submit supporting documentation of additional requirements under .0295 (o](7) to be viable for buffer mitigation. UT3 Intermittent @ crossing & woodline No forested pasture grazed by cattle 3.4Yes No Forested areas - Enhancement Site per 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (a)(6) if fence is installed =Preservation Site per 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(4) if fence isn't installed. A Off-line pond No Non -forested pasture No No N/A Page 2 of 4 Perry Hill Site Wildlands Engineering, Inc. April 16, 2019 feature Classification mite tSubjef Da Buf%r Rule Riparian Land uses Buffer, Credit zNutrient Mitigation Type Determination wY in rip arian potion areas scent to Feature Offset Viable at (0-200 j Viable 2.273.02 lbs-N per acre B Drainage conveyance No Non -forested pasture No Yes Restoration Site per 15A NCAC OZB .0295 (n) Subjectivity calls for the features were determined by DWR in correspondence dated April 15, 2019 using the 1:24,000 scale quadrangle topographic map prepared by USGS and the most recent printed version of the soil survey map prepared by the NRCS . 2 NC Division of Water Resources - Methodology and Calculations for determining Nutrient Reductions associated with Riparian Buffer Establishment 3The area of preservation credit within a buffer mitigation site shall comprise of no more than 25 percent (25%) of the total area of buffer mitigation per 15A NCAC 0295 (o)(5) and ISA NCAC 0295 (o)(4). Site cannot be a Preservation Only site to comply with this rule. ''The area described as an Enhancement Site was assessed and determined to comply with all 15A NCAC 02B .0295(o)(6). Cattle exclusion fencing is required to be installed around the mitigation area to get buffer credit under this part of the rule. 5The area of the mitigation site on ephemeral channels shall comprise no more than 25 percent (25%) of the total area of buffer mitigation per 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(7). The maps attached to this letter were prepared by Wildlands and were initialed by Ms. Merritt on April 15, 2019 and April 16, 2019. This letter should be provided in all stream and wetland, buffer and/or nutrient offset mitigation plans for this Site. This letter does not constitute an approval of this site to generate mitigation credits. Pursuant to 15A NCAC 02B .0295, a mitigation proposal and a mitigation plan shall be submitted to DWR for written approval prior to conducting any mitigation activities in riparian areas and/or surface waters for buffer mitigation credit. Pursuant to 15A NCAC 02B .0240, a proposal regarding a proposed nutrient load -reducing measure for nutrient offset credit shall be submitted to DWR for approval prior to any mitigation activities in riparian areas and/or surface waters. All vegetative plantings, performance criteria and other mitigation requirements for riparian restoration, enhancement and preservation must follow the requirements in 15A NCAC 02B .0295 to be eligible for buffer and/or nutrient offset mitigation credits. For any areas depicted as not being viable for nutrient offset credit above, one could propose a different measure, along with supporting calculations and sufficient detail to support estimates of load reduction, for review by the DWR to determine viability for nutrient offset in accordance with 15A NCAC 02B .0240. Page 3 of 4 Perry Hill Site Wildlands Engineering, Inc.. April 16, 2019 This viability assessment will expire on April 16, 2021 or upon the submittal of an As -Built Report to the DWR, whichever comes first. This letter should be provided in all stream, wetland or buffer mitigation plans for this Site. Please contact Katie Merritt at (919) 707-3637 if you have any questions regarding this correspondence. I AH/krn Attachments: Concept Map, Site map cc: File Copy (Katie Merritt) Sincerely, .1‘)may` Karen Higgins, Supervisor 401 and Buffer Permitting Branch Page 4 of 4 Reach 017 Ae IWILDLANDS ENGINEERING Branch Branch ® Project Location 1 Proposed Conservation Easement Proposed Internal Crossing Proposed Buffer Restoration Proposed Buffer Enhancement (via Cattle Exclusion) ® Utility Pole 0 250 500 Feet L i i i J Riparian Buffer Concept Map Perry Hill Mitigation Site Neuse River Basin (03020201) Orange County, NC Project Location 4 - - i Prolapsed Conservation Easement e • a r 1 IDZEUA R gttiZIOZEGIb 04210 Reach Name i% incision Stream Restoration Perry Branch Reach 2 Subtotal Stream Enhancement I % Erosion Per Branch Reach 1 21% 67% UT2 Reach 2 Subtotal IHream Enhancement N Perry Branch Reach 3 UT2 Reach 1 UT3 subtotal Site Total 54% 75% 38% 72% 45% 58% 76% 76% 63% 100%. 441:0„' WILDL.ANDS ENGINEERING 0 250 500 Feet Site Map Perry Hill Mitigation Site Neuse River Basin (03020201) Orange County, NC Signed 3/15/19 1 Daniel Johnson From:Chris Roessler Sent:Thursday, April 2, 2020 1:35 PM To:Daniel Johnson Cc:Andrea Eckardt Subject:FW: [External] FW: Cattle Exclusion assessment-Perry Hill-need more info Attachments:attestation_DavidMcKee_15March2019.pdf How bout this? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chris Roessler | Senior Scientist/Project Manager O: 919.851.9986, x 111 M: 919.624.0905 Wildlands Engineering, Inc. 312 W. Millbrook Rd, Suite 225 Raleigh, NC 27609 From: Merritt, Katie <katie.merritt@ncdenr.gov> Sent: Monday, April 15, 2019 1:50 PM To: Chris Roessler <croessler@wildlandseng.com> Cc: John Hutton <jhutton@wildlandseng.com> Subject: FW: [External] FW: Cattle Exclusion assessment‐Perry Hill‐need more info Hey Chris, Based on Mr. Mckee’s letter and other site factors I observed during my site visit on February 26, 2019, I will support that cattle had access to the areas circled in the picture below. Therefore, based on this assessment, would you like to provide a revised map for me to use for the Site Viability letter? Thus, showing the Preservation area (green) as cattle exclusion for Enhancement? If so, let me know. 2 From: Chris Roessler <croessler@wildlandseng.com> Sent: Monday, March 18, 2019 7:32 AM To: Merritt, Katie <katie.merritt@ncdenr.gov> Cc: John Hutton <jhutton@wildlandseng.com> Subject: [External] FW: Cattle Exclusion assessment‐Perry Hill‐need more info CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to report.spam@nc.gov Hi Katie‐> I showed David McKee your email and the map below and he was sure there were cows in those areas in July 1997. He signed the attached to attest to this. Let me know if you need anything else. Thanks, Chris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chris Roessler | Senior Scientist/Project Manager O: 919.851.9986, x 111 M: 919.624.0905 Wildlands Engineering, Inc. 312 West Millbrook Road, Suite 225 Raleigh, NC 27609 3 From: Merritt, Katie <katie.merritt@ncdenr.gov> Sent: Wednesday, March 6, 2019 2:37 PM To: John Hutton <jhutton@wildlandseng.com>; Daniel Taylor <dtaylor@wildlandseng.com> Cc: Schaffer, Jeff <jeff.schaffer@ncdenr.gov> Subject: Cattle Exclusion assessment‐Perry Hill‐need more info Hey John, Below is a picture showing two forested areas hatched in black. Based on my onsite observations of these areas and my review of the historical photos I was able to dig up, I am not certain that these areas qualify under 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(6) to receive Enhancement buffer credit at a 2:1 ratio. These areas did have cattle access during the time of our site visit. However, when looking at both historical aerials of these areas prior to the buffer protection rule as well as the presence of relic pasture fencing in and around the areas, it would appear the cattle were excluded from having access at some point and possibly prior to the effective date of the rule (1997). It isn’t until approximately 2008 that cows are observed in the fields adjacent to EC3 and Reach 1 of Perry Branch shown highlighted in Yellow below. Unless Wildlands has anything more they can provide me to assist in this assessment to confirm w/o a doubt there were cows present in the forested areas prior to the effective buffer rule date, I’m going to issue the viability letter based on my Best Professional Judgement and show these areas as viable for Preservation buffer credit under 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(4) which would yield a ratio of 5:1. I’d like to issue this letter by the 15th if at all possible, so please send me anything you have prior to then. If Wildlands agrees with the assessment of Preservation, then no information is required and the letter will be issued. Thank you, Katie 4 **please note my phone number has changed** Katie Merritt Nutrient Offset & Buffer Banking Coordinator 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality Office: 919-707-3637 Work Cell: 919-500-0683 Website: http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/401bufferpermitting 512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, NC 27620 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. APPENDIX 6.3 As‐Built Survey EEEEEEE EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE EEEEE CECECECECECE CECECECEC E C E CECECECECE-IX E CE SHEET 2 SHEET 4 PERRY BRANCH◄- FLOWPERRY BRANCH◄- FLOWU T - 3 F L OW ►U T - 2 F L OW ►U T - 1 F L OW ►WILDLANDS ENGINEERING, INC PERRY BRANCH MITIGATION SITE IPW IPW SURVEY AND ENGINEERING, PLLC SHEET 3 HWY 86COL EMAN L O O P R D FRANK PERRY RDH I G H L A N D F A RM R D EEE EE E E EEEEEEEEEEEE E E E E E E EEEE EEEEEEEE EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE E E CECECECECECECE CECECECECECECE C E C E C E C E CECECE CECECECECECECECEC E C E CECE - I X CE - I X WILDLANDS ENGINEERING, INC PERRY BRANCH MITIGATION SITE IPW IPW SURVEY AND ENGINEERING, PLLC MATCHLINE SHEET 3 CE-IX E CE PERRY BRANCH◄- FLOWU T - 3 F L OW ►U T - 2 F L OW ►NORTH C A ROLI N AS TEVEN C B A ILEYLAN D SU R V EYORPROFE S S IO N A LSEAL L-4493 HWY 86COL EMAN L O O P R D FRANK PERRY RDH I G H L A N D F A RM R D EEE EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE E E E E EEEEEEEEECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECE CE CE CECECE-I X CE - I XCE-I X CE - I X WILDLANDS ENGINEERING, INC PERRY BRANCH MITIGATION SITE IPW IPW SURVEY AND ENGINEERING, PLLC MATCHLINE SHEET 4 CE-IX E CEPERRY BRANCH◄- FLOWPERRY BRANCH◄- FLOWU T - 3 F L OW ►U T - 2 F L OW ►NORTH C A ROLI N AS TEVEN C B A ILEYLAN D SU R V EYORPROFE S S IO N A LSEAL L-4493 MATCHLINE SHEET 2 HWY 86COL EMAN L O O P R D FRANK PERRY RDH I G H L A N D F A RM R D EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE EEEEEEEEEEE E CE CECECE CECECECECECECE CE CE CECECECECECE C E C E C E C E CECECECE CE-I X CE-I X WILDLANDS ENGINEERING, INC PERRY BRANCH MITIGATION SITE IPW IPW SURVEY AND ENGINEERING, PLLC CE-IX E CEPERRY BRANCH◄- FLOWPERRY BRANCH◄- FLOWU T - 1 F L OW ►NORTH C A ROLI N AS TEVEN C B A ILEYLAN D SU R V EYORPROFE S S IO N A LSEAL L-4493 MATCHLINE SHEET 3 HWY 86COL EMAN L O O P R D FRANK PERRY RDH I G H L A N D F A RM R D APPENDIX 6.4 Overview Photographs Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix 6.4: Overview Photographs Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix 6.4: Overview Photographs Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix 6.4: Overview Photographs Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix 6.4: Overview Photographs Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix 6.4: Overview Photographs Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix 6.4: Overview Photographs APPENDIX 6.5 Permit Approvals November 13, 2020 DWR # 19-0157 Orange County NC Division of Mitigation Services Attn: Lin Xu 217 West Jones Street Raleigh, North Carolina 27603 Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Attn: Daniel Johnson 497 Bramson Court, Suite 104 Mt. Pleasant, South Carolina 29464 Subject: APPROVAL OF 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION Perry Hill Mitigation Site Dear Mr. Xu and Mr. Johnson: You have our approval for the impacts listed below for the purpose described in your application dated October 29, 2020, received by the Division of Water Resources (Division) October 30, 2020 and payment received October 30, 2020. These impacts are covered by the attached Water Quality General Certification Number 4134. This certification is associated with the use of Nationwide Permit Number 27 once it is issued to you by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Please note that you should get any other federal, state or local permits before proceeding with your project, including those required by (but not limited to) Sediment and Erosion Control, Non-Discharge, and Water Supply Watershed regulations. The Division has determined that the proposed project will comply with water quality requirements provided that you adhere to the conditions listed in the enclosed certification, The following proposed impacts are hereby approved. No other impacts are approved, including incidental impacts. [15A NCAC 02H .0506(b)] Type of Impact Amount Approved (units) Permanent Amount Approved (units) Temporary Stream S1 324 (linear feet) 0 (linear feet) S2 0 17 S3 104 0 , 7190436Ā- 6:2 5782Ā/, *Ā&+! - &#' Ȁ)( , Ȁ$#) %Ȁ(" ' ( Ȁ.' #, - +( ' ' #%- Perry Hill DWR# 19-0157 Page 2 of 3 S4 733 0 S5 2,076 0 S6 601 0 S7 0 16 S8 0 135 S9 0 60 S10 0 20 S11 0 11 S12 0 37 S13 0 72 S14 0 31 S15 0 80 S16 0 94 S17 0 69 S18 0 88 Total 3,838 730 404/401 Wetlands W1 0.020 (acres) 0.072 (acres) W2 0.124 0 W3 0.004 0.044 W4 0 0.003 W5 0.001 0.016 W6 0.003 0.024 W7 0.007 0 W8 0.001 0 W9 0.001 0.030 W10 0.001 0 W11 0 0.056 W12 0 0.013 Total 0.162 0.258 This approval is for the purpose and design described in your application. The plans and specifications for this project are incorporated by reference as part of this Certification. If you change your project, you must notify the Division and you may be required to submit a new application package with the appropriate fee. If the property is sold, the new owner must be given a copy of this Certification and is responsible for complying with all conditions. [15A NCAC 02H .0507(d)(2)]. If you are unable to comply with any of the conditions of the attached Water Quality General Certification, you must notify the Central Office within 24 hours (or the next business day if a weekend or holiday) from the time the permittee becomes aware of the circumstances. The permittee shall report to the Central Office any noncompliance with, and/or any violation of, stream or wetland standards [15A NCAC 02B .0200] including but not limited to sediment impacts to streams or , 7190436Ā- 6:2 5782Ā/, *Ā&+! - &#' Ȁ)( , Ȁ$#) %Ȁ(" ' ( Ȁ.' #, - +( ' ' #%- Perry Hill DWR# 19-0157 Page 3 of 3 wetlands. Information shall be provided orally within 24 hours (or the next business day if a weekend or holiday) from the time the permittee became aware of the non-compliance circumstances. The issuance of the 401 Water Quality Certification for the restoration/enhancement project does not represent an approval of credit yield for the project. This approval and its conditions are final and binding unless contested. [G.S. 143-215.5] This Certification can be contested as provided in Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes by filing a Petition for a Contested Case Hearing (Petition) with the North Carolina Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) within sixty (60) calendar days. Requirements for filing a Petition are set forth in Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes and Title 26 of the North Carolina Administrative Code. Additional information regarding requirements for filing a Petition and Petition forms may be accessed at http://www.ncoah.com/ or by calling the OAH Clerk’s Office at (919) 431-3000. One (1) copy of the Petition must also be served to the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality: William F. Lane, General Counsel Department of Environmental Quality 1601 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1601 This letter completes the review of the Division under section 401 of the Clean Water Act. Please contact Erin Davis at 919-817-0360 or erin.davis@ncdenr.gov if you have any questions or concerns. Sincerely, Paul Wojoski, Supervisor 401 & Buffer Permitting Branch Enclosures: GC 4134 cc: Todd Tugwell, Kim Browning, USACE Raleigh Regulatory Field Office Stephanie Goss, DWR Raleigh RO 401 file DWR 401 & Buffer Permitting Branch file Filename: 190157PerryHill(Orange)_401_approval ltr.Nov.13.2020.docx , 7190436Ā- 6:2 5782Ā/, *Ā&+! - &#' Ȁ)( , Ȁ$#) %Ȁ(" ' ( Ȁ.' #, - +( ' ' #%- STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES WATER QUALITY GENERAL CERTIFICATION NO. 4134 GENERAL CERTIFICATION FOR PROJECTS ELIGIBLE FOR US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS • NATIONWIDE PERMIT NUMBER 13 (BANK STABILIZATION), • NATIONWIDE PERMIT NUMBER 27 (AQUATIC HABITAT RESTORATION, ESTABLISHMENT AND ENHANCEMENT ACTIVITIES), AND • REGIONAL GENERAL PERMIT 197800080 (BULKHEADS AND RIP -RAP) Water Quality Certification Number 4134 is issued in conformity with the requirements of Section 401, Public Laws 92-500 and 95-217 of the United States and subject to the North Carolina Regulations in 15A NCAC 02H .0500 and 15A NCAC 02B .0200 for the discharge of fill material to surface waters and wetland areas as described in 33 CFR 330 Appendix A (B) (13 and 27) of the US Army Corps of Engineers regulations and Regional General Permit 197800080. The State of North Carolina certifies that the specified category of activity will not violate applicable portions of Sections 301, 302, 303, 306 and 307 of the Public Laws 92-500 and 95- 217 if conducted in accordance with the conditions hereinafter set forth. Effective date: December 1, 2017 Signed this day: December 1, 2017 By for Linda Culpepper Interim Director GC4134 Activities meeting any one (1) of the following thresholds or circumstances require written approval for a 401 Water Quality Certification from the Division of Water Resources (DWR): a) If any of the conditions of this Certification (listed below) cannot be met; or b) Any permanent fill into or modification of wetlands and/or waters except for single and independent stream stabilization or enhancement projects involving in -stream structures that meet the following criteria: i. Designed based on current natural channel techniques; and ii. In -stream structures do not exceed a spacing of three structures per 100 feet of stream length up to a total of 500 feet of streambank stabilization; or c) Any stream relocation; or d) Complete dewatering and drawdowns to a sediment layer related to pond/dam maintenance or removal; or e) Total temporary and permanent impacts to streambanks of greater than 150 feet for bank stabilization projects when non -natural armoring techniques (e.g. rip -rap, gabion baskets, deflection walls) are utilized; or f) Total temporary and permanent impacts to streambanks of greater than 500 feet for bank stabilization projects when natural techniques (e.g. sloping, vegetation, geolifts) are used; or g) Any permanent impacts to waters, or to wetlands adjacent to waters, designated as: ORW (including SAV), HQW (including PNA), SA, WS-I, WS-II, or North Carolina or National Wild and Scenic River. h) Any permanent impacts to waters, or to wetlands adjacent to waters, designated as Trout except for bank stabilization projects that qualify for a Nationwide Permit #13 provided that: i. The total impacts are less than 100 feet in length; ii. The project is not adjacent to any other existing stabilization structures; iii. All conditions of this General Certification can be met, including adherence to any moratoriums as stated in Condition #10; and iv. A Notification of Work in Trout Watersheds Form is submitted to the Division at least 60 days prior to commencement of work; or i) Any permanent impacts to coastal wetlands [15A NCAC 07H .0205], or Unique Wetlands (UWL); or j) Any impact associated with a Notice of Violation or an enforcement action for violation(s) of NC Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 02H .0500), NC Isolated Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 02H .1300), NC Surface Water or Wetland Standards (15A NCAC 02B .0200), or State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 02B .0200); or k) Any impacts to subject water bodies and/or state regulated riparian buffers along subject water bodies in the Neuse, Tar -Pamlico, or Catawba River Basins or in the Randleman Lake, Jordan Lake or Goose Creek Watersheds (or any other basin or watershed with State Regulated Riparian Area Protection Rules [Buffer Rules] in effect at the time of application) unless: i. The activities are listed as "EXEMPT" from these rules; or Page 2 of 10 GC4134 ii. A Buffer Authorization Certificate is issued by the NC Division of Coastal Management (DCM); or iii. A Buffer Authorization Certificate or a Minor Variance is issued by a delegated or designated local government implementing a state riparian buffer program pursuant to 143-215.23. Activities included in this General Certification that do not meet one of the thresholds listed above do not require written approval. I. ACTIVITY SPECIFIC CONDITIONS: 1. Any repairs or adjustments to the site shall be made according to the approved plans. Repairs that result in a change from the approved plans must receive written approval from DWR prior to commencement of the repairs. [15A NCAC 02H .0501 and .0502] 2. Written authorization for a compensatory mitigation project does not represent an approval of credit yield for the project. [15A NCAC 02H .0500(h)] 3. For all dam removal projects meeting the definition under G.S. 143-215.25 and requirements under G.S. 143-215.27 of a professionally supervised dam removal, the applicant shall provide documentation that any sediment that may be released has similar or lower level of contamination than sediment sampled from downstream of the dam in accordance with Session Law 2017-145. II. GENERAL CONDITIONS: 1. When written authorization is required, the plans and specifications for the project are incorporated into the authorization by reference and are an enforceable part of the Certification. Any modifications to the project require notification to DWR and may require an application submittal to DWR with the appropriate fee. [15A NCAC 02H .0501 and .0502] 2. No waste, spoil, solids, or fill of any kind shall occur in wetlands or waters beyond the footprint of the impacts (including temporary impacts) as authorized in the written approval from DWR; or beyond the thresholds established for use of this Certification without written authorization. [15A NCAC 02H .0501 and .0502] No removal of vegetation or other impacts of any kind shall occur to state regulated riparian buffers beyond the footprint of impacts approved in a Buffer Authorization or Variance or as listed as an exempt activity in the applicable riparian buffer rules. [15A NCAC 02B .0200] Page 3 of 10 GC4134 3. In accordance with 15A NCAC 02H .0506(h) and Session Law 2017-10, compensatory mitigation may be required for losses of greater than 300 linear feet of perennial streams and/or greater than one (1) acre of wetlands. Impacts associated with the removal of a dam shall not require mitigation when the removal complies with the requirements of Part 3 of Article 21 in Chapter 143 of the North Carolina General Statutes. Impacts to isolated and other non-404 jurisdictional wetlands shall not be combined with 404 jurisdictional wetlands for the purpose of determining when impact thresholds trigger a mitigation requirement. For linear publicly owned and maintained transportation projects that are not determined to be part of a larger common plan of development by the US Army Corps of Engineers, compensatory mitigation may be required for losses of greater than 300 linear feet per perennial stream. Compensatory stream and/or wetland mitigation shall be proposed and completed in compliance with G.S. 143-214.11. For applicants proposing to conduct mitigation within a project site, a complete mitigation proposal developed in accordance with the most recent guidance issued by the US Army Corps of Engineers Wilmington District shall be submitted for review and approval with the application for impacts. 4. All activities shall be in compliance with any applicable State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules in Chapter 2 of Title 15A. 5. When applicable, all construction activities shall be performed and maintained in full compliance with G.S. Chapter 113A Article 4 (Sediment and Pollution Control Act of 1973). Regardless of applicability of the Sediment and Pollution Control Act, all projects shall incorporate appropriate Best Management Practices for the control of sediment and erosion so that no violations of state water quality standards, statutes, or rules occur. [15A NCAC 02H .0506(b)(3) and (c)(3) and 15A NCAC 02B .0200]. Design, installation, operation, and maintenance of all sediment and erosion control measures shall be equal to or exceed the requirements specified in the most recent version of the North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Manual, or for linear transportation projects, the NCDOT Sediment and Erosion Control Manual. All devices shall be maintained on all construction sites, borrow sites, and waste pile (spoil) sites, including contractor -owned or leased borrow pits associated with the project. Sufficient materials required for stabilization and/or repair of erosion control measures and stormwater routing and treatment shall be on site at all times. For borrow pit sites, the erosion and sediment control measures shall be designed, installed, operated, and maintained in accordance with the most recent version of the North Carolina Surface Mining Manual. Reclamation measures and implementation shall comply with the reclamation in accordance with the requirements of the Sedimentation Pollution Control Act and the Mining Act of 1971. Page 4 of 10 GC4134 If the project occurs in waters or watersheds classified as Primary Nursery Areas (PNAs), SA, WS-I, WS-II, High Quality Waters (HQW), or Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW), then the sedimentation and erosion control designs shall comply with the requirements set forth in 15A NCAC 04B .0124, Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds. 6. Sediment and erosion control measures shall not be placed in wetlands or waters except within the footprint of temporary or permanent impacts authorized under this Certification. Exceptions to this condition require application to and written approval from DWR. [15A NCAC 02H .0501 and .0502] 7. Erosion control matting that incorporates plastic mesh and/or plastic twine shall not be used along streambanks or within wetlands. Exceptions to this condition require application to and written approval from DWR. [15A NCAC 02B .0201] 8. An NPDES Construction Stormwater Permit (NCG010000) is required for construction projects that disturb one (1) or more acres of land. The NCG010000 Permit allows stormwater to be discharged during land disturbing construction activities as stipulated in the conditions of the permit. If the project is covered by this permit, full compliance with permit conditions including the erosion & sedimentation control plan, inspections and maintenance, self -monitoring, record keeping and reporting requirements is required. [15A NCAC 02H .0506(b)(5) and (c)(5)] The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) shall be required to be in full compliance with the conditions related to construction activities within the most recent version of their individual NPDES (NCS000250) stormwater permit. [15A NCAC 02H .0506(b)(5) and (c)(5)] 9. All work in or adjacent to streams shall be conducted so that the flowing stream does not come in contact with the disturbed area. Approved best management practices from the most current version of the NC Sediment and Erosion Control Manual, or the NC DOT Construction and Maintenance Activities Manual, such as sandbags, rock berms, cofferdams, and other diversion structures shall be used to minimize excavation in flowing water. Exceptions to this condition require application to and written approval from DWR. [15A NCAC 02H .0506(b)(3) and (c)(3)] 10. If activities must occur during periods of high biological activity (e.g. sea turtle nesting, fish spawning, or bird nesting), then biological monitoring may be required at the request of other state or federal agencies and coordinated with these activities. [15A NCAC 02H .0506(b)(2) and 15A NCAC 04B .0125] All moratoriums on construction activities established by the NC Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC), US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), NC Division of Marine Fisheries (DMF), or National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) shall be implemented. Exceptions to this condition require written approval by the resource agency responsible for the given moratorium. A copy of the approval from the resource agency shall be forwarded to DWR. Page 5 of 10 GC4134 Work within a designated trout watershed of North Carolina (as identified by the Wilmington District of the US Army Corps of Engineers), or identified state or federal endangered or threatened species habitat, shall be coordinated with the appropriate WRC, USFWS, NMFS, and/or DMF personnel. 11. Culverts shall be designed and installed in such a manner that the original stream profiles are not altered and allow for aquatic life movement during low flows. The dimension, pattern, and profile of the stream above and below a pipe or culvert shall not be modified by widening the stream channel or by reducing the depth of the stream in connection with the construction activity. The width, height, and gradient of a proposed culvert shall be such as to pass the average historical low flow and spring flow without adversely altering flow velocity. [15A NCAC 02H .0506(b)(2) and (c)(2)] Placement of culverts and other structures in streams shall be below the elevation of the streambed by one foot for all culverts with a diameter greater than 48 inches, and 20% of the culvert diameter for culverts having a diameter less than or equal to 48 inches, to allow low flow passage of water and aquatic life. If multiple pipes or barrels are required, they shall be designed to the mimic the existing stream cross section as closely as possible including pipes or barrels at flood plain elevation and/or sills where appropriate. Widening the stream channel shall be avoided. When topographic constraints indicate culvert slopes of greater than 5%, culvert burial is not required, provided that all alternative options for flattening the slope have been investigated and aquatic life movement/connectivity has been provided when possible (e.g. rock ladders, cross vanes, etc.). Notification, including supporting documentation to include a location map of the culvert, culvert profile drawings, and slope calculations, shall be provided to DWR 60 calendar days prior to the installation of the culvert. When bedrock is present in culvert locations, culvert burial is not required provided that there is sufficient documentation of the presence of bedrock. Notification, including supporting documentation such as a location map of the culvert, geotechnical reports, photographs, etc. shall be provided to DWR a minimum of 60 calendar days prior to the installation of the culvert. If bedrock is discovered during construction, then DWR shall be notified by phone or email within 24 hours of discovery. If other site -specific topographic constraints preclude the ability to bury the culverts as described above and/or it can be demonstrated that burying the culvert would result in destabilization of the channel, then exceptions to this condition require application to and written approval from DWR. Page 6 of 10 GC4134 Installation of culverts in wetlands shall ensure continuity of water movement and be designed to adequately accommodate high water or flood conditions. When roadways, causeways, or other fill projects are constructed across FEMA-designated floodways or wetlands, openings such as culverts or bridges shall be provided to maintain the natural hydrology of the system as well as prevent constriction of the floodway that may result in destabilization of streams or wetlands. The establishment of native woody vegetation and other soft stream bank stabilization techniques shall be used where practicable instead of rip -rap or other bank hardening methods. 12. Bridge deck drains shall not discharge directly into the stream. Stormwater shall be directed across the bridge and pre-treated through site -appropriate means to the maximum extent practicable (e.g. grassed swales, pre -formed scour holes, vegetated buffers, etc.) before entering the stream. Exceptions to this condition require application to and written approval from DWR. [15A NCAC 02H .0506(b)(5)] 13. Application of fertilizer to establish planted/seeded vegetation within disturbed riparian areas and/or wetlands shall be conducted at agronomic rates and shall comply with all other Federal, State and Local regulations. Fertilizer application shall be accomplished in a manner that minimizes the risk of contact between the fertilizer and surface waters. [15A NCAC 02B .0200 and 15A NCAC 02B .0231] 14. If concrete is used during construction, then all necessary measures shall be taken to prevent direct contact between uncured or curing concrete and waters of the state. Water that inadvertently contacts uncured concrete shall not be discharged to waters of the state. [15A NCAC 02B .0200] 15. All proposed and approved temporary fill and culverts shall be removed and the impacted area shall be returned to natural conditions within 60 calendar days after the temporary impact is no longer necessary. The impacted areas shall be restored to original grade, including each stream's original cross sectional dimensions, planform pattern, and longitudinal bed profile. For projects that receive written approval, no temporary impacts are allowed beyond those included in the application and authorization. All temporarily impacted sites shall be restored -and stabilized with native vegetation. [15A NCAC 02H .0506(b)(2) and (c)(2)] 16. All proposed and approved temporary pipes/culverts/rip-rap pads etc. in streams shall be installed as outlined in the most recent edition of the North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Planning and Design Manual or the North Carolina Surface Mining Manual or the North Carolina Department of Transportation Best Management Practices for Construction and Maintenance Activities so as not to restrict stream flow or cause dis-equilibrium during use of this Certification. [15A NCAC 02H .0506(b)(2) and (c)(2)] Page 7 of 10 GC4134 17. Any rip -rap required for proper culvert placement, stream stabilization, or restoration of temporarily disturbed areas shall be restricted to the area directly impacted by the approved construction activity. All rip -rap shall be placed such that the original stream elevation and streambank contours are restored and maintained. Placement of rip -rap or other approved materials shall not result in de -stabilization of the stream bed or banks upstream or downstream of the area or in a manner that precludes aquatic life passage. [15A NCAC 02H .0506(b)(2)] 18. Any rip -rap used for stream or shoreline stabilization shall be of a size and density to prevent movement by wave, current action, or stream flows and shall consist of clean rock or masonry material free of debris or toxic pollutants. Rip -rap shall not be installed in the streambed except in specific areas required for velocity control and to ensure structural integrity of bank stabilization measures. [15A NCAC 02H .0506(b)(2)] 19. Applications for rip -rap groins proposed in accordance with 15A NCAC 07H .1401 (NC Division of Coastal Management General Permit for construction of Wooden and Rip -rap Groins in Estuarine and Public Trust Waters) shall meet all the specific conditions for design and construction specified in 15A NCAC 07H .1405. 20. All mechanized equipment operated near surface waters shall be inspected and maintained regularly to prevent contamination of surface waters from fuels, lubricants, hydraulic fluids, or other toxic materials. Construction shall be staged in order to minimize the exposure of equipment to surface waters to the maximum extent practicable. Fueling, lubrication and general equipment maintenance shall be performed in a manner to prevent, to the maximum extent practicable, contamination of surface waters by fuels and oils. [15A NCAC 02H .0506(b)(3) and (c)(3) and 15A NCAC 02B .0211 (12)] 21. Heavy equipment working in wetlands shall be placed on mats or other measures shall be taken to minimize soil disturbance. [15A NCAC 02H .0506 (b)(3) and (c)(3)] 22. In accordance with 143-215.85(b), the applicant shall report any petroleum spill of 25 gallons or more; any spill regardless of amount that causes a sheen on surface waters; any petroleum spill regardless of amount occurring within 100 feet of surface waters; and any petroleum spill Tess than 25 gallons that cannot be cleaned up within 24 hours. 23. If an environmental document is required under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), then this General Certification is not valid until a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) or Record of Decision (ROD) is issued by the State Clearinghouse. If an environmental document is required under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), then this General Certification is not valid until a Categorical Exclusion, the Final Environmental Assessment, or Final Environmental Impact Statement is published by the lead agency. [15A NCAC 01C .0107(a)] Page 8 of 10 GC4134 24. This General Certification does not relieve the applicant of the responsibility to obtain all other required Federal, State, or Local approvals before proceeding with the project, including those required by, but not limited to, Sediment and Erosion Control, Non - Discharge, Water Supply Watershed, and Trout Buffer regulations. 25. The applicant and their authorized agents shall conduct all activities in a manner consistent with State water quality standards (including any requirements resulting from compliance with §303(d) of the Clean Water Act), and any other appropriate requirements of State and Federal Law. If DWR determines that such standards or laws are not being met, including failure to sustain a designated or achieved use, or that State or Federal law is being violated, or that further conditions are necessary to assure compliance, then DWR may revoke or modify a written authorization associated with this General Water Quality Certification. [15A NCAC 02H .0507(d)] 26. The permittee shall require its contractors and/or agents to comply with the terms and conditions of this permit in the construction and maintenance of this project, and shall provide each of its contractors and/or agents associated with the construction or maintenance of this project with a copy of this Certification. A copy of this Certification, including all conditions shall be available at the project site during the construction and maintenance of this project. [15A NCAC 02H .0507 (c) and 15A NCAC 02H .0506 (b)(2) and (c)(2)] 27. When written authorization is required for use of this Certification, upon completion of all permitted impacts included within the approval and any subsequent modifications, the applicant shall be required to return a certificate of completion (available on the DWR website: https://edocs.deq.nc.gov/Forms/Certificate-of-Completion). [15A NCAC 02H .0502(f)] 28. Additional site -specific conditions, including monitoring and/or modeling requirements, may be added to the written approval letter for projects proposed under this Water Quality Certification in order to ensure compliance with all applicable water quality and effluent standards. [15A NCAC 02H .0507(c)] 29. If the property or project is sold or transferred, the new permittee shall be given a copy of this Certification (and written authorization if applicable) and is responsible for complying with all conditions. [15A NCAC 02H .0501 and .0502] III. GENERAL CERTIFICATION ADMINISTRATION: 1. In accordance with North Carolina General Statute 143-215.3D(e), written approval for a 401 Water Quality General Certification must include the appropriate fee. An applicant for a CAMA permit under Article 7 of Chapter 113A of the General Statutes for which a water quality Certification is required shall only make one payment to satisfy both agencies; the fee shall be as established by the Secretary in accordance with 143-215.3D(e)(7). Page 9 of 10 GC4134 2. This Certification neither grants nor affirms any property right, license, or privilege in any waters, or any right of use in any waters. This Certification does not authorize any person to interfere with the riparian rights, littoral rights, or water use rights of any other person and this Certification does not create any prescriptive right or any right of priority regarding any usage of water. This Certification shall not be interposed as a defense in any action respecting the determination of riparian or littoral rights or other rights to water use. No consumptive user is deemed by virtue of this Certification to possess any prescriptive or other right of priority with respect to any other consumptive user regardless of the quantity of the withdrawal or the date on which the withdrawal was initiated or expanded. 3. This Certification grants permission to the Director, an authorized representative of the Director, or DWR staff, upon the presentation of proper credentials, to enter the property during normal business hours. [15A NCAC 02H .0502(e)] 4. This General Certification shall expire on the same day as the expiration date of the corresponding Nationwide Permit and/or Regional General Permit. The conditions in effect on the date of issuance of Certification for a specific project shall remain in effect for the life of the project, regardless of the expiration date of this Certification. This General Certification is rescinded when the US Army Corps of Engineers reauthorizes any of the corresponding Nationwide Permits and/or Regional General Permits or when deemed appropriate by the Director of the Division of Water Resources. 5. Non-compliance with or violation of the conditions herein set forth by a specific project may result in revocation of this General Certification for the project and may also result in criminal and/or civil penalties. 6. The Director of the North Carolina Division of Water Resources may require submission of a formal application for Individual Certification for any project in this category of activity if it is deemed in the public's best interested or determined that the project is likely to have a significant adverse effect upon water quality, including state or federally listed endangered or threatened aquatic species, or degrade the waters so that existing uses of the water or downstream waters are precluded. History Note: Water Quality Certification (WQC) Number 4134 issued December 1, 2017 replaces WQC March 3, 2017; WQC 3885 issued March 19, 2012; WQC Number 3689 issued November 1, 2007; WQC Number 3626 issued March 19, 2007; WQC Number 3495 issued December 31, 2004; and WQC Number 3399 issued March 2003. Page 10 of 10 U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS WILMINGTON DISTRICT Action Id. SAW-2019-00125 County: Orange U.S.G.S. Quad: NC-Hillsborough GENERAL PERMIT (REGIONAL AND NATIONWIDE) VERIFICATION Permittee:NC Division of Mitigation Service Permittee: Wildlands Engineering Inc Attn: Mr. Tim Baumgartner Attn: Daniel Johnson Address: 217 West Jones Street, Suite 3000A Address: 497 Bramson Ct, Suite 104 Raleigh, North Carolina 27603 Mt. Pleasant, SC 29464 Telephone:919-707-8319 Telephone: 843-277-6221 Size (acres) 27 acres Nearest Town Hillsborough Nearest Waterway Eno River River Basin Neuse USGS HUC 03020201 Coordinates Latitude: 36.108078 °N Longitude: -79.128361 °W Location description: The NCDMS Perry Hill Mitigation Site is located at 2623 Frank Perry Rd, Hillsborough, Orange County, North Carolina. PIN: 9865081397. Description of projects area and activity: The co-applicants, NCDMS and Wildlands Engineering, Inc. have requested a Department of the Army permit authorization to discharge dredged and/or fill material into waters of the United States associated with the NCDMS Perry Hill Mitigation Site. Implementation of the proposed restoration and enhancement activities will result in the discharge of fill material into 4,568 linear feet of stream channel, and 0.420 acres of wetlands associated with mechanized land clearing, excavation, placement of fill material, and stream relocation activities for the mitigation site. Compensatory mitigation is NOT required in conjunction with the aforementioned activities. Refer to the enclosed Table 1 for a detailed summary of impacts Applicable Law: Section 404 (Clean Water Act, 33 USC 1344) Section 10 (Rivers and Harbors Act, 33 USC 403) Authorization: Regional General Permit Number and/or Nationwide Permit Number: NWP 27 – Aquatic Habitat Restoration, Enhancement, and Establishment Activities SEE ATTACHED RGP or NWP GENERAL, REGIONAL AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS Your work is authorized by the above referenced permit provided it is accomplished in strict accordance with the attached conditions and your submitted application and attached information dated October 29, 2020. Any violation of the attached conditions or deviation from your submitted plans may subject the permittee to a stop work order, a restoration order, a Class I administrative penalty, and/or appropriate legal action. This verification will remain valid until the expiration date identified below unless the nationwide and/or regional general permit authorization is modified, suspended or revoked. If, prior to the expiration date identified below, the nationwide and/or regional general permit authorization is reissued and/or modified, this verification will remain valid until the expiration date identified below, provided it complies with all requirements of the modified nationwide permit. If the nationwide and/or regional general permit authorization expires or is suspended, revoked, or is modified, such that the activity would no longer comply with the terms and conditions of the nationwide permit, activities which have commenced (i.e., are under construction) or are under contract to commence in reliance upon the nationwide and/or regional general permit, will remain authorized provided the activity is completed within twelve months SAW-2019-00125 of the date of the nationwide and/or regional general permit’s expiration, modification or revocation, unless discretionary authority has been exercised on a case-by-case basis to modify, suspend or revoke the authorization. Activities subject to Section 404 (as indicated above) may also require an individual Section 401 Water Quality Certification. You should contact the NC Division of Water Resources (telephone 919-807- 6300) to determine Section 401 requirements. For activities occurring within the twenty coastal counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA), prior to beginning work you must contact the N.C. Division of Coastal Management in Morehead City, NC, at (252) 808-2808. This Department of the Army verification does not relieve the permittee of the responsibility to obtain any other required Federal, State or local approvals/permits. If there are any questions regarding this verification, any of the conditions of the Permit, or the Corps of Engineers regulatory program, please contact Kimberly Browning, 919.554.4884 x60. Corps Regulatory Official: Date: November 17, 2020 Expiration Date of Verification: March 18, 2022 SAW-2019-00125 Table 1. Authorized discharge of fill material into waters of the United States in association with the NCDMS Perry Hill Mitigation Site (SAW-2019-00125). 1. Total Impacts: Stream – 4568 LF, Wetland – 0.420 ac Wetland: SAW-2019-00125 Stream: *Impacts are associated with aquatic resource restoration and enhancement activities and are expected to result in a net gain in Waters of the US. SPECIAL CONDITIONS 1. The permittee understands and agrees that the document entitled “FINAL Mitigation Plan – Perry Hill Mitigation Plan” dated July 31, 2020 is incorporated and made part of this permit. Execution of the work and terms given in the approved mitigation plan are a condition of this permit. 2. This Nationwide Permit verification does not imply suitability of this property for compensatory mitigation for any particular project. The use of any portion of this site as compensatory mitigation for a particular project will be determined during the permit review process for that project. SAW-2019-00125 COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATION Action ID Number: SAW-2019-00125 County: Orange Permittee: NC Division of Mitigation Services Wildlands Engineering, Inc Attn: Mr. Tim Baumgartner Attn: Daniel Johnson Project Name: NCDMS Perry Hill Mitigation Site Date Verification Issued: November 17, 2020 Project Manager: Kim Browning Upon completion of the activity authorized by this permit and any mitigation required by the permit, sign this certification and return it to the following address: US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS WILMINGTON DISTRICT Regulatory Division Mitigation Office Attn: Kim Browning 3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105 Raleigh, NC 27587 Please note that your permitted activity is subject to a compliance inspection by a U. S. Army Corps of Engineers representative. Failure to comply with any terms or conditions of this authorization may result in the Corps suspending, modifying or revoking the authorization and/or issuing a Class I administrative penalty, or initiating other appropriate legal action. I hereby certify that the work authorized by the above referenced permit has been completed in accordance with the terms and condition of the said permit, and required mitigation was completed in accordance with the permit conditions. _______________________________________ ______________________ Signature of Permittee Date December 5, 2020 LETTER OF APPROVAL Wildlands Engineering, Inc. ATTN: Shawn D. Wilkerson, President 1430 S. Mint Street, Suite 104 Charlotte, NC 28203 RE: Project Name: Perry Hill Mitigation Site Acres Approved: 13.73 Project ID: ORANG-2021-002 County: Orange City: Hillsborough Address: Frank Perry Road River Basin: Neuse Stream Classification: HQW Submitted By: Wildlands Engineering, Inc., ATTN: Geoff Smith, PE Date Received by LQS: November 23, 2020 Plan Type: Revised Dear Mr. Wilkerson: The subject erosion and sedimentation control plan has been approved. The enclosed Certificate of Approval must be posted at the job site. This plan approval shall expire three (3) years following the date of approval, if no land-disturbing activity has been undertaken, as is required by Title 15A NCAC 4B .0129. As of April 1, 2019, all new construction activities are required to complete and submit an electronic Notice of Intent (eNOI) form requesting a Certificate of Coverage (COC) under the NCG010000 Construction General Permit. After the form is reviewed and found to be complete, you will receive a link with payment instructions for the $100 annual permit fee. After the fee is received, you will receive the COC via email. You MUST obtain the COC prior to commencement of any land disturbing activity. The eNOI form may be accessed at deq.nc.gov/NCG01. Please direct questions about the eNOI form to Annette Lucas at Annette.Lucas@ncdenr.gov or Paul Clark at Paul.Clark@ncdenr.gov. If the owner/operator of this project changes in the future, the new responsible party is required to apply for his/her own COC. Letter of Approval Wildlands Engineering, Inc. December 5, 2020 Page 2 of 3 Rev. 05222020 Title 15A NCAC 4B .0118(a) and the NCG01 permit require that the following documentation be kept on file at the job site: 1. The approved E&SC plan as well as any approved deviation. 2. The NCG01 permit and the COC, once it is received. 3. Records of inspections made during the previous 12 months. Also, this letter gives the notice required by G.S. 113A-61.1(a) of our right of periodic inspection to insure compliance with the approved plan. Title 15A NCAC 4B .0118(a) requires that a copy of the approved erosion control plan be on file at the job site. Also, this letter gives the notice required by G.S. 113A-61.1(a) of our right of periodic inspection to insure compliance with the approved plan. North Carolina's Sedimentation Pollution Control Act is performance-oriented, requiring protection of existing natural resources and adjoining properties. If, following the commencement of this project, it is determined that the erosion and sedimentation control plan is inadequate to meet the requirements of the Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 (North Carolina General Statute 113A-51 through 66), this office may require revisions to the plan and implementation of the revisions to ensure compliance with the Act. Acceptance and approval of this plan is conditioned upon your compliance with Federal and State water quality laws, regulations, and rules. In addition, local city or county ordinances or rules may also apply to this land-disturbing activity. This approval does not supersede any other permit or approval. Please note that this approval is based in part on the accuracy of the information provided in the Financial Responsibility Form, which you provided. You are requested to file an amended form if there is any change in the information included on the form. This permit allows for a land- disturbance, as called for on the application plan, not to exceed the approved acres.  Exceeding the acreage will be a violation of this permit and would require a revised plan and additional application fee. In addition, it would be helpful if you notify this office of the proposed starting date for this project. Please notify us if you plan to have a preconstruction conference. Letter of Approval Wildlands Engineering, Inc. December 5, 2020 Page 3 of 3 Rev. 05222020 Your cooperation is appreciated. Sincerely, Dylan Reinhardt Assistant Regional Engineer Land Quality Section Enclosures: Certificate of Approval NPDES NCG01 Fact Sheet cc: Wildlands Engineering, ATTN: Geoff Smith, PE (gsmith@wildlandseng.com) Regional Office file APPENDIX 6.6 Vegetation Plot Data Table 4. Planted and Total Stem Counts Perry Hill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 0 - 2021 PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T Acer floridanum Southern Sugar Maple Tree 1 1 1 Acer negundo Boxelder Tree 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 Asimina triloba Common Pawpaw Shrub Tree 2 2 2 Betula nigra River Birch Tree 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 2 2 2 Cornus amomum Silky Dogwood Shrub Tree 2 2 2 Diospyros virginiana American Persimmon Tree 2 2 2 1 1 1 Nyssa sylvatica Black Gum Tree Platanus occidentalis Sycamore Tree 2 2 2 4 4 4 1 1 1 3 3 3 2 2 2 Populus deltoides Eastern Cottonwood Tree 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 Quercus alba White Oak Tree Quercus lyrata Overcup Oak Tree 2 2 2 2 2 2 Quercus pagoda Cherrybark Oak Tree 4 4 4 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 Quercus phellos Willow Oak Tree 1 1 1 Quercus rubra Northern Red Oak Tree 2 2 2 Ulmus alata Winged Elm Tree Ulmus americana American Elm Tree 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 Viburnum prunifolium Blackhaw Viburnum Shrub Tree 1 1 1 15 15 15 12 12 12 12 12 12 15 15 15 12 12 12 6 6 6 6 6 6 8 8 8 6 6 6 9 9 9 607 607 607 486 486 486 486 486 486 607 607 607 486 486 486 Color for Density Exceeds requirements by 10% Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10% Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10% Fails to meet requirements by more than 10% Volunteer species included in total PnoLS - Planted Stems Excluding Live Stakes P-all - All Planted Stems T - All Woody Stems 0.02 1 0.02 1 0.02size (ACRES) Species count Stems per ACRE 1 0.02 0.02 VP 3 VP 4 Stem count size (ares)11 Scientific Name Common Name Species Type VP 1 VP 2 VP 5 Current Plot Data (MY0 2021) Table 4. Planted and Total Stem Counts Perry Hill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 0 - 2021 Acer floridanum Southern Sugar Maple Tree Acer negundo Boxelder Tree Asimina triloba Common Pawpaw Shrub Tree Betula nigra River Birch Tree Cornus amomum Silky Dogwood Shrub Tree Diospyros virginiana American Persimmon Tree Nyssa sylvatica Black Gum Tree Platanus occidentalis Sycamore Tree Populus deltoides Eastern Cottonwood Tree Quercus alba White Oak Tree Quercus lyrata Overcup Oak Tree Quercus pagoda Cherrybark Oak Tree Quercus phellos Willow Oak Tree Quercus rubra Northern Red Oak Tree Ulmus alata Winged Elm Tree Ulmus americana American Elm Tree Viburnum prunifolium Blackhaw Viburnum Shrub Tree Color for Density Exceeds requirements by 10% Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10% Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10% Fails to meet requirements by more than 10% Volunteer species included in total PnoLS - Planted Stems Excluding Live Stakes P-all - All Planted Stems T - All Woody Stems size (ACRES) Species count Stems per ACRE Stem count size (ares) Scientific Name Common Name Species Type PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 1 3 3 3 2 2 2 3 3 3 1 1 1 3 3 3 1 1 1 2 2 2 6 6 6 3 3 3 2 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 17 17 17 12 12 12 18 18 18 13 13 13 16 16 16 6 6 6 9 9 9 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 688 688 688 486 486 486 728 728 728 526 526 526 647 647 647 0.02 0.02 1 0.02 1 0.02 VP 7 VP 8 VP 9 VP 10 1 0.02 11 VP 6 Current Plot Data (MY0 2021) Table 4. Planted and Total Stem Counts Perry Hill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 0 - 2021 Acer floridanum Southern Sugar Maple Tree Acer negundo Boxelder Tree Asimina triloba Common Pawpaw Shrub Tree Betula nigra River Birch Tree Cornus amomum Silky Dogwood Shrub Tree Diospyros virginiana American Persimmon Tree Nyssa sylvatica Black Gum Tree Platanus occidentalis Sycamore Tree Populus deltoides Eastern Cottonwood Tree Quercus alba White Oak Tree Quercus lyrata Overcup Oak Tree Quercus pagoda Cherrybark Oak Tree Quercus phellos Willow Oak Tree Quercus rubra Northern Red Oak Tree Ulmus alata Winged Elm Tree Ulmus americana American Elm Tree Viburnum prunifolium Blackhaw Viburnum Shrub Tree Color for Density Exceeds requirements by 10% Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10% Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10% Fails to meet requirements by more than 10% Volunteer species included in total PnoLS - Planted Stems Excluding Live Stakes P-all - All Planted Stems T - All Woody Stems size (ACRES) Species count Stems per ACRE Stem count size (ares) Scientific Name Common Name Species Type PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 3 3 3 1 1 1 20 20 20 2 2 2 1 1 1 9 9 9 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 35 35 35 2 2 2 4 4 4 2 2 2 16 16 16 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 42 42 42 1 1 1 2 2 2 12 12 12 2 2 2 2 2 2 7 7 7 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 21 21 21 2 2 2 6 6 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 7 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 14 14 14 1 1 1 4 4 4 15 15 15 15 15 15 14 14 14 15 15 15 201 201 201 7 7 7 8 8 8 6 6 6 9 9 9 17 17 17 607 607 607 607 607 607 567 567 567 607 607 607 581 581 581 0.350.02 1 0.02 1 0.02 1 0.02 VP 13 VP 14 Annual Means MY0 (2021) 14 VP 11 VP 12 1 Current Plot Data (MY0 2021) VEGETATION PLOT PHOTOGRAPHS Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix 6.6: Vegetation Plot Data – Vegetation Plot Photographs VEG PLOT 1 (04/06/2021) VEG PLOT 2 (04/06/2021) VEG PLOT 3 (04/06/2021) VEG PLOT 4 (04/08/2021) VEG PLOT 5 (04/08/2021) VEG PLOT 6 (04/06/2021) Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix 6.6: Vegetation Plot Data – Vegetation Plot Photographs VEG PLOT 7 (04/06/2021) VEG PLOT 8 (04/06/2021) VEG PLOT 9 (04/06/2021) VEG PLOT 10 (04/06/2021) VEG PLOT 11 (04/06/2021) VEG PLOT 12 (04/06/2021) Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix 6.6: Vegetation Plot Data – Vegetation Plot Photographs VEG PLOT 13 (04/06/2021) VEG PLOT 14 (04/06/2021)