20160981 Ver 1_Year 4 Montoring Report_20221028

Laserfiche Forms has encountered a problem.
An unexpected error has occurred. [LFF502-Unexpected Error]

3600 Glenwood Avenue, Suite 100
Raleigh, NC 27612
Corporate Headquarters
6575 West Loop South, Suite 300
Bellaire, TX 77401
Main: 713.520.5400
October 28, 2022
Samantha Dailey
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Division
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587
UzzleYear 4Monitoring Report(SAW-2016-01973)
Samantha,
Please find attached the UzzleYear 4MonitoringReport.In Year 4, all fourfixed vegetation plots met the
320 stems per acre success criteria. Sevenbankfull events were recorded on the stage recorder on LP1,
marking the fourth year of recorded bankfull events. Cross Sections 1 and 2 showed some bank erosion;
however,RES performed a supplemental livestake planting and will continue planting more shadeadapted
livestakes to establish stability along these banks. Groundwater Well 1 recorded a 2% hydroperiod and
Groundwater Well 2 recorded a 21% hydroperiod. Groundwater data is only shown from April 7th until
September 20th due to both wells being destroyed from an animal in early 2022. New wells have been
installedto replace the destroyed ones; the wells were moved to a new location very close to their original
locations. Afew small areas of re-sprouted Chinese privet observed in 2019 in the lower section of the
easement were treated in early 2020 and again in Mayof 2021 and will continue as needed throughout the
monitoring period.Year 4visual assessments of the easement boundary found no encroachments or
evidence of cattle entry. A small repair was being performed in the utility easement adjacent to the project
in mid-2020, however, there was no sign of excess sediment runoff or concentrated flow through the
riparian area. Highway 70 expansion is currently occurring along the easement boundaries. RES is
monitoring the easement on a regular basis to ensure that no encroachment or issues are impacting our
easement as construction is occurring.
RES is requesting a 5% stream credit release(143.80SMUs)for the completion of the Year 4monitoring
report. RES is requesting a 10% stream credit release (287.60 SMUs) forthe bankfull event performance
standard being met. Please see enclosed the credit release timeline and an updated credit ledger.
On December 1, 2021, the IRT provided comments on the Uzzle Year 3Monitoring Report.Please find those
comments below with RES’ responses in blue.
Todd Tugwell, USACE:
1. Cross sections 1 and 2 show some signs of migration and/or incision and wereaddressed in the report.
Please address these conditions in more detail insubsequent reports and include photographs of the areas
in question. Werethese conditions noted in other areas than just at the two cross-sections?
res.us

Further details on XS 1 & 2 have been added in Section 1.7 under stream geomorphology and pictures can
be found in Appendix B. These conditions were not noted in areas outside the area of XS 1 & 2.
Erin Davis, NCDWR:
1. What species were used in the early 2021 supplemental planting effort?
Species included in the supplemental planting were willow oak (Quercus phellos), water oak (Quercus nigra),
overcup oak (Quercus lyrata), American sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), and river birch (Betula nigra).
2. I appreciate the inclusion of the easement boundary photos.
Noted.
3. The GW1 low hydroperiod is concerning. I’m glad there is a plan to collect additional data if needed.
RES expects the hydroperiods to increase in future monitoring years as the site adjusts. Additional detail on
GW1 has been included in Section 1.7 under wetland hydrology.
4. Figure 2 CCPV – It’s helpful for review if items discussed in the report narrative are shown/called-out on
the CCPV (e.g. invasive treatment completed/proposed, supplemental planting completed/proposed,
streambank erosion monitoring/repaired, other SPAs & VPAs).
Figure 2 has been updated to include supplemental planting in 2021, supplemental livestakes, and invasive
treatment completed.
Thank you,

Jamey Mceachran

2

Date
6/6/2019
8/19/20192/25/202012/1/2021
11/20/2020
Actual Release
4
Date
Varies
Projected
12/31/202212/31/202312/31/202412/31/202512/31/2026
Release Date
NANANA
Coastal
Credits
NANANA
15%15%10%15%20%10%15%
Releases
Scheduled
Non-Forested Wetland
Johnston030202012/1/201910/28/2022
NA
Credits
Coastal
Wetland
Non-Riparian
Non-Forested
NA
Riparian
Non-RiparianNon-Riverine
County:8-Digit HUC:Year Project Instituted:Date Prepared:
NA
Forested Wetland Credits
RiparianRiverine
Riparian
Non-Riverine
Forested Wetland Credits
NA
5%5%
15%15%10%10%15%15%10%
Riverine
Riparian
Releases
Scheduled
Current and Future Credit Releases
Cold Cold
WaterWater
Cool Cool
WaterWater
Wilmington District Mitigation Bank Credit Release Schedule
Total Potential Credits
Stream Credits
2,8762,876
Warm Warm
WaterStream CreditsWater
431.40431.40287.60287.60287.60143.80287.60143.80287.60287.60
1725.60
5%5%
10%
15%15%10%10%10%10%10%60%
Releases
Scheduled
Uzzle Stream Mitigation ProjectEBX-Neuse ISAW-2016-019732016-0981v1
1, 2 Signature of Wilmington District Official Approving Credit Release
4
3
Credit Classification
2 (Year 0/As-Built)
3 (Year 1 Monitoring)4 (Year 2 Monitoring)5 (Year 3 Monitoring)6 (Year 4 Monitoring)7 (Year 5 Monitoring)8 (Year 6 Monitoring)9 (Year 7 Monitoring)
Potential Credits from As-Built Survey
Potential Credits from Mitigation Plan
Credit Release Milestone
Stream Bankfull Standard
Total Credits Release to Date
1 (Bank/Site Establishment)
Project Name:Sponsor Name:USACE Action ID:NCDWQ Action ID:Contingencies (if any): None 1 - The first credit release milestone is based on the potential credits stated in the approved
mitigation plan.2 - The first credit release shall occur upon establishment of the mitigation bank, which includes the following criteria: 1) Execution of the MBI or UMBI by the
Sponsor and the USACE; 2) Approval of the final Mitigation Plan; 3) Mitigation bank site must be secured; 4) Delivery of the financial assurances described in the Mitigation
Plan; 5) Recordation of the long-term protection mechanism and title opinion acceptable to the USACE; 6) 404 permit verification for construction of the site, if required.3
- The second credit release is based on the credit totals from the as-built survey, and may differ slightly from the credit totals stated in the mitigation plan.4 - A 15% reserve of
credits to be held back until the bankfull event performance standard has been met.

UZZLE STREAM
MITIGATION SITE
JOHNSTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA

SAW-2016-01973

YEAR 4 MONITORING REPORT

Provided by:

Bank Sponsor: EBX-Neuse I, LLC,
An entity of Resource Environmental Solutions
3600 Glenwood Avenue, Suite 100
Raleigh, NC 27612
919-209-1056

October 2022

Table of Contents
1.0 Project Summary ..................................................................................................................................... 2
1.1 Project Location and Description .............................................................................................. 2
1.2 Project Goals and Objectives..................................................................................................... 2
1.3 Project Success Criteria ............................................................................................................. 3
Stream Success Criteria ................................................................................................................... 3
Vegetation Success Criteria ............................................................................................................. 4
1.4 Project Components .................................................................................................................. 4
1.5 Stream Design/Approach .......................................................................................................... 5
1.6 Construction and As-Built Conditions ...................................................................................... 6
1.7 Year 4 Monitoring Performance (MY4) .................................................................................... 6
Vegetation ........................................................................................................................................ 6
Stream Geomorphology ................................................................................................................... 6
Stream Hydrology ............................................................................................................................ 7
Wetland Hydrology .......................................................................................................................... 7
2.0 Methods................................................................................................................................................... 7
3.0 References ............................................................................................................................................... 8
Appendix A: Background Tables
Figure 1: Site Location Map
Table 1: Project Mitigation Assets and Components
Table 2: Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3: Project Contacts Table
Table 4: Project Background Information Table
Appendix B: Visual Assessment Data
Figure 2: Current Conditions Plan View
Vegetation Plot Photos
Monitoring Device Photos
General Monitoring Photos
Stream and Vegetation Problem Areas
Appendix C: Vegetation Plot Data
Table 5: Planted Species Summary
Table 6: Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary
Table 7. Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot Species
Appendix D: Stream Measurement and Geomorphology Data
Table 8. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Table 9. Cross Section Morphology Data Table
Cross-Section Plots

Appendix E: Hydrology Data
Table 10. 2022 Rainfall Summary
Table 11. Documentation of Geomorphically Significant Flow Events
Table 12. 2021 Max Hydroperiod
Table 13. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results
MY4 Groundwater Hydrographs
Uzzle 1 Year 4 Monitoring Report
Stream Mitigation Site October 2022

1.0 Project Summary
1.1 Project Location and Description
The Uzzle Stream Mitigation Site (the Site), a component of the Neu-Con Stream and Wetland Umbrella
Mitigation Bank, is located in Johnston County, North Carolina, approximately six miles southeast of
Clayton. Water quality stressors currently affecting the Site include livestock production, agricultural
production, and improper flow dynamics due to impervious surface runoff. The Site presents 5,897 linear
feet of stream restoration and enhancement generating 2,876 Stream Mitigation Units (SMU) along Little
Poplar Creek and two unnamed tributaries.

The Site is located in the Neuse River Basin within Cataloging Unit 03020201, TLW 03020201100040,
part of the Neuse Regional Watershed Planning (RWP) area, and the Wake-Johnston Collaborative Local
Watershed Plan (WJCLWP). As part of the RWP and WJCLWP, the Site is located in a sub-watershed
identified as High Priority for stream corridor restoration due to current surrounding land use, hydrologic
impairment due to stormwater runoff, and projected impact from highway development.

Originally, consisting of pastureland and wooded areas, the Site’s total easement area is 27.3 acres within
the overall drainage area of 1,312 acres. Grazing livestock historically had access to all stream reaches
within the Site and the lack of riparian buffer vegetation, deep-rooted vegetation, and unstable channel
characteristics contributed to the degradation of stream banks throughout the Site. Prior to restoration work,
erosion and aggradation were especially prominent at the upstream end of the Site where Little Poplar Creek
enters via a culvert under HWY US-70.

The stream design approach for the Site was to combine the analog method of natural channel design with
analytical methods to evaluate stream flows and hydraulic performance of the channel and floodplain. The
analog method involves the use of a reference reach, or “template” stream adjacent to, nearby, or previously
in the same location as the design reach. The template parameters of the analog reach are replicated to create
the features of the design reach. The analog approach is useful when watershed and boundary conditions
are similar between the design and analog reaches. Hydraulic geometry was developed using analytical
methods to identify the design discharge.

The Site will be monitored on a regular basis throughout the seven-year post-construction monitoring
period, or until performance standards are met. Upon approval for closeout by the Interagency Review
Team (IRT), the Site will be transferred to the North Carolina Wildlife Habitat Foundation (NCWHF). The
NCWHF will be responsible for periodic inspection of the Site to ensure that restrictions required in the
Conservation Easement, or the deed restriction document(s) are upheld. Endowment funds required to
uphold easement and deed restrictions will be negotiated prior to site transfer to the responsible party.

This site is co-located with a DWR Riparian Buffer Bank. The width of the riparian restoration and
enhancement areas where buffer or nutrient offset credits are generated will begin at the most landward
limit of the top of bank and extend landward to a distance of at least 50 feet perpendicular to the streams,
then again 151-200 feet from the top of bank. There will be no overlapping buffer crediting areas with
stream crediting areas between 51-150 feet from the top of bank.

1.2 Project Goals and Objectives
Through the comprehensive analysis of the Site’s maximum functional uplift using the Stream Functions
Pyramid Framework, specific attainable goals and objectives will be realized by the Site. These goals
Uzzle 2 Year 4 Monitoring Report
Stream Mitigation Site October 2022

address the excess nutrient input, streambank erosion, and sedimentation that were identified as major
watershed stressors in the 2010 Neuse RBRP.

The Site goals are:
• Improve water transport from watershed to the channel in a non-erosive manner in a stable
channel;
• Improve water quality within the restored channel reach and downstream water sources by
reducing sediment and nutrient loads, and increasing dissolved oxygen levels;
• Improve flood flow attenuation on-site and downstream by allowing for overbank flows and
connection to the active floodplain; and
• Improve ecological processes by reducing water temperature, improving terrestrial and
aquatic habitat, and restoring a native plant community.

The Site objectives to address the goals are:
• Design and construct stable stream channels with appropriate pattern, dimension, and profile
based on reference reach conditions;
• Permanently exclude livestock from stream channels and their associated buffers;
• Add in-stream structures and bank stabilization measures to protect restored and enhanced
streams;
• Reduce bank height ratios and increase entrenchment ratios to reference reach conditions;
• Maintain and improve forested riparian buffers to at least 50 feet on both sides of the channel
along all reaches with a coastal plain hardwood riparian community;
• Treat exotic invasive species; and
• Establish a permanent conservation easement on the Site.

Limitations to achieving these watershed goals arise by remaining constrained to our Site boundaries. While
we are restoring the habitat and streams to stable and effective conditions that achieve our goals within the
Site parcels, we are unable to influence the effect of poor riparian buffers and livestock impact in other
areas within the watershed. However, through this Site’s connectivity with other projects in the watershed
and responsible stewardship of current restoration projects, overall watershed functionality and health will
improve to meet the RBRP goals.

1.3 Project Success Criteria
The Site follows the USACE 2003 Stream Mitigation Guidelines, and the “Wilmington District Stream and
Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update” dated October 24, 2016. Cross section and vegetation plot data
will be collected in Years 0, 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7. Stream and wetland hydrology data and visual monitoring
will be reported annually.

Stream Success Criteria
Four bankfull flow events must be documented within the seven-year monitoring period. The bankfull
events must occur in separate years. Otherwise, the stream monitoring will continue until four bankfull
events have been documented in separate years.
There should be little change in as-built cross-sections. If changes do take place, they should be evaluated
to determine if they represent a movement toward a less stable condition (for example downcutting or
erosion) or are minor changes that represent an increase in stability (for example settling, vegetative
changes, deposition along the banks, or decrease in width/depth ratio). Cross sections shall be classified
using the Rosgen stream classification method, and all monitored cross-sections should fall within the
quantitative parameters defined for channels of the design stream type. Bank height ratio shall not exceed
Uzzle 3 Year 4 Monitoring Report
Stream Mitigation Site October 2022

1.2, and the entrenchment ratio shall be no less than 2.2 within restored reaches. Channel stability should
be demonstrated through a minimum of four bankfull events documented in the seven-year monitoring
period.
Digital images will be used to subjectively evaluate channel aggradation or degradation, bank erosion,
success of riparian vegetation, and effectiveness of erosion control measures. Longitudinal images should
not indicate the absence of developing bars within the channel or an excessive increase in channel depth.
Lateral images should not indicate excessive erosion or continuing degradation of the banks over time. A
series of images over time should indicate successional maturation of riparian vegetation.
Vegetation Success Criteria
Specific and measurable success criteria for plant density within the riparian buffers on the Site will follow
IRT Guidance. Vegetation monitoring plots will be a minimum of 0.02 acres in size, and cover a minimum
of two percent of the planted area and there will be a minimum of four plots. Vegetation monitoring will
st
occur between July 1 and leaf drop. The interim measures of vegetative success for the site will be the
survival of at least planted three-year old trees per acre at the end of Year 3, 260 five-year old trees
at the end of Year 5 that are at least 7 feet tall, and the final vegetative success criteria will be 210 trees
per acre with an average height of 10 feet at the end of Year 7. Height measurement success criteria do
not apply to the understory trees or shrubs. Volunteer trees will be counted, identified to species, and
included in the yearly monitoring reports, but will not be counted towards the success criteria of total
planted stems. Additionally, no species may account for over 50 percent of total stems at a given plot.
1.4 Project Components
The Site is comprised of two easement sections, separated by a newly built ford crossing along Little Poplar
Creek. The stream reaches include Little Poplar Creek (LP1, LP2, LP4, LP5, and LP7) and two unnamed
tributaries (LP3 and LP6), split into seven reaches by treatment type and location. The stream mitigation
components are summarized below. Mitigation credits presented below are based upon the Approved
Mitigation Plan. The Project is co-located with a DWR Riparian Buffer Bank. The width of the riparian
enhancement areas where buffer credits are generated begin at the most landward limit of the top of bank
and extend landward to a distance of at least 50 feet perpendicular to the streams and from 151 – 200 feet.
The buffer from 50 – 150 feet is used to generate credit using the non-standard buffer credit calculation.
Therefore, there is no overlap of buffer crediting areas and stream crediting areas.
Uzzle 4 Year 4 Monitoring Report
Stream Mitigation Site October 2022

Mitigation Plan Credits
Pre-Design
Mitigation StationingMitigation Base
ReachConstruction Length
Type (Design) Ratio SMUs
Length (LF) (LF)
LP1 Restoration 1+24 to 07+53 766 629 1: 1 629
LP2 Enhancement II 07+53 to 23+72 1,619 1,619 1 : 2.5 648
LP3 Enhancement II 0+50 to 1+92 142 142 1 : 2.5 57
LP4 Enhancement II 23+72 to 29+31 559 559 1 : 2.5 223
LP5 Enhancement II 29+31 to 36+45 714 714 1 : 2.5 286
LP5 Enhancement II 37+06 to 52+50 1,544 1,544 1 : 2.5 618
LP6 Enhancement II 0+22 to 4+00 378 378 1 : 2.5 151
LP7 Enhancement II 52+50 to 55+62 312 312 1 : 2.5 125
Totals 6,034 5,897 2,736
Credit Loss in Required Buffer -150
Credit Gain for Additional Buffer 289
Total Adjusted SMUs 2,876
*SMUs are adjusted in accordance with Section XI(C)- “Procedures to Calculate Credits for Non-standard Buffer Widths”,
published in the October 2016 Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update. A detailed description
of the methodology and calculations is described in the Mitigation Plan.

1.5 Stream Design/Approach
Stream restoration and enhancement efforts along the tributaries at the Uzzle Stream Mitigation Site were
accomplished through analyses of geomorphic conditions and watershed characteristics. The design
approach applied a combination of analytical and reference reach-based design methods that meet
objectives commensurate with both ecological and geomorphic improvements. For Reach LP1, natural
design concepts were applied and verified through rigorous engineering analyses and modeling. The
objective of this approach is to build a geomorphically stable channel that provides habitat improvements
and ties into the existing landscape.

The Uzzle Stream Mitigation Site has been broken into the following reaches:

Reach LP1 (Priority I Restoration)
Reach beginning downstream of US HWY 70 at the northern project limits flowing south to Reach LP2.
Wooded active pasture was located adjacent to the reach. Priority I Restoration was performed along Reach
LP1 to address channel degradation and bank erosion caused by cattle access and high energy storm flows
from the upstream culvert. The design approach included meandering the channel within the natural valley,
aligning the channel with the upstream culvert, backfilling the existing stream, reconnecting the channel to
its floodplain, and excluding livestock from the stream. A minimum 50-foot buffer was established and
planted with native riparian vegetation. Woody debris and grade control structures were installed along the
bed to improve in-stream habitat and stability. The watershed that drains to the upper end of the project is
approximately 1,124 acres, and land use is primarily agricultural. The drainage area at the downstream end
of the reach is 1,174 acres.

Uzzle 5 Year 4 Monitoring Report
Stream Mitigation Site October 2022

Reaches LP2, LP3, LP4, LP5, LP6, and LP7 (Enhancement II)
Treatment of these reaches included treatment of invasive vegetation, debris removal, pocketed areas of
supplemental planting, and livestock exclusion. A minimum 50-foot buffer was established along the reach
and was planted with native riparian vegetation where existing vegetation was non-native or limited density.
The drainage area at the downstream end of the reaches is 1,312 acres. A rock ford crossing was constructed
at the crossing in the middle of Reach LP5. Both Reaches LP5 and LP6 right bank have less than 50 feet
buffers, but they run parallel to a 50 feet utility easement corridor that is fully vegetated maintained
herbaceous cover with some foot paths.
1.6 Construction and As-Built Conditions
Stream construction and planting was completed in May 2019. The Uzzle Mitigation Site was built to design
plans and guidelines. Project credits are based on design centerline, but as-built stream lengths are shown
on Table 1. The as-built survey was included in the Baseline Monitoring Report and includes a redlined
version.
1.7 Year 4 Monitoring Performance (MY4)
The Uzzle Year 3 Monitoring (MY4) activities were performed in February and September 2022. All Year
4 monitoring data is presented below and in the appendices. The Site is on track to meet vegetation and
stream interim success criteria.
Vegetation
Monitoring of the four permanent vegetation plots was completed during September 2022. Vegetation data
are in Appendix C, associated photos are in Appendix B, and plot locations are in Appendix B. MY4
monitoring data indicates that all plots are exceeding the interim success criteria of planted stems per
acre. Planted stem densities ranged from 405 to 647 planted stems per acre with a mean of 516 planted
stems per acre across the permanent plots. A total of 11 species were documented within the plots.
Volunteer species were noted in three plots, with an average of 132 stems per acre. The average stem height
in the vegetation plots was 7.3 feet. A few willows live stakes were added to Vegetation Plot 1 in the wet
area in March 2020.
Visual assessment of vegetation outside of the monitoring plots indicates that the herbaceous vegetation is
becoming well established throughout the project. RES performed supplemental planting in 2021 of about
40 bareroot trees, the species included willow oak (Quercus phellos), water oak (Quercus nigra), overcup
oak (Quercus lyrata), American sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), and river birch (Betula nigra). MY4
visual assessments of the easement boundary found no encroachments or evidence of cattle entry. A small
repair was being performed in the utility easement adjacent to the project in mid-2020, however, there was
no sign of excess sediment runoff or concentrated flow through the riparian area. Highway 70 expansion is
currently occurring along the easement boundaries. RES is monitoring the easement on a regular basis to
ensure that no encroachment or issues are impacting our easement as construction is occurring. A few small
areas of re-sprouted Chinese privet observed in 2019 in the lower section of the easement were treated in
early 2020 and again in May of 2021 and will continue as needed throughout the monitoring period.
Stream Geomorphology
Geomorphology data was not required for MY4. Monitoring results from MY3 are included in Appendix
D.Summary tables and cross section plots from MY3 are in Appendix D and normal monitoring activities
will resume in 2023 (MY5). Overall the baseline cross sections and profile on the restoration reach
Uzzle 6 Year 4 Monitoring Report
Stream Mitigation Site October 2022

relatively match the design. The cross sections on the Enhancement II reaches were included to monitor the
changes in dimension post cattle exclusion and riparian planting. Last year’s conditions show that shear
stress and velocities have been reduced for all restoration/enhancement reaches. All reaches were designed
as very coarse sand bed channels and remain classified as very coarse sand bed channels post-construction.

Visual assessment of the stream channel was performed to document signs of instability, such as eroding
banks, structural instability, or excessive sedimentation. The channel is transporting sediment as designed
and will continue to be monitored for aggradation and degradation. Cross Sections 1 and 2 showed signs of
bank erosion along the right bank in MY3. Cross Section 2 also had a Bank Height Ratio of 1.3 in MY3. It
appears that the initial channel erosion occurred between MY1 and MY2 but MY2 and MY3 is virtually
unchanged. Visual assessment still appears that no bed incision has occurred while there appears to still
have slight bank erosion. MY5 cross sections will tell us more about the channel. Photos of these areas can
be found in Appendix B. RES believes this erosion was caused by a log sill directly upstream of Cross
Section 1 that was angled slightly towards the point bar and by the low survival rate of the livestakes planted
during construction. RES has not noted bank erosion elsewhere in the stream besides around Cross Sections
1 and 2 and believes this is a situational issue due to the angle of the log sill upstream. RES performed a
supplemental livestake planting of Black Willow (Salix nigra) and Silky Dogwood (Cornus amomum) in
March 2022 which included these two erosion areas. RES also corrected the angle of the of the log sill
which photos can be shown in Appendix B. Continued planting of more shade adapted livestake species
will be attempted in the future if necessary. These areas will be monitored closely and if conditions worsen
in the following monitoring years RES will perform additional adaptive management as needed.

Stream Hydrology
The stage recorder on LP1 recorded seven bankfull events in MY4. The highest event was 0.86 feet above
the top of bank and occurred in August 2022. This year marks the fourth year in which, there have been at
least four bankfull events in four separate years of monitoring. The gauge location can be found on Figure
2, a photo is in Appendix B, and the hydrology data is in Appendix E.

Wetland Hydrology
Two groundwater wells monitor wetland hydrology in the existing wetland on site. Groundwater Well 1
recorded a 2% hydroperiod and Groundwater Well 2 recorded a 21% hydroperiod. Groundwater data is
thth
only shown from April 7 until September 20due to both wells being destroyed from an animal in early
2022. New wells have been installed to replace the destroyed ones; the wells were moved to a new location
very close to their original locations. The original location of GW1 appeared to be a microtopographic high
spot and very close to the stream channel and experiencing a shoulder effect. RES expects the hydroperiods
to increase in future monitoring years as the site adjusts. However, this was a historically dry growing
season and RES had limited amount of data due to the wells being destroyed. However, if well 1 continues
to show low hydroperiods, RES will install an additional gauge in the area to see if this is just a localized
issue or a problem with the well installation. Groundwater well locations can be found on Figure 2 and the
data is in Appendix E.

2.0 Methods
Stream monitoring was conducted using a Topcon GTS-312 Total Station. Three-dimensional coordinates
associated with cross-section data were collected in the field (NAD83 State Plane feet FIPS 3200).
®
Morphological data were collected at eight cross-sections. Survey data were imported into CAD, ArcGIS,
®
and Microsoft Excel for data processing and analysis. The stage recorder includes an automatic pressure
transducer flow gauge. The flow gauge was installed within the channel and will record water depth at an
Uzzle 7 Year 4 Monitoring Report
Stream Mitigation Site October 2022

hourly interval. A surveyed elevation was recorded at the bed and top of bank at the stage recorder elevation
to detect bankfull events.

Vegetation success is being monitored at four permanent monitoring plots. Vegetation plot monitoring
follows the CVS-EEP Level 2 Protocol for Recording Vegetation, version 4.2 (Lee et al. 2008) and includes
analysis of species composition and density of planted species. Data are processed using the CVS data entry
tool. In the field, the four corners of each plot were permanently marked with PVC at the origin and metal
conduit at the other corners. Photos of each plot are to be taken from the origin each monitoring year.

Wetland hydrology is monitored to document maintenance of jurisdictional groundwater levels in the
stream restoration area (as requested by NCIRT). This is accomplished with two automatic pressure
transducer gauges (located in groundwater wells) that record daily groundwater levels. One automatic
pressure transducer is installed above ground for use as a barometric reference. Gauges are downloaded
quarterly and wetland hydroperiods are calculated during the growing season. Gauge installation followed
current regulatory guidance. Visual observations of primary and secondary wetland hydrology indicators
are also recorded during quarterly site visits.
3.0 References
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual,
Technical Report Y-87-1. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.

Harman, W., R. Starr, M. Carter, K. Tweedy, M. Clemmons, K. Suggs, C. Miller. 2012. A Function-
Based Framework for Stream Assessment and Restoration Projects. US Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Washington, DC EPA 843-K-12-006.

Lee Michael T., Peet Robert K., Roberts Steven D., and Wentworth Thomas R., 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol
for Recording Vegetation Level. Version 4.2

Peet, R.K., Wentworth, T.S., and White, P.S. (1998), A flexible, multipurpose method for recording
vegetation composition and structure. Castanea 63:262-274

Resource Environmental Solutions (2018). Uzzle Stream Mitigation Site Final Mitigation Plan.

Rosgen, D. (1996), Applied River Morphology, 2nd edition, Wildland Hydrology, Pagosa Springs, CO.

Schafale, M.P. 2012. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina, Third Approximation.
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, NCDENR, Raleigh, NC.

US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), 2003. April 2003 NC Stream Mitigation Guidelines.

USACE. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Atlantic
and Gulf Coastal Plain Region (Version 2.0), ed. J. S. Wakeley, R. W. Lichvar, and C. V. Noble.
ERDC/EL TR-10-20. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center.

USACE. 2016. Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update.
Uzzle 8 Year 4 Monitoring Report
Stream Mitigation Site October 2022

Table 1. Uzzle - Mitigation Assets and Components
Project Credits

Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Uzzle Mitigation Site
Elapsed Time Since grading complete:3 years 5 months
Elapsed Time Since planting complete:3 years 5 months
1
Number of reporting Years:
4
Data Collection Completion or
Activity or DeliverableCompleteDelivery
Mitigation PlanNADec-18
Final Design – Construction PlansNAApr-19
Stream ConstructionNAMay-19
Site PlantingNAMay-19
As-built (Year 0 Monitoring – baseline)May-19Jul-19
Year 1 MonitoringDec-19Dec-19
Supplemental LivestakingNAMar-20
Invasive TreatmentNAMay-20
XS: Sep-20
Year 2 MonitoringOct-20
VP: Sep-20
Invasive TreatmentNAMay-21
XS: June-21
Year 3 MonitoringSep-21
VP: Sep-21
Oct-2
Year 4 MonitoringVP: Sep-22
Year 5 Monitoring
Year 6 Monitoring
Year 7 Monitoring
1 = The number of reports or data points produced excluding the baseline

Table 3. Project Contacts Table
Uzzle Mitigation Site
WK Dickson and Co., Inc. / 720 Corporate Center Dr., Raleigh,
Designer
NC 27607
3 years 5 months
Primary project design POC3 years 5 months
4
Construction Contractor
Construction contractor POCKory Strader [phone]
Matrix East, PLLC / 906 N. Queen St., Suite A, Kinston, NC
Survey Contractor
28501
Survey contractor POCChris Paderick, PLS
H&J Forestry
Planting Contractor
Planting contractor POCMatt Hitch
KBS Earthwork Inc. / 5616 Coble Church Rd., Julian, NC
Seeding Contractor
27283
Contractor point of contactKory Strader [phone]
Green Resource [phone]
Seed Mix Sources
Arborgen [phone]
Nursery Stock Suppliers
VP: Sep-22
RES / 3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100, Raleigh, NC 27612
Monitoring Performers
Stream Monitoring POCRyan Medric [phone]
Vegetation Monitoring POCRyan Medric [phone]

Table 4. Project Background Information
Project NameUzzle
CountyJohnston
Project Area (acres) 27.3
Project Coordinates (latitude and longitude)Latitude: 35.4754 N Longitude: -78.3117 W
Planted Acreage (Acres of Woody Stems Planted)3.6
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic ProvinceCoastal Plain
River BasinNeuse
USGS Hydrologic Unit 14-digit03020201100040
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8-digit03020201
DWR Sub-basin03-04-02
Project Drainage Area (Acres and Square Miles)1,312 ac (2.05 sqmi)
Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area 6%
CGIA Land Use ClassificationForest (49%) Agriculture (28%) Residential/Urban (16%)
Reach Summary Information
Parameters
LP1LP2LP3LP4LP5LP6LP7
Length of reach (linear feet)
62916191425592258378312
Valley confinement (Confined, moderately confined, unconfined)
---------------------
Drainage area (Acres and Square Miles)
112411742312021296421312
Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral
PPIPPIP
NCDWR Water Quality Classification
---------------------
Stream Classification (existing)E5E5G5C5E5G5C5
E5------------------
Stream Classification (proposed)
---------------------
Evolutionary trend (Simon)
FEMA classification AEAEAEAEAEAEAE
Regulatory Considerations
Supporting
ParametersApplicable?Resolved?
Docs?
SAW-2016-
Water of the United States - Section 404YesYes
01973
DWR # 16-
Water of the United States - Section 401YesYes
0981
USFWS
Endangered Species ActYesYes
(Corr. Letter)
SHPO (Corr.
Historic Preservation ActYesYes
Letter)
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA or CAMA)NoN/A
N/A
FEMA Floodplain ComplianceYesYes
No-Rise Cert
Essential Fisheries HabitatNoN/A
N/A

Legend
Conservation Easement
Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri
Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, ©
OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community
Date: 6/25/2019
Figure 1 - Site Location Map
Drawn by: RTM
Uzzle Stream Mitigation Site
©
Checked by: BPB
05001,000
Johnston County, North Carolina
1 inch = 1,000 feet
Feet

Invasive Species
!R
!>
!>
Document Path: R:\\Resgis\\entgis\\Projects\\100141_Uzzle\\MXD\\Monitoring\\MY4\\USACE Figures\\Uzzle MY3 CCPV.mxd

Uzzle MY4Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos

Vegetation Plot 1 (09/20/2022) Vegetation Plot 2 (09/20/2022)

Vegetation Plot 3 (09/20/2022) Vegetation Plot 4 (09/20/2022)

Uzzle MY4 Monitoring Device Photos

Wetland Gauge 1(09/20/2022) Wetland Gauge 2(09/20/2022)

Stage Recorder & Ambient (09/20/2022)

Uzzle MY4General Monitoring Photos

Stream near XS 1 (09/20/2022) Log sill upstream of XS 1 (09/20/2022)

Construction upstream of project (09/20/2022)

Uzzle MY4 Stream and Vegetation Problem Areas
Right bank erosion near XS 1 & 2 (9/1/2021)Livestakes on right bank erosion (03/08/2022)
Livestakes right bank erosion (09/20/2022) Broken 1 (02/09/2022)

Table 2. Planted Species Summary
CommonNameScientificNameTotalStemsPlanted
WaterOak Quercusnigra 1,800
Swamp Chestnut Oak Quercus michauxii 1,100
Sycamore Platanusoccidentalis 900
Bald Cypress Taxodium distichum 800
WillowOak Quercusphellos 700
Blackgum Nyssa sylvatica 700
Green Ash Fraxinus pennsylvanica 600
Silky Dogwood Cornus amomum 600
River Birch Betula nigra 500
OvercupOak Quercus lyrata 400
Tuliptree Liriodendron tulipifera 400
Flowering Dogwood Cornus florida 400
Buttonbush Cephalanthus occidentalis 300
Persimmon Diospyros virginiana 300
American Hazelnut Corylus americana 300
Total
9,800
Table 3. Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary
Wetland/Stream Vegetation Totals
(per acre)
Success Avergae
Planted Volunteer Total
Plot #Criteria Stem Height
Stems/AcreStems/AcreStems/Acre
Met?(ft)
1 405405809Yes4.8
2 5260526Yes10.4
3 48681567Yes5.7
4 64740688Yes7.7
Project Avg516132647Yes7.3

Table 4. Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot Species

Elevation (ft)

Elevation (ft)

Elevation (ft)

Elevation (ft)

Elevation (ft)

Elevation (ft)

Elevation (ft)

Elevation (ft)

Table 10. 2022 Rainfall Summary
Normal Limits
Clayton Station
MonthAverage
Precipitation
30 Percent70 Percent
January3.922.834.633.15
February3.352.284.000.84
March4.193.174.881.46
April3.702.464.432.41
May 3.642.454.354.10
June4.402.545.361.00
July 5.774.576.635.60
August5.703.856.813.35
September5.963.737.194.15
October3.612.334.34---
November3.662.064.46---
December4.002.744.77---
Total51.9035.0161.8526.06
Above Normal LimitsBelow Normal Limits

Table 11. Documentation of Geomorphically Significant Flow Events
Number of Bankfull Maximum Bankfull Height Date of Maximum Bankfull
Year
Events(ft)Event
Stage Recorder LP1
MY1 201951.217/23/2019
MY2 202061.709/1/2020
MY3 202161.367/27/2021
MY4 202270.868/12/2022

Table 12.
2022 Max Hydroperiod (Growing Season 17-Mar through 23-Nov, 251 days)
ConsecutiveCumulative
Well IDOccurrences
Hydroperiod Hydroperiod
DaysDays
(%)(%)
GW1 52241010
GW2 542168274

Table 13.
Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results
Uzzle
Hydroperiod (%)
Well ID
Year 1 (2019)Year 2 (2020) Year 3 (2021)Year 4 (2022)Year 5 (2023)Year 6 (2024)Year 7 (2025)
GW1 1112
GW2 23231921

Precipitation (inches)
Groundwater Elevation (inches)

Precipitation (inches)
Groundwater Elevation (inches)