20190647 Ver 1_Eight_Point_100113_MY3_2023_20240226

Eight Point Buffer Restoration Site

Year 3 Monitoring Report
Guilford County, North Carolina
Cape Fear River Basin - 03030003

DMS Contract 7865
DMS Project Number 100113
DWR Project Number 20190647

Prepared for:
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699
Data Collected: August 2023
Date Submitted: December 2023

Monitoring and Design Firm

Prepared by:

KCI Associates of North Carolina
4505 Falls of Neuse Road
Suite 400
Raleigh, NC 27609
[phone]

Project Contact: Adam Spiller
Email: [e-mail]
KCI ASSOCIATES OF N ORTH C AROLINA, P.A. www.kci.com
Employee-Owned Since 1988

MEMORANDUM

Date: February 23, 2024
To: Danielle Mir, DMS Project Manager
From: Adam Spiller, Project Manager
KCI Associates of North Carolina, PA
Subject: Eight Point Buffer Restoration Site
MY-03 Monitoring Report Comments
Cape Fear River Basin CU 03030003
NCDMS Project # 100108
Contract # 7865
Please find below our responses in italics to the MY-03 Monitoring Report comments from NCDMS
received on February 8, 2024, for the Eight Point Buffer Restoration Site.

 A double walled plastic culvert extends approximately 2’ into the easement southwest of the
primary residence at corner marker # 12. There is active erosion of the ground surface and
migrating headcut at the culvert outfall which has exposed approximately 15” for the rebar of
corner marking #12. It is recommended that his culvert be pulled out of the easement with care to
not increase or continue the erosion.
KCI Response: This culvert was installed as part of the new house construction that recently
occurred on the property outside of the easement. KCI will be in contact with the landowner to
resolve this encroachment.

 Please mention in the MY3 report that an undisclosed septic field failed within the conservation
easement, and it is being abandoned.
KCI Response: This change has been made.

 Please continue treatment to control the blackberries.
KCI Response: KCI will continue to treat any nuisance vegetation that is deemed a threat to
project success.

 Tubes will need to be removed by MY5 before closeout, unless DWR says differently.
KCI Response: The installed tree tubes are photo-degradable. Our experience has indicated that
these tubes will degrade over time and will not hinder tree growth or project success. The IRT,
including the DWR representative, has not required removal of tree tubes on past projects. KCI
can provide evidence of these tubes degrading over time if requested by DMS or DWR.

Please contact me if you have any questions or would like clarification concerning these responses.

Sincerely,

Adam Spiller
Project Manager

E NGINEERS  S CIENTISTS  S URVEYORS  C ONSTRUCTION M ANAGERS
4505 Falls of Neuse Road Suite 400 Raleigh, NC 27609 [phone] [phone] Fax
Eight Point Buffer Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC
DMS Project #100113 MY03 – 2023

TABLE OF CONTENTS
PROJECT SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................ 1
MONITORING PLAN ................................................................................................................................. 1
SUCCESS CRITERIA .................................................................................................................................. 1
ANNUAL MONTIORING .......................................................................................................................... 1

Appendix A – Background Tables and Site Maps
Figure 1. Project Vicinity Map ..................................................................................................................... 3
Figure 2. Project Asset and Current Conditions Map ................................................................................... 4
Table 1. Buffer Project Attributes ................................................................................................................. 5
Table 2. Buffer Project Areas and Assets ..................................................................................................... 6

Appendix B – Visual Assessment Data
Vegetation Plot Photos .................................................................................................................................. 8

Appendix C – Vegetation Plot Data
Table 3. Species and Quantity of Planted Stems ........................................................................................ 11
Table 4. Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Table .................................................................... 12

Eight Point Buffer Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC
DMS Project #100113 1 MY03 – 2023

PROJECT SUMMARY
The Eight Point Buffer Restoration Site (EPBRS) was completed in early 2021 and restored a total of
217,858 square feet of riparian buffer along an intermittent stream in the Randleman Lake Watershed of
the Cape Fear River Basin (HUC 03030003010050 – Randleman Reservoir/Hickory Creek). The buffers at
this site have been historically cleared for pasture and impacted by cattle and other anthropogenic impacts.
With the exception of a few large remnant oaks along the stream, the only vegetation in the riparian area
was pasture grasses. The completed project restored a functional riparian buffer and lowered the supply of
sediment entering Hickory Creek. All project assets are based on the surveyed conservation easement and
top of bank.

The EPBRS is protected by a 5.62 acre permanent conservation easement, held by the State of North
Carolina. It is located in central Guilford County, approximately eight miles southwest of Greensboro,
North Carolina. Specifically, the site is on Newman Davis Road just west of US‐73. The center of the site
is at approximately 35.9621 N and ‐79.8351 W in the Pleasant Garden USGS Quadrangle.

The mitigation work at the EPBRS was completed on February 24, 2021. This work included of chemical
control of pasture grasses and other non-native or invasive species. Disking was used in areas of fescue or
other allelopathic plants. 3,400 bare root seedlings were planted across the site with a 4’ Tubex Treeshelter
and a VisPore Weedmat fitted on every other tree. See Table 3 for a complete list of the species planted on
site. A custom herbaceous seed mix composed of native species was spread across the site. Finally, the site
boundary was marked with visible signs conforming to DMS and DEQ Stewardship standards.

MONITORING PLAN
Monitoring will be conducted for a period of five years following project implementation or until
performance standards have been achieved. Monitoring will consist of vegetation sampling and visual
inspection to ensure the health and vigor of the planted restoration area and that the requirements of the
conservation easement are being upheld. Vegetation sampling will consist of five 10m x 10m plots. Three
of these plots were permanently installed during the baseline monitoring, while the other two will be
randomly placed during each monitoring visit. The species, height, and origin (planted vs. volunteer) of all
trees within these plots will be recorded each year, and a photograph will be taken of each plot. Invasive
stems will be recorded in each plot but will not count towards reaching performance standards.

SUCCESS CRITERIA
Plots must achieve an average stem density of 260 stems/acre after five years with a minimum of four native
hardwood tree species or four native hardwood tree and native shrub species, where no one species is greater
than 50 percent of stems. Native hardwood and native shrub volunteer species may be included to meet the
final performance standard of 260 stems/acre upon DWR approval.

MONITORING RESULTS
Monitoring Year 3 vegetation data was collected on August 23, 2023. All five vegetation monitoring plots
had greater than 260 stems/acre and only one plot (Plot 1F, 3 species) had less than 4 native hardwood
species. Overall the site is well vegetated with extensive herbaceous coverage and many diverse volunteer
woody species. During the MY02 site walk with DMS, concern was expressed about the number of
sweetgum saplings growing on-site and a large, dense patch of blackberry growing near the northeast corner
of the site. This treatment was completed in December 2022. The treatment consisted of cutting down the
sweetgum saplings and spraying the stumps with herbicide and mowing down the blackberry, while
avoiding the trees growing within this area. In December 2023, a previously undisclosed septic field within
the conservation easement failed. The landowner has agreed to abandon the failed septic field and relocate
a new one outside of the conservation easement.

Eight Point Buffer Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC
DMS Project #100113 2 MY03 – 2023

APPENDIX A

Background Tables and Site Maps

Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan,Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (H ong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand),NGCC, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community
FIGURE 1. PRO JECT SITE VICINITY MAPEIGHT-POINT BUFFER RESTORATION SITEGUILFORD CO UNTY, NC ±0 0.50.25
Miles
Project Easem ent
^_
Project Location:Guilfo rd Co unty, NC
1
2
3
R1
R2
NC Center for Geographic Information & Analysis
Project Easement (5.68 ac)
Buffer Credits
TOB to less than 20' (514 sqft / No Credit)
20'-30' (347 sqft / 260 Credits)
30-100' (113,879 sqft / 113,879 Credits)
100-200' (103,632 sqft / 34,199 Credits)
Nuisance Vegetation Treatment (2023)
Vegetation Monitoring Plots
Successful
Not Successful
Sources: NC StatewideOrthoimagery, 2014.
FIGURE 2. PROJECT ASSETS andCURRENT CONDITIONSEIGHT-POINT BUFFER RESTORATION SITEGUILFORD COUNTY, NC ±0 10050Feet
Eight Point Buffer Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC
DMS Project #100113 5 MY03 – 2023

Table 1. Buffer Project Attributes
Project Name Eight Point Buffer Restoration Site
Hydrologic Unit Code 03030003010050
River Basin Cape Fear – Randleman Lake
Geographic Location (Lat, Long) 35.9621 N and -79.8351 W
Site Protection Instrument (DB, PG) DB 8295 PG 298
Total Credits (BMU) 148,337.845
Type of Credits Restoration
Mitigation Plan Date February 20, 2020
Initial Planting Date February 24, 2021
Baseline Report Date April 2021
MY1 Report Date December 2021
MY2 Report Date August 2022
Nuisance Vegetation Treatment December 13, 2022
MY3 Report Date September 2023
MY4 Report Date December 2024
MY5 Report Date December 2025

Eight Point Buffer Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC
DMS Project #100113 6 MY03 – 2023

Location Jurisdictional
Streams
Restoration
Type
Buffer
Width (ft)
Creditable
Area (sf)
Initial
Credit
Ratio (x:1)
% Full
Credit
Final Credit
Ratio (x:1)
Riparian
Buffer Credits
(BMU)
Convertible
to Nutrient
Offset (Yes or
No)
20-29 347 75% 1.33333 260.251 No
30-100 113,879 100% 1.00000 113879.000 No
101-200 103,632 33% 3.03030 34198.594 No
20-29 75% 2.66667 0
30-100 100%2 0
101-200 33%6 0
217,858 148,337.845
217,858 148,337.845
Reach
ID/Component
Rural or
Urban
Subject or
Nonsubject
Restoration
T1
1T1
T1
Enhancemen
t 2
SUBTOTALS
TOTALS
Table 2. Buffer Project Areas and Assets
Riparian Buffer (15A NCAC 02.B0295)

Eight Point Buffer Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC
DMS Project #100113 7 MY03 – 2023

APPENDIX B

Visual Assessment Data

Eight Point Buffer Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC
DMS Project #100113 8 MY03 – 2023

Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos
Plot 1 MY00 – 3/29/2021 Plot 1 MY03 – 8/23/2023

Plot 2 MY00 – 3/29/2021 Plot 2 MY03 – 8/23/2023

Plot 3 MY00 – 3/29/2021 Plot 3 MY03 – 8/23/2023

Eight Point Buffer Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC
DMS Project #100113 9 MY03 – 2023

Plot R1 MY03 – 8/23/2023 Plot R2 MY03 – 8/23/2023
Eight Point Buffer Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC
DMS Project #100113 10 MY03 – 2023

APPENDIX C

Vegetation Plot Data

Eight Point Buffer Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC
DMS Project #100113 11 MY03 – 2023

Common Name Scientific Name Quantity
Black Gum Nyssa sylvatica 170
River Birch Betula nigra 340
Persimmon Diospyros virginiana 340
Silky Dogwood Cornus amomum 170
Buttonbush Cephalanthus occidentalis 34
Pin Oak Quercus palustris 170
Tulip Poplar Liriodendron tulipifera 340
Sycamore Platanus occidentalis 340
White Oak Quercus alba 340
Swamp Chestnut Oak Quercus michauxii 340
Willow Oak Quercus phellos 476
American Elm Ulmus americana 340
Common Name Scientific Name % of mix
Autumn Bentgrass Agrostis perennans 10
Big Bluestem Andropogon gerardii 8
Lanceleaf Coreopsis Coreopsis lanceolata 10
Virginia Wild Rye Elymus virginicus 15
Soft Rush Juncus effusus 3
Switchgrass Panicum virgatum 10
Black‐Eyed Susan Rudbeckia hirta 10
Little Bluestem Schizachyrium scoparium 3
Indian Grass Sorghastrum nutans 3
Eastern Gamma Tripsacum dactyloides 3
Rye Grain Secale cereal 25
Table 3. Species and Quantity of Planted Stems
Herbaceous Seed Mix

5.62
2021-02-24
NA
2022-06-23
8/23/2023
0.0247
Planted Acreage
Date of Initial Plant
Date(s) of Supplemental Plant(s)
Date(s) Mowing
Date of Current Survey
Plot size (ACRES)
Eight Point Buffer Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC
DMS Project #100113 12 MY03 – 2023

Veg Plot 1
R
Veg Plot 2
R
Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Total Total
Betula nigra river birch Tree FACW 9 9 4 5 4
Cornus amomum silky dogwood Shrub FACW 1 1 1 1 5 1
Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Tree FAC 2 1 6 2
Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree FACU 2 2 2 1
Nyssa sylvatica blackgum Tree FAC 1 1 2 2
Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree FACW 4 4 1
Quercus alba white oak Tree FACU 4 4
Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak Tree FACW 8 8 4 4 1 1 5
Quercus palustris pin oak Tree FACW 2 2 2
Quercus phellos willow oak Tree FAC 2 1 1 8
Ulmus americana American elm Tree FACW 5 5
Sum Performance Standard 18 18 14 19 17 20 21 14
Acer rubrum red maple Tree FAC 1
Baccharis halimifolia eastern baccharis Tree FAC 7 1
Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash Tree FACW 3
Liquidambar styraciflua sweetgum Tree FAC 42 16 52 24 41
Pinus taeda loblolly pine Tree FAC 1
Pinus virginiana Virginia pine Tree 7
Ulmus alata winged elm Tree FACU 1 2 2
Sum Proposed Standard 18 18 14 19 17 20 21 14
18 19 20 21 14
729 769 810 850 567
3 8 8 5 5
63 41 64 51 71
2 4 2 4 3
0 0 0 0 0
18 19 20 21 14
729 769 810 850 567
3 8 8 5 5
63 41 64 51 71
2 4 2 4 3
0 0 0 0 0
Table 4. Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Table
Eight Points Buffer Restoration Site, DMS #100113
Scientific Name Common Name Tree/
Shrub
Indicator
Status
Veg Plot 1 F Veg Plot 2 F Veg Plot 3 F
Species
Included in
Approved
Mitigation Plan
Post Mitigation
Plan Species
Mitigation Plan
Performance
Standard
Current Year Stem Count
Stems/Acre
Species Count
Dominant Species Composition (%)
Average Plot Height (ft.)
1). Bolded species are proposed for the current monitoring year, italicized species are not approved, and a regular font indicates that the species has been approved.
2). The "Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan" section contains only those species that were included in the original approved mitigation plan. The "Post Mitigation Plan Species" section includes species that
are being proposed through a mitigation plan addendum for the current monitoring year (bolded) , species that have been approved in prior monitoring years through a mitigation plan addendum (regular font), and
species that are not approved (italicized).
3). The "Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" section is derived only from stems included in the original mitigation plan, whereas the "Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" includes data from mitigation plan
approved, post mitigation plan approved, and proposed stems.

% Invasives
Post Mitigation
Plan
Performance
Standard
Current Year Stem Count
Stems/Acre
Species Count
Dominant Species Composition (%)
Average Plot Height (ft.)
% Invasives

Eight Point Buffer Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC
DMS Project #100113 13 MY03 – 2023
Stems/
Ac.Av. Ht. (ft)# Species %
Invasives
Stems/
Ac.Av. Ht. (ft)# Species %
Invasives
Stems/
Ac.Av. Ht. (ft)# Species %
Invasives
729 2 3 0 769 4 8 0 810 2 8 0
810 2 3 0 931 2 9 0 1012 2 7 0
850 2 3 0 607 2 6 0 729 2 6 0
891 2 3 0 688 2 7 0 931 2 8 0
Stems/
Ac.Av. Ht. (ft)# Species %
Invasives
Stems/
Ac.Av. Ht. (ft)# Species %
Invasives
850 4 5 0 567 3 5 0
Monitoring Year 0
Veg Plot Group 2 R
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 4
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 1
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 1
Monitoring Year 0
Veg Plot Group 1 R
Veg Plot 1 Veg Plot 2 F Veg Plot 3 F
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 4