20072252 Ver 2_Bowman buffer CalcsREVISED 12-21-15_20151221

MITIGATION PLAN
Mt. Pleasant Creek Restoration Project
Bowman Property
Randolph County, North Carolina
DMS Contract D15012i
DMS Project Number 44
Cape Fear River Basin
Cataloging Unit 03030003
Prepared for:
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699
October 2015

MITIGATION PLAN
Mt. Pleasant Creek Restoration Project
Bowman Property
Randolph County, North Carolina
DMS Contract D15012i
DMS Project Number 44
Cape Fear River Basin
Cataloging Unit 03030003
Prepared for:
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
Prepared by:
KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A.
4601 Six Forks Rd, Suite 220
Raleigh, NC 27609
[phone]
October 2015

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This mitigation plan has been written in conformance with the requirements of the following:
• Federal rule for compensatory mitigation project sites as described in the Federal Register Title 33
Navigation and Navigable Waters Volume 3 Chapter 2 Section § 332.8 paragraphs (c)(2) through (c)(14).
These documents govern DMS operations and procedures for the delivery of compensatory mitigation.
Mt. Pleasant Creek is a perennial stream located in the Cape Fear River Basin (03030003 8 -digit
cataloging unit) in Randolph County, North Carolina. The portion of Mt. Pleasant Creek undergoing
enhancement in this project is an existing 1,886 linear feet segment located on the property owned by
Martha and Mickey Bowman. This project first originated as a DOT project in 2006, but was not
implemented at that time. The site was instituted by DMS in 2006. Agricultural BMPs have been
implemented on the property by DOT/DMS. During the acquisition phase (prior to 2006), DOT agreed to
provide the landowner with fencing (four strand high tensile), alternative watering, and a new ford
crossing. DMS contracted with the Randolph Soil & Water District to design and oversee the installation
of these BMPs. This mitigation plan presents the revised plans and design for the site.
The existing stream is predominantly a C4 stream. The 5.24 -square -mile project watershed is located in
a rural setting. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has established 100 -year water
surface elevations and no -encroachment limits on Mt. Pleasant Creek. The adjacent land at the
restoration site was used for cattle grazing and has wooded uplands and a cleared floodplain field. A
vegetated buffer along the stream, narrow on most of the west bank, is located within the stream
corridor. The existing stream ranges from 28 to 40 feet wide with steep to moderate bank angles. The
channel is incised, with bank height ratios ranging from 1.2 to 1.7. The goals for this project are:
- Restore long-term stability to exposed banks and reduce susceptibility to scour.
- Eliminate stream bacteria and nutrient exposure from animal waste and wallow.
- Restore a contiguous riparian buffer that connects to the surrounding forested mature buffer.
The project goals will be addressed through the following objectives:
- Enhance 705 linear feet of stream by stabilizing the bedform, re-establishing the thalweg where
there has been excessive sediment deposition, and repairing actively eroding banks.
- Improve an additional 871 linear feet of stream through enhancement by putting the stream in
a permanent conservation easement and eliminating the potential for future cattle access.
- Preserve an additional 290 linear feet of stream by putting the stream in a permanent
conservation easement.
- Buffer restoration and enhancement of 1.86 acres throughout the stream corridor.
The project is located approximately five miles southwest of Liberty, North Carolina in Randolph County.
Specifically, the site is approximately 2.4 miles west on Whites Chapel Road from the intersection of NC -
49. The center of the site is at approximately 35.35.7938° N and - 79.6363° W near the south-eastern
portion of the Grays Chapel USGS Quadrangle.
Approximately 705 linear feet of Mt. Pleasant Creek will be improved with Enhancement I activities to
stabilize the stream. The downstream 871 linear feet of Mt. Pleasant Creek will be improved by
Enhancement 11. The remaining 290 linear feet of Mt. Pleasant Creek will be preserved by putting the

stream in a permanent conservation easement. The site will be monitored for five years or until the
success criteria are met.
Mt. Pleasant Creek Restoration Project, Randolph County
DMS Contract D15012i; DMS Project Number 44, SCO ID 060678701
Mitigation Credits
Nitrogen
Phosphorous
Riparian
Non -riparian
Stream
Buffer
Nutrient
Nutrient
Wetland
Wetland
Offset
Offset
Type
R
RE
R
RE
R
RE
R
E
P
Linear
Feet/Acres
1,576
290
1.29
0.58
3.27
Credits
818.4
58
1.20
0.27
0.31
TOTAL CREDITS
876.4
-
1.79
R= Restoration E= Enhancement P= Preservation RE= Restoration Equivalent of Creation or Enhancement

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0
RESTORATION PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES...............................................................1
2.0
SITE SELECTION.................................................................................................................2
2.1
Directions....................................................................................................................................2
2.2
Site Selection..............................................................................................................................
2
2.3
Project Site Vicinity Map.............................................................................................................4
2.4
Project Site Watershed Map.......................................................................................................
5
2.5
Soil Survey...................................................................................................................................6
2.6
Project Site Current Condition Plan View...................................................................................7
2.7
Project Site Vegetative Communities.........................................................................................8
2.8
Project Site Historical Condition Plan View................................................................................9
2.9
Site Photographs.......................................................................................................................11
3.0
SITE PROTECTION INSTRUMENT......................................................................................13
3.1
Site Protection Instrument Summary Information...................................................................13
3.2
Site Protection Instrument Figure............................................................................................14
4.0
BASELINE INFORMATION.................................................................................................15
4.1
Watershed Summary Information............................................................................................16
4.2
Reach Summary Information....................................................................................................16
4.3
Regulatory Considerations........................................................................................................17
5.0
DETERMINATION OF CREDITS..........................................................................................18
6.0
MITIGATION WORK PLAN................................................................................................19
6.1
Target Stream Type and Plant Communities............................................................................19
6.2
Design Parameters....................................................................................................................19
6.3
Data Analysis.............................................................................................................................21
6.4
Proposed Mitigation.................................................................................................................
22
6.5
Proposed Mitigation Type........................................................................................................23
7.0
MAINTENANCE PLAN.......................................................................................................24
8.0
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS...........................................................................................24
9.0
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS........................................................................................25
10.0
LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN...................................................................................26
11.0
ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN......................................................................................27
12.0
OTHER INFORMATION.....................................................................................................28
12.1
References................................................................................................................................
28
Appendix A. Site Protection Instrument
Appendix B. Baseline Information Data
Appendix C. Project Plan Sheets

Mitigation Plan Mt. Pleasant Creek Restoration Project
1.0 RESTORATION PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) develops River Basin Restoration Priorities
(RBRP) to guide its restoration activities within each of the state's 54 cataloging units. RBRPs delineate
specific watersheds that exhibit both the need and opportunity for wetland, stream and riparian buffer
restoration. These watersheds are called Targeted Local Watersheds (TLWs) and receive priority for DMS
planning and restoration project funds. However, this project was identified by NCDOT, and the RBRP
was developed after this project was acquired. This project was not planned through that process.
The 2009 Cape Fear River Basin RBRP identified HUC 03030003020010 (Sandy Creek) as a Targeted Local
Watershed, of which the project site is a part (NCEEP 2009). This is a largely rural watershed. The
watershed is characterized by 54% forest; however, only 1.5% is protected as conservation lands. There
are six registered dairy operations, one registered cattle operation, one registered poultry operation,
and seven swine operations in the subbasin (NCDWR 2005). As of 2014, the watershed had no streams
on the NCDENR Division of Water Resources' (DWR) list of impaired waters, but the Sandy Creek
reservoir shows indications of high nutrient levels (NCDWR 2014). The Sandy Creek Reservoir's physical
water quality parameters (dissolved oxygen, water temperature, pH and conductivity) were within state
water quality standards in 2008 and nutrient concentrations were elevated. The reservoir's mean total
phosphorus ranged from 0.07 to 0.2 mg/L. and mean total organic nitrogen ranged from 0.7 to 0.9 mg/L.
In response to the availability of nutrients, chlorophyll a was greater than the state water quality
standard of 40 µg/L. and ranged from 41 µg/L. to 63 µg/L. Analysis of phytoplankton samples collected
in 2008 revealed the presence of severe blooms present throughout the summer (NCDWR 2009). The
project is located within a Water Supply Watershed and a long portion of Sandy Creek is recognized by
the NC Natural Heritage Program (NHP) as a Significant Natural Heritage Area. It is habitat for numerous
mussel species such as Carolina creekshell (Villosa vaughaniana), notched rainbow (Villosa constricta),
and eastern creekshell (Villosa delumbis) (NCEEP 2009).
Although the project was initiated before the 2009 RBRP, this Mitigation Plan design is aligned with the
basin priorities, and includes the following:
- Reduce sources of sediment and nutrients by enhancing riparian buffer vegetation, excluding
livestock, and enhancing stream and buffer function.
Project -specific goals for the site will include:
- Restore long-term stability to exposed banks and reduce susceptibility to scour.
- Eliminate stream bacteria and nutrient exposure from animal waste and wallow.
- Restore a contiguous riparian buffer that connects to the surrounding forested mature buffer.
The project goals will be addressed through the following objectives:
- Enhance 705 linear feet of stream by stabilizing the bedform, re-establishing the thalweg where
there has been excessive sediment deposition, and repairing actively eroding banks.
- Improve an additional 871 linear feet of stream through enhancement by putting the stream in
a permanent conservation easement and eliminating the potential for future cattle access.
- Preserve an additional 290 linear feet of stream by putting the stream in a permanent
conservation easement.
- Buffer restoration and enhancement of 1.86 acres throughout the stream corridor.
October 2015 1

Mitigation Plan Mt. Pleasant Creek Restoration Project
2.0 SITE SELECTION
2.1 Directions
The Mt. Pleasant Creek Site is located approximately 0.5 mile northeast of the intersection of Ramseur
Julian Road (SR 2442) and Whites Chapel Road (SR 2456) in Randolph County. From Raleigh, take U.S.
Highway 64 west to Siler City and then take U.S. Highway 421 north to N.C. Highway 49. Take a left onto
Highway 49, go approximately 3 miles, and take a right onto Whites Chapel Road. Stay on Whites Chapel
Road for approximately 5 miles and then the access driveway will be located on the right side of the
road.
2.2 Site Selection
Within the 03030003020010 USGS Cataloging Unit (Sandy Creek), most of the watershed is forest and
pasture land and remains unaffected by urban development. The 03030003020010 USGS Cataloging
Unit has been identified by DMS as a TLW. As of 2014, the watershed had no streams on DWR's list of
impaired waters; however, the Sandy Creek Reservoir shows indications of high nutrient levels, likely
related to the large number of animal operations. Continued implementation of practices to reduce
nutrient inputs to Sandy Creek Reservoir is recommended for this watershed (NCEEP 2009). The main
stream, Sandy Creek, flows through Randolph County to Sandy Creek Reservoir, a water supply for
Ramseur and Franklinville. The watershed for the Mt. Pleasant Creek Project/Bowman Site is comprised
of 5.24 square miles at the downstream limit. Section 2.4 Watershed Map shows the site in relation to
the project watershed. More information about the project watershed is located in Section 4.1.
The site receives flow from two perennial streams, Mt. Pleasant Creek (DWR Stream Index Number 17-
16-3) and one tributary (UT to Mt. Pleasant Creek). DWR classifies Mt. Pleasant Creek as WS -III, which
designates waters used as sources of potable water where a more protective WS -1 or II classification is
not feasible. These waters are also protected for Class C uses. WS -III waters are generally in low to
moderately developed watersheds. General discharge permits are only allowed near the water supply
intake whereas domestic and non -process industrial discharges are allowed in the rest of the water
supply watershed.
The project site is bounded by interspersed pasture and forest to the east, forest to the south, pasture
and forest to the north, and agricultural land and forest to the west. The site has a long history of
hydrologic modification due to cattle grazing on the property. The site offers an opportunity within this
TLW to reduce sediment inputs from failing banks and to reduce potential nutrients and bacteria
entering the streams from cattle. Expanded stream buffers will also extend the forested corridor along
the stream. The existing site conditions are shown in Section 2.6 and seen in site photographs (Section
2.9).
2.2.1 Historic Site Geology/Geomorphic Setting
A detailed soil delineation was previously performed by others on the site. The majority of the project
area (98.5%) is dominated by variations of the Georgeville soil series as mapped by NRCS. These are well
drained soils. NRCS has mapped the majority of the site as Georgeville silt loam, 8-15 percent slopes, but
there are a few inclusions of Georgeville silt loam, 2-8 percent slopes. The data below presents a typical
profile description for the Georgeville series (NRCS 2006).
October 2015 2

Mitigation Plan
Typical Profile for the Georgeville Soil Series
Horizon Name
Depth
Soil Color
Soil Unit 1:
Ap
0-8
2.5 YR4/6
Bt
8-30
2.5 YR4/8
BC
30-44
2.5 YR4/8
Mt. Pleasant Creek Restoration Project
Texture/Structure
Silt loam/gr
Clay/sbk
Sandy clay loam/sbk
2.2.2 Chronology of Impacts
There are no identified archeological or historical preservation sites located within the project area. The
land outside of the easement is used by the property owners for growing crops, grazing cattle, and
raising chickens. Cattle were totally fenced out of the stream when the easement was finalized for the
site. The 4 strand high tensile fencing was completed in 2009. Steep slopes to the south and east of the
stream have prevented extensive vegetation clearing. To the west and north of the stream, the land has
been cleared and has been used for grazing cattle. Most of the current cleared area is outside of the
conservation easement and will remain open for grazing cattle.
Historic aerials were examined for any information about how the site hydrology and vegetation have
changed over recent history. The reviewed aerials are found in Figure 2.8. Historic aerials were obtained
from the USGS EarthExplorer and NC OneMap for 1950, 1964, 1973, 1980, 1993, 2007, 2010, and 2014.
An abbreviated chronology of impacts can be described as follows:
1950 — The western field was cleared earlier than 1950. The stream channel is mostly forested
but has been impacted by a crossing.
1973 —The forest was cleared from the southern side of the field to the northern bank of Mt.
Pleasant Creek. No changes to the streams are apparent.
1993 — The chicken houses southeast of the project were constructed. No other impacts to the
streams are visible.
2007 — Fields were cleared along the stream confluence directly upstream of the project area.
2014 — The vegetation shows signs of natural regeneration from the southern side of the field to
the northern bank of Mt. Pleasant Creek.
October 2015 3

2.3 Project Site Vicinity Map
I�Jet LIBERTY
GUILFORD GSA
ALAMANCE o
421
RANDOLPH
CHATHAM
c
m
EE
MOORE m
� d
FON0MER Grape\ STALEY
�O
y 49
9
P
22
64
FRANKLINVILLE
�pR��er RAMSEUR
49
22
County Boundary
Project Site Location
Major Roads
Minor Roads
Major Rivers
Cities and Towns
0 0.75 1.5 PROJECT SITE VICINITY MAP N
MT. PLEASANT CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT n
Miles RANDOLPH COUNTY, NC N
October 2015 4

2.4 Project Site Watershed Map
October 2015 5

c.J Jun Ju
E
,F ✓!� J. t' 'o rf '. - '�.yt`,� 4 +
a:
I fill
JrL
x
Soil Series:
BaC - Bladin-Tarrus complex
CcC - Cecil sandy loam
GaB and GaC - Georgeville silt loam Project Easement
VaB -Vance sandy loam
WtC - W nott-Enon com lex NRCS Soil Survey (Randolph County)
PROJECT SITE NRCS SOIL SURVEY MAP N Soils Source: NRCS SSURGO
0 100 200 Data, Randolph County.
MT. PLEASANT CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT
Feet RANDOLPH COUNTY, NC Image Source: ap
Orthoimagery, 2014.014.
October 2015 6

2.6 Project Site Current Condition Plan View
W
WWI
10
13
J6
Project Easement
Non -Forested Areas in Easement (1.23 ac)
Mt. Pleasant Creek (Project Reach)
UT to Mt. Pleasant Creek
Other Streams
PROJECT SITE CURRENT CONDITIONS PLAN VIEW N
0 150 300 A Source: NC OneMap
Feet MT. PLEASANT CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT Orthoilvagery, 2014.
RANDOLPH COUNTY, NC
October 2015 7

2.7 Project Site Vegetative Communities
w"
r
'.. 17.
+
. Ir
4,
47, '1
.2,
w
-A-
lcrJ
Project Parcel Vegetative Communities
Project Easement Dry-Mesic-Oak Hickory Forest
Mt. Pleasant Creek (Project Reach) Pasture\Disturbed
UT to Mt. Pleasant Creek Piedmont Alluvial Forest
Other Streams
PROJECT SITE VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES N
0 150 300 A Source: NC OneMap
Feet MT. PLEASANT CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT Orthoimagery, 2014.
RANDOLPH COUNTY, NC
October 2015 8

Z.8 Pro-ect Site Historical Condition Plan View
1950 1964
1973 I
r
4d
II Project Easement
PROJECT SITE HISTORICAL CONDITION PLAN VIEW N
0 250 500 Image Source:
Feet MT. PLEASANT CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT USGS Earth Explorer.
RANDOLPH COUNTY, NC
October 2015 9

October 2015 10

Mitigation Plan
2.9 Site Photographs
Mt. Pleasant Creek Restoration Project
View looking west from the confluence with UT to Mt. Pleasant Creek. A constructed riffle will be installed upstream (right). A soil lift will be
installed downstream (left). Inner portion of the sediment bar will be removed and graded. 7/28/15
i
View looking west at eroded bank at the top of the project reach View looking east at eroded bank where the second soil lift will be
where the first (most upstream) soil lift will be installed. 7/14/15 installed. 7/14/15
View looking north upstream at eroded bank where the second soil View looking west where the third soil lift will be installed. The bar
lift will be installed. The sycamore will be removed. 7/14/15 will be graded. 7/14/15
October 2015 11

Mitigation Plan Mt. Pleasant Creek Restoration Project
October 2015 12

Mitigation Plan Mt. Pleasant Creek Restoration Project
3.0 SITE PROTECTION INSTRUMENT
3.1 Site Protection Instrument Summary Information
The land required for the construction, management, and stewardship of this mitigation project includes
portions of the following parcel. The conservation easement document for the project is finalized. A
copy of the land protection instrument is included in Appendix A.
Mt. Pleasant Creek Restoration Project
October 2015 13
Deed Book
Instrument
Site Protection
Acreage
Landowners
PIN
County
and
Number
Instrument
protected
Page Number
Bowman, Mickey
8714143409,
Conservation
DB 2408 PG
NSA
Randolph
9.61
Charles
8714147366
Easement
1076
October 2015 13

3.2 Site Protection Instrument Figure
October 2015 14

Mitigation Plan
4.0 BASELINE INFORMATION
Mt. Pleasant Creek Restoration Project
Regulatory Considerations
Project Information
Applicable?
Project Name
Mt. Pleasant Creek Restoration
Project
County
Randolph County
Documentation
Project Area (acres)
9.61 acres
Applying for NWP 27
Project Coordinates (lat. and long.)
35. 35.7938° N, - 79.6363° W
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province
Piedmont
Applying for NWP 27
River Basin
Cape Fear
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8 -digit
03030003
USGS Hydrologic Unit 14 -digit
03030003020010
DWQ Sub -basin
03-06-09
Historic Preservation Act
Project Drainage Area (acres)
3,354 acres
N/A
Project Drainage Area Percentage of
Impervious Area
1%
CGIA Land Use Classification
Piedmont Alluvial Forest 21% (3.4 ac), Dry-Mesic-Oak-Hickory Forest 42% (6.6 ac),
Pasture/Disturbed Community 37% (5.8 ac)
No
Existing Reach Summary Information
N/A
Parameters
Mt. Pleasant Creek
UT to Mt. Pleasant Creek
Length of reach (linear feet)
1,866
236
Drainage area (acres)
3,354 acres
33 acres
NCDWQ Water Quality Classification
WS -III
WS -III
Morphological Description (stream type) C4/1
134/1
Evolutionary trend
Stage VI
N/A
Mapped Soil Series
Georgeville silt loam
Georgeville silt loam
Drainage class
Well drained
Well drained
Soil Hydric status
Non -hydric
Non -hydric
Slope
0.7%
0-2%
FEMA classification
Zone AE
Zone AE
Existing vegetation community
Piedmont Alluvial Forest
Piedmont Alluvial Forest
Percent composition of exotic invasive vegetation 5%
5%
Regulatory Considerations
Regulation
Applicable?
Resolved?
Supporting
Documentation
Waters of the United States — Section
Yes
Applying for NWP 27
N/A
404
Waters of the United States — Section
Yes
Applying for NWP 27
N/A
401
Endangered Species Act
No
N/A
N/A
Historic Preservation Act
No
N/A
N/A
Coastal Zone Management Act
(CZMA)/ Coastal Area Management
No
N/A
N/A
Act (CAMA)
FEMA Floodplain Compliance
Yes
Yes
N/A
Essential Fisheries Habitat
No
N/A
N/A
October 2015 15

Mitigation Plan
4.1 Watershed Summary Information
Mt. Pleasant Creek Restoration Project
The site is part of the 03030003020010 USGS Cataloging Unit (Sandy Creek) within the Cape Fear River
Basin. The watershed for the Mt. Pleasant Creek project is comprised of 5.24 square miles at the
downstream limit. The watershed consists mainly of forested land with some land cleared for agriculture
and livestock. This area is experiencing increasing residential development, but remains predominantly
rural in nature. The majority of the impervious surface within the project watershed comes from roads,
residential homes, and livestock houses and amounts to approximately 1% of the total area of the
project watershed.
The site receives flow from Mt. Pleasant Creek (DWR Stream Index Number 17-16-3) and UT to Mt.
Pleasant Creek. Mt. Pleasant Creek leaves the project area and flows into Sandy Creek approximately 2.5
river miles (RM) past the downstream project limits. Sandy Creek flows into the Deep River
approximately 4 RM downstream of its confluence with Mt. Pleasant Creek, under Highways 64/49 just
west of the town of Ramseur.
The nearest Significant Natural Heritage Area (SNHA) is the CPF/Sandy Creek Aquatic Habitat area,
located approximately 2.5 miles downstream of the project site. There are no conservation or protected
areas located adjacent to the project site.
4.2 Reach Summary Information
Existing Conditions
The land outside of the conservation easement is used by the project landowners for growing crops,
grazing cattle, and raising chickens. Cattle were totally fenced out of the stream when the easement was
finalized for the site. The 4 strand high tensile fencing was completed in 2009. To the west and north of
the project stream, the land had been cleared and used for grazing cattle. Most of the historically
cleared area is outside of the conservation easement and will remain open for grazing cattle. Steep
slopes to the south and east of the stream prevented extensive vegetation clearing in those areas.
The project reach of Mt. Pleasant Creek enters the property on the northern end and flows
approximately 1,886 feet before exiting the property at the southwestern corner. The stream condition
varies throughout the length of the project reach, with a trend of greater instability towards the top of
the project reach and increasing stability in the downstream portion of channel. Overall the channel has
a moderate, but varied width -to -depth ratio that averages just over 12. The system is moderately
incised, with bank height ratios ranging from 1.2 - 1.7, and entrenchment ratios greater than 3
throughout. A natural bedrock waterfall is located approximately 125 feet upstream of the project site.
The existing channel between the rock waterfall and the beginning of the project is wooded and in
stable condition. At the beginning of the project, the channel becomes slightly incised. This upper
portion of the channel exhibits signs of instability as evidenced by a series of eroding banks. Many of the
banks in the upper half are nearly vertical and devoid of vegetation. The upper segment is also impacted
by an unstable stream crossing and historic cattle traffic. After the upper 750 linear feet of the project
reach, the stream begins to show increased signs of stability. The downstream portion of channel still
has some lengths of bank that are unvegetated and undercut, but the rate of change appears to be low
and the isolated areas of erosion are not as systemically widespread as in the upper portion of the
channel. Overall, the lower reach is stable.
October 2015 16

Mitigation Plan Mt. Pleasant Creek Restoration Project
The existing vegetation along Mt. Pleasant Creek consists of tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera),
sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), hackberry (Celtis laevigata), box
elder (Acer negundo), American elm (Ulmus americana), red maple (Acer rubrum), and black walnut
(Juglans nigra). Sub -canopy and shrub species include ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana), pawpaw
(Asimina triloba), box elder, tag alder (Alnus serrulata), elderberry (Sambucus canadensis), and painted
buckeye (Aesculus sylvatica). The herbaceous layer includes yellow crownbeard (Verbesina occidentalis),
Japanese stilt grass (Microstegium vimineum), Christmas fern (Polystichum acrostichoides), poison ivy
(Toxicodendron radicans), greenbriars (Smilax spp.), violets (Viola spp.), Southern trout lily (Erythronium
umbilicatum spp. umbilicatum), and spring beauty (Claytonia virginica). Former cattle disturbed areas
are scattered throughout the project area. The Mt. Pleasant Creek Site was intermittently grazed and as
a result is undergoing various stages of succession. The disturbed areas are dominated by fescue
(Festuca spp.), little bluestem (Schizachyrium spp.), and other grasses. There is a sparse scattering of
immature canopy and sub -canopy species such as black walnut (Juglans nigra), loblolly pine (Pinus
taeda), sweet gum, box elder, and Eastern red cedar (Juniperus virginiana) in these open areas. Shrub
and herbaceous species such as multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora) and Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense)
are present, especially along fence lines and transitional margins.
The segment of Mt. Pleasant Creek being enhanced was mapped and named by the USGS, indicating a
perennial stream. For this reason, a NCDWQ Stream Classification evaluation was not necessary for the
project reach of Mt. Pleasant Creek.
4.3 Regulatory Considerations
Following the completion of the mitigation plan, a pre -construction notification (PCN) will be completed
to apply for a Nationwide 27 Permit (NWP) to comply with Sections 401 and 404 of the Clean Water Act
with the Wilmington District of the US Army Corps of Engineers and the NCDENR Division of Water
Resources.
October 2015 17

Mitigation Plan
5.0 DETERMINATION OF CREDITS
R= Restoration RE= Restoration Equivalent of Creation or Enhancement
Mt. Pleasant Creek Restoration Project
Mt. Pleasant Creek Restoration Project, Randolph County
DMS Contract D15012i; DMS Project Number 44, SCO ID 060678701
Mitigation Credits
Nitrogen
Phosphorous
Riparian
Non -riparian
Stream
Buffer
Nutrient
Nutrient
Wetland
Wetland
Offset
Offset
Type
R
RE
R
RE
R
RE
R
E
P
Linear
Feet/Acres
1,576
290
1.29
0.58
3.27
Credits
818.4
58
1.20
0.27
0.31
TOTAL CREDITS
876.4
1.79
Project Components
Project
Restoration
Restoration
Component
Stationing/
Existing
Approach
Mitigation
Footage
-or-
Footage/
-or-
Location
(PI, Pill etc.)
Ratio
or Square
Restoration
Acreage
ReachlD
Footage
Equivalent
Mt. Pleasant
10 + 00 to 14+91
705 If
Enhancement I
1.5:1
705 If
470
Creek
15+11 to 17+25
Mt. Pleasant
17 + 25 to 25 + 96
871 If
Enhancement II
2.5:1
871 If
348.4
Creek
Mt. Pleasant
25 + 96 to 28 + 86
290 If
Preservation
5:1
290 If
58
Creek
Buffer
0-100' from TOB
48,944 sq ft
Restoration
1:1
48,944 sq ft
48,944 sq ft
Buffer
100-200' from TOB
7,088 sq ft
Restoration
2:1
7,088 sq ft
3,544 sq ft
Buffer
0-100' from TOB
22,760 sq ft
Enhancement
2:1
22,760 sq ft
11,380 sq ft
Buffer
100-200' from TOB
2,309 sq ft
Enhancement
4:1
2,309 sq ft
577 sq ft
Buffer
30-100' from TOB
126,342 sq ft
Preservation
10:1
126,342 sq ft
12,643 sq ft
Buffer
100-200' from TOB*
47,183 sq ft
Preservation
20:1
16,065 sq ft
803 sq ft
R= Restoration E= Enhancement P= Preservation RE= Restoration Equivalent of Creation or Enhancement
* Area of mitigation beyond 100' from TOB may be no more than 10% of the total buffer acreage. Area was reduced to 10% for 100-200',
equivalent to 25,463 square feet.
Mitigation credits presented in these tables are projections based upon site design. Upon completion of
site construction the project components and credits data will be revised to be consistent with the as -
built condition.
October 2015 18

Mitigation Plan Mt. Pleasant Creek Restoration Project
6.0 MITIGATION WORK PLAN
6.1 Target Stream Type and Plant Communities
The project involves enhancement through stabilization of the stream by installation of soil lifts,
upgrading an existing rock ford crossing, and installation of a constructed riffle consistent with the C4 -
type stream in the upper reach (Enhancement 1). Invasive species such as multiflora rose (Rosa
multiflora) and Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense) are present but are not widespread. The condition of
the invasive species will be re-evaluated at Year 3. Any areas that have a low density of existing
vegetation will be supplementally planted with the species listed below. Trees and shrubs will be
planted to establish overall stocking levels (8 feet x 8 feet spacing). Woody vegetation planting will be
conducted during dormancy. Species to be planted may consist of the following and any substitutions
from the planting plan will be taken from this list:
Bottomland Hardwood Forest —1.23 acres
Common Name Scientific Name
River Birch
Silky Dogwood
Swamp Chestnut Oak
American Sycamore
Arrowwood viburnum
Betula nigra
Cornus amomum
Quercus michauxii
Platanus occidentalis
Viburnum dentatum
Wetland Status
(Eastern Mts & Piedmont)
FACW
FACW
FACW
FACW
FAC
DMS expects some natural regeneration of native successional species such as sweetgum (Liquidambar
styraciflua), red maple (Acer rubrum), and loblolly pine (Pinus taeda). A custom herbaceous seed mix will
also be developed and used to further stabilize the stream and buffer areas.
6.2 Design Parameters
The mitigation approach for the project will aim to improve a stream ecosystem that will provide both
water quality and wildlife habitat benefits to the Cape Fear River Basin. The DMS's needs for mitigation
in this basin will be achieved by the improvement of a stream complex with 1,866 If of stream
enhancement and 1.85 acres of vegetated buffer. Figures 6.4 and 6.5 show the mitigation type and
extent. The proposed project conditions are shown in Section 6.4 and Appendix C.
Stream Enhancement I — 705 If
Enhancement I will occur in the upper section of the stream where the stream bed and banks will be
stabilized by construction activities. The upper section of stream will be enhanced through the
placement of soil lifts and the installation of riffle structures at critical points along the channel. This
area has also had cattle excluded from the project area when the easement was finalized (June 26,
2006).
In the project plan sheets (Appendix C, Sheet 3), there is a design for the typical soil lifts that will be
installed in the upper segment of Mt. Pleasant Creek. Additional in -stream structures, including
structural stone to reinforce the existing rock ford crossing and installation of a constructed riffle with
soil lifts, will be used to stabilize the channel (Appendix C). These structures are designed to reduce bank
erosion, influence secondary circulation in the near -bank region of stream bends, and provide grade
control. During construction, the number of mature trees removed from the existing riparian areas will
October 2015 19

Mitigation Plan Mt. Pleasant Creek Restoration Project
be minimized as much as possible. Any valuable trees that may provide immediate shade to the restored
channel will be left in place if feasible.
Stream Enhancement 11— 871 If
The Enhancement II mitigation strategy in the lower section of the stream will result from cattle
exclusion from the entire project, and buffer restoration activities, including planting and invasive
treatments. The lower section of Mt. Pleasant Creek will also be enhanced by the placement of the
stream in a perpetual conservation easement, and positive downstream effects due to improvements of
the upper segment (see above).
Stream Preservation — 2901f
The lower section of Mt. Pleasant Creek will be preserved by the placement of the stream in a perpetual
conservation easement
Riparian Buffer Restoration — 56,033 square feet
Riparian buffer restoration areas consist of riparian zone sites (within 200 feet from Mt. Pleasant Creek
top of bank) that are characterized by either an absence of trees or only scattered individual trees such
that the tree canopy is less than 25 percent of the cover and by a lack of dense growth of smaller woody
stems (i.e., shrubs or saplings). These areas will be planted with the bottomland hardwood forest
community as described in Section 6.1 and as shown on the planting plan in Appendix C. One area,
located south of the pasture and north of Mt. Pleasant Creek and measuring 0.63 acres (27,443 square
feet), was previously cleared and maintained as cleared, but has been allowed to naturally regenerate
since the conservation easement was established (refer to Figure 2.8).
Riparian Buffer Enhancement — 25,069 square feet
Riparian buffer enhancement areas consist of riparian zone sites that are characterized by conditions
between that of a restoration site and a preservation site such that the establishment of woody stems
(i.e., tree or shrub species) will maximize nutrient removal and other buffer functions. These areas will
be planted with the native deciduous trees and shrubs as described in Section 6.1 and as shown on the
planting plan in Appendix C.
Riparian Buffer Preservation —173,524 square feet
Riparian buffer preservation areas consist of riparian zone sites that are characterized by a natural forest
consisting of the forest strata and diversity of species appropriate for the local ecoregion. No planting
activities will be conducted in these areas, and they will be preserved within the site easement.
The riparian buffer sites have been additionally categorized based off of the distance measured from the
top of bank of Mt. Pleasant Creek. The table below shows the anticipated measurements.
October 2015 20

Mitigation Plan Mt. Pleasant Creek Restoration Project
Riparian Buffer Mitigation Unit Component Summation
Buffer Component
Mitigation
Ratio
Buffer
(sq ft)
Buffer
Receiving
Credit (sq ft)
Buffer Credit
Units
Restoration
0-100' from TOB
1:1
48,944
48,944
48,944
100-200' from TOB
2:1
7,088
7,088
3,544
Enhancement
0-100' from TOB
2:1
22,760
22,760
11,380
100-200' from TOB
4:1
2,309
2,309
577
Preservation
Subject Rural Streams 30-100' from TOB
10:1
126,342
126,342
12,634
Subject Rural Streams 100-200' from TOB*
20:1
47,183
16,065
803
Total
254,627
223,509
77,883
* Area of mitigation beyond 100' from TOB may be no more than 10% of the total buffer acreage. Area was reduced to 10% for 100-200',
equivalent to 25,463 square feet.
6.3 Data Analysis
Given that this project consists of only stream enhancement, the data collection and analysis was
limited as appropriate for this level of mitigation. Previous data collected by others at this site included
six cross-sectional survey measurements to characterize the nature of the existing channel. The
representative cross-sections have been included within this report (Appendix B). The majority of the
cross-sections have bank height ratios close to 1.5 or less, with the exception of Cross -Section 5, which
has a bank height ratio closer to 2.0. While there is variation throughout the site, the locations of these
cross-sections do not show significant signs of instability. This indicates that the stream and the
landscape are resilient enough to maintain stability, even with sub -optimal channel morphology. The
areas that are targeted for repair have bank height ratios between 1.5 and 2.0 due to local influences,
such as lack of vegetation and planform geometry, which have resulted in this portion of the channel
showing signs of instability. For this reason, the mitigation approach is targeted at correcting these local
influences through an enhancement approach. Instead of changing the complete character of the
channel, the enhancement is making small planform adjustments to soften tight meander bends and
stabilizing banks with soil lifts that will be immediately stable and also rapidly vegetate to create rooting
strength in the banks for long term stability. The repairs will also replicate the cross-sectional
dimensions found in the other stable reaches of the project, adding benches where feasible to create
bank height rations of 1.0.
October 2015 21

6.4 Proposed Mitigation
.r
..::,
goo
4-4 '!�.-
r
Project Easement (9.61 ac)
Enhancement 1 (705 If / 470 SMUs)
Enhancement 11 (871 If / 464 SMUs)
Preservation (290 If / 58 SMUs)
Other Streams
- Buffer Areas to be Planted (1.23 ac)
PROPOSED MITIGATION N
0 100 200 MT. PLEASANT CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT Source: NCOneMap
Feet RANDOLPH COUNTY, NC Orfhoimagery, 2014.
October 2015 22

6.5 Proposed Mitigation Type
October 2015 23

Mitigation Plan
7.0 MAINTENANCE PLAN
Mt. Pleasant Creek Restoration Project
The site will be monitored on a regular basis, with a physical inspection of the site conducted a
minimum of once per year throughout the post -construction monitoring period until performance
standards are met. These site inspections may identify site components and features that require
routine maintenance. Routine maintenance should be expected most often in the first two years
following site construction and may include the following:
Component/Feature
Maintenance Through Project Close -Out
Routine channel maintenance and repair activities may include securing of loose coir
Stream
matting and supplemental installations of live stakes and other target vegetation along the
channel. Areas where stormwater and floodplain flows intercept the channel may also
require maintenance to prevent bank failures and head -cutting.
Vegetation shall be maintained to ensure the health and vigor of the targeted plant
community. Routine vegetation maintenance and repair activities may include
Vegetation
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
(NCDA) rules and regulations.
Site boundaries shall be identified in the field to ensure clear distinction between the
mitigation site and adjacent properties. Boundaries may be identified by fence, marker,
Site Boundary
bollard, post, tree -blazing, or other means as allowed by site conditions and/or
conservation easement. Boundary markers disturbed, damaged, or destroyed will be
repaired and/or replaced on an as needed basis.
8.0 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
Monitoring of the Mt. Pleasant Creek Project shall consist of the collection and analysis of stream
stability and riparian/stream bank vegetation survivability data to support the evaluation of the project
in meeting established objectives. Specifically, project success will be assessed utilizing measurements
of stream stability, site photographs, and vegetation sampling.
Stream
Stream performance standards are based on 2003 Stream Mitigation Guidelines for determination of
channel stability and vegetative success. Stream stability will be documented through 1) annual visual
assessment 2) demonstration of bankfull events, 3) stream photo points and 4) monitoring three cross-
sections (for the Enhancement I section only).
1) Visual Assessment
An annual site walk will be conducted at the end of each monitoring period to document any stream
problem areas. Specific problem areas that could arise include excessive bank erosion, bed
deposition or aggradation, or problems with the installed structures. During site walks, any areas of
invasive species problems, tree and shrub mortality issues, or other problem areas will be noted.
The findings of the visual assessment as well as any recommended corrective actions for problem
areas will be summarized in the monitoring reports by way of a Current Conditions Plan View figure.
October 2015 24

Mitigation Plan
Mt. Pleasant Creek Restoration Project
2) Verification of Bankfull Events
During the monitoring period, a minimum of two bankfull events must be recorded within the five-
year monitoring period. These two bankfull events must occur in separate monitoring years.
Bankfull events will be verified using an automatic stream monitoring gauge to record daily stream
depth readings.
3) Photograph Reference Points
Permanent photograph reference points will be established to assist in characterizing the site and to
allow qualitative evaluation of the site conditions. The location and bearing/orientation of each
photo point will be documented to allow for repeated use.
4) Dimension
Permanent cross-sections will be established along Mt. Pleasant Creek and will be used to evaluate
stream dimension stability. This will include one cross-section in the constructed riffle to evaluate
the stability of this structure and then two cross-sections in other locations where the banks were
stabilized with soil lifts. Permanent monuments will be established at the left and right extents of
each cross-section by either conventional survey or GPS. The cross-section surveys shall provide a
detailed measurement of the stream and banks and will include points on the adjacent floodplain or
valley, at the top of bank, bankfull, at all breaks in slope, the edge of water, and thalweg.
Width/depth and entrenchment ratios will be calculated for each cross-section based on the survey
data.
Cross-section measurements should show little or no change from the as -built cross-sections. If
changes do occur, they will be evaluated to determine whether they are minor adjustments
associated with settling and increased stability or whether they indicate movement toward an
unstable condition.
Vegetation
Performance standards are established to verify that the vegetation component supports community
elements necessary for forest development and the maintenance of diffuse flow through the riparian
buffer in accordance with North Carolina Division of Water Resources Administrative Code 15A NCAC
0213.0295 (Mitigation Program Requirements for Protection and Maintenance of Riparian Buffers)
(NCDWR 2014 Temporary Rule). Performance standards are dependent upon the density and growth of
characteristic forest species. After five years of monitoring, an average density of 260 woody stems per
acre must be surviving and diffuse flow maintained. If monitoring indicates that the specified survival
rate is not being met, appropriate corrective actions will take place, which may include invasive species
control, the removal of dead/dying plants and replanting.
9.0 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Annual monitoring data will be reported using the DMS monitoring template. The monitoring report
shall provide a project data chronology that will facilitate an understanding of project status and trends,
population of DMS databases for analysis, research purposes, and assist in decision making regarding
project close-out.
October 2015 25

Mitigation Plan Mt. Pleasant Creek Restoration Project
Mt. Pleasant Creek Restoration Project
Required
Parameter
Quantity
Frequency
Notes
Three cross sections will be installed in the
Yes
Dimension
Cross-sections
Annual
Enhancement I section
One automatic recording gauge will be
Surface
installed on site; the device will be
1 automatic recording
Yes
Water
Annual
downloaded every two months to
Hydrology
gauge
document the occurrence of bankfull
events on the project
Yes
Vegetation
3 random 1,500 sq ft plots
Annual
Species composition and density
Exotic and
Locations of exotic and nuisance
Yes
nuisance
Annual
vegetation will be mapped
vegetation
Project
Locations of vegetation damage, boundary
Yes
Semi-annual
boundary
encroachments, etc. will be mapped
The first scheduled monitoring will be conducted during the first full growing season following project
completion. Monitoring shall subsequently be conducted annually for a total period of five years or until
the project meets its success criteria.
Monitoring of site restoration efforts will be performed for five years or until performance standards are
met. After planting has been completed in winter or early spring, initial plant stocking will be performed
to verify planting methods and to determine initial species composition and density. To monitor the
vegetation at this site, the NC Division of Mitigation Services will use a combination of visual monitoring
and random vegetation plots to cover 2% of the planted area. Visual monitoring will be conducted to
assess vegetative cover, diffuse flow and easement integrity. DMS will monitor three (3) rotating,
random 1,500 square foot vegetation plots in the planted area. These plots will be located in the 1.23
acre planted area, providing >5% coverage in that area. In each sample plot, monitoring parameters will
include species composition and density. The plots will be randomly selected using a grid and random
number generator (or similar method) for each of the monitoring year. Visual observations of the
percent cover of shrub and herbaceous species, diffuse flow and easement integrity will be documented
by photograph and site visits.
Photograph reference points (PRPs) will be established to assist in characterizing the site and to allow
qualitative evaluation of the site conditions. The location of each photo point will be marked in the
monitoring plan and the bearing/orientation of the photograph will be documented.
Annual monitoring reports will be prepared and submitted after all monitoring tasks for each year are
completed. The report will document the monitored components and include all collected data,
analyses, and photographs. Each report will provide the new monitoring data and compare the most
recent results against previous findings. The monitoring report format will be similar to that set out in
the most recent DMS monitoring protocol.
10.0 LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN
Upon approval for close-out by the Interagency Review Team (IRT), the sites will be transferred to the
NCDOT Stewardship Program. This party shall be responsible for periodic inspection of the sites to
ensure that restrictions required in the conservation easement are upheld.
October 2015 26

Mitigation Plan
11.0 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Mt. Pleasant Creek Restoration Project
Upon completion of site construction DMS will implement the post -construction monitoring protocols
previously defined in this document. Project maintenance will be performed as described previously in
this document. If, during the course of annual monitoring it is determined the site's ability to achieve
site performance standards are jeopardized, DMS will notify the USACE of the need to develop a Plan of
Corrective Action. The Plan of Corrective Action may be prepared using in-house technical staff or may
require engineering and consulting services. Once the Corrective Action Plan is prepared and finalized
DMS will:
1. Notify the USACE as required by the Nationwide 27 permit general conditions.
2. Revise performance standards, maintenance requirements, and monitoring requirements as
necessary and/or required by the USACE.
3. Obtain other permits as necessary.
4. Implement the Corrective Action Plan.
5. Provide the USACE a Record Drawing of Corrective Actions. This document shall depict the extent
and nature of the work performed.
October 2015 27

Mitigation Plan
12.0 OTHER INFORMATION
12.1 References
Mt. Pleasant Creek Restoration Project
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report
Y-87-1. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station.
NCDENR, Division of Water Quality. 2005. Cape Fear River Basinwide Water Quality Plan. Last accessed
7/2015 at: http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/ps/bpu/basin/capefear/2005
NCDENR, Division of Water Quality. 2009. Cape Fear River Lake and Reservoir Assessments Last accessed
7/2015 at: http://porta1.ncdenr.org/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=c7ld5O52-bd9d-4f99-
9bf9-bcf66b562623&groupld=38364
NCDENR, Division of Water Quality. 2013. Surface Water Classification. Last accessed 7/2015 at:
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/ps/csu
NCDENR, Division of Water Resources. 2014 Draft 303(d) list. Raleigh, NC. Last accessed 7/2015 at:
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/ps/mtu/assessment
NCDENR, Division of Water Resources. Adopted Temporary Consolidated Buffer Mitigation Rules (15A
NCAC 02B.0295) Effective 10/24/14.
NCDENR, Ecosystem Enhancement Program. 2009. Cape Fear River Basin Restoration Priorities 2009.
Raleigh, NC. Last accessed 7/2015 at:
http://www.nceep.net/services/lwps/cape_fear/RBRP%20Cape%2OFear%202008.pdf
NCDENR, Ecosystem Enhancement Program. 2003. Stream Mitigation Guidelines.
Rosgen, D. (1996), Applied River Morphology, 2nd edition, Wildland Hydrology, Pagosa Springs, CO
Schafale, M.P. and Weakley, A. S. 2012. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina,
Fourth Approximation, NC Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh, NC.
US Army Corps of Engineers Wilmington District (2003), Stream Mitigation Guidelines, April 2003.
USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Soil Survey of Randolph County. Raleigh, North
Carolina.
October 2015 28

Mitigation Plan
October 2015
Mt. Pleasant Creek Restoration Project
Appendix A. Site Protection Instrument

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF RANDOLPH
PREPARED BY Thomas D. Henry
& Assistant Attorney General
FIZETVK14 TO. North Carolina Department of Justice
Transportation Section
1505 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1505
FILED Krista M Lowe
Register of Deeds, Randolph Co,NC
Recording Fee: $26.00
NC Real Estate x Tx:$.00
20140925000132950 S/INS
Bk:RE2408 P9:1076
09l25l201401:06:57 PM 1l7
1 21,1D©IZ5ID 11milli1 #111111111I I
P.I.N. 4 8714143409, 8714147366
FIRST AMENDMENT TO CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND
EASEMENT OF INGRESS AND EGRESS
This First Amendment to Conservation Easement and Easement of Ingress and Egress
("First Amendment") is made on this �— day of -�LQteriber , 2014 by and between
MICKEY C. BOWMAN and wife MICHELE D. BOWMAN having an address of 5173
Whites Chapel Road, Staley, North Carolina 27355 ("Grantor"), and THE NORTH
CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, its successors and assigns, having
an address of 1598 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1598 ("NCDOT").
The designation Grantor and NCDOT (collectively, the "Parties") as used herein shall
include said Parties, their heirs, successors, assigns, respective agents, executors, administrators,
grantees, devisees, licensees, and/or all other successors as their interests may appear, and shall
include singular, plural, masculine, feminine or neuter as required by context.
WHEREAS:
Under a Conservation Easement and Easement of Ingress and Egress ("Original
Instrument") recorded on June 26, 2006 at Book 1979, Page 313 of the Randolph County
Registry, NCDOT possesses a conservation easement and access easement over, upon, and
across certain real property owned in fee simple by Grantor (the "Property'). Grantor's Property
is more particularly described in the Original Instrument and in Book 2012, Page 1727, Book
1373. Page 1069, and Book 1068, Page 157 of the Randolph County Registry.

�►�►��,���������������� IIII 1111111 IIII
RE2408 1077 217
By this First Amendment, the Parties mutually desire to amend the Original Instrument
with respect to the description of the Permanent Access Easement set forth in Paragraph 4 and
Exhibit A of the Original Easement. The original Permanent Access Easement was depicted on a
plat recorded at Book 101, Pages 36-37 of the Randolph County Registry, and labeled as
"Proposed Future Farm Road."
Given changed circumstances on the property and given changes to the planned Stream
Mitigation Project referenced in Paragraph 4 of the Original Instrument, the Parties mutually
desire to establish access to the Conservation Easement Area by means of an existing soil road
and mutually desire to abandon the "Proposed Future Farm Road" depicted at Book 101, Pages
36-37 of the Randolph County Registry.
The Parties acknowledge that substituting new access for the original access will reduce
the acreage of the Conservation Easement Area by 0.087 acres and will alter the boundaries of
the Conservation Easement Area, as depicted on the plat recorded at Book `� Page
of the Randolph County Registry.
The Parties agree that the establishment of a new Permanent Access Easement is
mutually beneficial, is consistent with the Original Instrument, and will effectuate the purposes
of the Original Instrument, including the purpose of conducting and monitoring the Stream
Mitigation Project.
The Parties agree that the mutual obligations, promises and duties herein imposed
constitute adequate mutual consideration,
The Parties mutually desire to resolve any and all claims concerning, or in any way
associated with, the substitution of the new access, described on the plat recorded at Book
i H � , Page of the Randolph County Registry, for the original access described in
the Original Instrument.
The Parties agree that, except as amended hereby, and in all other respects, the Original
Instrument shall remain in full force and effect and shall be interpreted to give meaning to its
provisions and to those contained herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of good and valuable consideration
acknowledged by both Grantor and NCDOT, the benefits of which flow to NCDOT and Grantor
from each other, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, and in further consideration of the
mutual covenants, terms. conditions and restrictions contained herein, Grantor and NCDOT
hereby amend the Original Instrument and establish this First Amendment thereto.
The terms and conditions of this First Amendment are as hereinafter set forth:
1. Grantor hereby grants and conveys unto NCDOT and its successors or assigns, in
perpetuity, a Permanent Access Easement as more particularly described in Exhibit A,
which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Any improvements to
or maintenance decisions regarding the Permanent Access Easement shall be at the

o�i�i,il������I��J�� II II I II III II III
RE2408 1078 3/7
discretion of NCDOT or the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, Ecosystem Enhancement Program ("EEP").
2. NCDOT and its authorized representatives, including the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers and EEP, at all reasonable times and continuing in perpetuity, shall have the
right to access the Conservation Easement Area through the Property over this
Permanent Access Easement (1) in order to conduct and monitor the Stream Mitigation
Project; and (2) for the purpose of inspecting the Conservation Easement Area to
determine if Grantor is complying with the terms, conditions, restrictions, and purposes
of the Original Instrument and this First Amendment.
3. The Conservation Easement Area encompasses perennial streams, wetlands and
surrounding land located on the Property, as more particularly described in Exhibit A,
comprising approximately 9.61 total acres.
4. Grantor covenants and represents that Grantor is the sole owner and is seized of the
Property in fee simple and has good right to grant and convey the aforesaid First
Amendment and Permanent Access Easement; that the Property, Conservation
Easement Area, and Permanent Access Easement are free and clear of any and all
encumbrances, except easements and leases of record or as of the date hereto, which
Grantor has made known to NCDOT; Grantor will warrant and defend the title against
the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever; that both Grantor and NCDOT have legal
access to the Property and the Conservation Easement Area; and Grantor covenants
that NCDOT shall have the use of and enjoy all of the benefits derived from and
arising out of the aforesaid easements conveyed. All easements conveyed herein shall
run with the land and shall be made part of any transfer of title by Grantor.
5. This instrument sets forth the entire agreement of the Parties with respect to the First
Amendment and Permanent Access Easement and supersedes all prior or
contemporaneous discussions, negotiations, understandings or agreements relating to
said Easements.
6. The burdens of this First Amendment shall run with the Property and shall be
enforceable against Grantor and all future parties who have an interest in the Property
in perpetuity.
7. The Original Instrument is amended only to the extent set forth herein. This First
Amendment does not affect, alter, or supersede the Original Instrument in any other
way. The Original Instrument (Book 1979, Page 313 of the Randolph County
Registry) is specifically incorporated herein by reference. Except as amended, the
Original Instrument shall remain in full force and effect and shall be interpreted to give
meaning to its provisions and to those contained herein.
8. Grantor acknowledges that:

1111t111HMIIWR 1111111111111111111111
RE2408 1079 417
a) NCDOT and authorized representatives shall have access to the Conservation
Easement Area by means of an existing soil road, as depicted on the plat
recorded at Book j41 , Page 'JIA _ of the Randolph County Registry;
b) The plan to construct the "Proposed Future Farm Road" depicted at Book 101,
Pages 36-37 of the Randolph County Registry is, has been and forever will be
abandoned;and
c) These changes will reduce the Conservation Easement Area by 0.087 acres and
will alter the boundaries of the Conservation Easement Area, as depicted on the
plat recorded at Book 1 4 Page_ of the Randolph County
Registry.
9. Grantor, their successors and assigns, hereby release and forever discharge the State of
North Carolina and any agencies thereof, including its officials, officers, directors,
employees, subsidiaries, affiliates, successors, assigns, agents, and representatives,
from all claims, demands and causes of action, whether known or unknown, that
Grantor has or may have or which may arise as a result of the mutual agreement
between the parties not to construct a new access road, depicted as "Proposed Future
Farm Road" on the plat recorded at Book�'�� Page_ of the Randolph
County Registry, but instead to continue using the existing access road as depicted on
the same plat. This release includes but is not limited to any and all claims by
Grantor, their successors and assigns, against NCDOT and the State, either directly or
indirectly, as well as any claims that have been or could be asserted in any independent
civil action relating to the change in terms of the original agreement between the
parties. Grantors, their successors and assigns, and all those claiming by, under or
through them, shall be forever barred from asserting any claim against NCDOT and the
State arising out of the change of circumstances described in this agreement.
10. All Parties have read and understand this First Amendment and have had an
opportunity to consult with counsel regarding the same.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD this First Amendment to Conservation Easement and
Easement of Ingress and Egress unto the NCDOT, its successors and assigns, forever, this First
Amendment to Conservation Easement and Easement of Ingress and Egress together with all and
singular the appurtenances and privileges belonging or in any way pertaining thereto.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor and NCDOT, intending to legally bind each other,
have set their hands on the date first written above.

2OI1I4D925000i9Z95D II II I II IIII IIII
RE2408 1080 5/7
GRANTOR:
` '`^_ C . C'�_ (Seal)
MICKEY C. BO IAN
0L e.Ja , (Seal)
:MICHELE D. BOWMAN
NORTH CAROLINA
4 COUNTY
I, A-c� 126v"92;rc_ , a Notary Public of County, North Carolina, do
hereby certify that MICKEY C. BOWMAN and wife MICHELE D. BOWMAN personally
appeared before me this day and executed the foregoing instrument.
Witness my hand and official stamp or seal this 10''� day of ,sc?T 12014.
l�
Notary Public Si re
f Arr1.1
Printed Name of Notary Public
5- l7 --
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
SIGNATURES CONTINUED ON PAGE FOLLOWING.
=O
j V ZO
F
8 U
d
ya
y co on expires
h..,.
l�
Notary Public Si re
f Arr1.1
Printed Name of Notary Public
5- l7 --
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
SIGNATURES CONTINUED ON PAGE FOLLOWING.

RE2408 1081 6/7
GRANTEE:
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
I CA
_(SEAL)
)
j By: Tom Childrey
l Manager, Right of Way Brand
`— North Carolina Department of Tr nation
NORTH CAROLINA
UJ4 Ke- COUNTY
I, U. 5 Wy Perr4 , a Notary Public of VA lLj, County, North Carolina, do
hereby certify that Tom'Childrey personally came before me this day and acknowledged that he
is the Manager of the Right of Way Branch for the North Carolina Department of Transportation,
an agency of the State of North Carolina, and that by authority duly given, he executed the
foregoing instrument.
Witness my hand and official stamp or seal this l �+4'Nday ofAll,
x
111aunu�n"�,,,
Notary Public SigAfiture
` SEAL �v , , ° IS . �t rr
�U� ^^' PrintedNameofNotaryrublic
coo -k 160, ao(b
tl: "', My commission expires:
1

RE2408 1082 717
EXHIBIT A
CONSERVATION EASEMENT AREA AND PERMANENT ACCESS EASEMENT
Being all of that property designated as "BOUNDARY SURVEY AND CONSERVATION
EASEMENT DEDICATION MAP OF THE MARTHA LEE BOWMAN PROPERTY
FOR THE NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, COLUMBIA
TOWNSHIP, RANDOLPH COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA," as shown on a survey for
North Carolina Department of Transportation revised January 16, 2014 and recorded in Plat
Book J ) at Page '?q in the office of the Register of Deeds for Randolph County.

Mitigation Plan
October 2015
Mt. Pleasant Creek Restoration Project
Appendix B. Baseline Information Data

Mitigation Plan
October 2015
Mt. Pleasant Creek Restoration Project
FHWA Categorical Exclusion Form

Categorical Exclusion Form for Ecosystem Enhancement
Program Projects
Version 1.4
Note: Only Appendix A should to be submitted (along with any supporting documentation)
as the environmental document.
Project Name: Bowman Stream Restoration Project
County Name: Randolph
EEP Number: D07030S
Project Sponsor: DENR Ecosystem Enhancement Program
Project Contact Name: Becky Ward, Ward Consulting Engineers,_PC
Project Contact Address: 8386 Six Forks Road, Suite 101, Raleigh, North
Carolina 27615-5088
Project Contact E-mail: [e-mail]
EEP Project Manager: Melonie Allen
Project Description
The North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) will complete a
stream restoration project al■ . Mt. Pleasant- • r of approximately
1,700
■ a -
11 linear feet of . a 11 linear feet of stream-. on property of r Martha Bowman
Randoli)h Countv.■0 * I.
Reviewed By:
Y' Gang 1t a1l-- /'-3 b3hr)
Date EEP Project Manager
Conditional Approved By:
Date For Division Administrator
FHWA
Check this box if there are outstanding issues
Final Approval By:
—)0-07
Date For Division Administrator
FHWA
i
1

' All . -cts
- po-
Regulation/Question Response
Coastal
Coastal Zone Management Act CZMA
1. Is the project located in a CAMA county?
Yes
No
2. Does the project involve ground -disturbing activities within a CAMA
Yes
Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
No
N/A
3. Has a CAMA permit been secured?
Yes
No
N/A
4. Has NCDCM agreed that the project is consistent with the NC
Yes
Coastal Management Program?
No
N/A
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability
Act
CERCLA
1. Is this a "full -delivery" project?
Yes
No
2. Has the zoning/land use of the subject property and adjacent
Yes
properties ever been designated as commercial or industrial?
No
N/A
3. As a result of a limited Phase I Site Assessment, are there known or
Yes
potential hazardous waste sites within or adjacent to the project area?
No
N/A
4. As a result of a Phase I Site Assessment, are there known or
Yes
potential hazardous waste sites within or adjacent to the project area?
No
N/A
5. As a result of a Phase If Site Assessment, are there known or
Yes
potential hazardous waste sites within the project area?
No
N/A
6. Is there an approved hazardous mitigation plan?
Yes
No
N/A
National Historic Preservation Act (Section 106)
1. Are there properties listed on, or eligible for listing on, the National
Yes
Register of Historic Places in the project area?
No
2. Does the project affect such properties and does the SHPO/THPO
Yes
concur?
No
N/A
3. If the effects are adverse, have they been resolved?
Yes
No
N/A

Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act (Uniform
Act
1. Is this a "full -delivery" project?
Yes
Band of Cherokee Indians? 'No
No
2. Does the project require the acquisition of real estate?
Yes
No
No
N/A
N/A
3. Was the property acquisition completed prior to the intent to use
Yes
federal funds?
No
N/A
N/A
4. Has the owner of the property been informed:
Yes
* prior to making an offer that the agency does not have condemnation
No
authority; and
N/A
* what the fair market value is believed to be?
Yes
Part 3: ■ : Activities
Regulation/Question Response
American Indian Reliqious Freedom Act (AIRFA)
1. Is the project located in a county claimed as "territory" by the Eastern Yes
Band of Cherokee Indians? 'No
2. Is the site of religious importance to American Indians?
Yes
No
N/A
3. Is the project listed on, or eligible for listing on, the National Register
Yes
of Historic Places?
No
N/A
4. Have the effects of the project on this site been considered?
Yes
No
N/A
Antiquities Act (AA)
1. Is the project located on Federal lands?
Yes
,No
2. Will there be loss or destruction of historic or prehistoric ruins,
Yes
monuments or objects of antiquity?
No
N/A
3. Will a permit from the appropriate Federal agency be required?
Yes
No
N/A
4. Has a permit been obtained?
Yes
No
N/A
Archaeological Resources Protection Act (AREA)
1. Is the project located on federal or Indian lands (reservation)? Yes
No

2. Will there be a loss or destruction of archaeological resources?
Yes
claimed as "territory" by the EBCI? :No
No
Yes
N/A
3. Will a permit from the appropriate Federal agency be required?
Yes
N/A
No
Yes
N/A
4. Has a permit been obtained?
Yes
N/A
No
1. Will real estate be acquired?
N/A
Endangered Species Act CE,$,A1
1. Are federal Threatened and Endangered species and/or Designated
Yes
Critical Habitat listed for the county?
No
2. Is Designated Critical Habitat or suitable habitat present for listed
Yes
species?
No
N/A
3. Are T&E species present or is the project being conducted in
Yes
Designated Critical Habitat?
No
N/A
4. Is the project "likely to adversely affect" the species and/or "likely to
Yes
adversely modify" Designated Critical Habitat?
No
N/A
5. Does the USFWS/NOAA-Fisheries concur in the effects
Yes
determination?
No
N/A
6. Has the USFWS/NOAA-Fisheries rendered a "jeopardy"
Yes
determination?
No
N/A
Executive Order 13007 (Indian Sacred Sites)
1. Is the project located on Federal lands that are within a county Yes
claimed as "territory" by the EBCI? :No
2. Has the EBCI indicated that Indian sacred sites may be impacted by
Yes
the proposed project?
No
N/A
3. Have accommodations been made for access to and ceremonial use
Yes
of Indian sacred sites?
No
N/A
Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA)
1. Will real estate be acquired?
Yes
'No
2. Has NRCS determined that the project contains prime, unique,
Yes
statewide or locally important farmland?
No
N/A

3. Has the completed Form AD-1006 been submitted to NRCS?
Yes
No
N/A
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA)
1. Will the project impound, divert, channel deepen, or otherwise
Yes
control/modify any water body?
No
2. Have the USFWS and the NCWRC been consulted?
Yes
No
N/A
Land and Water Conservation Fund Act Section 6
1. Will the project require the conversion of such property to a use other
Yes
than public, outdoor recreation?
No
2. Has the NPS approved of the conversion?
Yes
No
NIA
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Essential
Fish
Habitat
1. Is the project located in an estuarine system?
Yes
No
2. Is suitable habitat present for EFH-protected species?
Yes
No
N/A
3. Is sufficient design information available to make a determination of
Yes
the effect of the project on EFH?
No
N/A
4. Will the project adversely affect EFH?
Yes
No
N/A
5. Has consultation with NOAA-Fisheries occurred?
Yes
No
NIA
Mi rato Bird Treat Act MBTA
1. Does the USFWS have any recommendations with the project relative
Yes
to the MBTA?
2. Have the USFWS recommendations been incorporated?
Yes
No
/A
Wilderness Act
1. Is the project in a Wilderness area?
Yes
No
2. Has a special use permit and/or easement been obtained from the
Yes
maintaining federal agency?
No
N/A

Appendix A:
Letters, Responses, Etc.

National Historic Preservation Act:
Files at the North Carolina State Archeology Office were reviewed on December 12th, 2003. No
listed archeological sites were within the project boundaries (Stream and Wetland Mitigation
Feasibility Study, Bowman Property, Randolph County, NC: TIP Project No. R-0609WM,
NCDOT, 2004).
7

The
Catena
Group
Shannon Deaton
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Division of Inland Fisheries
1721 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699
410-B Millstone Drive
Hillsborough, NC 27278
[phone]
November 16, 2007
Subject: EEP Stream mitigation project (Bowman Site) on Mount Pleasant Creek, Randolph
County.
Dear Ms. Deaton,
The purpose of this letter is to request review and comment on any possible issues that might
emerge with respect to fish and wildlife issues associated with a potential wetland and stream
restoration project on the Bowman site.
The Bowman site has been identified for the purpose of providing in-kind mitigation for
unavoidable stream channel and/or wetland impacts. Several sections of channel have been
identified as significantly degraded. 1,700 linear feet of stream restoration and 200 linear feet of
stream enhancement of Mount Pleasant Creek are proposed (Figure 1).
We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please feel free to contact
us with any questions that you may have concerning the extent of site disturbance associated
with this project.
We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please feel free to contact
us with any questions that you may have concerning the extent of site disturbance associated
with this project.
Sincerely,
110.�M ff �
Kate Montieth
The Catena Group
410-B Millstone Drive
Hillsborough, NC 27278
cc:
Melonie Allen
EEP Project Manager
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699
Becky Ward
Ward Consulting Engineers, PC
8386 Six Forks Road, Suite 101
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615

The
Catena
Group
Dale Suiter
USFWS Raleigh Field Office
P.O. Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 33726
410-B Millstone Drive
Hillsborough, NC 27278
[phone]
November 16, 2007
Subject: EEP Stream mitigation project (Bowman Site) on Mount Pleasant Creek,
Randolph County, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Suiter,
The purpose of this letter is to notify you of activities occurring in Randolph County on
the Bowman site stream mitigation project. The Bowman site has been identified for the
purpose of providing in-kind mitigation for unavoidable stream channel impacts. A total
of 1,700 linear feet of stream restoration and 200 linear feet of stream enhancement of
Mount Pleasant Creek are proposed (Figure 1).
Two endangered species, Schweinitz's sunflower and the Cape Fear shiner, are known to
occur in Randolph County (http://149.168.1.196/nhp/find.php and
http://www.fws.gov/nc-es/es/countyfr.httnl). Potential project -related impacts to these
two species were evaluated in the Restoration Plan to be submitted to the NC Ecosystem
Enhancement Program (EEP) for this project. These findings are summarized below and
provided for your information.
Biological Conclusion Schweinitz's sunflower: No Effect
Potential habitat exists for Schweinitz's sunflower on the Bowman site along pasture and
road edges but not in the proposed area of impact of stream restoration activities. Surveys
were conducted on September 24, 2007, by Kate Montieth and Jennifer Logan of The
Catena Group and no plants were found. The nearest known population of Schweinitz's
sunflower is over 8 miles away northeast of Asheboro. Given the fact that potential
habitat on the site is outside of the area of impact and the fact that no individuals were
found during surveys, it can be concluded that the proposed stream mitigation project will
have "No Effect" on Schweinitz's sunflower.
Biological Conclusion Cape Fear shiner: No Effect
The Cape Fear Shiner is limited primarily to small stretches of the Deep, Haw, and
Rocky Rivers of the Cape Fear River basin (USFWS 1988). The most recent data on the
Cape Fear shiner population in the Deep River indicate that it is not currently known
upstream of the Coleridge dam on the Deep River. Mount Pleasant Creek, a tributary in
the Deep River watershed above Coleridge dam, flows through the Bowman site. This

portion of the stream is fairly narrow and shallow and does not contain habitat elements
(shallow rocky shoals) typical of the water bodies where the Cape Fear Shiner is
currently known to occur. Mount Pleasant Creek flows into Sandy Creek which is
dammed shortly before its confluence with the Deep River. There is an additional dam
on the Deep River in Ramseur, upstream of the Coleridge dam. Although the Cape Fear
shiner is reported to utilize smaller tributaries during high water periods in winter months
(http://www.fws.gov/nc-es/fish/CFS Fact_Sheetl .pdf), the presence of the dam on Sandy
Creek, as well as the two dams on the Deep River (Ramseur and Coleridge) would
restrict the species from utilizing the stream in the project area. Based on the lack of
typical habitat and the presence of barriers between occupied habitat and the project area,
it can be concluded that the proposed stream mitigation project will have "No Effect" on
the Cape Fear shiner.
Additionally, please provide comments on any possible issues that might emerge with
respect to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) or the Fish & Wildlife Coordination
Act (FWCA) from the construction of the stream restoration project on the subject
property.
If we have not heard from you in 30 days we will assume that you do not have any
comments regarding associated laws and that you do not have any other information
relevant to this project at the current time.
Please feel free to contact us with any questions you may have concerning the extent of
site disturbance associated with this project.
Sincerely,
Kate Montieth
The Catena Group
410-B Millstone Drive
Hillsborough, NC 27278
cc:
Melonie Allen
EEP Project Manager
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699
Becky Ward
Ward Consulting Engineers, PC
8386 Six Forks Road, Suite 101
Raleigh, NC 27615
10

Mitigation Plan
Existing Conditions
Cross -Sections
October 2015
Mt. Pleasant Creek Restoration Project

Mount Pleasant Creek - Bowman Property
Randolph County
Fiend Crew:
Becky Ward,.Zach Riffs
River Basin:
Cape Fear
Watershed:
Mount Pleasant. Creek
Reach:
Mount Pleasant Creek
DA:
5.24 square miles
Date:
113/2007
Station:
CS #1, 11+60
Feature:
Riffle
STATION
Hl
FS
ELEVATION NOTES
FEET
FEET
FEET
FEET
0+00
547.21
2.96
544.25
0+10
547.21
3.68
543.53
0+20
547.21
4.29
542.92
0+30
547.21
4.50
542.71 TOTALS
0+40
547.21
4.80
542.41
0+50
547.21
4.90
542.31
BANKFULL
Hydraulic Geometry
Width
Depth
Area
(Feet)
(Feet)
(Sq, Ft.)
0.7
0.1
0.1
3.3
1.8
5.8
3.5
3.4
12.0
4.5
3.6
16.1
3.0
3.6
10.9
2.0
3.4
6.7
2.0
2.7
5.5
2.0
2.1
4.1
1.7
1.6
2.7
2.8
0.4
1.1
25.5 65.0
0+60
547.21
5.15
542.06
SUMMARY DATA BANKFULL
0+66
547.21
5.29
541.92
A (BKF)
65.0
0+71
547.21
4.65
542,56
W (BKF}
25.5
0+76
547.21
5.28
541.93
547.21
9.40
0+81
547.21
5.82
541.39 LBKF
Max d
Mean d
3.6
2.5
0+82
547.21
598
541 23 T(7B L
1+00
0+85
547.21
9,16
538.05
Bottom of Bank
0+89
547.21
9.33
537.88
0+93
547.21
9.46
537.75
TW
0+96
547.21
9.40
537.81
0+98
547.21
8.96
538.25
1+00
547.21
8.14
539.07
1+02
547.21
7.63
539,58
1+04
547.21
7.13
540.08
545
1+07
547.21
5.82
541.39
RBKF
544
1+08
54711
5.24
541.97
TOB R
d
543
1+13
547.21
4.90
542,31
as
'=
1+19
547.21
4.84
542.37
542
1+28
547.21
4.77
542.44
D
541
1+41
547.21
4.73
542.48
540
1+51
547,21
4.79
542.42
1+50
547.21
4,34
542,87
LU
539
1+71
547.21
4.36
542.85
Fence
J
538
f
537
Crass Section L,S.11+50
+ --4- G=-ndBan 11
U 1U ZU 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170
Distance (feet)

Field Crew:
Becky Ward, Zach Pitts
River Basin:
Cape Fear
Watershed:
Mount Pleasant Creek
Reach:
Mount Pleasant Creek
IDA:
5.24 square miles
Date:
113/2007
Station:
CS #2, 12+12
Feature:
Rifle
STATION
HI
FS
ELEVATION NOTES
(FEET)
(FEET)
(FEET)
{FEET)
1.2
0+01
547.21
2.86
544.35
3.1
0+10
547.21
4.88
542.33
5.0
0+20
547.21
4.77
542.44
10.7
0+30
547.21
4.88
542.33
1-2
0+40
547.21
5.13
542.08
0+50
547.21
5.12
542.09
0+60
547.21
5.12
542.09
0+70
547.21
4.86
542.35
0+80
547.21
4.70
542.51
0+85
547.21
4.55
542.66
4+8g
547.21
4.08
543.13
Tree
0+97
547.21
5.81
541.44
1+05
547.21
5.48
540.73
LBKF
1+10
547.21
6.95
540.26
TOB L
1+13
547.21
9.73
537.48
1+17
547.21
9.50
537.71
1+20
547,21
9.42
537.79
Lang Sta 6.6
1+25
547.21
925
537.96
1+29
547.21
9.07
538.14
1+31
547.21
8.31
538.90
1+35
547.21
7.12
540.09
t+37
547.21
6.48
540.73
RBKF
1+39
547.21
5.75
541.46
TOB R
1+45
547.21
5-29
541.92
1+55
547.21
5.59
541.62
1+65
547.21
5.81
541.40
1+75
547.21
5.59
541.82
1+85
547.21
5.87
541.34
Fence
Mount Pleasant Creek - Bowman Property
Randolph County
TOTALS
BANKFULL
Hydraulic Geometry
Width
Depth
Area
{Feet)
(Feet)
(Sq Ff.)
5.0
0.2
1.2
3.0
1.9
5.6
4.0
3.1
12.5
3.0
3.0
8.9
5.0
2.9
14.3
4.0
2.7
10.7
2.0
2.2
4.4
4.0
1-2
4.9
1.5
0.3
0.5
31.5 63.1
SUMMARY DATA BANKFULL
A (BKF) 63.1
W (BKF) 31.5
Max d 3.1
Mean d 2.0
Cross Section L.S. 12+12
-Gmu-d f6arskrull
Q.z

Field Grew:
Becky Ward, Zach Pitts
River Basin:
Cape Fear
Watershed:
Mount Pleasant Creek
Reach:
Mount Pieasant Creek
DA:
5.24 square miles
Date:
113!2007
Station:
CS #4, 17+00
Feature:
Riffle
STATION
HI
FS
ELEVATION
NOTES
FEET
FEET
FEET
FEET
4.0
0+00
545.80
2.98
542.82
5.4
0+10
545.80
6.50
539.30
3.0
0+20
545.80
4.17
541.63
2.5
0+26
545.80
4.52
541.18
TOB L 1 Tree
0+31
545.80
7.90
538.90
LBKF
0+32
545.80
7.40
538.40
0+38
545.80
7.59
538.21
0+42
545.84
7.85
537.95
0+46
545.80
8.67
537.13
0+48
545.80
9.68
536.12
0+53
545.80
10.03
535.77
0+56
545.80
10.39
535.41
Lang Sta 526.5
0+58
545.80
10.30
535.50
0+60
545.80
10.37
535.43
0+62
545.80
10.24
535.57
0+64
545.80
7.69
538.11
0+64
545.80
7.90
538.90
RBKF
0+65
545.80
4.91
540,89
TOB R
0+70
545.80
4.89
540.91
0+80
545.80
4.19
541.61
0+90
545.80
5.40
540.40
1+00
545.80
5.38
540.42
Mount Pleasant Creek - Bowman Property
Randolph County
BANKFULL
Hydraulic Geometry
Width.
Depth
Area
Feet
Feet
(Sq. Ft
7.0
0.3
2.4
4.0
0.8
3.3
4.0
1.4
5.4
2.3
2,3
5.2
4.7
3.0
13.9
2.5
3.3
8.3
2.5
3.4
8.6
2.0
3.4
6.9
2.0
3.4
6.8
2.0
1.7
3.3
TOTALS 33.0
64.2
SUMMARY DATA fBANKFUL,L1
-
A (BKF)
64.2
W (BKF)
33.0
Max d
3.4
Mean d
1,9
543
542
541
m
540
a 539
I
m 538
LJ
537
536
535
0
Cross Section L.S. 17+00
=41 Gr-nd tSankfull
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Distance (feet)

Field Crew:
Becky Ward, Zach Pitts
Rivet Basin:
Cape Fear
Width
Depth
Watershed:
Mount Pleasant Creek
(§_q,
Reach:
Mount Pleasant Greek
0.3
dA.
5.24 square miles
1.9
7.4
Date:
1/312007
9.7
3.0
Station:
CS #5 -10+70
3.0
3.1
Feature:
Riffle
2.8
11.4
STATION
HI FS
ELEVATION
NOTES
FEET)
(FFFTi f1=PXz-r'
FEET
0+00
544.58 4.72
539.86
0+10
544.58 4.67
539.91
0+16
544,58 4.62
539.96
0+18
544.58 4.98
539.60
TOB L
0+20
544.58 7.28
537.30
LBKI=
0+20
544.58 7.80
536.78
0+24
544.58 10.48
534.10
0+27
544.58 10.52
534.06
0+30
544.58 10.53
534,05
Long Sta 719
0+33
544.58 10.22
534.36
0+37
544.58 10.04
534.54
0+43
544.58 9.84
534.78
0+44
544.58 8.15
536.43
0+45
544.58 7.28
537.30
RBKF
0+46
544.58 5.63
538.95
TUB R
0+50
544.58 4.45
540,13
0+55
544.58 4.76
539.82
0+60
544.58 4.41
540.17
0+70
544.58 5.33
539.25
0+80
544.58 5.63
538.95
Mount Pleasant Creek - Bowman Property
Randolph 'County
Ii
UL LKF) 64.9
KF) 25.0
ax d 3.2
an d 2.6
"J 536
535
534
Cross Section L.S. 18+70
-,r-Ground �--sankTi�r�
Distance (feet)
BANKFULL
Hydraulic Geometry
Width
Depth
Area
Feet(Feet)
(§_q,
Ft.
0.3
0.3
0.1
4.0
1.9
7.4
3.0
3.2
9.7
3.0
31
9.7
3.0
3.1
9.3
4.0
2.8
11.4
5.5
2.6
14.5
2.2
1.3
2.8
TOTALS 25.0
64.9
Ii
UL LKF) 64.9
KF) 25.0
ax d 3.2
an d 2.6
"J 536
535
534
Cross Section L.S. 18+70
-,r-Ground �--sankTi�r�
Distance (feet)

Field Crew:
Becky Ward, Zach Pitts
River Basin:
Cape Fear
Watershed:
Mount Pleasant Creek
Reach:
Mount Pleasant Creek
DA:
5.24 square miles
Date:
1IM007
Station:
CS #6, 20+38'
Feature,
Pool
STATION
Hl
FS
'ELEVATION
NOTES
FEET
FEET
FEET
FEET
3.0
0+00
543.66
4,57
538.99
12.5
0+10
543.66
4.93
538.73
4.3
0+15
543.66
5.54
538.12
TOB L
0+16
543.66
6.46
537.20
LBKF
0+17
543.65
7.35
536.31
0+19
543.66
9.10
534,56
0+22
543.66
10.38
533.28
0+25
543.65
10.90
532.76
Long Sta 683
0+30
543.66
11.07
532.59
0+33
543.65
90.37
533.29
TOB L
0+35
543.66
8.65
535.01
Tree roots
0+39
543.66
7.37
536.29
0+42
543.66
6.46
537.20
RBKF
0+45
543.66
5.41
538.25
TOB R
0+50
543.66
4.46
539.20
piled Debris
0+55
543.66
3.22
540.44
Piled Debris
Mount Pleasant Creek - Bowman Property
Randolph County
BANKFULL
Hydraulic Geometry
Width
Depth
Area
Feet
Feet
(Sq. Ft.
3.0
1.3
4.0
3.0
3.3
9.8
3.0
4.2
12.5
5.0
4.5
22.6
3.0
4.3
12.8
2.o
3.1
6.1
6.0
1.1
6.6
TOTALS 25.0
74.4
SUMMARY DATA jQaNL1FULLj
A (BKF)
74.4
W (BKF)
25.0
Max d
4.5
Mean d
3.0
Cross Section L,S, 20+38
Ground - Bank►ull ,
CA4

Field Crew:
Becky Ward, tach Pitts
River Basin:
Cape Fear
Watershed:
Mount Pleasant Creek
Reach:
Mount Pleasant Creek
DA:
5.24 square miles
Date:
1/3/2007
Station:
CS #7, :27+26
Feature:
Riffle
STATION
HI
FS
ELEVATION
NOTES
(FEET)
(FEET)
(FEET)
(FEET)
1.5
0+00
540.10
3.22
536.88
1.8
0+10
540.10
4.81
535.29
3.3
0+20
540.10
5.08
535.02
3.0
0+22
540.10
5.40
534.70
LBKF
0+23
540,10
5.64
534.46
1.3
0+25
540.10
6.43
533.67
TOB L
0+26
540.10
7.94
532.16
0+28
540.10
8.49
531.51
0+31
540.10
8.81
531.29
0+34
540.10
8.97
531.13
0+37
540.10
8.75
531.35
0+41
540.10
8.04
532.06
0+45
540.10
7.93
532.17
0+48
540.10
5.40
534.70
TDB R, RBKF
0+53
540.10
4.52
535.58
0+58
540.10
2.55
537.55
Start of Debris
0+61
540.10
1.33
538.77
Mount Pleasant Creek - Bowman Property
Randolph County
BANKFULL
Hydraulic Geometry
Width
Depth
Area
(Feet)
(Feet)
(Sq. Ft.)
1.5
0.1
0.2
1.5
0.6
1.0
1.0
1.8
1.8
2.5
2.8
7.0
3.0
3.3
9.8
3.0
3.5
10.5
3.0
3.5
10.4
4.0
3.0
12.0
4.0
2.6
10.3
2.5
1.3
3.2
TOTALS 26.0
66.0
SUMMARY DATA (BANKFULL)
A (BKF)
66.0
W (BKF)
26.0
Max d
3.5
Mean d
2.5
539
538
537
536
C 535
M
y 534
LU
533
532
531
Crass Section L.S. 27+20
# Ground -&-Ban kfull
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Distance (feet)

Mitigation Plan
October 2015
Mt. Pleasant Creek Restoration Project
Appendix C. Project Plan Sheets

U
PROJECT
W Z ENTRANCE
N Q
RD. l H1SE5 GHPe�� ��
v0`� "0�
Q
Ln
A
r
Z
v
Y1y bA
Vg N
VICINITY MAP
NOT TO SCALE
INDEX OF SHEETS
I TITLE SHEET
2 GENERAL NOTES & PROJECT LEGEND
3-4 DETAILS
5 SITE PLAN
6 PLANTING PLAN
7-8 EROSION CONTROL PLAN
DIRECTIONS TO SITE
From Raleigh, follow US -1 South to US -64 West.
Follow US -64 for about one hour then take a right
onto Eastern Randolph Road (SR2481). Eastern
Randolph Road quickly becomes Low Bridge Road.
Follow for about 2 miles then take a right onto Whites
Chapel Road. The project access will be on the left at
5173 Whites Chapel Road. Merge left as you drive
along the site access towards the two chicken facilities.
Take a left just after the two chicken buildings and
follow the access drive to the existing rock ford crossing.
NCD E0 DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
MT. PLEASANT CREEK PROJECT
(BOWMAN PROPERTY)
RANDOLPH COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
BEGIN PRESERVATION
i
♦ ♦ � ;moi- -�
PROJECT DATA
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE = 1.24 ACRES
Prepared In the Office of:
�� ASSOCIATES OF NC
ENGINEERS •PLANNERS•ECOLOGISTS
SUITE 220 LANDMARK CENTER II
4601 SIX FORKS RD., RALEIGH, NC
Prepared for: Prepared by:
LINDSAY CROCKER GARY M. MRYNCZA, PE
DMS PROJECT MANAGER PROJECT ENGINEER
LIN XU ALEX FRENCH
DMS REVIEW COORDINATOR PROJECT DESIGNER
/
LAT: 35'47'43.05"
LON : 79'38'08.73"
BEGIN ENHANCEMENT I
STREAM
STREAM
STREAM
�To�,
ENHANCEMENT I
ENHANCEMENT II
PRESERVATION
(1.5:1)
(2.5:1)
(5:1)
PROJECT
705 FT./
871 FT./
290 FT./
CREDITS
470 CR.
348.4 CR.
58 CR.
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE = 1.24 ACRES
Prepared In the Office of:
�� ASSOCIATES OF NC
ENGINEERS •PLANNERS•ECOLOGISTS
SUITE 220 LANDMARK CENTER II
4601 SIX FORKS RD., RALEIGH, NC
Prepared for: Prepared by:
LINDSAY CROCKER GARY M. MRYNCZA, PE
DMS PROJECT MANAGER PROJECT ENGINEER
LIN XU ALEX FRENCH
DMS REVIEW COORDINATOR PROJECT DESIGNER
/
LAT: 35'47'43.05"
LON : 79'38'08.73"
BEGIN ENHANCEMENT I
STATE
DMS PROJECT NUMBER
SHEET
NO.
TOTAL
SHEETS
�To�,
44
�
Ol
STATE
DMS PROJECT NUMBER
SHEET
NO.
TOTAL
SHEETS
�To�,
44
�
I
I 1
1 1
' 1 1
\ 1
/
BEGIN ENHANCEMENT II
20' ACCESS EASEMENT
&EXISTING DRIVE
I 1
1 1
I 1
I 1
1 1
\ 1
\ \
—100-50
0 100 200
GRAPHIC SCALE
PROJECT ENGINEER
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
P.E.
0 100 200
GRAPHIC SCALE
PROJECT ENGINEER
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
P.E.

CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE:
THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR FOLLOWING THE SEQUENCE OF CONSTRUCTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANS AND THE
FOLLOWING PROVISIONS, AS DIRECTED BY THE DESIGNER. CONSTRUCTION SHALL PROCEED IN THE SPECIFIED MANNER UNLESS
OTHERWISE DIRECTED OR APPROVED BY THE DESIGNER. THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS, ALONG WITH THE INSTRUCTIONS CONTAINED IN
THE PLANS, CONSTITUTE THE SEQUENCE OF CONSTRUCTION.
GENERAL SITE NOTES:
- UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHALL ANY WASTE MATERIAL OR TEMPORARY STOCKPILING MATERIAL BE PLACED IN ANY AREAS OUTSIDE
OF THE LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE.
- ALL PUMP AROUND OPERATIONS SHALL BE INSTALLED IN A MANNER THAT IT WILL BE ALLOWED TO RUN 24 HOURS A DAY UNLESS CHANNEL
WITHIN THE PUMP AROUND LOCATION CAN BE STABILIZED WITHIN THE WORK DAY.
PHASE 1: INITIAL SITE PREPARATION.
1. IDENTIFY PROJECT BOUNDARY, LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE, SENSITIVE AREAS, STAGING AREA, AND ACCESS POINTS WITH THE DESIGNER.
2. CONSTRUCT THE STAGING AREA INA MANNER TO SUPPORT THE EXECUTION OF THE PROJECT IN PHASES AS INDICATED IN THE PLANS
AND AS DIRECTED BY THE DESIGNER.
3. INSTALL EROSION CONTROL DEVICES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SITE STABILIZATION PLAN AND AS DIRECTED BY THE DESIGNER.
PHASE 2: COMPLETE REPAIR AREAS
4. BEFORE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES START, INSTALL PUMP AROUND OPERATIONS AS SHOWN IN PLANS.
5. INSTALL ROCK FORD AS DIRECTED IN THE PLANS.
6. INSTALL CONSTRUCTED RIFFLE AS DIRECTED IN THE PLANS.
7. INSTALL SOIL LIFTS AS DIRECTED IN THE PLANS.
8. GRADE INNER BARS AS DIRECTED IN PLANS.
9. ONCE DISTURBED AREAS AND EXPOSED SLOPES ARE STABILIZED, REMOVE PUMP AROUND SYSTEM.
UPON APPROVAL FROM THE DESIGNER, ITEMS 5 THROUGH 8 MAY BE CONSTRUCTED IN A DIFFERENT SEQUENCE THAN INDICATED
ABOVE OR CONCURRENTLY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ONLY START ON A SECTION THAT HE CAN FINISH AND STABILIZE IN ONE
WORKING DAY.
PHASE 3: PLANTING
10. LIVE STAKES AND BARE ROOT TREES SHALL BE INSTALLED DURING THE DORMANT SEASON (NOVEMBER 6 - MARCH 24). PREPARE AND
INSTALL LIVE STAKES AND BARE ROOT TREES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE BID PACKAGE AND AS DIRECTED BY THE DESIGNER.
PHASE 4: COMPLETION OF PROJECT SITE
11. REMOVE ALL REMAINING WASTE MATERIALS AND RESTORE THE REMAINING STAGING AND STOCKPILING AREAS, ACCESS ROADS,
AND ENTRANCES TO THEIR PRIOR CONDITION. SEED AND MULCH ALL DISTURBED AREAS UTILIZING THE SEED AND MULCH MIXES
SPECIFIED IN THE PLANS.
GENERAL NOTES:
BEARINGS AND DISTANCES:
ALL BEARINGS ARE NAD 1983 GRID BEARINGS.
ALL DISTANCES AND COORDINATES SHOWN ARE HORIZONTAL (GROUND) VALUES.
UTILITY/SUBSURFACE PLANS:
* NO SUBSURFACE PLANS ARE AVAILABLE ON THIS PROJECT. EXISTING
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES HAVE NOT BEEN VERIFIED. THE CONTRACTOR
IS RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING A UTILITY LOCATOR AND ESTABLISHING
THE EXACT LOCATION OF ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES IN THE PROJECT
REACH.
CONTROL POINTS
POINT NORTHING EASTING ELEV
KCI#1 744508.68 1811397.59 541.53
KCI#2 744520.75 1811197.66 541.10
PROJECT LEGEND
SOIL LIFT
CONSTRUCTED RIFFLE - --- --- --- --- --- -------------------------
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE -
SILT FENCE
SILT FENCE ROCK OUTLET - --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
EXISTING CONTROL POINT
6�
0
oQ oo a o 8 00 °00 �o� °00
Qi>C
SF
KCI#1
A.
H
U
W
O
0- ry
Y uJ
LLJ 0- IT
it
z Q 0
Q�
ULu �
Q O
J m
H
z
0
U
2
O
z
z
z
D
O
U
x
a
O
0
z
IAT'
OCTOBER 2015
scALI: N.T.S.
PROJECT
LEGEND &
NOTES

USE 700 GRAM
COIR MATTING y BACKFILL SOIL LIFTS WITH
ON TIE -OUTS 4 SUITABLE ONSITE MATERIAL.
a 00
O USE BURLAP INSTALL LIVE WHIPS BETWEEN SOIL LIFTS WITH APPROX.
3' BACKED HEAVY 1 FOOT OF PLANT MATERIAL EXPOSED. MINIMUM LENGTH OF
—I COIR MATTING CUTTINGS SHALL BE 4'. DISTANCE BETWEEN CUTTINGS
III—III ON ALL LIFTS SHALL BE 4". FILL VOIDS WITH SUITABLE SOIL.
III—I I II � I —III 1I—
—II—I—I—I
Z"— 6" EXPOSED
_ k m STONETOE
w III III III II
1.5'x1"z2" WOODEN STAKES ON 1' CENTERS.
STAKE EACH LAYER. STAKES SHALL BE NOTCHED BASEFLOW
OR HAVE A NAIL AT TOP. SEE SPECIAL PROVISIONS. 0 (D O Q 0 00
(UNDER LAYERS OF STAKING NOT SHOWN FOR z O O O O
CLARITY) oOnOQ�Q� jjO��o���/�(Og°� Qo��JOO�O� Ooh 00 o
N OOoo O'OOO�0000��000
O,g0Q000� qO QOOOGD �0OO Q QO
CJ OUO ��CJOOo��CJ00 ���OQ
STREAM
_ 3'MINIMUM _ BED
10% CABC STONE I
10 % CLASS A STONE
20% CLASS B STONE SECTION
60% CLASS 1 STONE
SOIL LIFT
SCALE:NTS
SEE SOIL LIFT DETAIL
12FT WIDE -2FT DEPTH
(TYP. BOTH SIDES)
ROCK FORD CROSSING:
III=III=III=III=1 I I=I I
I I=III I I I I I � 1=I I I=1 I I
=IIIIII
��
� �
III �LL
APPROX. 20 FEET
20% CLASS B STONE
—=IIIIIIIIII
A 60% CLASS 1 STONE
6" EXPOSED
o STONE TOE
00°Q Q o o Q X00 OO
° °o °
T
I2.0'MIN
0 O o 0 oo O° O ° � _ T MIN 1
TAPER BANK BACK AT A 21 SLOPE
10% CABG STONE
10% CLASS A STONE
TO TIE INTO EXISTING GRADE.
2D'/. CLASS B STONE
STABILIZE WITH COIR MATTING,
0
60% CLASS 1 STONE
f//
OBOTH SIDES OF STREAM.
O
(WASH IN NATIVE BED SECTION
BANK
MATERIAL ONCE STONE
OO O STREAM
MIXTURE IS INSTALLED)
00O(
w
00
w W o w
m w w w
— _ — FLOW —+ TAPER STONE INTO
_ 9BASEFLOW EXISTING STREAM BED
000Q B
O°O
CtSo��.:j)u�Qg — — — — — — — -
e`"`
ROCKFORDCROSSING.QOp `"`" "�_ U_�_
000
BANK
SEE PLAN SHEET 5 AND —I I —I I —I I I I —I I —I I I —I I —I I —I I _� I I—I I --
DETAIL ON THIS SHEET. �=III=III= —III—III—III— H —III—III—III—III— =�—�—-
- -- 1=III=III=III=III=III=III=III=� � �_� � �=III=III=III=III=1 I I� I—I I I
STREAM
PROFILE
CONSTRUCTED RIFFLE / SOIL LIFT
O EXTEND ROCK MIXTURE
SCALE: NTS
O MINIMUM OF 15 FEET PAST
v�
C) Q
U z
w J
o O
Of
I— Q
U
Y w F
LLJ Of
wO v O
Z
U w cn r
Z Z
Z Q 0 z
c j O
W>� o
J m O
0
z
H
Of
DATE: OCTOBER 2015
SCALE: N T S
DETAILS
12FT WIDE -2FT DEPTH
ROCK FORD CROSSING:
10% CABC STONE
10% CLASS A STONE
20% CLASS B STONE
A 60% CLASS 1 STONE
(SEE NOTE BELOW)
TAPER SOIL LIFT BACK AT A 2:1
TO TIE INTO ROCK FORD./
TAPER BANK BACK AT A 21 SLOPE
SLOPE
TO TIE INTO EXISTING GRADE.
STABILIZE WITH COIR MATTING,
0
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTED
RIFFLE / SOIL LIFTS.
f//
OBOTH SIDES OF STREAM.
O
SEE PLAN SHEET 5 AND
BANK
DETAIL ON THIS SHEET.
OO O STREAM
00O(
O
00
000000000
000Q B
O°O
oo0 uo
°On00o
000
BANK
B 00 �j 0°
STREAM
(1
O EXTEND ROCK MIXTURE
O MINIMUM OF 15 FEET PAST
° BOTTOM OF BANK, BOTH
SIDES.
O
TAPER SOIL LIFT BACK AT A 2:1 —�
SLOPE TO TIE INTO ROCK FORD.
A
PLAN
12FT WIDE - 2FT DEPTH
ROCK FOLCROSSING:
10 % CABC
MATCH EXISTING
10 % CLASE
SLOPE OF ACCESS DRIVE
20%CLASE
(BOTH SIDES)
60%CLASE
UNDERLAY STONE MIXTURE
WITH FILTER FABRIC
SECTION A -A
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTED
RIFFLE I SOIL LIFTS.
SEE PLAN SHEET 5 AND
TAPER ROCK BACK
DETAIL ON THIS SHEET.
INTO EXISTING BED
FLOW121.E
Qf—
UNDERLAY STONE MIXTURE
WITH FILTER FABRIC
PROFILE B -B
NOTE:
TOP 4" OF ROCK MIXTURE SHALL BE FINISHED WITH
A COMBINATION OF CABC STONE AND NATIVE BED
MATERIAL TO ENSURE
THAT A SMOOTH, TAMPED
SURFACE IS ACCOMPLISHED
FOR CATTLE PASSAGE.
ROCK
FORD CROSSING
SCALE: NTS
v�
C) Q
U z
w J
o O
Of
I— Q
U
Y w F
LLJ Of
wO v O
Z
U w cn r
Z Z
Z Q 0 z
c j O
W>� o
J m O
0
z
H
Of
DATE: OCTOBER 2015
SCALE: N T S
DETAILS

ANY DEVIATION FROM ABOVE DEWATERING PLAN
WILL REQUIRE DESIGNER APPROVAL.
1. INSTALL SILT BAGS(S) AND ROCK PAD(S).
2. INSTALL UPSTREAM PUMP AND TEMPORARY FLEXIBLE HOSE.
3. PLACE UPSTREAM IMPERVIOUS DIKE AND BEGIN PUMPING
OPERATIONS FOR STREAM DIVERSION.
4. PLACE DOWNSTREAM IMPERVIOUS DIKE AND PUMPING
APPARATUS. DEWATER ENTRAPPED AREA.
5. PERFORM REPAIR WORK IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANS.
6. EXCAVATE ANY ACCUMULATED SILT AND DEWATER BEFORE
REMOVAL OF IMPERVIOUS DIKES. REMOVE IMPERVIOUS
DIKES, PUMPS, AND TEMPORARY FLEXIBLE HOSE
(DOWNSTREAM IMPERVIOUS DIKES FIRST).
7. REMOVE SILT BAG(S) AND STABILIZE DISTURBED AREA WITH
SEED AND MULCH,
EXAMPLE OF PUMP -AROUND OPERATION
SCALE: NTS
STILLING BASIN MAINTENANCE:
1. SEDIMENT BAGS SHALL BE REPLACED AND DISPOSED OF WHEN IT
IS THREE-QUARTERS FULL OF SEDIMENT OR WHEN IT IS IMPRACTICAL
FOR THE BAG TO FILTER THE SEDIMENT OUT AT A REASONABLE
FLOW RATE,
2. ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT SHOULD BE DISPOSED OF IN A DESIGNATED
DISPOSAL AREA.
3. SPENT BAGS SHOULD BE DISPOSED OF PROPERLY AND NOT BURIED.
4. GRAVEL PADS SHOULD BE CHECKED DAILY DURING USE TO ENSURE THAT
GRAVEL HAS NOT BEEN WASHED AWAY OR BEEN CHOKED BY EXCESSIVE
SEDIMENTATION.
5. REPLACE PAD WITH CLEAN GRAVEL, AS NEEDED.
NOTE: PROVIDE STABILIZED OUTLET DOWN BANK TO STREAM
SPECIAL STILLING BASIN (SILT BAG) WITH ROCK PAD
SCALE.NTS
GPyO�P,
(OVER FILTER FABRIC)
NOTES:
1. TURNING RADIUS SUFFICIENT TO ACCOMODATE LARGE
TRUCKS SHALL BE PROVIDED.
2. ENTRANCE(S) SHOULD BE LOCATED TO PROVIDE FOR UTILIZATION
BY ALL CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES.
3. MUST BE MAINTAINED IN A CONDITION WHICH WILL PREVENT
TRACKING OR DIRECT FLOW OF MUD ONTO STREETS. PERIODIC
TOPDRESSING WITH STONE WILL BE NECESSARY.
4. ANY MATERIAL TRACKED ONTO THE ROADWAY MUST BE CLEANED
UP IMMEDIATELY.
5. GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE SHALL BE LOCATED AT ALL
POINTS OF INGRESS AND EGRESS UNTIL SITE IS STABILIZED.
FREQUENT CHECKS OF THE DEVICE AND TIMELY MAINTENANCE
MUST BE PROVIDED.
STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
SCALE:NTS
e�
OOoDOOO Oo
O 00
PLAN BJ
12"
SILTFENCE .,.....
o.,
4 I `NATURALGROUND
SECTION AA
CLASS B STONE SILT FENCE 12 I #57 STONE
,L1 0 2.� FLOW
O OO OO
SECTION BB NATURAL GROUND
SILT FENCE ROCK OUTLET MAINTENANCE:
1. REMOVE SEDIMENT WHEN IT ACCUMULATES TO ONE-HALF THE DESIGN VOLUME,
2. CHECK STRUCTURE AND ABUTMENTS FOR EROSION, PIPING, OR ROCK DISPLACEMENT.
REPAIR IMMEDIATELY.
3. REMOVE ROCK OUTLET WHEN CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA HAS BEEN
PERMANENTLY STABILIZED, INSPECTED AND APPROVED. REMOVE ALL WATER AND
SEDIMENT PRIOR TO REMOVING SCREEN. DISPOSE OF WASTE MATERIAL IN DESIGNATED
DISPOSAL AREA.
METAL POST
(1.33 Ib PER
LINEAR FOOT)
10 GAUGE MIN. —
TOP AND BOTTOM
STRAND
TEMPORARY SILT FENCE ROCK OUTLET DETAIL
SCALE:NTS
8' MAX.
12?4 GAUGE MIN.
MIDDLE AND VERTICAL WIRES
FILTER FABRIC I, I
WIRE FILTER FABRIC
COMPACTED FILL—
SILT FENCE MAINTENANCE _
1. INSPECT SEDIMENT FENCES WEEKLY
AND AFTER EACH RAINFALL EVENT.
2. SHOULD FABRIC TEAR, DECOMPOSE, OR IN
ANYWAY BECOME INEFFECTIVE, REPLACE
IT IMMEDIATELY.
3. REMOVE SEDIMENT DEPOSITS PROMPTLY TO
PROVIDE ADEQUATE STORAGE VOLUME FOR THE
NEXT RAIN AND TO REDUCE PRESSURE ON THE
FENCE. TAKE CARE TO AVOID UNDERMINING
FENCE DURING CLEANOUT.
4. REMOVE ALL FENCING MATERIALS AND
UNSTABLE SEDIMENT DEPOSITS AFTER THE
CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA HAS BEEN
PROPERLY STABILIZED, INSPECTED AND
APPROVED. BRING THE DISTURBED AREA TO
GRADE AND STABILIZE AS SHOWN IN THE
VEGETATION PLAN.
I
EXTENSION OF I
FABRIC AND
WIRE INTO TRENCH
I I
SILT FENCE DETAIL
SCALE:NTS
Y
Z
m
UTILIZE A STABILIZED —_`
SILT BAG WITH
OUTLET FOR THE r----��
ROCK PAD
DISCHARGE OF
CLEAN WATER
1
I ` 1
DEWATERING
IMPERVIOUS DIKE ,
PUMP
I
I
I�CHANNEL
o
I
/ I
I
IMPERVIOUS DIKE
TEMPORARY —�
LIVE CUTTING
n
FLEXIBLE HOSE I ♦
(1" TO 2" DIAMETER)
rn
I
I � I
LIVE STAKE
CONTRACTOR MAY UTILIZE
I
ANGLE CUT 30°-45°
ACCEPTABLE MATERIALS TO
GROUND
INCLUDE SHEET PILES, SANDBAGS,
' I FLOW
INLET FOR CLEAN
AND/OR THE PLACEMENT OF AN
1
WATER TO BE RAISED
ACCEPTABLE STONE LINED WITH
i
OFF STREAM
POLYPROPOLENE OR OTHER
I
O
BOTTOM. THIS MAY
\
IMPERVIOUS FABRIC. EARTH
REQUIRE PLACEMENT
MATERIALS SHALL NOT BE USED
'
I
OF GRAVEL UNDER
TO CONSTRUCT THE IMPERVIOUS
1
INTAKE.
DIKES.
,
AT LEAST THREE OF THE LISTED SPECIES MUST BE INSTALLED AND NO SINGLE
LIVE STAKING SPECIES SHALL COMPOSE MORE THAN 40% OF THE TOTAL
1
1
LIVE STAKES SHALL BE INSTALLED IN 3 ROWS AT 2' CENTER SPACING ON ALL
PUMP -AROUND
PUMP
LIVE STAKES DETAIL
SCALE:NTS
SEQUENCE OF DEWATERING
OPERATIONS
ANY DEVIATION FROM ABOVE DEWATERING PLAN
WILL REQUIRE DESIGNER APPROVAL.
1. INSTALL SILT BAGS(S) AND ROCK PAD(S).
2. INSTALL UPSTREAM PUMP AND TEMPORARY FLEXIBLE HOSE.
3. PLACE UPSTREAM IMPERVIOUS DIKE AND BEGIN PUMPING
OPERATIONS FOR STREAM DIVERSION.
4. PLACE DOWNSTREAM IMPERVIOUS DIKE AND PUMPING
APPARATUS. DEWATER ENTRAPPED AREA.
5. PERFORM REPAIR WORK IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANS.
6. EXCAVATE ANY ACCUMULATED SILT AND DEWATER BEFORE
REMOVAL OF IMPERVIOUS DIKES. REMOVE IMPERVIOUS
DIKES, PUMPS, AND TEMPORARY FLEXIBLE HOSE
(DOWNSTREAM IMPERVIOUS DIKES FIRST).
7. REMOVE SILT BAG(S) AND STABILIZE DISTURBED AREA WITH
SEED AND MULCH,
EXAMPLE OF PUMP -AROUND OPERATION
SCALE: NTS
STILLING BASIN MAINTENANCE:
1. SEDIMENT BAGS SHALL BE REPLACED AND DISPOSED OF WHEN IT
IS THREE-QUARTERS FULL OF SEDIMENT OR WHEN IT IS IMPRACTICAL
FOR THE BAG TO FILTER THE SEDIMENT OUT AT A REASONABLE
FLOW RATE,
2. ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT SHOULD BE DISPOSED OF IN A DESIGNATED
DISPOSAL AREA.
3. SPENT BAGS SHOULD BE DISPOSED OF PROPERLY AND NOT BURIED.
4. GRAVEL PADS SHOULD BE CHECKED DAILY DURING USE TO ENSURE THAT
GRAVEL HAS NOT BEEN WASHED AWAY OR BEEN CHOKED BY EXCESSIVE
SEDIMENTATION.
5. REPLACE PAD WITH CLEAN GRAVEL, AS NEEDED.
NOTE: PROVIDE STABILIZED OUTLET DOWN BANK TO STREAM
SPECIAL STILLING BASIN (SILT BAG) WITH ROCK PAD
SCALE.NTS
GPyO�P,
(OVER FILTER FABRIC)
NOTES:
1. TURNING RADIUS SUFFICIENT TO ACCOMODATE LARGE
TRUCKS SHALL BE PROVIDED.
2. ENTRANCE(S) SHOULD BE LOCATED TO PROVIDE FOR UTILIZATION
BY ALL CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES.
3. MUST BE MAINTAINED IN A CONDITION WHICH WILL PREVENT
TRACKING OR DIRECT FLOW OF MUD ONTO STREETS. PERIODIC
TOPDRESSING WITH STONE WILL BE NECESSARY.
4. ANY MATERIAL TRACKED ONTO THE ROADWAY MUST BE CLEANED
UP IMMEDIATELY.
5. GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE SHALL BE LOCATED AT ALL
POINTS OF INGRESS AND EGRESS UNTIL SITE IS STABILIZED.
FREQUENT CHECKS OF THE DEVICE AND TIMELY MAINTENANCE
MUST BE PROVIDED.
STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
SCALE:NTS
e�
OOoDOOO Oo
O 00
PLAN BJ
12"
SILTFENCE .,.....
o.,
4 I `NATURALGROUND
SECTION AA
CLASS B STONE SILT FENCE 12 I #57 STONE
,L1 0 2.� FLOW
O OO OO
SECTION BB NATURAL GROUND
SILT FENCE ROCK OUTLET MAINTENANCE:
1. REMOVE SEDIMENT WHEN IT ACCUMULATES TO ONE-HALF THE DESIGN VOLUME,
2. CHECK STRUCTURE AND ABUTMENTS FOR EROSION, PIPING, OR ROCK DISPLACEMENT.
REPAIR IMMEDIATELY.
3. REMOVE ROCK OUTLET WHEN CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA HAS BEEN
PERMANENTLY STABILIZED, INSPECTED AND APPROVED. REMOVE ALL WATER AND
SEDIMENT PRIOR TO REMOVING SCREEN. DISPOSE OF WASTE MATERIAL IN DESIGNATED
DISPOSAL AREA.
METAL POST
(1.33 Ib PER
LINEAR FOOT)
10 GAUGE MIN. —
TOP AND BOTTOM
STRAND
TEMPORARY SILT FENCE ROCK OUTLET DETAIL
SCALE:NTS
8' MAX.
12?4 GAUGE MIN.
MIDDLE AND VERTICAL WIRES
FILTER FABRIC I, I
WIRE FILTER FABRIC
COMPACTED FILL—
SILT FENCE MAINTENANCE _
1. INSPECT SEDIMENT FENCES WEEKLY
AND AFTER EACH RAINFALL EVENT.
2. SHOULD FABRIC TEAR, DECOMPOSE, OR IN
ANYWAY BECOME INEFFECTIVE, REPLACE
IT IMMEDIATELY.
3. REMOVE SEDIMENT DEPOSITS PROMPTLY TO
PROVIDE ADEQUATE STORAGE VOLUME FOR THE
NEXT RAIN AND TO REDUCE PRESSURE ON THE
FENCE. TAKE CARE TO AVOID UNDERMINING
FENCE DURING CLEANOUT.
4. REMOVE ALL FENCING MATERIALS AND
UNSTABLE SEDIMENT DEPOSITS AFTER THE
CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA HAS BEEN
PROPERLY STABILIZED, INSPECTED AND
APPROVED. BRING THE DISTURBED AREA TO
GRADE AND STABILIZE AS SHOWN IN THE
VEGETATION PLAN.
I
EXTENSION OF I
FABRIC AND
WIRE INTO TRENCH
I I
SILT FENCE DETAIL
SCALE:NTS
COIR MATTING
UNDERLAIN BY STRAW,
SEED, AND FERTILIZER
PROPOSED
GROUND
1" x 2" NOTCHED
GRADE STAKE
ANCHORING
"" ......... \\ I I NOTES:
\\\V\ V COIR MATTING AND LIVE STAKES SHALL BE INSTALLED ALONG
ANY DISTURBED BANKS WITHIN THE REPAIR AREAS THAT DO
NOT HAVE SOIL LIFTS.
MATTING SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO THE INTRODUCTION
1" x 2" NOTCHED OF WATER TO A STREAM SECTION.
GRADESTAKE
ANCHORING GROUND SHALL BE PREPARED AND SEED & FERTILIZER APPLIED
ACCORDING TO PROJECT SPECIAL PROVISIONS.
MATTING SHALL EXTEND FROM TOE OF SLOPE TO THE TOP OF
BANK.
COIR MATTING DETAIL
SCALE:NTS
STOCKPILED
EARTH
SILT FENCE
�SF�
---------190----------
NOTES:
TEMPORARY SEEDING MUST BE APPLIED TO STOCKPILES IF NOT
RELOCATED WITHIN 7 DAYS.
ALL STOCKPILES SHALL BE WITHIN LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE.
SILT FENCE SHALL BE INSTALLED DOWN GRADIENT OF ALL STOCK-
PILES.
TEMPORARY STOCKPILE DETAIL
SCALE: NTS
CH
G
0
N
n
wN
wz
Nzi
Oo
0of
¢
�U
rn F
Y 0
�o
oz
X2
rn (7
�w
v�
z
z
J
O
U
OfF
O
Z
z
Z
Z)
O
U
D-
O
0
z
�iZH[979:�ZSF�
EROSION
CONTROL
PLAN
Y
Z
m
OLLO
SQUARE CUT
BUDS
(FACING UPWARD)
o
g z
LIVE CUTTING
n
k m
(1" TO 2" DIAMETER)
rn
O O
LIVE STAKE
w
ANGLE CUT 30°-45°
GROUND
COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME
BLACK WILLOW SALIX NIGRA
SILKY WILLOW SALIX SERICEA
SILKY DOGWOOD CORNUS AMOMUM
ELDERBERRY SAMBUCUS CANADENSIS
NOTES:
COIR MATTING AND LIVE STAKES SHALL BE INSTALLED ALONG ANY DISTURBED
BANKS WITHIN THE REPAIR AREAS THAT DO NOT HAVE SOIL LIFTS.
AT LEAST THREE OF THE LISTED SPECIES MUST BE INSTALLED AND NO SINGLE
LIVE STAKING SPECIES SHALL COMPOSE MORE THAN 40% OF THE TOTAL
NUMBER OF LIVE STAKES TO BE INSTALLED.
LIVE STAKES SHALL BE INSTALLED IN 3 ROWS AT 2' CENTER SPACING ON ALL
DISTURBED STREAM BANKS, AT RANDOM SPECIES PLACEMENT.
LIVE STAKES DETAIL
SCALE:NTS
COIR MATTING
UNDERLAIN BY STRAW,
SEED, AND FERTILIZER
PROPOSED
GROUND
1" x 2" NOTCHED
GRADE STAKE
ANCHORING
"" ......... \\ I I NOTES:
\\\V\ V COIR MATTING AND LIVE STAKES SHALL BE INSTALLED ALONG
ANY DISTURBED BANKS WITHIN THE REPAIR AREAS THAT DO
NOT HAVE SOIL LIFTS.
MATTING SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO THE INTRODUCTION
1" x 2" NOTCHED OF WATER TO A STREAM SECTION.
GRADESTAKE
ANCHORING GROUND SHALL BE PREPARED AND SEED & FERTILIZER APPLIED
ACCORDING TO PROJECT SPECIAL PROVISIONS.
MATTING SHALL EXTEND FROM TOE OF SLOPE TO THE TOP OF
BANK.
COIR MATTING DETAIL
SCALE:NTS
STOCKPILED
EARTH
SILT FENCE
�SF�
---------190----------
NOTES:
TEMPORARY SEEDING MUST BE APPLIED TO STOCKPILES IF NOT
RELOCATED WITHIN 7 DAYS.
ALL STOCKPILES SHALL BE WITHIN LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE.
SILT FENCE SHALL BE INSTALLED DOWN GRADIENT OF ALL STOCK-
PILES.
TEMPORARY STOCKPILE DETAIL
SCALE: NTS
CH
G
0
N
n
wN
wz
Nzi
Oo
0of
¢
�U
rn F
Y 0
�o
oz
X2
rn (7
�w
v�
z
z
J
O
U
OfF
O
Z
z
Z
Z)
O
U
D-
O
0
z
�iZH[979:�ZSF�
EROSION
CONTROL
PLAN

-40 -20 0 40 80
GRAPHIC SCALE
RIPARIAN
ZONE
BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD PLANTING ZONE = 1.31 ACRES
12" - 18" BARE ROOT MATERIAL
680 STEMS/ACRE (8'X 8' SPACING), RANDOM SPECIES PLACEMENT
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
L
'CONSERVATION EA
'sEMEIVT
NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME STATUS % OF TOTAL # OF PLANTS
RIVER BIRCH BETULA NIGRA FACW 20 180
SILKY DOGWOOD CORNUS AMOMUM FACW 15 135
SWAMP CHESTNUT OAK QUERCUS MICHAUXII FACW 20 180
AMERICAN SYCAMORE PLATANUS OCCIDENTALIS FACW 25 225
ARROWHEAD VIBURNUM VIBURNUN DETATUM FAC 20 180
3�I
BARE ROOT PLANTING NOTE: EXISTING VEGETATION NOTE:
ALONG WITH THE PLANTING PLAN, BARE ALL OTHER AREAS AREAS OUTSIDE OF THE
ROOT PLANTS SHALL BE PLANTED PLANTING ZONE CONSIST OF MATURE MIXED
THROUGHOUT ALL DISTURBED AREAS HARDWOOD SPECIES.
WITHIN THE LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE,
EXCEPT FOR THE 20' ACCESS EASEMENT.
cQNSF
Req rIQN
� FqSFMFNr
c0/v
9/v
MFNT
1
0
SSP
•����• Z
Z
W
F-
C) U
W Zz
O
0� H
w U
W =
w O v o
Z
U a cn
I— Z 2 z
Q�� o
� > U
W >� J
J 00
v 0
H
Dare: OCTOBER 2015
scn�e: GRAPHIC
PLANTING
PLAN

EROSION CONTROL NOTES:
SITE AREA
STABILIZATION
TEMPORARY SEED MIX
1. IT IS THE INTENT OF THESE PLANS THAT AS SOON AS AN AREA OF GRADING
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL UTILIZE THE FOLLOWING SEED/FERTILIZER
S COMPLETE IT SHALL BE STABILIZED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE EROSION
MIX IN SEEDING ALL DISTURBED AREAS WITHIN THE PROJECT LIMITS:
CONTROL PRACTICES DESCRIBED IN THESE PLANS. DUE TO THE ANTICIPATED
AND SLOPES
DURATION AND SEQUENCE OF THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES, THE
SUMMER MIX (APRIL 15 - AUGUST 15)
CONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO MINIMIZE, AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, THE AMOUNT
GERMAN MILLET _ _ _ _ . _ SETARIA ITALICA _ _ . _ .. 20 LBS / ACRE
OF THE AREA THAT IS DISTURBED AT ONE TIME.
BROWNTOP MILLET . _ _ UROCHLOA RAMOSA---- 20 LBS / ACRE
2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL EXERCISE EVERY REASONABLE PRECAUTION
WINTER MIX (AUGUST 15 - APRIL 15)
THROUGHOUT THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT TO PREVENT EROSION
RYE GRAIN_ SECALE CEREALE....... 100 LBS /ACRE
AND SEDIMENTATION. EROSION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE INSTALLED AND
MAINTAINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROJECT PLANS, NORTH CAROLINA
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .
WHEAT _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ TRITICUM AESTIVUM_ . _ _ _ 20 LBS / ACRE
SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL GUIDELINES AND AS DIRECTED BY
FLATTER
THE DESIGNER.
ALL OTHER AREAS
PERMANENT SEED MIX
3. ALL DISTURBED SOILS WILL BE SEEDED FOR VEGETATIVE STABILIZATION
SEED MIX
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL UTILIZE THE FOLLOWING FOLLOWINGSTREAMSID
FOLLOWING THE GUIDELINES DESCRIBED ON THIS SHEET AND ACCORDING
TO THE FOLLOWING SCHEDULE: TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT SEEDING
AND FERTILIZER SPECIFICATION IN ALL AND FLOODPLAIN
MUST BE APPLIED ON ALL GRADED SLOPES AND FILL WITHIN 7 CALENDAR
NATURAL AREAS .
DAYS, PERMANENT SEEDING MUST BE APPLIED TO ALL DISTURBED AREAS
APPLICATION RATE (IN MIX)
WITHIN 15 WORKING DAYS.
PERMANENT NATIVE SPECIES % OF MIX LBS/ACRE
4. SILT FENCE SHALL BE INSTALLED AS DEPICTED ON THE PLANS PRIOR TO THE
VIRGINIA WILD RYE -- ELYMUS VIRGINICUS 35 8.75
COMMENCEMENT OF DISTURBANCE ACTIVITIES. SILT FENCE SHALL BE
BEAKED PANIC GRASS -- PANICUM ANCEPS 20 5.00
TEMPORARILY REMOVED IN EACH ISOLATED WORK AREA TO PERMIT GRADING
RIVER OATS -- CHASMANTHIUM LATIFOLIUM 30 7.50
OF THE RESTORED STREAM. IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING THE COMPLETION OF
DEER TONGUE -- DICHANTHELIUM CLANDESTINUM 5 1.25
STABILIZATION MEASURES FOR EACH ISOLATED AREA AND PRIOR TO THE
INITIATION OF WORK ON ANOTHER SECTION, THE SILT FENCE SHALL BE
FOX SEDGE -- CAREX VULPINOIDEA 5 1.25
REINSTALLED AT ITS ORIGINAL LOCATION. SILT FENCE SHALL BE MAINTAINED
REDTOP -- AGROSTIS ALBA 5 1.25
HEREAFTER AND SHALL NOT BE REMOVED UNTIL GROUND COVER HAS BEEN FULL
ESTABLISHED WITHIN THE LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE. SILT FENCE SHALL ALSO BE
TOTAL 100 25
INSTALLED ON THE LOW SIDE OF ANY TEMPORARY STOCKPILES OF EXCAVATED
MATERIAL.
FERTILIZER AND LIMESTONE SHALL BE APPLIED AT THE RATE
5, IN THE EVENT OF A STORM, THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR
OF 500 LBS / ACRE AND 2000 LBS / ACRE, RESPECTIVELY.
REMOVAL OR PROTECTION OF ANY EQUIPMENT, TOOLS, MATERIALS OR
FERTILIZER SHALL BE 5-10-10 ANALYSIS. UPON SOIL ANALYSIS
OTHER ITEMS NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE WORK THAT COULD BE AFFECTED
A DIFFERENT RATIO OF FERTILIZER MAY BE USED.
BY STORMWATER.
6. ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES WILL BE CHECKED FOR
STABILITY AND FUNCTIONAL OPERATION FOLLOWING EVERY RUNOFF
PRODUCING RAIN EVENT AND/OR AT LEAST ONCE PER WEEK. ANY NEEDED
MAINTENANCE OR REPAIRS SHALL BE MADE IMMEDIATELY TO MAINTAIN ALL
MEASURES AS DESIGNED. ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT SHALL BE REMOVED FROM
CONTROL MEASURES WHEN THEY REACH APPROXIMATELY 50% OF THEIR
FUNCTIONAL CAPACITY. THESE MEASURES SHALL BE REPAIRED IF DISTURBED
DURING MAINTENANCE. ALL SEEDED AREAS SHALL BE FERTILIZED, RESEEDED
AND MULCHED, AS NECESSARY, TO PROMOTE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF
VEGETATION COVER.
7. EACH SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICE WILL BE REMOVED AFTER ALL WORK IN
THE CORRESPONDING CONSTRUCTION PHASE HAS BEEN COMPLETED AND
THE AREAS HAVE BEEN STABILIZED.
8. THE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES AND STAGING AREAS IDENTIFIED ON THE
PLANS PROVIDE THE ONLY ACCESS POINTS INTO THE LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE.
NO ADDITIONAL ACCESS POINTS SHALL BE USED WITHOUT APPROVAL OF THE
DESIGNER.
9. ALL REPAIR WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED IN DRY OR ISOLATED AREAS, WITH
NO STANDING WATER OR WATER FLOWING THROUGH THE WORK AREA.
10. A TEMPORARY PUMP -AROUND SHALL BE UTILIZED BY THE CONTRACTOR
DURING WORK ON THE STREAM TO DIVERT FLOW FROM AND DEWATER
THE DESIGNATED AREA IN ORDER TO WORK. THE TEMPORARY PUMP -AROUND
USED BY THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MEET ALL REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED IN
THESE PLANS. THE TEMPORARY PUMP -AROUND SHALL BE INSTALLED AND
REMOVED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MANUFACTURER'S GUIDELINES. TWENTY-
FOUR (24) HOURS PRIOR TO THE INITIATION OF PUMP -AROUND ACTIVITIES, THE
CONTRACTOR SHALL MEASURE THE APPROXIMATE FLOW RATE AT THE PUMP -
AROUND LOCATION. THE FLOW RATE SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE DESIGNER
FOR APPROVAL. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL, THEREAFTER, UTILIZE A PUMP(S)
SUFFICIENT TO ACCOMODATE 120% (1.2 TIMES) THE APPROVED FLOW RATE.
GROUND STABILIZATION
SITE AREA
STABILIZATION
DESCRIPTION
TIME FRAME
PERIMETER DIKES,
SWALES, DITCHES
7 DAYS
AND SLOPES
HIGH QUALITY
WATER (HQ"
7 DAYS
ZONES
SLOPES STEEPER
7 DAYS
THAN 3:1
SLOPES 3:1 OR
7 DAYS
FLATTER
ALL OTHER AREAS
WITH SLOPES FLATTER
7 DAYS
THAN 4:1
INSPECTIONS
WEEKLY INSPECTIONS REQUIRED.
RAIN GAUGE MUST BE PRESENT AT SITE.
INSPECTIONS REQUIRED AFTER 0.5" RAIN EVENTS.
INSPECTIONS ARE ONLY REQUIRED DURING
"NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS".
INSPECTION REPORTS MUST BE AVAILABLE
ON-SITE DURING BUSINESS HOURS UNLESS A SITE
SPECIFIC EXEMPTION IS APPROVED.
RECORD MUST BE KEPT FOR 3 YEARS AND
AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST.
ELECTRONICALLY -AVAILABLE RECORDS MAY BE
SUBSTITUTED UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS.
SEEDBED PREPARATION
THE SEEDBED SHALL BE COMPRISED OF LOOSE SOIL AND NOT
COMPACTED. THIS MAY REQUIRE LIGHT MECHANICAL LOOSENING
OF THE SOIL. SOIL AMENDMENTS SHOULD FOLLOW THE FERTILIZER
AND LIMING DESCRIPTION IN THE ABOVE SECTIONS. FOLLOWING
SEEDING, MULCHING SHALL FOLLOW THE BELOW APPLICATION
METHODS AND AMOUNTS.
MULCHING
SEEDED AREAS ARE TO BE PROTECTED BY SPREADING STRAW MULCH
UNIFORMLY TO FORM A CONTINUOUS BLANKET (75% COVERAGE = 2
TONS/ACRE) OVER SEEDED AREAS. CONTRACTOR MAY PROPOSE
ALTERNATE METHODS OF SEED, FERTILIZER AND LIMING (HYDRO -SEEDING)
UPON SUBMISSION TO THE DESIGNER OF CALCULATIONS SHOWING
THE EQUIVALENCY OF THE PROPOSED METHOD.
p
u F
^� W
w
5
Z
z
w
N.T.S.
N �
W N
pK
W
d°
0�
8V
K=
Y~
0:0
wZ
x=
U3S2
EROSION
CONTROL
PLAN
SHEET 7 OF 8 I

11
0 ; ' \
O
TO
D
/ 1
Z
� 1
/ � 1
/ , 1
' 1 �
/ 1 ; CO
1 1 CONTRACTOR SHALEXISTNG 2" PLASTICL TAKE ATER LINE. ERVgT "' `
/pN I
/ 1 PRECAUTIONS TO ENSURE LINE EMF/VT�
1 \ IS NOT DAMAGED DURING
CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.
LOD \ \
toD
\ \ /LO
Vpp D
\ / D
PROPOSED SILT
STAGING AREA j / X00 FENCE ROCK OUTLET SF p
\ /
O
I / F
\\) 1 SF
1 '
\ 1
SF rt 00'
008 '
ao o°SQOO 001
0000Dc1
Oo0$o• g00 C) i e
U0 pF p,NK
f ............. 0000 lop
°g ; a
F 11— p 1
F
SF 1 10
1 1
1 /
1 1
♦ ��' 111 1
♦ 1 1 1
1 PROPOSED 11 1
11 STAGING AREA; 11
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
_ 1 1
EXISTING EARTHEN
NAD 83 O,y \\ \\ ACCESS PATH
F \ \
-20 -10 0 20 40
EXISTING RESOURCES NOTE: \ \
DAMAGE TO ANY EXISTING RESOURCES,
SUCH AS THE ACCESS DRIVE AND GRASS,
SHALL BE REPAIRED BY THE CONTRACTOR \ \
TO A CONDITION EQUAL TO, OR BETTER ♦ \ \\
THAN THE PRE -CONSTRUCTION CONDITION. ♦ \\
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE = 1.24 ACRES
�06 \'p0
LOD
SITE ENTRANCE OVERVIEW
SCALE: 1 " =100'
EXISTING GRAVEL
ACCESS PATH
CONSERVATION
EASEMENT
EXISTING CHICKEN
HOUSES
PROPOSED STABILIZED
CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
H
Q
z
0
Q
U
2
F
tr
O
z
z
D
O
U
S
a
O
0
z
Q
1 DATE: OCTOBER 2011
scare GRAPHIC
EROSION
CONTROL
PLAN
m