20030247 Ver 1_Monitoring Report_20140327

CLOSEOUT REPORT - 2014
CROSS CREEK
STREAM RESTORATION SITE
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
EEP Project: No.105
USACE Action ID: 2003 -00515
DWQ Project Number: 03 -0247
Status: 5 years of monitoring complete
Project Timeline
Project Acti-titites andNVlilestones
Cross Creek Stream Restoration - EEP Project No.105
ActiNity or Report
Data
Collection
Complete
Actual Completion
or Delivery
Project Institution - Property Option
-
Feb 2002
Restoration Plan
2002
Oct 2002
Permit Date - 404
-
Mar 2003
Final Design - 90%
-
2004
Construction
2004
Jan 2005
Plantings
Jan 2005
Jan 2005
Mitigation Plan / As -built (Year 0 Monitoring - baseline)
Apr 2006
Ju12006
Year 1 Monitoring
Nov 2006
Dec 2006
Year 2 Monitoring
Oct 2007
Dec 2007
Year 3 Monitoring
Oct 2008
Nov 2008
Supplemental Planting (Specimen Trees
-
2009
Invasive Species Control
-
Summer 2009
Year 4 Monitoring
Sept 2009
Nov 2009
Beaver Removal
Reasons for 303d listing or stressor
March 2010
Supplemental Planting
-
March 2010
Invasive Species Control
-
Summer2010
Year 5 Monitoring
Sept 2010
Nov 2010
Beaver Removal
-
May & June 2011
Invasive Species Control
-
Summer 2011
Beaver Removal
-
Nov 2012
Supplemental Planting
-
Dec 2012
Closure Submission
-
Apr 2014
Project Attributes
Project County
Cumberland Count
Ph sio ra hic Region
Sandhills /Coastal Plain
Ecore ion
Atlantic Southern Loam Plains
River Basin
Cape Fear
USGS 14di it HUC
03030004100050
NCDWQ Subbasin
03 -06 -15
Within EEP Watershed Plan?
TLW
WRC Class
Warm
% of project with boundary marking
—100%
Drainage Area
Little Cross Creek: 10.5 Cross Creek 25.5
Restored /Enhanced stream lengths (linear feet)
2090
Perennial or Intermittent
Perennial
Watershed type
Developed
Watershed distribution
27% Vegetated 40% Residential 28% Industrial 5%
Open water or transitional
Watershed impervious cover
— 70 percent
Stream Order
Little Cross Creek: 3rd Cross Creek 4th
Rosgen Classification of Asbuilt
C5type
Dominant Soil Types
Chewacla Loam, Rion Fine Sandy Loam
Reference Site ID
Country Club Branch and Little Rockfish Creek
NCDWQ Classification
Cross Creek (C), Little Cross Creek (C)
303d listed?
Yes
Upstream of a 303d listed segment?
Yes
Reasons for 303d listing or stressor
Im aried Biological Activity, fecal coliform
Total acreage of easement
— 4.67 acres
Total planted acreage as part of the restoration
— 4.67 acres
Ros en classification of preexisting
G5
Ros en classification of asbuilt
C5
Valle type/slope
VIII
Cowardin classification
Riverine
Trout waters designation
No
Species of concern, endangered, etc.?
No

Project Setting & Background
The project is located in a highly urban drainage in Fayetteville, NC and is comprised of
approximately 1400 feet of Cross Creek and about 700 feet of Little Cross Creek, a major
tributary. The project drains nearly 26 square miles of a highly impervious watershed. The
existing channels were dredged and straightened (see historical aerial) with a good deal of fill
deposited in the floodplain. The project was instituted in 2002, built in 2005 and was subject to
major supplemental planting in 2009 due to encroachment by the city on the west side of the
project resulting from rushed preparations in advance of a Presidential address at the
neighboring Martin Luther King memorial. The city remediated the encroachment areas.
Standard monitoring was completed in 2010. From 2010 through 2013 the site was treated for
repeated beaver infestations and invasive plants including kudzu, Japanese knotweed, and
Japanese Honeysuckle. Additional supplemental planting took place in 2012.
The treatments applied to the site involved P2 restoration of both channels, converting them
from G to C stream types, and the installation of a riparian buffer. Additionally, a small area in
the southwest corner of the floodplain was graded to dissipate the energies associated with
stormflows (see fig 1). Areas of the project include an extensive P2 bench, but the easement was
limited to 30 -50 feet in many places due to the urban constraints consisting of many power and
sewer utilities and negotiated needs with the City of Fayetteville. However, the post
construction topography on the west side of the channel has made it preferable for the city to
maintain the vegetated edge at widths greater than the easement. Other pinch points exist that
result in single sided easements and were removed from credit (see asset table and map). Utility
crossings were credited at 50 %. The easement along the lower third of the project on the east
side actually extends about 15 feet beyond a fence, but this corridor is covered by overlapping
sewer and power utilities. Therefore, this corridor is mowed grass and a forested buffer was not
practical, but the easement prevents additional development activities in this area. The project
has been reviewed and accepted by EEP stewardship.
Project Goals
• Provide a stable stream channel that neither aggrades nor degrades while maintaining its
dimension, pattern, and profile with the capacity to transport its watershed's water and
sediment load.
• Provide the stream with a floodplain at the stream's current elevation.
• Improve aquatic habitat with the use of natural material stabilization structures such as
root wads, rock vanes, woody debris and a riparian buffer.
• Provide wildlife habitat and bank stability through the creation of a riparian zone.
Cross Creek
EEP Project Number 105
Cumberland County, North Carolina
Success Criteria and Project Performance
Ve etg ation: Success was defined in the mitigation plan as representation by 6 target tree species
across the site. Density criteria were not specified, but the site exhibits a dense and diverse
assemblage of native trees and shrubs. All eight vegetation plots met success criteria. Densities
ranged from 1000 to 5400 stems per acre with 6 to 18 native woody species noted per plot (42
woody species site wide). Supplemental planting of the site occurred in 2009 in response to
encroachment and again in 2012 in response to beaver impacts and areas subject to invasives
control. Several invasive plant species were observed and treated, most notably, Japanese
honeysuckle, Japanese Knotweed, and Kudzu. See the remediation map below.
The Riparian Buffer is considered successful.
Streams: The mitigation plan generally referred to stability monitoring without specifying
criteria. The project is a large urban drainage with sandy soils and exhibited scour and
deposition at various times, but is stable and demonstrating dynamic equilibrium. The channel
has good access to its floodplain and although the monitoring firm only reported 3 overbank
events, the true number was likely far greater. Neither the design firm nor the monitoring firm
documented bankfull events with sufficient rigor, but sediment deposition and storm debris were
always evident on the projects flood features. Two of the 6 cross sections did enlarge in year
5, but the rest were stable and over 90% of the stream banks were stable at year 5. This is now in
excess of 95 %. Some of the responses in the profile were the result of repeated beaver
colonization of the site, particularly on the tributary, which resulted in cycles of deposition and
winnowing, with bed elevations varying in keeping with dynamic equilibrium. One large bar
did form on Little Cross Creek above the confluence, but with continued beaver control it has
dissipated in subsequent storm events and never resulted in channel widening. The two
stormwater outfalls in the southwest portion of the project were hardened and the floodplain in
this area was reinforced with geotextile material to help manage the storm flows. However, the
larger of these two conveyences was overwhelmed by the volume and intensity of stormflows
and subsequently widened. Between the very high density of vegetation and geotextile
surrounding this area, this outfall has now stabilized and is not affecting the stream channel.
The condition of this feature has remained the same over the last three years, with minimal
additional erosion and even some deposition on the channel edge. The stream component of
the project is considered successful.
Closeout Report
March 2014
page 2

Project Restoration Components and Mitigation Assets (See Accompanying Asset Map)
Cross Creek Closeout Report
EEP Project Number 105 March 2014
Cumberland County, North Carolina page 3
Overall
Project
Existing
Overall
Component
Restoration
Footage or
Restored
Mitigation
or Reach ID
Level
Approach
Acreage
Footage
Type
Footage
Ratio
Units
Comment
Full Restoration
999
1:1
999
Cross Creek
Mainstem
R
P2
1360
1376
PH Restoration of dimension pattern and profile, instream structures and
vegetated buffers.
Utility Impacted
142
2:1
71
Single Sided
Easement
235
No Credit
0
Tributary -
Little Cross
Creek
R
P2
705
714
Full Restoration
604
1:1
604
PII Restoration of dimension pattern and profile, instream structures and
vegetated buffers.
Utility Impacted
110
2:1
55
Totals
2065
i 2090
2090
1729
Cross Creek Closeout Report
EEP Project Number 105 March 2014
Cumberland County, North Carolina page 3

Cross Creek Assets and Monitoring Features Map
#105 (Fayetteville, NC)
N
0 100 200 400 600 800
Feet w
S
Cross Creek Closeout Report
EEP Project Number 105 January 2014
Cumberland County, North Carolina page 4

Cross Creek Closeout Report
EEP Project Number 105 March 2014
Cumberland County, North Carolina page 5

Cross Creek Closeout Report
EEP Project Number 105 March 2014
Cumberland County, North Carolina page 6

98
96
94
d 92
0 90
a 88
w 86
84
82
0
Cross Creek (Station 23 +05)
Cross Section #4 - Pool
99
97
95
e 93
A
> 91
w
89
87
0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Distance (feet)
—Y6,2-07/04/07 Year 3 - 08/12/08 —Year 4 —Year 5 - 2010
Cross Creek (Station 3 +11)
Cross Section #5 - Pool
98
96
94
a
92
w 90
ss
86
0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Distance (feet)
—Y-2-07104/07 —Y-3-08/12/08 Year 4 —Year 5 - 2010
Cross Creek (Station 3 +81)
Cross Section #6 - Rifle
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Distance (feet)
—Year 2 07/04/07 —Year 3 - 08/12/08 —Year 4 —Year 5 - 2010
Cross
EEP Project # 105 February, 2014
Cumberland County, North Carolina Page 7
Cross Creek (Station 12 +54)
Cross Section #1 - Riffle
98
Cross Section #2 - Pool
96
98
94
Floodprone Are.(approx.)
-------- - - - - -- ----------------------------------------------
•a° 92
__
Klf
9 6
w 90
Bankfull Elev. (approx.)
SS
94
86
0 20 40 60 80 100
°9
Distance (feet)
Year 2 - 07/04/07 —Year 3- 08/12/08 —Year 04 —Year 5 -2010 —BANI FUL.
98
96
94
d 92
0 90
a 88
w 86
84
82
0
Cross Creek (Station 23 +05)
Cross Section #4 - Pool
99
97
95
e 93
A
> 91
w
89
87
0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Distance (feet)
—Y6,2-07/04/07 Year 3 - 08/12/08 —Year 4 —Year 5 - 2010
Cross Creek (Station 3 +11)
Cross Section #5 - Pool
98
96
94
a
92
w 90
ss
86
0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Distance (feet)
—Y-2-07104/07 —Y-3-08/12/08 Year 4 —Year 5 - 2010
Cross Creek (Station 3 +81)
Cross Section #6 - Rifle
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Distance (feet)
—Year 2 07/04/07 —Year 3 - 08/12/08 —Year 4 —Year 5 - 2010
Cross
EEP Project # 105 February, 2014
Cumberland County, North Carolina Page 7
Cross Creek (Station 13 +60)
Cross Section #2 - Pool
98
Floodprone Area (approx.)
__
Klf
9 6
^
94
°9
92
90
88
86
0 10 20
30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Distance (feet)
Year 2- 07/04/07 —YSr 3- 08/12/08 —Year4 —Year 5 -2010
Cross Creek (Station 20 +58)
Cross Section #3 - Riffle
97
95
Floo4prone Area (approx.)
--- ------ - -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
;93
Bankfall Elev. (approx.)
091
r
_289
w
87
85
0
20 40
60 80 100 120 140 160
Distance (feet)
-*-Year 2.07/04/07 -Year 3 - 08/12/08 —Year 4 —Year 5 - 2010
98
96
94
d 92
0 90
a 88
w 86
84
82
0
Cross Creek (Station 23 +05)
Cross Section #4 - Pool
99
97
95
e 93
A
> 91
w
89
87
0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Distance (feet)
—Y6,2-07/04/07 Year 3 - 08/12/08 —Year 4 —Year 5 - 2010
Cross Creek (Station 3 +11)
Cross Section #5 - Pool
98
96
94
a
92
w 90
ss
86
0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Distance (feet)
—Y-2-07104/07 —Y-3-08/12/08 Year 4 —Year 5 - 2010
Cross Creek (Station 3 +81)
Cross Section #6 - Rifle
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Distance (feet)
—Year 2 07/04/07 —Year 3 - 08/12/08 —Year 4 —Year 5 - 2010
Cross
EEP Project # 105 February, 2014
Cumberland County, North Carolina Page 7

Reach 1 Longitudinal Profile
Cross Creek 'Stream Restoration
2010'lonitoring - Year 0, Year 1, Year 2, Year 3, Year 4, Year 5
100
700
S00 900
99
84
STATION
98
83
Y'earOOLBK
+ Y'earOORBK
— — - Y-en-001I-ater
0
�^ ++
0
96
95
R'
'
e + • •
94 r +
+ o
93
x x ° +
92 `� +X
x
x+
8- r- —
s !
x
86
Jjh
ML
8
700
S00 900
1000
84
STATION
(ft)
83
Y'earOOLBK
+ Y'earOORBK
— — - Y-en-001I-ater
82
Year 03RBK
Year 04IhA eg
Y'earOJAI-ater
81
Year 05 LBF
_Y'ear MWater
-Y"ear M Ihahreg
s0
0
100 200
300 400
Year 02 watts
Year 02 RBF
x. rear 02 LBF
Year MLBK
—Year 03Ihai eg
— - Year 03Water
XS-1-pow
Tti5_ Rile
+XS�Po1
Sao 640
700
S00 900
1000
STATION
(ft)
Y'earOOIhah-eg •
Y'earOOLBK
+ Y'earOORBK
— — - Y-en-001I-ater
Y'earO3LBK
Year 03RBK
Year 04IhA eg
Y'earOJAI-ater
Year 05 RBF
Year 05 LBF
_Y'ear MWater
-Y"ear M Ihahreg
1100 1240 1300 140 -0 1500
Year 01lhaheg
Year 04LBK
A Keep d-Hook
Year 01 Water
Year 01 RBK
SM
Year 01 RBK
XS -1 -RMk
0 RDck+Crws Vine

H
W
W
W
100
99
98
97
96
95
94
93
92
91
90
89
88
87
86
85
84
83
82
81
80
Reach 2 Longitudinal Profile
Little Cross Creek Stream Restoration
2010 Monitoring - Monitoring Year 0, Year 1, Year 2, Year 3, Year 4, Year 5
♦ o
♦ a
L
C
� o
� U
• 0
a) U)
U) U)
c N
M N
■ U
X■ + X n ■
- - - --
♦ tj
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
STATION (ft)
Year 02Thalweg
– – – Year 02 water
X Year 02 RBK
X Year 02 LBK
– – Year00 Thalweg
♦ Year00 LBK
+ Year00 RBK
– – Year00 Water
--------- Year 01 Thalweg -- ------- Year 01 Water
Year 01 RBK
Year 01 LBK
Year 03 Thalweg
– - – - Year 03 Water
• Year 03 LBK
Year 03 RBK
Year 04 Thalweg
Year 04 Water
Year 04 RBK ■ Year 04 LBK
—�— XS -1 -Riffle
XS -2 -Riffle
—Year 05 Thalweg
Year 05 Water
• Year 05 RBF
13 Year 05 LBK
0 Rock J -Hook
■ Rock Cross Vane
■ Sill
Cross Creek Closeout Report
EEP Project Number 105 March 2014
Cumberland County, North Carolina page 9

Cross Creek Closeout Report
EEP Project Number 105 March 2014
Cumberland County, North Carolina page 10
Cross Section 1 Stantec - MY3
1+66.3 Riffle
Cross Section 2 Stantec -MY3
1 +80.3 Pool
Cross Section 3 Stantec -MY3
10+04.3 Riffle
Cross Section 4 Stantec -MY3
10 +71.0 Pool
Dimension
MYO
MY]
MY2*
MY3*
MY4*
MY5*
MYO
MYl
MY2*
MY3*
MY4*
MY5*
MYO
MYI
MY2*
MY3*
MY4* MY5*
MYO
MYl
MY2*
MY3*
MY4*
MY5*
BF Width (ft)
1 34.2
33.6
21.6
21.43
18.54
19.84
90.0
89.4
33.4
33.99
34.07
23.69
38.6
19.37
33.47
35.42
29 36.9
49.6
37.8
35.82
35.33
33.66
40.3
FPW
>100
91.8
>100
>100
>100
>100
0.99
1.04
n/a
n/a
n/a
>100
>100
78.37
128
110
115 >100
3.8
101.4
n/a
n/a
n/a
>100
BF XS Area
67.8
62.7
39.92
38.44
36.59
42.27
1.0
92.18
92.68
93.07
71.22
70.8
34.6
71.91
75.96
66.97 92
113.6
78.6
111.5
112.61
106.67
120.82
Mean Depth
2.0
1.87
1.84
1.79
1.97
2.13
1.5
2.76
2.73
2.73
3.01
1.8
1.78
2.15
2.14
2.31 2.49
2.3
2.08
3.11
3.19
3.17
3
Max De th
3.2
3.26
2.58
2.68
2.56
2.78
5.29
5.27
5.11
4.5
3.4
2.25
3.86
3.99
3.94 4.69
4.3
4.59
5.93
6.15
6.03
6.11
BHR
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0 1
1.0
1
1
W/D
17.3
17.95
11.7
12.0
9.4
9.3
12.1
12.5
12.5
7.9
21.0
10.9
15.6
16.6
12.6 14.8
21.7
18.2
11.5
11.1
10.6
13.4
ER
>2.9
2.73
>4.6
>4.6
>4.6
>5.04
n/a
n/a
n/a
>4.22
>1.8
4.04
3.824320287
3.11
3.36 2.7
2.68
n/a
n/a
n/a
2.48
Cross Creek Closeout Report
EEP Project Number 105 March 2014
Cumberland County, North Carolina page 10
Cross Section 6 Stantec - MY3
1 +94 Riffle
Cross Section 5 Stantec - MY3
2 +91 Pool
Dimension
MYO
MYI
MY2*
MY3*
MY4*
MY5*
MYO
MYI
MY2*
MY3*
MY4*
MY5*
BF Width (ft)
36.4
67
35.78
39.82
39.82
36.23
23.3
17.5
24.1
22.25
16.68
25.07
FPW
100.5
108
100
100
100
90.0
89.4
n/a
n/a
n/a
100
BF XS Area
50.1
69
58.99
54.95
38.48
37.85
35.5
23.4
35.91
35.51
25.88
49.17
Mean Depth (ft)
1.4
1.03
1.65
1.38
0.99
1.04
1.5
1.36
1.49
1.6
1.55
1.96
BF Max Depth
(ft)
3.0
3.16
3.8
3.2
2.7
3.3
2.3
2.61
3.0
3.3
3.1
3.3
Bank Height
Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Width/Depth
Ratio
26.5
65.1
21.7
28.9
39.5
34.8
15.3
12.9
16.2
14.0
10.8
12.8
ER
1.5
3.02
2.51
2.60
2.76
3.9
5.01
n/a
n/a
n/a
4
Cross Creek Closeout Report
EEP Project Number 105 March 2014
Cumberland County, North Carolina page 10

Current Plot Data (MYS 2414) Annual Means
Common Name
Species Type
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
MY5 (2014)
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
boxelder
Tree
1
1
red maple
Tree
4
2
9
15
red maple
Tree
silktree
.shrub Tree
hazel alder
Shrub Tree
8
7
5
3
5
16
44
Red Chokeberry
Shrub
5
1
2
9
baccharis
Shrub Tree
eastern baccharis
Shrub Tree
2
4
2
S
river birch
Tree
2
d
10
American beautyberi
Shrub
2
3
3
1
9
American hornbeam
Shrub Tree
Coastal American Ho
Shrub Tree
hackberry
2
2
eastern redbud
Shrub Tree
coastal sweetpeppe
Shrub
1
dogwood
Shrub Tree
3
3
cypress
i
2
witchalder
1
dwarf witchalder
Shrub
1
1
green ash
Tree
2
1
4
possumhaw
Shrub Tree
Possum -haw
Shrub Tree
1
3
3
2
9
inkberry
Shrub
1
I
1
eastern redcedar
Tree
4
4
Chinese privet
Shrub Tree
1
1
sweetgum
Tree
18
18
17
36
26
43
12
174
tuliptree
Tree
1
2
3
Tulip -tree, Yellow Pc
Tree
sensitive plant
Vine Shrub
3
2
5
10
wax myrtle
Shrub Tree
2
2
6
2
12
red mulberry
Tree
1
tupelo
Tree
swamp tupelo
Tree
1
1
blackgum
Tree
21
1
21
6
princesstree
Tree
1
1
loblolly pine
Tree
2
2
15
19
sycamore
Tree
American sycamore
Tree
15
2
8
10
1
1
37
Sycamore, Plane-trei
Tree
swamp cottonwood
Tree
2
2
4
pear
Tree
Callery pear
Tree
1
2
2
5
oak
Shrub Tree
2
5
3
southern red oak
Tree
1
overcup oak
Tree
2
21
1
6
water oak
Tree
1
willow oak
Tree
1
2
2
2
2
9
Shumard oak
Shrub Tree
flameleaf sumac
Shrub Tree
24
4
14
3
39
flameleaf sumac
Shrub Tree
blackwillow
Tree
Common Elderberry
Shrub Tree
1
1
2
4
bald cypress
Tree
2
4
4
10
eastern poison ivy
Shrub Vine
5
6
11
winged elm
Tree
21
2
American elrn
Tree
3
4
4
11
American Elm, WhitE
Tree
2
1
1
1
5
slippery elm
Tree
11
18
4
33
unknown
1
1
4
possumhaw
I Shrub Tree
11
1 21
1
4
Stem count
size (ares)
size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE
95
64
.55
23
134
49
81
61
562
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
8
0.02
102
4.42
4.42
4.42
0.02
0.42
0.02
0.20
F33451
19
12
14
20
13
17
13
45
2590
2226
930.8
5423
1583
3278
2469
2842.916635
14 10 10 18 6 17 13

Table 9 -Verification of Bankfull Events
Cross Creek Stream Restoration -EEP Project No. 105
Date of Data
Date of
Method
Photo
Collection
Occurrence
Visual observation ofsediment
9/24/2008
9/6/2008
MY3 Report (Appendix B4, Photo 1)
and debris in flood lain
Evidence ofbankfull event.JPG (in
11/19/2009
11/2009
Visual Observation
digital data subtrission)
9/1/2010
9/29/2010
Weather Data
No photo available
Recommendation and Conclusions
The project was instituted in 2002 and is situated in a highly urban setting surrounded by utilities, but the buffer is dense, very diverse and the trees are generally large. The stream is stable and
prior instabilities associated with the stormwater outfalls near the bottom of the project have arrested. The easement along the lower third of the project on the east side extends about 15 feet
beyond a fence, but this corridor is covered by overlapping sewer and power utilities. Therefore, it exists as mowed grass, because a forested buffer was not practical, but the easement prevents
additional development activities in this area. The project has been reviewed and accepted by EEP stewardship. Assets were removed to account for some segments with single sided easements
and reduced to account for utility crossings. EEP considers the project ready for regulatory closure and proposes the project be closed with 1,729 SWs.
Contingencies
Supplemental planting and invasive control has been successfully completed for the project. EEP considers the project ready for regulatory closure without contingency.
Cross Creek Closeout Report
EEP Project Number 105 March 2014
Cumberland County, North Carolina page 12

Preconstruction Photographs
Cross Creek
EEP Project Number 105
Cumberland County, North Carolina
Year 5 Photos
Closeout Report
March 2014
page 13

Appendix A. Watershed Planning Information
Watershed Characteristic Overview
The Cross Creek stream restoration project is located within the City of Fayetteville and includes
portions of Cross Creek and Little Cross Creek. It is located within HUC 03030004100050, the
Cross and Little Cross Creek watershed, which is listed as a Targeted Local Watershed (TLW) in
the 2009 Cape Fear River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP) plan (2009 Cape Fear RBRP) as
well as the 2001 RBRP. Currently, EEP has two other projects in this TLW.
The 2012 NCDWR 303(d) List identifies Cross Creek, UT at Cross Creek POTW and Little Cross
Creek as impaired water for Aquatic Life due to Fair Bioclassification for Benthic
Macroinvertebrate populations or Low Dissolved Oxygen. Approximately 2 percent of this TLW
is designated as Significant Natural Heritage Area (SNHA), including the Bonnie Doone Natural
Area which is rated as Very High (the second highest collective rating). In addition, there are 19
identified Natural Heritage Element Occurrences (NHEOs) and approximately 5 percent of this
TLW is classified as managed/conserved area. There are no High Quality Waters (HQWs) or
Outstanding Resource Waters (ORWs) found in this TLW. The TLW area is approximately 2
percent agricultural, approximately 24 percent impervious and has 46 percent non - forested buffer
area. Almost 50 percent of the waterbodies within this TLW are classified as water supply.
Links to Watershed Goals and Objectives
The project involves restoration along two stream reaches in a highly urban landscape. These
streams were previously straightened and their floodplains filled. As a result, downcutting has
occurred and created an unstable stream system that has no access to its floodplain. The riparian
buffer was also removed further destabilizing the channels. The restoration of these stream
reaches will provide a stable channel with the capacity to transport sediment load and manage
streamflow, provide access to the floodplain and improve habitat.
This watershed is experiencing impacts from urban stressors including bank erosion and
sedimentation from altered hydrology, degraded water quality from urban debris /trash and
stormwater as well as evidence of excessive nutrients. Though TLW specific goals are not
specified in the 2009 Cape Fear RBRP, priorities for this watershed are similar to CU -wide goals
which include management of stormwater /runoff and reduction of sediment inputs from
deforestation and development activities. The establishment of a riparian buffer, improved
connection to the floodplain and stabilization of the stream bed and banks will contribute to
watershed goals by reducing impacts from stormwater, including the removal of nutrients, and
reducing sediment inputs into the stream.
Goldsboro Housing Authority
EEP Project Number 145
Wayne County, North Carolina
Watershed Summary
There are two additional EEP Tier 1 mitigation projects within this TLW. Blounts Creek, which
is located south of the Cross Creek site, is a stream project that includes 8,000 feet of stream
preservation. Tarlton Swamp, which is located north of the Cross Creek site, is a stream and
wetland project with over 4,000 feet of stream restoration, enhancement and preservation as well
as 9 acres of wetland restoration and enhancement. In addition, there are five Clean Water
Management Trust Fund projects and one 319 Grant funded project in this TLW.
Closeout Report
March 2014
page 14
HARNETT a
Wires cr�k Lwa
. ., ® r:
= Great Coharie CreekLVJ
•
_ CUMBERLAND
C�
Leek
HOKE
f
SAMPSON
v
1
Legend
.
• EEP Projects tier 1)2014 CIosamts
• EEPPrg.ds(fierl)
BLADEN
Agicutturai BMPS)2a13)
ROBESON •
♦ 319 Projects
G MTFSites e
�...
EEP Local Watershed Plans
-
EEPTargeted Loeal Watersheds
N
A EEP 2014 Project Closeout o s
r
s 12 -�
QCatalog llntts yi{E
Cross C reek (Cape Fear 03030004)
vMlles "^
cournr Boundaries
5
Rer. 30J an2014
Closeout Report
March 2014
page 14

Appendix B. Land Ownership and Protection
SITE PROTECTION INSTRUMENT
The land required for the construction, management, and stewardship of this
mitigation project includes a portion of the following parcel:
The conservation easement is available at the county register of deeds office or at the
link below:
http: / /www.nceep. net /GIS_ DATA / Cross %20Creek %20 %23105 %20(WRP) /PROPERTY/ 105
_CrossCreek.pdf
Goldsboro Housing Authority
EEP Project Number 145
Wayne County, North Carolina
Appendix C. Project Permits
RECEIVED
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS MAR 2.4 2003
WILMINGTON DISTRICT NG 1METLnNOs
M81ORATION
Action Id. 200300515 County: Cumberland Qoad: Fayetteville
GENERAL PERMIT (REGIONAL AND NATIONWIDE) VERIFICATION
Property owner: NC Wetlands Restarabon Program
Alta: Jason. Guilty
Address: 1619 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1619
Telephone No: (919) 733 -5208
Zone: 17 UTM: North 3882100 East: 692244
St., and Location of Property (water6odv. Highway na arr uunrher, tawa,. etc.): Site is located ru Cross Creek and
Little Cruse Creek, off Martin Luther King Freeway, between Murchison Read and Bragg Boulevard, h Fayetteville,
Cumberland. County, North Caroli—
D— ription or Activity: Restoration of 2,D65 linear feet of Cteas Creekand Little Crass Creel,
Applicable Law: 4R Section 404 (Clean Wow Act, 33 U.S.C. 1344)
(cheek all that apply) Scction 10 (River and Harbaxs Act of 1899)
Authorization: Nationwide Permit Number 27
Your work is aurb.tims] by this Regional General (RGP) or Nationwide Permit (NWP) provided it is
accomplished in strict aecurdauce with the attached conditions and your submitted plans. If your activity Is
subject 10 Sectian 404 (if Section 404 block above is cheeked), before bcgianmg . work you must also recsivc a Section
401 water quality certification firm the N.C, Division of Envimmmental Management, telephone [phone]. For
any activity within the twenty coastal counties, before begbating work you must contact the N.C. Division of Coastal
Management, telephone [phone].
Please read and carefully comply with the attacked conditions of the RGP or NWF. Any violation of the condifions of
the RGP or the MVP referenced above may subject the peominm to a swp work order, a restoration order, aadlor
appropriate legal action
This Deparunem of the Army RGP or NWP venfrcatiou does curt aelieve the permitorc of the responsibility to obtain any
other required Federal, State, or local approvala'permits. The pomaittee may need to contact appropriate State and local
agencies before beginning work.
If there are any questions regarding this authorteaLou or any of the ernditicos of the General Permit or Nationwide
Permit, pleas, coaled the Corps Regulatory Official specified below:
Date: March 20 2003 ...,�
Carps Regulatory Official: Telephone No,; (911) 2Sl -497r
Expiration Date of Verlffcattan; Mamh 2n 2065
SURVEY PLATS, FIELD SKETCH, WETLAND DELINEATION FORMS, PROJECT PLANS, ETC., MUST BE
ATTACH r:n TO THE FILE COPY OF THIS FORM, IF REQUIRED OR AVAILABLE.
ce—reaass,
a—a -
Closeout Report
March 2014
page 15
Site Protection
Deed Book &
Acreage
Grantor
County
Instrument
Page Number
protected
Conservation
Illa C. Haire, widow
Cumberland
6552/861
0.050
Easement
Mt. Sinai Foundation,
Cumberland
Conservation
6583/324
0.510
Inc.
Easement
Conservation
City of Fayetteville
Cumberland
6598/745
4.060
Easement
W. Joshua Haire and
Cumberland
Conservation
6608/618
0.040
L'Tanya Haire
Easement
The conservation easement is available at the county register of deeds office or at the
link below:
http: / /www.nceep. net /GIS_ DATA / Cross %20Creek %20 %23105 %20(WRP) /PROPERTY/ 105
_CrossCreek.pdf
Goldsboro Housing Authority
EEP Project Number 145
Wayne County, North Carolina
Appendix C. Project Permits
RECEIVED
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS MAR 2.4 2003
WILMINGTON DISTRICT NG 1METLnNOs
M81ORATION
Action Id. 200300515 County: Cumberland Qoad: Fayetteville
GENERAL PERMIT (REGIONAL AND NATIONWIDE) VERIFICATION
Property owner: NC Wetlands Restarabon Program
Alta: Jason. Guilty
Address: 1619 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1619
Telephone No: (919) 733 -5208
Zone: 17 UTM: North 3882100 East: 692244
St., and Location of Property (water6odv. Highway na arr uunrher, tawa,. etc.): Site is located ru Cross Creek and
Little Cruse Creek, off Martin Luther King Freeway, between Murchison Read and Bragg Boulevard, h Fayetteville,
Cumberland. County, North Caroli—
D— ription or Activity: Restoration of 2,D65 linear feet of Cteas Creekand Little Crass Creel,
Applicable Law: 4R Section 404 (Clean Wow Act, 33 U.S.C. 1344)
(cheek all that apply) Scction 10 (River and Harbaxs Act of 1899)
Authorization: Nationwide Permit Number 27
Your work is aurb.tims] by this Regional General (RGP) or Nationwide Permit (NWP) provided it is
accomplished in strict aecurdauce with the attached conditions and your submitted plans. If your activity Is
subject 10 Sectian 404 (if Section 404 block above is cheeked), before bcgianmg . work you must also recsivc a Section
401 water quality certification firm the N.C, Division of Envimmmental Management, telephone [phone]. For
any activity within the twenty coastal counties, before begbating work you must contact the N.C. Division of Coastal
Management, telephone [phone].
Please read and carefully comply with the attacked conditions of the RGP or NWF. Any violation of the condifions of
the RGP or the MVP referenced above may subject the peominm to a swp work order, a restoration order, aadlor
appropriate legal action
This Deparunem of the Army RGP or NWP venfrcatiou does curt aelieve the permitorc of the responsibility to obtain any
other required Federal, State, or local approvala'permits. The pomaittee may need to contact appropriate State and local
agencies before beginning work.
If there are any questions regarding this authorteaLou or any of the ernditicos of the General Permit or Nationwide
Permit, pleas, coaled the Corps Regulatory Official specified below:
Date: March 20 2003 ...,�
Carps Regulatory Official: Telephone No,; (911) 2Sl -497r
Expiration Date of Verlffcattan; Mamh 2n 2065
SURVEY PLATS, FIELD SKETCH, WETLAND DELINEATION FORMS, PROJECT PLANS, ETC., MUST BE
ATTACH r:n TO THE FILE COPY OF THIS FORM, IF REQUIRED OR AVAILABLE.
ce—reaass,
a—a -
Closeout Report
March 2014
page 15

APPENDIX - D Debit Ledger
Mitigation Project Name Cross Creek
EEP IMS ID 105
River Basin CAPE FEAR
Cataloging Unit 03030004
Applied Credit Ratios: 1.20879:1 1.5:1 2.5:1 5:1 1:1 3:1 2:1 5:1 1:1 3:1 2:1 5:1 1:1 3:1 2:1 5:1
Information from EEP Debit Ledger dated 3/12/2014
E
m ' o
E
E
g c
m o
E
m m
m
`: m
`o
=
o
m e o
m E
0
N
c
N C
m
n N
_a «
N
_a
_a c
10
_a d
N
o
c w
C
c
c
d
C
N N
N d
c
m
N N
cn
N
L
c
c
d
a`
�' y
o
d' U
d' t
c
�+
o
O N
z�
O U
z
O L
z c
w
O d
za
10 d
o�
10 U
o
0 S
M
o c
0 d
oa
W
W
W
W
U
U
U W
U
Beginning Balance (feet and acres)
2,090.00
Beginning Balance (mitigation credits)
1,729.00
NCDOT Pre -EEP Debits (feet and acres): Not Applicable
EEP Debits (feet and acres):
DWQ Permit No
USACE Action IDs
Impact Project Name
NCDOT TIP X -0002D -
1998 -0337
1993 -00197
Fayetteville Bypass
1,387.69
NCDOT TIP R -2562A -
1999 -0339
1993 -02820
NC 87 Widening
702.31
Remaining Balance (feet and acres)
0.00
Remaining Balance (mitigation credits)
0.00
Information from EEP Debit Ledger dated 3/12/2014