20181029 Ver 1_Mitigation Plan_2020_20210422

irZIF
Staff Review Form
NORFH CA.,i0:INA
En vironmenfrr!QvoGry
Updated September 4,2020
Staff Review
Does this application have all the attachments needed to accept it into the review process?*
6* Yes r No
ID#* Version* 1
20181029
Is this project a public transportation project?* C Yes
r No
Reviewer List:* Erin Davis:eads\ebdavis
Select Reviewing Office:* Central Office-[phone]
Does this project require a request for payment to be sent?*
C
Yes
r
No

Project Submittal Form
Please note:fields marked with a red asterisk *below are required. You will not be able to submit the form until all
mandatory questions are answered.
Project Type:* r For the Record Only(Courtesy Copy)
r New Project
r Modification/New Project with Existing ID
✓ More Information Response
✓ Other Agency Comments
r Pre-Application Submittal
r Re-Issuance\Renewal Request
✓ Stream or Buffer Appeal
Is this supplemental information that needs to be sent to the Corps?*
✓ Yes ( No
Project Contact Information
Name: Lin Xu
Who is submitting the inforrration?
Email Address: [e-mail]
Project Information
Existing ID#: Existing Version:
20181029 1
20170001(no dashes) 1
Project Name: Monkey Wall Mitigation Project
Is this a public transportation project?
✓ Yes
6* No
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
✓ Yes r No r Unknown
County(ies)
Mitchell
Please upload all files that need to be submited.
Click the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach docurrent
Mon keyWa ll_100069_MP_2020.pdf 28.19MB
Only pdf or knz files are accepted.
Describe the attachments
or comments:
Sign and Submit
17 By checking the box and signing box below, I certify that:

■ I,the project proponent, hereby certifies that all information contained herein is true,accurate, and complete to
the best of my knowledge and belief.
■ I,the project proponent, hereby requests that the certifying authority review and take action on this CWA 401
certification request within the applicable reasonable period of time.
■ I agree that submission of this online form is a"transaction"subject to Chapter 66,Article 40 of the NC General
Statutes(the"Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
■ I agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66,Article 40 of the NC General
Statutes(the"Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
■ I understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as a
written signature;AND
■ I intend to electronically sign and submit the online form.
Signature:
Submittal Date: Is filled in autocratically.

Final Mitigation Plan
Monkey Wall Project
DMS Project #: 100069 I Contract #: 7536 I USACE Action ID: SAW- 2018-01162
DWR Project #: 20181029 I RFP: 16-007336
June 2020
French Broad River Basin I HUC 06010108 I Mitchell County, North Carolina
Prepared By:
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC
For Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
919-209-1062
Prepared For:
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
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).
• NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services In -Lieu Fee Instrument signed and dated July 28, 2010
These documents govern NCDMS operations and procedures for the delivery of compensatory mitigation.

4.1;t1T °p DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
, I WILMINGTON DISTRICT,CORPS OF ENGINEERS
a _ 2, 69 DARLINGTON AVENUE
° „ilk, It tl WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403-1343
yrT REPEYATTENTIOTO N OF: May 27, 2020
Regulatory Division
Re: NCIRT Review and USACE Approval of the NCDMS Monkey Wall Mitigation Site / Mitchell
Co./ SAW-201 8-01 1 62/ NCDMS Project # 100069
Mr. Tim Baumgartner
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
Dear Mr. Baumgartner:
The purpose of this letter is to provide the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
(NCDMS) with all comments generated by the North Carolina Interagency Review Team
(NCIRT) during the 30-day comment period for the Monkey Wall Draft Mitigation Plan, which
closed on April 24, 2020. These comments are attached for your review.
Based on our review of these comments, we have determined that no major concerns
have been identified with the Draft Mitigation Plan, which is considered approved with this
correspondence. However, several minor issues were identified, as described in the attached
comment memo, which must be addressed in the Final Mitigation Plan.
The Final Mitigation Plan is to be submitted with the Preconstruction Notification (PCN)
Application for Nationwide permit approval of the project along with a copy of this letter. Issues
identified above must be addressed in the Final Mitigation Plan. All changes made to the Final
Mitigation Plan should be summarized in an errata sheet included at the beginning of the
document. If it is determined that the project does not require a Department of the Army permit,
you must still provide a copy of the Final Mitigation Plan, along with a copy of this letter, to the
appropriate USACE field office at least 30 days in advance of beginning construction of the
project. Please note that this approval does not preclude the inclusion of permit conditions in
the permit authorization for the project, particularly if issues mentioned above are not
satisfactorily addressed. Additionally, this letter provides initial approval for the Mitigation Plan,
but this does not guarantee that the project will generate the requested amount of mitigation
credit. As you are aware, unforeseen issues may arise during construction or monitoring of the
project that may require maintenance or reconstruction that may lead to reduced credit.

Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter, and if you have any questions
regarding this letter, the mitigation plan review process, or the requirements of the Mitigation
Rule, please call me at 919-554-4884, ext 60.
Sincerely,
Kim Browning
Mitigation Project Manager
for Tyler Crumbley
Enclosures
Electronic Copies Furnished:
NCIRT Distribution List
Harry Tsomides, Paul Wiesner—NCDMS
Brad Breslow—RES

� T OF DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
�� � �� WILMINGTON DISTRICT,CORPS OF ENGINEERS
69 DARLINGTON AVENUE
A �I'1 ef) WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403-1343
iG ' GP
Z'£ 4.4� REPLY TO
Srares oa ATTENTION OF:
CESAW-RG/Browning May 8, 2020
MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD
SUBJECT: Monkey Wall Mitigation Site - NCIRT Comments during 30-day Mitigation Plan Review
PURPOSE: The comments listed below were received during 30-day comment period in accordance
with Section 332.8(g) of the 2008 Mitigation Rule in response to the Notice of NCDMS Mitigation Plan
Review.
NCDMS Project Name: Monkey Wall Mitigation Site, Mitchell County, NC
USACE AID#: SAW-2018-01162
NCDMS #: 100069
30-Day Comment Deadline: April 24, 2020
DWR Comments, Mac Haupt:
1 . DWR appreciates the review from DMS staff prior to IRT review. In this case there seemed to
be quite a few comments. DWR will follow up on a few of their comments and RES's responses:
a. Comment#3- DWR is concerned about moving the stream credit above the JD origin. As
will be stated several times, the main concern about this project will be maintenance of
appropriate flow.
b. Comment #11 and comment #15- one response states that cattle will be removed so no
fencing is needed while comment #15 states that cattle have the ability to access this
reach but will not because it is steep. If any cattle are adjacent to the easement the
project needs to be fenced.
c. Comment # 33- DWR is also concerned with the wetlands adjacent to the stream
channels constructed, both in terms of wetland drainage (more about that later) and
maintenance of appropriate channel characteristics.
d. Comment#34- DWR has noted recently on older projects (10-15 years old)the continued
presence of fescue. DWR recommends treating the fescue before planting the trees.
e. Plan sheet comment-2nd bullet- DWR is also concerned about the potential for piping and
loss of channel stability if the log cascade structures are not installed properly.
2. The central issue at this site will be flow. Table 6 shows the DWR stream determination scores,
and while all the reaches made intermittent, they just made it.
3. Section 7- Mitigation Workplan- Reach G2- DWR does not think the upper portion of reach G2
will have the appropriate flow or show the relevant channel characteristics. DWR believes there
will be at least 300 linear feet of stream credit at risk on this reach.
4. Figure 12- DWR likes the planned wetland monitoring gauge in wetland WA.

5. Design sheet 6- DWR believes it will be very important to properly fill and pack the relict channel
since it is adjacent to the newly constructed channel. In addition, the old channel is downslope
from the wetlands and if the channel is not filled correctly, groundwater will be lost through this
relic channel and it will essentially be acting like a ditch and drain the adjacent wetlands.
6. Design sheet 7- this is the reach that DWR believes is most vulnerable to losing flow. Similar to
the comment above, DWR believes it is critical to fill the relic "channel" correctly or it may cause
flow to enter the relic channel and thereby reduce flow to a channel that is already intermittent
at best.
7. Design sheet P1- please limit the Ash planting percentage to 5%. In addition, to make up for
the 10% needed DWR recommends that the tree species selected is an appropriate mountain
species, something other than Tulip poplar or Sycamore.
8. Design sheet D3- in order to alleviate problems of the previous two comments, DWR strongly
recommends closely adhering to 12 inch compacted lifts shown in the channel backfill detail.
NCWRC Comments, Andrea Leslie:
1 . There are Brown Trout in Big Rock Creek, and in-stream activities should be avoided during the
Brown Trout moratorium (October 15 —April 15).
2. There is a robust Eastern Hellbender (Cryptobranchus alleganiensis, US Federal Species of
Concern, NC Special Concern) population in Big Rock Creek. In order to minimize impacts from
sedimentation to this population, it is extremely important that excellent erosion and sediment
control be practiced on-site.
3. We recommend supplementing the woody species planting list with some additional understory
species.
USACE Comments, Kim Browning:
1 . Reach G2: The formation of stream channel characteristics and flow is a concern in the upper
section of this reach being daylighted. Please revise Section 8.1 .2 performance standard to
include maintaining an OHWM and that the channel will be jurisdictional at the end of the 7-year
monitoring period. A minimum of 30-days flow must be documented every year of the monitoring
period.
a. Please move the flow gauge closer to the top of this reach. It is also advisable to have
photos/video footage to document flow.
2. When submitting the PCN, please include an estimate of the number of trees, or acres, to be
cleared for the NLEB 4(d) Rule.
3. Please place a veg plot in the planted area of WA, random is fine.
a. Will FACW species be planted in this area since it was not identified as a different
planning zone?
4. Tables 1 and 16: footnote indicates that Section 7.7 contains explanation of credit adjustments.
I believe this should read Section 7.4.
5. Section 7.5: The area under the utility easement should receive a credit reduction using the
Buffer Credit Calculator, despite the fact that these areas will be protected in an easement, the
areas will not be maintained in a permanent buffer due to utility maintenance/access, plus these
areas are designed with ford crossings, which are deductions using the Calculator. Please revise
the credit calculator and associated asset tables.
6. Sections 3.2.4 and 9.5 do not address invasive species. Please update accordingly and ensure
that invasives are reported each year in the plot data.
7. Section 3.3: With pastures directly east and west of the project, and no assurance that
Environmental Banc & Exchange will be the perpetual landowner of the property surrounding
the easement, there is concern that future landowners may use the existing pastures adjacent
to the CE for cattle. Livestock exclusion should be considered in future risks and uncertainties
since the easement boundary is not being fenced.

8. Section 3.4.2: Should this read "...are classified as A/B-type...?"
9. Section 5: the first paragraph has fragmented sentences. Please correct
10.Section 5.2: Other potential items to discuss in this section is the potential for road widening,
maintenance along the southwest side of the easement; the effect of utility line maintenance on
the riparian buffer; invasive species; adjacent landowner encroachments; hydrologic trespass
near WA.
11 .With the small watersheds, flow is a concern for this project, especially near the upper reaches
that appear to be an old landslide area. Documentation of flow will be closely monitored for this
project.
12.Section 7.2.1 : Sweetgum and red maple will not be counted towards vegetative success. It is
anticipated they will occur naturally because they are high dispersal species.
a. Any planting that occurs after April 30 will likely not count towards a full year of vegetative
monitoring.
b. Please reduce the amount of Ash planted to less than 5%.
13.Section 7.2.2: Please confirm that fescue will be treated prior to planting.
14.Section 7.3: Areas where existing stream channels are abandoned and partially filled and left for
habitat diversity and flood storage: Please ensure these areas are designed so that they are not
inundated year-round and should ideally dry up toward the end of spring to ensure that predatory
fish species do not live within the pools. The maximum depth of ephemeral pools should typically
be between 8 and 14 inches, with very gradual and wide side slopes to promote easy access by
desired species. These areas should not be so numerous that they leave gaps in the tree
canopy.
15.Section 8.1 .4: Please clarify if permanent cross section will be used for the digital image stations,
or show photo points on Figure 12.
16.Section 8.1 .3: The ER should be no less than 1.4 for B channels and 2.2 for C/E channels.
Please update Table 17 as necessary.
Kim Browning
Mitigation Project Manager
Regulatory Division

MEMORANDUM 2res
3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100 Raleigh,North Carolina 27612 919.209.1062 tel.
919.829.9913 fax
TO: NCIRT and NCDMS
FROM: Kasey Carrere -RES
DATE: June 26th,2020
RE: Response to Monkey Wall Mitigation Site-NCIRT Comments during 30-day
Mitigation Plan Review; DMS Project ID No. 100069,Contract#7536,USACE AID#:
SAW-2018-01162
DWR Comments,Mac Haupt:
1. DWR appreciates the review from DMS staff prior to IRT review. In this case there seemed to be
quite a few comments. DWR will follow up on a few of their comments and RES's responses:
a. Comment#3-DWR is concerned about moving the stream credit above the JD origin.As
will be stated several times,the main concern about this project will be maintenance of
appropriate flow.
RES understands the IRT's concern with flow on G2. As discussed in Section 3.3 of
the mitigation plan, Reach G2's historic valley has been heavily modified, so
determining an exact point for the stream origin presented challenges. Because the
valley is so manipulated, the origin of Reach GI was utilized as a reference for
determining the origin of Reach G2. Both reaches have very similar drainage areas at
the top of their respective valleys (approximately 12 acres) and Reach GI originates
from a wetland seep (Wetland WB). Based on these similarities and the unique nature
of the project reaches,RES decided to begin the alignment of G2 just below an existing
wetland seep (Wetland WC) comparable to the current condition of Reach GI-A.
Furthermore, the design approach will include the removal of an existing 15 inch
perched culvert and associated road, and include re-grading the valley to mimic
conditions similar to the cascade morphology seen along Reach GI-A. RES staff has
continually observed flow from the existing culvert and on multiple occasions has
observed (and heard) flow below the rocks along the proposed "daylighting"
restoration section. Lastly, RES is proposing a flow gauge approximately 35-feet
downstream of the proposed G2 stream origin, with the purpose of demonstrating
consecutive flow requirements as stated in the Wilmington Mitigation guidance.
1

b. Comment#11 and comment#15-one response states that cattle will be removed so no
fencing is needed while comment#15 states that cattle have the ability to access this
reach but will not because it is steep. If any cattle are adjacent to the easement the project
needs to be fenced.
Livestock was initially on the parcel prior to closing of the parcel. However,recently
cattle have been removed from the project and will not have access to the
conservation easement in the future.
c. Comment#33-DWR is also concerned with the wetlands adjacent to the stream
channels constructed,both in terms of wetland drainage (more about that later)and
maintenance of appropriate channel characteristics.
RES anticipated that DWR would be concerned with the unintentional drainage of
the wetlands adjacent to G1 and G2. Thus,RES is proposing the installation of one
groundwater gauge to monitor these adjacent wetlands. Since proposed channel
slopes are steep(8%to 12%),the channel should easily maintain appropriate channel
characteristics.
d. Comment#34-DWR has noted recently on older projects(10-15 years old)the continued
presence of fescue. DWR recommends treating the fescue before planting the trees.
The following sentence in section 7.2.2 was revised and states "Non-native and
invasive species on site include,bermudagrass,tall fescue,broomsedge bluestem, all
of which will be treated prior to planting.".
e. Plan sheet comment-2nd bullet-DWR is also concerned about the potential for piping
and loss of channel stability if the log cascade structures are not installed properly.
RES understands DWR's concern. However, if the structures are installed per detail,
there should be minimal or no issues with the structures. RES plans to have staff
onsite when the first several cascades are installed to ensure that the structures are
installed properly by the contractor.Additionally, all structures will be monitored
during construction to ensure that they are functioning properly.Any issues will be
addressed before construction is completed.
2. The central issue at this site will be flow. Table 6 shows the DWR stream determination scores,
and while all the reaches made intermittent,they just made it.
RES understands the IRT's concern of flow but is confident that flow performance criteria will
be met by the end of the project.Flow will be monitored closely during the monitoring period
and updates will be found in the yearly monitoring reports.
3. Section 7-Mitigation Workplan-Reach G2-DWR does not think the upper portion of reach G2
will have the appropriate flow or show the relevant channel characteristics. DWR believes there
will be at least 300 linear feet of stream credit at risk on this reach.
RES understands the IRT's concern of flow but is confident that flow performance criteria will
be met by the end of the project.Flow will be monitored closely during the monitoring period
and updates will be found in the yearly monitoring reports.
2

4. Figure 12-DWR likes the planned wetland monitoring gauge in wetland WA.
RES appreciates this feedback.
5. Design sheet 6-DWR believes it will be very important to properly fill and pack the relict
channel since it is adjacent to the newly constructed channel. In addition,the old channel is
downslope from the wetlands and if the channel is not filled correctly,groundwater will be lost
through this relic channel and it will essentially be acting like a ditch and drain the adjacent
wetlands.
RES appreciates DWR's concern. If the existing channel is filled and plugged per plan,RES
does not anticipate any issues with permanent loss of groundwater to the old channel.
6. Design sheet 7-this is the reach that DWR believes is most vulnerable to losing flow. Similar to
the comment above,DWR believes it is critical to fill the relic "channel"correctly or it may cause
flow to enter the relic channel and thereby reduce flow to a channel that is already intermittent at
best.
RES appreciates DWR's concern. As noted in 5 above, RES does not anticipate issues with
loss of groundwater if the old channel is filled/plugged per plan.
7. Design sheet P1-please limit the Ash planting percentage to 5%. In addition,to make up for the
10%needed DWR recommends that the tree species selected is an appropriate mountain species,
something other than Tulip poplar or Sycamore.
RES has revised the planting plan to not include ash and replaced that with additional
understory species, as per NCWRC recommendations.
8. Design sheet D3-in order to alleviate problems of the previous two comments,DWR strongly
recommends closely adhering to 12-inch compacted lifts shown in the channel backfill detail.
As noted in 5 & 6 above,RES does not anticipate issues with loss of groundwater if the old
channel is filled/plugged per plan.
NCWRC Comments,Andrea Leslie:
1. There are Brown Trout in Big Rock Creek,and in-stream activities should be avoided during the
Brown Trout moratorium (October 15 —April 15).
RES will adhere to WRC recommendations.No construction is anticipated to occur during the
trout moratorium.
2. There is a robust Eastern Hellbender(Cryptobranchus alleganiensis),US Federal Species of
Concern,NC Special Concern)population in Big Rock Creek. In order to minimize impacts from
sedimentation to this population,it is extremely important that excellent erosion and sediment
control be practiced on-site.
RES understands and has addressed this concern in Section 4.2 by adding the following
statement"... it is important to note that there is population of Eastern Hellbender
(Cryptobranchus alleganiensis), an US Federal Species of Concern and NC Special Concern
Species,in Big Rock Creek(where our project reaches ultimately drain to). In order to
minimize impacts from sedimentation to this population,it is extremely important that
3

excellent erosion and sediment control be practiced on-site." RES will ensure that proper
erosion and sediment control measures will be installed and maintained during the
construction of this site.
3. We recommend supplementing the woody species planting list with some additional understory
species.
RES agrees and has supplemented the proposed planting list in Section 7.2.1 (Table 13)with
the following understory species: tag alder(Alus serrulata), eastern redbud(Cerdis
canadensis), flowering dogwood(Cornus florida), and red mulberry (Morus rubra).
USACE Comments,Kim Browning:
1. Reach G2: The formation of stream channel characteristics and flow is a concern in the upper
section of this reach being daylighted. Please revise Section 8.1.2 performance standard to
include maintaining an OHWM and that the channel will be jurisdictional at the end of the 7-year
monitoring period.A minimum of 30-days flow must be documented every year of the
monitoring period. a. Please move the flow gauge closer to the top of this reach. It is also
advisable to have photos/video footage to document flow.
A sentence was added to Section 8.1.2, "Additionally, all streams must maintain an Ordinary
High-Water Mark and the channel will be jurisdictional by year 7,which will be monitored
and reported in each monitoring report". The flow gauge will be moved closer to the top of the
reach and Figure 12 will be updated to show this change. Pictures will be taken at the flow
gauge to document flow over the monitoring period.
2. When submitting the PCN,please include an estimate of the number of trees,or acres,to be
cleared for the NLEB 4(d)Rule.
When submitting the PCN,RES will provide the approve Categorical Exclusion,which
includes the Northern Long-Earned Bat 4(d)Rule Streamlined Consultation Form.
3. Please place a veg plot in the planted area of WA,random is fine. a.Will FACW species be
planted in this area since it was not identified as a different planning zone?
Figure 12 has been updated to move a random to the planted area of WA, as requested.
4. Tables 1 and 16: footnote indicates that Section 7.7 contains explanation of credit adjustments. I
believe this should read Section 7.4.
Both tables have been revised to refer to Section 7.4 instead of Section 7.7.
5. Section 7.5: The area under the utility easement should receive a credit reduction using the Buffer
Credit Calculator,despite the fact that these areas will be protected in an easement,the areas will
not be maintained in a permanent buffer due to utility maintenance/access,plus these areas are
designed with ford crossings,which are deductions using the Calculator. Please revise the credit
calculator and associated asset tables.
RES has re-ran the Buffer Credit Calculator, and due to the fact that the areas under the
powerline easement will be protected in an easement and may not be maintained in a
permanent buffer due to utility access,credit will deducted from the 0-30 foot buffer width
zone,and no additional credit will be generated in the 31-150 buffer width zone.RES has
4

confirmed with the IRT that this is an appropriate credit adjustment and has provided the
credit calculator and associated asset tables in the digital submission. Clarification has been
added in Section 7.5 stating "RES is not seeking any stream credit for the linear footage or
additional credit for wider buffers within the footprint of the utility easement and is applying a
credit reduction for the area within the 0-30 foot buffer width zone."
6. Sections 3.2.4 and 9.5 do not address invasive species. Please update accordingly and ensure that
invasives are reported each year in the plot data.
Section 3.2.4 has been revised to indicate that the pastures adjacent to the project reaches are
... composed primarily of non-native species including,bermudagrass(Cynodon dactylon)
with tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea) and broomsedge bluestem (Andropogon virginicus)
mixed throughout." Section 9.5 does address non-native species, stating "Invasive and noxious
species will be monitored so that none become dominant or alter the desired community
structure of the Project. If necessary,RES will develop a species-specific treatment plan."
7. Section 3.3: With pastures directly east and west of the project,and no assurance that
Environmental Banc&Exchange will be the perpetual landowner of the property surrounding the
easement,there is concern that future landowners may use the existing pastures adjacent to the
CE for cattle. Livestock exclusion should be considered in future risks and uncertainties since the
easement boundary is not being fenced.
The following language has been added to Section 3.3: "Signage will be placed along the
entire conservation easement boundary,in addition to no trespassing signs along the property
boundary,to reduce potential encroachment from future adjacent landowners. RES will take
the necessary legal actions and provide warnings to anyone who may potentially encroach on
the property".
8. Section 3.4.2: Should this read "...are classified as A/B-type...?"
That is correct, Section 3.4.2 has been revised per comment.
9. Section 5: the first paragraph has fragmented sentences. Please correct
Revised the fragmented sentences
10. Section 5.2: Other potential items to discuss in this section is the potential for road widening,
maintenance along the southwest side of the easement;the effect of utility line maintenance on
the riparian buffer; invasive species; adjacent landowner encroachments;hydrologic trespass near
WA.
The following statement has been added to Section 5.2: RES does not anticipate hydrologic
trespassing to occur near WA.Additionally, all potential future encroachments will be
addressed at the time of occurrence. Signage will be placed around the entire conservation
easement to deter any possibilities of utility maintenance on the riparian buffer,widening,
potential future encroachments or any other possible occurrences.
11. With the small watersheds,flow is a concern for this project,especially near the upper reaches
that appear to be an old landslide area. Documentation of flow will be closely monitored for this
project.
5

RES understands the IRT's the concern of flow but is confident that flow performance criteria
will be met by the end of the project.Flow will be monitored closely during the monitoring
period and updates will be found in the yearly monitoring reports.
12. Section 7.2.1: Sweetgum and red maple will not be counted towards vegetative success.It is
anticipated they will occur naturally because they are high dispersal species.
a. Any planting that occurs after April 30 will likely not count towards a full year of
vegetative monitoring.
RES understands and has addressed this concern in Section 7.2.1 by adding the
following statement: "It is important to note that if any planting occurs after April 30th,
it may not count towards a full year of vegetative monitoring."
b. Please reduce the amount of Ash planted to less than 5%.
RES has revised the planting plan to not include ash and replaced that with additional
understory species, as per NCWRC recommendations.
13. Section 7.2.2: Please confirm that fescue will be treated prior to planting.
Section 7.2.2 has been revised to indicate that fescue as well as other species will be treated
prior to planting
14. Section 7.3: Areas where existing stream channels are abandoned and partially filled and left for
habitat diversity and flood storage: Please ensure these areas are designed so that they are not
inundated year-round and should ideally dry up toward the end of spring to ensure that predatory
fish species do not live within the pools. The maximum depth of ephemeral pools should typically
be between 8 and 14 inches,with very gradual and wide side slopes to promote easy access by
desired species. These areas should not be so numerous that they leave gaps in the tree canopy.
Section 7.3 now includes the following statement to address this concern: "These filled areas
will have a maximum depth of 8-14 inches,with very gradual and wide slopes to promote easy
access to wildlife. Furthermore,with these parameters these areas will not be inundated year-
round and will be spaced adequately as to avoid gaps in the canopy layer."The channel
backfill detail(Sheet D3)has also been revised to reflect a maximum depth of 14".
15. Section 8.1.4: Please clarify if permanent cross section will be used for the digital image stations
or show photo points on Figure 12.
Added the following sentence to Section 8.1.4 to address this concern: "Digital image stations
will be collocated with monitoring all monitoring devises(cross sections,vegetation plots, and
monitoring gauges)", and revised Figure 12 to indicate the collocation of digital images
stations and monitoring devices.
16. Section 8.1.3: The ER should be no less than 1.4 for B channels and 2.2 for C/E channels.
Please update Table 17 as necessary.
This has been revised in Section 8.1.3 and in Table 17.
6

Table of Contents
1 PROJECT INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Project Components 1
1.2 Project Outcomes 1
2 WATERSHED APPROACH 2
2.1 Site Selection 2
3 BASELINE AND EXISTING CONDITIONS 3
3.1 Watershed Summary Information 3
32 Landscape Characteristics 3
3.3 Land Use—Historic, Current, and Future 5
3.4 Reach Summary Information 6
4 REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS 10
4.1 Environmental Screening and Documentation 10
4.2 Threatened and Endangered Species 10
4.3 Cultural Resources 11
4.4 Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA)/Hydrologic Trespass 11
4.5 Clean Water Act- Section 401/404 11
5 FUNCTIONAL UPLIFT POTENTIAL 13
5.1 Anticipated Functional Benefits and Improvements 13
5.2 Potential Constraints to Functional Uplift/Project Risks and Uncertainties 14
6 MITIGATION PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 16
7 MITIGATION WORK PLAN 18
7.1 Reference Streams 18
7.2 Vegetation and Planting Plan 23
7.3 Mitigation Summary 25
7.4 Determination of Credits 25
7.5 Credit Calculations for Non-Standard buffer Widths 27
8 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS 28
8.1 Stream Restoration Success Criteria 28
8.2 Vegetation Success Criteria 28
9 MONITORING PLAN 30
9.1 As-Built Survey 30
9.2 Visual Monitoring 30
9.3 Hydrology Events 30
9.4 Cross Sections 30
9.5 Vegetation Monitoring 31
9.6 Scheduling/Reporting 31
10 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN 34
11 LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN 35
12 REFERENCES 36
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan i March 2020
Project#100069

List of Tables
Table 1. Monkey Wall Project Components Summary 1
Table 2. Project Watershed Summary Information 3
Table 3. Mapped Soil Series 4
Table 4. Existing Wetlands 5
Table 5. Summary of Existing Channel Characteristics 6
Table 6. Summary of Stream Parameters 9
Table 7. Regulatory Considerations 10
Table 8.Anticipated Impacts to Aquatic Resources 11
Table 9. Land Use Comparison Before and After Restoration Activities 13
Table 10. Functional Benefits and Improvements 17
Table 11. Select Reference Streams from Zink et al. (2012)with Morphological Data 18
Table 12. Peak Flow Comparison 23
Table 13. Proposed Plant List 24
Table 14. Monkey Wall Project(ID-100069) -Mitigation Assets and Components 26
Table 15. Monkey Wall Project Credits-Base SMUs 26
Table 16. Project Credit Adjustments 26
Table 17. Monitoring Requirements 32
Table 18. Monitoring Quantities and Schedules 33
List of Figures
Figure 1 —Project Vicinity
Figure 2—USGS Quadrangle
Figure 3 —Landowner Parcel
Figure 4—Land-use
Figure 5 —Mapped Soils
Figure 6—Existing Conditions
Figure 7—Historical Conditions
Figure 8 —Project Constraints
Figure 9— Conceptual Design Plan
Figure 10—Planting Plan
Figure 11 —Buffer Width Zones
Figure 12—Monitoring Plan
Appendices
Appendix A—Plan Sheets
Appendix B—Data Analysis and Supplementary Information
Appendix C— Site Protection Instrument
Appendix D— Credit Release Schedule
Appendix E—Financial Assurance
Appendix F—Maintenance Plan
Appendix G—DWR Stream Identification Forms
Appendix H—USACE District Assessment Forms
Appendix I—Wetland JD Forms and Maps
Appendix J—Invasive Species Plan
Appendix K—Approved FHWA Categorical Exclusion
Appendix L—DMS Floodplain Requirements Checklist
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan ii March 2020
Project#100069

1 PROJECT INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project Components
The Monkey Wall Project (Project) is located within a rural watershed in Mitchell County, North Carolina
approximately two miles northwest of Bakersville, NC, and is accessible from Fork Mountain Road off
Highway 226 (-82.2067° W, 36.0559° N). The Project lies within the French Broad River Basin North
Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) sub -basin 04-03-06, and United States Geological Survey
(USGS) 8-digit hydrologic unit code (HUC) 06010108, 14-digit HUC 06010108060010 (Figure 1), and
within the Southern Crystalline Ridges and Mountains Level IV ecoregion. The Project area is comprised
of a 25.25-acre easement involving two unnamed tributaries totaling 3,514 existing LF, which drain to Big
Rock Creek, a tributary of the French Broad River. This Project proposes to restore 3,116 linear feet (LF)
of stream, enhance 120 LF of stream, and preserve 278 LF of stream and provide water quality benefit for
86.6 acres of drainage area. The stream mitigation components are summarized in Table 1.
1.2 Project Outcomes
The streams proposed for restoration and enhancement have been significantly impacted by livestock
production, agricultural practices, and a lack of riparian buffer. Proposed improvements to the Project will
help meet the river basin needs expressed in the 2009 French Broad River Basin Restoration Priorities
(RBRP) as well as ecological improvements to the riparian corridor within the easement.
Through stream restoration, enhancement, and preservation, the Project presents 3,514 LF of proposed
stream generating 3,999.160 Cold Stream Mitigation Units (SMU) (Table 1). This mitigation plan is
consistent with the July 4, 2018 Post Contract IRT Meeting Minutes and IRT response emails (Appendix
B).
Table 1. Monkey Wall Project Components Summary
Stream Mitigation
Mitigation Approach Linear Feet Ratio Cold SMU
Restoration 3,116 1 3,116.000
Enhancement II 120 5 24.000
Preservation 278 10 27.800
Total
3,514 3,167.800
Non-standard Buffer Width Adjustment 831.360*
Total Adjusted SMUs 3,999.160
* Credit adjustment for Non-standard Buffer Width calculation using the Wilmington District Stream Buffer Credit
Calculator issued by the USACE in January 2018. See section 7.4 for further information.
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 1 March 2020
Project #100069

2 WATERSHED APPROACH
The Project was selected based on its potential to support the objectives and goals of the DMS 2009 French
Broad RBRP. The French Broad RBRP identified several restoration needs for the entire River Basin, and
two for the Toe, Cane, and Nolichucky Rivers (06010108). The Project watershed, Big Rock Creek, was
identified as a Targeted Local Watershed (TLW) (HUC 06010108060010), a watershed that exhibits both
the need for conservation and restoration. Approximately 11 % of this TLW is agricultural lands, while the
remaining 85% of the area is forested. Goals outlined in the 2009 RBRP include:
French Broad River Basin Restoration Goals:
1. Implement wetland and stream restoration projects that reduce sources of sediment and nutrients
by restoring riparian buffer vegetation, stabilizing banks, excluding livestock, and restoring
natural geomorphology, especially in headwater streams;
2. Restore and protect habitat for priority fish, mussel, snail, and crayfish species in the basin [see
Wildlife Resource Commission (2005) for a complete list];
3. Cooperate with land trusts and resource agencies to help leverage_ federal and state grant funding
for watershed restoration and conservation efforts;
4. Protect high quality habitats, especially those prioritized by the Natural Heritage Program as
Significant Natural Heritage Areas;
Catalog Unit Specific Goals (06010108):
5. Focus restoration efforts in the expanded Bald Creek LWP area,
6. Work with Partners to protect and restore habitat for the Appalachian elktoe in the Cane and Toe
river watersheds.
The Project will address one of the goals outlined in the 2009 French Broad RBRP. Restoring the Project
stream with a stable, natural design will reduce erosion and sedimentation while improving habitat (RBRP
Goal 1). By establishing a permanent conservation easement at the Project, aquatic habitat and riparian
buffers within the Big Rock Creek Watershed will be protected in perpetuity. Additionally, excess nutrient
loads and sedimentation are also major stressors within the watershed, and the Project will help address
these stressors as described in Section 6.
2.1 Site Selection
Currently, the Project area lacks riparian buffers on much of the Project and livestock have complete access
to both streams. Livestock access has resulted in bank erosion, sediment deposition, and channel incision.
The Project will directly and indirectly address stressors identified in the RBRP by stabilizing eroding
stream banks, reconnecting incised streams to their floodplains, reducing sediment and nutrient loads, and
restoring forested buffers on two headwater stream channels. Project -specific goals and objectives will be
addressed further in Section 5. A project watershed map with the Project's drainage areas is shown on
Figure 2 and watershed planning priority boundaries are shown on Figure 1.
The land required for the construction, management, and stewardship of this Project includes portions of
three parcels in Mitchell County with the following ownership Appendix C and Figure 3.
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 2 March 2020
Project #100069

3 BASELINE AND EXISTING CONDITIONS
3.1 Watershed Summary Information
3.1.1 Drainage Area and Land Cover
The Project area is comprised of two unnamed tributaries that flow southwest into an on -site confluence
and ultimately drain into Big Rock Creek, approximately a half -mile downstream of the Project. The
drainage area for the Project is 86.6 acres (0.13 mi2) (Table 2). Primary land use within the drainage area
consists of approximately 50% forest, 47% pasture, 1% cropland, less than 1% residential, and less than
1% impervious surface (Figure 4). Historic and current land -use within the immediate Project vicinity has
been pastureland, where livestock have had complete access to the Project streams. This long-term land use
has negatively impacted both water quality and streambank stability along the Project streams.
Table 2. Project Watershed Summary Information
Watershed Feature Designation
Level IV Ecoregion 66d — Southern Crystalline Ridges and Mountains
River Basin French Broad
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8-digit 06010108
USGS Hydrologic Unit 14-digit 06010108060010
DWR Sub -basin 04-03-06
Project Drainage Area (acres) 86.6
Percent Impervious Area <1%
3.12 Surface Water Classification
The project tributaries have not been classified, but the portion of Big Rock Creek that the Project reaches
ultimately drain to has been classified as Class C and Trout Waters (NCDEQ, 1998). Class C Waters
protected for uses such as secondary recreation, fishing, wildlife, fish consumption, aquatic life including
propagation, survival and maintenance of biological integrity, and agriculture. Secondary recreation
includes wading, boating, and other uses involving human body contact with water where such activities
take place in an infrequent, unorganized, or incidental manner (NCDEQ, n.d.). Trout Waters is a
supplemental classification intended to protect freshwaters which have conditions which shall sustain and
allow for trout propagation and survival of stocked trout on a year-round basis. This classification is not the
same as the NC Wildlife Resources Commission's Designated Public Mountain Trout Waters designation
(NCDEQ, n.d.).
3.2 Landscape Characteristics
3.2.1 Physiography and Topography
The Project is located in the Southern Crystalline Ridges and Mountains level IV ecoregion within the Blue
Ridge level III ecoregion (Griffith, 2002). The southern part of the region is wetter than the north. It is
mostly forested with chestnut oak dominating on most slopes and ridges. There are a few small areas of
pasture, apple orchards, Christmas tree farms, and cropland. This region occurs primarily on Precambrian
igneous and high-grade metamorphic rocks. The crystalline rock types are mostly gneiss and schist, cover
by well drained, acidic, loamy soils. Topography of the region includes steep slopes and elevations ranging
from 1,200-4,500 feet. The topography within the project limits consists of relatively narrow valleys and
steep slopes from 5 percent to over 33 percent and elevations that range from 2,487-2,935 feet.
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 3 March 2020
Project #100069

3.2.2 Geology and Soils
According to geology data from the North Carolina Geologic Survey, published in 1985, the Project is
within Ymg map unit, occurring in the Blue Ridge Belt. This map unit is associated with metamorphic
rocks of the magmatic biotite-hornblende gneisses formation that formed from the Proterozoic periods
within 1,214 million years ago. The layered biotite-granite gneiss, biotite-hornblende gneiss, amphibolite,
calc-silicate rock, locally contains relict granulite facies rock.
The NRCS Web Soil Survey depicts several map units across the Project and are summarized in Table 3
and Figure 5.
Table 3. Mapped Soil Series
Map Unit
Symbol
Map Unit Name
Percent
Hydric
Drainage Class
Hydrologic Landscape
Soil Group Setting
BtF
Buladean-Chestnut complex,
central mountain, 50 to 95 0% Well Drained A Mountain Slopes
percent slopes, stony
CnD2
Clifton clay loam, 15 to 30
percent slopes, eroded
0% Well Drained B Mountain Slopes
FeE2
Fannin sandy clay loam, 30 to
50 percent slopes, eroded
0% Well Drained B Mountain Slopes
TsC
Thunder-Saunook complex, 8 to
15 percent slopes, very bouldery
0% Well Drained B Mountain Slopes
Tsll
Thunder-Saunook complex, 15
to 30 percent slopes, very 0% Well Drained B Mountain Slopes
bouldery
During field investigations of the site, shallow rock and outcrops were observed throughout the project
area; and therefore, it is anticipated that rock will be encountered during construction. Given that the project
streams are high gradient and require armoring for vertical stability, RES plans to utilize on -site rock for
proposed structures and channel substrate. Additionally, any encounters with bedrock will be addressed
through field adjustments that take advantage of the site's natural geology.
3.2.3 Existing Wetlands
A survey of existing wetlands was performed in August of 2018. Wetland boundaries were delineated using
current methodology outlined in the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual
(Environmental Laboratory 1987). Soils were characterized and classified using the Field Indicators of
Hydric Soils in the United States, Version 7.0 (NRCS, 2010). Within the boundaries of the proposed Project,
three jurisdictional wetlands are present in and adjacent to the Project (Appendix I, Figure 6, Table 4).
Wetlands are labeled as WA (Wetland A) through to WC (Wetland C) and are described below in Table 4.
A preliminary jurisdictional determination (PJD) request was sent to the USACE on April 26, 2019 and
confirmed on June 17, 2019 (SAW-2018-01162, Appendix I).
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 4 March 2020
Project #100069

Table 4. Existing Wetlands
Wetland ID Wetland Type Area(ac) Vegetation
WA Emergent Palustrine 0.24 ac Tree Stratum:
NA
Shrub Stratum:
NA
Herb Stratum:
False nettle (Boehmeria cylindrica), common threesquare
(Schoenoplectus pungens var.pungens),soft rush(Juncus effuses),
shallow sedge(Carex lurida)
Woody Vine Stratum:
NA
WB Forested Palustrine 0.02 ac Tree Stratum:
Northern red oak (Quercus rubra), southern red oak (Quercus
falcata), white oak (Quercus alba), chestnut oak (Quercus
montana),red maple(Acer rubrum),American sycamore(Platanus
occidentalis), eastern red cedar (Juniperus virginiana), cucumber
magnolia(Magnolia acuminate),and hickory(Carya spp.)
Shrub Stratum:
WC Forested Palustrine 0.01 ac NA
Herb Stratum:
False nettle (Boehmeria cylindrica), common threesquare
(Schoenoplectus pungens var.pungens),soft rush(Juncus effuses),
shallow sedge(Carex lurida)
Woody Vine Stratum:
NA
3.2.4 Existing Vegetation
Vegetation around the unbuffered Project reaches is active pastureland, composed primarily of non-native
species including, bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon) with tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea) and
broomsedge bluestem (Andropogon virginicus) mixed throughout. The project reaches have been heavily
grazed by livestock, and thus a well-developed understory is absent. Vegetation within the forested areas
of the project reaches consist of northern red oak, southern red oak, white oak, chestnut oak, red maple,
American sycamore, eastern red cedar, cucumber magnolia,and hickory.
3.3 Land Use—Historic, Current, and Future
Historic aerial imagery indicates that the Project has been used extensively for agricultural purposes,where
the Project streams lacked a forested riparian buffer, since at least 1956.According to landowner accounts,
the rock wall located on top of reach G2 was constructed in the early 1900s while clearing rocks from the
adjacent pastures (the wall is discussed further in Section 3.4). This wall has remained intact since its
construction. The location of the project streams has remained essentially unchanged and have not moved
significantly. Imagery indicates that the Project and adjacent areas have been utilized for pasture, and
minimal residential development has taken place (Figure 7). The area remains in an agricultural
community,and pastures remain active directly east and west of the Project.
Several watershed characteristics, such as farm paths,vegetation,and potentially soil parameters have been
modified. Livestock currently have access to the entire Project and are actively degrading the channel.
Furthermore, riparian buffers are absent on much of the Project reaches. Soil structure and surface texture
have been altered from long-term active grazing.
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 5 March 2020
Project#100069

The future land use for the Project area will include a 25.25-acre conservation easement, that will be
protected in perpetuity. The Project easement will encompass 3,514 linear feet of functioning streams with
a minimum 30-foot riparian buffer.The riparian buffer while meeting the minimum 30-foot width required,
will exceed the minimum out to 150-feet on much of the Project. Outside the Project, the area will likely
remain in agricultural and single-family residential use. Signage will be placed along the entire conservation
easement boundary, in addition to no trespassing signs along the property boundary, to reduce potential
encroachment from future adjacent landowners. RES will take the necessary legal actions and provide
warnings to anyone who may potentially encroach on the property.
3.4 Reach Summary Information
The Project area is comprised of two easement areas, bisected by an overhead powerline, where two
unnamed tributaries drain southwest to an on-site confluence (Figures 2 & 6). Results of the preliminary
data collection are presented in Table 5.Morphological parameters are in Appendix B;the USACE district
assessment form is located in Appendix H.
Table 5. Summary of Existing Channel Characteristics
BKF Low
Drainage ABKF- BKF Mean Bank Width/Depth Bank Entrenchment Slope
Reach Area Width Height Sinuosity
(ac) (ft2) (ft) Depth Height Ratio Ratio Ratio (ft/ft)
(ft) (ft)
G1-A 12 3.3 6.7 0.5 0.7 13.9 1.0 1.2 NA 0.16
G1-B 14 3.7 7.4 0.5 0.7 15 1.0 1.3 NA 0.16
G1-C 41 4.0 6.0 0.7 2.2 8.7 1.6 2.3 NA 0.15
G2 34 3.7 5.4 0.7 2.3 7.7 1.7 2.3 NA 0.14
1ABI =cross-sectional area(measured at approximate bankfull stage as estimated using existing conditions data and NC
Regional Curve equations where field indicators were not present)
3.4.1 Existing Channel Morphology
G1-A
Reach G1-A begins just downstream of WB, a slope seep on the northwest end of the project. This 278-
linear foot reach flows southwest towards G1-B and is classified as a A/B-type channel.This reach currently
has a forested buffer greater than 150 feet and the right bank has an intact 75-foot buffer. The reach is
confined to a steep valley with little evidence of livestock,though having full access.
t R
j .' i ( !,- . eye �' I .
*,a, we � w "2 „-- ,. tea.. r
.." 4 ` =
r
1 '..,&-• -.- ;;::i':: ,..,.F-V-- ter. N
Reach G 1-A Reach G 1-A
Looking upstream Looking downstre
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 6 March 2020
Project#100069

G1-B
Reach G1-B begins on the northwest end of the Project, from G1-A. This 120-linear foot reach flows
southwest towards G1-C and is classified as an A/B-type channel. This reach currently has a forested
buffer, along the left bank,but the right bank has a very narrow buffer that will be planted. Evidence of
livestock is apparent on this reach, and has caused, erosion, and bank instability.
otqw
--oiotvt-- sii,irw74 fe,--t,
R rl 8
�
-t � 5 c ,: t '''r of-
� � � y
., '
a.7i-`
Reach Gl-B
Looking downstream towards G1-B from the G1-A reach break
G1-C
Reach G1-C begins where G1-B leaves the forested buffer. This 1,521-linear foot reach flows southwest to
the confluence with G2 and is classified as a high gradient G-type channel.This reach lacks a riparian buffer
entirely, and livestock have complete access to the reach. Livestock access has caused channel incision,
degradation, erosion, and bank instability. Moreover, this channel is moderately incised at the most
upstream portion,and incision increases as the reach continues downstream. This reach is bisected by a 40-
foot powerline easement.
-vim.
''.s' a-m ;jam �, e 8 -` s� f: -n vsx
{44 £S^ 4*k �R �obiJ -
.A' 1 . ' . ysy�t ,,n da . r fi-
i,is
411k
Ctai
:, rj"r'.fY,,,,: `..'dL,4. ..,,,,- L ,1 ..��.,,r`I..Y'tia b' ':-li
Reach G1-C Reach G1-C
Looking upstream Looking downstream
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 7 March 2020
Project#100069

G2
Reach G2 begins on the southeast end of the project, where the rock had been installed within the channel
footprint in the early 1900s. The wall is approximately 268 linear feet and 5-foot tall at its tallest, is located
entirely in the valley bottom, and occurs on the upper portion of this reach. This 1,725-linear foot reach
flows south to southwest towards the confluence with GI-C and is classified as a high gradient G-type
stream. This reach lacks a riparian buffer entirely, and livestock have complete access to this entire reach.
Livestock access has caused channel incision, degradation, erosion, and bank instability. This reach is
bisected by a 40-foot powerline easement.
Reach G2
Looking west toward the rock wall
Reach G2
Looking upstream
Reach G2
Looking upstream along the rock wall
Reach G2
Looking downstream
3.4.2 Channel Classification
The Project streams have been classified as intermittent using the NCDWR Stream Identification Form
version 4.11 and are classified as A/B-type, G/C-type, and G- type streams, (Rosgen, 1996). Table 6
summarizes these stream parameters and the stream determination scores can be found in Appendix G;
stream determinations have been confirmed by the USACE.
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 8 March 2020
Project #100069

Table 6. Summary of Stream Parameters
USACE Rosgen
Reach Hydrology Stream Determination Score Classification Existing Reach Stream
Status Length(LF) Classification
Gl-A Intermittent 22 77 278 A/B
Gl-B Intermittent 22 39 120 A/B
G1-C Intermittent 22 26 1,521 G/C
G2 Intermittent 21.5 23 1,595 G
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 9 March 2020
Project#100069

4 REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS
Table 7 is a summary of regulatory considerations for the Project. Supporting documentation can be found
in Appendix I,Appendix K,and Figure 8.
Table 7. Regulatory Considerations
Regulation Applicable? Resolved? Supporting Documentation
Endangered Species Act Yes Yes Appendix K
National Historic Preservation Act Yes Yes Appendix K
FEMA Floodplain Compliance No N/A N/A
Coastal Zone Management Act(CZMA)/ No N/A N/A
Coastal Area Management Act(CAMA)
Magnuson Stevens Act-Essential Fisheries Habitat No N/A N/A
Waters of the United States-Section 404 Yes Yes Appendix I
Waters of the United States-Section 401 Yes Yes Appendix I
4.1 Environmental Screening and Documentation
To ensure that a project meets the "Categorical Exclusion" criteria,the Federal Highways Administration
(FHWA) and NCDMS have developed a categorical exclusion (CE) checklist that is included as part of
each mitigation project's Environmental Screening process. The CE Approval Form for the Monkey Wall
Project is included in Appendix K and was approved by DMS and FHWA in February 2019.
4.2 Threatened and Endangered Species
Plants and animals with a federal classification of endangered or threatened are protected under provisions
of Sections 7 and 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973,as amended.A desktop analysis was performed
to identify rare species or unique habitats on-site, including using the USFWS Information for Planning
and Conservation (IPAC) online tool and performing a query of the North Carolina Natural Heritage
Program database of natural heritage element occurrences (USFWS, 2018; NCNHP, 2018). Additionally,
a field investigation was conducted to evaluate federally protected species potentially occurring on the
Project. A letter was sent to the USFWS requesting review of the project and input on whether there are
any possible concerns for threatened and endangered species, and a response was received October 12,
2018. Additionally, to comply with the NLEB 4(d) streamlined rule for federal agencies, the required
consultation form was submitted by the Federal Administration to the USFWS as part of the Categorical
Exclusion. It was determined that the project"may affect the NLEB, but any incidental take of the NLEB
is not prohibited by the final 4(d) rule."However, RES will avoid tree cutting from May 15 —August 15,
if possible,to protect sensitive summer roosting habitat. Documentation of all correspondence is included
in Appendix K.
Furthermore, it is important to note that there is population of Eastern Hellbender (Cryptobranchus
alleganiensis), an US Federal Species of Concern and NC Special Concern Species, in Big Rock Creek
(where our project reaches ultimately drain to). In order to minimize impacts from sedimentation to this
population, it is extremely important that excellent erosion and sediment control be practiced on-site.
The Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act requires consultation with state fish and wildlife agencies when
"waters of any stream or other body of water are proposed or authorized, permitted or licensed to be
impounded,diverted...or otherwise controlled or modified."A letter was sent to the NCWRC in September
of 2018 requesting review and comment of possible issues with respect to fish and wildlife resources on
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 10 March 2020
Project#100069

the Project.NCWRC responded on October 12, 2018. The only comment received from the NCWRC was
to ensure coordination with the USFWS, regarding the NLEB, was completed. Documentation is included
in Appendix K.
4.3 Cultural Resources
A review of the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office GIS Web Service database and a field
evaluation were conducted to evaluate potential occurrences near or on the Project. No archeological
artifacts have been observed or noted during preliminary surveys of the Project for restoration purposes.
Letters describing the Project and requesting review or comment on potential resources in its vicinity were
sent to the North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources, State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO;
September 11, 2018), to the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians (EBCI; September 24, 2018), to the
Cherokee Nation (CN; October 8, 2018), and to the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians in
Oklahoma (UKBCI; October 5, 2018). RES received a response letter from SHPO on October 8, 2018
which confirmed that no known historic resources would be affected by the project. RES received a
response from CN on November 26,2018,stating the Nation does not foresee this project imparting impacts
to Cherokee cultural resources at this time. Additionally, the CN further states that should any items of
cultural significance be discovered, all activity should be halted, and to contact the CN for further
consultation. No correspondence has been received from the ECBI or the UKBCI at the time of this
submittal. All correspondence is included in Appendix K.
4.4 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)/Hydrologic Trespass
According to the North Carolina Floodplain Mapping Information System, the Project reaches are not
within a flood hazard zone (FEMA, 2009) (Figure 8). The Project can be found on Flood Insurance Rate
Map (FIRM) Panel 0855 (map number 3710085500J), effective date February 4, 2009. Furthermore,there
will be no hydrologic trespass outside of the Project as a result of the stream restoration activities. A DMS
Floodplain Requirements Checklist form was completed for the Project and is included in Appendix L.
4.5 Clean Water Act- Section 401/404
Impacts to jurisdictional streams and wetlands will be unavoidable,due to the restoration and enhancement
actives proposed. Although these impacts are unavoidable,the proposed stream treatment will result in an
overall functional uplift of the stream system, as described in Section 5. Table 8 outlines the anticipated
impacts to aquatic resources associated with the Project. In general, GI-A and GI-B, which are proposed
for preservation and enhancement II respectively,will not have any stream,wetland,or open water impacts.
Furthermore,the two reaches proposed for restoration, GI-C and G2, will have permanent impacts, due to
stream restoration and stream realignment. One wetland (WA) will be impacted due to stream restoration
and enhancement activities. Wetland A will have both permanent and temporary impacts due to the
restoration and re-alignment of GI-C and G2. Thus, one wetland gauge will be installed in WA to monitor
wetland hydrology and this data will be reported in yearly monitoring reports. All stream and wetland
impacts will be accounted for in the Pre-Construction Notification form.
Table 8. Anticipated Impacts to Aquatic Resources
Resource Aquatic Permanent/
Type Resource Temporary Classification Impact Type Impact Area/Length
ID
Gl-C Permanent Intermittent Stream Restoration 1,529 LF*
Stream 1,710 LF*
G2 Permanent Intermittent Stream Restoration
Permanent NA Stream Restoration 0.04 ac
Wetland WA
Temporary NA Stream Restoration 0.16 ac
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 11 March 2020
Project#100069

Open NA
Water
Buffer NA
*Includes stream restoration length under power line
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 12 March 2020
Project#100069

5 FUNCTIONAL UPLIFT POTENTIAL
The Stream Functions Pyramid Framework(Harman et. al. 2012)brings together four components:the five
functional categories, function-bases parameters, measurement methods, and performance standards. By
using the Stream Functions Pyramid Framework, this can aid in developing project objectives, perform
existing condition assessments and monitoring, developing performance metrics, and design criteria. The
Framework separates stream functions into five categories, ordered into a hierarchy, which communicate
the interrelations among functions and illustrate the dependence of higher-level functions (biology,
physicochemical, and geomorphology) on lower level functions (hydrology and hydraulics). Fischenich
(2006) found that the most critical functions include those that address hydrodynamic processes, sediment
transport processes, stream stability and riparian buffer restoration. By addressing these fundamental
functions and processes, a restored stream and riparian system can support more dependent functions that
typically require time to establish,such as diverse biological communities,chemical and nutrient processes,
diverse habitats and improved water, and soil quality. Project goals and objectives will address the most
critical functional parameters that will result in a restored stream and riparian area over time. Anticipated
functional benefits and improvements within the Project area,as based on the Function-Based Framework,
are outlined in Table 11.
5.1 Anticipated Functional Benefits and Improvements
A functional based approach broadens the reach-scale goals of a restoration project by contextualizing the
functional uplift to the watershed scale. By applying an ecosystem restoration approach, the proposed
Project will provide localized ecological and water quality benefits that could, in combination with other
restoration projects within the watershed, have beneficial impacts on the French Broad River Basin. The
restoration approach at the reach scale of this Project will benefit the hydraulic and geomorphology
functions of the system but could also benefit the upper-level functions(physicochemical and biology)over
time.
5.1.1 Hydrology
According to the Stream Functions Pyramid Framework, hydrology is defined as the transport of water
from the watershed to the channel. The Project has no limiting factors of water transportation from the
watershed to the channel.The Project will locally address several historic hydrologic disturbances including
deforestation and channel modification.The land use within the Project's catchment area will not be altered
outside of the easement area, meaning hydrologic parameters such as reach runoff, flow duration, and
discharge will continue to be determined by existing watershed characteristics occurring beyond the
boundaries of the Project. However, it is important to note that with the conversion of approximately 22%
of the Project watershed from pastureland to forest(Table 9), it is anticipated that the Project will provide
an overall benefit to the hydrology at the catchment scale;this will provide considerable functional uplift
through the functional tiers of the Pyramid.
Table 9. Land Use Comparison Before and After Restoration Activities
Land use 11/0of Project Drainage Area 11/0of Project Drainage Percent Change
Before Restoration Area After Restoration
Pasture 47.26% 25.26% i 21.99%
Forest 50.40% 72.40% T 21.99%
Cropland 0.95% 0.95% 0.00%
Residential 0.79% 0.79% 0.00%
Impervious Surface 0.60% 0.60% 0.00%
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 13 March 2020
Project#100069

5.1.2 Hydraulic
The hydraulic function of the Pyramid is defined as transport of water in the channel,on the floodplain,and
through sediments.The greatest potential uplift at the Project will be achieved through increasing floodplain
connectivity throughout the Project and the removal of the rock wall on G2. Floodplain connectivity and
stable flow dynamics are actively degrading through the Project and approaching not functioning.With the
restoration of G1-C and G2 floodplain connectivity will be re-established and documented by installing
stage recorders on each reach. Bank-height ratios will be reduced,and entrenchment ratios will be increased
by restoring G1-C and G2 and measured by surveying cross sections during the monitoring period.
5.1.3 Geomorphology
Geomorphology,as defined within the Pyramid Framework,is the transport of wood and sediment to create
bed forms and dynamic equilibrium. Sediment transport will be improved on restoration and enhancement
reaches (G1-B,G1-C, and G2) of the Project. This will be accomplished,by reducing the excess sediment
load entering the stream. This reduction will be achieved by establishing a functional buffer, constructing
a channel that maintains stable dimension, plan, and profile, and daylighting the upstream portion of G2.
This will be measured through the monitoring period by surveying vegetation plots and cross sections.
Furthermore,by daylighting of the upstream portion of G2,the rock wall will yield substrate material to be
utilized for channel bed stability and habitat creation. Transport and storage of woody debris will be
improved through increases in channel roughness from plantings and the installation of structures. All of
these functional parameters are interconnected and depend on each other, improving this wide range of
parameters will result in long-term functional geomorphic uplift.
5.1.4 Physicochemical
The Pyramid Framework defines the physicochemical category as temperature and oxygen regulation and
the processing of organic matter and nutrients. Many of these physicochemical benefits occur slowly over
time and are dependent on multiple variables within the stream ecosystem. Therefore, it is not practical or
feasible to directly measure these parameters within the monitoring time frame of this project. With that
said,it is logical to use existing riparian buffer and visual performance standards to demonstrate the positive
correlation between geomorphic parameters and physicochemical parameters. The restoration activities
associated with this Project can be expected to promote the following: nutrient and sediment reduction,
temperature regulation, and oxygen regulation. These reasonable outcomes, although not measured, will
be promoted though the reforestation of the riparian buffer,daylighting the upstream portion of G2,adding
bank stabilization to Project reaches, and drop structure installation.
5.1.5 Biology
The highest category of the Pyramid is biology and is defined as the biodiversity and life histories of aquatic
and terrestrial life, specifically referring to animals. Since the life histories of many species will likely
benefit from stream restoration and are depending on all the lower-level functions, the functional uplift
from the hydraulic and geomorphic levels would likely have a positive effect on the biology over time is
anticipated. However,biological monitoring will not be conducted as a part of this project. With that said,
it is logical to use established riparian buffers and visual performance standards to demonstrate the positive
correlation between lower levels of the Pyramid.Reasonable outcomes of this project will include improved
aquatic habitat through the installation of habitat features, construction of pools at varying depths, and
planting the riparian buffer
5.2 Potential Constraints to Functional Uplift,Project Risks, and Uncertainties
The main constraint associated with the Project is the presence of an existing overhead powerline that
bisects the parcel. RES explored re-locating the powerline, but this was not feasible due to surrounding
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 14 March 2020
Project#100069

topography, the need to coordinate with multiple landowners outside the Project area, and the associated
costs of relocation. In-lieu of moving the powerline, RES is proposing to include the existing utility
easement within the boundary of the conservation easement (Figure 8). While the utility company will
still reserve the right to maintain the powerline corridor,other uses (e.g. cattle access)will be restricted by
the conservation easement. The easement language will be modified in coordination with DMS and the
State Property Office (SPO) to include this area as an internal crossing. RES will not be seeking stream
credit for the linear stream footage within this area. Fords have been designed along Reaches GI and G2
within the powerline easement to provide access for utility maintenance. Culvert installation was also
explored,but the engineer determined a culvert would be a much greater impact to the channels,especially
since access should be infrequent.
No General Aviation or Commercial airports are located within five miles of the proposed project.
All reaches will have the required 30-foot minimum riparian buffer required for mountain streams, while
in most places the buffer will extend out to a maximum of 150-feet. RES does not anticipate hydrologic
trespassing to occur near WA or anywhere outside the property. Additionally, all potential future
encroachments will be addressed at the time of occurrence. Signage will be placed around the entire
conservation easement to deter any possibilities of utility maintenance on the riparian buffer, widening,
potential future encroachments or any other possible occurrences.
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 15 March 2020
Project#100069

6 MITIGATION PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
Through the comprehensive analysis of the Project's maximum functional uplift using the Stream Functions
Pyramid Framework, specific, attainable goals and objectives will be realized by the Project. These goals
clearly address the degraded water quality and nutrient input from farming that were identified as major
watershed stressors in the 2009 French Broad River RBRP. The Project will address outlined RBRP Goals
1 and 5 (listed in Section 2).
The Project goals are:
• Improve water transport from watershed to the channel in a non-erosive manner in a stable channel;
• Improve flood flow attenuation on-site and downstream by allowing for overbank flows and
connection to the floodplain;
• Restore native floodplain and riparian vegetation; and
The expected outcomes are:
• Improve instream habitat;
• Reduce sediment,nutrient, and fecal coliform inputs into stream system;
• Indirectly support the goals of the 2009 French Broad RBRP to improve water quality and to reduce
sediment and nutrient loads, especially in the Big Rock Creek watershed.
The Project objectives to address the goals are:
• Design and reconstruct the stream channels sized to convey bankfull flows that will maintain a
stable dimension,profile, and planform;
• Add in-stream structures and bank stabilization measures to protect the restored stream;
• Install habitat features such as brush toes, woody materials, and pools of varying depths to the
restored stream;
• Remove the 268-linear foot rock wall located on the most upstream portion of G2 to daylight the
existing stream and restore the natural profile of the channel;
• Increase forested riparian buffers to at least 30 feet on both sides of the channel along the Project
reach with a hardwood riparian plant community;
• Treat any exotic invasive species present within the Project; and
• Establish a permanent conservation easement on the Project that will exclude future livestock from
the stream channel and its associated buffers and prevent future land-use changes.
Anticipated functional uplift,benefits, and improvements within the Project area, as based on the Function
Based Framework are outlined in Table 10.
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 16 March 2020
Project#100069

Table 10. Functional Benefits and Improvements
Level Function Goal Objective Measurement
Method
Percent Project
H r o to transport water from the Convert the land-use of drainage area
Transport
of water converted to
1 from the watershed to watershed to the channel in a streams and their watersheds riparian forest
the channel non-erosive manner from pasture to riparian forest (indirect
measurement)
Cross sections
Hydraulic Improve flood bank
Transport of water in to transport water in a stable connectivity by reducing bank Stage Recorders
2 the channel, on the non-erosive manner height ratios and increasing
floodplain, and Bank Height Ratio
through the sediments entrenchment ratios
Entrenchment Ratio
Reduce erosion rates and
channel stability to reference As-built stream
reach conditions profile
Geomorphology to create a diverse bedform and a
Transport of wood and stable channel that achieves Improve bedform diversity Cross sections
3 sediment to create healthy dynamic equilibrium and (pool spacing,percent riffles,
diverse bedforms and provides suitable habitat for life etc.) Visual monitoring
dynamic equilibrium
Increase buffer width to a Vegetation plots
minimum 30 feet
Vegetation plots
to achieve appropriate levels for Unmeasurable (indirect
Physicochemical° water temperature,dissolved measurement)
Temperature and oxygen concentration,and other Objective/Expected Benefit
4 oxygen regulation; important nutrients including but Establish native hardwood Established a
processing of organic not limited to Nitrogen and riparian buffer and exclude perpetual
matter and nutrients Phosphorus through buffer livestock. conservation
planting easement(indirect
measurement)
Unmeasurable
Biology * Objective/Expected Benefit
to achieve functionality in levels
Biodiversity and life Improve aquatic habitat
histories of aquatic life 1-4 to support the life histories of through the installation of As-Built Survey(in-
5histories and riparian aquatic and riparian plants and habitat features,construction direct measurement
life animals through instream of pools at varying depths,and
planting the riparian buffer
°These categories are measured indirectly; *This category is not quantifiably measured
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 17 March 2020
Project#100069

7 MITIGATION WORK PLAN
7.1 Reference Streams
Physical parameters of channels located within the Project were used, as well as other reference materials,
to determine the target stream type. The "Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina"
was also used to narrow the potential community types that would have existed at the Project (Schafale,
2012).An iterative process was used to develop the final design parameters for the restoration reaches based
on cascade reference data found on site, and published step-pool data. The channel morphology
characteristics of high gradient, headwater streams in North Carolina have been characterized by Zink et
al. (2012) and are applicable as a starting point for the design of step-pool systems.With cascade and step-
pool systems,design objectives focus on energy dissipation,grade control and stability. The morphological
design parameters of importance when considering these objectives include riffle slope ratio, riffle length
ratio, pool length ratio, pool-to-pool spacing and step height ratio. A hybrid design approach was adapted
for G1 and G2 that incorporates, analytical, analog and empirical techniques. The primary purpose of the
proposed cascade and step-pool systems is to provide grade control and energy dissipation as stormflows
move down valley and to enhance physicochemical functions through processing of nutrient loads.
Select morphological parameters reported by Zink et al. (2012) with similar longitudinal slopes to the
middle and lower sections of G1 and G2 are presented in Table 11 while the morphological table with
proposed design parameters for G1 and G2 is presented in Appendix B. All morphological design
parameters are within the range of the reference dataset below.
Table 11. Select Reference Streams from Zink et al. (2012)with Morphological Data
Stream Slope(tt/tt) D50 D84 WAD HSTEP/WBKF SRIF/SWSE LRIF/WBKF ',POOL/WBKF p-p/WBKF
LS4 0.0370 71 347 21.5 0.02 1.0 0.6 0.4 0.6
LS2 0.0450 175 512 18.1 0.04 0.8 1.3 1.0 2.1
BF 0.0480 39 194 16.9 0.04 1.6 0.7 0.9 1.6
LS1 0.0540 145 450 18.4 0.04 - - 0.8 1.0
SR1 0.0680 163 745 17.6 0.07 0.4 1 0.7 1.3
AC 0.0900 70 191 20.7 0.08 1.1 0.8 0.7 2.0
NC 0.0920 47 154 25.0 0.09 0.7 1.5 0.7 1.9
PC 0.1040 96 268 19.5 0.10 0.8 1.5 0.2 1.3
Min 0.0370 39 154 16.9 0.02 0.4 0.6 0.2 0.6
Median 0.0610 84 308 19.0 0.06 0.8 1.0 0.7 1.5
Max 0.1040 175 745 25.0 0.10 1.6 1.5 1.0 2.1
7.1.1 Reference Data Characterization
Through the course of conducting reference reach searches, several streams were identified as possessing
qualities of stability and natural form.However,these reaches were determined not to be suitable references
for the project due to either incompatible stream type, valley form, slope or insufficient reach length.
Reference streams for high gradient, small drainage, head-waters mountain streams representative for the
Monkey Wall restoration site are just not readily available in the region. Also,it was determined that typical
reference reach tables and values of the pattern and long-profile data were found to not be applicable to the
design of cascade and step-pool systems in this high of a gradient valley.
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 18 March 2020
Project#100069

Given the uniqueness of the project site consisting of cascade and step-pool morphology,a combination of
approaches was used for the design and reference values as stated above and in the below sections of this
report. The best on-site reference conditions came from GI-A(see image below)which exhibits a cascade
,,q morphology. Along this reach, step height ratios were
it.
�`,, _ , Y measured, cross-sectional areas, slopes and discharge
aka were calculated,verified and compared to the design. The
' _ , f restoration design parameter values relied heavily on a
itt
hybrid of cascade and steppool morphology and have
-' '_ g Y gY
,,, ~ • '{ come from previous project related experience, a small
4 , amount of varied published regional empirical
p. =ljtj.
.T- ° ;� ,> relationships, and reference reach conditions along
Reaches GI-A and-B.
y'7, ."--------4j, -..• •• - •_ st-•-,,,„• !,,,,_54„ :.
>•' `� Whenpools occupygreater than 50%of the length of the
g
F channel reach (which is the case for the Monkey Wall
t' reaches),correlations can be made between the step height
ratio and slope, resulting in step heights approximated from channel width and slope (Zink et al, 2012).
Given the gradient of the project site and design reaches, both cascade and step-pool morphology were
heavily relied on as it is the best fit for high gradient stream designs.
7.1.2 Stream Restoration Approach
The treatment plan and design approach were developed based on existing conditions, project goals, and
objectives outlined in Sections 3 and 5. The Project will include a combination of Priority I and Priority II
Restoration, Enhancement II, and Preservation. As stated above, the restoration design approach will
incorporate the construction of a single-thread, high gradient, cascade and step-pool channel system, with
parameters based on cascade and step-pool morphology and reference conditions along the representative
reaches within the Monkey Wall site.A combination of analog,empirical,and analytical design techniques
were used to determine the design discharge and to verify design stability. Conceptual plan views are
provided in Figure 9.
The design approach for GI and G2 are specific to cascade and step-pool systems for treatment mitigation
goals for the site. The proposed systems include a series of cascades or pools connected by riffles and/or
boulder and log steps that restores floodplain connectivity to the site. The riffles, steps and pools provide
grade control, energy dissipation and bedform diversity to restore high gradient systems. The proposed
design for all reaches has been set to not exceed a drop of 1.25 ft per step structure which is consistent with
published information (see above) and reference step data observed and collected on-site.
The detailed treatment plan and design approach is as follows:
Reach G1-A
A Preservation approach is proposed for this reach,due to its high quality,wide riparian buffers,and terrain.
Preservation activities will include:
• Minimal buffer planting on the right bank,to increase riparian buffer beyond 75 feet;
• Livestock exclusion; and
• Establishing a conservation easement to be protected in perpetuity.
Reach G1-B
An Enhancement II approach is proposed for the reach to address eroding banks and channel entrenchment.
Enhancement activities include:
• Livestock exclusion; and
• Riparian buffer planting to 150-feet.
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 19 March 2020
Project#100069

Reach G1-C
A combination of Priority I and Priority II restoration is proposed for the reach to address eroding banks,
channel incision,bed degradation and floodplain connectivity.
Restoration activities include:
• Constructing a new single thread channel and floodplain benches in the existing floodplain;
• Installing log and rock structures to provide grade control with drops no greater than 1.25 feet;
• Establishing a cascade, step-pool or riffle-pool sequence throughout the reach;
• Filling the existing channel;
• Creating floodplain to reduce shear stresses at higher flows;
• Livestock exclusion; and
• Riparian buffer planting to a minimum of 30-feet at the downstream end and out to 150-feet
everywhere else.
One gauge will be installed on the right floodplain in WA to monitor wetland hydrology. This data will be
reported in yearly monitoring reports. No wetland credits will be generated on WA;thus,wetland success
criteria will not need to be met during the monitoring period.
Reach G2
A combination of Priority I and Priority II restoration is proposed for the reach to address eroding banks,
channel incision, bed degradation, and floodplain connectivity. Since the post-contract IRT visit in July
2018, and the subsequent design, reach G2-A was incorporated into G2-B (now G2) and is proposed for
restoration. Reach G2's historic valley has been heavily modified, so determining an exact point for the
stream origin presented challenges. Because the valley is so manipulated, the origin of Reach GI was
utilized as a reference for designing the origin of Reach G2. Both reaches have very similar drainage areas
at the top of their respective valleys(approximately 12 acres)and Reach GI originates from a wetland seep
(Wetland WB). Based on the similarities of the valleys, and the unique nature of the project reaches, RES
decided to begin the alignment of G2 just below an existing wetland seep (Wetland WC) similar to the
current condition of Reach GIA. Furthermore,the design approach will include the removal of an existing
15 inch perched culvert and associated road, and include re-grading the valley to mimic conditions similar
to the cascade morphology seen along Reach GI-A. RES staff has continually observed flow from the
existing culvert and on multiple occasions has observed (and heard) flow below the rocks along the
proposed "daylighting" restoration section. RES is proposing to gage Reach G2 for the purpose of
demonstrating consecutive flow requirements as stated in the Wilmington Mitigation guidance.
Restoration activities along this reach include:
• Remove culvert and associated road at upstream of reach and tie proposed channel into seep located
above the culvert;
• Removing the rock wall, and therefore daylighting the channel,present on the upper portion of the
reach;
• Constructing a new single thread channel and floodplain benches in the existing floodplain;
• Installing log and rock structures to provide grade control with drops no greater than 1.25 feet;
• Establishing a cascade, step-pool or riffle-pool sequence throughout the reach;
• Filling the existing channel;
• Creating floodplain to reduce shear stresses at higher flows;
• Livestock exclusion; and
• Riparian buffer planting to 150-feet on both sides of the stream.
Typical Design Sections
The riffle cross-sections are sized to convey the equivalent of the Q1-2 discharge within the channel.Higher
flows will spread onto vegetated benches beyond top of bank and the historical floodplain that has been
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 20 March 2020
Project#100069

disconnected by the down cutting of the channel over time. A higher with-to-depth ratio (15-20) and wide
floodplain benches has been designed to minimize flow depths, thus decreasing potential velocities and
shear stresses that cause erosion. The higher width to depth ratios will allow for encouragement of
vegetation to establish and grow at the low flow channel stage,allowing the channel to narrow up overtime.
Large riffle substrate material is needed to resist the high shear stresses of the relatively steep channel
slopes. The material will be harvested from the abandoned channel, rock from the removal of the wall on
G2 and substrate found in the valley. For both reaches,the design D50 and D85 particles are 180 mm and
256 mm, respectively, which will resist shear stresses and mobilization up to the 100-year storm. Boulder
step structures will be used for additional grade control and energy dissipation. The boulder structures will
be silled in across the vegetated bench and perpendicular to flow to prevent scour and failure around the
structures during high flows.
Typical cross sections for riffles/steps and pools are shown on the design plan sheets in Appendix A. The
cross-section dimensions were developed for the design reach by using an in-house spreadsheet. The cross
sections were altered slightly to facilitate constructability;however,the cross-sectional area,width to depth
ratio, and side slopes were preserved.
Longitudinal Profiles
The design profiles are presented in Appendix A. These profiles extend throughout the entire project for
the proposed channel alignment. The profiles were designed using empirical relationships, past project
experience,and published reference stream data. The bed slopes and energy gradients were determined for
the design reach based on the existing valley slope of the design reach. Log and rock structures will be
utilized in the design to control grade, divert flows, and provide additional habitat diversity and stability.
Channel Slope(S)versus Pool to Pool Spacing to Bankfull Riffle Width(P./Wpm)
- 8 Ps 1 Weer=8.2513549m`
R2=0.9226 I
El; 7 - - -
s
a GMC-95 Step-Pools
Y=9.3x-'-0a
• 6 — R..O.B. I
5 — -
ac
coffl •
✓ 4 .
c S
- 3
•
•
0 2
Q 1
a
0 _ _ 1
a 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Channel Slope(%)
In-Stream Structures
Structures will be incorporated into the channel design to provide additional stability and improve aquatic
habitat. Native materials and vegetation will be used for revetments and grade control structures where
applicable. Typical structures that will protect the channel bed will include constructed riffles and log and
rock step pools. Given the slope and gradient of the creek, structures are designed to not exceed 1.25 feet
of drop from one pool to the next. This is done to limit the potential scour of the upstream structure.
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 21 March 2020
Project#100069

7,1,3 Data Analysis
Stream Hydrologic Analysis
Stable cross-section dimensions were readily identified on the reference stream section above the project
site (Reach G1-A), and the resulting cross-sectional areas correlated well with the cross-section
dimensions/areas measured throughout the existing project reaches. Discharge estimates based on the
measured cross-sections were calculated for the project reaches using a single-section analysis. Manning's
`n' was estimated from relative roughness calculations of the bed material and from observation of the
channel flow conditions.Water surface slope was assumed to be consistent with the slope of the bed profile.
Discharge was then plotted against a graph of the regional curve data. The graphing of this data indicated
that the calculated discharges were not consistent with the bankfull discharges generated from regional
curve data;but instead correlate with larger storm events.The data set used for the published regional curve
equations did not include any streams with gradients steeper than 5%on drainage areas similar in size to
the project and was therefore determined not suitable for estimating design flows for the Project. However,
we are confident that the dimensions of the channel are correct and consistent based on our analyses of the
project reaches.
Hydrologic evaluations were performed for the design reaches using multiple methods to determine and
validate the design discharge and channel geometry required to provide regular floodplain inundation. The
use of various methods allows for comparison of results and eliminates reliance on a single model. Peak
flows(Table 12)and corresponding channel cross sectional areas were calculated for comparison to design
parameters using the following methods:
• Reference and on-site channel discharge calculations (Manning's)
• Regional Flood Frequency Analysis,
• NC and VA Regional Curves for the Mountains,
• USGS regional regression equations
Regional Flood Frequency Analysis
A flood frequency analysis was completed for the study region using historic gauge data on all nearby
USGS gauges with drainage areas between 0.46 and 18.8 mi2. Flood frequency equations were developed
for the 1.5- and 10-year peak discharges based on the gauge data. Discharges were then computed for the
design reaches for comparison.
Regional Curve Equations
The North Carolina Mountain regional curves by Harman et al. (2003), the Virginia Mountain regional
curves by Keaton et al. (2005)and USGS for discharge were used to provide comparison of flows predicted
by the flood frequency analysis, reference reach and project reaches. The regional curve equations for NC
discharges by Harman et al. (2003) and for VA discharges by Keaton et al. (2005):
(1) Qb =100.64(DA)°76 (Harman et al., 2003)
(2) Qb 43.249*(DA)07938 (Keaton et al., 2005)
Where Qbkf=bankfull discharge (ft3/s)and DA=drainage area(mi2).
USGS Regional Regression Equations
USGS regression equations estimate the magnitude and frequency of flood-peak discharges(Weaver,et al.,
2009). The regression equations were developed from gauge data in different physiographic regions of the
Southeastern United States. For this analysis, the 5- and 10-year return intervals were used and the
corresponding equations for the rural Blue Ridge ecoregion(Hydrologic Region 2) are below:
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 22 March 2020
Project#100069

(3) Q5=209*(DA)°749
(4) QI0=288*(DA)°736
Table 12. Peak Flow Comparison
Drainage FFQ FF NC VA USGS RR USGS RR Ex. Conds. Design
Reach Q Regional Regional Calculated
Area(Ac) Q1.5 Qs(3) Qio(4) Q
Qio Curve Q(1) Curve Q(2) Q
G1A 12 1 2 5 2 11 15 20-25 NA
G1C(U/S G2) 41 3 8 12 5 27 38 38-50 50
G1C(D/S G2) 87 6 17 22 9 47 66 38-50 70
G2 34 2 7 11 4 23 33 30-45 40
Sediment Supply
There is significant instability and erosion along the channel,which appears to be a result of historic cattle
activity and agricultural activities occurring up to and along channel banks and not from watershed
activities. It is anticipated that sediment supply from agricultural land adjacent to the project will decrease
as buffers are enhanced and widened and as the channel is stabilized and realigned. The lower bank height
ratios will allow for dissipation of the flows over the floodplain.
7.2 Vegetation and Planting Plan
7.2.7 Plant Community Restoration
The restoration of the plant communities is an important aspect of the restoration Project. The selection of
plant species is based on what is typically native to the area. Several sources of information were used to
determine the most appropriate species for the restoration project.
A Montane Oak-Hickory Forest will be the target community along the Project reaches. The target
community will be used for the planting areas within the Project, shown in Figure 10. The plant species
list has been developed and can be found in Table 13. Species with high dispersal rates are not included
because of local occurrence,adjacent seed sources,and the high potential for natural regeneration.The high
dispersal species include red maple and sweetgum, and both species are common in Montane Red-Cedar
Hardwood Woodland. However, sweetgum especially seems to be associated with more disturbed
examples, so while these species could be counted towards success, they should be monitored to ensure
they do not outcompete the other proposed species (Schafale and Weakley, 1990; Schafale,2012).
The restoration of plant communities along the Project will provide stabilization and diversity. For rapid
stabilization of the stream banks (primarily outside meanders), silky dogwood (Cornus amomum), black
willow(Salix nigra),and Tag alder(Alnus serrulata),were chosen for live stakes along the restored channel
because of their rapid growth patterns and high success rates.Willows grow at a faster rate than the species
planted around them,and they stabilize the stream banks.Willows will also be quicker to contribute organic
matter to the channel.When the other species are bigger,the black willows will slowly stop growing or die
out because the other species would outgrow them and create shade that the willows do not tolerate. The
live stake species will be planted along the outside of the meander bends three feet from the top of bank,
creating a three-foot section along the top of bank.
It is anticipated that the vegetation planting/replanting will be conducted between November 15 and March
15,per the October 2016 USACE/NCIRT monitoring guidance. If the Project completes construction after
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 23 March 2020
Project#100069

March 15,but before April 30,the Project will be planted immediately following construction so that there
are 180 days prior to the initiation of the first year of monitoring. It is important to note that if any planting
occurs after April30t'', it may not count towards a full year of vegetative monitoring.
Table 13. Proposed Plant List
Bare Root Planting Tree Species
Species Common Name Stratum Spacing(ft) Unit Type %of Total Species
Composition
Betula nigra River Birch Canopy 9X6 Bare Root 15
Liriodendron tulipifera Tulip poplar Canopy 9X6 Bare Root 15
Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Canopy 9X6 Bare Root 15
Carya ovata Shagbark hickory Canopy 9X6 Bare Root 10
Quecrus alba White oak Canopy 9X6 Bare Root 10
Quercus montana Chestnut oak Canopy 9X6 Bare Root 10
Alnus serrulata Tag Alder Understory 9X6 Bare Root 5
Cercis canadensis Eastern Redbud Understory 9X6 Bare Root 5
Corpus florida Flowering Dogwood Understory 9X6 Bare Root 5
Morus rubra Red Mulberry Understory 9X6 Bare Root 5
Quercus rubra Northern red oak Canopy 9X6 Bare Root 5
Live Staking and Live Cuttings Bundle Tree Species
Species Common Name %of Total Species Composition
Alnus serrulata Tag alder 20
Corpus amomum Silky dogwood 20
Physocarpus opulifolius Ninebark 20
Platanus occidentalis American Sycamore 20
Salix nigra Black willow 20
7.2.2 In-Site Invasive Species Management
Treatment for invasive species will be required within all grading limits associated with stream restoration,
as well as within the entire conservation easement. Invasive species will require different and multiple
treatment methods, depending on plant phenology and the location of the species being treated (Appendix
J).Non-native and invasive species on site include,bermudagrass,tall fescue,broomsedge bluestem,all of
which will be treated prior to planting.
All treatment will be conducted as to maximize its effectiveness and reduce chances of detriment to
surrounding native vegetation. Treatment methods will include mechanical (cutting with loppers, clippers,
or chain saw) and chemical (foliar spray, cut stump, and hack and squirt techniques). Plants containing
mature,viable seeds will be removed from the Project and properly disposed.All herbicide applicators will
be supervised by a certified ground pesticide applicator with a North Carolina Department of Agriculture
and Consumer Services (NCDA&CS) license and adhere to all legal and safety requirements according to
herbicide labels, and NC and Federal laws. Management records will be kept on the plant species treated,
type of treatment employed,type of herbicide used,application technique,and herbicide concentration and
quantities used. These records will be included in all reporting documents.
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 24 March 2020
Project#100069

7.2,3 Soil Restoration
After construction activities,the subsoil will be scarified,and any compaction will be deep tilled before the
topsoil is placed back over the Project. Any topsoil that is removed during construction will be stockpiled
and placed over the Project during final soil preparation. This process should provide favorable soil
conditions for plant growth. Rapid establishment of vegetation will provide natural stabilization for the
Project.
7.3 Mitigation Summary
Natural channel design techniques have been used to develop the restoration design described in this
document. The combination of the analog, empirical, and analytical design methods was determined to be
appropriate for this Project because the watershed is rural, the causes of disturbance are known and have
been abated, and there are minimal infrastructure constraints. The original design parameters were
developed through an iterative process using analytical and empirical tools and numerical simulations of
fluvial processes and checked against measured analog/reference reach data and step pool morphology
published data. The designs presented in this report provide for the restoration of natural Mountain cobble-
bed channel features and stream bed diversity to improve benthic habitat. The proposed design will allow
flows that exceed the design bankfull stage to spread out over the floodplain and help reduce shear stresses
and limit erosion and degradation.
Areas where the existing stream alignment is abandoned due to realignment, it will be filled in with using
material excavated from the new channel. However,multiple segments will be left partially filled to provide
habitat diversity and flood storage. These filled areas will have a maximum depth of 8-14 inches,with very
gradual and wide slopes to promote easy access to wildlife. Furthermore,with these parameters these areas
will not be inundated year-round and will be spaced adequately as to avoid gaps in the canopy layer.Native
woody material will be installed throughout the restored reach to reduce bank stress,provide grade control,
and increase habitat diversity.
Forested riparian buffers will be established along the Project reaches. An appropriate riparian plant
community (Montane Oak-Hickory Forest) will be established to include a diverse mix of species. The
plant species list has been developed and can be found in Table 14. Although there is one planting zone,
certain targeted species will be planted in the appropriate target community location. Replanting of native
species will occur where the existing buffer is impacted during construction.
Due to the nature of the project, complete avoidance of stream and wetland impacts is not possible.
Proposed stream impacts,including stream relocation,will be replaced on-site.Wetland impacts associated
with restoration efforts will have both temporary and permanent impacts to existing wetlands. However,
stream restoration will provide an overall increase to wetland function due to the addition of native trees
and shrubs along the stream banks, and restored hydrology. All stream and wetland impacts will be
accounted for in the Pre-Construction Notification(PCN)form.
7.4 Determination of Credits
Mitigation credits presented in Table 14 and Table 15 are projections based upon Project design (Figure
9; Appendix A). Upon completion of Project construction, the project components and credits data will
only be revised to be consistent with the as-built condition if there is a large discrepancy. Any deviation
from the mitigation plan post approval, including adjustments to credits, will require a Mitigation Plan
Addendum. This would require approval by the IRT.
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 25 March 2020
Project#100069

Table 14. Monkey Wall Project (ID-100069)- Mitigation Assets and Components
Mitigation As-Built
Existing Mitigation
Project Plan Mitigation Restoration Priority Credits Footage
Segment Footage/ Proposed Stationing Footage/ Category Level Level Ratio Comments
(SMUs) or
Acreage Acreage (X:1) Acreage
Extend riparian butler to at
Gl-A 278 0+55 to 3+33 278 Cold P - 10:1 27.800 least 30-feet livestock
exclusion,and conservation
easement establishment
Extend riparian buffer to at
least 30-feet,minor bank
G1-B 120 3+33 to 4+53 120 Cold EII - 5:1 24.000 - stability work,livestock
exclusion,and conservation
easement establishment
944 4+53 to 13+79 926 Cold R 1 1:1 926.000 Full channel restoration,
establish a riparian buffer to
Gl-C§ at least 30-feet,livestock
577 14+55 to 19+82 527 Cold R 1 1:1 527.000 exclusion,and conservation
easement establishment
516 0+07 to 6+35 628 Cold R 1 1:1 628.000 Full channel restoration,
establish a riparian buffer to
G2§ at least 30-feet,livestock
1,079 6+82 to 17+17 1,035 Cold R 1 1:1 1,035.000 exclusion,and conservation
easement establishment
§Powerline bisects this reach
Table 15. Monkey Wall Project Credits- Base SMUs Table 16. Project Credit Adjustments
Stream Riparian Wetland Non-riparian Coastal Type SMUs
Restoration Level
Warm Cool Cold Riverine Non-Riv Wetland Marsh Total Base SMUs 3,167.800
Restoration - - 3,116.000 - - - - Credit Loss in Required Buffer -132.476*
Re-establishment - - - - - - - Credit Gain in Required Buffer 839.145*
Rehabilitation - - - - - -
-
Net Change in Credit Buffers 706.669
Enhancement - - - - - -
-
Total Adjusted SMUs 3,874.469
Enhancement I - - - - - - -
Enhancement II 24.000 **Credit adjustment for Non-standard Buffer Width calculation
Creation - - - - - - - using the Wilmington District Stream Buffer Credit Calculator
Preservation 27.800 issued by the USAGE in January 2018. See section 7.4 for further
information.
Totals - - 3,167.800 - - - -
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 26 January 2020
Project#100069

7.5 Credit Calculations for Non-Standard buffer Widths
To calculate functional uplift credit adjustments,the Wilmington District Stream Buffer Credit Calculator
from the USACE in January 2018 was utilized. To perform this calculation,GIS analysis was performed to
determine the area(in square feet) of ideal buffer zones and actual buffer zones around the Project stream.
Minimum standard buffer widths are measured from the top of bank(50 feet in Piedmont and Coastal Plain
counties or 30 feet in mountain counties). The ideal buffers are the maximum potential size (in square feet)
of each buffer zone measured around all creditable stream reaches, calculated using GIS, including areas
outside of the easement. The actual buffer is the square feet in each buffer zone, as measured by GIS,
excluding non-forested areas, all other credit type (e.g., wetland, nutrient offset, buffer), easement
exceptions,open water, areas failing to meet the vegetation performance standard, etc. The stream lengths,
mitigation type,ideal buffer,and actual buffer are all entered into the calculator. This data is processed,and
the resulting credit amounts are totaled for the whole project. In conclusion, the Buffer Credit Calculator
calculated a net gain of 706.669 credits; therefore, the total adjusted SMUs for the Project is 3,874.469
(Table 16,Figure 11,Appendix B). As shown on Figure 11, RES is not seeking any stream credit for the
linear footage or additional credit for wider buffers within the footprint of the utility easement and is
applying a credit reduction for the area within the 0-30 foot buffer width zone.
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 27 March 2020
Project#100069

8 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
The success criteria for the Project will follow the 2016 USACE Wilmington District Stream and Wetland
Compensatory Mitigation Update and subsequent agency guidance. Specific success criteria components
are presented below.
8.1 Stream Restoration Success Criteria
8.1.1 Bankfull Events
Four bankfull flow events must be documented within the seven-year monitoring period. The bankfull
events must occur in separate years. Otherwise, the stream monitoring will continue until four bankfull
events have been documented in separate years. Stage Recorders will be installed on GI-C and G2.
8.1.2 Surface Flow
All intermittent stream restoration reaches will be monitored to document intermittent or seasonal surface
flow. This will be accomplished through direct observation and the use of hydraulic pressure transducers
with data loggers. Reaches must demonstrate a minimum of 30 consecutive days of flow. Flow gauges will
be installed on GI-C and G2. Additionally, all streams must maintain an Ordinary High-Water Mark and
the channel will be jurisdictional by year 7,which will be monitored and reported in each monitoring report.
This will be documented using flow gauges and visual indicators.
8.1.3 Cross Sections
There should be little change in as-built cross sections. If changes do take place,they should be evaluated
to determine if they represent a movement toward a less stable condition (for example down-cutting or
erosion) or are minor changes that represent an increase in stability (for example settling, vegetative
changes, deposition along the banks, or decrease in width/depth ratio). Cross sections shall be classified
using the Rosgen stream classification method, and all monitored cross sections should fall within the
quantitative parameters defined for channels of the design stream type. Bank height ratio shall not exceed
1.2, and the entrenchment ratio shall be no less than 1.4 within restored riffle cross sections for B channels
and 2.2 for C and E streams. Channel stability should be demonstrated through a minimum of four bankfull
events documented in the seven-year monitoring period.
8.1.4 Digital Image Stations
Digital images will be used to subjectively evaluate channel aggradation or degradation, bank erosion,
success of riparian vegetation, and effectiveness of erosion control measures. Longitudinal images should
not indicate the presence of developing bars within the channel or an excessive increase in channel depth.
Lateral images should not indicate excessive erosion or continuing degradation of the banks over time. A
series of images over time should indicate successional maturation of riparian vegetation. Digital image
stations will be collocated with monitoring all monitoring devises (cross sections, vegetation plots, and
monitoring gauges).
8.2 Vegetation Success Criteria
Specific and measurable success criteria for plant density within the riparian buffers on the site will follow
IRT Guidance. Vegetation monitoring plots will be a minimum of 0.02 acres in size and cover a minimum
of two percent of the planted area.Vegetation monitoring will occur annually between July 15 and leaf drop
and will include a combination of fixed and random plots. The interim measures of vegetative success for
the site will be the survival of at least 320 planted three-year old trees per acre at the end of Year 3, 260
five-year old trees with an average height of six feet at the end of Year 5, and the final vegetative success
criteria will be 210 trees per acre with an average height of eight feet at the end of Year 7. Volunteer trees
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 28 March 2020
Project#100069

will be counted, identified to species, and included in the yearly monitoring reports, and may be counted
towards the success criteria of total planted stems if the species is from the approved planting list in Section
7.4. Furthermore, any single species can only account for up to 50 percent of the required number of stems
within any vegetation plot. Any stems more than 50 percent will be shown in the monitoring table but will
not be used to demonstrate success.
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 29 March 2020
Project#100069

9 MONITORING PLAN
Annual monitoring data will be reported using the DMS Monitoring Report Template dated June 2017 and
NC IRT monitoring template. The monitoring report shall provide a project data chronology that will
facilitate an understanding of project status and trends, research purposes, and assist in decision making
regarding project close-out. Monitoring reports will be prepared annually and submitted to DMS.
Monitoring of the Project will adhere to metrics and performance standards established by the USACE's
April2003 Wilmington District Stream Mitigation Guidelines and the NC IRT's October 2016 Wilmington
District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update. Table 17 outlines links between project
objectives and treatments and their associated monitoring metrics and performance standards within the
context of functional uplift based on the Stream Functions Pyramid Framework. Table 18 outlines the
monitoring quantities and schedules for the Project. Figure 12 is the monitoring Plan with proposed
locations for vegetation plots, flow gauges, stage recorders, one wetland gauge, and one rain gauge.
9.1 As -Built Survey
An as -built survey will be conducted following construction to document channel size, condition, and
location, and monitoring gauge locations. The survey will include a complete profile of thalweg, water
surface, bankfull, and top of bank to compare with future geomorphic data. Longitudinal profiles will not
be required in annual monitoring reports unless requested by USACE. Stream channel stationing will be
marked with stakes placed near the top of bank every 200 feet. The As -built survey will follow the
requirements outlined in the 2016 USACE/NCIRT monitoring guidance.
9.2 Visual Monitoring
Visual monitoring of all mitigation areas will be conducted a minimum of twice per monitoring year by
qualified individuals. The visual assessments will include vegetation density, vigor, invasive species, and
easement encroachments. Visual assessments of stream stability will include a complete streamwalk and
structure inspection. Digital images will be taken at fixed representative locations to record each monitoring
event, as well as any noted problem areas or areas of concern. Results of visual monitoring will be presented
in a plan view exhibit with a brief description of problem areas and digital images. Photographs will be
used to subjectively evaluate channel aggradation or degradation, bank erosion, success of riparian
vegetation, and effectiveness of erosion control measures. Longitudinal photos should indicate the absence
of developing bars within the channel or an excessive increase in channel depth. Lateral photos should not
indicate excessive erosion or continuing degradation of the banks over time. A series of photos over time
should indicate successional maturation of riparian vegetation.
9.3 Hydrology Events
Stage recorders will be installed to document the occurrence of bankfull events. A minimum of one gauge
will be installed on each tributary that is greater than 1,000 feet in length, with one gauge required for every
5,000 feet of length on each tributary and a maximum of five gauges per tributary. Reaches with Priority 1
Restoration (designed to reconnect the stream to its floodplain), gauges will be capable of tracking the
frequency and duration of overbank events. Where restoration or enhancement activities are proposed for
intermittent streams, monitoring gauges will be installed to track the frequency and duration of stream flow
events.
9.4 Cross Sections
Permanent cross sections will be installed at an approximate frequency of one per 20 bankfull widths with
half in pools and half in riffle on the restoration portions of the Project reaches. Morphological data will be
measured and recorded for all cross -sections; however, only riffle cross sections will include bank height
ratio and entrenchment ratio measurements. Cross sections will be monitored in Years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7.
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 30 March 2020
Project #100069

9.5 Vegetation Monitoring
Vegetation monitoring plots will be a minimum of 0.02 acres in size and cover a minimum of two percent
of the planted area(Peet,Wentworth, and White, 1998; USACE, 2016). There will be 16 plots within the
planted area(19.02 acres;Figure 12).Plots will be a mixture of fixed and random plots,with 13 fixed plots
and three random plots. Planted area indicates all area in the easement that will be planted with trees.
Existing wooded areas are not included in the planted area. The following data will be recorded for all trees
in the fixed plots: species,height,planting date (or volunteer),and grid location.For random plots, species
and height will be recorded for all woody stems. The location (GPS coordinates and orientation) of the
random plots will be identified in the annual monitoring reports. Vegetation will be planted, and plots
established at least 180 days prior to the initiation of the first year of monitoring. Monitoring will occur in
Years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7 between July 1st and leaf drop. Invasive and noxious species will be monitored so
that none become dominant or alter the desired community structure of the Project. If necessary, RES will
develop a species-specific treatment plan.
9.6 Scheduling/Reporting
A baseline monitoring report and as-built drawings documenting stream and wetland restoration activities
will be developed within 60 days of the planting completion on the Project. The report will include all
information required by DMS mitigation plan guidelines, including elevations, photographs and sampling
plot locations, gauge locations, and a description of initial species composition by community type. The
report will also include a list of the species planted and the associated densities. Baseline vegetation
monitoring will include species,height,date of planting,and grid location of each stem. The baseline report
will follow DMS As-Built Baseline Monitoring Report Template June 2017, USACE guidelines, and the
October 2017 Mitigation Credit Calculation Memo.
The monitoring program will be implemented to document system development and progress toward
achieving the success criteria. The restored stream morphology will be assessed to determine the success
of the mitigation. The monitoring program will be undertaken for seven years or until the final success
criteria are achieved,whichever is longer.
Monitoring reports will be prepared in the fall of each year of monitoring and submitted to DMS. The
monitoring reports will include all information and be in the format required by USACE.
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 31 March 2020
Project#100069

Table 17. Monitoring Requirements
Level Treatment Objective Monitoring Metric Performance Standard
Improve the
Convert land-use of transport of water
Project reaches from the watershed
1 a from pasture to to the Project NA NA
riparian forest reaches in a non-
erosive way
Stage Recorders Four bankfull events occurring in separate
and/or pressure years
transducers:
Reduce bank height Improve flood Inspected At least 30 days of continuous flow each
ratios and increase bank connectivity semiannually year
entrenchment ratios by reducing bank
2 by reconstructing height ratios and
a the channel to increase
mimic reference entrenchment Entrenchment ratio shall be no less than
reach conditions ratios Cross sections: 1.4 within restored B channels,and 2.2 for
Surveyed in C/E channels
Years 1,2,3,5 and 7
Bank height ratio shall not exceed 1.2
As-built stream profile NA
Entrenchment ratio shall be no
Cross sections: less than 1.4 within restored
Reduce erosion reaches
Establish a riparian rates and channel Surveyed in
buffer to reduce stability to Years 1,2,3,5 and 7
erosion and reference reach
o sediment transport conditions Bank height ratio shall not exceed
o into the project 1.2
3 o stream.Establish Improve bedform
stable banks with diversity(pool
c°., livestakes,erosion spacing,percent Identify and document significant
C. control matting,and riffles,etc. Visual monitoring: stream problem areas;i.e.
other in stream Performed at least
Increase buffer semiannually erosion,degradation,
structures. width to 30 feet aggradation,etc.
Vegetation plots: MY 1-3: 320 trees/acre
Surveyed in MY 5:260 trees/acre and 6 feet avg.height
Years 1,2,3,5 and 7 MY 7:210 trees/acre and 8 feet avg.height
Vegetation plots:
Surveyed in MY 1-3: 320 trees/acre
Years 1,2,3,5 and 7
sei' Unmeasurable MY 5:260 trees/acre and 6 feet av height
ht
c) Exclude livestock Objective/Expected (indirect MY 7:210 trees/acre and 8 feet avg.height
measurement)
m from riparian areas Benefit
4 Visual assessment of
o and conservation Establish native
•ti easement,and plant hardwood riparian established Inspect signage.
xa a riparian buffer buffer and exclude conservation easement Identify and document any
c- livestock. signage:Performed at damaged or missing signs
least semiannually
(indirect Easement Compliance
measurement)
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 32 March 2020
Project#100069

Table 18. Monitoring Quantities and Schedules
Parameter Quantity Frequency Notes
Pattern 1 project reach Baseline Additional surveys will be performed upon request by USACE
Baseline,
Dimension 6 cross sections Monitoring Surveyed cross sections will be split between riffles and pools
years 1,2,3,5,
and 7
Profile 1 project reach Baseline Additional surveys will be performed upon request by USACE
Two pressure transducer gauges will be installed on-site;these
2 flow gauges Annual devices will be inspected on a quarterly basis to document the
Surface Water occurrence of consecutive flow days
Hydrology Two stage recorders will be installed on-site;these devices will be
2 stage recorders Annual inspected on a quarterly basis to document the occurrence of
bankfull events
Groundwater 1 groundwater Pressure transducers will be installed on-site;the devices will be
Hydrology monitoring well Annual inspected on a quarterly basis to document wetland hydroperiods
13 fixed Monitoring
Vegetation vegetation plots years 1,2,3,5, Vegetation will be monitored per IRT guidelines
and 3 random and 7
plot
Exotic and
Nuisance N/A Annual Locations of exotic and nuisance vegetation will be mapped
Vegetation
Project Boundary N/A Semi-annual Locations of fence damage,vegetation damage,boundary
encroachments,etc.will be mapped
Stream Visual N/A Annual Semi-annual visual assessments
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 33 March 2020
Project#100069

10 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN
In the event the mitigation site or a specific component of the mitigation site fails to achieve the necessary
performance standards as specified in the mitigation plan,the sponsor shall notify the members of the IRT
and work with the IRT to develop contingency plans and remedial actions.
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 34 March 2020
Project#100069

11 LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN
The Project will be transferred to the NCDEQ Stewardship Program (or 3rd party if approved). This party
shall serve as conservation easement holder and long-term steward for the property and will conduct
periodic inspection of the Project to ensure that restrictions required in the conservation easement are
upheld. Funding will be supplied by the responsible party on a yearly basis until such time an endowment
is established. The NCDEQ Stewardship Program is developing an endowment system within the
nonreverting, interest-bearing Conservation Lands Conservation Fund Account. The use of funds from the
Endowment Account will be governed by North Carolina General Statute GS 113A-232(d)(3). Interest
gained by the endowment fund may be used for the purpose of stewardship, monitoring, stewardship
administration, and land transaction costs, if applicable.
The Stewardship Program will periodically install signage as needed to identify boundary markings as
needed. The landowner will be responsible for easement compliance per the terms of the recorded
conservation easement(including fence/crossing maintenance etc.)
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 35 March 2020
Project#100069

12 REFERENCES
Cowardin, L.M.,V. Carter, F.C. Golet and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater
Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services,
FWS/OBS-79/31. U.S. Department of the Interior,Washington,DC.
Endangered Species Act of 1973, Pub. L. 93-205, 87 Stat. 884, codified as amended at 16 U.S.C. ch. 35
§1531 et seq.
Environmental Laboratory. (1987). U.S.Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual,
Technical Report Y-87-1. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station.
Fischenich, C. 2001. "Stability thresholds for stream restoration materials." ERDC Technical Note No.
EMRRP-SR-29, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center,Vicksburg,Miss.
Fischenich, J.C. (2006). Functional Objectives for Stream Restoration, EMRRP Technical Notes
Collection(ERDC TN-EMRRP-SR-52). Vicksburg, MS: US Army Engineer Research and
Development Center. Retrieved from http://el.erdc.usace.army.mil/elpubs/pdf/sr52.pdf
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). (2008). Flood Insurance Rate Map North Carolina:
Panel 0855. In the Flood Risk Information System (FRIS)web application. Retrieved from
https://mapl.msc.fema.gov/idms/IntraView.cgi?KEY=36428972&IFIT=1. Accessed on March
27, 2019.
Griffith, G.E., J.M. Omernik, J.A. Comstock, M.P. Schafale,W.H. McNab, D.R. Lenat,T.F. MacPherson,
J.B. Glover, and V.B. Shelburne. (2002). Ecoregions of North Carolina and South Carolina,
(color Poster with map, descriptive text, summary tables, and photographs): Reston,VA: U.S.
Geological Survey(map scale 1:1,500,000).
Harman,W.H. et al. (2003). Updated Equations for the Regional Curve Relationships for the Mountain
Region. Raleigh,NC: NCSU BAE. Retrieved from
https://web.archive.org/web/20170705004307/https://www.bae.ncsu.edu/programs/extension/wqg
/srp/mtntable.html
Harman,W., R. Starr, M. Carter, K. Tweedy, M. Clemmons, K. Suggs, C. Miller. (2012). A Function-
Based Framework for Stream Assessment and Restoration Projects. US Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds,Washington, DC EPA 843-K-12-006.
Keaton, K.N., T. Messinger, and E.J. Doheny. (2005). Development and analysis of regional curves for
streams in the non-urban valley and ridge physiographic province, Maryland,Virginia, and West
Virginia. USGS Scientific Investigations Report 2005-5076. Reston,VA: USDOI-USGS.
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality(NCDEQ). (n.d.). DWR Primary Surface Water
Classifications. Retrieved from https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-
re sources/planning/classification-standards/classifications#DWRPrimaryClassification
NCDEQ. (1998). Clear Creek Surface Water Classification. In NC Surface Water Classifications web
application. Retrieved from
https://ncdenr.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=6e 125 ad7628f494694e25 9c80
dd64265. Accessed March 27, 2019
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 36 March 2020
Project#100069

North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP). (2009). French Broad River Basin
Restoration Priorities 2009.
North Carolina Geological Survey. (1985). Geologic map of North Carolina: North Carolina Geological
Survey, General Geologic Map, scale 1:500000.
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP). (2018).North Carolina Natural Heritage Data
Explorer. Retrieved from https://ncnhde.natureserve.org/
NRCS. (2017). Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States,Version 8.1. L.M. Vasilas, G.W.
Hurt, and J.F. Berkowitz(eds.). USDA,NRCS,in cooperation with the National Technical
Committee for Hydric Soils.
NRCS (n.d.).Web Soil Survey.Washington, DC: USDA-NRCS. Retrieved from
http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov. Accessed June 25, 2019
Peet, R.K., Wentworth, T.S., and White, P.S. (1998). A flexible, multipurpose method for recording
vegetation composition and structure. Castanea 63:262-274
Rosgen, D. (1996),Applied River Morphology, 2"d edition,Wildland Hydrology, Pagosa Springs, CO
Schafale, M.P. (2012). Guide to the Natural Communities of North Carolina, Fourth Approximation.
Raleigh,NC: North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation,
NCDENR
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). (2003). Stream Mitigation Guidelines: April 2003.
Raleigh,NC: USACE, USEPA,NCWRC, and NCDWQ.
USACE. (2012). Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Eastern
Mountains and Piedmont Region(Version 2.0). ERDC/EL TR-12-9. Berkowitz, J.F., J.S.
Wakely,R.W. Lichvar, and C.V.Noble (Eds.). Vicksburg, MS: USACE, U.S. Army Engineer
Research and Development Center.
USACE. (2016).Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update.
USACE. (2018).Wilmington District Stream Buffer Credit Calculator.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). (2018). Endangered Species, Threatened Species,
Federal Species of Concern, and Candidate Species: Mitchell County. Retrieved from
https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/Mitchell.html
Zink, Jason M., Gregory D. Jennings,and G. Alexander Price, 2012. Morphology Characteristics of
Southern Appalachian Wilderness Streams.Journal of the American Water Resources
Association (JAWRA) 1-11. DOI: 10.1111/j.1752-1688.2012.00647.x
Monkey Wall Mitigation Plan 37 March 2020
Project#100069

Barnett pr,,,
7za
Beech Creek
HOPSON EXPRESS r. •.•
Beans Creek Church v
DM
, Sig Rock Creek CA
Baptist Church S/
FED
EEM
arson Gap
lidit •0
'dn eadr
tj0
w
Fork Mountain Pottery
r
m
m
EEO uneroKee
National Fare'
Monkey Wall Project
liEln
,:
Memorial Church 9
Legend
Reli
7 II Proposed Easement akersville
7 Er!' JP°
TLW-06010108060010 Mou ain
Service Area- HUC 06010108
Federal Land
Pisgah National Forest River Burnsville Spruce Pin
3 ,, , Micaville t---'�
-.w 36.05.69, -82.2062
N
Date: 2/27/2020
*���� +�L� Figure 1 -Project Vicinity
/1ti.i W e Drawn by: EJU ol
IdeS
- +o- �,a,.t���+,'t+� 5 Monkey Wall Mitigation Project
��O 0 1,000 2,000 Checked by: MDE
Mitchell County, North Carolina 1 inch=2,000 feet
g. Feet

2L4 $
) ‘. ... \ ..Fito)\',,'‘':,. ."-:;irs? . •S
; r
.,v l t txom - s I ii _
k•J L ', , MiA1.- ...• V 4., AlitZ.Liii'k'ii:,!.:1.i4''.. lre"---7 ,.. 0 (---- 1(4... ,„,,, ', '.. .".. c.
z,t .,� _ ,7 pi '}'Aar '. Frintliridrrila i .' 1.7.rp,,Ar .:s;r4.-
--.• 1\ -‘1- •77:.c4:nfr c-Ttt, .. . . i„ 4 1 ‘` Ctr-f.b. , i
4 ,....," .,...-...,,,,.„.„..„,,,..
_;., ,-,\_ ___„ ...,,...;:.. L „.,-, . -;:.., .-Aki---, -• •
- rik , Pi,. ••'7-NiL___A •0 li •,* ' '"' 1/-.:',;VIrt- .;, 1 lar-4
'`-••. •%.t.t7--).!•./•••• \L--' ..,_, :-: - i• '-., ,'\.,,i& .. •1:. .•/.V a - ir :- ,. .._.. .: ,.,,f.:...24,...4:!:A..,...,I. .
' "kilt .1-,. ) • . . -. b -‘-•-s...:...:2\i'v
'-l--
- -.' N,R .. 5 ;.
,l , c<f•r j-►fir
_I •V----_•;A,C•-•%-"T-...-• ‘i... • '•/'.•-; . - . :.• v,-• '•.1- ---__.--. ..'.'iiiir#,s, .. ii.i.s._ tk 1,, -.- /4 .. ... ..•C___
.- ::' .r-. k .j. c..... _ -IP"tini(• .iir.: :..f.:17-:"i. '..7 ago , .f,,,,,, _
_ . . k „,,,,,,,!,___.(....,.7_,-.. ... ;1/4,, -.,1 •-., %) / ei,,
,„.. . .. ..„ .
s),..._. -v -• , ,_ ,,...„ • -1., ... o . , .._._. 4
-- ? ••\j/ .?")))/
~ ° ' -', Vic••-, 14.23 ac 1 _ `L rs7. 1 --il, f�
;6 c
.�.i, - 64° Lam'f .i 4 P� ...__._ / /
• • • II- , --.0421.83 ac "---\...../P N\h.....,,_______ ._ .‘)
� � a.r'
J.1�1 �' Y' 86.6 ac .. G1-C .„...„Ait (--", (_
, _ lip.,,,....--,vo. -,..-••-• rj,.....:,:z3WFL Nitie-yorir
\.. r.. .'.. .- t--1,1„,-)V"-\ .. ff.(1.. ' - • . < willi 1,2 ,,......,.........../
-,-1-- ''..-• 1.-.., ---\-----....,_,A)11\V_ ..: ) *:::: ',r. ./. .,:;_ . 1.--P" :
,1 ){{ r'_f �. ,*r„_„.., ..,,.,
55.09 ac � '
-> 0....'' ....'„..,- -WO ' ti..l .... ' /..-, ...atio-
�Jjjff1///J• 1 ..0./ : - `...,...,,,--- ? - --r;-' . 1-,44.,-..-..'_ .. il) '
.•., ,. ..• • r . _ . . . -. ''• - .. -.. .6 '
f i{ram ,;, 1 I :,, U' $ _ .A -
II
.: .. --':: --1-0. (..: 0 (-,:.: 4i -.,/
1, r
t,k(:),i ./‘./..'y'...:','11 - 41'6 .. N ,
•• iliv.„ Wirect1/4_, .
Fenri•ivr-,,,,r,....,,,1/4. „„..
li . 4. ,....'.... -._ . / ..00Alki- I. f ... ...tini.. b•_--i.v.1,-\_-"16.1m....... —s......,. tr.-2J
P. _ kill _li _..... -
4,-..v
--, ---
'
f :,,, ,,,;.•,. ..:,- •. . ... ..... ,. -..:., ---_,-_,_.-.\,
, „,..... .., ,---
le:, � � r
,7 ---11.-i
ti,or•:•:,..k,,,\,-... ..4-- ._c_,:
•-•- lii'' '-'•....'", 1.5) . 1 02'.\-''' ''r.-----0)1. Tr"- pt.-- N--. \\--1„
7 ,--- • -.- r-._:.,...1/4N q i.„.
ill \--„...„..----------
Legends -_�_ d �� t „,F.' , 101,7.00:-
Proposed Easement V • \‘ d(1�bal.4.1(:((;), - . ALNI*H .►k Nilik-
Drainage Area ,�+r
N Figure 2 - USGS Quadrangle Date: 2/27/2020
*�q����giwb�►LZ�tiI w E Bakersville (1979)
�A.,- ..�A�_.�;i� Drawn by: EJU Pres
a;Ar S Monkey Wall Mitigation Project Checked by: MDE
flit 0 1,000 2,000
Il
Feet
Mitchell County, North Carolina 1 inch=2,000 feet

r a •�'
. fir +~• %~.- t� • Y �'` ..•' 7`.y .. - ..
•
• .1,-
......-.
�,••'� /4 �'.: _T- `' Y.... - �. ..7�11 . '�':•�'rt' .fir_
• • "T Ct}?F' • 174. f .. - ''' �� ... T •_'s Vim,
•
\' 1
•
�i.... � C��`'•}- •om . $. - L1 -
•
114l. � w
' • 0. OP* 7,744 j-Ly� •K.- •
. .., ., '/
�-
•
•--# 'i .. - Environmental Banc&Exchange LLC
Environmental Banc&Exchange LLC` 0855-00-24-8634
-.
0855• -00-14-9 3,,._ -
• ",: F' /
• �,. .of s i t.'j
•*" �• . 4\ Environmental Banc&Exchange L'LC
••4 :.
--' -.. . 0855-00-23-1885 -
:.fit' •' :
Legend r -• _ 1` :`. •t,,dill
Proposed Easement - _ =. -
Project Parcel
Parcel .
N
Date: 2/27/2020
*yip +�L� Figure 3 - Landowner Parcels
I y'01_ :1•Ptle 04414,1 w e Drawn by: EJU
��..� e:.......��, IdeS
��'►� ►..,t,•���+�.+t�� 5 Monkey Wall Mitigation Project
��'�#` 0 200 400 Checked by: MDE
Il Mitchell County, North Carolina 1 inch=400 feet
Feet

.
. ... . . _ •,.
. ...2. _
4,...'• -••••-...•.4v._ :•.!- _...-: .77_-,.... .-:•-•.; '.. ,...i'iir •:ft- , =,..:.•'•••. •••: -• •,.. -,-!- _ .. .... .,.... . . ,... _ .,...
4-•, _.,.... ..,;,•7...,,_-..e... . ...• - . ... „ r• ...*.i.,_,. ••• •.-‘,..._:;•....:.•„t.,,..-... •,-••..i.. ,, •.,_„.J". . : • :
• - ..• - •
2 ..,, '.r..• ..j§:-.• . ,-..;-..'• ' .•-. .•:::.-..' ..;.-.... .;1..tt '::‘,..,, :: • ;
! .C • - •• ' •-.-• -''''''-• .., . • ... . 4:5 #•'..-.Q.'-t•-•,....:'--- '-.'''.' •• . ... _ ,. . _. • ...,., :.
.4'...,.,• • • • i , ...P....), . . •-- `-:. 1110.. - ". • : • L.- s . ,. , .. • • •• ..4,
...,..... • •
.. ....., .
. • .. ..•••,. •.b ' 'F',:-.'
. .. .•..• '..' •'' ',. ••r -••• • - - • •
• i-jk• . .".
.... .....' . . _. -. .. ..• .
• ' 4 .. .„.-.• . ... ,.. .... - -. : .. :...
•a•• -' . . .' • • 4 • .
'1" ,•711... - •7... .._ Ai..:!.. ;...--• .• • . "...-1., ..0 - . . ,...
..,_ - • „.•-•n •".-. •-- : "- - ,.. it-e- .. .., :. . : . ... .... .. . ..
ir 1•41:.L•G 5.-LI:. .1" •.' II -, •,„..0 ' . ••• :'....7 v- . .... . . .
..', * •.4....•.°.,,,,Ti -.:L, ..,,, IL- ." !‘,..\:.%...,..r..' •. .:',..-.,•_•. ,•• . ' • • . . .
', •
...,', ' '4v-••• ••419' • •' •'110'• lbw ••7 ••!.:. -7'.•'••••• 1•:•:•!. . . -
. :I, • • le• - -% •.' •
• .. ..• .• ,........ . .,. .•. ...
,,;,,.... , *fir- - , _,,e,:,,,„ .. .... -. .:-.:•.. ` ..........': •e-. .•;_-... •...,_ : ..-. .
•, ,. - , . ,.• . - 24.-.--m..*,... .,1 ...-,..--,,,f':'4. .• , •- •••••••.. • :-.''- •. .....-. '-...--.•• ..,,-•...;:id1C•4`.' ' • ,• 1:--
• •...4..,.; .
.•C'.';'''•• ..•,..'4- ,..1., •.-.4•i -. • ". -. .• 0...•V1444,..."..'„:-7 .. :-....,..:' •••-'c:0,..$17=•• ' -
_ 'Iv .........,- ... .. ,., r• ,.. . .
•'. :.,.;.,:.:--',.'!•:•,-,i.,'..,•1A1-•.'..,.•''...i',.'.-...:....:17.-..••;-. f'.i •i•;"4.71:&1;,'4,4X ,•••f•-•'.1. .T.,"f.c:zic...'41":." In2jr:
.. -• k.,''.,....••. ••• Iiii-L. ,;-'*;.-.•. ;•' ' 11.::',..:" 14--P2k_....1.4.......• t':- 1..;• .• '-' 4,....6:,..1..f...•:••-•-•;":•••• •.,i...,-;7.)'a...kj!';'.. 'P.4,
: . , f , .,. i. 4 .f: .. }..:.,,•::.„.4.. •_.•_,..:...._-:-:•_, ..s...14: .•71.1. .......;7.14,r?• 14...,..' • --.L'L•• 7.4--,..,•,..4.--- ..r•,-.'iv'..• ' '. r•••",-.A.4tC.' V" i
...'...•• ..%%.....'' , •-•.3:• '. • ,• -"^-:- -...t,=••-•.,:- '-,•-• --...,-.7.• •••,-.._--. ....... '..•;".... ., --. •2--••_ •,:•• •::.•s-••L%., - c.."i•.1 • -....''-
,. •, •.. ,• . . • - :" .- ..'t-I''',-••• •.-••::.'•=:.....;-• •• •,,*_,;,., -•:)••• --46:- •:).••..-4,',...V -Iile7,--11•:..•:••;•'
• .,
• • ..7...• ., ._.......;$,•:1:-..... -,,,., :,:.:,m'L.:..".•4,...z,-..,.....!....„-:,,„,,.. -.,•- - . Alkiii.,-. '•.-;:....,1-,i....::-...,.....1. - •.• i,.. ,..:•.4
..1 .; ..s...•• ,. •• •. •.. . • ..• -.-_,-.... ,,,,---••_:3.k: ,...r.;H4F...,t,..-ics.-44... ....t,. ,-...
:1 ..• .....40„.„,,,..... ...,:l..1...,,--;,. •-- .*
. . $ •''',•l'..-' ','-*--'•'‘-:•-.--- .V•'. .-••P7-,•-4.,74•:i..4.-."''‘• ''. .-"4,... .-‘'.?. • ....' .' ...•A , ..•. 4,..- ,
. .,. .
.....64. ....- .. >1°';'..- .•4...., .::.'..e..'.. ...... ,...4. j'.
•,, ',40
• • . ... • • • . ...... . . .
.,..,.‘: ••.,v,. .
.'Z
r vA
• • !..6-..,4 ... ..-. - ,, -.4 . ...-.. . ... . . ,, ....
• 4 :.•,i''.5.dir .4 •
•'- : ..••F'-. • .-'I .1.k.••-..i
I'',.,t.. ., ;..! ,;:"/•1 itt:.• •......• . •''' * .,.4-4.'- - • •• •-‘';`- • '.1,,?• •:f.-41
, . ., • ''ii,. •-***;• - , ,:_•, !..4.-..k" ,.0, ,,..r.....4...,.L.A.,„ibtk,.:.....,4#
....., 4 . ii - ..,,,T •
:•'•,cJ`-..-,:.:Tit:',.•,••• :'
-• •-,
- . .,.• . . _., • - •4 •• ^6..7., .1,' : /
,.
4......,g.r,,,
• ; •‘... • ,,. . . :....••.. ...;!..„..1:
-. .. . •P...,tt 4 :t.'•''''''Ci• 1
••:•..1-:'7 ,^...•-14 :.,,v•••, •7
1. -•‘. •;•• ..••1 .,:4 -;*--- "7- ••i 4/4-4-•'.'--'. . .; / .0
. .. .
.- - . ;e.F.44!+'0.!.••.- .."••••••..e....• , ‘ 4,...;,..
,--:410* ....,--.. '„....,„,... ........,..,...: .._ .., . ,....:...,,...„.....„, ....7..'-ft.i.4.•' .er'
p '.• N 4•' .S--b--.. . -'•,:", i., •'''. •• '.' ,• ,
. -. '..•:fl!„:...,.r.., .;..;......,•.. 4...1".• ;,f,•,K.
liv-..": .;,,. •4P% . ''•• ..t.ti,''.,.•'.. te..T.f., ;-,,_;4'.....:-...".. '_.-..A1..-. ,
. . . . .,.)...'.2......,.4.1.,:-.• ... .,...• .: ' , ' '. . ' ''At . ;. ..t.I:...."..,.... .-1,.;
Ito . .
....:A 11 . P 4,,-- -.•.--.. . . •
--. ' • • ' i'''.'. 14 ..',it..;•4:.......1',.''
L'..••••<:'!''It;',kr••••-!
......,.,
noll• ' „4-.,..1 ....r..' -‘* • . ...,. , (
.. •-.< '- ' P-. '.••:;,Dr.3. • .,•.• .
40.,
,..P,'.'•7.: 0411'.•••:.',..,•'t-..',.••• '',. - f I r.,It y...I.......%
- 44, ..''.l:Wir :4..ti10;..!k•_
••••r..... ,,,. -. ' .•
• • •• • •• '4* - •
...." ,...e4.---..41•-• ...., ••••;,••••40.v•-...
. .:...-.."••44A••..•.• ,•.?•••••4,. 1 ..?!•••••-•,'7.••.••,
:.-.••••- ,..t., 4t '.
,...'.......A..fc,,,A .....i....'.••.•••. •As.,11....:. .
• :f.•'-.7, •• _ •0• ' ....•,.e•,
-- 1.-.' .444c?-)_._•• :. -
_ . ,. , . . •
:.•:•••,14,0,••••-•1,,,,,,,e1:.f.lr' L.,...'11. ', -..• s
..,:•.f... .. .A. /..m..n. .H.4.-.:-•-•;:: ••,...•..,.i..... •,.,........:.• .,
•• -• • .••--••--7- 4, '41,-. -. „...
.?. ;iiir •-:'.,M,....1,'',.,,:14,11:!:-4.::;,..i.-!.ii'lli
. - . ,. ... ‹ ,.. . --
... • .4... ,, .. .
k.•-Oti-C.'•••„.-i$40k..-,Ar."!"'-'•4'.4.',ILke... •-'•:2 .
• ' •• -. vik % *v•:.4.7._;,;. :,..--at
..."1:-.,-'' .. •Lit•!'''.':' -•v--j•Ii;t..1'ti.':,*r.7:.*•• '...'•'.L X,,' ':
;..... ,,,.;...... r., ._1,•-• • _ :.,. ..I....-.4,t,,.;;;:•,':,k•.s,r•••14.-.',.. •••:.t.:it:.:!,:„..,,•w.., •,:•,.,•,'.1,.; ,•..
.. . ....Ir.
... 41 - i • . 4 PT+.
- • ,• • -••-:2.6...-p....2-7.s,riii.• ..,
-..-..-- -.' . L.•• L-....,-. 22,.''••••• • ;L.:0 '' •' -:- !h'1,4,, '
. - .•
P• ...•.,.
- .-; . .4.- ."...t.• ... nt.$ - '11.-1,1•4:'''''4.',. i• •. ,'47, -4,-...,'t-..,''$.1,..' " ' 4' •.' .-
... ._...„.44,,,,...F ,'.0.:,,,,i:•.:.,.. $6,...- .-• ' 4. A-v.. ..! ••,•••••• '•,,. oc- '
irovA• -""••.k..1,%.•• ••'• - ..,. ••,....,.• •. • ...A:A.L'i.t.e.-;•:7..".:It„•,•L!-6 ..'4,,:....,.,1:1.,..)
. .: ,..,..:',•.4 _.• ,._, .
- •' '''':02-.:44.--', ".. .. !''..z. '•
' •V-'' :. . .:,.1,..;..$.s.,„•.•:...;:•••-• . •;,..'..,1•:•_-;i:!-- ..........•,7•: . • 'e.;',.?.. ...,_... .' , .,p,.., ,.,
\ . •. .( -.;,`• ... . :'...'1\14-.;:!.- -....,.:..,.::',*:".4:.,. ..1,..,,t;.....,._.,4-,,•,-,.....:„..,;-.-.r . : - ,,...,:,....;: ....,..:.i. ,:,1.4‘,1.,..,
•. ,:...,... • I kii,.,. . e._;,...1•••.,=•!. ',,,4*,;.....,•"•*-.: _.•C;-.-:4i.f..a'S-4 L.Y..'..,..:',•.,‘•°:.- :!7 i•Ni;e...,.‘ -t, .
. 1-, .L 4:7/F 77,, . ..,x,'•'.'-';, •A4,.&.....4$4.,#4/ 414.4.$!,,.4•-- X,-.•-1, 4... '.••..y. :'••f.'' '•'.
'I$4...Y,.••-4 •-,• ••... .•'• 1 ..•'
., 4.., ')0,fit:''144 7,..'.Arl'- '4%-,..' 1.-!':''.404'i",.4. r^.... ..! ,., ,... ...• ..,. . .., ... ... .4, . ..
.1,_,,tjAti,AftiV ..4,,'' .• $ 1,,• • '•'' '• • . 1.- -
' ..-: '.••• 400•-,.•:..if . • ,i.. ..' . ., ,114' .. lit. •,4„ ,.,-z;•"),.•4,.- 44 ,,$.- *,.. , ...• ,. .it;,.,..'.'4 t'$:','.'1' ..., : •..i
.. .. . 'i••.".,-....:4.111.i. .!,-'t,,• •'Z''' .4.#•..' 4.,/,','''•..7.,*44".•':' :1'1.-.. 5-: S.'......•(''''4V'• •it- '•••• A.'7-.
tit0 04V•'.. .. *
41111111.4 . . ,. • . . '-.... •
.... .,41„. •.'ilt4
• I ' ...' ''..." . .- . . ,. , . •
• ir .......t.,
' i..... , .. ......
Legend
•
I
Proposed Easement Land-Use
-2 - - Drainage Area Cropland(0.95%)
.,
, • s- .
2 • - - Jia .
• • ')''
Forest(50.4%)
.-4`ii, •• •
, . ..
i .
Impervious Surface (0.61%) . •
._., ...... .,
--;
Pasture(47.3%)
Residential (0.79%)
.1.
s
Date: 2/27/2020
-,-
-,I Figure 4- Land-Use
s .taltirAllriAtrOl w ___-_141.,_\72-s F
Drawn by: EJU
1 tiji*OL111./.4614."'"aalial
, ..,,,.....,.,..................., .....
tip._ ......... , Monkey Wall Mitigation Project
Checked by: MDE Ides
44101kair
0 250 500
11 Mitchell County, North Carolina 1 inch=500 feet
Feet

e
Mg
at • µ
a `'-,� r" • •CnD2
.40111. N. •• • •. _
CnD2
WS
R3
4:1/1
{
CnE2
CP
CnD2 '
CnD2
• ID
I • r CnD2 �2
f i
VS ,
I. CnD2,
CnD2
CnD2
--71 ------7:F: __.;.,.
• EdE
Legend . • d Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name
BtF Buladean-Chestnut complex,50 to 95 percent slopes
Proposed easement TsD Thunder-Saunook complex, 15 to 30 percent slopes
CnD2 Clifton clay loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes
Nonhydric (0%) TsC Thunder-Saunook complex, 8 to 15 percent slopes
NRCS-Web Soil Surve 2019 FeE2 Fannin sandy clay loam, 30 to 50 percent slopes
N
Date: 2/28/2020
*���� +�L� Figure 5 - Mapped Soils
+�*�� ��I���1/����~1 w e Drawn by: EJU
.�..� ,::.......��, Pres
��'►� �.rr,.t��'�1'L�� 5 Monkey Wall Mitigation Project
��'�#` 0 200 400 Checked by: MDE
Mitchell County, North Carolina 1 inch=400feet
Feet

ir • .... .. .•
• . _,,,.. .,.,,....„ :,. ,,,... _.... .- ,.....„.„-•:.,,,,,...„,....„.. ,• .:-.,...,,••A l'e.•'.••:. ,,.•••••.•,..•,.• •.•:•-••• '..!,.:••••'`.•:-:. ••: •••• ..-`••• •"•••,'...--..4.•••:._-.,••••4 ..i, ...-i•-.1,..e.•:.e.i.il
,.,,::. , : • k•-k..4,--,-0 Af•- .--L. ,-.=._:.. _.'-.-... •,..- ' >•74..1,.Aliii_-,k .--•, ...V1i- ,,,*•-,,.......4.---,:,.`::-•j'•••,-1`.• •N -:.-•••• -•'-'404,:,7,-/1.4'-..,-.•:( '- •a...-':t .
•
•
t
-`�P^�.�",��,s . C_ ' v T*��a •�"i-4 •:.....
ti°� -• '%4e �2` �5�.� • ..4�`"'„ ...�" _4. • 4s'':. ::�.� .+�...��
.. •',• ',. _ •1 _ a; `r r.^ai • , '. 'y..- 4:` ? .. y _ y,-4•,"� -. t. dry.
°t I3 ; c
" '..• • ..:411+:%-•••••-•----- • .'
.a fir. ' .
°.^ k7 11R'J LS.. 1 .. \ - + .( . . 'y' ‘ .. .�",M ^ Y i s t
• .. WB _
a'- -- : ,.. •.',...
x, _ :w1- ;.:.P;: . _ g: G1.P- ,�,f ;.11„ aka 7k'.+ 11' . `y 6`
.lY*-'_~ , .' f,r,,„r.' .� : y"- "77°n °4p ' ' • #7 -Y: •'N N A 4 .:b 'i-+1 :I _ r.9'
.,1 ex t ?.' •• iV Fr,.. t•
•
•
• ; . . er�: - �*' i'� 1 + C V' E' "W
. _• '.4.t _� " �
•
„it 9-�'��.4 • - h{r'. R ! •�f, 47R- f:��a ice. ,-*
.fir._ '* �' di-; S , ,, '
-t r �• � ti..
'� .!i ^� 'y .. '• — . ; -, „ - 5 '{•.fi•
• .y- f • Powerline Easement ;
-gg •
Gqf� ; ''� v `• ®mil^"� ' ► 6 =ti:' a' • 4, •,
' - . ., - ./.,.,:::.. Shed it ;, • ,
•
•
l y. a
. fry
•
t..
#.. • i 4- � aka S
Legend .:,..
Barn • _ 1st •' `' .•�� _�i
I Proposed Easement r. P.
d
Utility Access Easement •`;`
•' FF
�`LLG Existing Wetland(0.29 ac) • �`
•O Existing Rock Wall
Existing Stream "`• �r'
5
N
ggg Date: 2/28/2020
*���� •�L� Figure 6- Existing Conditions
+�*�����I��i1/ 0111
� �~1 w ---F Drawn by: EJU
��'►� ►..,r,•ie�+�,+�� Monkey Wall Mitigation ProjectPres
�� R. 0 150 300 Checked by: MDE
Il
Mitchell County, North Carolina 1 inch=300 feet
g.
Feet

1956 44"' .` 1 N 1992 • .. �` A r , -
• i i • ,y- • r ter•, • (gy" •k ,e r 4 ,.
Ort } y
• `i . {' ' Yam. 'l'Sys -k «-..4 i:. " i; rt _ ati 3,.1yr„ , '' 1 " `,• r'# •
•
$'- • • 4� .-• 7 • ""` �' .. - " � x - _ 4
4
h y
• ' !�t: i . tie " ;y�l , /,
y ;
51 • ,.
Nilo , . .
9k ,•.: .. mil•,
r .
Zto,.., y'4t . Vvolip.. •.p .
o
4V177..
i _ " ' off. •6- � j r ;,
. 'f'Syr[
e`, �: 6 t , r. s. �p
• i' .. ► N '+ S ource.USGS Earth Expl ,r. Source:USGS Earth Explorer
1999
,-a.• .F•i r
r ... -,..., A Ir. ii.
-i +L' :.
•
Ik- ' '.' *.t b.. . -. ,•
1 rr
Legend
A
Proposed Easement .. `
_-, • Source:USGS Earth Explorer Source:NC One Map
N
Date: 3/2/2020
•R.���� .�►�� Figure 7 - Historical Conditions
`�'�`,��'-��w,���ti„r� Drawn by: EJU
i0:41'*►�;,;;ili;"���� Monkey Wall Mitigation ProjectPres
�i"��` 0 400 800 Checked by. MDE
- IlMitchell County, North Carolina 1 inch=800 feet
Feet

lit jsr
Yt �-✓i'i•'� Y`. }/ � �.'� •,..�c-k 1[.•, �a. y x r1' r --�. t�:1pf. ���-
•
-.A' fi t.
_ t _ram'. ; .' -.•'' ry1. : . r:' i�;.J:•4.,
�,' • • .li FE�a • 7. } '•�+j. is - ::
" '} i. '� -� err ���.�:`.: ` •.. _ jt.'� ; ', '. �•'- ,
•
•
I. .-!. �'\•,'�µ: • - l .�..'*•.. L7' 1'S: x -.-:::..::,;..,At, _ri T.*;1.. is
•
•
.:�. �;.` - • - „f. .fie., � �_ : _ �_ `'-,:.'�� , .t.;�i _�'r `tr.
�' • �.'A � .�.1. • ,. d Jet.
. �,�E•.: ';' Fa:J_., i~ .. �� ., y, sa*ti.- '.v g4. •} ._ -1n, rr .y
"* •
A 7
'1 =i* - • ,�y�x i.' ' ' - ��. . .,,ti. "-.e • ..J 1.
• T i py,i 4 F liT`..0• n '•};rlr? `" jk p ." `.
y R i: g '� ` r yn, 4 -,r fit-.; *�4•l„. 4;_•.,".�y.?��i �t,••0
:rho _ ' +¢" r. . �,' . • •,i 4;, J i• ' I
•`•• ‘, j.,-4'.e Y.. 'T
=•*IV
•
, � �'''�• ?.'aN. .i. r�'e f r' •Vie•..._ _ •- z • �• �.
•
•
Powerline Easement :. ., • ,` �''. .
,, ;
:.; ,� .�
• L. t,• x
- 'Y
• tip '.' - Qa -- • Shed ' - ;.
li
4 / --.
1 y V ] :` -
Legend .. -= . •
•
Proposed Easement
fir. ' .;
*'• s
Utility Access Easement
W Existing Wetland
•
NWI Wetlands(USFWS 10-29-2018) (None)
3E.
1
N
Date: 2/28/2020
*���� •�L� Figure 8- Project Constraints
+#oPa tirAlllgri 7 w e Drawn by: EJU
��'►� ►..,t,•���+�+ � 5 Monkey Wall Mitigation ProjectPres
��'�#` 0 200 400 Checked by: MDE
Il
Mitchell County, North Carolina 1 inch=400 feet
Feet

•
;- Xi :
. .
it '4
..r Y •
W� • • Y1
w .-.-. ... N, .A•"A 0111‘...-: .
. ...-411,1117.0•*Ie. •
ist
'
V, VV • V . 5 V P ,a'• V r
1.
�;'•
7 ;.•
..,,, r} .& . a.���At. �.•� r?.;`$. 2. .
' �a i.},'K~ ..°I�.- - ' : 7l.A'AAA.
,
•
%
y�r. 9r r rC r k-a 4 ,4. ' n rri -ON.
•. at �" !•; k' ' " .,
2 �.. . p1S"6.^t.. '°±' -3:
•+' r . .' .• • r - -fit- ••`
•
4 '? , • • -. ,Ie. ..r•am";b1 k`.loll
..1.‘,
t:. ¢_ ,
•
Ra .mom `:
P' /. -., 1 C
a
4.
a
am :.
Removal of Structure z ' ' ^
Monkey Wall Project credos
Legend en` Reach Mitigation Type Proposed Length(LF) Mitiation Ratio SMUs
G1-A Preservation 278 10:1 27.800
-• II Proposed Easement(25.25 ac) Approach G1-B Enhancement II(5) 120 5:1 24.000
G1-C Restoration 926 1:1 926.000
►:���: Restoration G1-C Restoration 527 1:1 527.000
6��� UtilityAccess Easement
G2 Restoration 628 1:1 628.000
Existing Wetland Enhancement II G2 Restoration 1,035
3,514 1:1 1,035.000
_ Total 14 3,167.800
- Preservation -
Remove Rock Wall Credit Loss in Required Buffer -132.476
Credit Gain for Additional Buffer 839,145
E Total Adjusted SMUs 3,874.469
N
Date: 6/11/2020
Figure 9-Concept Design Plan
w e Drawn by: MDE res
Monkey Wall Mitigation Project0
_ 5 Checked by:KC
0 150 300
11 Mitchell County, North Carolina 1 inch=300 feet
Feet

res
4,, ti
s ,
0 75 150
_will ETTTTSR
Feet
�m1■.■■■■■■.■■■■■■■■■■■■\.—
.mO■■■■■.■■■■■■.■■■■■..■■■■■■■■■■.._
.0.M■■■■■■■■■■.■■■■■■.■■■■■■.■■■■■■.■■■■\m._
Una.
MM •.I.:■■■....■■...11111IMMEMMEMEMMMEMMEMEMMEMEM:::::...._ _
7■1 \► a■��.■.■■■■.■.■■■■.■
\1111�\ i//111� _ ■-■■■.■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■.■.■■■■.■.■■■■.■■■■■■.■■■■■■■■ Figure 10 PlantingPlan
liii
9iiiuiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiininiiiMonkey Wall
■■ i■■.■■■■■■.■.■..■.■■■■■■.�■■■■■■■■■■■■■;;; �,�.C,IMME�=11�V� c�,e '`�' '`� �� Mitigation Project
!1111 r% 11111111111111111111iii1�■ 1.1111111111111111111111111■11111111111111
iiiii 11►91111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111iiii11111111:'■. ::111111111111111; Mitchell County, North Carolina
■■■II■■■ \.■.■■.■.■.■■■■.■.■■■■.■.■■■■.■.■■.■.■.■
1111\\MMUM ■■■min■■\ ■II11111111111111111111111111111M11O/='_-■�■��EM111111111111111111111f
•.■■I■■■.■.■■■■.■.■■.■.■ \■.■■.■.■.■■■■.■■■■.■■mom
■.■■,I.■■M■■■M■■M■■■M■■ EMMOBW■■■■emOM ■,■■■.III.•._..■■■■■��11111111111111111111111111111111�
11I111111111� ■■■■■.■..II11111111iiiii11111111111111111111111111111 Date 2/27/2020 Drawn by: MDE
IIIII1 ■.■.■■.■.■.■■.■. 1111 1111111
11111111111111111111111111111111111111111lllli111111ii i Checked by:RTM 1 in=150 feet
ilill!!!!iiiilllll kLegend
ii111111■■■.■■■■■110 __ ■■■■■��■, Q Proposed Easement
MEMMEWOMMEEMEMMUMMEMEMMMEMEMEMMEMEMEMENNEMEMEMMEMEMMIWIlo►111!l11111iiil _Lamm.■......._ mama
III ................. _ mama
■■■■■■,�■■■■■.■■■■■■.■■■■■■.■■■■■■.■■ Planting Area (19.86)
M■■■■�.\�■■�.■.■■■■.1�■■■.■.11111111111111111111i��■�.111111111111111111111�m\�11111\ � ,
iiiii 11 I11 111111111 1111111 _ Mitigation Approach
■ , - !iiiii. ■ .■■■■■■■■■■■■■.■■ .■.■■■■.■■■■■■.■■■■■■.■■■■■■■■■■■■►_
11111111101_11: ■111111:11111111111111Pti I11111111::��!1111111111111111111111111IIM■i Restoration
■► �'1�� iil lillllilil�!:�lillllili! iiiii■■■1111111111111111111111111111111 — Enhancement
n Preservation
Illilill1111111� lil.. ■11111111 ".---- ■■MIn
1IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
� ..IIIIII .
.....................■...■■■■..■■■.■■.■■■.■■.■■■■■. -
-..■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■•—
::::111111111 111 ...... :•--
ss ..M1■■■■■.■■■i
IIIIIPPPP
Bare Root Planting Tree Species
Species Common Name Spacing(It) Unit Type
%of Total Species
Composition
Fraxinus americana American ash 9X6 Bare Root 15
Liriodendron tulipifera Tulip poplar 9X6 Bare Root 15
Platanus occidentalis American sycamore 9X6 Bare Root 10
Betula lenta Sweet birch 9X6 Bare Root 10
Carya ovalis Red Hickory 9X6 Bare Root 10
Carya ovata Shagbark hickory 9X6 Bare Root 10
Quecrus alba White Oak 9X6 Bare Root 10
Quercus montana Chestnut oak 9X6 Bare Root 5
s cobra Northern red oak 9X6 Bare Root 5
Magnolia fraseri Mountain magnolia 9X6 Bare Root 5 +w*���� �i�
Oxydendrum arboretum Sourwood 9X6 Bare Root 5 �rM�� ����Ll��4> �~,
Live Staking and Live Cuttings Bundle Tree Species /r1f����>��
Species Common Name %of Total Species Composition ,��#�
Salix nigra Black willow 50 VW
Comus amomum Silky dogwood 25
Alnus serrulata Tag Alder 50

Ideal Buffers Actual Buffers ores
N
W E
.41111611111111174111h'--
I
S
/ G�_p , 0 150 300
G10 i G10 Il
Feet
•
Figure 11 - Buffer Width Zones
Monkey Wall
I� Project
Mitchell County,
•
North Carolina
��
Date: 6/11/2020 Drawn by: MDE
�����.... - ' �����•�•�•, Checked by:KC 1 in=300 feet
��.... �:�.- Legend
Proposed Easement
(144;1,, _ . '•,.. r, ,
,����i Right of Way
Buffer Width Zone
0-15 feet
16-20 feet
- 21-25 feet
26-30 ft
31-50 feet
51-75 feet
76-100 feet
101-125 feet
Buffer Width Zone (feet from Ordinary High Water Mark)
''.:.
1 126-150 feet
Buffer Zones less than 15 feet >15 to 20 feet >20 to 25 feet >25 to 30 feet >30 to 50 feet >50 to 75 feet >75 to 100 feet >100 to 125 feet >125 to 150 feet
1 Max Possible Buffer (square feet) 105,420 35,140 35,140 35,140 140,560 175,700 175,700 175,700 175,700
Ideal Buffer (square feet) 108,214 36,777 37,055 37,176 148,956 187,907 190,723 175,183 165,445
Actual Buffer (square feet) 105,298 34,932 34,889 34,811 137,862 168,779 165,586 147,320 135,596
1 Zone Multiplier 50% 20% 15% 15% 9% 7% 6% 5% 3%
Buffer Credit Equivalent 1,584 634 475 475 285 222 190 158 95 +�*���� '��i!
Percent of Ideal Buffer 97% 95% 94% 94% 93% 90% 87% 84% 82% M+►a..�,�r���+ant
Credit Adjustment -43 -32 -28 -30 264 199 165 133 78 i�rt�kj�►•'�ji,�*raw���j�, ..
Total Baseline Credit Credit Loss in Required Buffer Credit Gain for Additional Buffer Net Change in Credit from Buffers Total Credit ,� #��
3,167.800 -132.476 839.145 706.669 3,874.469

� res
L.
„ ti
,_..
.,.: . " , ____ . ..„... .._. _ . ... _ .... _ . _.. ..,._ . 0 0
�� r 0 75 150
i — Feet
WA— — —� Figure 12 MonitoringPlan
ii 4 �� - . .. .; Monkey Wall
♦ G� wg Mitigation Project
sm. c,.c�
0 _� Mitchell County, North Carolina
rr \
0 I ..
♦ • Date: 5/22/2020 Drawn by: MDE
er
�1 — — ■ — — t Checked by:RTM 1 in=150 feet
♦\ }_ Legend
�� we El Proposed Easement
MI —mod ♦ VA Existing Wetland
♦ 1 -O Od Planting Area(19.86)
Monitoring Approach
G2 _ II Fixed Vegetation Plot
��� ♦ Random Vegetation Plot
O 0ry Cross Section
® Stage Recorder
Flow Gauge
® Wetland Gauge
® Rain Gauge
----.....„_ Mitigation Approach
-, . ,• - —Restoration
Enhancement II
—Preservation
'sli&.
There will be 13 fixed vegetation plots and 3 will
be randomly placed each monitoring year.
Flow gauge,stage recorder, wetland gauge, cross �`t a0 Vain= t
�}, _t: ' section,and vegetation plot locations are all proposed �1�rt��I���ji�*r���•�� ��
locations. Ma
ar
;^_ .'3,! k Fixed digital image locations will occur at each cross
e> '' section, vegetation plot,and stage recorder.

Appendix A - Plan Sheets

c 1 r
:kec yanc:,nl Fserr - ira
` CGi'c Crecy
, MONKEY WALL MITIGATION SITE res
UPper PvrKa r
Buiadearl
°r MITCHELL COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA 3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100
N nis Itchlar '4 Raleigh, NC 27612
i - Main: 919.829.9909
1 � ,„� www.res.us
�OOkloyr.ff
Engineering Services Provided By:
PC:gri Nerrp!I Hi:1 FRENCH BROAD RIVER BASIN . H U C 06010108 Angler Environmental LLC
i ,.. Relief License: F-1428
5 %hi •-.. MrKinaeyCan*
JUNE 2020 SEAL
Sa ke rsvlie
Greer*Cove
❑a;Rrnk M1i2
�� RESOURCE ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, LLC
Norrnarn.
E„.
$a: .. 3600 GLENWOOD AVE, SUITE 100
P.nlond RALEIGH, NC 27612
rr3YiIre !194i wi
Sprrne Pne
PROJECT LOCATION
Rlue Rqck
VICINITY MAP
NTS
V\ \
;I
,� �
l/1
x\ I-
�/ X Q N
, l 1 w
o
_) ,
l 1 Sheet List Table ° N
CL co
Sheet Number Sheet Title z
\.1 - COVER o
// ��� ,z Al OVERALL AERIAL VIEW fl
__ \� Z
8) 1_ \ \ E I GENERAL NOTES S LEGEND 0
0 +� 2 ,./' I\�c 0
� � I \ E2 EXISTING CONDITIONS fl
0
\ SI REACH GI u_
/ - - - - - 0
Know what's below. .- \ j S2 RACH G Iz
Call before you dig ,�' ! \-/ } 6E }
X� \ y
, S 3 REAC H G I o z,'" , fr. A , 54 REACH G I o w 2
NOTICE TO CONTRACTORf / Y �6 / \ 55REACH G I w Lu
rI
CC a.
PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, DIGGING, OR EXCAVATION THE } ^ -- \+
CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR LOCATING ALL UNDERGROUND } /Uj /� �O +\
>, S 6 REACH G
UTILITIES (PUBLIC OR PRIVATE) THAT MAY EXIST AND CROSS THROUGH 7 d' / / \ 57 REACH G2
THE AREA(S) OF CONSTRUCTION, WHETHER INDICATED ON THE PLANS \-OR NOT. CALL "8 I I " A MINIMUM OF 72 HOUS PIOR TO DIGGING OR - -EXCAVATING. REPAIS TO ANY UTILITY DAMAGED RESULTING FROM \ S8 RACH G2
CONSTUCTION ACTIVITIES SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE / _ X '-j'40
• x--x x x�� 59 REACH G2
CONTRACTOR. N
\HF
/
�� , �'' ' ' hl ,,'' / r II � ���` ' v ►/ S I 0 REACH G2
If
CO
/ ' \ S I I REACH G2
' /-'
PROJECT DIRECTORY l4
+ ,,� \ P I PLANTING PLAN
\0. � \ lam+
`- - /ill
F I DEMOLITION PLAN
DESIGNED BY: ik
\ EC I EROSION CONTROL NOTES
8, 5�0 ��
RESOURCE ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, LLC � \ 15\
3600 GLENWOOD AVE., SUITE 100 .\� �� \ D I DETAILS
RALEIGH, NC 2 7 6 I 2 �,\ '� D2 DETAILS
SURVEYED BY: -/ D3 DETAILS
ASCENSION LAND SURVEYING, PC \\.\�- ��X
.\ _ D4 DETAILS
116 WILLIAMS ROAD - -
MOCKSVILLE, NC 27028
DMS PROJECT #: 100069
CONTRACT #: 7536
PROJECT NUMBER: 100918
USACE ACTION ID #: SAW-20I 8-0 1162 PROJECT MANAGER: KMC
RFP #: 16-007336 DESIGNED: MKG
DRAWN: TRS
CHECKED: AFM
PROJECT TOPOGRAPHY AND EXISTING CONDITIONS
PLANIMETRICS SURVEY WAS PROVIDED BY SITE MAP SHEET NUMBER:
ASCENSION LAND SURVEYING, PC (NC FIRM LICENSE NTS
NUMBER C-4288, CHRISTOPHER L. COLE, NC PLS -
L-5008), DATED APRIL 18, 20 19 - JULY 27, 20 19
I \ I

l 1 l 1
/ /4"------,, •
1.11111111111111111/11111.1111111.111111t Ores
Monkey Wall Project Credits /' '\
Proposed Mitigation / i `\�, _
Reach Mitigation Type SMUs - i \ R
Length (LF) Ratio �/ WETLAND WB ``\� 3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100
Gl-A Preservation 278 1 . 10.0 28 /' _/
Gl-B Enhancement II (5) 120 1 : 5.0 24 ————————— \O-\ 2 I ,, Raleigh, NC 27612
Main: 919.829.9909
Gl-C Restoration 926 1 : 1.0 926 /' ��� www.res.us
Gl-C Restoration 527 1 : 1.0 527 I�EACh G I -B ,' I Engineering Services Provided By:
G2 Restoration 628 1 : 1.0 628 AGE cF 1 Angler Environmental, LLC
G2 Restoration 1,035 1 : 1.0 1,035 ENHANCEMENT II ��t I _ 4' . • License: F-1428
.._--' SEAL
Total 3,514 3,168 / , \ I . '
1
44 ... ' _
vG 1
1
o. ,/ ..... 1
rn
- /� ��/ 1 t
-------- -- -- -- -- __ �, I
/' //^/ /2/ REACH G I —A I FULL SCALE: 1"=80
/'' G, ;'/7 PRESERVATION ____0
2" = FULL SCALE
'' %%// 1" = HALF SCALE
1
'�/ / 1
'—'/
�G`</ //E,/ /%// I u i
j/i/ 1 Q N
V
/' I.
M
0 N
REACH G I -C `' / ' MD/i ' ' —/ /
/v - • . ._ . -
Z
0
\� �G / /�_ /// - - -_- - __�%��'�/ -� •
U)
%
/ / m ��'" �- rb
` /% / / /. / / /�/
7
\,� /� / ' / / -' /P WETLAND WC
1.‹..,(.._
. . . e , ,/,/ 7 z
ct
, /
'/
Z
N
illit--- -1 -4 G AGE // ;, / / /�/ . � O
� � Z
A %/ � ,,/,- / / z
/ ....„,,------„- ....,-2---,
11
\\c/
� /_ '��'''11, //'i ///// WW\\ /, /�// /Q� �/
♦ L ; '/' .�''��' /// / , /P .
\\ \ " " +' v / // �aJ�i 7/0
' /
♦ ...' •... 1 /////, 1 <
" " -
/ I I _ -�-
0 \ 4, .:- I /fi \ ',. ,
f /• / #
Lu
./7/,
/ri'/ ,
c WETLAND WB " " -_5_, „, // f 7,6/-' ��,„ 0 O
\\,, \\
,...,......,
// „-/ i
/ —............. .
J J
'cT, \ \\/-,\ -\,, .......-__,....;,,,, „, ....... i -./ -4... D
-
vv , O
\ �% / / r _ U LLJ
•
`` '� REACH G 2 /iN -
�R =rF w - w O
Tz- \ \�_,,,, - ��' I�ESTOI�ATI ON z w
I r 2
I.
O \ �� C
z ‘ 0 / # 0
a \:10 �(D1 / /
/ PROJECT NUMBER: 100918
x PROJECT MANAGER: KMC
a \\ g�� / / DESIGNED: MKG
- %\ v ;9� /' / _ DRAWN: TRS
ccc \\ ��� / / / CHECKED: AFM
\` // / ��/ SHEET NUMBER:
oc
\ /
/ .. ..------ .--•••
z 1 / 1
LT_ I \ / ' A / ..-/,,/ Al
J ` J

1 r 1
STREAM CONSTRUCTION NOTES:
LEGEND
Pres
I . ALL PROPOSED CHANNELS AND TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT CROSSINGS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED IN EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR —50— —
A DRY CONDITION VIA OFFLINE CONSTRUCTION WHERE POSSIBLE. PUMP AROUND OPERATIONS 3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100
SHOULD BE LIMITED TO AREAS WHERE THE EXISTING AND PROPOSED CHANNEL ALIGNMENTS OVERLAP. EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR 46 Raleigh, NC 27612
2. ALL IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND PUMPING APPARATUS SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE STREAM AT THE END PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR (50) Main: 919.829.9909
OF EACH DAY TO RESTORE NORMAL FLOW BACK TO THE CHANNEL UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED BY PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR 42) www.res.us
THE ENGINEER. WITH APPROVAL, A PUMP AROUND MAY BE ALLOWED TO RUN CONTINUOUSLY IF THERE
IS NO FORECAST FOR RAIN OVERNIGHT, AND/OR THE PUMP APPARATUS IS MAINTAINED AND EXISTING WETLAND NY NY NYW Engineering Services Provided By:
MONITORED CONTINUOUSLY. Angler Environmental, LLC
-----ee— License: F-1428
3. CONSTRUCT UPSTREAM PORTION OF THE CHANNEL FIRST, WORKING IN AN UPSTREAM TO EXISTING STREAM —99-----
-91--- SEAL
DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION, UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER. --
EXISTING TOP OF BANK -----TB TB TB
4. REMOVE AND STOCKPILE TOPSOIL WITHIN AREAS THAT ARE TO BE CUT 9" OR MORE BELOW EXISTING EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK ---
—BB BB BB
GRADE. STOCKPILED TOPSOIL IS TO BE PLACED ALONG THE FLOODPLAIN BENCHES.
5. STRUCTURES ARE TO BE INSTALLED IN LOCATIONS SHOWN ON PLAN SHEETS (AS INDICATED ON THE EXISTING OVERHEAD ELECTRIC UTILITY LINE oHE oHE
STRUCTURE TABLES) USING METHODS DESCRIBED IN THE DETAIL SHEETS. PRIOR TO FINE GRADING, PROPERTY LINE
OBTAIN APPROVAL OF THE ENGINEER ON INSTALLATION OF STRUCTURES.
EXISTING FENCELINE —x—x—x—x—x—x—x—x—
G. UPON COMPLETION OF FINE GRADING, INSTALL STREAM BANK STABILIZATION INCLUDING, EROSION
CONTROL MATTING OR SOD MATS ALONG CHANNEL BANKS. PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
7. FILL AND STABILIZE ABANDONED SEGMENTS OF THE EXISTING CHANNEL PER DIRECTION OF THE PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF CHANNEL
ENGINEER.
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
CONSERVATION EASEMENT LCE
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG DETAIL
(SEE DETAIL D3)
LOG CASCADE
(SEE DETAIL D4)
BOULDER CASCADE
(SEE DETAIL D4) > `K)
u.i
I-
0
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL o
�Y�Y�Y�Y�Y.
(SEE DETAIL D4) O M
'ei�i�i�i�1
i'� i J N
t***a 0_
Z
LOG STRUCTURE 0 0
(PROFILE) o ~
0
ROCK STRUCTURE cn
(PROFILE) Z
0
0
0
U-
H-
0
z
oC }
O 11
u_ Q
Z w Z_
O v) 2
() W
5 J W
W W
0= 0= 0_
z
W
H 0
O
z
z U w
m O 2 W
ryl—
co
L O V)
LLI z W
H
z
0 O
w v w
w J w W
z O 0
Y 2 U 0
0 z
a 2
Z
0_ 0
U
4)
a PROJECT NUMBER: 100918
PROJECT MANAGER: KMC
DESIGNED: MKG
a
0
DRAWN: TRS
CHECKED: AFM
cc SHEET NUMBER:
_ E 1
z
w
J
L_
J \ J

l 1 l \
r
res 0 res
,,,,,„____
,fix=3 r=�C=x=x=x=x=x=x=,,° \_„
3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100
/-1 Raleigh, NC 27612
�i;�- �Gt WETLAND WB Mai919.829.9909 res us
LEACH GI -B -
/+// ��E �cF
�. Engineering Services Provided By:
\_GE
X/ Angler Environmental, LLC
Gt License: F-1428
1 SEAL
r—
En
r, -
; �- 1
l
I(��---_4;/l //
�� � r/i 1
-- x x - x xx xx REACH G I -C \. \-'r1/111 I_ \\\\ S u1I 1
�- - =X— II 1- x—x 1/// lIf I� � )1,IILillle- ,----:-.--_7-71,:\'\ , I U0l
`, I_=� � ''' 1 \1\\\11\\\ \-- '
—_^ _-�,,° \ \\\ '/ � �\i / lAl1
v , VVN FULL SCAL
E: 1
80
"=� II \�\\\ ? `\ \ \1 \ \\,\—. \\ ;fi \ rn o 80 160
\ \ REACH G I -A , _
I 1" = HALF SCALE
\V
i-‹ c;
f
/ I „ \ \-- it-',.'. „ 1 \ \ c-
II \\\ - j, -', 1( i
„,_.__,. ...„ . ..,„\„
, , \\_____ , ,
\`— .> / /\ ,G� \\\\\\ ,...��\\ ,\\ \ Q M
_ - - - _ _ _____—
o . \\\\\ \\ \\\� `��/ \\l�\ CL co
",\,t ,---------z-,.. \\,. %, -, . ----:---'c\\ '
/
OZ
\ ". NN2,,,N N.
Cj
�c� \ \ \ \ j/Ill �,� IIIIr �i�• \\ 1
�ohF \ _\ \\; r y/� /�jli _�,,� ,q-� \ \\11IIIIIII� ////r(( ((((/�111/IIII((al
Illl1111�11111,�1�,/ o\ \ \ \� ti // , -— c \\\\ 111 Ill �Ili�l IIII IIII 1111 IIII II llii��iii���%�''ll WETLAND WB—X�o� �� v vv_ �'`l'fi , ::::\\7==—\\ \\::':\\\1- 4:\\\\� 11�vv , N ,,IIII �Illlllilill�l�llliill�llii �, rI
\ — \ III ",
��vv Vv\v ��llll6� /�i \ V\ I I o
x�°� \�, ��� \ vAvv;!�ll�� Ij/�%i/ �i/ A\ \ lll�� LL
•
\\-\\ , o• )
� _ \�� -° E� - _ � - _ \�\\~ \ ` i%/�i/ ce/i/ =' \ \ O Ct
\ / _ _ -o7F , 1 \\ \\\ - >� �%i� i/i�� / \\ �� 1\\ \III ���
z o LL z
_ �o,ti - _� :; /ce/�i�i/�/i��// ✓ \\ k \ \ I 1 O cn
(( III I l� �� �_ �_ /�/ / \ 1 >LIJ
\\ , s\\��C\ /I \ \�\ \ \ —{'`:// ,,/�/ce/i/jj//�//%�j//%/j am .// \ \r\\ �� o7E�oHE�ohE oti
"� t 1 ( 1 J > > l > \\ \ \\
L \ Z , y�i/////ii�iii ..i> .ice// � - -//,.:( \ oHE�
•
• -�� \ f/
\ + �1 / y '1\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\ \./ z��j /ii //IIIIi / ce IIII \ ���1 - - _
0 / /7 % - ----- 4 t 0, \ ___-
w _1
....._ . k \ -. -. H 0
r \
// % /yam
n/
. \ i / / / �//� ., / � ��/ fYLi Z\ \ \ � Jl \ \ / 11 U
\ + \ � : /l // I \ \ \\\ \\C / V
11/ -
i ''' ,,(-_,)( 0_ r-)r2! 0
_,, ,'• ,/ i / i N •:--x----A=„4, I- Z
-E) \ \ 4\ Lk\-\--_-_// ‘*\\,,,,,14\ 1 1 _____„ ----=_-_----------:---i<://,:,5- /z/l_*///7/:-/.%' / / 0 N c", N ,..„.4(,,, _
„......,-,,,. __.,0, , ..,,, r-i ,-0= / , N ------------L--,_,,_,..„.„,__ 2 >_ 0
4, il , 1 < D :
\ \\-\ \�\ /�_�\<I 1\ 1 \\l\\� \\�\���`,�—=� \ �� ��z///// 7' / \`� °ham .- i O
>— 0
/)?(5 /,/ / 0 i
\ \ \, ,___ , _ , _ _ , _ ______,, _-_-_-_, , , -2, .._• - f--'";-- t // ///
/4/ ,-i / . N ,, //
\ 7\ \\N\_------ - ......... - ,- - 7 v--_-_- .-- -,--- _ Ji , --/ I 7 / 0 i . °,,, NA 2 Z W J
__-__ c 1/ z , irl / / 1 N, / /0:N ,L_---
\ \ \\\ s.\.. ____ --- ___ _-- ...--„_-_--_--5-_--;-----,-----__-_ :.--„i--- -- __-__---7,--.=„,_____--_ .._:-_-,( __...
g \ \ _/_\\ ,..., '-....,_.--,__-_________ „..--_-_------..--_,--- --,....<_ ____ 4 i N ,NN
\, �% ILEAC H G 2 }�/ �/ \ � cc
o
f
I \\ \\\� ��� }�/ I \\\° \\ j
k/ PROJECT NUMBER: 100918
r r i tiF PROJECT MANAGER: KMC
a \ \ \'` �� �0, }/ / \ N\\ / DESIGNED: MKG
}/ o DRAWN: TRS
:Co \ \ / k/ / CHECKED: AFM
o°'c x 1 \ ��\� X °" SHEET NUMBER:
6E \ \
Ed . NN,.
Ed 1 II t \ f ,x \ °
w \ I �\ ,,� NN
. E2
I I x II ,,/v, I + - vo"
'. ', I \. / \jam \
.,.
J ` J

1 r 1
J
ores
3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100
Raleigh, NC 27612
Main: 919.829.9909
www.res.us
Engineering Services Provided By:
Angler Environmental, LLC
REACH G I -A License: F-1428
PRESERVATION sEAL
STA 0+55 TO 3+33
2+00
I +50 _I -
--+- - -iu:Iiiiiilaiiiii...._,
y y y y �__� i y '- - - ,ems \ \ / /// // / i i i / / //VZ // `� \
y- 3-- y v y � i ems_ j �/ / i ...77/ice i � /J / / / /j /
+OO y y y u � y �rf_c �� `���. �/ �3 S0' / - /- , 1 /� % % // `
0 y y y _yam y _ =e— 1r
�` // / / i i �4 / / _ 41
L
y y �j� _ \\ \\ \
y y y ��1��i 1',
y
\ — FULL SCALE: 1"=20
0 20 40
WETLAND WE, 2" = FULL SCALE
1" = HALF SCALE 1\
0
In
+ u.i
CO Q o
W 0 N
ZN 1- N
==.1U) 0 co
N
CL co
I— z
Q o
U
D
w
o
z
v� O
11
O
u_
I—
O
z
oC }
O 11
u_ Q
Z 0 z_
(n W J
5 J W
W W rI
0= 0= 0_
Q
Z_
inJ
H O
cm
z
Q
co U
O
mo I= 2
o
H z =
w J H Q
, J Z W
-
O
0 §4..
w U
W J
J
U
g Z W J
Tz Q = i—
i_ 2 0 0
o 0 H z
ZCC CC
'Co
U 0_ 0
N
O
a PROJECT NUMBER: 100918
o PROJECT MANAGER: KMC
a
DESIGNED: MKG
0
DRAWN: TRS
c cm CHECKED: AFM
u)
cc SHEET NUMBER:
di
SI
a
z
J
L_
J \ J

c 1 r
. EAC N G I -C STA 4+5 3 TO STA 19+00 res
8 7'
Q 2.85' I .5'
0 1 0
3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100
BANKFULL STAGE Raleigh, NC 27612
REACH G I -C N m
RESTORATION W a Main: 919 es.us909
STA 4+53 TO 1 3+79 J n / www.res.us
= TYPICAL RIFFLE CROSS SECTION Engineering Services Provided By:
/ X / i / / \ \ \ \ U Angler Environmental, LLC
/ / / / // / / ///// \ \ \ \\ \ Q License: F 1428
/ / / / / / / // /// / I I I I I I 1 I I I \ \ \� \ \
/ / /// / / ////// / , 1II I1 I I II I SL
ACH G 1 -B i / / / / / / / / / \ \ / ///I I I I I I I I II j \ II I \ 9.5'
Epp, ENHANCEMENT II / / // / // //// //// �// \� / / / / I I I I \ I I I 1
\ „, : -� / / / / \ �/ / / J � I I I I I I I I I I I 3.5' 2.0' 2.0' _
_ - STA 3+33 TO 4+53 / / / / / / / / / / \ / / / / / I I I \ I I I i BANKFULL STAGE
A _ _ _
,\\ j / / / / / / / / / //// / // / / / / / / / / / I I I I I I I I I ) I / 1 I +5
\�, ��3 ' �� _ � � � � � � � - � � / / / // / / / � i / / I / / / / / / � / / / 1 1 I I I I / / / 17 00 I C______,,,-
, -„_ \ Sp —
�i i i�/�i i i /i �� � / // / / / / ' / /I � / / I I —I 1 I — 1 I I I 1 / } 50 ,— II '7,in• 529
\� —\__. - - v� / / / / / / �- _ / / /// w/5 a / �, ��. 6-+-00J - �� -I�I`_ 1- -1 -�� • 4•T,L - d e
\\\\\\ \\ \ \ \ ��� ----/'-,-----4�p �� / // , +0 a _� �� •- S26 528
\\ \�\ �� \� \\' _ _ O �,�� �1- -- 4+50 �i : -.,-; + — � ► ._ - �1 � —_ - �r ;��._, — S2 TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS SECTION
\ \ \ \ L I - _ T J _ / / — 1 I / .t: (1�,`; ��,.<< ��� L -1- 52 5\ \ \\ \\ \ !CY _� \— ---- + 1 +-�=.-.1., �\ - - -F- -1,- p �i/ `, I ., 4 .� I It�`�!,I ir-Z`�° ���. f,�{I ��, ��cA �i �., / 52 1 , ,./ i��.� ``.VAA\V AA \\ VAA�. zsi>ii a.' �i.. �a��.Z� _ �.��� � / 520 _�1\ \ \-- �� \ — I - \. \ \\� \\\�� L S4 \ 1 S- I I �J' / l 1 SI7 SI8:_ii
1 / / / // ``� \� \\\ \\ ��� \ \ \ \ \ � \ \ � - -,� _- � _ \ \ \ 58 � -fir„------��® I� tee:\ -\\ \�\� \\\ — \\� � — _ - -�53 � ' —.\\ \\\\ ) I I I I SIO ` I 51 14 jSlr5 l l j l lOer _. - < \ 9.5'\ \\ \ \ ` - 51 = ® �\\ \\ \ \ \ I I 1 51I I I ��� ��, / / / /,� ,-�;.�— \
\ — — — — �, ; \�\\ \ \ \ \I I I I I / 1�!l- ," \ \ \ \ \\ 2.0' 2.0' 3.5'
-\-, ______ ,_\\\\\\ \\\\\� \ \ \�\ `\ \ \ I \\ \_�-- \ Nc � �/ -� �` \ \ \ \ \ \
�_ \\ \ \ 1 1 \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ I I I I \ \ ✓ —sue \ \ \ \ \ \ \ BANKFULL STAGE `
FULL SCALE: 1 20
\ \\ \\ N \ \\\ \ \ *\ \ — .,s \ \\ \ \ \ ` \ , \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \
\ \ \\\ \\\ \\ \ \ - - \ - \ \ - - \ - - \ \\ , \ \\ - \ \\ \ \ , \
-- N \ `. \ : \` \ \ - \ - \ — \ 2 = FULL SCALE
() — — \ — 1" = HALF SCALE
�Q TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS SECTION
EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE u.i
1-
ABANDONED AND BACKFILLED o N
SEE DETAIL D3 1- N
U co
J N
IZ
Z
0
I-
U
D
fI
H
Z
0
0
rI
2750 2750 u_
I-
O
EXISTING TOP Z
OF BANK oC >-
0 Ct
u_
2740 N. 2740 aj o Z
z w -
O Q
.\\, FD w w
5 J
�. �'k W LJ rI
CC CC 0_
2730 2730
- PROPOSED TOP
z
- OF BANK
= W
`\`2720 2720 I- 0
(n r
Z
U
r_ 2
o LIJ 2710 - , % � 2710 Q
Q
EXISTING GRADE
I ALON G STREAM � I Z =
CENTERLINE
CC
G
U
6
::::
, 1 • 2700 fY
co
0
20% --_ ::::
W
J Tz PROPOSED
, � Z inJ
Q = I—
CHANNELBED Z O U U
U Z
2680 - 0 2
a 5 % PROJECT NUMBER: 100918
cm PROJECT MANAGER: KMC
o 2670 2670 DESIGNED: MKG
Q
0
DRAWN: TRS
CHECKED: AFM
u)
cc SHEET NUMBER:
6E
di
Z
w V 3+50 4+00 4+50 5+00 5+50 6+00 6+50 7+00 c2
J
L SCALE: HOR 1 "=20'; VERT 1 "= 1 0'
J \ J

c 1 c
. EAC I-1 G I -C STA 4+5 3 TO STA 19+00 res
8 7'
2.85' I .5' _ 0
EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE BANKFULL STAGE
3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100
REACH GI -C Raleigh, NC 27612
ABANDONED AND BACKFILLED m
RESTORATION // // /� �� /� Main: 919.829.9909
O STA 4+53 TO 13+79 / / / / i SEE DETAIL D3 www.res.us
IX I \ \ \ , / / . -- TYPICAL RIFFLE CROSS SECTION Engineering Services Provided By:
(\� Lu I I I \ \ I / / / / / Angler Environmental, LLC
Z / / \ \ / / /� �� /� „ �_ � _ � � / � �_% �� /�� �����/ License: F1428
�—� I I I / \ � \ \ \ I / �r ��� � \ \ SEAL
i I I I I I I I I I 1 / // // / // /� > \ 1 II I ( // // // I I I j \ \� i `� \ \
I \ ' 1 ►— I I I I I I I I I J I I I I I ( I ( ( / / / \ I I / / I I I I \ \ \ \ 1 \ l / 9.5'
I I I I 1 \ I l i I I I I I i J I I I I I I I I ( / / / ) III I / / I , I I / / I / 1 \ \\ \ ) 3.5' 2.0' 2.0' _
I I I I l l l 1 I l I I l I J l I I I I I ► 1 I I ' ' ) ) \ ( / I ,_ -�- _ _ ts1_�_-� - I I I / 1
/ — — — = �__ - BANKFULL STAGE
I I I I i I / / I I I I I I I I I I \ \ I / / / / 2 / --�- / - �= _
I I I I J I / I I I I �I 1 1 1 A I 1 1 I / / �,-'�-�>�� ��>7\7\
6,
II I I I I 1 1II I I f / / II I I / 11 1 \ I \ - ---, \ ,aN!IT_
1HIT_IIIII:::::
o
lI IIII II I I \ f / I I i / _ :7:\:
C:\ � �
ll ' 11I I I I I I I I 1 \ \ \ l I II / I 1 - — ---- - �9,7+g 2, ._..
. G+50 -,--.1,i• _\, ,/- D.,:, „,..,, - \
, _ __ ,
WAWA
° _ — 00 , �.�.,.._zrall — _ �t,— -.� - -;,, - 1 _' c , - 4''V' - -{ '*AI-\ !'I \1: 50 TYPICAL RIGhT MEANDER CROSS SECTION
00 /
1 I� -► - - - _ ./( Zi%,` — - - _ _ ;�._ _ 7+5O __ -f� -I —� S40 1 I — ! v_ ° � - - �® —II I, � \ : �; - _._\J
- - - - - - -' 1----__Ej.
/ _ Fiory 7 -
7 S 18 — _ A i ,,. ..• .. ., ►�"' / / \ � �ii = -' V A \ I 544 S45 \ 546� \ \ \ _ �:�,. -1-,
l '‘s
520 - - - — / J /%�—'- - \ II 1 I \ N l S50 1 \ +S5 I 1 I -- I •�,., -1: . _ — — — —
5.'4 =---�1_-- \\\\\\\ S33 S34 / / /� ! ,— _ —. \ \\ I \ \ I I 552 553 .,`�.
-�` S25 S26 528 S29 S3 I S32 � ) / _— — A \ \ \ \ 1 I I I 1 I I I V 1 1 I �l' i - ::'
�T � \ \ \ \ \ \ I 1 I I I 1 I S 5 5 - :! - - - 2.0' 2.0' 3.5'
"., --_- \ C / I T� 112" CP�� I ) ) \ ) ) ) I \ \ I I I I I I I \ \ I i _
\ __--- _'� \ ) ) I I \ \ \ / / / > I — / / / / / / ( I \ \ I I I I I I I I I I 556 S57 BANKFULL STAGE
\\ ``
_ �,, - \ \ I I I 1 \ \ 1 / / / I I I ININ — 26 I .�0 / / / / / I 1 1 I1 1\ I II � I I I I I I \ 1 J I � ► �, �Dv.-�r�-` e\ \ I I I \ \ \ I / II IINOUT 6 8. 2 I 1 I I I I FULL SCALE: 1"=20
� � \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ I I I I I \ f\ \ \ I I / / / / / I I I I I 1 I I I I I I / 1 I l U I I I o�� �� �\ \ \ \ \ \ \ ` \ I I I I I \ \ I \ \ \ 1 I IIJ / / / / ) I I 1 ) / / I I I I I / / / / / I I / 0 20 40
N \N� \ \ \ \ 1 \ I \ \ \ \ I II / , / / / / / I I I / / / / / , , / / i / o� \�� ��\ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \\ \ ISjrl N I�IPL Tb B \ \ I I II / / / / / / / / // / / // / / I I I I I 1 / / / / / / / / / / / / — 2 = FULL SCALE
� � \ \ \ I \ I I / ( / / / / / / / / / / I I I I I / / / / / Lu 1 = HALF SCALE\x �\ �� \� N \ �\ \ \ R\EMO�(EDIANb L�ISOEIS I \ 1 I / / / / / / / / / / / i i / / / / / / / / / / / / / z\ \ \ \ _ 1 1 1 / / / / / / / I / / / / cn TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS SECTION
� , CNN NN xN\ N \\ \ \ \ �F F S�iTE\ 1 / / / / / / / / i / / l\ \ x i\ � \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ Q cp
N
\ \ \\ \ \ \ ° N
0
z
0
111
F-
U
D
fY
H
U)
Z
O
U
fY
O
2690 2690 u_
O
Z
oC }
O Ct
u_ Q
2680 2680 0
() W J
J W
W W f'
2670 2670
1 � Q
i _... ` PROPOSED TOP Z
M '`- OF BANK W
2660H
I 2660 U) fY
_/ Q
9czu) "39% EXISTING GRADE Z U
u) JI\ ALONG STREAM Q
co i - CENTERLINE _
0 1 1 Q
L1J2650 1 \\�� 2650 r N-
- O 0
PROPOSED I 9•04% _ Z =
CHANNEL BED 1 ° -�,,\ U
H' 1
�1 2640 - 2640 J Z LLJ
0
U
in J
0
cl 2630 ,-/ 2630 g Z W J
�9%- z O = ~
U o
w
a 2 <
z 2620ii 2620 cc cc
cc o
o
PROJECT NUMBER: 100918
o `` PROJECT MANAGER: KMC
a 2610 I 2610 DESIGNED: MKG
2
DRAWN: TRS
Tro CHECKED: AFM
o)
o
cc SHEET NUMBER:
L
di
z S3w 7+00 7+50 8+00 8+50 9+00 9+50 10+00 10+50
L_
SCALE: hOR I "=20'; VERT I "= 10'
J \ J

________ ---- --- ---_____--- ____- --- ---- --- ----\---\\__----___- --___T---------___T----------------__________*\-___,- ---2-- \ ___ ___ ___ _____ _ ___ ___ _ ____ ___
EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE , �� - _- __ _ __ \ _- _ _ _ - _ ____-_ -- ____-______ _____- _ __ �EAC N G I -C STA 4+53 TO STA 19+00 ores
ABANDONED AND BACKFILLED / - -__- - __ _- - -�__ LT_— -- ____ , _ - -_
SEE DETAIL D3 • � � �/ _ _ - - -_-- -__-- - - - - - - - - _ - - __ ____------_ -`- - _ _ - -Afi= - :_______1-_____ib-,-,...1_.;.-4-_______-_-„__________________- -irtik
_ __ __ __ __ __ ____ __ __ __ __ _ _
__ _
____ __ _._ - - - - - - - - - - - _ _ _, _ _ _ _
�// / � �� � / �/ PAC___- - €D-- I-SP 3€D' _ - - - - - -_ _- - _\_ - -_- - _`- - - _ _ - - _ = _ 1 3600GlenwoodAve Suite100
/ / // /j � �j ��i �� �� �� __=�F-E ��I� - j - - - - - - - - -_ -3 - - — _ — = - - - _ BANKFULLSTAGE
� / / / � �— �� _ _- -- - - - _— —_ _ _ _ _ _ — _ - -L= _� _ _ _ - - — - - - _— _ _ Raleigh, NC27612
— - - _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ _ --_ - - — — _ - - - - - Main: 919.829.9909
/ /i• / / /i• ce i �/� /' I� — — — —
-
/ / ��/ �// � � � r _ - � _ -___- -_ - - -_ - - - - /� - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ —• - - — �o _ _ - - - -__ - -__ _ - _ - - - - - - - - - www.res.us
/ //74 7 /j/// / � . > L I I / c -c - _— _______________ _ _ _�________ - ____ __-`_ == = = — -i / / / / / i 'r - fll _��-�, _ \ � — � � = - - - _- - - - - - --_ — - - __ - -- ___ — - - - - En ineerin ServicesProvidedB/ /// //j j//i j/// \ / �j y_ .1=� // /j / i / I \ v - -^__-___ __ -= E /.E� - - _ ___ __ _ -_= TYPICAL fZIFFLE C fZOSS SECTION Angler Environmental, LLC
/ / / ///j / / \ \ j/ � j /i� %Gz= �� __ '/= �-- �, / J \ - - - - - - _ - - - - - __- -�� — -� - -- - - - License: F1428
/ / / // / / / l / / i / = sz _�— �_�=_- - -,� / /—I 1 — — —— - - - _ _�-_-_- - -_-_- ___/j/// / /// / / / / /�% //• /// % ! i' ---\ \ \ - �- ,F=_=-> g -` — l \ T — ,O — y _ _ SEAL
/
// ��� / / / //� \ / /�j//i/�i/ '_- �"_ -'���� \ \ \ I I I I I �" ©IP f '= ---,,II l l- - _ — -- ___- -
/ / / // / / / \ / / /. - _ }� \\ 1 \ \ 1 I I I 1 I l q--�4 ��// / / ` � - - - - - - _— _ - 3.5' 2.0' 2.0'_ ,g \ r — ii BANKFULL STAGE/ / �-/ // / ,— \ \ \ 1 / 1 / l l I S \ ` �,/ \ \ \ \ j //jii/� � �� \ \ \\ \\ 1 1 1 \ I I 1 / l / l / 1 / /'a���\� (N9 NNUS'�'TRASIi , o
\ 1 1 / �j�//! � �� \ \ \ I I \ 1 I I I 1 / / / / / 12+50 / 1 I I r = 1 _ /� f\ \ 1 I I / / _ --- -< _® - / i ce- __ _ _'' /I 1 1 I / '� v v V \ II / / / _- ; ! - - \ \\ \ \ \ I I I I I /I 2+00 L / ';�'�� - :�, -1- i _ ��1 _ l / / �— �� ��— 1 \-- - — m�� \ \ \ \ I I I I ., , e.�Y� firl�,`",'•`..'S� ��. �.���! $� 7 ,� �/ / o ��� �Lu / i -
- -__,e__� � _ _� \ \ \ \ \ II I I +50 III /
, li 1 �� — _ - -`� � S70 S76 -` r _ a� -I� %.;4-l4t� .. / 1 \ \ ��� - — -_ TYPICAL RIGhT MEANDER CROSS SECTION
\ - �. •.- - V A V 1 \ I I�t � S68 S7 I \ _ .z;,,v _ _ — } - �; _\ I I +O , - �,, ;:,.• I_" V ,�� \ 1 S73 II S74 I' -I = ::-y / - ° --��7iii"'''
gif Awl
N \ \ I I ,, ---- 1 VOI‘- 4i: IIP .7' o 4 NN\
__ _
\ 1 S78 I - ,.� - _ +50 9.5' N
\ -.all W. .III W. .III .0.7.-
\ \ 1 \ \ \ I S80 I -•=\ \ 1 _ 2.0' 2.0' 3.5'
\ S53 I I 1 S56 S57 I I \ i \ S81 _-\ \ \ S 5 2 I 1 \ V 1 / BAN KFULL STAGE
550 \ 551 A\ \ \ \ \\ I I 1 I I V A \
1 S82 \ A�� 584 - 1 ��
1 1 \ 1 \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 1 I \ \ \ \\ \ FULL SCALE: 1"=20
I 1 1 I \ \ \ \ \ 1 I I I \l `\ 585 \ ``
\ \ I I \ \ X
�� A A 0 20 40
I\ II I \ +1 I� �, O \� \\ �\ 2" = FULL SCALE
1 I I I •OI G I -C PROPOSED FORD O \ do 1" = HALF SCALE
I CROSSING
I I I I I I \ RESTORATION \ \ TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS SECTION
I i I I I I I ICI STA 4+53 1 3+79
ui
I W
I I I I I I 1 1 1 I i I I U �\ ��� �� ~
I I I I I I 1 1 I ` \ Ncp
IIIIII
U N
O co
I- _1 (NI
CL co
\ Z
O
U
D
Ct
H
U)
Z
O
U
tY
2630 2630 0
H
O
Z
u_
2620 0 tY
2620 z a z
() W J
J W
W W rI
2610 r-- 2610
w
`- -- lGQQ� COI Q w Z
Qt ~ Q
�t W W J
2600 ` 6) F 2600 ~
c s
cc; .35%co PROPOSED TOP O U
m - _ OF BANK —
in 2590 -` 1
`/2.39% 2590 Q ryl—
a, EXISTING GRADE
- ALONG STREAM ~ z
- /2.74% CENTERLINE61 U
= 2580 2580 J W
o —
U
0 Lil _1
2570 ` 2_Oo% 2570 J
IN-
U _ LLJ Z W J
PROPOSED - _ z o = H
> CHANNEL BED _ U
w I— z
z 2560 2560 a 2
z
cc
o_
U
N
O
a PROJECT NUMBER: 100918
PROJECT MANAGER: KMC
.2 2550 2550
0 DESIGNED: MKG
Q
DRAWN: TRS
u) CHECKED: AFM
w
cc SHEET NUMBER:
I I
z 10+50 11 +00 11 +50 12+00 12+50 13+00 13+50 14+00 S4
w
J
L SCALE: hOR I "=20'; VERT 1 "= 1 0'
J \ I

\
\\�`\ \ \\\
.
EACNGI CS TA 4
+5
3TO STA I9+00 I
, ___ ___ ___ i / II 1 \ \ \ \—
ia
_______ ,
_ II \ ores
/ ___ _ _ _ _ — _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE ///////�/i/� IIIII IIIIIII ISII \\\\\\\\\\\\ \\0\\\\ \III �_ _ _ _ \— _ _ — _ _ _ — _ — _ _ _ — _/' % _ _ ABANDONED AND BACKFILLED / / / I I \ I 8.7'_— % ' _ _ _ _% — _ _ ,_ / - - _— __ _ - -_ _ _ — _ _ - - - - _ _ SEE DETAIL D3 \ iP 1
' — /�/� % II \\
3 600 Glenwoo
d
A ve, Su i t e 10 0_ _ _- - - - -
-77
/ — — _— _ � \, _ _ _ — _ _ _ // / // /� / // / I Raleigh, NC 27612i _ _ — _ — / // // // // // / // / I I I/ \ \ \/ i / / / / i /i _ — —_ _ _ — _ _ - - -_ _ ---
_ / / l \ \�' i% // j/ / / / //j // / / j� - - - - _ //% / / / / / I I \ 1 I \ \ \ Main: 919.829.9909
\// / � / / i / —= � — — � _� -- __ _ _ / I www.res.us_ _ _ _ _ i / / /� _ _ i_ _ _ _ / / ////// / // / // / / I I \i I \
I I ` `,I \ \ \ \i / __ _ — _ — _ -- - _ � — _� �/ i /// �%j/ // /// // / .7 / / ' ' \ 'i _ � / ii / i/ i - - — � � — —� _ / // i/ 7 % /// /i / // Engineering Services Provided B y:I I \/ �/ i // ' �_ _ � � � � _ i � i/% j// �/�/ /ce/ i � � / % � _�� �— — _ / %� � / // / / / I \ TYPICAL RIFFLE CROSS SECTION
PI INe'PIPF BE Angler Environmental, LLC� % � _ - - - _ — =_ _ — _ � /�% // ////�/// ' — // / / / / / E(VO�E� A P1DISP ED I I \� % __ ___ = = — _ —= — , - - - - - - � � /i— - ' — — _ ___—_____- -_ _ __ — - - _- _ � - � / //// / / CF J License: F1428� i /� / / / /_ _ // � ,o — — — _ — -- _ _- _ _ — �� / � / SEAL� — - - _ - - _ — _ -- - - — — _ i / // ' / _ /� / //� � � — / � �/ ///// / � a_ / // j— _ _ � _ ii
// / � / ' / / 3.5 2.O 2.
_ / / / � : � /— /i / / / �,� ': ' e � \ �`�� 1 / /
//\ N� �TN�U T 1 \ I I
V ." -----ni----gl--:-----, _ g, ._____17___--_.-__ _______----- ;7-2,--',::-L--7_,-.: ---� � r — � 1— ."1---- <\ — _ �_ __= _ � -_/—__ � / I/ ////5�/'_ /� A � // BANKFULL STAGE/V \ �S / X/ I A ) / l / / / J I / // / / � / / / / / / ti� _ - ir
\ �__Z
--- � �°— -- ` T �" _ r '� \ �o>"Lh "� -�i�e ` �� � = -1�-."4 \ \� ®— — am \ \���• �� �\\ -`_ = � � � \ \ \/ ` � r � i \
Atio/
i. � //
' / /\ \\ \ \ \I \
\ \ ---_-_-_-4..
\ 1 F /�
` .1\ l` ` .— � f � �
#7,
IX c-
TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS SECT ION O A \ \ .-ri-77:: --1 --- /I/A\
/ ' ---C7-- • - �.� _ 41,vA°141'
— _ —� .� _Oi\ , � Qa; _, 4,,; z,.; ._:N� — A c `� � ���_�%� � \� ...N
. ? � \ I •:•�.�• _ .: .S 1 , V' _ \ e �
it
\ _I 1\ -' — S102 I577 \ \ � .. v__ . .y _er _ -
585 ,,�.-578 580 58 I \ \ S84 r �,� _ . _ 1. i / /8 5101 I I I, \ � _ VI I0 \ II 9.5'I 582 \ \ \ 1567 - 588 589 \ \\ \ \ \ \ -` \ / I \ I I I I \ I I I Y — - I SI I \
\ \ 1 \ \ \ \ —\ ' 590 \ 592593 , 594 \ \ 596 �597 \ \ ::1/4
/ I I I I I I \ 2.0' 2.0' 3.5'\L1 \ oy \ \ \ \ :\ \ \ I I / ) lit\ � �
1.
\ \ \ \ y y\ I / / I / \ I I I I \ , I I BANKFULLSTAGE\ \ \ \ 51 12\ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ / / / ../ 6)\ \ / I\ \ \ \ \ \ \ I I \ : `\ FULL SCALE: 1"=2
0\ \\ I / I HI \\ \ spyLR\ \ \ I \ � :\ /Ogp \ < \ \ \ \ \ ` I I / � rO wo \ � � 0 20 40
I \ �\ \ \ \ / / I y � 7��yo i J � \ \ \ \ \ RECr I / I \ 2" FULL SCALE/ / \ y/ , SI I . 1" = HALF SCALE\ > \ \ \ \ \ \ \ RES ORATIbN / \ �/ / /\� \ \ \ \ \ 'F *4+55\TO 1 +82 / /\\ \\ \ A \ � \i \ A\ \ \ / TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS SECTION
z \ \ \ \ \` \ \ �w , v • v • \ v \ • \ v vv �� � yN A \ \ VAVA VAVA /U
di
I- \ \\ \\\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ / o CD
N
CO
UTILITY ACCESS
\. co
\ \\ \ \ \\\\ \ \\ y `\'
EASEMENT \� ,� Avg v v� vy v 1 \ A) // ` v
/
\ \ I I I // / J / / 1 -'\.' y i yl y \ \y y H
,yo , \ \ \ I J / ! .4? y � y l v • "\ 4 \
< I lyly 4
,yo \\\ \ `� I v/y L yy A y \'' \w Cr)
Z
\ \ \ ' I I yl 4 y• IY y� y\ 0
0
2580 _ 2580 I-
In
UTILITY AC-,FSS +
EASEMENT —
ri >-
0
u_ Q
Q
2570 2570 0
w w J
5 J in
W W W'
CC CC 0_
2560 -----_ 2560
--_ PROPOSED TOP Q
OF BANK z
W J
i4 93%_ O
2550 2550
EXISTING GRADE Z
cz
co
ALONG STREAM U
m _ CENTERLINE I__,_ __
.v_
0
2540 2540
z
CO
PROPOSED8.---------r___ ___
�i ChANNEL BED __ _ › U
co 2530 ��� 2530 Q co LLI
U
0 in _IL
occ
2520 ��',, 2520 g Z inJ
Tz
O z
w Z
z 2510 2510 o
U
N
O
PROJECT NUMBER: 100918
PROJECT MANAGER: KMC
Q 2500 2500 DESIGNED: MKG
o
DRAWN:
Tin
CHECKED: AFM
w
o°'c — SHEET NUMBER:
di
I I
z S5
w 1 4+00 1 4+50 1 5+00 1 5+50 1 +00 1 +50 1 7+00 1 7+50
J
L_
SCALE: HOR 1 "=20'; VERT 1 "= 1 0'
J \ J

W\\ y
y \\
\
'
........
\\-
\
\
\\
\
\\
1
/` �\ \ \ / / / \ � \\
/
/
/\ � ....
\ / / / _ _ _
____ ___ ........
. EACN G I -C STA 19 +00 TO STA 19 +93\ \ \ \ � \ ores
y \� \ ,\
. ,
....
'-
/ / / / �/ � \y � E . I B � -1-...,„ EX5�ING ChA , EL TO BE \\ / / // / / � -� yyy y X\ \ I Io
--.../ = KE e t --ZIaPSl \ -� ABAND ED AND IS CKFILLED 77: _
:/ 44:4 \ ' � yyOF� I \\
\ .�, .r0 '-' I � -1-....,....... .E DETAI \2
3 6
00 Gle Glenwood
wood A v e,
Su i
t e 100 0- \ -\��� J I �.�, yyy _ \ \ \\ \\\ \I yyy yy \ BANKFULL STAGE Raleigh, NC 27612y y y y \ \ \ \ \\ �'
y \ x\ \ Main: 919.829.9909\ \\ � "— I I \
` I V I \` y y
VASyy yy V� �\ A
\ \ \ \ \ \ I 1 ... rv =— ,, \ \ X www.res.us
I \\\ 1\ I I N. \ \ \ \ \ \ '_E \ REACH G2 \ Engineering Services Provided By:y:
\ \ y y \�
I1 Angler Environmental, LLC\ \........ N\ I yy y y
y yy y \ \\ k \\\\ \ \ \ TYPICAL RIFFLE CROSS SECTIONr\ \ \ \ I \ \\ License: F-1428I I N. �\ \\ \ \ \ I \ / y1y y y " y y \ !/
\ \ \ \ \ \ SEAL\ \ I I \ ' y — — — \ \\�\\ \ I y y - yy y .v\y �, _ r\ \ I2.0\ \ \\ \ I I I I \ y � y yy \ z - \ \ \\ \
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ I I I 1 y e y yy / \ \ \
\ \ \ \ y\ \ oyy /\ \\ \\ ''\ \ 4.6 2.0 2.0'
----
\\ \ \ \\ \\ \ yI ` y / \\ \� / k\v y y` y\ `\ y BAN KFULL STAGEI I I / ^ \\\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ / y A / / / / ` IV v\ V / / 2 1 I 1y y I y y '\y l -.�' Nyy / / / / \ v N\\ / / / / yy \. y\ 1 1y , y / / / —\ _ A-........„
\ 1 N1 I I yy y yyy\ yN`.1 y • r, L. / / X\y / / \ \ N\ / / / 1 4y yy \ yy .� R / r \ �'\�/ / / / / y y y yyv , . ' Iyy yn� I \ \\ \ \/ / / / yyyy y y yy \ _,`•
ti,
yy `y yy \ �
1 \koO Wy l 4--,4 y yylV+✓Oy y y "_
o.
Psj AEI" — \1 . ' \ I -K........r / / yt ' }• � yya ' q ya \ N \ TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS SECTION��� \ \\
/ / ' \\/ " ' / y yy \ /sy 4 yy �Iy /
y y vl )/ I
Or) I I^ \\- - - - \ '\.i•/ / 750 / y y y y y v y y \ B �f \ - - // i 1 � . ' \ 5114 451 15y51 IE yy 151 IV�yy \� \ �C — —� \'r\ I 2.0'
1--- y �-p y1 y y t \ -I�• yy1 y y y � 4 I 2.0' 2.0' 4.6'
I 19w•n ! _ v _SI 12 y1 fi - — / � - -
, lv \ e ///i / 51 1 1 r y ��%��_ - - . -- v �� ---I-------- _ ,_-�'� _ — — _ AvA BAN KFULL STAGE �_51 10iiiii/A , --L_- y y"+c ems y yy �y . y\y 5120 _ X — — — — — — /
.77..„.(t;,.....%
\ _ y
` _ i \\ '_ "yam" y y y ..,\ �� � r y �_ ----\-
_ -iI \ \ \�-- ~ \ \ y y y y y . am`y. y y y � A yy 5121 '.� /� � N/ , / \ �y \ // �}-'' ` �X\ 51OV \ \\ \� \ \yy _ yyyy yy'�yyyyy ` y4---4-
\ \ \ may . y \y\y •......
\ \yy\ y FULL Li 20
;4Dtb.%:-/ \
5 1 07 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ yyy �y— yyyyy y \r \ �Iy y \y y �y 'tJ122 't,�iy y / / / / / �� - -.- ry�L- v / �f --/--- \
\ \ \\\ y yy = 1 \• y\y y\a yv y \y y \y y \ y yl ?9\ \`\� ' � vy\y / / \ \\ \ \ \ \ y yy y \ / y y \ yy \v y y y 1v `\ '' \ �y71\\ ` .-y vy yya \ �yy y ` ' / / / } 2= 40\/ X \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \
/ \ \\ \\i, \ \ \\\ \ \ \ \ \ \ 5 C_\ T- \ y -% y/\ vy\' y \ yy y�yyy ` y .v yy \'4 \\y ky 5123 -,:ba -_ / / /ice�L \\ 2" = FULL SCALE„' 1 N. \ \ \ \ � �p \Y�I ]� y- - am�v y yy\ y y\`' y\yy y yy y \ y y � \y y y \ = < TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS SECTION `\ `\,\\ / t/. L _ \ \ \ \ \ y
y y yam y y y\yey' yy\.v y\y y\ yy y \y � y \vy S 124i � \e�T \ � \ i = HALF SCALE
\ \ \ \ \ \/ a•►• 5105 \ \ \ \\ \ �TK \ 4' �. fib` I�+ — \-, yy \ y � ` yy yy\y y\ y \yyy \\ �3/ y \v . y \ \''' y y\
y \ � y \ \ y \y y y \ \
` / < \ \/ / \ \\\\\\\\ \ \ v y \" y \ lg� \_ \ \ \ \ \ - y\ 1 y "y \ y • y y\yy y .1y l
7/ \ \ \ \ 5125 \ -O/ 5104 \ \ \\ \ �
\ I \ )// \ y di
1 1 � \ 0
St----- ----.-- \ \ \\ \/ \ \ \ \\ N \ 1 > I - 1 �X \ O QCD
\ I\ \�\\ \ \ I
L \ //1 \ EkSTIVGI�E TQ BE \ \ o� � 1 N� � I 36" RCP 1 I 11 / \ REVEIAI\ I OED )(X� II 1 0\ //\ \ \ \ \ \ \\ � �XX'
\ \ \ 1 \ INV OUT _ 2488.45 CLN
O \ \ 1 I 1 \ \ \ \ Ok O - hE rn \ X \ \ \ \ I I CO\ \ \ \ V / \ \ * \ INV IN = 2489.59\\ 5102 \ \ / 1 x� \ \ I \ \; \
/ 0
/ \ \ \ \ 1 x. \ \ WETLAND WA / U
i \ �5101 I \ \ / \ X� _ \
i / . \ \ \ \/ \\ \\ \ 1/X\ \ — \ '
/ /;1 I, ,/ \ I Ct
\\ \ L \ \\ \ - Cn
n Z
U
ct
O
2550 2550
0
z
oC }
O rI
u_ Q
2540 2540 0 Lu
(n W
J in
H W W W'
z CC CC 0_
wl
2530 Q 2530
w
Q
r\I Iii.
PROPOSED TOP COZ
OF BANK 0-)
Q W J
HO
2520 z1 2520 U) f
EXISTING GRADE 0 I Z Q
CO ALONG STREAM l O U
CENTERLINE ryl-
_CO o Q/2.o0q 0a 2510L
co
2500 ----------------- 2500 J Z W
co
e58%_
Oo PROPOSED - UL __ __--_CI-IANNEL BED EX. 3C,�CP W Jo ,\
§4.,_
CD
__OCC
2490 [ �y� 2490 w Z W J
,
PROP 1 4 z 0 2
OF 42 RCP U H Z
@ 8. 13% W —
C.) 2480 2480 c o
ii
N
O
PROJECT NUMBER: 100918
PROJECT MANAGER: KMC
o
2470 2470 DESIGNED: MKG
DRAWN: TRS
0
Tiii
CHECKED: AFM
u)
o°'c SHEET NUMBER:
L
di
z S 6
w 1 7+50 1 8+00 1 8+50 19+00 19+50 20+00 20+50
J
L_
SCALE: HOR I "=20'; VERT I "= 10'
J \ I

c 1 r
. EACN G2 STA 0+07 TO STA 17+ 17
7.7'
/ / / /// ,///// // ///� / / / I / I / I / I / / I i I I I I 1 y I .7' 2. 15' 302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / I I I I I I I II BAN KFULL STAGE Raleigh, NC 27605
// /// /// // // / / / // // / / // / / / I / / / / / // / / / 1 I 1 1 I I I I I I \ Main: 919.829.9909
// �/ //// �// / //// / / / // / // / // / / / / / / / / /i / / / / / / I I I I I ,.j I I i I 1\ \ °j WWW.res.us
/ / / / / / II
/ / / / •/ / / / / / II I / II / / / 11/ I '
\ \ \ ' Engineering Services Provided By:
/ / / I I I / / // / / / / // / / / / / / / // / / / / / / / I / I / I / / / I I I / / �� 0 \ \ \ , Angler Environmental, LLC
/ / / / / 1 I I / / / / / / / ///
/ / / / / / �/ / / /
/ / / II/ / I I I / / / / / C / / E ISIG RCKI WALL License:1 1III \ / / / / / / / / / / / / �� I I TYPICAL RIFFLE CROSS SECTION SEAL
- - - - - - - III II / 1 1 \ I \ / / / / / / / / / / / ,R yO14A/T1,0/ i / / / / I Tb EIRgMbVED / 1 I 1 I I I / / I I
I-7- - - -1—}- - -1� _ _ - 1 1 I / / / / / / / / /� / /To/ +3g / / / III 1 I I 1 I 1 I / I 1 I I I I 1 / I 1 ki I I
I I I I I / / / / / / / / / / / / / 1 I 11 I / / / I I I I I I 1 s / I I I -r �I 1 / I I 1 I I
1 I I I I I I I I / /� 4/7 �/- 7- /� / / � / / / / // / / / / // / / 9 /I I I I I I I / / I I I 1 I I i 8.5
iiII I �/ / -- — / / / / / / / / I ) I I 1 / / I I I I I I I I / l / 1 I I I I I / I I I I I I \ 4.6' 2.0'
\ 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I 1 I I46113 8 /. / ' / / / /� �� =Z _ �/ \ / /� / 1 1 / I I I 1 I I I I / 1 ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I \ P\ I \ I I I I 1 1 I I 5 35 S 1 4 1 , 5143 -, �/ / / / P / / / /// -�- _/ / _ / / I I I I,I�-I 1 1 1 I I I I I 1 1 I I I BANKFULL STAGE
1 I I I I I I 51 33 ' � + _ + _ • / / / / T 7' - � _ 1 I
\ I I 1 +00`, — . — 1 j " = L _ _ , � 5I47 / / / / �/ / / / �� —L 1 I I / I I I 1 I I I I I I O �� !
\ I l l / / 1 1 I I I I O , 1
\ III I I 1 S 13 I I ,� , , - JI •.. ___� FO K w LL/ / / / / / / / I / �''
t ..�-- :z - 9 i i I l 1 1 I I 1 1 \ I I 1 Pc 1 F��
\ \ I I I I • 11 I I I , 29 k50 - ��.;t � � V�-_ 4,1"/
— r ���' IIII\___1 = l / / / / l l 1 1 1 l I I I 1
\ I A I \ \ 5 27 \ \ 2, - •z,•b.4 its_.'�,. 5..y.?�� —le, Mr I'" A �� v���vV,,,k Q L ��_ " -�• O — ' / / �• 51 66
�O / / � / l l 1 1 � 1 1 1 1 1 I \ 'I �'.. �
I I 1 I ' ' ..•�* ;�.,U _ - Q \ \\ / / / / I I I I I �\ k I ► I
6 , 00 _ — .it ;,e�•\-- \ \ � 5 1 3 6� 1 '., - - _ / / / / 1 1 50 , - , 'y 6 5 ,
k _ �\ \ v v' ` V A ,�, 2+ 0 j I I k .,• d�i V 115 I I ,L�
.� d \ S 132 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 5145 \ \ \ \ \ 1 I '� _,:• F\, _ J 1 / I _ I , \ . _
�=�. � 5130 \ \ \ \ \ \ \\\ \\ \\\\ \ \ \ \ \\ 5148 ( 1- - ., v:4,.,�� <_, 24,,......— - 3 +00 ' i ' , ' I i,viV — /
15 CFI' G / � \ \ \ . \\ \\\\ \\\\\ \ \ \ \ \\ \\ \ I I \ I \ \�\ \ \ L
S 149 I t ►� _ , //A\, --- - ,_ _ TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS SECTION ��
SI26 \ \ \ \\ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 11 II \ \ \ \\\ \ \ \ ` ( ' / / 5151 \ — —� _ ,\ � 5162
INV OUT = 2738.E I vA vvvv\\\\�\\ \\ VA A V A A v vv 11 I I A V I I I I� I A VA \ \ VA A \ \ V A \ \ V �v S 152 \ \ �\ / ,_ ,LArA �������®.��� 16 I - F 7p -- -
\\\\\\ \\\\\\ � \\\\ \ \ \� � \\\\III IIII II � I � I � � ��\��\ \\\ \ \ \ \ \� \��\ \ \ \ \ 5153 \ �; �i/
\ \\ \\\\ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ I \ I I \ I \\ \\\ \ \ \ \ \\ \\ \ \\ \ \\ 5 1 54 \ \ \ \ 5 160 \ —
\\\ \\\ \\ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ 8.5' \ �```
T �\\\\�\\�\\:�\\\\ � � I I I I I \\� \ \ \ \ \� \ \ \ \\�\\\ \\\\ \ 5155 \ \ 5157 \ 5158 \ \ \ \\ \ \\ �\ _ — — -
T T
T T
FULL SCALE: 1 -20
T T T \ \�\\ \ \ \\ \ \\\ \\\ \ \ \ \ \\\\ \ \\ \ \ \\ \ - - - - - - - - - - J 0 20 40
T T T �\ \ \\ \\\ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \\ — — 1 BANKFULL STAGE
T T EXISTING PIPE TO BE \\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\ \\ \ \ \\\\\ - - - - - - - - -
REMOVED AND DISPOSED \ \\ \\\\\\ \ \\�\ \\ �\\ \ _-___ — — — — 2ii = FULL SCALE
T T \\ \\\\� \ \ \ \ _ _ — — — 1 = HALF SCALE
T4TT OF OFF-SITE \ \ \\\\\\\\\\\\�\x\\,_ �� — __- -
TTT EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE • \�\\\\\�\ \\\ � - - - - -
T T ABANDONED AND BACKFILLED \ \\ \\ -_ — 1-
4. T SEE DETAIL D3 \ \x\\ o N
T T 4. cp
T T T
TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS SECTION O co
CL co
WETLAND WC z
0
1—
U
D
fI
H
cn
0
U
rI
0
2750 2750 2700 2700 I-
0
z
oC }
0 il
u_ Q
2740 \\ 2740 2690 2690
Z 0 z_
O cn
1 EXISTING GRADE (7) w LiJALONG STREAMLi1 rI
W
E--- `` CLN rLKLINt a
2730 2730 2680 2680
V\ PROPOSED TOP Q
.IIL_ ',3� OF BANK PROPOSED TOP Z
i � �JS OF BANK W J
9
O
2720 \ I.`. 2720 2670 2670 E
EXISTING GRADE 11 Z Q
ALONG STREAM C. U
23
CENTERLINE '`
o O % ~CO 11' Q I—
LU
2710 2710 2660 2660 CV
Z
Q
~ 2700 1 1 \1 2700 2650 �� 2650 J z W
o PROPOSED co \. Q
CHANNEL BED ; I`� --r— O
W
Q 3`?O ` �'O/z. in J
2690 0 2690 2640 �640
o
2 Z W J
Z O
w , PROPOSED i— 2 0 0
o ; `,\ ChANNEL BED u Z
z 2680 1 2680 2630 2630 o
U
N ,,
O
PROJECT NUMBER: 100918
PROJECT MANAGER: KMC
Q 2670 2670 2620 2620 DESIGNED: MKG
0
DRAWN: TRS
CHECKED: AFM
o)
al
cc SHEET NUMBER:
L
Ed
z 0+00 0+50 I +00 I +50 2+00 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 S 7
w
J_
LL
SCALE: hOR I "=20'; VERT I "= 10' SCALE: hOR I "=20'; VERT I "= I O'
J \ J

\ \ \
\\ \° \\ . EACI-1 G2 STA 0+07 TO STA 17+ 17
\ res
�o ` 7.7'
0 \` \\ UTILITY ACCESS I .7' 2. 15'
` \� \ -� 302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
+ 'o \ EASEMENT BAN KFULL STAGE Raleigh, NC 27605
W \\ \ `\ Z Main: 919.829.9909
CO Z / \ ti° \ J 6) www.res.us
_ / / / / /� / / // // \` \ \\ U Engineering Services Provided By:
U ,/ / / / / / / ' / // / / \ \ Angler Environmental, LLC
Q / // / // / / // // / / // /' / / / / REACH G2 ii License: F 1428
/ / / / / / ' / / / / RESTORATION \ %� TYPICAL RIFFLE CROSS SECTION
/ / / / / / / / / / / / \ s° \\ �i � _ SEAL
\ / y2 /
/ / ,i-,�� / / / / / / / / / / STA 0+07 TO 6+35/ / _f
\ ! �X - 1
� / / / \ /
�// / // �/ / / �// // / / l l / l / / / / / / / / / / / / / \ �° I I \ 1 \ \ \ ` 8.5'
\ O /, / / , ////// / ' / , / / / ei / l l ' , / ' /' / / / / / ' / / / \�` I ' j ' II\\ I I I \ \' // / / / / / / - / / / / / / / / / / ' ' / / I I I I I I I \ 4.6 . _
2.0BANKFULL STAGES155 \ \ / / / / / / /' / / / / / / / / I I \ \ I \ \ 50�:
\ _ 'i:' \ / // // / / �// // // // / / / / / / T /-r �_ / / � / / / / � / // / / / // / / / // /1 I I II I I \ I l \ \\ \ \ - / �/,.,\�I` 3+50 / / ' / / / / / l ' _ r\ I I • 7+00� -_-- P _ 1m1 I i S 5 7 - .�- / / / / / / / / / / / / / /� ' -� / LL
/ / / / / / J - _S58 ! %' 5 / +50_/_ - / - � - T -� ° l� I �� — 5192 / S19 1
I I ► 51 60 �� /'R = 1— 7-7_, — - -- - - = —/, — ( — 7-- f — - - - +OO � - _i pr. I /\ 51
— y Y��ti �](�f�l _ i;.pry ��.� �- �•i�, .�♦ /____
�. �- —t ���t� \� V� \ S 189 . /
i I I I �� - / AT,/ �-��� .: — ��li. Vim' .,, }��; ti t•l�.'�% . ��V�•• 1•' ►•?''fit i� _�'- S 1 88 ��
I I I I I 1 � 5162 / / T � ®; - - - - �r- - - L _ � -I \ V v �0� �
I . � F_ I l I q� I ? % l� �T'f� / J / \ ' S 186 \ TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS SECTION
\ •\\ \ \ \ \\\l\ ` I I 1 I i '\ \ E 51 63 / S 1 65 / 15 1 66 / 5 1 67 I 5 1 69 5170 5 1 7 1 j51731 51 74 1 5 1 75 51 76 / 5 178 / 5 1 79 5180 / 5151 5 1 82 I S 184 I I \ \\\ l I ,� ��; \\ \
\ \ \ \\ \ I I I I \ \ \ `r;, -t _ i 1 _ / / 1 I / I I \ ' ( l / I i / / / •` ) I \ Q \ >' - - -' -`� \\ \
\ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ I I \ \ A, '>� —d_ I I I I I I I / / / I / �_ _, 9f _ /,�x�
\ \ \\ \ I I \ — - - I I I I _ l w - \ \
\ \ \ ` I \ \ \ \ Y — _ �_ 1 �l — I I I I I I �� I / I I _ - / \ - -\-- _ \
\\ \ \ \ \\ \\\ I \ \ — \'1— " , _r -- �-fl,l ,J-jam- 1- Q� �L__I I ( .� I - - - � \ \�
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ —._�-`\��` \ - pia-- �`d f—� s7`��i�I ` -� j / ���ter;�- i ,�`a�'�� �.o�F / ��__—= -�r�— — _\— — \ \ �\ 8.5 ��
\ \ V\ �� � = - --- fir:— \ _ ������
\ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ - mac- __ \ �_` 'r --�'ry'' '_ -!_ \ — _T / —r�s—
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ � \ '�- \ \ `�°-_ �\� \ s 3 � � �`_ _ \ — — -- - __ - - \� - - _ - - _� 2.0' 4.6 FULL SCALE: 1"=20
==----. --=-----f---- ---- - *.c,17:--- -- :=--- -->-7,j - - --.: :. ;
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ — — — — — — _ BAN KFULL STAGE
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ �� I I I — _ \ \ 2 - FULL SCALE
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ v `\ \ \ \ 1" = HALF SCALE
\ \\ \ \\ \ \ \ I I I \ \\� \�\ \\\� \\ \ PROPOSED FORD 1
\ l iI I I I 1 I 1 I\ \ \\\� . \\ \ \\\� CROSSING w
I I 1 I I I I I \\\ \\ \ \ \ \ \� \\ \, Q
11 I I \ \ \ \ \ \� c- o N
' \\\ \\ \ CL co
� \ \ TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS SECTION
EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE �°
ABANDONED AND BACKFILLED \ Z
\ O
SEE DETAIL D3 \ �tio \ v
. \ D
o I
\
2650 2650 2
I—
EXISTING GRADE O
ALONG STREAM Z
CENTERLINE CC >-
O CC
u_
2640 2640 z o z
__``\ LC� �N Q W
+ UTILITY ACCESS W
■ EASEMENT � o w w rI
—_- cc cc Q_
/8 Q ��
2630 >' .4 %./ `� 2630
I
Q
ice_ PROPOSED TOP Z
eft 00% OF BANK W
2620 2620 ~ O
Q
O U
2
2610 2610 Q fY CV
O
u) ;!G.,98% (-1 0_ Z =
PROPOSED \`��� 0
2600 CHANNEL BED — 2600 J Q
cip
0 4 G9% O
U
in
2590 /4 49% 2590 Z W J
- z OTz
o
o \49% w z
2580 c cc
z 2580
o_ o
U
N
O
PROJECT NUMBER: 100918
PROJECT MANAGER: KMC
Q
0
o
2570 2570 DESIGNED: MKG
DRAWN: TRS
CHECKED: AFM
0)
al
cc SHEET NUMBER:
I I IEd
I
z 3+50 4+00 4+50 5+00 5+50 6+00 6+50 7+00 S8
w
_,
Li
SCALE: HOR I "=20'; VERT I "= 10'
J \ I

\4,� / ' 1 1
A- x\Xk \' . EAC1-1 G2 STA 0+07 TO STA 17+ 17 ores
k, \
X
X\X�\,, o 7.7'
EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE ��X \ I .7' 2. 15'
ABANDONED AND BACKFILLED -k'� \\ 302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
X EXISTING STRUCTURE O
SEE DETAIL D3 X \. — — — — BANKFULL STAGE Raleigh, NC 27605
�X \ — — TO BE REMOVED AND g
_ - - - -
-_ �vO
— _ — _ _ _ DISPOSED OF OFF-SITE Z o Main: 919.829.9909
X \�\�— — — — — _ _ www.res.us
i/ — ..1 — — - - - - - I
— • — — >�
�'//% — — % —i / '� — f �'� — - — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — U Engineering Services Provided By:
j �i�/ ��- - — j _ —— k\—��_ — — — — — _ ~ Angler Environmental, LLC
/ / _ — _ _ — — — _ —
Q
O+ ///!ii%'�� % - — —'— �\ ` X — — _ — __ — —_ �- = - - TYPICAL RIFFLE CROSS SECTION License: F-1428
N / / / // ////,-%- -/ �� _-- __ — --— _/ - - - - - - - — 1 — � _ - - - - - - - — _ - - SEAL
/ // / /� // /— — / --_—_- - '— - - - — — — 'r - —""\— _�==— — � �` _ = _
w / // // / / — _ — —
Z. / // Vim- y - tea --ra- = — • - - -�� / i
_ / i // / /%/// / //// �. �--� \ \ ��,�1s`\ J - ��X— — _ — — / 8.5'
- 0
P
1
______ ____ ____ ,.... .......
x _.___
------ ---- -: --
•
.2---------''''
7 ''.:-._.-
\ - - _-= - -
/ / / �- // / . ./ � \ - - \ _ — \ �\ _ _ —_- - - - � / BANKFULL STAGE\ \ I ' — —/� � O — ,� ,,•. 5203 5204 5207 A 1 O — — v / / -
I I \ \ 1 1 —/a�� k0 1� �/ fl \ 5209 \ Il ���� �00 �� /5201 \ vI A A \ t / ///'� _�A ��1�' //.ie4,� 5199v\ 5200 — — — v \ VA \�S2 I O ✓vA� ?�: v ,� -���I \ 4_ f \\\
V A \ / /// y� �' - - -,�/ /� ` ,, \- - - V A\ \\ A V A \ \ � �\ fixv�- ,I "— — r — — — — - - - - \\ \ \ \\�O :11r.1.1-1-1_1_1177777-
/ TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS SECTION
I 7+QQ \ k \ �-\Y�,� - - � 5196 \ \\ \ S2I3
5214
r�.�, \���� a. r �- \ S 195 A A V A A V A V \ \ .�.�-
- - - - ' I - - - \\ \ ` 5192 5193 \\ �\ - - - - - - _ \\-,\ \ \�\\ \\\ I\ 5215 � :� _"== \\
- — — 5188 \ �, 1 � / \ \ \ - - — \ \ \ \ 5216 \ _ 00. 8.5' \\\\\\������w
— V I �' i V v v v v - - - v v v v v , \ � �i V`` �r� FULL SCALE: 1"=20
S 1 86 \ I I I ��'/apt //�� \ \� \ \ \ \� \ \\ \\ 52 1 7 \ � / �r \ 2.0 J� 4.6
i 2 S 184 \ ) // i'/ / ��\ \\ \ \ \ ` I REACH G 2 \\\ \\\ \ \ \ 5218 'r I \ \\ BANKFULL STAGE 0 20 40
-- 1----- ---- ---� _ --�- ) \ \\ \ \� \ \ \ RESTORATION \ \ \ \\ \ \\\
_ —_ — __ 7 , '� \ \ \ \ 2" = FULL SCALE
�' - -� \ \ \ \ STA 6+82 TO 1 7+ 1 7 \ \ 1 S2 19 `f. `f.
—�����—� --. �'/ \\ A \ \� \ \ V A v v 1" = HALF SCALE
_1.._ — \ \ 5221
__ --_— \_ __ _ — � ' lit
\ 'yo TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS SECTION co
O N
UTILITY ACCESS 0_ co
\ \ EASEMENT
Z
\ O
O
� � U
\ \ H
rI
O
U
0'
O
2610 2610
0
z
oC }
O 0'
u_ Q
2600 2600 z o z
o ) 2
() W
J in
W W 0_'
0= 0= 0_
2590 2590
Q
Z
W
H O
2580 —�'�N 2580
u N . i Z Q
Etsfor
/- -- SN------op H
a 2570 -,-_ _ _-- . 2570 Q N
3G2%__- PROPOSED TOP
-0 EXISTING GRADE OF BANK z UI
ALONG STREAM1A —G9- �� B.00%
= CENTERLINE `- ------____
J
�, 2560 ---------- -------------- 2560 J H LLI
O - ---
E --------8-----8- -----
>_ 0
o -_ - _ --_---- - _ _ W J
2550 ----- 2550 w —Iw
Z in J
PROPOSED - B.OD�jo z O =
> CHANNEL BED
lEr-o W0 ~ z
U
z 2540 2540 0 o
U
N
O
a PROJECT NUMBER: 100918
o) PROJECT MANAGER: KMC
o
Q 2530 2530 DESIGNED: MKG
0
DRAWN: TRS
CHECKED: AFM
0)
u)
o°'c SHEET NUMBER:
L
w
ww
7+00 7+50 8+00 8+50 9+00 9+50 10+00 10+50 S9
_,
L_
SCALE: hOR 1 "=20'; VERT 1 "= 1 0'
J \ I

r _x%'_ 1 r 1
' \,. \
___ ____ ___ __ ___ .......
'� - — 7�x `` \\\ . EAC I-1 G 2 STA 0+07 TO STA 17+ 17
EXISTING STRUCTURE /�ij � � ' / rx' ^�\�� \\ \ fPres
\ �\\ TO BE REMOVED AND / //i%/ - / �' j ��'x \ \ \\\ \\ • f
\ \\\ DISPOSED OF OFF SITE /'/�'� / �' �' � ' / - �i \ \ `\ \ \\ \\ \f 7.7'
r �\ \ \ \ // / / / / _ i i \ \ \ \ \ \ \\\ \
P
1
\ \ \\\ __ � ��/ice �� �� �� �-----;---- � % � � / � � ' -- \ \\ � \�\ \\\ \ \\ \\ �� 302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
\ — i i _ / \ \ \ \ \ \ BAN KFU LL STAGE
/ / \\_: t1it
_ _\ — //j/� i =��— = �' �\ \\\\� \\\ \ \\\ f\ �I WWW.res.us
�' // / / \ \ \ \ \ L /i�i�'�� �� — _ =___ __ — \` \ \ \ \ \ \ \ Engineering Services Provided By:
/
/ / r` \ \ I — — — —' '�����x�''� — — _ —- _ — — _ — \\ \\\\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ c_ Angler Environmental, LLC
S / — '' /' / I — — — — — - - - - J/ /' i i — \\ \ `\\` \ \ \\ TYPICAL RIFFLE CROSS SECTION License: F 1428
O / / / / / I f \ \ \ I - - - - - x // /�/ — P� t �2 � — \\\\\ \ \ \ \ SEAL
/ l l I l i / 1 \ _ —X j//// / /// R- ESTORATION `N, \ \ \ \\ \
/ / j I I I _ SHED �/ i 1 r _ , _ \_ v ,�� / // �� / \ STA 6+82 T -I�+ 1 7 \ \\ \ \
l / 1 I l l I — x�x // / / \ ` \\ ` \
/ / 1 ter \ •r — \\ \
l / l l / l \ ��\ i� - - - - J// �/ C \ ___ ._ \\\\ \� 8.5'
///// // . __..
, / z/ , ,I ___ __. ,... , Q \ - — — _ _ _ P20' 1
/ l / I l I / jr ij ��,�x/ \\ A v� e� _ — /i _____\ '‘'' --- nO ' -.-------------- — _ _ — -..1 - _r_-___ it\ _—� BANKFULL STAGE
�— i��� � — _ I 5 , — -� 1'_, I ram•• _ ,.. ,,,, c , 4, _.f� 4. v ; � .-;. / _ _ , ,
/ / / // / // // / /l / / l x /' 'j/�//'/ =—`=��j� _ — 4 c' , I--, ` r' Air, ���// Y' S234 �1�.� r - �- XJ^ o)
/// / /// / / // / / / �_ � 7 ,�,-� O — - -�. - ='�i. - - ��`�� jam♦ 5235 — . . •\ , ,
/ / / , / i / -` `�..%;� �'--. �' \ -% i ` ,_i .!... _\ - , \ 5230 •I��_��Ii� I� ♦� 5236 \``: !'i: — — ----
/ — — 1
' xvr--- __—' '�- -- — — — 5225 5226 5228 `..I�� _ \ \
/ \
'�� —_ / �' 5222 \ \ \ \\ \ I _h' _--, — .. `\
S22 1 S223 \\ \ \ I \ \ \�' ��
X � ��"`4 - - - - \ \\ \ \ \
O , _ — - . \\ \ \ \ •\ `\ \\ ��\\ \\ I 5237 \� I'\ / \ \ \ TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS SECTION `O
��e ::::/ ����- i A S2 I ✓ _ — A v v v A A A V A A\ \\ A V A A V I ���. p N\ \ ���Z_�;�
"Q�, \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ I \� \ , 5238 \ \ "... ... M
_; � — ` \, \ \ \ ` \ ` \\ II \`.\-- 5239 jai `��O - - - - - \ \ \ \ I \' \ \ \ 2.0' 4.G' FULL SCALE: 1 -20
rm 20
40
k0 w..__, i :7").
S2I6
5240
r _....
; 0
/ ��`� / 6, BANKFULL STAGE
`'\' 2' L SCALE
� _ �— I l ,/�/ 52 1 4 .\ EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE \\\ \ \ \ I I \`,�-- �,'' \ /
\ • .'� 1" = HALF SCALE
/ v ABANDONED AND BACKFILLED A \ \ \ v`..
� \"_1 52 1 3 \ V I ` _ „_ � v x
SEE DETAIL D3 \ \ \ O ! `SO
\ \ O _�.�
\\ \ \\ NIX I aS241 \t \ EU
a
N
0 co
\ — CL co
Off`\\ \\ I 11 \ 5242 ��' TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS SECTION
Q' \�\ V A I I v v _ z
�'i \� \ \ \\\ ` I I S243 \\ O
/ \ \ \\ \ I \ :=4. \ /S 1-
\ \ \\\ I \'_ .\ X 0
\ \ \\ \ I \ ` z' 0
v . v v\ \ I I •a -v. rI
v \'VA v \ I ';y \
\ \\\\ I \ \\\ z
U
rI
2580 2580 O 0
l-
O
z
oC }
O rI
2570 2570 z u_a z_
(D W
J W
W W Q_'
2560 2560
EXISTING GRADE Q
ALONG STREAM
CLNI EKLI NE z
W
2550 2550 ~ O
-----__ _ PROPOSED TOP i
Q
BANK (-jco 1
2540 . 2%_ 2540 N
_-ri ------- ------,—_ t45!=----___ O 0
Hz =2530 - JzW2530 co -
PROPOSED _---_
O
CHANNEL BED -L--- 0
g in
2520
/ 2520 � -I2 Z W J
Tz Q = i-
o w H z
z 2510 2510 a cc
0_ o
U
N
O
PROJECT NUMBER: 100918
x PROJECT MANAGER: KMC
o_ 2500 2500 DESIGNED: MKG
2
DRAWN: TRS
0)
CHECKED: AFM
u)
cc SHEET NUMBER:
6E
di
z 1 0+50 1 1 +00 1 1 +50 1 2+00 1 2+50 1 3+00 1 3+50 1 4+00 S 1 0
w
J_
SCALE: hOR I "=20'; VERT I "= I 0'
J \ I

-----
LCE 0 1
x- res
x-x-x-x-x-x�x�x�x� - - - _
LCE - - - - x_x—x_
_ x x—x—x—x_ _ _ �EAC N G 2 STA 0+07 TO STA 17+ 17
- - - - _ _ _ - _
_ - - _ - x-x-x-x—x_x__ - - - _
%�/j jj - - - - -- L _ - - - - - x x x X x x X x x X X x x x x x— I .7' 2. 15 7.7'
/ — — — — —
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
jj jji j/ - - — =— _ —= - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - _ - - - X X X X X X�C X�(X�(�<x x X X X X X X X X X X X X X�(X X x X X X_-- BANKFULLSTAGE Raleigh, NC27605
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — _ X X X—
/� // / / / �_ — / — // /- - - -_-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -_= - - -_—_- _ - - _ €— �£E- - _ E Main: 919.829.9909
/ / // /- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ — �_ _ _ —__ — _LEE _ O�
. •v-- . _ y y ma
yamy Engineering ineering ServicesProvided v
i d ed By:
// Angler Enviromental, LLC
/ / / / _ __ — —
— — - - — License: F1428/ / / R CH G2 / // :=— — — ---- y.- y = /_ _ — =
— - - _/ / / / / — j TYPICAL RIFFLE CROSS SECTION SEAL R ORATIO — � � y/ / �y y /
ll/ / yyyt_y // :117
////// //• �////— C -- / / /GE/STA 6+�2 TO 1 17 / / / / / y_ yy / A/ / / l /
/// // / / / , / e '!� y /' / /// / / \ l // / // / / / _ 'bF / V.5'/ / / / // / / / \ / l / / ' ., yy / y y // / / / / / 11:7-111;112::::54:01;1:1'4:1
A/ / / y a
P
1
N KFULL STAGE
.tt
l l / /� � // / / � w`o y yy y — — — — /y \\ y/ / / / / / � // / l \ y y /`3 � \/ i / / / / / / � / / /\/ // / / I / � O \ / / / _/ — ffl � yy // ,, / jrT — .V - � y _.. , •fi y -N 1 � - L_)Li \ - - — / ,/ Q-+ JO � l — \! , G — r .�.0 _ ��Av•� �� g i / ,_ , , . o- o - / \ i / � '
I A. O —, i � \ tO/
_ r . - �: l ___,/_n� 1.-vi \ / — d �l y Y — —%}1 � 1 �, \ T� \ 1 — 1�, _ I / /_I i7i> FY — — v �iyI� am: ,/ L� y — �• ��' .v, y . N y ls
y I = y
5255 / !_ t\Ti yy y y thr_ = 5252 5253 '� y—." �, 4/4,- 65245� -- 5246 - — 52475248 _-- 5250 525 I i ` �, � � �_— — — —, � � ;�,.� ' = - �, TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS SECTION— - -—/ " / — 5242t _ _ -__ _ -- \ y ywy5256 y � _ _--
- y
5 -�_ y yyy50 / S240 _r — —/ / / / /a — — __ _—_--RS=_= �E-524 I i i / /, / c„+'"— — _-- '\ — \ \ v y y yy yyy yy yy . y/y\y y 'y \ L— acY y y v yy
/ �/ It• '� �� / —� / // / / / /
== r 5��-
- `— \ \ \ y � yy y y\ y �. y\yyyyy• /yy r -y- - yvy y ---4-- y yy— �y yyy y y y/ }I / \ y y y' \yy \'yy y y � ' �yy y VyL _ yyyy y yvydVv
' \ y .4, \/ / - 5238 5239 a - - \
A / / / �'l— \ \ \ \ \ V.5_�— _,—�� — yy ) v�\ V , J : /y 1 y y\y " ' FULL L SCALE: 1i
=2
0 1 y/ —9 4 — — 1— �— _ \ \ y y \ 4,4� / ° y _y4',..„,\ ✓y y y vy\ \ \ 1,1_�q"�y yy\ yL/ y y\ \y/ y yyy \— � yy y 2.0 4.bi• •� — \ y ��� /. 5237 = — _ \ BARN � yl \� y y y y y y\A y " \ 0 20 Y..
40// 7j _ �- \ \ \ — — — — — _ \ v�� / yy y \ / / .✓
y y y y y yyv'� yy /yy y yyy / r 'v_.v// \ \ \ BAN KFULL STAGE/ \ \ \ \ y \ 4// 5236 9.—' — \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ / y <y \ yyyy \ !4. / y y y / ry — . y \ \// �/ i — — \ \ \ \\ \ \ / �,•I i y y y / i .. � y y " yyy \ / y +' yy yy \ +7 \ 2u = FULL SCALE\ \ Ai \ \ \ \ / `•!I� 1 y\y y \ y y yyy y E yy/ y ,�y y yy y yy\yy \ \ \\ \ / • / y y \yy\y yyd / iyyy y yy--y- y
LF SCALE
/ y "\ yy�+ 1 y y y y y -y y= y \/ \ /y/ /�y �y— y y y , may y \/ \ \ \ \ // ��\ \ —
/ \ /� \ \
\Ci O \ � \ \ y y y —� \5 ` : O \ N
\ - - - ` - - - — —
— — — - - - � � � _
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ — _ I
I \/ \ / \ y , „
\ /y / y/ / yy/�—ri� y y ya--- yyyy �
y / �/ yy — y y y��y y \ 0\ \�/ \ \
• 47'
% '
\ � I �\ \� � /y ' y — / \� \ \ Q OE � +� � � y � y � mayy � y yy Q 0� TR � P _ I I / \ y \� �€{�4QVED AND DISPUSIEDI I I / // '/ r / / y // yy \\y y y y \ \\ - - - _ — — - - __ — __ / �.i, � � c _
„ •' y / y
4.:-4- • 1 � — y y y \ co\ +/\ TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS SECTION (NI_ I_ _ FF SIITEII I I I / / / ' — y `' — —= — � .� jy /yy \ � +� \ \ co CL= - -�— - - I I / l•
rii,
`mot - -- \ I I I I I I //; ; f # ilb — \ - - - - \ \ / y:, yy \ \ \
EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE I
0017• ; / \ ` _ --
-- '� \ 1) )/
— I I ` N:ioI / ,d1I \ \ — M \I II , , � vv IWETL---A.1\[D\1/\>/k +\ \
\ \I U ABANDONED AND BACKFILLED
SEE DETAIL D3 \\
\ - -
_ ___ __ I II I II IIIII l0" r1D\r' jam '
II I I I ;Ri_i / r. a�I I I I _
_ 1vAV + Ct
z
\\\__ x / 1:-: \ #A- - - -
U
Ct
2560 2560 U_
I-
O
Z
cc- }
O Ct
u_
2550 2550 z o z_
O cn 2
() W
J in
W W W'
2540 2540
EXISTING GRADE Q
ALONG STREAM Z
CENTERLINE
W
I— 0
2530 2530
PROPOSED TOP
Z
a __- - OF BANK O (�
co --_-___ ___
Lu
2520 -`---------------------- 2520 Q Et
N 5
_ ``-
�--� -7.37% J Q
25I0 '- 2510 J W
col
------ __ -7•5 2% O
o
-------5
Q 2500 2500
U
g Z W J
rci
PROPOSED Z• O = ~
CHANNEL BED U
O I— Z
o W
z2490 2490 c cc
o_ o
TIE REACH GF2 INTO PROPOSED
a BED OF REACH GF I
PROJECT NUMBER: 100918
PROJECT MANAGER: KMC
a
o
0
2480 2480 DESIGNED: MKG
DRAWN: TRS
CHECKED: AFM
u)
cc SHEET NUMBER:
L
di
z 14+00 14+50 15+00 15+50 16+00 16+50 17+00 17+50 311
w
J_
SCALE: HOR I "=20'; VERT I "= I 0'
J \ J

l 1 l \
X
-'z/
PLANTING LEGEND ,yr ,.-�`� Ores
LIMITS OF CONSERVATION LCE _ ice,♦♦♦♦♦♦♦�� 1.
/ '. WETLAND MI5 \ 1
EASEMENT ,:-‘ ”/ �,♦�♦�♦♦♦♦�• //// \\ I
PROPERTY LINE ��♦�♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦�/ / 3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100
ILEAC h G I -B ,�'♦♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦• /// /// \
RIPARIAN PLANTING ` , ��♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦�•/ /// / i ` I Main: 919.29 9909
(TOTAL AREA: 20.3 AC) ENHANCEMENT II }/+ y�♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦////// '/// I
� .* 4*0*0* 14*0Y /", ,/'/' <"f /"/ i//'iii � // � www.res.us
SUPPLMNTAL PLANTING/INVASIVS CONTROL 1i Engineering Services Provided By:
(TOTAL ARA: 4. I AC) � /�� } �I♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ / / /// �.♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ / / // // x Angler Environmental, LLC
} y,♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ // / // / \ \ License: F 1428
�i •,.♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ // / / // �\
�,♦���♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ///;;P.////// // i \'� SEAL
,•♦♦♦♦♦•;�♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦/// /f� // // /
\ \)
��♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦`♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦/ / / /// /
4/ ,♦♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦�'*♦i♦i♦:♦�': �- /// / // //// I i\
.� / \'`'
♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦ii♦i♦i♦•j,�♦i!� /// //i// / /// / /
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦���,,r♦♦♦♦� // // // // KEAC h G I A
/
NI
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦!%♦♦♦♦♦♦� / /// /// / P ICES E I�VAT I O N
9♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦��'�•►�♦♦♦♦� / /// ///// — - - 1
/♦�♦�♦�♦�♦�♦�♦�♦�♦,♦o� �♦�♦�♦�♦�♦�♦�A // ////// // — - - —//
1 ��iiiiiiii♦♦�'i�'�/♦♦♦♦♦♦♦�////// / / \ i11
.A♦♦♦♦♦♦i♦i♦,!�♦♦!'�♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i� // /// /////
♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦♦�®'.�i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i // /// // //
-it"fe. /
al/
I // k .' \ 1`141
�F .�♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦O ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ \ / //N: // /////// 0(///
iik/ / ./ FULL SCALE: 1"=100
#♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ 1 .♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦\ / / ; / }�(
♦♦i♦i♦♦i♦♦i♦♦♦ " ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦i♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦i♦i /���.4" / 0 100 200
2 = FULL SCALE
// \ \
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦O♦° , ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦•���•♦♦♦j- . .#.4 0,/ /// \ 1" = HALF SCALE
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦� ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦i�%?�I�♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦�. w
IZEAC h G I -C *�♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦%r�0♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦���i!O+,i�, ;144j♦♦♦j♦j♦j♦♦♦j♦j♦j♦j♦j� /' \� \, o N
I�ESTOI�ATI ON ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ►A♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦��i!♦y♦♦�♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦� - \� N
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦,��♦y40
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦�'g ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦! WETLAND MI5 CL♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i!4. ..-ay
\ co
f
/ ,41#♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦'1►♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ z
/ / '
��O♦♦�►� .:4; •• A- ...to' \+\ (..)
II'♦♦♦♦♦♦ a
O♦�l ` �O VO♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ N \ I—
Ct
i ,ji, Z
a
.'i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦�.!s��',16 •♦♦♦e��i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦♦��♦o���i �♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i/ -if Ct
0
� i ♦♦ -�� � O�o ♦ ♦ � : s��♦♦O�♦O♦ - - \ �� — z• � � ? 0tl4$44* 400.4 ' _._ --•.'''''' V H
011,
� � �� O
-.. 1 ....?„,\----\ , 6d >_.
' "e ii♦♦♦♦♦♦�♦O♦.♦♦♦�!♦O♦♦r�!-iv•. 0
0� i�_. ♦� 7 �.4 ,+♦ � i� . O�� � : �♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦I �, z�� �� - �o _ _ O ♦ � 0♦ ► ' � 0 - ♦♦�♦♦. ►� , -�>� XX---, �, o
/ N
♦ - Oicey® '� O„� , !
� o , o
-
X '—�'�x - - -♦♦♦♦-♦♦-.♦�
\T � G �i♦►♦!♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦O♦ a,����� �♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦yFi! r♦� �� ♦tO - �- 0��/ i i -- LLJ LLJ rI
\ or ♦ . ♦♦ � � , , fr frCL
I At
x4 / \�oH/ .
♦A� �2ra0� / �
4,444.-Vii440 1' 0 :
/ ),4'., ; A, 1 \ ,........_
��� ►!�'!!♦! ��`�,�0!!O��� ♦♦! � ���� ! ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦,'�1 �Q,►♦♦��►�♦♦♦♦♦��y0��♦♦j� �,/ I I \oH� �
\�� \11 l! .,���t+, 3►�11♦ ►11 ►♦1IGooA� � ,' °����y�►♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦��1�0••.0��♦♦♦.o♦♦♦ / I � 44
N \ i- "— �: �.!�O♦a1!0�, �3 � �s- ' 't ''w 000, �i►♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ i'v ♦� ♦ •�!♦♦♦� W
\� y� °� ;,
N\-- _.!!�� s' ���►�L'OAstI—V!� -.1/4- !003/ !♦�►♦fin, ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦!��!!��1�,O,��i ♦O:♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ PLANTING TABLE PLANTING NOTES
a c.,�s`o. Ott'♦�„Irv►pt+�►♦♦♦� ♦♦!♦�A1�♦��,4'7♦�1 �♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦f'O♦mod,Oeli';�1i►�♦♦♦♦♦♦ - O/
„9 / \, `\k_ `'�4. 4t�.,♦.44:4 '�2.��♦�������'�A!•''%/v/'' '♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦• ��'/e♦�♦?�♦�♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦• Permanent Riparian Seed Mix LL
/
����I♦ ♦C�♦♦,����ll; �♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦���,�yy♦♦����♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦� ALL PLANTING AREAS
Q
N\ \ ���� Vi���'j� ' / Percent I I . EROSION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE PROPERLY MAINTAINED UNTIL PERMANENT VEGETATION Z
N ` � A>.� 4t" .40,��k���♦♦♦. ' ,,_���1��(�j_♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦fJ' 'A4�A, F'St,' Common Common Name Scientific Name Composition
\ � � �� �► � ��♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦���� ♦♦ V♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ IS ESTABLISHED AND FINAL APPROVAL 11AS BEEN ISSUED. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSPECT
pp 1� �•��♦ ,,1����� , ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦��� A��� ,�♦♦♦♦♦♦♦� �c Virginia Wildrye Elymus virgmicus 25% EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AT THE END OF EACH WORKING DAY TO ENSURE MEASURES ARE Z
0 \ N CO♦�,,4k 11) ,� �♦ ♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦ O/�`�I�♦ � ♦♦♦ ♦♦ /l FUNCTIONING PROPERLY.
in ` I� `♦♦•�♦���*�®�0��♦♦�����♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦!G�I��♦�♦����♦♦♦♦�♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ��� Indian Grass Sorghastrum nutans 25%
\ I�S�� ♦��♦���������♦������,�����♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦�����s������♦��I���♦♦♦♦��♦��♦♦♦♦♦♦� Little BI ue Stem Schizachyrium scoparium I O% 2. DISTURBED AREAS NOT AT FINAL GRADE SHALL BE TEMPORARILY VEGETATED WITHIN I O 11
�� � �♦�� ���♦♦♦ ► ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦�"�Q���® ♦'�I"�♦♦��♦�♦♦�� � Soft Rush Juncus effusus I0% WORKING DAYS. UPON COMPLETION OF FINAL GRADING, PERMANENT VEGETATION SHALL BE �J
\ � ��!�� '�����0�� t♦♦♦♦♦♦♦��� ��j�'I�O '�' ♦♦♦�iI♦♦� ESTABLISHED FOR ALL DISTURBED AREAS WITHIN I O WORKING DAYS. SEEDING SHALL BE IN fn\ - `���` �►♦�♦.►���*♦♦♦♦e-e►��G:C f. 1 4l ♦♦♦♦�♦♦. Blackeyed Susan Rudbeckia hirEa I O% ACCORDANCE WITH EROSION CONTROL PLAN. — Z v
Llj WETLAND WB \ �� OO,>♦�♦!��es!1►0♦`�'!!�►♦a1, .,!9!A0Nri#1!y�♦��/,p/1�►4rr♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦� Deerton9ue Dichanthelium clandestinum I0% Z
\ \ � ��_�� .,��♦����♦,+O`♦♦�•��I �4♦.������♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦• Common Milkweed Ascle ias s riaca 5%
H \ v�.f-\� � ♦�♦��������♦ 4�� �������♦♦♦♦♦�♦♦ � f� p y 3. ALL DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE PREPARED PRIOR TO PLANTING BY DISC OR SPRING-TOOTH _1 F-
7
�.� A!4.�♦♦+�A♦♦♦♦♦. CHISEL PLOW TO MINIMUM DEPTH OF 12 INCHES. MULTIPLE PASSES SHALL BE MADE ACROSS
♦♦♦ / Showy Goldenrod Solidago erecta 5% PLANTING AREAS WITH THE IMPLEMENT AND THE FINAL PASS SHALL FOLLOW TOPOGRAPHIC
,(,) N Ni, \v 1��������I��♦ #4 'v ��� ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦�♦� CONTOURS. Q
o ` +� � ��� 2 ���,(���♦�♦�♦�♦�♦�♦�♦�♦�♦�♦�♦�♦� Live Staking and Live Cuttings Bundle Tree Species 8
J
`�`a 4. BARE ROOT AND LIVE STAKE TREE SPECIES SHALL FOLLOW THE COMPOSITION SHOWN IN THE
C3 \�*,:,..��� / � w:♦:♦:♦:♦:♦:♦:♦:♦:♦:♦♦����/ Percent TABLE TO THE LEFT. SPECIES MAY BE SUBSTITUTED BASED ON AVAILABILITY. U
\ �! `f/ Common Name Scientific NameComposition
5. BARE ROOT AND LIVE STAKE TREE SPECIES SHALL BE PLANTED ACCORDING TO THEIR RESPECTIVE in J
p ` \\�\,, �� � ,: �.♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦.♦� Silky dogwood Cornus amomum 20% J
U \ \ - 44',-,�♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦��j DETAILS. w Z w J
\ -4-4 ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦� American Sycamore Plantanus occidentals 20%
\` ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦A Ninebark Physocarpus opulifolius 20% G. BARE ROOT PLANTING DENSITY IS APPROXIMATELY 800 STEMS PER ACRE. SPECIES SHALL BE Z I H
a) \ �,�:♦:♦:♦:♦:♦:♦:♦♦♦♦�� ILEAC h G 2 DISTRIBUTED SUCH THAT 3 TO G PLANTS OF THE SAME SPECIES ARE GROUPED TOGETHER. O
Alnus serrulata 20% G
o �� ���+�♦♦♦`��� ' •' I�ESTOI�ATI ON Bla k willow Salix nigra 20% 7. TREATMENT/REMOVAL OF INVASIVE SPECIES, PINES AND SWEET GUMS LESS THAN G" DBH SHALL W z
\\\ A BE PERFORMED THROUGHOUT THE PLANTED AREA. 0 cc Q
z \ �� Bare Root PlantingTree Species
0
\�� 8. TEMPORARY SEED MIX SHALL BE APPLIED AT A RATE OF 150 LBS/ACRE TO ALL DISTURBED AREAS 0_ 0
\ ,� Percent WITH SLOPES EQUAL TO OK STEEPER THAN 3: I I .
Common Name Scientific Name
o \ \ \ \ +,,' Composition
'�\� ` 9. PERMANENT RIPARIAN SEED MIX SHALL BE APPLIED TO ALL DISTURBED AREAS WITHIN THE PROJECT NUMBER: 100918
River Birch Betula nigra 15%
\ CONSERVATION EASEMENT AT A RATE OF 15 LBS/ACRE.
f Tulip Poplar Liriodendron tul'p'fera 15% PROJECT MANAGER: KMC
�° \\ ` I DESIGNED: MKG
a \ f\� ` American Sycamore Plantanus occidental's I 5% I O. PERMANENT HERB SEED MIX SHALL BE APPLIED TO ALL DISTURBED AREAS WITHIN THE
/ CONSERVATION EASEMENT BREAKS AT A RATE OF 15 LBS/ACRE. DRAWN: TRS
�\ �� 't Shagbark Hickory Carya ovata I O%
\\ CHECKED: AFM
:Co� \ \ White Oak Quercus alba I O%
a�
CC \ \ -�- Chestnut Oak Quercus montana I0% SHEET NUMBER:
pC \v�\� /I Tag Alder Alnus serrulata 5%
Q ` •
\\ \, f\ \ } Eastern Redbud Cerc's canadens's 5%
z \ +\ Flowering Dogwood Corn us Ronda 5% P 1
W ,
�_ \ X�X\k X } , Red Mulberry Morus rubra 5%
W \ \r X�X/ / Northern Red Oak Quercus rubra 5%
J ` J

l 1 l \
. I. X
\ Ii
NOTES: ; k I0 res
CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL FENCING, // - _ _ _ _ _ I
STRUCTURES AND OTHER DEBRIS LOCATED x ,/ I
WITHIN LIMITS OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT _X—X�X
AND DISPOSE OF OFF-SITE. I/ I
x 3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100
/ ://C: I Raleigh, NC 27612
j I I Main: 919.829.9909
x
/� C www.res.us
�//�/ ice/ G� c,. WETLAND VVB i Engineering Services Provided By:
� \, i Angler Environmental, LLC
x License: F-1428
REACH G I -B +/1---r-
d- \\\I SEAL
,7v s-
I
�G�
//
i \ \
i/ ' 1
i
i'
/'/ / ;,,, ' *
/
//[;17/ 'P t
v11
„11
\ \ , Iir 11 ,...
__ �' `IIIIt11111IZ)V f
/+i i� Illl���l��l�1 x
_ l
`�'� I('\\� /�\\\� �lFULL SCALE: 1"=100
j \ 7 \\\\�� 0 100 200
i /
�/ � ��// ' \\\� II
/x
� � � \�� i \
2" = FULL SCALE
//'/ .�\ •.\�\� �n� .'' LEACH G I -A }/} 1" = HALF SCALE
REMOVE ALL EXISTING ,)(-T v� — //���� �,�
emu. �\ ./�/ -. �� '
FENCE LOCATED WITHIN ,�F`'� �, /� / :��� w
r,
THE EASEMENT AND X,� ���\ �, , ��\ v . N
DISPOSE OF OFF-SITE , � LEACH G I -C ��`��:: /-t�l \\�� ' ;����\\
/� p c,
\,,,›, ...._rf../
) \_____\_:
yY" ' J
OZ
vv v 1 III 11 IIIII��;1 \
�/ v � � � ' III ,..� _,-- 1 I
v��\� - '��w� 1 vvvvvv�����\Ilv\���w` �� \
\\ \ _ ;�`"7� �% f �\ \ \�,\\ �i�ll / WETLAND WB fl
- ~
<J.;/c<,0\\\\k \0 /
z
lir
2- N
N'' 1°7, o,:\
\
I/I\ I,
, �I
�✓- \\ e
0 +
fY
\ O
4 ,\ - � �` +\R K
1 ' ,i% ,� u_
0
ill
7\-(5' --. „........... --, ,_ / A \ �m, \ -- ' i REACH G2
/ �o �\\\r ` \\ 0 4)\ �\;j �// /�
jj// • Will
Von, j - - \
7 -./ � • Q
-7
CT Cl-rI
\/� k�o _ -
A. _ AN— � , ////// /� oe ,
_ _ - -- -
/ .. —cm _ _ - - —X--rF-X---X—X=-X=X7 /�/�
/ N _ �o e�
—Y�X� oHe - — - - _ �ary/ �/� � /////%j':____// ___/- n -;/:,:t-r;'//:',Lill'il./--741/Li/.11.7:::iii:!---
_ -
"____ �o" —°H ° — " /� / / /�/ i;•L
L �F 4` Q
o
I
, N \ 0,\,- _,_ ' .''''i(),/ #'' , //
'� �/
V�\ I O
N vv f\ / i0 //� `'. /%_ _— r� �� � I IIIII II \ \1 I I//i=1 �I�III I A0,,, oE P` n
i
--��_ z ,,,,/,
// � � , II�I I ' I//E I\\ `\ �fv--- - � wlv\\ % / /' l/ I �IIII
I / I I I
k
Z
Q
\ __ y �/ i/ /�
Li_
1 ( 1 ' ) \V ) 1 IQ ft / j ; llllll -ic; \ \ \ d
, oHF / U\ 1M. X �/ u l /N ` \ - - -�' ' \\\\ / F / / � ,7llli / 6 / I—
Q
L0 , .` - - ► '�`. y��� �\\\\\\� \\� \ ` iJJ � �r
/ Q c � \ /\ / / � I v —
i --://, / % �N �� — � -',� � � /
_...7 4 \ \ \
4- t..-- -,__- v;;I, 1 k i I i
ii-
7/ O//P,\ til
J
rn \ \\ �-.\\ / 7 z-,/, \\ \ \\�\\ -/ ,_ //�// lfrN / O
,,, 1, t /7 47' 2
WETLAND WB ��\ `i 1 �\\�\,�_ — I I /
N`. -r �\�� /�� . \�.. \\ �-`�_ -\\ III ,1� }, �+ �/ U 0
\ \ \\\\ \ \ \ ��� � , 1 I
\ \ / w J
�� ��\�- - -/ — /ice-���� ,, A,/ '/ r / w Z W J
g \ \\\ i / ��V// /
Y \ / /.� z 0 = �
/4 /\-,
. \ --'------,- .--- -,---..- -,-------,-------- t a 2 <
\ v \ \
Co:Co \ \ f� �� N/ \ PROJECT NUMBER: 100918
o LEGEND \\ \\\i, C� ��+ \ / PROJECT MANAGER: KMC
a \\ / DESIGNED: MKG
0LIMITS OF CONSERVATION \\ \\ �` .r +/+ / / DRAWN: TRS
LCE \�� REMOVE ALL EXISTING/ / \ / CHECKED: AFM
0)
EASEMENT \ \ \ \ STRUCTURES LOCH ,fib \ '
EXISTING FENCELINE — \ \ f\\ ` \' SHEET NUMBER:
6E \\ \ -\\ WITHIN THE EASNT ANDz_Hu \ \ \\\\\\\
DISOSE OF OITE\ F1
/
J ` J

c 1 r 1
TEMPORARY SEEDING SCHEDULE - FALL TEMPORARY SEEDING - LATE WINTER/EARLY SPRING TEMPORARY SEEDING - LATE WINTER/EARLY SPRING GROUND COVER SCHEDULE
Ores
SEEDING MIXTURE SEEDING MIXTURE SEEDING MIXTURE SITE AREA DESCRIPTION STABILIZATION TIME FRAME STABILIZATION TIME FRAME EXCEPTIONS
SPECIES RATE (LB/ACRE) SPECIES RATE (LB/ACRE) SPECIES RATE (LB/ACRE) PERIMETER DIKES, SWALES, DITCHES AND
SLOPES 7 DAYS NONE
• RYE (GRAIN) 120 • RYE (GRAIN) 120 • GERMAN MILLET` 40• WINTER WHEAT` 50 HIGH QUALITY WATER (HQW) ZONES 7 DAYS NONE 3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100
SEEDING DATES `IN THE PIEDMONT AND MOUNTAINS, A SMALL-STEMMED SUDANGRASS MAY Raleigh, NC 27612
• MOUNTAINS—AUG. 15 - DEC. 15 `OMIT WINTER WHEAT WHEN DURATION OF TEMPORARY COVER IS NOT TO BE SUBSTITUTED AT A RATE OF 50 LB/ACRE. SLOPES STEEPER THAN 3: I 7 DAYS IF SLOPES ARE I O' OR LESS IN LENGTH AND ARE NOT Main: 919.829.9909
STEEPER THAN 2: I , 14 DAYS ARE ALLOWED
• COASTAL PLAIN AND PIEDMONT—AUG. 15 - DEC. 30 EXTEND BEYOND JUNE. www.res.us
SEEDING DATES SLOPES 3: I OR FLATTER 14 DAYS 7 DAYS FOR SLOPES GREATER THAN 50 FEET IN LENGTH
SOIL AMENDMENTS SEEDING DATES • MOUNTAINS: MAY 15 - AUG. 15 Engineering Services Provided By:
FOLLOW SOIL TESTS OR APPLY 2,000 LB/ACRE GROUND AGRICULTURAL • MOUNTAINS (ABOVE 2,500 FT): FEB. 15 - MAY 15 • PIEDMONT: MAY I - AUG. 15 ALL OTHER AREAS WITH SLOPES FLATTER Angler Environmental, LLC
LIMESTONE • MOUNTAINS (BELOW 2,500 FT): FEB. I - MAY I • COASTAL PLAIN: APR. 15 - AUG. 15 THAN 4: I 14 DAYS NONE (EXCEPT FOR PERIMETERS AND HWQ ZONES)
License: F-1428
AND I ,000 LB/ACRE 10- 10- I 0 FERTILIZER. • PIEDMONT: JAN. I - MAY I
SEAL
• COASTAL PLAIN: DEC. I - APR. 15 SOIL AMENDMENTS
MULCh FOLLOW RECOMMENDATION OF SOIL TESTS OR APPLY 2,000 LB/ACRE Permanent Riparian Seed Mix
APPLY 4,000 LB/ACRE STRAW. ANCHOR STRAW BY TACKING WITH ASPHALT, SOIL AMENDMENTS GROUND AGRICULTURAL LIMESTONE AND 750 LB/ACRE 10-10-I 0 FERTILIZER.
NETTING, OR A MULCH ANCHORING TOOL. A DISK WITH BLADES SET NEARLY FOLLOW RECOMMENDATION OF SOIL TESTS OR APPLY 2,000 LB/ACRE Common Name Scientific Name Percent
Composition
STRAIGHT CAN BE USED AS A MULCH ANCHORING TOOL. GROUND AGRICULTURAL LIMESTONE AND 750 LB/ACRE 10-10-I 0 FERTILIZER. MULCh
APPLY 4,000 LB/ACRE STRAW. ANCHOR STRAW BY TACKING WITH ASPHALT, Virginia Wildrye Elymus virgmicus 25%
MAINTENANCE MULCh NETTING, OR A MULCH ANCHORING TOOL. A DISK WITH BLADES SET NEARLY Indian Grass Sorghastrum nutans 25%
REPAIR AND REFERTILIZE DAMAGED AREAS IMMEDIATELY. TOPDRESS WITH 50 APPLY 4,000 LB/ACRE STRAW. ANCHOR STRAW BY TACKING WITH ASPHALT, STRAIGHT CAN BE USED AS A MULCH ANCHORING TOOL. Little Blue Stem Schizachyrium scoparium I0%
LB/ACRE OF NITROGEN IN MARCh. IF IT IS NECESSARY TO EXTEND TEMPORARY NETTING, OR A MULCH ANCHORING TOOL. A DISK WITH BLADES SET NEARLY Soft Rush Juncus effusus I0%
COVER BEYOND JUNE 15, OVERSEED WITH 50 LB/ACRE KOBE (PIEDMONT AND STRAIGHT CAN BE USED AS A MULCH ANCHORING TOOL. MAINTENANCE Blackeyed susan Rudbeckia hirta 10%
COASTAL PLAIN) OR KOREAN (MOUNTAINS) WINTER WHEAT IN LATE FEBRUARY REFERTILIZE IF GROWTH IS NOT FULLY ADEQUATE. RESEED, REFERTILIZE AND Deertongue achanthehum clandestmum 10%
OR MAINTENANCE MULCH IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING EROSION OR OTHER DAMAGE. Common Milkweed Asclepias syriaca 5%
EARLY MARCh. RE-FERTILIZE IF GROWTH IS NOT FULLY ADEQUATE. RESEED, RE-FERTILIZE AND
MULCH IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING EROSION OR OTHER DAMAGE. Showy Goldenrod Solidago erecta 5%
EROSION CONTROL:
GENERAL NOTES CONSTRUCTION NOTES: STREAM CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE:
I . REVIEW CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE FOR ADDITIONAL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES. ALL PERMANENT AND TEMPORARY I . INSTALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AS DESCRIBED IN THE EROSION CONTROL PLAN AND NOTES. I . CONDUCT PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING INCLUDING OWNER, ENGINEER, ASSOCIATED CONTRACTORS,
EROSION CONTROL STRUCTURES (I.E ROCK CHECK DAMS, SILT FENCE AND TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES) EROSION CONTROL MEASURES MAY BE PHASED-IN TO THOSE AREAS OF THE PROJECT CURRENTLY AND OTHER AFFECTED PARTIES.
SMALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION OF THE LAND-DISTURBING ACTIVITY. BEING WORKED ON. THE CONTRACTOR MAY MODIFY OR RELOCATE EROSION CONTROL MEASURES TO
MAKE ADJUSTMENTS FOR UNFORESEEN FIELD CONDITIONS SO LONG AS PROPER CONSTRUCTION IS 2. OBTAIN EROSION CONTROL PERMIT FROM COUNTY OFFICE AND ALL OTHER APPROVALS NECESSARY
2. CONSTRUCTION ACCESS AREAS SHOWN ARE TO GUIDE CONTRACTOR DURING CONSTRUCTION. CONTRACTOR SMALL MAINTAINED TO ENSURE THE INTEGRITY AND USEFULNESS OF THE PROPOSED MEASURES. ALL TO BEGIN AND COMPLETE THE PROJECT.
COORDINATE WITH ENGINEER IF ALTERNATIVE CONSTRUCTION ACCESS ROUTES WILL IMPROVE EFFICIENCY OF DISTURBED AREAS ALONG CHANNEL BANKS SMALL BE STABILIZED WITH TEMPORARY SEED AND MULCh
CONSTRUCTION. AT THE END OF EACH DAY. 3. CONTRACTOR IS FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING ALL APPROPRIATE PARTIES AND ASSURING
THAT UTILITIES ARE LOCATED PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION. CALL NC 8 I I FOR
3. ALL AREAS DISTURBED BY THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE SEEDED PER THE SPECIFICATIONS IN THE SEEDING SCHEDULE 2. EXISTING WETLANDS CANNOT BE ENCROACHED UPON UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES IF NOT APPROVED UTILITY LOCATING SERVICES 48 HOURS PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORK. CONTRACTOR
SHOWN ON THIS SKEET. AS DESIGNATED IMPACT AREAS. HIGH VISIBILITY FENCING MUST BE PLACED AROUND ALL EXISTING SMALL VERIFY LOCATION AND DEPTH OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.
WETLANDS THAT ARE LOCATED ADJACENT TO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES AND/OR ARE LOCATED WITHIN
4. CONTRACTOR TO PERFORM SOIL TESTING TO DETERMINE VEGETATIVE VIABILITY PRIOR TO LAND DISTURBANCE. THE PROPOSED CONSERVATION EASEMENT. 4. PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, STABILIZED GRAVEL ENTRANCE/EXIT AND ROUTES OF INGRESS AND EGRESS I-
SMALL BE ESTABLISHED AS SHOWN ON THE PLANS AND DETAILS. 0 N
5. MULCH: APPLY 2 TONS/ACRE GRAIN STRAW AND ANCHOR STRAW ON ALL OTHER DISTURBED AREAS. 3. STOCKPILE AREAS AND TEMPORARY STREAM CROSSINGS MAY BE RELOCATED OR ADDED UPON THE N
APPROVAL OF THE ENGINEER. SILT FENCING MUST BE INSTALLED AROUND ALL STOCKPILE AREAS. 5. INSTALL TEMPORARY STREAM CROSSINGS AS SHOWN ON PLANS. TEMPORARY STREAM CROSSINGS coO `N
G. EROSION CONTROL: SHOULD ONLY BE INSTALLED WHEN NECESSARY. 0 co
A. INSTALL PERMANENT VEGETATIVE COVER AND THE LONG-TERM EROSION PROTECTION MEASURES OR STRUCTURES AS 4. THE WORK TO RESHAPE THE CHANNEL BANKS WILL BE PERFORMED USING EQUIPMENT WORKING FROM
DIRECTED BY ENGINEER UPON CONSTRUCTION COMPLETION. APPROPRIATE EROSION CONTROL MEASURES MUST BE THE TOP OF THE EXISTING STREAM BANK, WHERE POSSIBLE. G. PREPARE STAGING AND STOCKPILING AREAS IN LOCATIONS AS SHOWN ON THE CONSTRUCTION PLANS Z
PLACED BETWEEN THE DISTURBED AREA AND AFFECTED WATERWAY AND MAINTAINED UNTIL PERMANENTLY VEGETATED. OR AS APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER. ANY EXCESS SPOIL FROM STREAM CONSTRUCTION SMALL BE 0
H
5. CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WILL NOT BE PLACED WITHIN THE ACTIVE CHANNEL TO PERFORM WORK IF USED TO CONSTRUCT CHANNEL PLUGS AS SHOWN ON PLANS. 0
B. PROVIDE FOR HANDLING THE INCREASED RUNOFF CAUSED BY CHANGED SOIL AND SURFACE CONDITIONS. USE POSSIBLE. PLATFORMS SHOULD BE USED TO CROSS CHANNEL WHERE ACCESS IS NOT POSSIBLE. D
EFFECTIVE MEANS TO CONSERVE EXISTING ON-SITE SOIL CONDITIONS. 7. CONTRACTOR TO PERFORM SOIL TESTING TO DETERMINE VEGETATIVE VIABILITY PRIOR TO LAND I-
G. NO MORE CHANNEL SMALL BE DISTURBED THAN CAN BE STABILIZED BY THE END OF THE WORK DAY OR DISTURBANCE. cn
Z
C. DURING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES, ALL DISTURBED AREAS SMALL BE STABILIZED AT THE END OF EACH WORKING PRIOR TO RESTORING FLOW TO NEWLY CONSTRUCTED CHANNEL SEGMENTS. 0
DAY. USE TEMPORARY PLANT COVER, MULCHING, AND/OR STRUCTURES TO CONTROL RUNOFF AND PROTECT AREAS 8. ALL PROPOSED CHANNELS AND TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT CROSSINGS SMALL BE CONSTRUCTED IN 0
SUBJECT TO EROSION DURING CONSTRUCTION. 7. CONTRACTOR SMALL REMOVE ALL TEMPORARY CONTROL DEVICES ONCE CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETE A DRY CONDITION VIA OFFLINE CONSTRUCTION WHERE POSSIBLE. PUMP AROUND OPERATIONS fl
AND THE SITE IS STABILIZED. A MAXIMUM OF 200 LINEAR FEET OF STREAM MAY BE DISTURBED AT SHOULD BE LIMITED TO AREAS WHERE THE EXISTING AND PROPOSED CHANNEL ALIGNMENTS OVERLAP. 0
U_
D. ALL SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROLS ARE TO BE INSPECTED AT LEAST ONCE EVERY SEVEN CALENDAR DAYS AND ANY ONE TIME. STABILIZE STREAM BANKS IMMEDIATELY AFTER GRADING. I—
AFTER ANY STORM EVENT OF GREATER THAN 0.5 INCHES OF PRECIPITATION DURING ANY 24-HOUR PERIOD. 9. INSTALL PUMP AROUND APPARATUS AND IMPERVIOUS DIKES AT UPSTREAM END OF PROJECT. AS 0
MAINTENANCE OF SEDIMENT TRAPPING STRUCTURES SHALL BE PERFORMED AS NECESSARY PER THESE INSPECTIONS. 8. ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL MUST BE PLACED WITHIN DESIGNATED STOCKPILE AREAS. CONSTRUCTION PROGRESSES, MOVE PUMP AROUND OPERATION DOWNSTREAM. Z
SILT FENCING SMALL BE INSTALLED AS SHOWN ON PLANS. oC }
9. AT LOCATIONS IN WHICH THE EXISTING CHANNEL IS BEING MAINTAINED, TEMPORARY PUMP AROUND I O. CONSTRUCT UPSTREAM PORTION OF THE CHANNEL FIRST, WORKING IN AN UPSTREAM TO 0 Ct
E. STABILIZATION MEASURES SHALL BE INITIATED AT THE END OF EACH DAY IN PORTIONS OF THE SITE WHERE DAMS AND BYPASS PUMPING WILL BE USED TO DE-WATER THE WORK AREA AS DESCRIBED IN THE DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER. Q
Z w Z
CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES HAVE TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLY CEASED. GROUNDCOVER MUST BE ESTABLISHED DETAILS. O Q -
PER THE "GROUND COVER SCHEDULE" SHOWN ON THIS SKEET IN AREAS WHERE CONSTRUCTION HAS TEMPORARILY I I I . ROUGH GRADING OF CHANNEL SMALL BE PERFORMED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF STRUCTURES. —
CEASED. ALL AREAS WHERE FINAL GRADE HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED SMALL BE PERMANENTLY STABILIZED WITHIN 2 I O. WHEN THE PROPOSED CHANNEL HAS BEEN SUFFICIENTLY STABILIZED TO PREVENT EROSION, ALL 5 J IJJ
CALENDAR DAYS. TEMPORARY PUMP AROUND DAMS WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE ACTIVE STREAM CHANNEL AND 12. INSTALL STRUCTURES AS SHOWN ON PLANS AND DETAILS. PRIOR TO FINE GRADING, OBTAIN CC CC rI
a
NORMAL FLOW RESTORED. ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT SMALL BE DISPOSED OF IN DESIGNATED SPOILS APPROVAL OF THE ENGINEER ON INSTALLATION OF STRUCTURES.
F. CONTRACTOR MUST TAKE THE NECESSARY ACTION INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO TIRE WASHING STATIONS AT EACh AREAS PRIOR TO REMOVAL OF TEMPORARY PUMP AROUND DAM.
ACCESS POINT TO MINIMIZE THE TRACKING OF MUD ONTO THE PAVED ROADWAY FROM CONSTRUCTION AREAS. 13. UPON COMPLETION OF FINE GRADING, INSTALL STREAM BANK STABILIZATION INCLUDING, EROSION
DAILY REMOVAL OF MUD/SOIL MAY BE REQUIRED. I I . AT LOCATIONS IN WHICH LOG STRUCTURES, ROCK STRUCTURES, BOULDER TOE STABILIZATION, AND CONTROL MATTING OR SOD MATS ALONG CHANNEL BANKS. Q
LOG TOE STABILIZATION ARE CALLED FOR ON THE PLANS, TEMPORARY COFFER DAMS AND BYPASS Z
G. ALL EROSION CONTROL DEVICES SHALL BE PROPERLY MAINTAINED DURING ALL PHASES OF CONSTRUCTION UNTIL THE PUMPING WILL BE USED TO DE-WATER THE WORK AREA, EXCEPT AT LOCATIONS IN WHICH THE NORMAL 14. FILL AND STABILIZE ABANDONED SEGMENTS OF THE EXISTING CHANNEL PER DIRECTION OF THE
COMPLETION OF ALL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES AND ALL DISTURBED AREAS HAVE BEEN STABILIZED. ADDITIONAL FLOW CAN BE DIVERTED AROUND THE WORK AREA WITH THE USE OF AN EXISTING CHANNEL. WHEN ENGINEER. W J
CONTROL DEVICES MAY BE REQUIRED DURING CONSTRUCTION IN ORDER TO CONTROL EROSION AND/OR OFF SITE THE TOE HAS BEEN SUFFICIENTLY STABILIZED TO RESTRAIN EROSION ALL TEMPORARY COFFER DAMS H 0
cal SEDIMENTATION. CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL TEMPORARY CONTROL DEVICES ONCE CONSTRUCTION IS WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE ACTIVE STREAM CHANNEL AND NORMAL FLOW RESTORED. 15. ALL IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND PUMPING APPARATUS SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE STREAM AT THE END (n
COMPLETE AND THE SITE IS STABILIZED. ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT SMALL BE DISPOSED OF IN DESIGNATED SPOILS AREA PRIOR TO REMOVAL OF EACH DAY TO RESTORE NORMAL FLOW BACK TO THE CHANNEL UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED BY
W
co
cci OF TEMPORARY COFFER DAM. THE ENGINEER. WITH APPROVAL, A PUMP AROUND MAY BE ALLOWED TO RUN CONTINUOUSLY IF THERE Z U O
h. EROSION CONTROL MATTING SMALL BE INSTALLED ALONG CONSTRUCTED CHANNEL BANKS FROM APPROXIMATELY 2.0' IS NO FORECAST FOR RAIN OVERNIGHT, AND/OR THE PUMP APPARATUS IS MAINTAINED AND = Z
o TO 3.0' ABOVE TOP OF BANK DOWN TO CHANNEL TOE. 12. MATERIAL THAT IS REMOVED FROM THE STREAM WILL BE RE-DEPOSITED OUTSIDE OF THE ACTIVE MONITORED CONTINUOUSLY. H
in CHANNEL AND ITS FLOODPLAIN. Q
a I. SILT FENCING TO BE INSTALLED AROUND INDICATED STOCKPILE AREAS TO PREVENT LOSS OF SEDIMENT. STOCKPILE I G. DURING STREAM CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES, THE WORK AREA SMALL BE STABILIZED IMMEDIATELY
I AREAS MAY BE RELOCATED UPON APPROVAL FROM ENGINEER. 13. TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT STABILIZATION OF ALL DISTURBED GRASSED AREAS AT THE TOP OF THE AFTER GRADING AND AT THE END OF EACH WORKING DAY. O
CHANNEL BANKS WILL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SEEDING AND MULCHING SPECIFICATION AS H Z H
co J. ASPHALT TACKIFIER SMALL NOT BE USED. SHOWN ON PLANS. I7. INSTALL LIVE STAKE, BARE ROOT, AND CONTAINERIZED PLANTINGS AS SPECIFIED ON PLANTING PLANS. Z
WI
J H
0
i K. WETLANDS/STREAMS CANNOT BE ENCROACHED UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES IF NOT APPROVED AS DESIGNATED 14. RE-FERTILIZE AND RE-SEED DISTURBED AREAS IF NECESSARY. J Z 0
col IMPACT AREAS.
o 15. CONTRACTOR SMALL COMPLETE SELF INSPECTIONS AND MONITORING AS OUTLINED IN THE > Z
o L. ACTIVITIES MUST AVOID DISTURBANCE OF WOODY RIPARIAN VEGETATION WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA TO THE SELF-INSPECTION AND SELF-MONITORING COMBINED FORM LOCATED AT: > O 0
c5- GREATEST EXTENT PRACTICABLE. REMOVAL OF VEGETATION MUST BE LIMITED TO ONLY THAT NECESSARY FOR https://decl.nc.gov/about/divisions/energy-mineral-land-resources/erosion-sediment-control/forms. THIS > 0
o CONSTRUCTION OF THE CHANNEL. FORM SHOULD BE UP TO DATE AND AVAILABLE AT THE JOB SITE AT ALL TIMES. W O
J
o M. NO ONSITE BURIAL OF VEGETATION OR CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS WILL BE PERMITTED. VEGETATIVE DEBRIS SMALL BE W Z W Ed r
Tz STOCKPILED AND DISPOSED OF ONSITE PER DIRECTION OF ENGINEER. Z O I
1- LL.I
H
N. ANY GRADING BEYOND THE CONSTRUCTION LIMITS SHOWN ON THE PLAN IS A VIOLATION OF THE NORTH CAROLINA U H Z
o EROSION CONTROL ORDINANCE, AND IS SUBJECT TO A FINE. W 5—
U G
z O. PLEASE REFERENCE PLAN SKEET DETAILS AND NCDENR STANDARDS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF EROSION CONTROL CC CC
CC Q
o MEASURES.
a)
0
a P. THE CONTRACTOR SMALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES RELATED TO THE PROJECT NUMBER: 100918
CONSTRUCTION SITE. PROJECT MANAGER: KMC
o
DESIGNED: MKG
o Q. THE LOCATIONS OF SOME EROSION CONTROL MEASURES MAY HAVE TO BE ALTERED FROM THOSE SHOWN ON THE DRAWN: TRS
PLANS IF DRAINAGE PATTERNS CHANGE DURING CONSTRUCTION. CHECKED: AFM
01
u)
a) R. IF IT IS DETERMINED DURING THE COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION THAT SIGNIFICANT SEDIMENT IS LEAVING THE SITE SHEET NUMBER:
L (DESPITE THE PROPER IMPLEMENTATION AND MAINTENANCE OF EROSION CONTROL MEASURES), THE PERSON
Lii RESPONSIBLE FOR THE LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITY IS OBLIGATED TO TAKE ADDITIONAL PROTECTIVE ACTION.
z
ECI
J
L_
J \ 1

c 1 r
WHEN AND WHERE TO USE IT
SILT FENCE IS APPLICABLE IN AREAS: FLOW
I .25 LB./LINEAR FT. STEEL POSTS
WHERE THE MAXIMUM SHEET OK OVERLAND FLOW PATH LENGTH TO THE FENCE IS I 00 FEET. g MIDDLE LAYERI' -]
TOP LAYER
WHERE THE MAXIMUM SLOPE STEEPNESS (NORMAL[PERPENDICULAR] TO FENCE LINE) IS 2H: I V. EXTRA STRENGTH BOTTOM LAYERPres
THAT DO NOT RECEIVE CONCENTRATED FLOWS GREATER THAN 0.5 CFS. FILTER FABRIC c,/4
' l
\ ,,,,
T r�ioni***ainii***iwor*************i******rri 1 l EARTH SURFACE
DO NOT PLACE SILT FENCE ACROSS CHANNELS OR USE IT AS A VELOCITY CONTROL BMP. I ` ` TES 1 ......................... 1 I 1
�N A ��iiiiiiiir� i � i ��iiii�ii.1001�.�r�J A
CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS: �� Oq `��iiii.011010�16�.�00.�01�0��.01, \//\iA\-'\ /��i\\��\\%�i\j� 302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
I . USE A SYNTHETIC FILTER FABRIC OF AT LEAST 95% BY WEIGHT OF POLYOLEFINS OK POLYESTER, WHICH IS \ ,9e'Pi I Raleigh, NC 27605
CERTIFIED BY THE MANUFACTURER OR SUPPLIER AS CONFORMING TO THE REQUIREMENTS IN ASTM D 646 I I . c B TRENCH 0.25' DEEP
SYNTHETIC FILTER FABRIC SHOULD CONTAIN ULTRAVIOLET RAY INHIBITORS AND STABILIZERS TO PROVIDE A \\\\\` :\ \ „\ HEAVY DUTY PLASTIC TIE ONLY WHEN PLACED ON Main: 919.829.9909
MINIMUM OF 6 MONTHS OF EXPECTED USABLE CONSTRUCTION LIFE AT A TEMPERATURE RANGE OF 0°TO 120° / FOR STEEL POSTS PLAN VIEW ENDS OF BAGS IN EARTH SURFACE WWW.res.us
BACKFILL TRENCH WITH \ ` \ ADJACENT ROWS BUTTED
F. COMPACTED EARTH \_ . \
2. ENSURE THAT POSTS FOR SEDIMENT FENCES ARE I .33 LB/LINEAR FT STEEL WITH A MINIMUM LENGTH SLIGHTLY TOGETHER
OF 5 FEET. SEE NOTE LOWEST POINT Engineering Services Provided By:
MAKE SURE THAT STEEL POSTS HAVE PROJECTIONS TO FACILITATE FASTENING THE FABRIC. `)'CFF \\/
GROUND LEVEL g
` SECTION B B An ler Environmental, LLC
CONSTRUCTION:
License: F-1428
I I . CONSTRUCT THE SEDIMENT BARRIER OF EXTRA STRENGTH SYNTHETIC FILTER FABRICS. \ \ SEAL
2. ENSURE THAT THE HEIGHT OF THE SEDIMENT FENCE DOES NOT EXCEED 24 INCHES ABOVE THE GROUND / BURY FABRIC
SURFACE. (HIGHER FENCES MAY IMPOUND VOLUMES OF WATER SUFFICIENT TO CAUSE FAILURE OF THE USE EITHER FLAT BOTTOM \ / /
STRUCTURE.) OR V BOTTOM TRENCH +�. , .\ •\\ /�/.-.i ,\\/ EARTH SURFACE
3. CONSTRUCT THE FILTER FABRIC FROM A CONTINUOUS ROLL CUT TO THE LENGTH OF THE BARRIER TO AVOID SHOWN BELOW SECTION A-A
JOINTS. WHEN JOINTS ARE NECESSARY, SECURELY FASTEN THE FILTER CLOTH ONLY AT A SUPPORT POST WITH 4
FEET MINIMUM OVERLAP TO THE NEXT POST. SILT FENCE INSTALLATION SANDBAG BARRIERS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED OF THREE LAYERS OF SANDBAGS.
4. EXTRA STRENGTH FILTER FABRIC WITH 6 FEET POST SPACING DOES NOT REQUIRE WIRE MESH SUPPORT FENCE. THE BOTTOM LAYER SHALL CONSIST OF 3 ROWS OF BAGS, THE MIDDLE LAYER
SECURELY FASTEN THE FILTER FABRIC DIRECTLY TO POSTS. WIRE OR PLASTIC ZIP TIES SHOULD HAVE MINIMUM SHALL CONSIST OF 2 ROWS OF BAGS AND THE TOP LAYER SHALL CONSIST OF I
50 POUND TENSILE STRENGTH. NOTE: END OF DIKE AT GROUND LEVEL TO BE ROW OF BAGS. THE RECOMMENDED DIMENSION OF A FILLED SANDBAG SHALL BE
5. EXCAVATE A TRENCH APPROXIMATELY 4 INCHES WIDE AND 8 INCHES DEEP ALONG THE PROPOSED LINE OF HIGHER THAN THE LOWEST POINT OF FLOW CHECK. APPROXIMATELY 0.5 FT X 0.5 FT X I.5 FT.
POSTS AND UPSLOPE FROM THE BARRIER. FILTER FABRIC FILTER FABRIC SUFFICIENT SANDBAGS ARE TO BE PLACED TO
6. PLACE 12 INCHES OF THE FABRIC ALONG THE BOTTOM AND SIDE OF THE TRENCH. PREVENT SCOURING.
7. BACKFILL THE TRENCH WITH SOIL PLACED OVER THE FILTER FABRIC AND COMPACT. THOROUGH COMPACTION COMPACTED v COMPACTED ;I-
OF THE BACKFILL IS CRITICAL TO SILT FENCE PERFORMANCE. EARTH NO EARTH NO
8. DO NOT ATTACH FILTER FABRIC TO EXISTING TREES. �
RUNOFF c0 RUNOFF c0
MAINTENANCE: SANDBAG IMPERVIOUS DIKE
co ! NTS
INSPECT SEDIMENT FENCES AT LEAST ONCE A WEEK AND AFTER EACH RAINFALL. MAKE ANY REQUIRED REPAIRS W H H
IMMEDIATELY. N N
SHOULD THE FABRIC OF A SEDIMENT FENCE COLLAPSE, TEAR, DECOMPOSE OR BECOME INEFFECTIVE, REPLACE IT WA-
lli V�
PROMPTLY. �J
FILTER
REMOVE SEDIMENT DEPOSITS AS NECESSARY TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE STORAGE VOLUME FOR THE NEXT RAIN AND TO FABRIC 4 FILTER FABRIC
REDUCE PRESSURE ON THE FENCE. TAKE CARE TO AVOID UNDERMINING THE FENCE DURING CLEANOUT. IIIIIII
REMOVE ALL FENCING MATERIALS AND UNSTABLE SEDIMENT DEPOSITS AND BRING THE AREA TO GRADE AND STABILIZE FLAT-BOTTOM TRENCH DETAIL V SHAPED TRENCH DETAIL IIIIIII
IIIIII NOTES:
IT AFTER THE CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA HAS BEEN PROPERLY STABILIZED.
I I. EXCAVATION SHALL BE PERFORMED ONLY IN DRY AND/OR ISOLATED SECTIONS OF CHANNEL.
#w-- 2. IMPERVIOUS DIKES SHOULD BE USED TO ISOLATE WORK AREAS FROM STREAM FLOW.
CPO o•'0 COARSE AGGREGATE 3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT DISTURB MORE AREA THAN CAN BE STABILIZED IN ONE
- G .4.el STONE SIZE = 2"-3" WORKING DAY. A MAXIMUM OF 200 FEET MAY BE DISTURBED AT ANY ONE TIME.
t) /- 4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DETERMINING PUMP SIZE SUFFICIENT TO
� � � PUMP BASE FLOW.
TEMPORARY SILT FENCE ',o .'o �-‘ 5. DIKE MUST BE CONSTRUCTED OF NON-ERODIBLE MATERIALS SUCH AS SANDBAGS.
I0•c_.,/ �0uc ' SEQUENCE OF CONSTRUCTION:
NTS o 0 0 0 0 �/ W
II��0. ��� �-�����•-: I I. INSTALL STILLING BASIN AND STABILIZED OUTFALL USING CLASS A RIP RAP AT THE Q N
� �t�I�v�O O O O•• DOWNSTREAM END OF THE DESIGNATED PROJECT WORKING AREA. 0 0
40 0000U,L1 , ��•.. .��� . 2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL THE PUMP AROUND PUMP AND THE TEMPORARY PIPING 0
41 THAT WILL CONVEY THE BASE FLOW FROM UPSTREAM OF THE WORK AREA TO THE J C\1
��;��.O O = O� STABILIZED OUTFACE. 0_ co
�����<' � 3. INSTALL UPSTREAM IMPERVIOUS DIKE AND BEGIN PUMPING OPERATIONS FOR STREAM
SC' 40�o. .��! DIVERSION. Z
2"x 2"X 2'WOODEN �j �tw�� ar �►
STAKE ON 2'CENTERS NOTES: N �••o• ��.� � 4. INSTALL THE DOWNSTREAM IMPERVIOUS DIKE AND DEWATERING PUMPING APPARATUS IF 0
�.���.� NEEDED TO DEWATER THE ENTRAPPED AREA. THE PUMP AND HOSE FOR THIS PURPOSE I-
EXISTING CULVERT PIPE; •,w, i1 5
GRADE I I. EROSION CONTROL WATTLES OK COIR LOGS/WATTLES AS NEEDED ',It- �P�� Q\,PN z SHALL BE OF SUFFICIENT SIZE TO DEWATER THE WORK AREA. THIS WATER WILL ALSO BE C.)
MAY BE USED IN PLACE OF SILT FENCE. PUMPED TO AN OUTFALL STABILIZED WITH CLASS A RIP RAP.
SLOPE 2. INSTLL A MINIMUM OF 2 UPSLOPE STAKES AND 4 cL� 5. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL EXCAVATE ANY ACCUMULATED SILT AND DEWATER BEFORE
7,\/\am / � /�j DOWNSLOPE STAKES AT AN ANGLE TO WEDGE WATTLE REMOVAL OF THE IMPERVIOUS DIKE. WHEN DEWATERING AREA, ALL DIRTY WATER MUST BE 1-
� PUMPED THROUGH A SILT BAG. REMOVE IMPERVIOUS DIKES, PUMPS, AND TEMPORARY\\\\\\ \\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\�\77\\\7fC/ \ \\ \ \ IN PLACE. FLEXIBLE HOSE/PIPING STARTING WITH THE DOWNSTREAM DIKE FIRST. 0
�i�/��\\�\\�\\�j\\����������j\\�\/ / \\\ \\\j PURPOSE: 6. ONCE THE WORKING AREA IS COMPLETED, REMOVE ALL RIP RAP AND IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND 0
• STABILIZE DISTURBED AREAS WITH SEED AND MULCH.
� STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES SHOULD BE USED AT ALL POINTS WHERE TRAFFIC WILL BE LEAVING A 7. ALL WORK IN CHANNEL MUST BE COMPLETED BEFORE REMOVING IMPERVIOUS DIKE. 0
MINIMUM 9" EROSION INSTALL WATTLE IN CONSTRUCTION SITE AND MOVING DIRECTLY ONTO A PUBLIC ROAD. INSTALL A CULVERT PIPE ACROSS THE LL
CONTROL COIR WATTLE/LOG 2"TO 3"TRENCH ENTRANCE WHEN NEEDED TO PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE. I-
0
PROFILE VIEW EROSION CONTROL WATTLE CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS: Z
I . CLEAR THE ENTRANCE AND EXIT AREA OF ALL VEGETATION, ROOTS, AND OTHER OBJECTIONABLE MATERIAL AND CE 0 >-
NTS PROPERLY GRADE IT. Ct
2. PLACE THE GRAVEL TO THE SPECIFIC GRADE AND DIMENSIONS SHOWN ON THE DETAIL, AND SMOOTH IT. FLOW ii 0 Z
3. PROVIDE DRAINAGE TO CARRY WATER TO A SEDIMENT TRAP OR OTHER SUITABLE OUTLET. Z W
4. USE GEOTEXTILE FABRICS BECAUSE THEY IMPROVE STABILITY OF THE FOUNDATION IN LOCATIONS SUBJECT TO 0 (n 2_
SEEPAGE OR HIGH WATER TABLE. W J
INTAKE HOSE W
CLASS A 5 W -
MAINTENANCE: STONE CC CC Q_
PUMP AROUND
MAINTAIN THE GRAVEL PAD IN A CONDITION TO PREVENT MUD OR SEDIMENT FROM LEAVING THE CONSTRUCTION SITE. PUMP
THIS MAY REQUIRE PERIODIC TOP DRESSING WITH 2-INCH STONE. AFTER EACH RAINFALL, INSPECT ANY STRUCTURE Ara
USED TO TRAP SEDIMENT AND CLEAN IT OUT AS NECESSARY. IMMEDIATELY REMOVE ALL OBJECTIONABLE MATERIALS WORK r i
INSTALLATION NOTES:
PUMP SPILLED, WASHED, OR TRACKED ONTO PUBLIC ROADWAYS, OR AIRFIELD PAVEMENTS. DE-WATIMG AREA `=` Z
SITE PREPARATION **%� W
TEMPORARY GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE IMPERVIOUS
O
I I . GRADE AND COMPACT AREA.
E 2. REMOVE ALL ROCKS, CLODS, VEGETATION, AND OBSTRUCTIONS SO THAT MATTING WILL NTS DIKE _■ Cr)
LL HAVE DIRECT CONTACT WITH THE SOIL. , IMPERVIOUS DIKE Z
3. PREPARE SEEDBED BY LOOSENING 3 TO 4 INCHES OF TOPSOIL ABOVE FINAL GRADE. ���• U
m 4. TEST SOILS FOR ANY NUTRIENT DEFICIENCIES AND SUBMIT SOIL TEST RESULTS TO THE
QENGINEER. APPLY ANY TREATMENT SUCH AS LIME OR FERTILIZERS TO THE SOIL IF NEEDED. FLOW ���� - 1
W SEEDING g� Q
# 5 WASHED STONE ,�'4* * DISCHARGE HOSE '^
I . SEE PLANTING SHEETS FOR SEEDING REQUIREMENTS. "�j"` �*�� CLASS A _ Cr)
2. APPLY SEED TO SOIL BEFORE PLACING MATTING. • 'i ''I •I STONE O J
NOTES: .j'�j'�j'�j'�j'�j'�j'�j'�j'�kj'�j'� i. �I Z
ooti.000.i.roo �, • �I �_
VE
Q INSTALLATION -STREAM BANK ;�w,•�• •�h iY Q�r� �, NOTE: HOSE SHOULD BE .. Q
0KEY IN MATTING I. CONSTRUCT DAM ACCORDING TO NCDENR �1 • • • w �1�
EROSION CONTROL MANUAL A ��•� � � �'�� A dim^- / KEPT OUTSIDE OF WORK
H I I . SEE GRADING NOTES ON ELAN AND PROFILE SHEETS AND DETAIL SHEETS FOR V �7��Y��7��`f�Y- SILT BAG ,���� AREA J
o- o- % I- W 2. RIPRAP SHALL BE CLASS �� • • • • ♦ r�
INFORMATION REGARDING WHAT AREAS ARE TO RECEIVE COIRci) MATTING. ,± • • �� LOCATION J
3. PLACE ROCK DAM AS SHOWN ON PLANS. •_•_• • -.-•-.
2. OVERLAP ADJACENT MATS 6" (IN DIRECTION PARALLEL TO FLOW) AND ANCHOR EVERY 12" Z 0
00� EXTEND CLASS B RIP RAP ROCK APRON 2 FEET ,:,I„1„1„1„1„1Iei D
ACROSS THE OVERLAP. THE UPSTREAM MAT SHOULD BE PLACED OVER THE DOWNSTREAM „1. -!�. -..- -• -
o MAT. DOWNSTREAM FROM TOE OF ROCK DAM 0
o I.0'THICK CLASS
3. EDGES SHOULD BE SHINGLED AWAY FROM THE FLOW OF WATER. B ROCK APRON STABILIZED OUTFACE
(3 4. LAY MAT LOOSE TO ALLOW CONTACT WITH SOIL. DO NOT STRETCH TIGHT. B CLASS A STONE FILTER FABRIC >_ 0
0 5. ANCHOR MAT USING BIODEGRADABLE STAKES. --e
0 6. EXTEND MAT 2 TO 3 FEET EAST TOP OF BANK. 2 0 PLAN W J
Q 7. PLACE ADJACENT ROLLS IN THE ANCHOR TRENCH WITH A MINIMUM OF 4" OVERLAP. MIN. J
U SECURE WITH BIODEGRADABLE STAKES, BACKFILL ANCHOR TRENCH, AND COMPACT SOIL. STAKE MATTING JUST \• • W di8. STAKE AT 12" INTERVALS ALONG OVERLAP. ABOVE CHANNEL TOE �\ DISCHARGE Z W J
9. IF MORE THAN ROLL IS REQUIRED TO COVER THE CHANNEL FROM THE TOP OF BANK DOWN AND BACKFILL W/ W(SPILLWAY) EXISTING HOSE Q O = L=
> TO THE TOE, THEN OVERLAP MATTING BY A MINIMUM OF I'. RIFFLE MATERIAL 2' MIN. MIN. 2/3 STREAM WIDTH FILTER FABRIC GROUND / 1 o
�� SPILLWAY CREST I' MIN OF# 5 0 I- Z
o WASHED STONE
_ STABILIZED OUTFACE I 15'TO 20' I W
6" RIFFLE .-�- .-�- CLASS A STONE
z MATERIAL CLASS B RIP RAP w; .�,� , 0=
_ BANKFUL
N "'i • • • •��_,. FLOW ,- - f•�•�•�•�• •• i\i\\\/\ _� � , - \i/
o '•�•�•�•�•` m m .• • • • • • \�\\ i\\\ \ i\i' \i\\�\\/
I .0'THICK CLASS7.01.01.01.01.01.04 / \ \ / \ \/ ' \ /\/
a EROSION CONTROL MATTING MUST MEET OR EXCEED THE ��.�.�.�.�...� o in o /\\/,\�\\\/\//\�\\ , \\ \/
FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS: B ROCK APRON .* b /\j \ //\\ \\//\/\\, \ /\\ PROJECT NUMBER: 100918
• • • • • 1:. -- .in 111 •/ • • • • PROJECT MANAGER: KMC
o .�0iO_i.00�•LC T•�_T!� � �
• I00% COCONUT FIBER COIR TWINE WOVEN INTO A •�-•�-•�-•�-•�-•�-•� �� • ��'� '�`'���-��
a (COIR) `� 8" OF CLASS A DESIGNED: MKG
o HIGH STRENGTH MATRIX. STONE
• THICKNESS -0.35 IN. MINIMUM. COI R MATTI NG CUTOFF TRENCH) '
DRAWN: TRS
SHEAR STRESS- 5 LBS/SQFT FILTER FABRIC CLASS B FILTER FABRIC EXISTING CHECKED: AFM
0) • FLOW VELOCITY- OBSERVED 16 FT/SEC NTS RIP RAP CHANNEL
cc • WEIGHT- 29 OZ/SY SECTION B B SECTION A-A SILT BAG PROFILE SHEET NUMBER:
L • OPEN AREA - 38%
di • SLOPES- UP TO A MAXIMUM OF I : I
Q
z TEMPORARY ROCK CHECK DAM PUMP AROUND $ DEWATERING DETAIL Dl
-J
J
L_
NTS NTS
J \ I

c" 1 r
STREAM REAM C H ANNEL3' MAXIMUM
BANK HEIGHT ,II
0 res
14II IMIII 1
,, ,
verl
z
_____ 1 "' II' I 11I / LIVE STAKES
iI'ii+ i 46 II � SURFACE FLOW
4" CEDAR POST
302 Jefferson Street,
treet, Suite
e 110__�\ � / I � / I I I Y+ 111 hIDIVERSION /\ \ / / /
- / IIII I \ \ \ / \II 6 IInII' Raleigh, NC 27605
� \ \ _` ` `I / �i \i �/, . - : • . . y, /\
IIh 4l1 y V , ,. 4. , Mi /\►, ) 7 �] � ; / Main: 919.829.9909
1 C A / i :( / _ /
ON v < www.res.usw
II 1� - _ /\/\/\/\/\/ \ — ;\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ Engineering Services Provided By:
\\ \\ \\ \\ \\
,, \I1\ Ili , \ \ / / j\ /
\ / /� \ \ \ / /
\ . � .\�
<
Angler Environmental
, LLC
License: F1428III , ifr , / / \ // /�/
i /
STONE APPROACH i \
/// /i\//\/ /\%\ %\\ %\ i`%\ i\ i\/\/ / / /\ \ /, SEAL
f / SECTION: NO STEEPER BACKFILL WATTLES z
THAN 5: I SLOPE ON ROAD WI TOPSOIL BANKFULL
CLASS A STONE OVER O
FILTER FABRIC
EXISTING VAR. PER ELAN N
GRADE SECTION B-B SMALL BRANCHES 15 N
CHANNEL BOTTOM FLOW
SURFACE FLOW 2"x 2"X 3'WOODEN AND BRUSH
DIVERSION X\ J STAKE ON 2' CENTERS OF BANK LIVE STAKES LIVE STAKES _ SMALL LOGS AND/OR
/ LARGE BRANCHES WITH A\\// MINIMUM 12" COIR �� ' MIN DIAMETER OF 4"
/ \/\\ WATTLE/LOG �I1\ .
// / / / S�Op PROPOSED •nI,$r
1 a� \� ii
EXISTING STREAMBANK \ \ \ 2"x 2"X 3'WOODEN • • STREAM BED ��;��.�,,�1
//\ / / V/�/ //., STAKE ON 2' CENTERS A '�' �I��` a� ��
�" ' ��� BARE ROOT PLANTINGS �
' I I ON G'TO 8' CENTERS \\/�\/�\//\\/ \/ \/j FLOW _ + 9 ',
O 3.0'
/\ . // // / • • . • !;
,VAAj/AA VAAVA \ \A� • PS
•ASTONE ,
III3"STRNCHATTLE IN 2"TO .I!�- .i O /V\ /VA�VA /VA�. I AA/VA�. \�A
FILTER FABRIC ► A • .�� y .., !P/',• ., „
N. 4/1•'�� cam. I �u�i s;:� • \ \ j / /\\�\\//\\\//\\//\\//\\/\
NOTES: PROFILE VIEW �AVB:' =�;:i,sA �►`,,,i,!'� -• ili��° \ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\\
I. CONSTRUCT STREAM CROSSING WHEN FLOW IS LOW. ! --11 �W -$01 Q`� / / / /
L ��511 i�• III %�� -n� 1 . \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \/
2. HAVE ALL NECESSARY MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT ON-SITE BEFORE WORK BEGINS. f. •• \ I/! 1 `/\\/\\/X//\//,//\\//\/\ \/ \/\/ \/\
3. MINIMIZE CLEARING AND EXCAVATION OF STREAM BANKS. DO NOT EXCAVATE CHANNEL BOTTOM. B 11i\� '���'li� ``YY '�% � II�� �`�� B /�/, /A //�//�//
COMPLETE ONE SIDE BEFORE STARTING ON THE OTHER SIDE. MIN 3 0' N\ �/ II 111‘
7 CHANNEL TOP
4. INSTALL STREAM CROSSING PERPENDICULAR TO FLOW. • IFS • 1 1/ • OFBANKSECTION A A
5. GRADE SLOPES NO STEEPER THAN 5: I ��� /6. MAINTAIN THAT IN THE COI WATTLE SLOPEBEAK I'r *,,/
7. A STABILIZED QPAD OF NQATURAL CLASS FA STONE, 66 TO 9NC CONSTRUCTION THICK, LLIINED WITH N TER FABRIC SHALL EL. ` (�� '�
BE USED OVERTHE BERM AND ACCESS SLOPES. NTS
8. FILTER FABRIC USED SHALL BE NCDOT TYPE 2 ENGINEERING FABRIC OR EQUIVALENT. • 1Y/ • 1 • je/4
• NOTES:
9. WIDTH OF THE CROSSING SHALL BE SUFFICIENT(8' MIN.)TO ACCOMMODATE THE LARGEST VEHICLE LIVE STAKES
CROSSING THE CANNEL. I I . DRIVE 2 ROWS OF 4" CEDAR POSTS ON MINIMUN 3' di
10. CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE AN APPROPRIATE RAMP ANGLE ACCORDING TO EQUIPMENT UTILIZED.
I I. TEMPORARY CROSSINGS ARE TO BE ABANDONED IN PLACE. CENTERS PAST MINIMUM DEPTH AS ShOWN. o
A 2. FILL ThE VOID BETWEEN POST ROWS WI AN EVEN MIX ¢0 0
OF hARDWOOD LOGS, LIMBS, AND BRUSh AS ShOWN. I- N
3. REDUCE POST SPACING AS NEEDED TO IMPROVE co
POND CROSSING ENGINEERED SEDIN/ENT PACK (ESP) STRUCTURE STABILITY. CL co
NTS Z
NTS a
H
U
D
II
H
Z
TOP OF BANK TOE OF BANK
a RIP RAP APPROACH
U
(5' MIN) TIMBER MAT CROSSING TIMBER MAT APPROACH
Ct
H
0
TIMBER MAT INSTALLED COARSE AGGREGATE Z
FLOW PARALLEL
MIN. 2' (#5 WASHED STONE) G" DEEP
CLASS B RIP RAP (UNLESS ADDITIONAL COVER IS
NOTES:
REQUIRED BY MANUFACTURER) a LL Z
EARTH FILL 1. CONSTRUCT STREAM CROSSING WHEN FLOW IS LOW.
2. INSTALL STREAM CROSSING PERPENDICULAR TO FLOW. fi
i/rj0/ W 3. CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE APPROPRIATE BEDDING MATERIAL WITH MANUFACTURER. Q
�, �y, 4� FILTER FABRIC W
i/•//• �i_`� 4. FILTER FABRIC USED SHALL BE NCDOT TYPE 2 ENGINEERING FABRIC OK EQUIVALENT. J LU
I . a�I "T '- '-r '�i 5. WIDTH OF TYPICAL FARM CROSSINGS SHALL BE PER PLAN OR A MINIMUM OF 12'. W W Ct
it �y1�� �.�p,ArA6 ' G. WHEN REQUIRED, CONTRACTOR TO ENSURE PIPE MATERIAL AND COVER MEET H-20 CC CC 0_
toiro��• �� - - ` - 1E1- - - -1E1 -1E1 - , -- `-� I LOADING REQUIREMENTS.
�.ti�l III III III III— I—III—III—III III-1 1t���?�,► ,
�//y♦/� - - - - - S�"r � —I III III III III— III III III III III III III=
jt,.. * 111E111E111E111E111E111E111-111— IE111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111=111E '-`►,
OR* 1/ /1°' 111EIII=III=III=III=III=III=III=III=III=III=III=III=III=III=III=III=III=III=1 T 1=11 — Wes► Q
•S,R*a�� IE111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111=111E111E111E111E111E111=111=1
�• �• CARRIAGE BOLT ,��� �� Z
W...a _-111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111—III-1 .
.11.11 .' - IE111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111En 1-111-111 1' -1 1 1E1 1 1E1 1 1E1 1 1E1 1 1E1 1 1E1 1 1E1 1 1E1 1 1E1 1 1= .#
W,_ ..,_ .c — 11-111E111E111E111EI I I—III—III= 1111EIII—III 1 — �1 W
Yr.c Ia.1�1• 0 0 0 0 it \i\\/\\/\\/\\/\\/\\/\\�\\�\\/\\/\ 1=1 1=1 1=1 I1 1=1 1=1 -1 1=1 I— / \ \ �\ �\i�\i�\ /icei`
el.etc \,\�\�\�\�\�\�\�\�\� \ 111=111 I i 1 -11 I-111=11 =11 -/\�\� � � � � � � ����
- "I"11� \� \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ -I 1=I IMEW =1 1= N 111=11 \\r\\r\\�\�\�\�\�\�\�\i Q
m '%i ,_ ,_ \TIM5KMAT
R - R R - -1 I-1 I-1 1_ � IPE SIZE PR PLANin \\//\ \ \ >�\�\� _ MOW \//\//\/\ Q
I� \ \ LOG SILL (�
/\ ------- -- ---- // INSTALL CLAY PLUG 2 FEET FLOW v 0 V�
TIMBER MAT INSTALLED /,, , \//\//\//\//\//\//\//\//\//\//\//\//\\//\\/j ,, ,, ,, %/�\ BELOW CULVERT INVERT SET TOP OF LOG AT — J
Q PERPENDICULAR \/�\\//\\\//\\\/ // PROPOSED BED INVERT Z
in 0 \/ \/\\\\\ \\ \\/\\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\/��'/ 2
1 NOTES: \//\/\.\\, ,\\/\\\/\\i\\A,\\\x\\,\\�/:./,,//
= PLAN VIEW INVERT PER PLAN BURY 20% MIN 3'
U) 1. TIMBER MATS SHALL BE USED FOR TEMPORARY OF CULVERT AREA UNLESS COARSE AGGREGATE J W
c1 CONSTRUCTION ACCESS TO TRAVERSE WET AND/OR MUDDY NOTED OTHERWISE BY (#5 WASHED STONE) _ I j' I J Z 0
O ARES ADJACENT TO THE STREAM AND TO CROSS THE ENGINEER a P m MIN 3' G�
0 STREAM AND OTHER CONCENTRATED FLOW AREAS. SECT ON VIEW •CARRIAGE BOLT 2. THE STREAM CROSSING SHALL BE INSTALLED WHEN FLOW IS 11-111-11 111E111-111—i I I-111E111E111E111E111E111E111-111-111 111E 111-111 111-1°I 1-111—I i -i I 111E111-111-11 0
C_ TIMBER MAT INSTALLED =111=111-1 —111E111E111E111EI I I—III—III 111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111EI I I-11—III—III—III=
(TYP) LOW. THERE SHALL BE MINIMAL TO NO DISTURBANCE OF THE U
PERPENDICULAR EARTH FILL IT/ III J III III III III III III III III III III J III III III III III III III III III I I I
Q TIMBER MAT CHANNEL BED AND BANKS AS A RESULT OF INSTALLING THE -111 /\ l \ V/ \ /(J\ /��\ l l\ l /\ /��\ /��\--111- W
CLASS 'S RIP RAP APPROACHES OR CROSSING. =III=D/O O/O O\D OO OO O/O O/O OO OO= 11 W
TOP OF BANK INSTALLED PARALLEL III J
3. THE LENGTH OF TIMBER MAT REQUIRED TO CROSS THE Ijj
STREAM OK CONCENTRATED FLOW AREAS SHALL BE SUCH -_-�� c � _ Z W J
Ta - 0 0 0 0 ° 11111i111111 1-11 EWE��= /� THAT THE TIMBER MAT EXTENDS PAST THE TOP OF BANK ON -III- -III- Z Q
>, / / / Y\Y \//xy/`//`//N//\7\Y`/ / / EACH SIDE OF THE CROSSING A SUFFICIENT DISTANCE TO / 111-1
, A \/\\/\\/\\/\\ \ /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/� SUPPORT THE MAXIMUM EQUIPMENT SIZE USING THE O (_)\ O O (_)\ O O O = -
c %/\ //\//\//\//\//\ / // / / / / / / / // // // // / //i//�• U H Z
\\/\ \\/\\/\\/\\/\\/\\/\\\ W/ /\\/\\\/% A ��\/\/�/� 4. STREAM AMNCROSSINGS SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH THE TIMBER G. 1 O O O O O HO O O 1 O C Q
(- cc
j\\j,, /\j/\\j/\\j/\\j/\\j/\\j\\j /\\j\\j\\j\\j\j\\j/\\j/\\j/\\j/\\j/\\j/\\j/\\j/\\\/�` MAT LENGTHS ORIENTED PERPENDICULAR TO THE TOPS OF 11-11� T �J 111-11 C
'Co //,\//.\/\/.\/.\/.\/\/\/\/\. \ \/x\/\/\\,\ \//�\//�\//�\//�\//�\//�\j/\�\/x THE STREAM BANKS. TIMBER MAT STREAM APPROACHES 11/ ��� �\ �\ ��� ��� 1 0_ a
U • MAT LENGTHS
\ \�\/�\\ \/ ORIENTED 51-IALL BE INSTALLED
DTOI THE TOPS OFTH THE HE STREAM BANKS. — —� �— —
FILTER FABRIC 111 Il I— ICI I I—III I I—I —_� II— I— ICI I I— I I—I 1 —III—III—III—I 1 I-1 I-111—
Q TOE OF BANK 5. STREAM CROSSING APPROACHES FROM DRY AREAS SHALL 11-111E111E111E111E111E111E111-111-1 1-111E111E111E111E111E111111 111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111-111-11
(TYP) APPROXIMATE BASE FLOW -III-111E111E111E111E111E111E111-11 111 I I I-111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111E111-111= PROJECT NUMBER: 100918
n BE CONSTRUCTED USING CLASS 'S RIP RAP PLACED OVER
0 WATER SURFACE FILTER FABRIC. l''''h
PROJECT MANAGER: KMC
o G. ALL TIMBER MATS, FILTER FABRIC, AND RIP RAP SHALL BE IO' MIN. _ IO' MIN. """'"
DESIGNED: MKG
o COMPLETELY REMOVED FROM THE SITE WHEN THE CROSSING
DRAWN: TRS
IS REMOVED.
SECTION VIEW ' CHECKED: AFM
STREAM CHANNEL I \_
LOG SILL SHEET NUMBER:
L TOP OF BANK SET TOP OF LOG AT
w PROPOSED BED INVERT
PROPOSED CULVERT CROSSING PLAN VIEW
z TIfVBE N/AT TEN/PORAY COSSING D2
w
_1 NTS NTS
L
J \ I

C 1 r
INSTALL LIVESTAKES
NOTES: AROUND OUTSIDE OF COIR FIBER
MEANDER BENDS INSTALL LIVESTAKES MATTING
I . LOGS SHOULD BE AT LEAST 10" IN DIAMETER, 5-8' LONG, RELATIVELY + + + AROUND STRUCTURES + 0.75"TO 2" ►I
STRAIGHT, AND HARDWOOD. + + + + + + + + + 1
2. CABLE ANCHORS SHOULD BE PLACED I'TO 3' FROM EACH END OF LOG. + Pres
+++++ + + + + + ++++++ + ++++ + FLAT TOP ENDf
+ + + + + + ++ + + ++++ ++++ 302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
TERAL BUD 1 Raleigh, NC27605
Main: 919.829.9909
// WWW.res.us
BANKFULL ELEVATION / II]
INSTALL COIR MATTING
��0 i PER DETAIL
T- Engineering Services Provided By:
SIDE BRANCH Angler Environmental, LLC
+++ + + REMOVED AT EXCAVATE/GRADE UPPER BANK g
\\\\i i\ \\ \ z
\ \ License: F 1428
++++ + + ++++ SLIGHT ANGLE r
\ice\i\\ i\i\\�\
\i\\/�,\\,0 \ \ \\,\\\ 1/4 TO 1/3 OF LOG + + + + + - - PER DETAIL
INSTALL LIVE STAKES SEAL
\ \/\,<% \ DIAMETER CAN BE EXPOSED WATER TABLE Ai / / / / / /`. / / 'j /
\\\ \i\\� i \i\\ i \� \ \/ \/\/\/\/\/ \/\/
\\\ \\i \ \\\ \%\\,\\ v ' v \j\j\j\j\j\/\j\/\ \ /\j\j\ /\j\j /\\ EXISTING CHANNEL BANK
\/ \/\\ \%\\/ \ \\ - PRIOR TO FINAL GRADING - - ��\//\//\//\/\/\/\/\ ! /\//\// // //\// / //\
\\ \ \�\\i\\ \i\�\\ j\j\j\j\j\jjj\ \/ / /\/\ k/\\/\\/
PLAN VIEW ® ,�\/\\/\\/\\/\\/\\/\\ /\\/\\/\\/\/\/ /
\ \\\�\ \ \\>\\ \�\\i\ PROPOSED BED
\\/ \/\ \/ \ /\, LARGE CHANNEL \// //\//\ \// // // //\//\
DETAIL 45 DEGREE \\\\/\j\\ / j\\/ X\\X\\-
\�\\ \ \\\\ \ \%\\\\� SPACING TAPERED BUTT END \/\/'�- -
!\ \ \i\\ /\ \\�\ \�,. TIE TO EXISTING GRADE \�/// //% //%//%/ ///
\\ \\ \\�\\/\\ \ \\�\\/\\ \\ MIN SLOPE 2.0 H: I V
\ \\A\�\%\\\ \ ��\i\i\\i\\�\i\) COI R FIBER 3.0' \' j\/ / i i i .
\\\ \\,\ \ \\/,\\, \\\\\ /\\,\\\ \/\/ 1, \ SMALL CHANNEL MATTING LIVESTAKE \�X\\\X\\\ \\\ \\ \\ \\ \\� /
/\\\\i \A \ i\A \i ' r, SPACING S ' // // // // // / / /
\!VGA \\\ i iA V ° \\ \V�\\�\\\y ��V ��\ , _ 1 .5'
%�\\\\ \\\ \\j/\\/�\ \ \\,....\ ,
\! MINIMUM OF 2/3 OF LOG DIAMETER COIR FIBER \ /\/� � \
„\
\ \\/\ / //\ \ / 1/ \\/\\/,,
/ - O O MATTING •/i./i / EXISTING
\\ -,j\/ \/\ BEDDED BELOW EXISTING CHANNEL INVERT \ \ \ \' \ \ /105
CHANNL BD
NWSIO" MINIMUM LOG DIAMTER(TY .) / // / k
. v.;.'-
\ /\ \ /\ \ / N�� O �`�'�`�. `� 4NOTES: BENCHVARIESINSTALL CABLE ANCHOR AS SHOWN. DRILL(OK SAW CUT) \ / \/ / SEE PLANSHEETS\ e % IV ;% �``*N../ I . SEED AND MULCH ALL BANKS PRIOR TO INSTALLING FOR WIDTH
PILOT HOLE THROUGH LOG 1/3 TO 1/4 OF THE WAY DOWN \ /\/ / / /\/ � `���`�� � �SO THAT ANCHOR CABLE IS NOT EXPOSED. \ // / / a� �: : ` ► � � _.�� COIR MATTING.
\/\ /\/ A;w. i _4 _ ‘ I .-. . NWS
//\/\/\/ / LIVESTAKE
LOG TOE PROTECTION LIVESTAKE SPACING 2.0'
LARGE CHANNEL O
NTs TYPICAL SECTION - I .01 COIR FIBER
- -' MATTING
NOTES: ( •
TOD
I. SEE TABLE ON PLANTING SHEET FOR ACCEPTABLE SPECIES AND COMPOSITION.
2. LIVE STAKES SHOULD BE 2 TO 3 FEET LONG AND 0.75 TO 2 INCHES IN DIAMETER. `
3. LIVE STAKES SHALL BE PLANTED ON I .5'ALTERNATING SPACING ON LARGE LLJ
BANKFULL ELEVATION CHANNELS (POOL DEPTH > 2FT) AND I .0'ALTERNATING SPACING ON SMALL O Q o
CHANNELS (POOL DEPTH < 2FT). ; " • YPICAL BANK GRADING o 0
\\,\\\/\\ \\ \ 4. LIVE STAKES SHALL BE PLANTED ON ALL RESTORATION REACHES AND ALONG ALL N
\\ co
\//\/\\\ \\% ENHANCEMENT REACHES AS SHOWN ON LIVE STAKE SHEET(S). NWS NTS O c\I
i/,\ \�\\!\\`%\ \\%\\ 1/4 TO 1/3 OF LOG 0_ co
i\�\\� ` \ \ \\/\\- i\ \ LIVESTAKE SPACING Z
\,\\\\%\\j\\,\\\\�\\/\\�\ yDIAMETER CAN BE EXPOSED
\ \%\\� \ \\j \\j\j\\ PRIOR TO FINAL GRADING LIVE STAKING SMALL CHANNEL Z
\i\\i\\�\i\\\\\\\�\i\i\\\\ NTS l=
\ i\i\\/\\i \i\\\ \\/ \i\ PROPOSED BED
\%\\/\\\ %\\\i\\i\\�\i \\\�
\\i\��\\i\ \i\�\\�\ \i\\ .'�---'1 Ct
F-
�\i\\ii\ \\/\\ �\A i �j�
\\�\�\\ \\\'\ \ \\%\\%\\ BACKFILL AREA BETWEEN BANK AND Z
\ \\/\\ \,\\/\\ \\\/\/\/\\/\\/� COIR FIBER ROLL(APPLY PERMANENT 0
\� \\ \i \ +I f !\\\\/\\ \ \\ SEED MIX COIK MATING) DIBBLE PLANTING METHOD
\%\\i\\/\\i\\i\\i\),I I \\\ \i�\\/ USING THE KBC PLANTING BAR Ct
\ �\\\ ;;.' - \\i \ \\i\\\i
\ \\\ �.j,�4- l' A \\/\\ \i EXISTING BANK FLOW
/\� �;� \\/\\ MINIMUM OF 1/2 TO 2/3 OF LOG PLANTED COIR FIBER �- H
0
��\i\\ ,\\/ \%%\\0 DIAMETER BEDDED BELOW ROLL PLANTED COIR
ROLL WOOD STAKES ~ 2" Z
STAWOKOD ES \\-\\-- CHANNEL INVERT
12" LOG DIAMETER(TYP.) NORMAL WATER I 11 >-
LEVEL i: �� �.. �r u- 0 Ct
*Ali 11:-11A "7AIL a 11:-1M "7 ' IR I' 11-T1'.11!
/ II'=11 II' 1111- :11'�1=1 I'=11=11. 11=III'=L 111111= Z
f/(�11)\\/\/ =an- ' �1=�1=i 11=11= 11=111 1 ii=n=11=11=11 -
NOTES: ` 11 / � �� 11111111111A:=11:1111:IL1 :II: L11:11 #11#11:IL1 II:Im1111�1,:��:11=.11=.11' 0 u) 2
11,.
y \/ 0.5'TO I .25' \� -11=11*IF111=11=1ft "11'=11*ILi1=11=11.. 11=11=11=11=11=11=
1� �� 1 1=11=11.= 1.=11=11-1 -11-11-11?11-11-1 11-11-11-11-11=11! w J
1 . INSTALL STAKES ON 3' CENTERS ON EACH SIDE OF ROLL. TOP OF STAKE SHOULD ► _nn_n _nnn_ i%nnnnn-
NOT EXTEND ABOVE ROLL. ' �1� 5 W
2. EXCAVATE A SMALL TRENCH (DEPTH APPROX 1/2 TO 2/3 OF LOG DIAM) FOR DENSE COIR MATTING I iit
2.0'TO 3.0' I. INSERT 2. REMOVE 3. INSERT a
PLACEMENT OF ROLL. (ROLANKA BioD-Mat®90 OR 11 PLANTING BAR AS PLANTING BAR PLANTING BAR 2
3. COIR LOGS SHALL BE 1 O FT LONG AND HAVE A DIAMETER OF 12 IN. SHOWN AND PULL AND PLACE INCHES TOWARD
EQUIVALENT) 1 PLAN VIEW KEY IN UPSTREAM END HANDLE TOWARD SEEDING AT PLANTER FROM
II OF ROLL APPROX 2-4 PLANTER. CORRECT DEPTH. SEEDING.
COI LOG (TOE POTECTI ON) WOOD STAKE (' NOTES: FT INTO BANK
Q
NTS I . DESIGNER TO MARK LOCATIONS AND DIMENSIONS OF Z
SILLS IN THE MELD PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.
r in J
2. INSTALL STAKES ON 3' CENTERS ON EACH SIDE OF ROLL.
SECTION VIEW TOP OF STAKE SHOULD NOT EXTEND ABOVE ROLL. H_ 0
a) 3. EXCAVATE A SMALL TRENCH (APPROX 2" DEEP) FOR
Cr) r2
E PLACEMENT OF ROLL. i11- 1 �, IL�u.=11.= li, -11=i4-11=YI=
Ilf 41:= =IIF 11#1
.11 p11= -11:=11=11 L 11=tL:IL1:=11=11? II 1.11=e1.11=1h Z
m NEW CHANNEL TO BE MTV yL11=11.=11.= II= 11=I1-11=11= II= 11.=1001=11=1
CONSTRUCTED �O 11: 11.= 11.-11.=11 II 11=11.=,[1=.11.=1L 11 _1=11.=1#11.=11: 0
0 / 11:11=-IL`Llial:iial:�lal it7I=11i1111i=itriL11• II.= 11.=11 ;11.=11.=1
____y
'11=11=1111=II11=
in 111.=11. i1.=11.=11.=11.= 11=i .11=11=11=11=
ii.-1i.-n.-n.-n.-n =n IISII=n.=n.=n -a=a=a=a=a=uF H
11=a=a=a=a=a=1
CO VEGETATED SILL DEPLECTO 4. PULL HANDLE OF 5. PUSH 6. LEAVE
BAR TOWARD HANDLE COMPACTION _ Cr)
NTS PLANTER, FIRMING FORWARD HOLE OPEN. O J
Q OLD CHANNEL TO BE O� SOIL AT BOTTOM. FIRMING AT TOP. SOIL THOROUGH LY. Z
�i DIVERTED OK ABANDONED ��CHANNEL PLUG 2 .. Q
I-
1 J H W
co MIN. 25' `, Q Z
PLANTING NOTES: , ��� NOTES:
o PLAN VIEW 7 MAX. 75'
CD 1...
PLANTING BAG BARE ROOTS SHALL BE PLANTED 6 O
EXISTING CHANNEL DURING PLANTING, SEEDLINGS SHALL 0
0 TOP OF BANK BE KEPT IN A MOIST CANVAS BAG OK FT. TO I 0 T. ON CENTER,
Q SIMILAR CONTAINER TO PREVENT THE �' RANDOM SPACING, AVERAGING 8 W J
_ ROOT SYSTEMS FROM DRYING. FT. ON CENTER, APPROXIMATELY J
-- illir UNCOMPACTED BACKFILL �' To _ _ 680 PLANTS PER ACRE. Lii2 Ll1
6. BOTTOM OF �, / KBC PLANTING BAR
I .5' MINIMUM BANKFULL ELEVATION z EXISTING CHANNEL �-0-\< j\\,/\/\\- \%\�j\/\\ j\\,\A\ PLANTING BAR SHALL HAVE A BLADE Q 0 = ~
_ A i\ \ /\ i\j\\ //\ \ \\ WITH A TRIANGULAR CROSS SECTION, Z
. \\%\\j\\j\\„\\\/�\j\\/ \,--, „A\/,---- \\\/\/\\i AND SHALL BE 12 INCHES LONG, 4 I- 0 0
0 30' \\%\/\\/\\/\\%\ \\% \�\\%\i�\�\\�\/\\�\ �%\\- INCHES CENTER.WIDE AND I INCH THICK AT Z_
U HFINISHED GRADE ROOT PRUNING
NEW CHANNEL BANK SHALL COMPACTED BACKFILL I
fr 0
\ / //\/ ��\�/ /Z / ���'</ jZ ALL SEEDLINGS SHALL BE ROOT
U
Vi COMPACTED BACKFILL 1 BE TREATED AS SPECIFIED (I 2"TO 18" LIFTS) PRUNED, IF NECESSARY, SO THAT NO
(12" LIFTS) I IN PLANS ►•.
o NOCHHES BELOW THE MORE
ROOT COLLAR.
a 1 0' MIN ® NOTES: 11 PROJECT NUMBER: 100918
TifiPROJECT MANAGER: KMC
a I I . FILL EXISTING CHANNEL TO TOP OF BANK ELEVATION WHEN POSSIBLE.
T / 2. CHANNEL MUST BE FILLED IN 12"TO 18" LIFTS, DESIGNED: MKG
o PROPOSED 3. IF CHANNEL CANNOT BE COMPLETELY FILLED TO TOP OF BANK, FILL TO 6" DRAWN: TRS
-o CHANNEL INVERT ABOVE TOP OF BANK FOR 25' OUT OF EVERY 1 00'SEGMENT.
/// CHECKED: AFM
(114 -z-•---
,--
cc SHEET NUMBER:
IMPERVIOUS SELECT MATERIAL
of (PER DIRECTION OF ENGINEER) TYPICAL SECTION
di TOE PROTECTION
Q
z DACE .00T PLANTING D3
w CHANNEL PLUG CHANNEL BACKFILL
LI NTS
NTS NTS
J \ I

c" 1 r
BANKFULL WIDTH (Wbkf) ores
LOW FLOW CHANNEL
I/3 I/3
SURFACE LOG I/3 302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
PM I— .- PINBOULDER EMBED LOGS A MIN. 2X Raleigh, NC 27605
FLOW 1 (TYP) Wbkf OR.
THE VALLEY Main: 919.829.9909
EXTENTS
NOTES: `-) `• — — —� www.res.us
\ — — Engineering Services Provided By:
I I . RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL STRUCTURES SMALL BE INSTALLED IN B I ) I \ �- .. ra"srs%'s.�`:-
NEWLY GRADED CHANNEL SECTIONS, AS SPECIFIED ON THE PLAN `- -�J_ / - + — �� Angler Environmental, LLC
SHEETS. . — — B License: F-1428
2. ELEVATION CONTROL POINTS SHALL BE DESIGNATED AT THE "°'"'` SEAL
i. . . . . I. . . . ,. . . BEGINNING AND END OF RIFFLE POINTS TO ESTABLISH PART OF _ _ _
PT
$ I#*oWP$
��• THE PROFILE OF THE CHANNL. SUVY OF CONTROL POINTS ILOG
—
Z4IZ1 r SMALL BE REQUIRED TO ESTABLISH ACCURATE RIFFLE LOGS TO BE PLACED AT 45°TO — —
INSTALLATION WITHIN A TOLERANCE OF ±0.2. 55°ANGLE TO Wbkf %��.���s�•.
ZAP,O• • �JP. ��0 414,6�-0f1115mi. 3. GRADE CONTROL ROCK SHALL BE COMPRISED OF A 50/50 MIX OF
� � • • • z • CLASS A AND B RIPRAP. GRADE CONTROL ROCK SMALL BE PLACED
„. . PC
A' re•r• 1, G��1������••:■� 1�r• SUCH THAT THE ADDITION OF THE SPECIFIED THICKNESS OF k
— — —
N
.�.j I�Ii�IwI�I�I���I�I� RIFFLE MATERIAL SHALL ACHIEVE THE DESIGNATED GRADES. - �. \ \
Ar • 4 dPIt . RIFFLE MATERIAL SHALL BE COMPRISED OF ROCKS AND LOGS. - - N • \
��� ' ?�� , ��� ■� �� � THE ROCK MATERIAL COMPOSITION SMALL MATCh TABLE I I . RIFFLE — \ \ 0� \ 7 Wbkf
'stdi• • • • � • • • MATERIAL SMALL BE EXCAVATED, STOCKPILED, AND RE-USED ID
\I
"10. ,11.."al"al"II"al"al"al•■��11,• FROM ABANDONED CHANNEL SECTIONS. ROCK RIFFLE MATERIAL Q j
eadV.Z Z.A v i i i ii i i OBTAINED OFFSITE SMALL BE SLIGHTLY ROUNDED, "RIVER-TYPE" i
•.■�VIII �1! �"�����.■4pW�4" - G" LOGS
SMALL POOL . `��.� . . . ��`1, : . . ROCK, UNLESS OTHER ROCK CHARACTERISTICS ARE APPROPRIATE I '
•mir�-IlIZI���:aIZIZIZ�4II�I�: FOR THE CHANNEL.
�• • �► �, • • • •� • 5. SPACING AND NUMBER OF LOGS SHOULD BE BASED ON RIFFLE
-• P �•�� �I I1I� THALWEG
��:■��/ .�oe�p� t.����•.0..1��• LENGTh AND MAY VARY BASED ON LOG AVAILABILITY. LOGS
'Iti• �4 . . u . � t st
•���s �i�i�ir'�i�` ~ 44074,1111��� 1i SHOULD BE SPACED EQUALLY AND ANCHORED TO THE CHANNEL PLAN VIEW BANKFULL WIDTH (Wbkf) iim
��•■0•11—•04�4.Zrt��� drst BED WITH BOULDERS.
r�`".1, 114�411$11�.��.411V,1144 ■`�1114� 6. THE PLACEMENT OF GRADE CONTROL ROCK AND/OR RIFFLE
'' �• • • �t1 b l • MATERIAL SMALL BE DONE IN A MANNER TO CREATE A SMOOTH LOW FLOW CHANNEL
LARGE COBBLE/ �•.•I'•-•- ��� ���� � ��!�-
��:■��11r���w !�� •�o�.■�� 1r� PROFILE, WITH NO ABRUPT "JUMP" (TRANSITION) BETWEEN THE
SMALL BOULDERS i• e, • • . • • • • • • BANKFULL
��j� �J�I���I�I� UPSTREAM POOL-GLIDE AND THE RIFFLE, AND LIKEWISE NO
.410.■*�11 ,� ,� ,44,� ,� ,O•■f�0 •
i� �, • • • ,■ • • • • • • ABRUPT "DROP" (TRANSITION) BETWEEN THE RIFFLE AND THE
1Zdi:■��11.�.�.�,,WIS ���•■fi ll fe DOWNSTREAM RUN-POOL. THE FINISHED CROSS SECTION OF r:"-I' ° ° BOULDERS °°°o°
STREAM BED o0000000 0°00°000
i• �' • • • • • • • • THE RIFFLE MATERIAL SMALL GENERALLY MATCh THE SHAPE AND - SURFACE LOG �o,o°oopo°aQa° °°Qo°°°0000
o0c��:.��11����� �4� � �..��1�S• — P. o0000 0000°
DIMENSIONS SHOWN ON THE RIFFLE TYPICAL SECTION WITH SOME (� ) SURFACE LOG o0 000
� i• � • � ,,. •/ � • • — — EMBED LOGS A MI N. 2 '�a°°oop_ ��-°
'� '� / '� 'l �� _� O00000 ��o,o.
��1�,��. ����� ���[�► ± lid�1 ,0 VARIABILITY OF THE THALWEG LOCATION AS A RESULT OF THE — _ — — Wbkf OR THE VALLEY WIDTH. ,000000.
i /:/ �■ : : 1.0(4, : SMALL POOLS AND LOGS. TO — _ �� _
2°1° 4°7° __ °aP
-•.•Ii�- Ii�-�V.�.-` . .- p apo FLOW — _ — — 000°.=° ����. oo S
��: `f ����������o�• �• 7. THE END OF RIFFLE CONTROL POINT MAY TIE IN TO ANOTHER °° = ° ��_ — — _ _ — _ _ _ _ °o°° r �=♦=�♦�♦�♦�� -z7
�� • '• �` • • • • IN STREAM STRUCTURE (LOG SILL , J HOOK, ETC.). NO LOGS o 00 �f'_Oe.SO
mil/ .r","'C ��v��1/�� opo�o Joo 0000°°O°o° Oo° o°poo \ 7 ♦ 049 ;' .46. '=.?�_id ' ) <
ANCHOR BOULDER �g -1 SHOULD BE INCLUDED WITHIN THE FOOTPRINT OF THE PROPOSED gOo 0 000 000°000 a o 0 0 00 0 00 000 ` ,�o,:.o ,., ,.
• ••
• • 0 0 ° °0 o°ap o°0 0° o°a0 o°ap o ooa0 o°ap o o°a 1 0..� T� `N 7 �Y � ,,'
_00 0000002,,,, 0oo0o°po00000 0 00000000 0 0 000 0 0� �o` 1 1 s#./;,;�.�j1`i}.�`,•,;,•'"f
Y;.
• �� STRUCTURE. o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 "' 4041 `
Oo 0o 8' VO'g 00°°O o.00o Ot og'4 o°OOo L T �� ' V
Wqr�� 8. THE CONSTRUCTED RIFFLE SHALL BE KEYED IN TO THE STREAM 8 OZ. GEOTEXTILE ^" °°oo°°°oo°�°oc�°°oo°°°oo°°°oo °°° o•° s IP. 4*- ♦�♦.
can o0 an 00�00000000 000 0000
BANKS AND/OR BED AS DESIGNATED BY THE DESIGNER. THE "KEY" FABRIC ^''o� °°° o°°000°°000°°000°°000°°000°°000°°o o°°0000°oa� y .��� W
,o 000 000000000000000000000 000000o Ooo�ooc ea- -
� O
oo°oppoopoo0o 00000 oo0op° Q
SHALL EXTEND BEYOND THE TOP OF BANK FOR THE LENGTh OF FOOTER LOG o0o po 0 o°°oQa°°o G
° °o oo°o 00°000°0000°0� 0 CV
THE RIFFLE. WHERE PRESERVATION OF EXISTING STREAM BANK �P•) SELECT MATERIAL n ^ OOOOQO 0 FOOTER LOG I- N
VEGETATION IS A PRIORITY A "KEY" MAY NOT BE USED (OR THE 0 c i
DIMENSIONS MAY BE ADJUSTED) TO LIMIT DISTURBANCE. SECTION A-A 8 OZ. GEOTEXTILE SECTION B-B J N
e_ co
FABRIC
Z
LOG CASCADE o
U
NTS D
IfI
F-
Z
0
0
fI
NOTES:
ANCHOR BOULDER LARGE COBBLE/SMALL O
BOULDERS, TYP I . THIS DETAIL CAN BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTING LOG AND BOULDER CASCADES FOR
HYDRAULIC SLOPES GREATER THAN 4%. ~
4.0' CHANNEL 4.0' TOP OF BANK O
TYP BOTTOM WIDTH 2. CASCADE STEPS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED WITH I ROW OF FOOTER BOULDERS OR LOGS
�® BANKFULL WIDTH (Wbkf) AND I ROW OF HEADER BOULDERS OR LOGS. Z,
�- ��J�i��T_`� ��7 �, `� ��7 --T-��- 3. PLACE HEADER BOULDERS OR LOGS SLIGHTLY UPSTREAM ON TOP OF THE FOOTER
T////////�j// �j �j Tj // // LOW FLOW CHANNEL BOULDERS OK LOGS. 0 Ct
\/\ \ \ \ \�/\\/\\\\\\\\\\\\\� 4. PLACE BOULDERS AND BACKFILL WITH SELECT MATERIAL. W Q
T\ \ \ \ \ /�//� 5. THE GEOTEXTILE FABRIC SHALL EXTEND FROM THE BOTTOM OF THE FOOTER TO THE z 0 Z_
/ \ , \/G.t \' -I/3 /3 I/3-f FINISHED GRADE ELEVATION AND SHALL BE PLACED THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE 0
0.5' MIN ■ \ I�� f� � STRUCTURE. Q
\/\\ ���� PROPOSED TOE OF BANK F
�/�� �.� - �` •f: • tea U� G. CASCADES SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED SO THAT LOW FLOW IS CENTERED WITHIN THE W W
I .0' MIN \, tIf�.�[��� �� " I vs.0 I�x�I ek- ��r-/ CENTER I/3 OF THE BANKFULL CHANNEL. W W rI
h� C,`�/' _ ���/'�c' 7 /j/ 1 �. 7. CASCADE STEPS SHALL SLOPE 2-4%WITH THE HIGHEST PORTION OF THE STEP ON THE a
\ \\ /� W �(" /\\.\\/\\\ I 1 1I DOWNSTREAM LEADING EDGE.
/ / j // \// // I 8. REFER TO THE THALWEG PROFILES) FOR DROP HEIGHT BETWEEN CASCADE STEPS.
\ / 77V—V \ \/\ RIFFLE MATERIAL; =— _ P� I 1 BOULDER 9. ALL MATERIALS ARE TO BE APPROVED BY ENGINEER OR ENGINEER'S ONSITE
\ /\/ /� /j / /� \ /\ D5O = 4" B �_= ��� r.
c• I — �P') CONSTRUCTION OBSERVER.
\ /\ I �1 Z
4" - G" LOGS ( �1 — —
BOULDERS TO BE PLACED AT 45°- — pQ PT • ' "'� �' w
TO 55°ANGLE TO Wbkf Cr) r2
i ` �� _/ a H O
CROSS SECTION A-A' GRADE CONTROL ROCK , I
50/50 MIX OF CLASS A AND
E BRIPRAP f — _ I ��_ � _ — J
m I Y ���_��I` c I P��l� SURFACE BOULDER
Z Q
��w _
- - _ - —`_Iry
Q
II
RIFFLE MATERIAL;
- --i- .ti.--- - y- _ � �`,_ _ I H O
\ I\ I�Wbkf FOOTER z Q
Q D50 = 4"
w • BOULDER
I \ \ \ \
J i- w
U) VARIES PER PROFILE Q J
0
co D
BEGIN RIFFLE Z
E.) PROPOSED TOP
BANKFULL WIDTH (Wbkf) �_
0 CONTROL POINT "IIIIIIIP'
OF BANK O
13 >- 0
0 PLAN VIEW LOW FLOW CHANNEL w J
FLOW END RIFFLE CONTROL POINT J
UGLIDE (BOULDER OR LOG CASCADE) BANKFULL Lii Z w J
Z 0 =
POOLTz lik. __
• . RUN °oap o00 °°�0000p000 Z�� °000000 0
/ STREAM BED
j j/( ,V)� /-�_�_r�_`�0� POOL -\_.--. SURRFACE BOULDER ���°g°°oo°0�°0°0000. SURFACE BOULDER o o�oopg$ooSo" 0
\' \' — — 1o0.) °0°000 °o°�0°c
\ \\/\\/\\/\\/ /\\/ \/ \\ \\/\\ \/\\/\ _ — — — — •0 08, _ / ooa Do
U // /�\/ / \ //� //. //. ,.,, \ — _ _ ( o op oo\ 2%— J iiyo 0 Q
z A\ \\ \ /\ °ac \ — — — _ — 000 0". t', i c cc
�� I FLOW — — — _ _ °r%' 'f '4"i1 0_
O 4" - G" LOGS GRADE CONTROL ROCK ooE ■ °°°oa°°, ° �� — — .....
�` '
N 9o0d° 004,000°0, ,o •our — =C=` s st&F. :d
50/50 MIX OF CLASS A AND oo ... 0000000, °000 0000- \ `� ` � ��l t,�'�/
.O 'poo.�o poe.00oop000p°oopoo. o00 0�..
o�■.,, a o0 oa o00 000 000,1-.- �..0 000p o00 �,. � � ♦•:`-•�:-.•�;;• ♦•; ♦',
B RIPRAP -'.000 00000000000000000000^►, 000000000k, J." 0000 . I , �-- �l�`. o ;lfVe ,��,�/:,'.1�
Q p o0 0p° �,.'
PROFILE osn.--nc�n0000QOosoo °op°o o� ,00l 00p°o I� 4-,-. .-.. .-Y�.'. ?.? ;�� PROJECT NUMBER: 100918
0 8 OZ. GEOTEXTILE o 0 oS boo�no 0 000 000 00o b o o; 000 0 0
X 0,�0♦ 0 °0 0 °0 °00 °0 .0 °0 °0 °0 0 0 0 0 0 , ,.
O FABRIC or:,.i '0000000°000000000000-00000 �00000000000 0 0000000�' _ '�oo0p — — ♦♦�� � ���.:��• — J
"- (2`?WV.°oo°';o o° o°oo°o�_ o°• 0000 ��♦♦���� , '�'�'�'�� = PROJECT MANAGER: KMC
000 000 :o. "000 000 000 000 000 000 � o 000 0 �A
0 FOOTER BOULDER '°°° °°° °°° °o° °°oo*t 4 °oo FOOTER BOULDER =_.��
n�?O��O��Ooo°o0 00°oo°i o 00°o ,���� DESIGNED: MKG
0
2 ( ) 8 OZ. GEOTEXTI LE
00^°°"---"'°oo°o FABRIC DRAWN: TRS
SELECT MATERIAL a_
n CHECKED: AFM
cs)0) SECTION A-A SECTION B-B
cc SHEET NUMBER:
6E
di
•IFFLE GRADE CONTROL
BOULDER CASCADE D4
z
w NTS
NTS
J \ I

Appendix B —
Data/Analysis/Supplementary Information

IRT Meeting Notes

MEMORANDUM 2res
302 Jefferson Street,Suite 110 Raleigh,North Carolina 27605 919.209.1052 tel. [phone] fax
TO: NC IRT,NC DMS,Wilmington District COE
FROM: Bob White,RES
DATE: 9-4-18
RE: RES Monkey Wall Full Delivery Wetland Mitigation Site
IRT Site Visit,July 30,2018
Attendees: Todd Tugwell (USACE), Mac Haupt (NC DWR), Harry Tsomides (NC DMS),
Amanda Jones (USACE), Paul Wiesner (NC DMS), Periann Russell (NC DMS), Kirsten Ullman
(NC DMS), Bob White (RES), Daniel Ingram (RES), David Godley (RES), Jeff Baker(RES).
Site Visit Date: July 30, 2018, (Weather: Mostly Sunny — 85F)
The Monkey Wall site is located on the north side of Fork Mountain Road, north of Bakersville,
Mitchell County, North Carolina. The project site is located at approximately 36.054691°N, and
-82.207310°W. The site is within the French Broad 06010108 watershed and is comprised of two
unnamed tributaries on an approximately 80-acre tract of land. The confluence of the tributaries
is in the project easement and the continuing second order stream flows to Big Rock Creek
approximately 0.4 miles downstream. Big Rock Creek is designated by the NCWRC as a Hatchery
Supported Trout Water.
Field meeting comments:
• The group met and parked on the eastern (8-acre) parcel and proceeded downslope to
restoration reach G2-B which flows on the 8-acre parcel for approximately 350 feet. This
area of the reach is an area of concentrated cattle use and the stream is the only source of
water. Two shelters are in this vicinity and will be removed during construction. The
consensus of the group was that restoration is the appropriate treatment for the reach.
• The group next accessed the 72-acre parcel from the residential drive off Fork Mountain
Road near three on-site barns at the confluence of the two project tributaries (G2-B to the
east and G1-C to the west). All three barns will be removed during construction. This is
an area of significant livestock use as the barns provide shade and shelter from the
elements. Additionally, the cattle are fed immediately upslope. Here the banks are
unstable and eroding, the bed exhibits a surplus of sediment from upslope erosion and the
incised channel infrequently access the floodplain. Jurisdictional wetlands are present at
the confluence.
1

• Further upslope on G1-C the channel is incised with occasional cattle access points. This
character is present throughout the reach to G1-B.
• G1-B is an area that will benefit from an EII treatment through cattle exclusion fencing,
invasive vegetation control and planting).
• Upstream from G1-B is preservation reach G1-A. It was discussed that the lower reach of
G1-A exhibits characteristic of the potential design for the onsite restoration reaches and
could be used as a reference. The head of G1-A is a seep which was observed by the group.
The area surrounding the seep is a jurisdictional wetland.
• The top of the eastern tributary was next examined starting at the seep (spring) above the
top of G2-A. Below the seep a channel does not form until surface water flows across the
cattle and farm road and into reach G2-A.
• After examining the area below the farm road, it was agreed that flow is subsurface, and
that G2-A begins at the top of a rock wall to a location below the"crook" in the wall at the
lowest mature tree. RES excavated the rock wall at this point before the field meeting to
examine flow which was observed.
• G2-B at the point of the excavation is covered by a rock"wall". This wall was reportedly
constructed in the early 1900's while clearing rocks from the adjacent pastures. A
discussion ensued concerning what to call the aquatic feature below the wall. Amanda
Jones (USACE) determined that the stream feature is non jurisdictional. Todd Tugwell
(USACE) expressed that the stream may not exhibit a bed and bank and could flow
subsurface below the wall. The position of RES is that removal of the wall is analogous to
"daylighting" stream channel as a form of restoration.
• Overall,the IRT members agree that the Monkey Wall Site is suitable to cold-water stream
mitigation. RES and NC DMS understand that final design approaches and crediting
rationale must be fully justified in the mitigation plan.
• It was recognized that Mr. Tugwell expressed concern that the soils and geology of the
channel below the rock wall may not support continued surface flow within a channel. It
is understood that the restored streams will exhibit a defined bed and bank and will be
considered jurisdictional streams at project closeout. The mitigation plan will show the
location of proposed stream gauges. It is understood that RES will document annual
continuous flow of 30 days.
• A PJD will be obtained on the project site and the associated PJD map will show the origin
and location of all streams and wetlands upon the subject site.
2

If
- ...-• t� "a,' -!'ra;'"� ; Agreed
•
!k•. iC Top of
.+. ■,' i4j -`.,.. '/ '4, ' Reach
Ili :.' r.. 't- i -v7ir ' 4
':.Ji.I*l e 47.r .Arm •' ;.. r _,. 4. f=�"`c. :,-r: , ,.,%�y .
' '!''',4...4-A'
„.„, .l•.,:ir'. N ,;44 -"- •',-,-i"• :4,'''• ..'..:•'; '>- •.:•...- --.._
i i I t•'-ft-- • • , -•4.. •'.. .'-'• ' ,. ,y, *. .-5.p. i...•,
K - 1r' •''•1fAy ' r,` ,:-., t� 1J.' .may.- + . '
Y r ` . f i. •
FJ-' .. y ,... 4..: Y�1., lei _ , y. JA/.4'- .-,,,. "T:r'4•),'/ .
..• r y �4' �. +l,r!�r _ , I.f - Ii A ?i,{1 1 :9�.F,••y -'' 'y sa.-
;�/x. .!'-'. „ ,y�.: r.., - i % -fir. : ' T�'t�r .` ;a:. #y
ki ;IAA ri 1 ". - .. F` s 9'; J 3. `.
'' r ,n ',WC ,�"4 .f -fie
•�'':4 '",,, •
, t '1' r r!, - :! .•;:' fie. ;
-I.. {y'' '.w.' l�s P'`'. . . . ~Ff) P
% f' ;� y-':, , .::'4 r . Wall Excavation 1 ,' -/ '' . -
^I.•
Top of G2-A
1, 9 At upslope end of Wall
o`.. ..� - ,, v.� . . :
Rry '+,�y'' - Top of G2-B at bottom -
,
y of trees at wall excavation
r��: location ..
_ �. • r-
-.•. G2-B .4. ,
r
Legend H
= :::: :::h1t
d E (18.93 ac) 'grit N I, ' 7--
'
r .: , 4"
i
Project Parcels Reach Approach Length Ratio SMU
Parcels G1-A Preservation 251 10:1 25
ml Stream Mitigation G1-B Enhacement II 190 5:1 38
Restoration G1-C Restoration 1,441 1:1 1,441
Enhacement II (2.5:1) G2-A Enhacement II 114 2.5:1 46
G2-B Restoration 1,258 1:1 1,258
Enhancement II (5:1) '
Total 3,254 2,808
Preservation Non-Standard Buffer Width Adjusted SMUs 3,456
Date: 9/4/2018
IRT Site Visit Notes (7/30/2018)
Drawn by: MDE
I o Monkey Wall Mitigation Site0 res
Mitchell County, North Carolina

Megan Engel
From: Haupt, Mac <[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2018 4:50 PM
To: Wiesner, Paul; Todd Tugwell;[e-mail]; Russell, Periann; Ullman, Kirsten J;
Russell, Periann
Cc: Bob White; Tsomides, Harry; Daniel Ingram; David Godley
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Monkey Wall_100069_7-30-18 IRT Site Meeting Memo_2018
Paul, Daniel, Bob,
In general, I believe the minutes reflect what we discussed on site.
However, I do recall a couple of areas excavated in the rock wall area that did not exhibit flow, or any sign of
water. There may have been some water at the top of the rock wall, but I thought as we walked down there was a real
question as to whether"daylighting"the valley at the rock wall would in fact yield a flowing stream.
In addition,the total SMUs with non-standard buffer width adjustment will likely need to be modified after our
discussions with RES on October 11th
Thanks,
Mac
From:Wiesner, Paul
Sent:Wednesday, September 5, 2018 4:06 PM
To:Todd Tugwell <[e-mail]>;[e-mail]; Russell, Periann
<[e-mail]>; Ullman, Kirsten J <[e-mail]>; Haupt, Mac
<[e-mail]>; Russell, Periann <[e-mail]>
Cc: Bob White ([e-mail]) <[e-mail]>;Tsomides, Harry<[e-mail]>; Daniel Ingram
<[e-mail]>; David Godley<[e-mail]>
Subject: Monkey Wall_100069_7-30-18 IRT Site Meeting Memo_2018
All:
RES sent out meeting minutes on Monday, August 20, 2018 for this post contract IRT site visit. DMS asked for several
revisions.
The revised meeting minutes have been received by RES and are attached.
Please let us know if you have any additional comments/concerns.
Thanks
Paul Wiesner
Western Regional Supervisor
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
828-273-1673 Mobile
paul.wiesner©ncdenr.gov

Western DMS Field Office
5 Ravenscroft Drive
Suite 102
Asheville, N.C. 28801
Ac
r `NO#hh�g Compares
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
From: Bob White [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday,August 20, 2018 5:19 PM
To:Tsomides, Harry<[e-mail]>;Todd Tugwell <[e-mail]>; Wiesner, Paul
<[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; Russell, Periann <[e-mail]>; Ullman,
Kirsten J <[e-mail]>
Subject: [External] Monkey Wall notes
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless verified.Send all suspicious email as an attachment to
Please see notes, I look forward to comments.
Sincerely,
Bob White
Project Manager
RES I res.us
Mobile: [phone]
2

Megan Engel
From: Tsomides, Harry <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday,August 23, 2018 1:13 PM
To: Bob White
Cc: Wiesner, Paul; Russell, Periann; Ullman, Kirsten J
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: [External] Monkey Wall notes
Bob,
I left you a voice mail yesterday afternoon about this. Following are the DMS comments. Please address these and send
a revised memo back to me. We will get it over to the IRT. If you have any questions please give me a call. I would like
this by tomorrow noon if at all possible.
Harry
• Please include a map of the site with the memo. Areas of interest discussed in the memo should be included on
the map for reference.
• Please include the following statement in the memo: RES and DMS understand that final design approaches and
crediting rationale must be fully justified in the mitigation plan.
• The IRT stated that the restored streams will need to have a defined bed and bank and will need to be a
considered jurisdictional streams at project closeout to receive mitigation stream credit. The mitigation plan
should show the location of all proposed stream flow gauges. Project streams will need to show a yearly
minimum of 30-days of continuous flow.
• There was discussion about where mitigation credit would begin on reaches G2-A and G2-B. Please indicate that
a PJD will be obtained on the project site and the associated PJD map will show the origin and location of all
streams and wetlands on the site. The starting location of reach and the associated crediting will be thoroughly
explained and justified in the mitigation plan.
• It is stated "Overall,the IRT members agree that the Monkey Wall Site is suitable to cold-water stream
mitigation at the SMUs proposed. Remove "at the SMUs proposed".The purpose of the contracting meeting is
to get IRT agreement on suitability of the project for mitigation. It is the providers responsibility during project
development to justify the SMUs proposed.
• It is stated "Should the [rock wall] channel not maintain surface flow a credit adjustment would be assessed
following success monitoring.". Delete or revise statement. Performance criteria and monitoring requirements
are developed in the mitigation plan, not agreed upon at the contracting meeting. In addition, credit
adjustments for mitigation plan-approved project components not meeting performance criteria are made
during the credit release schedule, not following success monitoring.
• It is stated "Amanda Jones (USACE determined that the stream feature is non-jurisdictional." Please complete
the set of parentheses around "USACE".
• Add all attendees who were on site to the attendee section; Harry Tsomides; your construction guy(cannot
recall his name); anyone else not listed ; correct the spelling of Periann's last name.
Harry Tsom ides
1

Project Manager
Division of Mitigation Services
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Tel. [phone]
[e-mail]
5 Ravenscroft Drive
Suite 102
Asheville, NC 28801
`N0# ra w
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
From: Bob White [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday,August 20, 2018 5:19 PM
To:Tsomides, Harry<[e-mail]>;Todd Tugwell <[e-mail]>; Wiesner, Paul
<[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; Russell, Periann <[e-mail]>; Ullman,
Kirsten J <[e-mail]>
Subject: [External] Monkey Wall notes
CAUTION: External email. Do no c links or open attachments unless verified.Send all suspicious email as an attachment to
. -
Please see notes, I look forward to comments.
Sincerely,
Bob White
Project Manager
RES I res.us
Mobile: [phone]
2

Morphological Parameters

Monkey Wall Morphological Parameters
Existing Design
GIA GIB GIC GIC(D/S G2) G2 GIC(U/S G2) GIC(D/S G2) G2
Feature Riffle/Step Riffle Riffle Riffle Riffle Riffle I Pool Riffle I Pool Riffle I Pool
Drainage Area(ac) 12 14 41 87 34 41 87 34
Drainage Area(mi2) 0.02 0.02 0.06 0.14 0.05 0.06 0.14 0.05
NC Regional Curve Discharge(cfs)2 5 6 12 22 11 12 22 11
VA Regional Curve Discharge(cfs)3 2 2 5 9 4 5 9 4
Design/Calculated Discharge(cfs)1 20-25 20-30 38-50 38-50 30-45 50 70 40
Dimension
BF Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 3.3 3.7 4.0 8.1 3.7 5.0 9.5 8.0 15.0 5.0 10.0
BF Width(ft) 6.7 7.4 6.0 7.8 5.4 8.7 9.5 11 12 7.7 8.6
BF Mean Depth(ft) 0.5 0.5 0.7 1.0 0.7 0.6 1.0 0.7 1.2 0.7 1.2
BF Max Depth(ft) 0.7 0.7 1.3 1.7 1.4 0.9 1.7 1.2 2.2 1.0 1.9
Wetted Perimeter(ft) 7.1 7.7 7.1 9.3 6.3 9.1 10.3 11.4 13.1 8.3 9.7
Hydraulic Radius(ft) 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.9 0.6 0.7 0.9 0.8 1.1 0.8 1.0
Width/Depth Ratio 13.9 15.0 8.7 7.6 7.7 15.0 n/a 15.0 n/a 12.0 n/a
Floodprone Width(ft) 8.2 10 15.2 12.0 9.9 30 n/a 40 n/a 50 n/a
Entrenchment Ratio 1.2 1.3 2.3 1.5 2.3 3.4 n/a 3.6 n/a 6.5 n/a
Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.0 1.6 1.1 1.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Materials
Description(D50)I cobble/boulders I cobble/boulders I cobble/gravel I cobble/gravel I cobble/gravel cobble I cobble I cobble
Profile
Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max
Riffle Length(ft) NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 5 11 8 12 5 14
Run Length(ft) NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Pool Length(ft) NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 8 16 11 13 8 14
Pool-to-Pool Spacing(ft) NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 10 16 17 21 9 20
Additional Reach Parameters
Valley Length(ft) 272 111 1427 98 1702 1427 98 1702
Channel Length(ft) 278 120 1498 100 1790 1431 98 1710
Sinuosity NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Channel Slope(ft/ft) 0.16 0.16 0.15 0.09 0.14 0.15 0.08 0.14
Rosgen Classification A/B3 A/B3 G4 C4b G4 E4a C4b E4a
I Bankfull stage was estimated using NC Regional Curve equations and existing conditions data
2 NC Regional Curve equations source:Harman et al.(2000)
3 VA Regional Curve equations source:Keaton et al.(2005)

Cross Sections of Current Conditions
& Reference Reaches

- - '•n G1 -XS1
Riffle
2478 -
2477
2476
2475
2474
_
a)
w 2473
2472
2471
2470 7
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Width
Bankfull Dimensions Flood Dimensions Materials
3.0 x-section area (ft.sq.) 51.8 W flood prone area(ft) --- D50 (mm)
4.8 width (ft) 10.8 entrenchment ratio --- D84 (mm)
0.6 mean depth (ft) 2.2 low bank height(ft) 229 threshold grain size (mm):
1.4 max depth (ft) 1.6 low bank height ratio
5.7 wetted parimeter(ft)
0.5 hyd radi (ft)
7.5 width-depth ratio
Bankfull Flow Flow Resistance Forces & Power
8.2 velocity(ft/s) 0.045 Manning's roughness 14 channel slope (%)
24.8 discharge rate (cfs) 0.29 D'Arcy-Weisbach fric. 4.66 shear stress(Ib/sq.ft.)
1.97 Froude number --- resistance factor u/u* 1.55 shear velocity(ft/s)
--- relative roughness 45 unit strm power(Ib/ft/s)

- - '•n G1 -XS2
Riffle
2452
2451 -
2450 -
\N‘''''%„tc,..4e.fieeel
02449
w2448
w
2447 -
2446
2445
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Width
Bankfull Dimensions Flood Dimensions Materials
3.3 x-section area (ft.sq.) 10.8 W flood prone area(ft) --- D50 (mm)
4.4 width (ft) 2.5 entrenchment ratio --- D84 (mm)
0.8 mean depth (ft) 1.5 low bank height(ft) 218 threshold grain size (mm):
1.1 max depth (ft) 1.4 low bank height ratio
5.6 wetted parimeter(ft)
0.6 hyd radi (ft)
5.7 width-depth ratio
Bankfull Flow Flow Resistance Forces & Power
8.1 velocity(ft/s) 0.045 Manning's roughness 12 channel slope (%)
26.7 discharge rate (cfs) 0.28 D'Arcy-Weisbach fric. 4.44 shear stress(Ib/sq.ft.)
1.85 Froude number --- resistance factor u/u* 1.51 shear velocity(ft/s)
--- relative roughness 46 unit strm power(Ib/ft/s)

Riffle
2431 -
2430 -
2429 -
c
m2428
0
w
2427
2426
2425
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Width
Bankfull Dimensions Flood Dimensions Materials
3.3 x-section area(ft.sq.) 11.8 W flood prone area (ft) --- D50 (mm)
7.5 width (ft) 1.6 entrenchment ratio --- D84 (mm)
0.4 mean depth (ft) 1.8 low bank height(ft) 122 threshold grain size(mm):
1.1 max depth (ft) 1.6 low bank height ratio
8.3 wetted parimeter(ft)
0.4 hyd radi (ft)
16.9 width-depth ratio
Bankfull Flow Flow Resistance Forces & Power
5.7 velocity(ft/s) 0.045 Manning's roughness 10 channel slope(%)
18.6 discharge rate(cfs) 0.32 D'Arcy-Weisbach fric. 2.47 shear stress (Ib/sq.ft.)
1.58 Froude number --- resistance factor u/u* 1.13 shear velocity(ft/s)
--- relative roughness 15.6 unit strm power(Ib/ft/s)

- - ion G1 G2 -XS1
Riffle
2393 -
2392
2391
0 2390 jr.
22389
2388
2387
2386
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Width
Bankfull Dimensions Flood Dimensions Materials
3.4 x-section area (ft.sq.) 12.0 W flood prone area(ft) --- D50 (mm)
6.7 width (ft) 1.8 entrenchment ratio --- D84 (mm)
0.5 mean depth (ft) 2.0 low bank height(ft) 121 threshold grain size (mm):
1.1 max depth (ft) 1.8 low bank height ratio
7.6 wetted parimeter(ft)
0.4 hyd radi (ft)
13.5 width-depth ratio
Bankfull Flow Flow Resistance Forces & Power
5.7 velocity(ft/s) 0.045 Manning's roughness 9 channel slope (%)
19.2 discharge rate (cfs) 0.31 D'Arcy-Weisbach fric. 2.47 shear stress(Ib/sq.ft.)
1.53 Froude number --- resistance factor u/u* 1.13 shear velocity(ft/s)
--- relative roughness 16.1 unit strm power(Ib/ft/s)

Riffle
2725 -
2724 -
2723
0 2722
cT5
ai 2721
2720
2719
2718 7
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Width
Bankfull Dimensions Flood Dimensions Materials
3.7 x-section area (ft.sq.) 9.6 W flood prone area(ft) --- D50 (mm)
7.4 width (ft) 1.3 entrenchment ratio --- D84 (mm)
0.5 mean depth (ft) --- low bank height(ft) 233 threshold grain size (mm):
0.7 max depth (ft) --- low bank height ratio
7.7 wetted parimeter(ft)
0.5 hyd radi (ft)
15.0 width-depth ratio
Bankfull Flow Flow Resistance Forces & Power
7.3 velocity(ft/s) 0.050 Manning's roughness 16 channel slope (%)
26.8 discharge rate (cfs) 0.37 D'Arcy-Weisbach fric. 4.75 shear stress(Ib/sq.ft.)
1.86 Froude number --- resistance factor u/u* 1.57 shear velocity(ft/s)
--- relative roughness 36 unit strm power(Ib/ft/s)

Cross Section G1A/B-XS2
Riffle
2735
2734
2733
2732
02731
m2730
w2729
2728
2727
2726
2725
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Width
Bankfull Dimensions Flood Dimensions Materials
3.4 x-section area (ft.sq.) 7.9 W flood prone area(ft) --- D50 (mm)
6.8 width (ft) 1.2 entrenchment ratio --- D84 (mm)
0.5 mean depth (ft) --- low bank height(ft) 244 threshold grain size (mm):
0.7 max depth (ft) --- low bank height ratio
7.2 wetted parimeter(ft)
0.5 hyd radi (ft)
13.5 width-depth ratio
Bankfull Flow Flow Resistance Forces & Power
7.4 velocity(ft/s) 0.050 Manning's roughness 17 channel slope (%)
25.1 discharge rate (cfs) 0.37 D'Arcy-Weisbach fric. 4.96 shear stress(Ib/sq.ft.)
1.91 Froude number --- resistance factor u/u* 1.60 shear velocity(ft/s)
--- relative roughness 39 unit strm power(Ib/ft/s)

Cross Section G1AIB-XS3
Riffle
2745 -
2744
.N\\ 7/
2743
2742
c
.02741
m
(;)2740
w
2739
2738
2737
2736 ,
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Width
Bankfull Dimensions Flood Dimensions Materials
3.3 x-section area (ft.sq.) 8.2 W flood prone area(ft) --- D50 (mm)
6.7 width (ft) 1.2 entrenchment ratio --- D84 (mm)
0.5 mean depth (ft) --- low bank height(ft) 211 threshold grain size (mm):
0.7 max depth (ft) --- low bank height ratio
7.1 wetted parimeter(ft)
0.5 hyd radi (ft)
13.9 width-depth ratio
Bankfull Flow Flow Resistance Forces & Power
6.9 velocity(ft/s) 0.050 Manning's roughness 15 channel slope (%)
22.5 discharge rate (cfs) 0.38 D'Arcy-Weisbach fric. 4.30 shear stress(Ib/sq.ft.)
1.79 Froude number --- resistance factor u/u* 1.49 shear velocity(ft/s)
--- relative roughness 31 unit strm power(Ib/ft/s)

- - •n G2 -XS1
Riffle
2548 -
2547 -
2546
0 2545
cTs
ai 2E
2 - -
2541
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Width
Bankfull Dimensions Flood Dimensions Materials
1.7 x-section area (ft.sq.) 8.5 W flood prone area(ft) --- D50 (mm)
4.5 width (ft) 1.9 entrenchment ratio --- D84 (mm)
0.4 mean depth (ft) 1.7 low bank height(ft) 184 threshold grain size (mm):
0.8 max depth (ft) 2.2 low bank height ratio
5.2 wetted parimeter(ft)
0.3 hyd radi (ft)
11.7 width-depth ratio
Bankfull Flow Flow Resistance Forces & Power
6.8 velocity(ft/s) 0.045 Manning's roughness 18 channel slope (%)
11.8 discharge rate (cfs) 0.34 D'Arcy-Weisbach fric. 3.75 shear stress(Ib/sq.ft.)
2.06 Froude number --- resistance factor u/u* 1.39 shear velocity(ft/s)
--- relative roughness 29 unit strm power(Ib/ft/s)

- - •n G2 -XS2
Riffle
2522
2521
2520
m2519 -
0
2518 - --- -- -
2517
2516
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Width
Bankfull Dimensions Flood Dimensions Materials
2.4 x-section area (ft.sq.) 15.0 W flood prone area(ft) --- D50 (mm)
4.4 width (ft) 3.4 entrenchment ratio --- D84 (mm)
0.5 mean depth (ft) 1.4 low bank height(ft) 231 threshold grain size (mm):
1.2 max depth (ft) 1.1 low bank height ratio
5.5 wetted parimeter(ft)
0.4 hyd radi (ft)
8.0 width-depth ratio
Bankfull Flow Flow Resistance Forces & Power
7.9 velocity(ft/s) 0.045 Manning's roughness 17 channel slope (%)
19.2 discharge rate (cfs) 0.31 D'Arcy-Weisbach fric. 4.69 shear stress(Ib/sq.ft.)
2.10 Froude number --- resistance factor u/u* 1.56 shear velocity(ft/s)
--- relative roughness 46 unit strm power(Ib/ft/s)

- - '•n G2 -XS3
Riffle
2482 -
2481 -
2480 - •--------,
. • .--\•\\\/
02479
w2478 -
w
2477
2476
2475
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Width
Bankfull Dimensions Flood Dimensions Materials
2.2 x-section area (ft.sq.) 11.0 W flood prone area(ft) --- D50 (mm)
3.2 width (ft) 3.4 entrenchment ratio --- D84 (mm)
0.7 mean depth (ft) 1.5 low bank height(ft) 260 threshold grain size (mm):
1.2 max depth (ft) 1.3 low bank height ratio
4.2 wetted parimeter(ft)
0.5 hyd radi (ft)
4.7 width-depth ratio
Bankfull Flow Flow Resistance Forces & Power
8.7 velocity(ft/s) 0.045 Manning's roughness 16 channel slope (%)
19.1 discharge rate (cfs) 0.29 D'Arcy-Weisbach fric. 5.29 shear stress(Ib/sq.ft.)
2.10 Froude number --- resistance factor u/u* 1.65 shear velocity(ft/s)
--- relative roughness 59 unit strm power(Ib/ft/s)

- -ction G2 -XS4
Riffle
2462 -
2461 -
2460
0 2459
22458
2457
2456
2455
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Width
Bankfull Dimensions Flood Dimensions Materials
3.1 x-section area (ft.sq.) 15.0 W flood prone area(ft) --- D50 (mm)
5.3 width (ft) 2.8 entrenchment ratio --- D84 (mm)
0.6 mean depth (ft) 1.9 low bank height(ft) 130 threshold grain size (mm):
1.2 max depth (ft) 1.6 low bank height ratio
5.9 wetted parimeter(ft)
0.5 hyd radi (ft)
8.9 width-depth ratio
Bankfull Flow Flow Resistance Forces & Power
6.1 velocity(ft/s) 0.045 Manning's roughness 8 channel slope (%)
19.2 discharge rate (cfs) 0.29 D'Arcy-Weisbach fric. 2.64 shear stress(Ib/sq.ft.)
1.48 Froude number --- resistance factor u/u* 1.17 shear velocity(ft/s)
--- relative roughness 18.1 unit strm power(Ib/ft/s)

Cross Section G2 -XS5
Riffle
2428 -
2427
2426
c
0
m2425
0
w
2424
2423
2422
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Width
Bankfull Dimensions Flood Dimensions Materials
3.8 x-section area (ft.sq.) 12.8 W flood prone area(ft) --- D50 (mm)
6.0 width (ft) 2.1 entrenchment ratio --- D84 (mm)
0.6 mean depth (ft) 1.6 low bank height(ft) 101 threshold grain size (mm):
1.3 max depth (ft) 1.2 low bank height ratio
7.0 wetted parimeter(ft)
0.6 hyd radi (ft)
9.3 width-depth ratio
Bankfull Flow Flow Resistance Forces & Power
5.5 velocity(ft/s) 0.045 Manning's roughness 6 channel slope (%)
21.0 discharge rate (cfs) 0.29 D'Arcy-Weisbach fric. 2.07 shear stress(Ib/sq.ft.)
1.29 Froude number --- resistance factor u/u* 1.03 shear velocity(ft/s)
--- relative roughness 13.1 unit strm power(Ib/ft/s)

- - •n G2 -XS6
Riffle
2415
2414 - •
2413
m2412
0
w
2411 -
2410 -
2409 r
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Width
Bankfull Dimensions Flood Dimensions Materials
2.7 x-section area (ft.sq.) 8.8 W flood prone area(ft) --- D50 (mm)
3.8 width (ft) 2.3 entrenchment ratio --- D84 (mm)
0.7 mean depth (ft) --- low bank height(ft) 79 threshold grain size (mm):
1.3 max depth (ft) --- low bank height ratio
5.2 wetted parimeter(ft)
0.5 hyd radi (ft)
5.4 width-depth ratio
Bankfull Flow Flow Resistance Forces & Power
4.8 velocity(ft/s) 0.045 Manning's roughness 5 channel slope (%)
12.7 discharge rate (cfs) 0.29 D'Arcy-Weisbach fric. 1.60 shear stress(Ib/sq.ft.)
1.17 Froude number --- resistance factor u/u* 0.91 shear velocity(ft/s)
--- relative roughness 10.4 unit strm power(Ib/ft/s)

Project Attribute Table

Project Background Information
Project Name Monkey Wall
County Mitchell
Project Area (acres) 24.42 ac
Project Coordinates (latitude and longitude) -82.2067° W, 36.0559° N
Planted Acreage (Acres of Woody Stems Planted) 19.05 ac
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province 66d —Southern Crystalline Ridges and Mountains
River Basin French Broad
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8-digit I 6010108 USGS Hydrologic Unit 14-digit I 6010108060010
DWR Sub-basin 04-03-06
Project Drainage Area (Acres and Square Miles) 86.60 ac (0.13 mi2)
Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area <1%
CGIA Land Use Classification(s) Mixed hardwoods/Conifers, Managed Herbaceous Cover, Unmanaged Herbaceous Cover-Upland, & Mixed Upland
Hardwoods
Reach Summary Information
Parameters G1-A G1-B G1-C G2
Length of reach (linear feet) 278 120 1,521 1,725
Valley confinement (Confined, moderately confined, unconfined) Confined Confined Confined Confined
Drainage area (Acres and Square Miles) 11.83 ac (0.01 mi`) 14.23 ac(0.02 mi`) 86.60 ac (0.13 mi`) 55.09 ac (0.08 mi`)
Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral Intermittent Intermittent Intermittent Intermittent
NCDWR Water Quality Classification C, TR C, TR C, TR C, TR
Stream Classification (existing) A A A A
Stream Classification (proposed) B B B B
Evolutionary trend (Simon) II I I II I I
FEMA classification Zone X Zone X Zone X Zone X
Wetland Summary Information
Parameters Wetland A Wetland B Wetland C
Size of Wetland (acres) 0.24 0.02 0.01
Wetland Type (non-riparian, riparian riverine or riparian non-riverine) Riparian riverine Riparian riverine Riparian riverine
Mapped Soil Series TsC BtF TsD
Drainage class Well Drained Well Drained Well Drained
Soil Hydric Status Non-hydric Non-hydric Non-hydric
Source of Hydrology Groundwater, surface Groundwater Groundwater
hydrology
Restoration or enhancement method (hydrologic, vegetative etc.) NA NA NA
Regulatory Considerations
Parameters Applicable? Resolved?
Water of the United States - Section 404 Yes No
Water of the United States - Section 401 Yes No
Endangered Species Act Yes Yes
Historic Preservation Act Yes Yes
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA or CAMA) No N/A
FEMA Floodplain Compliance No N/A
Essential Fisheries Habitat No N/A

Appendix C — Site Protection Instrument

SITE PROTECTION INSTRUMENT
Site Protection Instrument(s) Summary Information
The land required for the construction, management, and stewardship of this mitigation project includes
portions of the parcels listed below in Table Cl. Environmental Banc &Exchange, LLC(a wholly owned
subsidiary of RES)has obtained a conservation easement from the current landowners for the project area.
The easement deed and survey plat will be submitted to DMS and State Property Office (SPO)for approval
and will be held by the State of North Carolina. The easement deed will follow the NCDMS Full Delivery
Conservation Easement Template dated May 5, 2017 and included in this appendix. Once recorded, the
secured easement will allow Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC to proceed with the project
development and protect the mitigation assets in perpetuity. Once finalized, a copy of the land protection
instrument(s) will be included in Appendix C.
Table Cl.Project Parcel and Landowner Information
Owner of Record PIN County Site Protection Deed Book and Acreage
Instrument Page Numbers Protected
Environmental Banc Conservation
&Exchange LLC 0855-00-24-8634 Mitchell Easement 596/515 2.63
Environmental Banc Conservation
&Exchange LLC 0855-00-14-9533 Mitchell Easement 596/515 18.00
Environmental Banc Conservation
&Exchange LLC 0855-00-23-1885 Mitchell Easement 596/566 2.31

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT
AND RIGHT OF ACCESS PROVIDED
PURSUANT TO
FULL DELIVERY
MITIGATION CONTRACT
COUNTY
SPO File Number:
DMS Project Number:
Prepared by: Office of the Attorney General
Property Control Section
Return to: NC Department of Administration
State Property Office
1321 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1321
THIS DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND RIGHT OF ACCESS, made
this day of , 20 , by Landowner name goes here
, ("Grantor"), whose mailing address is Landowner address goes here , to the State of
North Carolina, ("Grantee"), whose mailing address is State of North Carolina, Department of
Administration, State Property Office, 1321 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1321. The
designations of Grantor and Grantee as used herein shall include said parties, their heirs,
successors, and assigns, and shall include singular, plural, masculine, feminine, or neuter as
required by context.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-214.8 et seq., the State
of North Carolina has established the Division of Mitigation Services (formerly known as the
Ecosystem Enhancement Program and Wetlands Restoration Program) within the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources for the purposes of acquiring, maintaining, restoring,
enhancing, creating and preserving wetland and riparian resources that contribute to the
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 1 of 11

protection and improvement of water quality, flood prevention, fisheries, aquatic habitat, wildlife
habitat, and recreational opportunities; and
WHEREAS, this Conservation Easement from Grantor to Grantee has been negotiated,
arranged and provided for as a condition of a full delivery contract between ( insert name and
address of full delivery contract provider ) and the North Carolina Department of Environmental
Quality, to provide stream, wetland and/or buffer mitigation pursuant to the North Carolina
Department of Environmental Quality Purchase and Services Contract Number
WHEREAS, The State of North Carolina is qualified to be the Grantee of a Conservation
Easement pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 121-35; and
WHEREAS, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources and the United
States Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District entered into a Memorandum of
Understanding, (MOU) duly executed by all parties on November 4, 1998. This MOU
recognized that the Wetlands Restoration Program was to provide effective compensatory
mitigation for authorized impacts to wetlands, streams and other aquatic resources by restoring,
enhancing and preserving the wetland and riparian areas of the State; and
WHEREAS, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the North Carolina
Department of Transportation and the United States Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington
District entered into a Memorandum of Agreement, (MOA) duly executed by all parties in
Greensboro, NC on July 22, 2003, which recognizes that the Division of Mitigation Services
(formerly Ecosystem Enhancement Program) is to provide for compensatory mitigation by
effective protection of the land, water and natural resources of the State by restoring, enhancing
and preserving ecosystem functions; and
WHEREAS, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, the North Carolina Division of
Water Quality, the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management, and the National Marine
Fisheries Service entered into an agreement to continue the In-Lieu Fee operations of the North
Carolina Department of Natural Resources' Division of Mitigation Services (formerly Ecosystem
Enhancement Program) with an effective date of 28 July, 2010, which supersedes and replaces
the previously effective MOA and MOU referenced above; and
WHEREAS, the acceptance of this instrument for and on behalf of the State of North
Carolina was granted to the Department of Administration by resolution as approved by the
Governor and Council of State adopted at a meeting held in the City of Raleigh, North Carolina,
on the 8th day of February 2000; and
WHEREAS, the Division of Mitigation Services in the Department of Environmental
Quality, which has been delegated the authority authorized by the Governor and Council of State
to the Department of Administration, has approved acceptance of this instrument; and
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 2 of 11

WHEREAS, Grantor owns in fee simple certain real property situated, lying, and being
in Township, County, North Carolina (the "Property"), and being
more particularly described as that certain parcel of land containing approximately
acres and being conveyed to the Grantor by deed as recorded in Deed Book at Page
of the County Registry, North Carolina; and
WHEREAS, Grantor is willing to grant a Conservation Easement and Right of Access
over the herein described areas of the Property, thereby restricting and limiting the use of the
areas of the Property subject to the Conservation Easement to the terms and conditions and
purposes hereinafter set forth, and Grantee is willing to accept said Easement and Access Rights.
The Conservation Easement shall be for the protection and benefit of the waters of if known,
insert name of stream, branch, river or waterway here.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, terms, conditions, and
restrictions hereinafter set forth, Grantor unconditionally and irrevocably hereby grants and
conveys unto Grantee, its successors and assigns, forever and in perpetuity, a Conservation
Easement along with a general Right of Access.
The Conservation Easement Area consists of the following:
Tracts Number containing a total of acres as shown on the plats
of survey entitled "Final Plat, Conservation Easement for North Carolina Division of Mitigation
Services, Project Name: , SPO File No. , EEP Site No.
Property of ," dated , 20 by name of surveyor,
PLS Number and recorded in the County, North Carolina Register
of Deeds at Plat Book Pages
See attached"Exhibit A", Legal Description of area of the Property hereinafter referred to as the
"Conservation Easement Area"
The purposes of this Conservation Easement are to maintain, restore, enhance, construct,
create and preserve wetland and/or riparian resources in the Conservation Easement Area that
contribute to the protection and improvement of water quality, flood prevention, fisheries,
aquatic habitat, wildlife habitat, and recreational opportunities; to maintain permanently the
Conservation Easement Area in its natural condition, consistent with these purposes; and to
prevent any use of the Easement Area that will significantly impair or interfere with these
purposes. To achieve these purposes, the following conditions and restrictions are set forth:
L DURATION OF EASEMENT
Pursuant to law, including the above referenced statutes, this Conservation Easement and
Right of Access shall be perpetual and it shall run with, and be a continuing restriction upon the
use of, the Property, and it shall be enforceable by the Grantee against the Grantor and against
Grantor's heirs, successors and assigns, personal representatives, agents, lessees, and licensees.
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 3 of 11

IL GRANTOR RESERVED USES AND RESTRICTED ACTIVITIES
The Conservation Easement Area shall be restricted from any development or usage that
would impair or interfere with the purposes of this Conservation Easement. Unless expressly
reserved as a compatible use herein, any activity in, or use of, the Conservation Easement Area
by the Grantor is prohibited as inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation Easement.
Any rights not expressly reserved hereunder by the Grantor have been acquired by the Grantee.
Any rights not expressly reserved hereunder by the Grantor, including the rights to all mitigation
credits, including, but not limited to, stream, wetland, and riparian buffer mitigation units,
derived from each site within the area of the Conservation Easement, are conveyed to and belong
to the Grantee. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the following specific uses are
prohibited, restricted, or reserved as indicated:
A. Recreational Uses. Grantor expressly reserves the right to undeveloped recreational
uses, including hiking, bird watching, hunting and fishing, and access to the Conservation
Easement Area for the purposes thereof.
B. Motorized Vehicle Use. Motorized vehicle use in the Conservation Easement Area is
prohibited except within a Crossing Area(s) or Road or Trail as shown on the recorded survey
plat.
C. Educational Uses. The Grantor reserves the right to engage in and permit others to
engage in educational uses in the Conservation Easement Area not inconsistent with this
Conservation Easement, and the right of access to the Conservation Easement Area for such
purposes including organized educational activities such as site visits and observations.
Educational uses of the property shall not alter vegetation, hydrology or topography of the site.
D. Damage to Vegetation. Except within Crossing Area(s) as shown on the recorded
survey plat and as related to the removal of non-native plants, diseased or damaged trees, or
vegetation that destabilizes or renders unsafe the Conservation Easement Area to persons or
natural habitat, all cutting, removal, mowing, harming, or destruction of any trees and vegetation
in the Conservation Easement Area is prohibited.
E. Industrial, Residential and Commercial Uses. All industrial, residential and
commercial uses are prohibited in the Conservation Easement Area.
F. Agricultural Use. All agricultural uses are prohibited within the Conservation Easement
Area including any use for cropland, waste lagoons, or pastureland.
G. New Construction. There shall be no building, facility, mobile home, antenna, utility
pole, tower, or other structure constructed or placed in the Conservation Easement Area.
H. Roads and Trails. There shall be no construction or maintenance of new roads, trails,
walkways, or paving in the Conservation Easement.
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 4 of 11

All existing roads, trails and crossings within the Conservation Easement Area shall be shown on
the recorded survey plat.
L Signs. No signs shall be permitted in the Conservation Easement Area except
interpretive signs describing restoration activities and the conservation values of the
Conservation Easement Area, signs identifying the owner of the Property and the holder of the
Conservation Easement, signs giving directions, or signs prescribing rules and regulations for the
use of the Conservation Easement Area.
J. Dumping or Storing. Dumping or storage of soil, trash, ashes, garbage, waste,
abandoned vehicles, appliances, machinery, or any other material in the Conservation Easement
Area is prohibited.
K. Grading, Mineral Use, Excavation, Dredging. There shall be no grading, filling,
excavation, dredging, mining, drilling, hydraulic fracturing; removal of topsoil, sand, gravel,
rock, peat, minerals, or other materials.
L. Water Quality and Drainage Patterns. There shall be no diking, draining, dredging,
channeling, filling, leveling, pumping, impounding or diverting, causing, allowing or permitting
the diversion of surface or underground water in the Conservation Easement Area. No altering
or tampering with water control structures or devices, or disruption or alteration of the restored,
enhanced, or created drainage patterns is allowed. All removal of wetlands, polluting or
discharging into waters, springs, seeps, or wetlands, or use of pesticide or biocides in the
Conservation Easement Area is prohibited. In the event of an emergency interruption or
shortage of all other water sources, water from within the Conservation Easement Area may
temporarily be withdrawn for good cause shown as needed for the survival of livestock on the
Property.
M. Subdivision and Conveyance. Grantor voluntarily agrees that no further subdivision,
partitioning, or dividing of the Conservation Easement Area portion of the Property owned by the
Grantor in fee simple ("fee") that is subject to this Conservation Easement is allowed. Any future
transfer of the Property shall be subject to this Conservation Easement and Right of Access and to the
Grantee's right of unlimited and repeated ingress and egress over and across the Property to the
Conservation Easement Area for the purposes set forth herein.
N. Development Rights. All development rights are permanently removed from the
Conservation Easement Area and are non-transferrable.
O. Disturbance of Natural Features. Any change, disturbance, alteration or impairment of
the natural features of the Conservation Easement Area or any intentional introduction of non-
native plants, trees and/or animal species by Grantor is prohibited.
The Grantor may request permission to vary from the above restrictions for good cause
shown, provided that any such request is not inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation
Easement, and the Grantor obtains advance written approval from the Division of Mitigation
Services, 1652 Mail Services Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652.
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 5 of 11

III. GRANTEE RESERVED USES
A. Right of Access, Construction, and Inspection. The Grantee, its employees and agents,
successors and assigns, receive a perpetual Right of Access to the Conservation Easement Area
over the Property at reasonable times to undertake any activities on the property to restore,
construct, manage, maintain, enhance, protect, and monitor the stream, wetland and any other
riparian resources in the Conservation Easement Area, in accordance with restoration activities
or a long-term management plan. Unless otherwise specifically set forth in this Conservation
Easement, the rights granted herein do not include or establish for the public any access rights.
B. Restoration Activities. These activities include planting of trees, shrubs and herbaceous
vegetation, installation of monitoring wells, utilization of heavy equipment to grade, fill, and
prepare the soil, modification of the hydrology of the site, and installation of natural and
manmade materials as needed to direct in-stream, above ground, and subterraneous water flow.
C. Signs. The Grantee, its employees and agents, successors or assigns, shall be permitted
to place signs and witness posts on the Property to include any or all of the following: describe
the project, prohibited activities within the Conservation Easement, or identify the project
boundaries and the holder of the Conservation Easement.
D. Fences. Conservation Easements are purchased to protect the investments by the State
(Grantee)in natural resources. Livestock within conservations easements damages the
investment and can result in reductions in natural resource value and mitigation credits which
would cause financial harm to the State. Therefore, Landowners (Grantor)with livestock are
required to restrict livestock access to the Conservation Easement area. Repeated failure to do so
may result in the State (Grantee)repairing or installing livestock exclusion devices (fences)
within the conservation area for the purpose of restricting livestock access. In such cases, the
landowner(Grantor) must provide access to the State (Grantee)to make repairs.
E. Crossing Area(s). The Grantee is not responsible for maintenance of crossing area(s),
however, the Grantee, its employees and agents, successors or assigns, reserve the right to repair
crossing area(s), at its sole discretion and to recover the cost of such repairs from the Grantor if
such repairs are needed as a result of activities of the Grantor, his successors or assigns.
IV. ENFORCEMENT AND REMEDIES
A. Enforcement. To accomplish the purposes of this Conservation Easement, Grantee is
allowed to prevent any activity within the Conservation Easement Area that is inconsistent with
the purposes of this Conservation Easement and to require the restoration of such areas or
features in the Conservation Easement Area that may have been damaged by such unauthorized
activity or use. Upon any breach of the terms of this Conservation Easement by Grantor, the
Grantee shall, except as provided below, notify the Grantor in writing of such breach and the
Grantor shall have ninety (90) days after receipt of such notice to correct the damage caused by
such breach. If the breach and damage remains uncured after ninety (90) days, the Grantee may
enforce this Conservation Easement by bringing appropriate legal proceedings including an
action to recover damages, as well as injunctive and other relief. The Grantee shall also have the
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 6 of 11

power and authority, consistent with its statutory authority: (a) to prevent any impairment of the
Conservation Easement Area by acts which may be unlawful or in violation of this Conservation
Easement; (b) to otherwise preserve or protect its interest in the Property; or (c) to seek damages
from any appropriate person or entity. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Grantee reserves the
immediate right, without notice, to obtain a temporary restraining order, injunctive or other
appropriate relief, if the breach is or would irreversibly or otherwise materially impair the
benefits to be derived from this Conservation Easement, and the Grantor and Grantee
acknowledge that the damage would be irreparable and remedies at law inadequate. The rights
and remedies of the Grantee provided hereunder shall be in addition to, and not in lieu of, all
other rights and remedies available to Grantee in connection with this Conservation Easement.
B. Inspection. The Grantee, its employees and agents, successors and assigns, have the
right, with reasonable notice, to enter the Conservation Easement Area over the Property at
reasonable times for the purpose of inspection to determine whether the Grantor is complying
with the terms, conditions and restrictions of this Conservation Easement.
C. Acts Beyond Grantor's Control. Nothing contained in this Conservation Easement
shall be construed to entitle Grantee to bring any action against Grantor for any injury or change
in the Conservation Easement Area caused by third parties, resulting from causes beyond the
Grantor's control, including, without limitation, fire, flood, storm, and earth movement, or from
any prudent action taken in good faith by the Grantor under emergency conditions to prevent,
abate, or mitigate significant injury to life or damage to the Property resulting from such causes.
D. Costs of Enforcement. Beyond regular and typical monitoring expenses, any costs
incurred by Grantee in enforcing the terms of this Conservation Easement against Grantor,
including, without limitation, any costs of restoration necessitated by Grantor's acts or omissions
in violation of the terms of this Conservation Easement, shall be borne by Grantor.
E. No Waiver. Enforcement of this Easement shall be at the discretion of the Grantee and
any forbearance, delay or omission by Grantee to exercise its rights hereunder in the event of any
breach of any term set forth herein shall not be construed to be a waiver by Grantee.
V. MISCELLANEOUS
A. This instrument sets forth the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the
Conservation Easement and supersedes all prior discussions, negotiations, understandings or
agreements relating to the Conservation Easement. If any provision is found to be invalid, the
remainder of the provisions of the Conservation Easement, and the application of such provision
to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is found to be invalid, shall not be
affected thereby.
B. Grantor is responsible for any real estate taxes, assessments, fees, or charges levied upon
the Property. Grantee shall not be responsible for any costs or liability of any kind related to the
ownership, operation, insurance, upkeep, or maintenance of the Property, except as expressly
provided herein. Upkeep of any constructed bridges, fences, or other amenities on the Property
are the sole responsibility of the Grantor. Nothing herein shall relieve the Grantor of the
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 7 of 11

obligation to comply with federal, state or local laws, regulations and permits that may apply to
the exercise of the Reserved Rights.
C. Any notices shall be sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested to the
parties at their addresses shown herein or to other addresses as either party establishes in writing
upon notification to the other.
D. Grantor shall notify Grantee in writing of the name and address and any party to whom
the Property or any part thereof is to be transferred at or prior to the time said transfer is made.
Grantor further agrees that any subsequent lease, deed, or other legal instrument by which any
interest in the Property is conveyed is subject to the Conservation Easement herein created.
E. The Grantor and Grantee agree that the terms of this Conservation Easement shall survive
any merger of the fee and easement interests in the Property or any portion thereof.
F. This Conservation Easement and Right of Access may be amended, but only in writing
signed by all parties hereto, or their successors or assigns, if such amendment does not affect the
qualification of this Conservation Easement or the status of the Grantee under any applicable
laws, and is consistent with the purposes of the Conservation Easement. The owner of the
Property shall notify the State Property Office and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in writing
sixty (60) days prior to the initiation of any transfer of all or any part of the Property or of any
request to void or modify this Conservation Easement. Such notifications and modification
requests shall be addressed to:
Division of Mitigation Services Program Manager
NC State Property Office
1321 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1321
and
General Counsel
US Army Corps of Engineers
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, NC 28403
G. The parties recognize and agree that the benefits of this Conservation Easement are in
gross and assignable provided, however, that the Grantee hereby covenants and agrees, that in
the event it transfers or assigns this Conservation Easement, the organization receiving the
interest will be a qualified holder under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 121-34 et seq. and § 170(h) of the
Internal Revenue Code, and the Grantee further covenants and agrees that the terms of the
transfer or assignment will be such that the transferee or assignee will be required to continue in
perpetuity the conservation purposes described in this document.
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 8 of 11

VI. QUIET ENJOYMENT
Grantor reserves all remaining rights accruing from ownership of the Property, including
the right to engage in or permit or invite others to engage in only those uses of the Conservation
Easement Area that are expressly reserved herein, not prohibited or restricted herein, and are not
inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation Easement. Without limiting the generality of
the foregoing, the Grantor expressly reserves to the Grantor, and the Grantor's invitees and
licensees, the right of access to the Conservation Easement Area, and the right of quiet
enjoyment of the Conservation Easement Area,
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said rights and easements perpetually unto the State of
North Carolina for the aforesaid purposes,
AND Grantor covenants that Grantor is seized of said premises in fee and has the right to
convey the permanent Conservation Easement herein granted; that the same is free from
encumbrances and that Grantor will warrant and defend title to the same against the claims of all
persons whomsoever.
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 9 of 11

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Grantor has hereunto set his hand and seal, the day
and year first above written.
(SEAL)
NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF
I , a Notary Public in and for the County and State
aforesaid, do hereby certify that , Grantor, personally appeared
before me this day and acknowledged the execution of the foregoing instrument.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and Notary Seal this the
day of , 20 .
Notary Public
My commission expires:
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page l0 of 11

Exhibit A
[INSERT LEGAL DESCRIPTION]
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 11 of 11

Appendix D — Credit Release Schedule

CREDIT RELEASE SCHEDULE
All credit releases will be based on the total credit generated as reported in the approved final mitigation
plan, unless there are major discrepancies and then a mitigation plan addendum will be submitted. Under
no circumstances shall any mitigation project be debited until the necessary Department of the Army(DA)
authorization has been received for its construction or the District Engineer (DE) has otherwise provided
written approval for the project in the case where no DA authorization is required for construction of the
mitigation project. The DE, in consultation with the IRT, will determine if performance standards have
been satisfied sufficiently to meet the requirements of the release schedules below. In cases where some
performance standards have not been met, credits may still be released depending on the specifics of the
case. Monitoring may be required to be restarted or be extended, depending on the extent to which the site
fails to meet the specified performance standard.The release of project credits will be subject to the criteria
described as follows in Table D.
Table D. Stream Credit Release Schedule
Credit Interim Total
Release Release Activity Release Release
Milestone
0 Initial Allocation—see requirements below 30% 30%
1 First year monitoring report demonstrates performance 10% 40%
standards are being met
2 Second year monitoring report demonstrates performance 10% 50%
standards are being met
3 Third year monitoring report demonstrates performance 10% 60%
standards are being met
* Fourth year monitoring report demonstrates performance ° 65%
4* are being met 5/0 (75%**)
5 Fifth year monitoring report demonstrates performance ° 75%
standards are being met 10/° (85%**)
6* Sixth year monitoring report demonstrates performance 5% 80%*
standards are being met (90%**)
7 Seventh year monitoring report demonstrates performance 90%
standards are being met and project has received closeout 10% (100%**)
approval
*Please note that vegetation data may not be required with monitoring reports submitted during these monitoring years unless
otherwise required by the Mitigation Plan or directed by the IRT.
—10%reserve of credits to be held back until the bankfull event performance standard has been met.
Initial Allocation of Released Credits
The initial allocation of released credits,as specified in the mitigation plan,can be released by DMS without
prior written approval of the DE upon satisfactory completion of the following activities:
1) Approval of the final Mitigation Plan.
2) Recordation of the preservation mechanism,as well as a title opinion acceptable to the USACE
covering the property.
3) Completion of project construction (the initial physical and biological improvements to the
mitigation site) pursuant to the mitigation plan; per the DMS Instrument, construction means
that a mitigation site has been constructed in its entirety, to include planting, and an as-built
report has been produced. As-built reports must be sealed by an engineer prior to project
closeout, if appropriate but not prior to the initial allocation of released credits.

4) Receipt of necessary DA permit authorization or written DA approval for projects where DA
permit issuance is not required.
Subsequent Credit Releases
All subsequent credit releases must be approved by the DE, in consultation with the IRT, based on a
determination that required performance standards have been achieved. For stream projects a reserve of
10% of a site's total stream credits shall be released after four bankfull events have occurred, in separate
years,provided the channel is stable and all other performance standards are met. In the event that less than
four bankfull events occur during the monitoring period, release of these reserve credits shall be at the
discretion of the IRT. As projects approach milestones associated with credit release, DMS will submit a
request for credit release to the DE along with documentation substantiating achievement of criteria
required for release to occur. This documentation will be included with the annual monitoring report.

Appendix E — Financial Assurance

FINANCIAL ASSURANCE
Pursuant to Section IV H and Appendix III of the NCDEQ DMS (formerly Ecosystem Enhancement
Program) In-Lieu Fee Instrument dated July 28, 2010, the North Carolina Department of Environmental
Quality (NCDEQ) has provided the USACE-Wilmington District with a formal commitment to fund
projects to satisfy mitigation requirements assumed by NCDEQ DMS.This commitment provides financial
assurance for all mitigation projects implemented by the program.

Appendix F — Maintenance Plan

MAINTENANCE PLAN
The site will be monitored on a regular basis and a physical inspection will be 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:
Fl.Maintenance Plan
Component/
Feature Maintenance through project close-out
Routine channel maintenance and repair activities may include chinking of in-stream
structures to prevent piping, securing of loose coir matting, and supplemental
installations of live stakes and other target vegetation along the channel.Areas where
Stream stormwater and floodplain flows intercept the channel may also require maintenance
to prevent bank failures and head-cutting. Stream maintenance activities will be
documented and reported in annual monitoring reports. Stream maintenance will
continue through the monitoring period.
Routine wetland maintenance and repair activities may include securing of loose coir
Wetland matting,channel plug maintenance,and supplemental installations of live stakes and
other target vegetation within the wetland.
Vegetation shall be maintained to ensure the health and vigor of the targeted plant
community. Routine vegetation maintenance and repair activities may include
supplemental planting, pruning, mulching, and fertilizing. Exotic invasive plant
Vegetation species shall be treated by mechanical and/or chemical methods. Any vegetation
requiring herbicide application will be performed in accordance with NC Department
of Agriculture(NCDA)rules and regulations.Vegetation maintenance activities will
be documented and reported in annual monitoring reports. Vegetation maintenance
will continue through the monitoring period.
Site boundaries shall be identified in the field to ensure clear distinction between the
mitigation site and adjacent properties. Boundaries will be marked with signs
identifying the property as a mitigation site, and will include the name of the long-
Site term steward and a contact number. Boundaries may be identified by fence,marker,
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. Easement compliance monitoring
and staking/signage maintenance will continue in perpetuity as a stewardship
activity.
Road N/A
Crossing
Routine site visits and monitoring will be used to determine if beaver management
is needed. If beaver activity poses a threat to project stability or vegetative success,
Beaver RES will trap beavers and remove impoundments as needed.All beaver management
activities will be documented and included in annual monitoring reports. Beaver
monitoring and management will continue through the monitoring period.

Appendix G — DWR Stream ID Forms

(; 1-
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: LI lO d j 3 Project/Site: mc„ , ke,`(f \u r) Latitude:
Evaluator: illl 94. ,, t . )e,> M
County: :4 c VT i I Longitude:
Total Points: Jrc Stream Determination circle one) Other �.iN, �/'r�y
Stream is at least intermittent 1 Ephemeral tiptermitten Perennial e.g. Quad Name: S 4-e
if a 19 or perennial if a 30* c� 1
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 1 ) Absent Weak Moderate Strong
la.Continuity of channel bed and bank 0 1 2 CI)
^2. Sinuosity of channel along thaiweg 0 d 2 3
3. In-channel structure:ex. riffle-pool,step-pool, 1 2 3
ripple-pool sequence
4. Particle size of stream substrate 0 1 C2) 3
5.Active/relict floodplain 0 I1 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 1 2 3
7. Recent alluvial deposits 1 2 3
8. Headcuts 0 C) 2 3
9.Grade control () 0.5 1 1.5
10. Natural valley 0 0.5 � 1.5
11. Second or greater order channel (12.2.2 Yes=3
a artificial ditches are not rated;see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 6 _)
12. Presence of Baseflow 0 1 G.J 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria lk 1 2 3
14. Leaf litter 1.5 1J 0.5 0
15. Sediment on plants or debris (0] 0.5 1 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles (� 0.5 1 1.5
17. Soil-based evidence of high water table? No=0 e
C. Biology (Subtotal = 7 )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed ` 2 1 0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed t 2 1 0
20.Macrobenthos(note diversity and abundance) 0 1 2 3
21.Aquatic Mollusks 0 2 3
22. Fish 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Crayfish 0 0.5 1 _ 1.5
24.Amphibians 0 0.5 1 1.5
25,Algae 0 0.5 1 1.5
26.Wetland plants in streambed FACW=0.75; OBL= 1.5 Other=0
"perennial streams may also be identified using other methods.See p.35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

Ga
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 1/2 (p/Za/ 5 Project/Site: A„,,v P, vV c, I) Latitude:
Evaluator: M' J rs,P r O County: M,lc ke.1 Longitude:
V
Total Points: Stream Determination(circle one) Other ctteYS
Stream is at least intermittent I v,l l e
if 2 19 or perennial if 2 30* 1 Ephemeral er Perennial e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 1. 5 ) Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1'Continuity of channel bed and bank 0 1 Q 3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 0 1� _2 3
3. In-channel structure:ex, riffle-pool,step-pool, 1 2 3
ripple-pool sequence
4. Particle size of stream substrate 0 1 (2) 3
5.Active/relict floodplain 0 1 1 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 1 2 3
7. Recent alluvial deposits 1 2 3
8. Headcuts 0 2 3
9. Grade control 0 _ `0. 1 1.5
10. Natural valley 0 0.5 CD 1.5
11.Second or greater order channel (No Yes=3
a artificial ditches are not rated;see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = )
12. Presence of Baseflow 0 1 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 1 2 3
14. Leaf litter 1.5 Ct 0.5 0
15.Sediment on plants or debris 0.5 1 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles % 0.5 1 1.5
17.Soil-based evidence of high water table? No=0
C. Biology (Subtotal = (o )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 2 1 0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 2 1 0
20. Macrobenthos(note diversity and abundance) 0 1 2 3
21.Aquatic Mollusks 0 1 2 3
22. Fish 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Crayfish 0 0.5 1 1.5
24.Amphibians 0 0.5 1 1.5
25.Algae 0 0.5 1 1.5
26.Wetland plants in streambed FACW=0.75; OBL= 1.5 Other=0
`perennial streams may also be identified using other methods.See p.35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

Appendix H — USACE District Assessment
Forms

Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet Summary
Reach G1-A G1-B G1-C G2
1 Presence of flow/persistent 2 2 3 3
pools in stream
2 Evidence of past human alteration 5 3 2 0
3 Riparian zone 4 3 0 0
4 Evidence of nutrient or chemical 3 2 2 2
discharges
5 Groundwater discharge 4 2 2 1
0
U
t 6 Presence of adjacent floodplain 0 0 2 2
a
7 Entrenchment/floodplain access 0 0 1 1
8 Presence of adjacent wetlands 1 0 1 1
9 Channel sinuosity 2 1 2 2
10 Sediment input 4 3 3 3
11 Size &diversity of channel bed 5 3 2 2
substrate
12 Evidence of channel incision or 5 2 2 2
widening
13 Presence of major bank failures 5 4 2 2
Z.,'
a 14 Root depth and density on banks 5 1 0 0
y 15 Impact by agriculture, livestock, or 4 2 0 0
timber production
16 Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool 4 3 1 1
complexes
17 Habitat complexity 5 2 0 0
a 18 Canopy coverage over streambed 5 2 0 0
cz
19 Substrate embeddedness 3 2 1 1
20 Presence of stream invertebrates 5 2 0 0
cs) 21 Presence of amphibians 4 0 0 0
0
0
op 22 Presence of fish 0 0 0 0
23 Evidence of wildlife use 2 0 0 0
Total Score: 77 39 26 23

Appendix I — Wetland JD Forms and Maps

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action ID: SAW-2018-01162 County: Mitchell
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Property Owner: Bradley Gouge Livin2 Trust
Address: 138 Bradley Gouge Road
Johnson City,TN 37604
Property Owner: Marshall Street,Janice Street and Milan Street
Address: 10058 N.226 Hwy
Bakersville,NC 28705
Size(acres): 26 acres
Nearest Town: Bakersville
Nearest Waterway: Big Rock Creek
Coordinates: 36.0548-82.2091
River Basin/HUC: French Broad/06010105
Location description: The site is located at 385 Fork Mountain Road,near Bakersville,NC.PINs 0855-00-24-8634,
0855-00-14-9533,0855-00-35-2677,0855-00-34-2454(Bradley Gou2e Livin2 Trust)and 0855-00-23-1885(Street).
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
X There are waters,including wetlands, on the above described project area, that may be subject to Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act(CWA)(33 USC§ 1344)and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act(RHA) (33 USC§403).The
waters,including wetlands, have been delineated,and the delineation has been verified by the Corps to be sufficiently
accurate and reliable. Therefore this preliminary jurisdiction determination may be used in the permit evaluation process,
including determining compensatory mitigation.For purposes of computation of impacts,compensatory mitigation
requirements,and other resource protection measures,a permit decision made on the basis of a preliminary JD will treat
all waters and wetlands that would be affected in any way by the permitted activity on the site as if they are jurisdictional
waters of the U.S. This preliminary determination is not an appealable action under the Regulatory Program
Administrative Appeal Process(Reference 33 CFR Part 331).However,you may request an approved JD,which is an
appealable action,by contacting the Corps district for further instruction.
_ There are waters on the above described property, that may be subject to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act(CWA)(33
USC§ 1344)and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act(RHA)(33 USC§ 403).However, since thewaters have
not been properly delineated,this preliminary jurisdiction determination may not be used in the permit evaluation
process. Without a verified wetland delineation,this preliminary determination is merely an effective presumption of
CWA/RHA jurisdiction over all of the waters at the project area,which is not sufficiently accurate and reliable to
support an enforceable permit decision. We recommend that you have the waters of the U.S. on your property
delineated. As the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner,you may wish to
obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that can be verified by the Corps.
B. Approved Determination
_ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described property subject to the permit requirements
of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act(RHA) (33 USC§403)and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act(CWA)(33
USC§ 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations,this determination may be relied upon for
a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
_ There are waters of the U.S. including wetlands on the above described property subject to the permit requirements of
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act(CWA)(33 USC§ 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations,this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
_ We recommend you have the waters of the U.S. on your property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to
accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner,you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation
that can be verified by the Corps.

_ The waters of the U.S.including wetlands on your project area have been delineated and the delineation has been
verified by the Corps. If you wish to have the delineation surveyed,the Corps can review and verify the survey upon
completion. Once verified,this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA and/or RHA
jurisdiction on your property which,provided there is no change in the law or our published regulations,may be relied
upon for a period not to exceed five years.
_ The waters of the U.S.including wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat
signed by the Corps Regulatory Official identified below on . Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations,this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
_ There are no waters of the U.S.,to include wetlands,present on the above described project area which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act(33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations,this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
_ The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act
(CAMA). You should contact the Division of Coastal Management to determine their requirements.
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US and/or wetlands without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act(33 USC§ 1311).Placement of dredged or fill material,
construction or placement of structures,or work within navigable waters of the United States without a Department of the
Army permit may constitute a violation of Sections 9 and/or 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act(33 USC§401 and/or 403). If
you have any questions regarding this determination and/or the Corps regulatory program,please contact Amanda Jones at
828-271-7980,ext.4225 or [e-mail].
C. Basis for Determination:
See attached table and map depicted jurisdictional waters of the U.S.
D. Remarks:
This determination is associated with the study area shown on the attached map dated 04/26/19 and labeled Potential
Wetland or Non-Wetland Waters of the U.S.Map.
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the
particular site identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation
provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants,or anticipate
participation in USDA programs,you should request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the
Natural Resources Conservation Service,prior to starting work.
F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in
B. above)
This correspondence constitutes an approved jurisdictional determination for the above described site. If you object to
this determination,you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. Enclosed you
will find a Notification of Appeal Process(NAP)fact sheet and request for appeal(RFA)form. If you request to appeal
this determination you must submit a completed RFA form to the following address:
US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Attn: Jason Steele,Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW,Room 10M15
Atlanta,Georgia 30303-8801

In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps,the Corps must determine that it is complete,that it meets the criteria
for appeal under 33 CFR part 331.5,and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the
NAP. Should you decide to submit an RFA form,it must be received at the above address by N/A(Preliminary-JD).
**It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this
correspondence.** Digitally signed by
FUEMMELER.AMAND FUEMMELER.AMANDAJONES.124
A.JONES.1242835090 2835090
Corps Regulatory Official: Date:2019.06.1714:1358-04'00'
Amanda Jones
Issue Date of JD: June 17,2019 Expiration Date: N/A Preliminary JD
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure
we continue to do so,please complete our Customer Satisfaction Survey, located online at
http://corpsmapu.usace.army.mil/cmapex/f?p=13 6:4:0.
Copy furnished:
Resource Environmental Solutions/Attn: Jeremy Schmid(via email)

NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: Bradley Gouge Living Trust File Number: SAW-SAW-2018-01162 Date: June 17,2019
Attached is: See Section below
❑ INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission) A
❑ PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission) B
❑ PERMIT DENIAL C
❑ APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION D
E PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION E
SECTION I-The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision.
Additional information may be found at http://www.usace.army.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/RegulatoryProgramandPermits.aspx or
Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331.
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit,you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission(LOP),you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature
on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety,and waive all rights to appeal the
permit,including its terms and conditions,and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
• OBJECT: If you object to the permit(Standard or LOP)because of certain terms and conditions therein,you may request that the
permit be modified accordingly.You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district engineer. Your
objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice,or you will forfeit your right to appeal
the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter,the district engineer will evaluate your objections and may: (a)modify the
permit to address all of your concerns,(b)modify the permit to address some of your objections,or(c)not modify the permit
having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After evaluating your objections,the district engineer
will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration,as indicated in Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT:You may accept or appeal the permit
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit,you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission(LOP),you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature
on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety,and waive all rights to appeal the
permit,including its terms and conditions,and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
• APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit(Standard or LOP)because of certain terms and conditions therein,you
may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form
and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of
this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by
completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer
within 60 days of the date of this notice.
D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DE TERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or provide new information.
• ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the date of
this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety,and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
• APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD,you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers Administrative
Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the district engineer. This form must be received by
the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DE TERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps regarding the preliminary JD.
The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish,you may request an approved JD (which may be appealed),by contacting the Corps
district for further instruction. Also you may provide new information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD.

SECTION II-REQUEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an initial
proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons or
objections are addressed in the administrative record.)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record,the Corps memorandum for the record
of the appeal conference or meeting,and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to clarify the
administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record. However,you may
provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative record.
POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION:
If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may
appeal process you may contact: also contact:
District Engineer,Wilmington Regulatory Division, Mr. Jason Steele,Administrative Appeal Review Officer
Attn: Amanda Jones CESAD-PDO
151 Patton Avenue,Room 208 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
Asheville,North Carolina 28801-5006 60 Forsyth Street,Room 10M15
828-271-7980,ext.4232 Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government
consultants,to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15 day
notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportunity to participate in all site investi ations.
Date: Telephone number:
Signature of appellant or agent.
For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits send this form to:
District Engineer,Wilmington Regulatory Division,Attn.:Amanda Jones,69 Darlington Avenue,Wilmington,
North Carolina 28403
For Permit denials,Proffered Permits and approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this form to:
Division Engineer,Commander,U.S.Army Engineer Division,South Atlantic,Attn: Mr.Jason Steele,
Administrative Appeal Officer,CESAD-PDO,60 Forsyth Street,Room 10M15,Atlanta,Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]

Appendix 2 - PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD: 04/26/19
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: Resource Environmental Solutions
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: CESAW-RG-A Monkey Wall Mitigation Site 2018-01162
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES AND/OR
AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: NC County/parish/borough: Mitchell City: Bakersville
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format):
Lat.: 36.0548 Long.: -82.2091
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Big Rock Creek
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
❑■ Field Determination. Date(s): Aug 2018
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES IN REVIEW AREA WHICH "MAY BE"SUBJECT TO REGULATORY
JURISDICTION.
Site Latitude Longitude Estimated amount Type of aquatic Geographic authority
number (decimal (decimal of aquatic resource resource (i.e.,wetland to which the aquatic
degrees) degrees) in review area vs. non-wetland resource "may be"
(acreage and linear waters) subject(i.e., Section
feet, if applicable) 404 or Section 10/404)
WA 36.0548 -82.209 0.2476 ac wetland Section 404
WB 36.0581 -82.2047 0.0278 wetland Section 404
WC 36.0569 -82.205 0.0134 wetland Section 404
G 1 36.0561 -82.206 1 ,977 If non wetland water Section 404
G2 36.0573 -82.204 1 ,637 If non wetland water Section 404

1) The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional aquatic resources in
the review area, and the requestor of this PJD is hereby advised of his or her option
to request and obtain an approved JD (AJD) for that review area based on an
informed decision after having discussed the various types of JDs and their
characteristics and circumstances when they may be appropriate.
2) In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or a
Nationwide General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring "pre-
construction notification" (PCN), or requests verification for a non-reporting NWP or
other general permit, and the permit applicant has not requested an AJD for the
activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware that: (1) the permit applicant has
elected to seek a permit authorization based on a PJD, which does not make an
official determination of jurisdictional aquatic resources; (2) the applicant has the
option to request an AJD before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit
authorization, and that basing a permit authorization on an AJD could possibly result
in less compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions; (3) the
applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than accepting the terms
and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4) the applicant can
accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply with all the terms and
conditions of that permit, including whatever mitigation requirements the Corps has
determined to be necessary; (5) undertaking any activity in reliance upon the subject
permit authorization without requesting an AJD constitutes the applicant's acceptance
of the use of the PJD; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered
individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps permit
authorization based on a PJD constitutes agreement that all aquatic resources in the
review area affected in any way by that activity will be treated as jurisdictional, and
waives any challenge to such jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance
or enforcement action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7)
whether the applicant elects to use either an AJD or a PJD, the JD will be processed
as soon as practicable. Further, an AJD, a proffered individual permit (and all terms
and conditions contained therein), or individual permit denial can be administratively
appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331. If, during an administrative appeal, it
becomes appropriate to make an official determination whether geographic
jurisdiction exists over aquatic resources in the review area, or to provide an official
delineation of jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review area, the Corps will
provide an AJD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable. This PJD finds
that there "may be"waters of the U.S. and/or that there "may be"navigable waters of
the U.S. on the subject review area, and identifies all aquatic features in the review
area that could be affected by the proposed activity, based on the following
information:

SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply)
Checked items should be included in subject file. Appropriately reference sources
below where indicated for all checked items:
n Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor:
Map:Vicinity, USGS, NWI, Soils, Existing Conditions, WOUS
n Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor.
n Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
n Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Rationale:
n D• ata sheets prepared by the Corps:
n Corps navigable waters' study:
n U• .S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
n USGS NHD data.
n USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
n U• .S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: 24k Bakersville
n Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
n N• ational wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
n State/local wetland inventory map(s):
n F• EMA/FIRM maps:
n 1• 00-year Floodplain Elevation is: .(National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
n P• hotographs: n Aerial (Name & Date):
or n Other (Name & Date):
n Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
n Other information (please specify):
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily
been verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for later jurisdictional
determinations.
Digitally sig
FUEMMELER.AMAND FUEMMELER.AMAnedbyNDAJONES.124
A.JONE5.1242835090 2835090
Date:2019.06.17 14:09:51-04'00'
Signature and date of Signature and date of
Regulatory staff member person requesting PJD
completing PJD (REQUIRED, unless obtaining
the signature is impracticable)'
1 Districts may establish timeframes for requestor to return signed PJD forms. If the requestor does not respond
within the established time frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is
necessary prior to finalizing an action.

9.
� '�' * �Y + Ldi rY 16. ' I r` 11i ' -.'• J' Qt., fir. J i k i '� 4' I i _ .
AT
1 ?., ,I i % �# j_i .r•1 f •}' +� ti -• r r•yt �" J ''Y I {4 Pres
•
1.• dr.
•
..... 7 .i.,...
•
•
�r}. -JP
i• -� .� T. ..} f '' = .Y' ' .F }`' �. �{ { [ }�T `I t �,A, $` F.,.•] a
•
,.., .1. g.
•
5•e , •r� y '.: � r y. , ..•4 :*h •4''hF i `~' 4'4 �, * ,yam . y� ' f . , •• � � }-111-1. k I'.,' •I'''..
r i •
• •
. • 1
_. ,F 4 ; {' fn..... • '.0. '• )� .. I • ,. � P i x: ' .• .T.. r.
■ .is rL_ 1 i. . •Y.1 J S � '
•
k�7�f'' • i lii
' • i *4l - * I • �+ryL r . • '. k •5'� Ia*. . ' ' ,�• y L' � L "I_ i -ill'- S , r • e rk ! •, • I I F ,
•
•
4' W 1 3 4 kii r 5. } .i;' • ' 0 100 200
f . r +' i „III •
y ,,s4 4N{,i ' Feet+y{` ;.' 1 in
• et' 0'I E r .liX, I'I ', C a F
. `s r.- =�r* •. . ` '• - • t Potential� , . I ...._' `er_ .- . . s , _ �°`. • • �' . .
_� •, "� 'r • 4 •' I Wetland or Non-Wetland Waters
i, -. ' " + ' 'II. ..,•:_ .,ti , . .. - of the
1 '' • ••. •.•• `� i #' '.t ., I . 'l - ;. io,. U.S. Map
�. ! ;. .tih. •
Monkey Wall
WA•
• t ' Mitigation Site
•
••
' +l •
� = Y • r. Mitchell County, North Carolina
4 _ .a - . ',-chi .. • I fii - s L -
•
• ' _ kit sf _ -� .. .� - :- I + � • "y, Date: 4/26/2019 Drawn by JLS
a• - r. . s - s �r•_{. � 4�- � � pis" .7 ,Tr4
•
( '• ' } • .� K , 4, i _ 7;,' r _ - . , .. ..,-,'L • w' Revisions: NONE Checked by: BPB
•
•
i ti • ; '#* Legend
•
.. . h NB • I • • • Study Area(26 ac)
•
^. • 1 Potential Wetland Waters of the US
•
, - Potential Non-Wetland Waters of the US
r' .. .
T Wetland Data Point
r.
- _ WC Upland Data Point
r
•
i"
F ;A 1 44 '
a w, �'T k REFERENCE
+T��a. * . - 1 Horizontal Datum is NAD83 UTM Z15N.
''' � - y- rIE 1 F ' ' - ...-r
° . _ - 2)Map Projection is NAD_1983_StatePlane_
• iy7k' far ,"y I 1'- ':`. :�i Ll ~, I`'{ 'L' • North Carolina FIPS 3200 Feet
�'•_ _ 1. '
- : L..#1:: • • r ,
X , • ` gym 'k.' J_.• 1' + ;N, - _ r 7 — v F r Y*}• , - T �, 9. L r ,
•
•
•
p i 3 '� (. ._.: I' . I 'ti f� t`• , . * ..f. if . .. s1 ,y... �r ...„. :t ' .. ... y�I.�Ma�Ralmiir��'.
' '+ •vi. _ + x .a , -3 ri ate' * .} r ; • F .} ' °r1'F • SFN �k ' f..a+ { .y :a .�1,����������.��� ���
c-te, 'm • ' . . i 0..i.4.4
iN, i �oe► � ° • fi • F* r ' ' }. M1r ; ;' w �� /r7j<<���,1��,,,
h ,. tip .'r.L. 4 :1 r.. `
#f` $_. 4. 4' �xr .iL. .. :+f' i :€ 4` L. ;ham=:�', I';a- ;il d `._. *Mi
f 4 'r f. . r '. _ it y' , I :.a ♦P1
i1 * x k .y :Y .J • •y3r 'Y7E+ • + n I�I.S*. `. . :R - *x,k
.4. ' ,. r Lr IJ •JF .. ' ..r ''qf r" -e 4. . Ma . • .Y .�i►..1. '5aJ ��"'.7.- •"1 - . .... �1 yr

302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Or es
Raleigh, NC 27605
Corporate Headquarters
5020 Montrose Blvd.Suite 650
Houston,TX 77006
Main:713.520.5400
April 26, 2019
Amanda Jones
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Asheville Field Office
151 Patton Ave, Room 208
Asheville,NC 28801
Dear Ms. Jones,
Resource Environmental Solutions (RES) is pleased to present this Request for a Preliminary
Jurisdictional Determination for the Monkey Wall Mitigation Site located in Mitchell County,North
Carolina(36.0559°N, -82.2067°W.). As part of this scope of work, RES is submitting this request to the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps)for a confirmation of the limits of Waters of the U.S. on the
subject site.
The Monkey Wall Mitigation Site (the "Site") is contained in five parcels totaling 78-acres of proposed
easement in Mitchell County,NC. The Site was contracted through Division of Mitigation Services
(DMS)in response to an RFP for the French Broad River Basin (8-digit USGS HUC 06010108, TLW
06010108060010)to provide cold water stream mitigation units. The Project will involve the restoration,
enhancement, and preservation of tributaries to Big Rock Creek. The Project is consistent with the 2009
French Broad RBRP and will result in significant ecological improvements including water quality
improvement,habitat restoration and a decrease in non-point source pollution from livestock.
res.us

We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please feel free to contact me at
[phone] if you have any additional question regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
Jeremy Schmid l Senior Ecologist
Attachments: Jurisdictional Determination Request Form, Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form,
Landowner Authorization Form,Vicinity Map, USGS Topographc Map,National Wetlands Inventory
Map, Soils Map, Potential Waters of the U.S. Delineation Map, and Wetland Data Sheets
2

Jurisdictional Determination Request
US Army Corps
of Engineers.
Wilmington District
This form is intended for use by anyone requesting a jurisdictional determination (JD)from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District(Corps). Please include all supporting
information, as described within each category, with your request. You may submit your request
via mail, electronic mail, or facsimile. Requests should be sent to the appropriate project
manager of the county in which the property is located. A current list of project managers by
assigned counties can be found on-line at:
http://www.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/RegulatoryPermitProgram/Contact/CountyLocator.aspx,
by calling 910-251-4633, or by contacting any of the field offices listed below. Once your
request is received you will be contacted by a Corps project manager.
ASHEVILLE&CHARLOTTE REGULATORY WASHINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
FIELD OFFICES US Army Corps of Engineers
US Army Corps of Engineers 2407 West Fifth Street
151 Patton Avenue,Room 208 Washington,North Carolina 27889
Asheville,North Carolina 28801-5006 General Number: [phone]
General Number:[phone] Fax Number: [phone]
Fax Number:[phone]
WILMINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
RALEIGH REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE US Army Corps of Engineers
US Army Corps of Engineers 69 Darlington Avenue
3331 Heritage Trade Drive,Suite 105 Wilmington,North Carolina 28403
Wake Forest,North Carolina 27587 General Number:910-251-4633
General Number:[phone] Fax Number:[phone]
Fax Number:[phone]
INSTRUCTIONS:
All requestors must complete Parts A, B, C,D, E, F and G.
NOTE TO CONSULTANTS AND AGENCIES: If you are requesting a JD on behalf of a
paying client or your agency, please note the specific submittal requirements in Part H.
NOTE ON PART D —PROPERTY OWNER AUTHORIZATION: Please be aware that
all JD requests must include the current property owner authorization for the Corps to
proceed with the determination, which may include inspection of the property when
necessary. This form must be signed by the current property owner(s) or the owner(s)
authorized agent to be considered a complete request.
NOTE ON PART D -NCDOT REQUESTS: Property owner authorization/notification for
JD requests associated with North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
projects will be conducted according to the current NCDOT/USACE protocols.
NOTE TO USDA PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS: A Corps approved or preliminary JD
may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security Act of
1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in
USDA programs, you should also request a certified wetland determination from the local
office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
Version:May 2017 Page 1

Jurisdictional Determination Request
A. PARCEL INFORMATION
Street Address: 385 Fork Mountain Rd
City, State: Bakersville, NC
County: Mitchell
Parcel Index Number(s) (PIN): 0855-00-24-8634,0855-00-14-9533,0855-00-35-2677,0855-00-34-2454,0855-00-23-1885
B. REQUESTOR INFORMATION
Name: Jeremy Schmid
Mailing Address: 302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Telephone Number: 919-345-3034
Electronic Mail Address: [e-mail]
Select one:
I am the current property owner.
❑ I am an Authorized Agent or Environmental Consultant'
riInterested Buyer or Under Contract to Purchase
Other, please explain.
C. PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION2
Name: Bradley Gouge Living Trust;Marshall Street,Janice Street and Milan Street
Mailing Address: 385 Fork Mountain Rd; 10058 N 226 HWY
Bakersville, NC; Bakersville, NC
Telephone Number:
Electronic Mail Address:
1 Must provide completed Agent Authorization Form/Letter.
2 Documentation of ownership also needs to be provided with request(copy of Deed, County GIS/Parcel/Tax Record).
Version:May 2017 Page 2

LANDOWNER AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRITION:
Deed Book: 571 Page: _464-469 County:_Mitchell
Parcel ID Number: 0855-00-24-8634, 0855-00-14-9533, 0855-00-35-2677, 0855-00-34-2454
Street Address: 385 Fork Mountain Road, Bakersville, NC 28705
Property Owner(please print: Bradley Gouge Living Trust
Property Owner(please print): Bradley Gouge(Trustee), Ricky Dean Gouge(Trustee), Sally Elizabeth
Parker(Trustee)
The undersigned, registered property owner(s)of the above property, do hereby authorize
Resource Environmental Solutions,the NC Department of Environmental Quality,and the US
Army Corps of Engineers,their employees,agents or assigns to have reasonable access to the above
referenced property for the evaluation of the property as a potential stream,wetland and/or
riparian buffer mitigation project,including conducting stream and/or wetland determinations and
delineations, as well as issuance and acceptance of any required permit(s) or certification(s).
Property Owners(s) Address: 138 Bradley Gouge Road, Johnson City,Tennessee 37604
(if different from above)
Property Owner Telephone Number: 423-202-0251
Property Owner Telephone Number:
UWe hereby certify the above information to be true and accurate to the best of my/our knowledge.
./141t. jg
/2/
Prope Ow A thorized S ature) ate)
�f /.72/s/ 7
(Pro e Owner A , orized Signature) (Date)
7__ c " -Z‘e/ .61./ /..a--4:- -,7
(Pro fwner Authorized Signature) ate

Landowner Authorization Form
Site:_ Monkey Wall
Property Legal Description
TRACT 1 -Deed Book: 133 Page:b County;Mitchell
Parcel ID Number:0855.00-23-1885
Street Address:Fork Mountain Road,Bakersville,NC 28705
Property Owner(please print):Marshall Street,Janice Street and Milan Street
The undersigned,registered property owners of the above property,do hereby authorize
Resource Environmental Solutions,the NC Division of Water Resources,and the US Army Corps of Engineers,
their employees,agents or assigns to have reasonable access to the above referenced property for the evaluation of
the property as a potential stream,wetland,and or riparian buffer restoration project,including conducting stream
and or wetland determinations and delineations,as well as issuance and acceptance of any required permit(s)or
certifications).
Property Owner Address: 10058 N 226 HWY,Bakersville,NC 28705
1/We hereby certify the above information to be true and accurate to the best of my/our knowledge.
(Property Owner Authorized Signature)
Date
1 ;
(Pro Owner Authorized Signature)
t7dIe
`d%
( roperty Owner Authorized Signature)
Date

Jurisdictional Determination Request
F. JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION(JD)TYPE (Select One)
riI am requesting that the Corps provide a preliminary JD for the property identified herein.
A Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD)provides an indication that there may
be"waters of the United States" or"navigable waters of the United States"on a property.
PJDs are sufficient as the basis for permit decisions. For the purposes of permitting, all
waters and wetlands on the property will be treated as if they are jurisdictional "waters of
the United States". PJDs cannot be appealed (33 C.F.R. 331.2); however, a PJD is
"preliminary" in the sense that an approved JD can be requested at any time. PJDs do
not expire.
I am requesting that the Corps provide an approved JD for the property identified herein.
An Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD)is a determination that
jurisdictional "waters of the United States" or"navigable waters of the United
States" are either present or absent on a site. An approved JD identifies the limits of
waters on a site determined to be jurisdictional under the Clean Water Act and/or
Rivers and Harbors Act. Approved JDs are sufficient as the basis for permit
decisions. AJDs are appealable (33 C.F.R. 331.2). The results of the AJD will be
posted on the Corps website. A landowner, permit applicant, or other"affected
party" (33 C.F.R. 331.2)who receives an AJD may rely upon the AJD for five years
(subject to certain limited exceptions explained in Regulatory Guidance Letter 05-
02).
ElI am unclear as to which JD I would like to request and require additional information
to inform my decision.
G. ALL REQUESTS
171
Map of Property or Project Area. This Map must clearly depict the boundaries of the
review area.
7 I Size of Property or Review Area 26 acres.
The property boundary (or review area boundary)is clearly physically marked on the site.
Version:May 2017 Page 4

Jurisdictional Determination Request
H. REQUESTS FROM CONSULTANTS
Project Coordinates (Decimal Degrees): Latitude: 36.0548
Longitude: -82.2091
InA legible delineation map depicting the aquatic resources and the property/review area.
Delineation maps must be no larger than l 1x17 and should contain the following: (Corps
signature of submitted survey plats will occur after the submitted delineation map has been
reviewed and approved).6
• North Arrow
• Graphical Scale
• Boundary of Review Area
• Date
• Location of data points for each Wetland Determination Data Form or tributary
assessment reach.
For Approved Jurisdictional Determinations:
• Jurisdictional wetland features should be labeled as Wetland Waters of the US, 404
wetlands, etc. Please include the acreage of these features.
• Jurisdictional non-wetland features (i.e. tidal/navigable waters, tributaries,
impoundments) should be labeled as Non-Wetland Waters of the US, stream, tributary,
open water, relatively permanent water, pond, etc. Please include the acreage or linear
length of each of these features as appropriate.
• Isolated waters, waters that lack a significant nexus to navigable waters, or non-
jurisdictional upland features should be identified as Non-Jurisdictional. Please
include a justification in the label regarding why the feature is non jurisdictional (i.e.
"Isolated", "No Significant Nexus", or"Upland Feature"). Please include the acreage
or linear length of these features as appropriate.
For Preliminary Jurisdictional Determinations:
• Wetland and non-wetland features should not be identified as Jurisdictional, 404,
Waters of the United States, or anything that implies jurisdiction. These features can be
identified as Potential Waters of the United States, Potential Non-wetland Waters of
the United States, wetland, stream, open water, etc. Please include the acreage and
linear length of these features as appropriate.
[ l Completed Wetland Determination Data Forms for appropriate region
(at least one wetland and one upland form needs to be completed for each wetland type)
6 Please refer to the guidance document titled"Survey Standards for Jurisdictional Determinations"to ensure that the
supplied map meets the necessary mapping standards.http://www.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory-Permit-
Pro gram/Jurisdiction/
Version:May 2017 Page 5

Jurisdictional Determination Request
Completed appropriate Jurisdictional Determination form
• PJDs,please complete a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form'and include the
Aquatic Resource Table
• AJDs,please complete an Approved Jurisdictional Determination Form'
El Vicinity Map
ZAerial Photograph
USGS Topographic Map
sr Soil Survey Map
Other Maps, as appropriate (e.g. National Wetland Inventory Map, Proposed Site
Plan, previous delineation maps, LIDAR maps, FEMA floodplain maps)
Landscape Photos (if taken)
piNC SAM and/or NCWAM Assessment Forms and Rating Sheets
riNC Division of Water Resources Stream Identification Forms
LOther Assessment Forms
' www.saw.usace.army.mil/Portals/59/docs/regulatory/regdocs/JD/RGL 08-02AppAPrelim JD Form fillable.pdf
' Please see http://www.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory-Permit-Program/Jurisdiction/
Principal Purpose:The information that you provide will be used in evaluating your request to determine
whether there are any aquatic resources within the project area subject to federal jurisdiction under the regulatory
authorities referenced above.
Routine Uses:This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal,state,and local
government agencies,and the public,and may be made available as part of a public notice as required by federal
law. Your name and property location where federal jurisdiction is to be determined will be included in the
approved jurisdictional determination(AJD),which will be made available to the public on the District's website
and on the Headquarters USAGE website.
Disclosure: Submission of requested information is voluntary;however,if information is not provided,the
request for an AJD cannot be evaluated nor can an AJD be issued.
Version:May 2017 Page 6

Appendix 2 - PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD: 3/4/19
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: Jeremy Schmid
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: CESAW-RG-A
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES AND/OR
AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: NC County/parish/borough: Mitchell City: Bakersville
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format):
Lat.: 36.0548 Long.: -82.2091
Universal Transverse Mercator: NAD83
Name of nearest waterbody: Big Rock Creek
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
❑ Field Determination. Date(s):
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES IN REVIEW AREA WHICH "MAY BE"SUBJECT TO REGULATORY
JURISDICTION.
Site Latitude Longitude Estimated amount Type of aquatic Geographic authority
number (decimal (decimal of aquatic resource resource (i.e.,wetland to which the aquatic
degrees) degrees) in review area vs. non-wetland resource "may be"
(acreage and linear waters) subject(i.e., Section
feet, if applicable) 404 or Section 10/404)
see attached table

Waters Name State owardin_Code HGM_Code Meas_Type Amount Units Waters_Type Latitude Longitude Local_Waterway
WA NORTH CAROLINA PEM DEPRESS Area 0.2476 ACRE DELINEATE 36.0548 -82.209
WB NORTH CAROLINA PFO DEPRESS Area 0.0278 ACRE DELINEATE 36.0581 -82.2047
WC NORTH CAROLINA PFO DEPRESS Area 0.0134 ACRE DELINEATE 36.0569 -82.205
G1 NORTH CAROLINA R4 Linear 1977.4 FOOT DELINEATE 36.0561 -82.206
G2 NORTH CAROLINA R4 Linear 1754.3 FOOT DELINEATE 36.0573 -82.204

1) The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional aquatic resources in
the review area, and the requestor of this PJD is hereby advised of his or her option
to request and obtain an approved JD (AJD) for that review area based on an
informed decision after having discussed the various types of JDs and their
characteristics and circumstances when they may be appropriate.
2) In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or a
Nationwide General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring "pre-
construction notification" (PCN), or requests verification for a non-reporting NWP or
other general permit, and the permit applicant has not requested an AJD for the
activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware that: (1) the permit applicant has
elected to seek a permit authorization based on a PJD, which does not make an
official determination of jurisdictional aquatic resources; (2) the applicant has the
option to request an AJD before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit
authorization, and that basing a permit authorization on an AJD could possibly result
in less compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions; (3) the
applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than accepting the terms
and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4) the applicant can
accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply with all the terms and
conditions of that permit, including whatever mitigation requirements the Corps has
determined to be necessary; (5) undertaking any activity in reliance upon the subject
permit authorization without requesting an AJD constitutes the applicant's acceptance
of the use of the PJD; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered
individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps permit
authorization based on a PJD constitutes agreement that all aquatic resources in the
review area affected in any way by that activity will be treated as jurisdictional, and
waives any challenge to such jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance
or enforcement action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7)
whether the applicant elects to use either an AJD or a PJD, the JD will be processed
as soon as practicable. Further, an AJD, a proffered individual permit (and all terms
and conditions contained therein), or individual permit denial can be administratively
appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331. If, during an administrative appeal, it
becomes appropriate to make an official determination whether geographic
jurisdiction exists over aquatic resources in the review area, or to provide an official
delineation of jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review area, the Corps will
provide an AJD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable. This PJD finds
that there "may be"waters of the U.S. and/or that there "may be"navigable waters of
the U.S. on the subject review area, and identifies all aquatic features in the review
area that could be affected by the proposed activity, based on the following
information:

SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply)
Checked items should be included in subject file. Appropriately reference sources
below where indicated for all checked items:
n Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor:
Map:Vicinity, USGS, NWI, Soil, Existing conditions, WOUS
n Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor.
n Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
n Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Rationale:
n D• ata sheets prepared by the Corps:
n Corps navigable waters' study:
n U• .S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
n USGS NHD data.
n USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
n U• .S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: 24k Bakersville
n Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
n N• ational wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
n State/local wetland inventory map(s):
n F• EMA/FIRM maps:
n 1• 00-year Floodplain Elevation is: .(National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
n P• hotographs: n Aerial (Name & Date):
or n Other (Name & Date):
n Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
n Other information (please specify):
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily
been verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for later jurisdictional
determinations.
Jeremy Schmid n;ao;za,oa`zs;oo°
a�,-nm-���Fa
Signature and date of Signature and date of
Regulatory staff member person requesting PJD
completing PJD (REQUIRED, unless obtaining
the signature is impracticable)'
1 Districts may establish timeframes for requestor to return signed PJD forms. If the requestor does not respond
within the established time frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is
necessary prior to finalizing an action.

fi
fQ
•
itv
Monkey Wall Site
'ck4,550
B,F+•rq le
Carrivn
Legend c°"1104
y ,
Study Area (26 ac)
au
N Vicinity Map Date: 3/1/2019
Ailla
V•Vit
�L��{`��.4.11„ E Drawn by: GDSres
._��►�,.�..,�.�' i�"����r�� Monkey Wall
0 500 1,000 Mitigation Site Checked by:MDE
1 inch=1,000 feet
Feet Mitchell County, North Carolina

% 14ra,
N
g,If.,EEE4zok
.11
•
¢rk
•
V
LI
49.
\ ,. ,,,g ,,,.,,
-tv.
•
Legend
Study Area (26 ac) . ' NW
1
N USGS Bakersville Quadrangle(2016) Date: 3/1/2019
�L�ionp+���t mpillrAft w E 0 Drawn by. GDS r
s
dr,4,,0.-gr avAiN��*'ins Monkey Wall
g ;#w S Mitigation Site Checked by:MDE
IN 0 1,000 2,000
Feet Mitchell County, North Carolina 1 inch=2,000 feet

. ...
�} •
P
•
•
•
•
� CnD sue '. i
___-pliir
f {F •
•
•
•
11
II•
1a"3I EdE
•
•
•
F
•
.•
•
•
•
•
•
•
ti
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
II
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Legend \7YCl� .
Study Area (26 ac)
is
Hydric (100%) EdE
In Predominantly Hydric (66-99%)
Partially Hydric (33-65%)
I Predominantly Nonhydric (1-32%)
Nonhydric (0%) ti
" Mapped Soils Date: 3/1/2019
�L��{`���+�*�� w E Drawn by. GDS
.-:�►�..:r..,�......�,;,��s��� Monkey Wall0 res
rrs�.��rr"LJ
��y�# 0 200 400 Mitigation Site Checked by:MDE
Feet Mitchell County, North Carolina 1 inch=400feet

1 - le ';)-.. .. Vt. ' . .- "tr ' ' 4- '... .4 Ah4fap -. 've_q44-. Ai ,.• 4.- . .•._• .• % ,
•.... ..%6 - it 14. 14%.- 11 .
•
•�` ti " +"- • t AI.- '. J-• f_t :�:k _'} 5i ,
•
`r i �, 4 5
* +
'' 1 r# Y* 4 r •
.;a'
J' �4 ' it},
11 { .� ,..,• 6 ..tAp r
A. 4
It ... . ,:i. l......-ICIIMr 1141011r117- ' II . ...i. - .: - . - •i•, . .
• . r.re ,-,....... . ji g2.:0%.,. i I I:V '.1 10 ..
r ir ‘ - - ' •••-•`. .itc : , f.r... ,. • , • , . . . . L), . .,
mot. ' t 'ir .{. ,'rl'. yi.
N , 4, # r. •. l� k; , w a5: 1 F ,.
.I.i.4..1...-'(1'.1).
.1.• .1'•'''A 'A • I, . ••••• 1 %i'l-e ' IP'':, ,-P,
•
•
ll. IP
Nwk
k....
"; • ; ,1 x
_ 5 •4 •Ith' .r4t�:O '
' * 4fx }iV55 n r . • Of, 1k-" •, .410k:...,. ' .4 ... -1, j„,.....' 0 • - ..'"
'; t 1.'4
�y ' r .y
. ... .I. . . j. , • 4.. . - , ; •
A
4 1 P f r I , +
, .
! r. T„'1 Ga i'. • l'x.
Legend -- - • IL .... . -2-11
•
Study Area (26 ac) . . f. -'
1 NWI Wetlands (USFWS 10/29/2018) _ ti
1
N National Wetlands Inventory Date: 3/1/2019
�L��{`��I If�+���.-grAft A E Drawn by: GDS
:�►�..�..,�...��prire0 .4 Monkey Wall
0 res
,,w rrsi.11116LJ
g 'Ri 0 200 400 Mitigation Site Checked by:MDE
VieFeet Mitchell County, North Carolina 1 inch=400feet

•
�. Pre
. ._. , • "1 '- ,: ... . • , '� - �, •.'air •£ 1�k : F tip.}'-
„,:: .. ..,,....•
•
'! • ? - r • I :s • r- rs-.-at' ! 'aF' ar *a-s
•
•
•
•
,r - S
.r . .+._ �k _ _ '.I`. ""^k i�• nh `;i' � ' r� C`. F :-y r, - ••i'.+r._L'r
t $ •• +�. r* xJ • ;�,I � � f t lr 'f} ' ii _1. # r , 3 'I , • ': ,i.' , +�I }. y,
' *, • +` •�4 r r 4 y e _ 'S� - ..- ,,• 'F• • �, : .it I ..r4� �.•' 1 ,Y 7S . ,-I '•'4*., �I. .: - 1 .' •• } -.I
2.
}.sk Y Jti aeell � +� ~;l i,! 'IR .'+ # ' • _ ,�, ._J} I . 'i.•" - • I V } , {�' }.F I ~ .I' _ may,`}- _ sR
•
1.
' • v• r �;�r f .s jJ, ' y • *a _k-. ' " "i; _4 1 J•
`o .l * Y • 1 1S 'i.7,I'- �C. �^ 1 s � yr :a i' , w
F;. �. I Ana _+, ` r L' L+F r•'i; 5 •. .L..' . . �• f 2
• - s T' Ir •1 JM /]: r l'1i• l IS"' s +#3. ,WS ' ''•
.. • [! 7 , ` .} ,. .i,rl ¢.7. t Cam ,•
i -. }.. i. .ti 5 + - .� ` [F[I�{ t. r •i F .t °� .1r 5's k.il �,s {Y 1r li
S
x r _',t a=, • I ,.1. F. Feet
- , ., , -14 "
J_ 7i' - ry'f' _ k _ _ 41. � k � i . _ f _ _ ,T' 1 in=200 feet
�, 4+' •
s • ,� 7 ' :i I_. .+ `y. r.;! 1.- I: T I'h ' •• R • _ ' I • £y;. r 4' " "' -r _
i.
•
.I ::s. ti{.r-.. _;' #: 'f - rF° r,, - • � Ni., , `- r:ti•,-.+ . _ • _1 - #.# , y Potential
` Ill"'� '. . .i #. t ..-, ..-`�',*' ,. 4 F�,.:4 , ...-s .` ti.->w . , Wetland or Non-Wetland Waters
' , � : ]. J '. '- •
;, ,1 iiik t . .'Y � �.. . p �- • :� of the U.S. Map
eio
�` • {_, �•, ,.`,_i�„ . _ {: Monkey Wall
i '' Y Mitigation Site
. ,111 wry- -�' *i. L� 'f - {
1
•
•
•
is ~iy • _ q4.
^'_ " ' Mitchell County, North Carolina
• - fY.. .�:- • ,I. .. I Y� ? I .. rLv„ Date: 3/4/2019 Drawn by JLS
V _. _.:_, yrf r1 _.- ,; rrti , 5 ..t Revisions: NONE Checked by: BPB
``` Jh1 _ _ - :41.- .n .I + *- • :-.1 r::�` lam, s, ll'. • I _ ..
J IT --,L ' •
S .{ { - :f.-. t '. 'i T. '#„L[ `��
I ,` r ! ' 5+r Legend
'Ili
III
._' l' .I f'•x•AZ y . _ �r,.. ,: j • -F - �: s`-' T'�'+rY WB • Study Area(26ac)
w F
f. �' •
t=...a. _ tis_ - 'K'T -r; - _ •Ya _ -' .t.t' - ' , r i/� Potential Wetland Waters of the US
i L. y�y " .,i: ., •' - Potential Non-Wetland Waters of the US
J17_• '~ j ._ ;" if a � ?-Y. Wetland Data Point
- • Upland Data Point
•
•
dip. rI; p'JyF{L _ - ' n REFERENCE
' - q 1)Horizontal Datum is NAD83 UTM Z15N.
40.
'. .r' ' I' r } ,, 2)Map Projection is NAD_1983_StatePlane_
'At.: : ' _ • '• y I'll ± _ pA#-{.* . North_Carolina_FIPS_3200_Feet
'k n �, £ - '!i 4 F'
H ` . - o- Yi 1'.fir. _ Ta _ • CCC--- 5 J - -"
�y - _ � r 'I* r -•'Z y r';i °' ''FI' r+i :..r........±-}:.. :� S k
' �; - " Y• 7ti M1_ .w4+. 1 1 ;- .may. _ _ •............-_ -,,,-• • . ..::✓•- #r ,.. 'S • �.� � ..1:'_ iig .x'-� .
tt?
,...
-5 i i :'k° } ` t` ' f I �. 'ter •, f i r ,. ,,. _ _ •I r } 'r 'r���R��IILillliim �/4ti ��
iii• ,
r • ' ' . • ' ' Jr. �}x t . I r L , k of �

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Monkey Wall City/County: Bakersville/Mitchell Sampling Date: 13-Aug-18
Applicant/Owner: RES State: NC Sampling Point: DP-1
Investigator(s): Robert White Section,Township,Range: S T R
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Floodplain Local relief(concave,convex,none): convex Slope: 0.0% / 0.0 °
Subregion(LRR or MLRA): MLRA 228 in LRR N Lat.: 36.0548 Long.: -82,2087 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Thunder-Saunook complex NWI classification: PEM
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 0 No 0 (If no,explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑d ,Soil ❑ ,or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"present? Yes 0 No 0
Are Vegetation ❑ ,Soil ❑ ,or Hydrology ❑ naturally problematic? (If needed,explain any answers in Remarks.)
Summary of Findings-Attach site map showing sampling point locations,transects, important features,etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 0 No 0
Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No 0 Is the Sampled Area Yes 0 No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No O within a Wetland?
Remarks:
site heavily impacted by livestock access
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators(minimum of one required;check all that apply) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks(B6)
d❑ Surface Water(Al) ❑ True Aquatic Plants(B14) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(B8)
d❑ High Water Table(A2) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(C1) ❑ Drainage Patterns(B10)
❑ Saturation(A3) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots(C3) ❑ Moss Trim Lines(B16)
❑ Water Marks(Bl) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) ❑ Dry Season Water Table(C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits(B2) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) ❑ Crayfish Burrows(C8)
❑ Drift deposits(B3) ❑ Thin Muck Surface(C7) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust(B4) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks) ❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants(Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits(B5) ❑ Geomorphic Position(D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(B7) ❑ Shallow Aquitard(D3)
❑ Water-Stained Leaves(B9) ❑ Microtopographic Relief(D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna(B13) FAC-neutral Test(D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth(inches): _ 1
Water Table Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth(inches):
Saturation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O No 0
(includes capillary fringe) Yes O No 0 Depth(inches):
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well,aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant Sampling Point: DP-1
Species?
Absolute Rel.Strat. Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size:- ) %Cover Cover Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 0 ❑ 0.0% That are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 3 (A)
2 0 ❑ 0.0%
° Total Number of Dominant
3 0 ❑ 0.0% - Species Across All Strata: 3 (B)
4 o ❑ 0.0%
5 0 ❑ 0.0% - Percent of dominant Species
6. 0 ❑ 0.0%
That Are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)
7 0 ❑ 0.0% Prevalence Index worksheet:
8 0 ❑ 0.0% _ Total %Cover of: Multiply by:
0 =Total Cover on species 20 x 1 = 20
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
FACW species 25 x 2 = 50
1 0 ❑ 0.0%
0 ❑ 0.0% FAC species 0 x 3 = 0
23. 0 ❑ 0.0% FACU species 0 x 4 = 0
4. 0 ❑ 0.0%- UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
5 0 ❑ 0.0% Column Totals: 45 (A) 70 (B)
6 0 ❑ 0.0% Prevalence Index= B/A= 1.556
7 0 ❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
$ 0 ❑ 0.0% 0 Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
9 0 ❑ 0.0%
❑d Dominance Test is>50%
1 0 0 ❑ 0.0%
❑d Prevalence Index is<_3.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 0 =Total Cover ❑ Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
1 0 ❑ 0.0% data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2 o ❑ 0.0% ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3 0 ❑ 0.0% 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4 0 ❑ 0.0% - be present,unless disturbed or problematic.
5. o ❑ 0.0% - Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6. o ❑ 0.0% - Four Vegetation Strata:
❑ 0.0% Tree stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding vines,3 in.
0
7 - - - (7.6 cm)or more in diameter at breast height(DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) 0 =Total Cover regardless of height.
Sapling/shrub stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding
1• Boehmeria cylindrica 5 ❑ 11.1% FACW vines,less than 3 in.DBH and greater than 3.28 ft(1 m)tall.
2. Schoenoplectus pungens var.pungens 10 ❑d 22.2% OBL Herb stratum-Consists of all herbaceous(non-woody)plants,
3. Juncus effusus
20 ❑d 44.4% FACW regardless of size,and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4• Carex lurida 10 ❑d 22.2% OBL Woody vines-Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
in height.
5. o ❑ 0.0%
6 0 ❑ o.o°io - Five Vegetation Strata:
7. o ❑ o.o%
- Tree-Woody plants,excluding woody vines,approximately 20
8 0 ❑ 0.0% ft(6 m)or more in height and 3 in.(7.6 cm)or larger in
0 ❑ 0.0% diameter at breast height(DBH).
9' Sapling stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding woody
10 0 ❑ 0.0% - vines,approximately 20 ft(6 m)or more in height and less
11 0 ❑ 0.0% than 3 in.(7.6 cm)DBH.
. -
12 0 ❑ 0.0% Shrub stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding woody
vines,approximately 3 to 20 ft(1 to 6 m)in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 45 =Total Cover
Herb stratum-Consists of all herbaceous(non-woody)plants,
0 ❑ 0.0% including herbaceous vines,regardless of size,and woody
1 species,except woody vines,less than approximately 3 ft(1
2. 0 ❑ 0.0% - m)in height.
3. 0 ❑ 0.0% - Woody vines-Consists of all woody vines,regardless of
4. _
0 ❑ 0.0% height.
5. - o ❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic
6 0 ❑ 0.0% Vegetation
0 =Total Cover
Present? Yes 0 No 0
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix= National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

Soil Sampling Point: DP-1
Profile Description:(Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type 1 Loc2 Texture Remarks _
0-1 10YR 3/1 Loam
1-12 10YR 4/1 85 10YR 5/8 15 C M Sandy Loam
1 Type:C=Concentration.D=Depletion.RM=Reduced Matrix,CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Location: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol(Al) ❑ Dark Surface(S7) ❑ 2 cm Muck(A10)(MLRA 147)
❑ Histic Epipedon(A2) ❑ Polyvalue Below Surface(S8)(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Black Histic(A3) ❑Thin Dark Surface(S9)(MLRA 147,148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox(A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)
❑ Stratified Layers(A5) 0 Depleted Matrix(F3) (MLRA 136,147)
❑ 2 cm Muck(A10)(LRR N) ❑ Redox Dark Surface(F6) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface(All) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface(F7)
❑ Other(Explain in Remarks)
❑ Thick Dark Surface(Al2) ❑ Redox Depressions(F8)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral(Sl)(LRR N, ❑ Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR N,
MLRA 147,148) MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) ❑ Umbric Surface(F13)(MLRA 136,122)
❑ Sandy Redox(S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)(MLRA 148) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Stripped Matrix(S6) ❑ Red Parent Material(F21)(MLRA 127,147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type:
Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? yes 0 No 0
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Monkey Wall City/County: Bakersville/Mitchell Sampling Date: 13-Aug-18
Applicant/Owner: RES State: NC Sampling Point: DP-2
Investigator(s): Robert White Section,Township,Range: S T R
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Hillside Local relief(concave,convex,none): convex Slope: 0.0% / 0.0 °
Subregion(LRR or MLRA): MLRA 228 in LRR N Lat.: 36.0549 Long.: -82,2086 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Thunder-Saunook complex NWI classification: Upland
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 0 No 0 (If no,explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ ,Soil ❑ ,or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"present? Yes 0 No 0
Are Vegetation ❑ ,Soil ❑ ,or Hydrology ❑ naturally problematic? (If needed,explain any answers in Remarks.)
Summary of Findings-Attach site map showing sampling point locations,transects, important features,etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 0 No 0
Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No 0 Is the Sampled Area Yes 0 No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O No O within a Wetland?
Remarks:
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators(minimum of one required;check all that apply) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks(B6)
❑ Surface Water(Al) ❑ True Aquatic Plants(B14) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(B8)
❑ High Water Table(A2) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(C1) ❑ Drainage Patterns(B10)
❑ Saturation(A3) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots(C3) ❑ Moss Trim Lines(B16)
❑ Water Marks(Bl) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) ❑ Dry Season Water Table(C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits(B2) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) ❑ Crayfish Burrows(C8)
❑ Drift deposits(B3) ❑ Thin Muck Surface(C7) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust(B4) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks) ❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants(Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits(B5) ❑ Geomorphic Position(D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(B7) ❑ Shallow Aquitard(D3)
❑ Water-Stained Leaves(B9) ❑ Microtopographic Relief(D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna(B13) ❑ FAC-neutral Test(D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes O No O Depth(inches): _
Water Table Present? Yes O No 0 Depth(inches):
Saturation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 0
(includes capillary fringe) Yes O No 0 Depth(inches):
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well,aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant Sampling Point: DP-2
Species?
Absolute Rel.Strat. Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size:- ) %Cover Cover Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 0 ❑ 0.0% That are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 0 (A)
2 0 ❑ 0.0%
Total Number of Dominant
3 0 ❑ 0.09
/o - Species Across All Strata: 2 (B)
4 0 ❑ 0.0%5 0 ❑ o.0% - Percent of dominant Species
0 ❑ o.o% That Are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 0.0% (A/B)
6.
7 0 ❑ 0.0% Prevalence Index worksheet:
8 0 ❑ o.0% _ Total %Cover of: Multiply by:
0 =Total Cover OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
FACW species 0 x 2 = 0
1. 0 ❑ 0.0%
- FAC species 10 x 3 = 30
2 0 ❑ 0.0%
3. 0 ❑ 0.0% _ FACU species 50 x 4 = 200
4. 0 ❑ 0.0%- UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
5 0 ❑ 0.0% - Coluron Totals: 60 (A) 230 (B)
6 0 ❑ 0.0% Prevalence Index= B/A= 3.833
7 0 ❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
$ 0 ❑ 0.0% ❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
9 0 ❑ 0.0%
❑ Dominance Test is>50%
1 0. 0 ❑ 0.0%
❑ Prevalence Index is<_3.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 0 =Total Cover ❑ Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
1 0 ❑ 0.0% data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2 0 ❑ 0.0% ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3 0 ❑ 0.0% 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
- be present,unless disturbed or problematic.
4 0 ❑ 0.0%
5. o ❑ 0.0% Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6. o ❑ 0.0% Four Vegetation Strata:
0 ❑ 0.0% Tree stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding vines,3 in.
7 - -- (7.6 cm)or more in diameter at breast height(DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) 0 =Total Cover regardless of height.
Sapling/shrub stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding
1• Trifolium repens 20 ❑d 33.3% FACU vines,less than 3 in.DBH and greater than 3.28 ft(1 m)tall.
2. Digitaria serotina 10 ❑ 16.7% FAC Herb stratum-Consists of all herbaceous(non-woody)plants,
3. Schedonorus arundinaceus
30 ❑d 50.0% FACU regardless of size,and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
0 ❑ 0.0% Woody vines-Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
4' in height.
5. 0 ❑ 0.0%
6 0 ❑ o.o°io - Five Vegetation Strata:
7. o ❑ o.o% -
Tree-Woody plants,excluding woody vines,approximately 20
8 0 ❑ 0.0% - ft(6 m)or more in height and 3 in.(7.6 cm)or larger in
0 ❑ 0.0% diameter at breast height(DBH).
9. Sapling stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding woody
10 0 ❑ 0.0% vines,approximately 20 ft(6 m)or more in height and less
11 0 ❑ 0.0% than 3 in.(7.6 cm)DBH.
. -
12 0 ❑ 0.0% - Shrub stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding woody
vines,approximately 3 to 20 ft(1 to 6 m)in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 60 =Total Cover
Herb stratum-Consists of all herbaceous(non-woody)plants,
0 ❑ 0.0% including herbaceous vines,regardless of size,and woody
1 species,except woody vines,less than approximately 3 ft(1
2. 0 ❑ 0.0% - m)in height.
3. 0 ❑ 0.0% - Woody vines-Consists of all woody vines,regardless of
4. _
0 ❑ 0.0% height.
5. _ 0 ❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic
6 0 ❑ 0.0% Vegetation
0 =Total Cover
Present? Yes 0 No 0
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix= National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

Soil Sampling Point: DP-2
Profile Description:(Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type 1 Loc2 Texture Remarks _
0-4 7.5YR 4/3 Clay Loam
4-12 7.5YR 5/4 Clay Loam
1 Type:C=Concentration.D=Depletion.RM=Reduced Matrix,CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Location: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol(Al) ❑ Dark Surface(S7) ❑ 2 cm Muck(A10)(MLRA 147)
❑ Histic Epipedon(A2) ❑ Polyvalue Below Surface(S8)(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Black Histic(A3) ❑Thin Dark Surface(S9)(MLRA 147,148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox(A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)
❑ Stratified Layers(A5) ❑ Depleted Matrix(F3) (MLRA 136,147)
❑ 2 cm Muck(A10)(LRR N) ❑ Redox Dark Surface(F6) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface(All) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface(F7)
❑ Other(Explain in Remarks)
❑ Thick Dark Surface(Al2) ❑ Redox Depressions(F8)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral(Sl)(LRR N, ❑ Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR N,
MLRA 147,148) MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) ❑ Umbric Surface(F13)(MLRA 136,122)
❑ Sandy Redox(S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)(MLRA 148) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Stripped Matrix(S6) ❑ Red Parent Material(F21)(MLRA 127,147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type:
Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No 0
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

Appendix J — Invasive Species Plan

INVASIVE SPECIES PLAN
Annual monitoring and semi-annual site visits will be conducted to assess the condition of the finished
project. These site inspections may identify the presence of invasive vegetation. RES will treat invasive
species vegetation within the project area and provide remedial action on a case-by-case basis. Common
invasive species vegetation, such as Chinese privet(Ligustrum sinense),multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora),
tree-of-heaven (Ailanthus altissima), and Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), will be treated to
allow native plants to become established within the conservation easement. Invasive species vegetation
will be treated by approved mechanical and/or chemical methods such that the percent composition of
exotic/invasive species is less than 5% of the total planted area. Any control methods requiring herbicide
application will be performed in accordance with NC Department of Agriculture (NCDA) rules and
regulations. If areas of invasive species exist within the easement,they will be monitored yearly as part of
the monitoring protocol and treated if necessary. If required,problem areas will continue to be treated until
the project easement shows overall trending towards meeting all monitoring requirements.

Appendix K — Approved FHWA
Categorical Exclusion Form

Categorical Exclusion Form for Division of Mitigation Services
Projects
Version 1 .4
Part 1: General Project Information
Project Name: Monkey Wall
County Name: Mitchell
DMS ID Number: 100069
Project Sponsor: Resource Environmental Solutions LLC
Project Contact Name: Bob White
Project Contact Address: 302 Jefferson Street Suite 110,Raleigh,NC 27605
Project Contact E-mail: [e-mail]
DMS Pro'ect Mana•er: Paul Weisner
Project Description
The Monkey Wall Stream Mitigation Project("Project")is located in Mitchell County, approximately two miles northwest
of Baskerville.The Project is located in the French Broad River Basin within Cataloging Unit 06010106, and TLW
06010108060010.The Project's watershed is primarily forested and pasture, and historically served this purpose.Water
quality stressors currently affecting the site include livestock production and lack of riparian buffer.This project presents
the opportunity to provide up to 3,942 cold stream mitigation units.These will be derived from 3,062 linear feet of
Priority I Restoration, 104 linear feet of Enhancenient Il, and 251 linear feet of Preservation.
For Official Use Only
Reviewed By:
Date DMS Project Manager
Conditional Approved By:
Date For Division Administrator
FHWA
❑ Check this box if there are outstanding issues
Final Approval By:
TC-i
Date
For Division Administrator
FHWA
Version 1.4, 8/18/05

Part 2: All Projects
Regulation/Question Response
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA)
1. Is the project located in a CAMA county? ❑Yes
ElNo
2. Does the project involve ground-disturbing activities within a CAMA Area of ❑Yes
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 Coastal Management ❑Yes
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 properties ever been ❑Yes
designated as commercial or industrial? ❑✓ No
❑ N/A
3. As a result of a limited Phase I Site Assessment, are there known or potential ❑Yes
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 potential hazardous ❑Yes
waste sites within or adjacent to the project area? ❑ No
❑✓ N/A
5. As a result of a Phase II Site Assessment, are there known or potential hazardous ❑Yes
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 Register of ❑Yes
Historic Places in the project area? ✓❑ No
2. Does the project affect such properties and does the SHPO/THPO concur? ❑Yes
❑ 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
❑ No
2. Does the project require the acquisition of real estate? ✓❑Yes
❑ No
❑ N/A
3. Was the property acquisition completed prior to the intent to use federal funds? ❑Yes
❑✓ No
❑ N/A
4. Has the owner of the property been informed: ❑✓ Yes
* prior to making an offer that the agency does not have condemnation authority; and ❑ No
*what the fair market value is believed to be? ❑ N/A
Version 1.4, 8/18/05

Part 3: Ground-Disturbing Activities
Regulation/Question Response
American Indian Religious Freedom Act(AIRFA)
1. Is the project located in a county claimed as "territory" by the Eastern Band of ✓❑Yes
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 of Historic ❑Yes
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, monuments or objects ❑Yes
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(ARPA)
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
❑ 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
Endangered Species Act(ESA)
1. Are federal Threatened and Endangered species and/or Designated Critical Habitat ❑✓ Yes
listed for the county? ❑ No
2. Is Designated Critical Habitat or suitable habitat present for listed species? ❑✓ Yes
❑ No
❑ N/A
3. Are T&E species present or is the project being conducted in Designated Critical ❑Yes
Habitat? ❑✓ No
❑ N/A
4. Is the project"likely to adversely affect"the species and/or"likely to adversely modify" ❑Yes
Designated Critical Habitat? ❑✓ No
❑ N/A
5. Does the USFWS/NOAA-Fisheries concur in the effects determination? ❑Yes
❑ No
✓❑ N/A
6. Has the USFWS/NOAA-Fisheries rendered a "jeopardy" determination? ❑Yes
❑ No
✓❑ N/A
Version 1.4, 8/18/05

Executive Order 13007 (Indian Sacred Sites)
1. Is the project located on Federal lands that are within a county claimed as "territory" ❑Yes
by the EBCI? ❑✓ No
2. Has the EBCI indicated that Indian sacred sites may be impacted by the proposed ❑Yes
project? ❑ No
✓❑ N/A
3. Have accommodations been made for access to and ceremonial use of Indian sacred ❑Yes
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, statewide or locally ❑✓ Yes
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 control/modify any ❑✓ Yes
water body? ❑ No
2. Have the USFWS and the NCWRC been consulted? ❑✓ Yes
❑ No
❑ N/A
Land and Water Conservation Fund Act (Section 6(f))
1. Will the project require the conversion of such property to a use other than public, ❑Yes
outdoor recreation? ❑✓ No
2. Has the NPS approved of the conversion? ❑Yes
❑ No
❑✓ N/A
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 the effect of the ❑Yes
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
❑✓ N/A
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA)
1. Does the USFWS have any recommendations with the project relative to the MBTA? ❑Yes
✓❑ No
2. Have the USFWS recommendations been incorporated? ❑Yes
❑ No
✓❑ N/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 maintaining ❑Yes
federal agency? ❑ No
❑✓ N/A
Version 1.4, 8/18/05

Northern Long-Eared Bat 4(d) Rule Streamlined Consultation Form
Federal agencies should use this form for the optional streamlined consultation framework for the northern long-
eared bat(NLEB). This framework allows federal agencies to rely upon the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service's
(USFWS)January 5,2016,intra-Service Programmatic Biological Opinion(BO)on the final 4(d)rule for the
NLEB for section 7(a)(2)compliance by: (1)notifying the USFWS that an action agency will use the streamlined
framework;(2)describing the project with sufficient detail to support the required determination; and(3)enabling
the USFWS to track effects and determine if reinitiation of consultation is required per 50 CFR 402.16.
This form is not necessary if an agency determines that a proposed action will have no effect to the NLEB or if
the USFWS has concurred in writing with an agency's determination that a proposed action may affect,but is not
likely to adversely affect the NLEB (i.e.,the standard informal consultation process).Actions that may cause
prohibited incidental take require separate formal consultation. Providing this information does not address
section 7(a)(2)compliance for any other listed species.
Information to Determine 4(d) Rule Compliance: YES NO
1. Does the project occur wholly outside of the WNS Zone'? ❑ 0
2. Have you contacted the appropriate agency2 to determine if your project is near 0 ❑
known hibernacula or maternity roost trees?
3. Could the project disturb hibernating NLEBs in a known hibernaculum? ❑ 0
4. Could the project alter the entrance or interior environment of a known ❑ 0
hibernaculum?
5. Does the project remove any trees within 0.25 miles of a known hibernaculum at ❑ 0
any time of year?
6. Would the project cut or destroy known occupied maternity roost trees,or any ❑ 0
other trees within a 150-foot radius from the maternity roost tree from June 1
through July 31.
You are eligible to use this form if you have answered yes to question#1 or yes to question#2 and no to
questions 3,4, 5 and 6. The remainder of the form will be used by the USFWS to track our assumptions in the
BO.
Agency and Applicant3 (Name, Email, Phone No.):
Donnie Brew, [e-mail], [phone]
Federal Highway Administration
Bob White,[e-mail], [phone]
Resource Environmental Solutions
http://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/nleb/pdf/WNSZone.pdf
2 See http://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/nleb/nhisites.html
3 If applicable-only needed for federal actions with applicants(e.g.,for a permit,etc.)who are party to the consultation.

Project Name: Monkey Wall Mitigation Project, DMS Project#: 100069
Project Location (include coordinates if known): 36.0559°N,-82.2067° W
The Project is in Mitchell County approximately 2 miles northwest of Bakersville,NC. To access
the site from Asheville,proceed west on I-240 and take the exit for I-26 W. Continue on I-26 and
then take the exit for US-19 N and follow as it turns into US-19 E. Then take a left onto NC-197
N.NC-197 N will merge into NC-226 N; follow this for three miles, and then take a left onto
Fork Mountain Road. In 0.3 mile,the site will be on your left.
Basic Project Description (provide narrative below or attach additional information):
The Project is in the French Broad River Basin within Cataloging Unit 06010108, TLW
06010108060010, and NC Division of Water Resources (DWR) sub basin 04-03-06. The Project
area includes two unnamed tributaries that drain to Big Rock Creek. The current State
classification for Big Rock Creek is C; Tr.; however,the Tr. designation does not apply to the
Project tributaries (NCDWQ 2011). Therefore, the Project streams are classified as Class C
waters.
The Project will include Priority I stream restoration on two reaches (G1-C and G2-B),
Enhancement II on two reaches (GI-B, and G2-A), and Preservation on one reach (G1-A).
Stream Restoration activities will include constructing an A type stream with appropriate
dimensions and pattern, reconnecting the channel to the floodplain. In-stream structures such as
log sills and brush toes will be installed for vertical stability and to improve habitat. Buffer
improvements will filter runoff from agricultural fields, thereby reducing nutrient and sediment
loads to the channel. Livestock exclusion fence will be installed, as needed, along the easement
boundary. The widening and restoration of the riparian areas will also provide wildlife corridors
throughout the project area.
Enhancement activities will include channel grading to commit all flow to a single thread channel,
grading, and vegetative planting. Livestock exclusion fencing will be installed.
Preservation activities will include livestock exclusion fencing and establishment of a permanent
conservation easement.

General Project Information YES NO
Does the project occur within 0.25 miles of a known hibernaculum? El
Does the project occur within 150 feet of a known maternity roost tree? ❑
Does the project include forest conversion4?(if yes,report acreage below) ►1 ❑
Estimated total acres of forest conversion <2.0
If known,estimated acres5 of forest conversion from April 1 to October 31 <2.0
If known, estimated acres of forest conversion from June 1 to July 316
Does the project include timber harvest?(if yes,report acreage below) ❑
Estimated total acres of timber harvest
If known,estimated acres of timber harvest from April 1 to October 3I
If known,estimated acres of timber harvest from June 1 to July 31
Does the project include prescribed fire? (if yes, report acreage below) ❑
Estimated total acres of prescribed fire
If known,estimated acres of prescribed fire from April 1 to October 31
If known, estimated acres of prescribed fire from June 1 to July 31
Does the project install new wind turbines?(if yes, report capacity in MW below) ❑
Estimated wind capacity (MW)
Agency Determination:
By signing this form;the action agency determines that this project may affect the NLEB, but that any
resulting incidental take of the NLEB is not prohibited by the final 4(d) rule.
If the USFWS does not respond within 30 days from submittal of this form,the action agency may
presume that its determination is informed by the best available information and that its project
responsibilities under 7(a)(2) with respect to the NLEB are fulfilled through the USFWS January 5,
2016, Programmatic BO. The action agency will update this determination annually for multi-year
activities.
The action agency understands that the USFWS presumes that all activities are implemented as
described herein. The action agency will promptly report any departures from the described activities to
the appropriate USFWS Field Office. The action agency will provide the appropriate USFWS Field
Office with the results of any surveys conducted for the NLEB. Involved parties will promptly notify the
appropriate US S Field Office upon finding a dead, injured, or sick NLEB.
At",
Signature: Date Submitted:
a Any activity that temporarily or permanently removes suitable forested habitat,including,but not limited to,tree removal
from development,energy production and transmission,mining,agriculture,etc.(see page 48 of the BO).
5 If the project removes less than 10 trees and the acreage is unknown,report the acreage as less than 0.1 acre.
6 If the activity includes tree clearing in June and July,also include those acreage in April to October.

t'h,te
F j
, ,
cs,„,,
.../
.9
f
°Wman{yd
/i
Putman
a
if/
P(a ,t,
White Dogwood(
Pa,.. .t n .
p
0eq) Al
''a
on Lt o4 a
agch Rd Ra ''ca
tEsc r 1
m
a
m i
t
1
1
1
I
` 3>
/' m
� N
1 2
/ Fnrk(,,, AllIllr
.
`a ..
k c
\\ Fork mountainn,p o'
6
nRa Little Rack Cies''k
1 _
c d
_�� V�� / t o4°(n
/ Pq(
nryb') oef'
as
a,
"'o
Monkey Wall
/�F 4�, ° Site ---________0/ 6
L
a v r
'',,,,[[/ A eel' l� (a
P:�t+pers ck Ct �� eY gRa ?1
n9sP ,_
Legend ,tit69eRd
\ 1 - - N?76/11
q1N_
Proposed Easement z
Green
7hi cµc't Su, Mountain
TLW 06010108060010 n9s Rd
NV,eW Z'
EJ 4'y NC NHP Element Occurrences
w J4
- 5 Mile Aviation Zone
°°ust Knot 1O er2'
® Airports
Sunset My ',
I
N
Date: 9/28/2018
Figure 1 -Vicinity Map
,�'at:+�■P"4iat w rs
���1►�����R�+��#r� Drawn by: MDE
w ����'�~~,*�%.j,ik `�[j�� S Monkey Wall Mitigation Site Checked by: RMW
Itt 0 1,000 2,000
il
Il Mitchell County, North Carolina 1 inch=2,000 feet
Feet

V•14-- -. Ts- _, w)yrr•ii it;,s t-(2__, ) , „i .
.k\\,\,, ,, - \p'/OTE: ' ),/ <4 ' -- - - ',, -4X'4'-4‘4. 1.Sr
s'< . (Ai$ e,', w ‘
:lit >-----) \ ,-//( ,---- '2 , '
e . \i- '-- ' W I -
`,1\
Lz,
4011i
• � - ���.�•. v._ �� � rJ \\M e....7,,,:ifstrirf
,�1\`a�( r. Illy�1'�i��
1ft 4ili;;r. iiir rrr- 44244
\- 2;%
i:
N., -- -,:__Ymiti. ., - ,1 ,' p a I ' -
, ,.._ •• , ;:, fi If 1 4 . e%4.zik r;.3----1' y/if Niri i____sy-- -Rc\ I- -i\;"-51-A ,\), ,r,_l__)
% -7v_ — /"\;:s7 Y('--W
itt:& q f' 'je 1 D 4
J .k- .' 14-,;:iAttt,'!„ ' Zitic . ab NCo-,6-,c, z‘. ,,\.% . .( ----\, .,.,;.
444 -77_1‘,-7,7P*J 7.-v*,471,Friklit,StilifiLelts' II . (II; / r-1
% \,-0_-__---=-*, \". r\ - fk__ikl ... >'- 11- ----tr gel":N_* X.
.k----,, ---, .\, :, , g ,, \r-vr , 0 ,,( , i
--,..\-- _,.\/.,,,,-J .,
.„, .-,:. .,. .„. ,
'''' ......,_-__,p, L.„ e\•`‘...-
4 - Ii%: _::: ..±?1; ,\\,, ,y017 -',':' ',1- 4,, ;;J,N-, N_.. .,_,\
Mak L -7 ',‘; .'''',4 , '-b ,c,3dit.i -AN I/ i iGi Iti -4.444, C71-1,/,, ,(A01._
A - k\_, q 32! /4y! y
1; -^-k6f---.---7 ( fia. --- \\- f jj:3"; TV41_• :01,!'V ,_, iv ..:,_ i..)? \I
: \' J ,;-, ,' 4 \- 4 ! ‘4°' p °,,j,v46_4.: \-
,, _,:, ------- ,i, ,y,c/c,„„\{-\ .\_,_..„w4, ,._
t:1' r?-4,V ,Nv..i..N -4‘,-;-0 40402:y
II ‘; ko r L,---;) .- :5J.i.A\ 7P--- " ac_ Am.... . '4.•: '1., --N147-140:1/44- „M". ,;4:
111() .,V4114 P71 -- -P I
'19- :1-°461°°.
9r7
- /,„,i,
1 rOr— '1 /�
j-'\ • ri,„7---, r rr„.--------- , X.t,_ _.,;;;' -'4\k-
fj°114.4Z/Ikfi
, .'\ ._. .\. ...,.. ,,(7--7- .z- ,‘ A 1, ..:,,...' _,
2. _ 5Z.•• .-1..„_-
fir/,:.-7,--,41).virf -v...7 —N--"N...;v7v•-•y-Ar 1- ---frosi.Nif 4 0 ,_
* -!:.-- -- Or 1 - A•‘ k '---N.. ,"%%~1. 1 ,.‘4w%, .-%/1%,, -;;(-.N.,...__n-r- • f '‘. • . fti 1
\'`,1 cL------. 7 ' , 3e i
r,~LN .._ -_--;.- sri,,, - 0,\_) jytk 0'—
C
Litt%
egend-_..V, ' :-="11 'q 7 : I Li itt,
4 or
" — ----------
:7".717_143_. I
Proposed Easement ! \` \V� �
0 J11111)I/Il:rCC� .:.1 nift�t\,A �
Drainage Areas ±�y� —ti \",c.\, ♦ ,\
, �� � 11L `c.�•-`
:.
Figure 2-USGS Map Date: 9/28/2018
��`��'-��:Polgr,��i alr Drawn by: MDEr P S
w •����'�~~,*�%�Ij� `7[j�� S Monkey Wall Mitigation Site Checked by: RMW
�"�� 0 1,000 2,000
Mitchell County, North Carolina 1 inch=2,000 feet
Feet

air•
44
. .- Agreed
fx • _:�. Top of
4. •" 'Fs,:'s'''T., Reach
''fir: ' :P ` .... i . ' ..-too. .
•
P.
l� fa, d
pi*p,
,......- .-, Ittp.
. .y'.. 1 ' '..: ` ' _ - ' ( _ .
AI
re )
,., ,,, 4,, ,. .,,
_. .... . v
.. r. ... ,,!, -44, '•
rr s -.... I
;gil•;': _ • • . Wall Excavation GryP
1‘. C11 ' •. . _ _.
Top of G2-A
/11.046 At upslope end of Wall
isirfriiiip_7,_ _4: ._ • .- .
Rd Top of G2-B at bottom
of trees at wall excavation
location
_ i I.
: eao,
'fir*.4.6..-.. • ,...
1"
Legend
Proposed Easement(18.93 ac)
���� Potential Wetlands 7� r
Project Parcels \ " .r. ,
Parcels • -..,:- k r. ;. r
4-Drk Mountain Rd F . ' . .
1 Stream Mitigation �'a ,*:, - .
. l
r S /
Restoration g.
c '98' ., ,'
Enhacement II (2.5:1) f F f eta .
Enhancement II (5:1) ^ `` •
Preservation - •
`1 c In, Streak*contributors
E
Figure 6-Conceptual Map Date: 9/4/2018
N w E Drawn by: MDE
0150 30o Monkey Wall Mitigation Site res
Feet Mitchell County, North Carolina

Matthew DeAngelo
From: Stancil,Vann F <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, October 12, 2018 2:19 PM
To: Matthew DeAngelo
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: [External] Project Scoping for Monkey Wall Mitigation Site in Mitchell County
Matt,
I've reviewed the description for the Monkey Wall Mitigation Site, which is located on the north side of Fork Mountain
Road and east of NC Hwy 226 in Mitchell County. The site includes two small, unnamed tributaries to Big Rock Creek,
which is a tributary to the North Toe River. There are no records of any state or federally listed species at the site nor
any in the immediate vicinity of the site.
Regarding terrestrial species,the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has listed the northern long-eared bat(Myotis
septentrionalis) as threatened under the Endangered Species Act. Mitchell County is within the range
(https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/nleb/pdf/WNSZone.pdf) of the northern long-eared bat and
may be present or in the vicinity of the project site. As such, consultation with the USFWS may be required. For more
information, please see https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/nleb/or
https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/NLEB RFO.html or contact the Asheville office of the USFWS to ensure that potential
issues related to this species are addressed.
Thanks for the opportunity to review this mitigation project for issues related to fish and wildlife. Please let me know if I
can assist further.
Vann
From: Matthew DeAngelo<[e-mail]>
Sent:Tuesday, September 11, 2018 2:29 PM
To: Stancil, Vann F <[e-mail]>
Cc:Jamey McEachran <[e-mail]>; Bob White<[e-mail]>
Subject: [External] Project Scoping for Monkey Wall Mitigation Site in Mitchell County
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless verified.Send all suspicious email as an attachment to
Dear Mr. Stancil,
The Monkey Wall Stream Mitigation Site has been identified by Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC(RES)to provide
compensatory mitigation for unavoidable stream impacts in Mitchell County, North Carolina.
The purpose of this letter is to request, review, and comment on any possible issues that might emerge with respect to
fish and wildlife associated with a potential stream restoration project on the attached site. A detailed project
description along with maps showing the location and approximate limits of the conservation easement are attached
along with a KMZ file.
We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation.You may return the comment to my attention at the
address listed in the attached letter or via email. Please feel free to contact me at [e-mail] with any questions
that you may have concerning the extent of site disturbance associated with this project.
1

Sincerely,
Matt DeAngelo
Ecologist
RES I res.us
Direct: 984.255.9133 I Mobile: [phone]
Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C.Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
2

Matthew DeAngelo
From: Cortes, Milton - NRCS, Raleigh, NC <[e-mail]>
Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2018 4:45 PM
To: Matthew DeAngelo
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE:AD-1006 Request for the Monkey Wall Mitigation Site in Mitchell County
Attachments: AD1006_ Monkey_Wall_ConsewrvationEasyment.pdf
Importance: High
Follow Up Flag: Flag for follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Mathew:
Please find attached the Farmland Conversion Impact Rati ng evaluations for the Monkey Wall Conservation Easement in
Mitchell Co., NC
If we can be of further assistance please let us know
Best regards;
' 9 agedf
Acting State Soil Scientist
Natural Resources Conservation Service
4407 Bland Rd,Suite 117
Raleigh,NC 27609
Phone:[phone]
[e-mail]
USDA
From: Matthew DeAngelo [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2018 9:49 AM
To: Cortes, Milton - NRCS, Raleigh, NC<[e-mail]>
Subject: AD-1006 Request for the Monkey Wall Mitigation Site in Mitchell County
Mr. Cortes,
Resource Environmental Solutions (RES) requests review and comment from the Natural Resources Conservation Service
on any possible concerns that may emerge with respect to farmland resources including prime, unique, statewide, or
local important farmland associated with the Monkey Wall stream mitigation project.This project is being developed for
the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services. Please note that this request is in support of the development of the
Categorical Exclusion (CE) and an Environmental Resources Technical Report for the referenced project.
Attached is a request letter along with Form AD-1006 with Parts I and III completed and maps of the Monkey Wall Site.
We ask that you review the site information and complete Parts II, IV, and V as required by NRCS. We thank you in
advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please feel free to contact me with any questions that you may have
concerning the extent of site disturbance with this project.
Sincerely,
1

Matt DeAngelo
Ecologist
RES I res.us
Direct: 984.255.9133 I Mobile: [phone]
This electronic message contains information generated by the USDA solely for the intended recipients.Any
unauthorized interception of this message or the use or disclosure of the information it contains may violate the law and
subject the violator to civil or criminal penalties. If you believe you have received this message in error, please notify the
sender and delete the email immediately.
2

U.S. Department of Agriculture
FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING
PART I (To be completed by Federal Agency) Date Of Land Evaluation Request 9/11/2018
Name of Project Monkey Wall Federal Agency Involved Federal Highway Admin (FWHA)
Proposed Land Use Conservation Easement County and State Mitchell County
PART II(To be completed by NRCS) Date Request Received By Pe r,on Completing F r
NRCS 09/24/2018 Milton Con CS NC
Does the site contain Prime, Unique,Statewide or Local Important Farmland? YES NO Acres Irrigated Average Farm Size
(If no,the FPPA does not apply-do not complete additional parts of this form) n n none 68 acres
Major Crop(s) Farmable Land In Govt.Jurisdiction Amount of Farmland As Defined in FPPA
CORN Acres: 13.3 % 18,871 acres Acres: 21.3 % 28,546 acres
Name of Land Evaluation System Used Name of State or Local Site Assessment System Date Land Evaluation Returned by NRCS
Mitchell Co. NC LESA N/A October 28, 2018 By eMail
PART III (To be completed by Federal Agency) Alternative Site Rating
Site A Site B Site C Site D
A.Total Acres To Be Converted Directly 19
B.Total Acres To Be Converted Indirectly
C.Total Acres In Site 21.6
PART IV(To be completed by NRCS) Land Evaluation Information
A.Total Acres Prime And Unique Farmland 0
B.Total Acres Statewide Important or Local Important Farmland 16.80
C. Percentage Of Farmland in County Or Local Govt. Unit To Be Converted 0.0890
D. Percentage Of Farmland in Govt.Jurisdiction With Same Or Higher Relative Value 99.3
PART V(To be completed by NRCS) Land Evaluation Criterion 0
Relative Value of Farmland To Be Converted(Scale of 0 to 100 Points)
PART VI (To be completed by Federal Agency) Site Assessment Criteria Maximum Site A Site B Site C Site D
(Criteria are explained in 7 CFR 658.5 b.For Corridor project use form NRCS-CPA-106) Points
1. Area In Non-urban Use (15)
2. Perimeter In Non-urban Use (10)
3. Percent Of Site Being Farmed (20)
4. Protection Provided By State and Local Government (20)
5. Distance From Urban Built-up Area (15)
6. Distance To Urban Support Services (15)
7. Size Of Present Farm Unit Compared To Average (10)
8. Creation Of Non-farmable Farmland (10)
9. Availability Of Farm Support Services (5)
10.On-Farm Investments (20)
11. Effects Of Conversion On Farm Support Services (10)
12.Compatibility With Existing Agricultural Use (10)
TOTAL SITE ASSESSMENT POINTS 160 O O O O
PART VII (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Relative Value Of Farmland (From Part V) 100 0 0 0 0
Total Site Assessment(From Part VI above or local site assessment) 160 0 0 0 0
TOTAL POINTS(Total of above 2 lines) 260 0 0 0 0
Was A Local Site Assessment Used?
Site Selected: Date Of Selection YES pi NO n
Reason For Selection:
Name of Federal agency representative completing this form: Date:
(See Instructions on reverse side) Form AD-1006(03-02)

STEPS IN THE PROCESSING THE FARMLAND AND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING FORM
Step 1-Federal agencies(or Federally funded projects)involved in proposed projects that may convert farmland,as defined in the Farmland Protection Policy Act(FPPA)
to nonagricultural uses,will initially complete Parts I and III of the form.For Corridor type projects,the Federal agency shall use form NRCS-CPA-106 in place
of form AD-1006.The Land Evaluation and Site Assessment(LESA)process may also be accessed by visiting the FPPA website,http://fppa.nres.usda.gov/lesa/.
Step 2-Originator(Federal Agency)will send one original copy of the form together with appropriate scaled maps indicating location(s)of project site(s),to the Natural
Resources Conservation Service(NRCS)local Field Office or USDA Service Center and retain a copy for their files.(NRCS has offices in most counties in the
U.S.The USDA Office Information Locator may be found at http://offices.usda.gov/scripts/ndISAPI.dll/oip_public/USA map,or the offices can usually be
found in the Phone Book under U.S.Government,Department of Agriculture.A list of field offices is available from the NRCS State Conservationist and State
Office in each State.)
Step 3-NRCS will,within 10 working days after receipt of the completed form,make a determination as to whether the site(s)of the proposed project contains prime,
unique,statewide or local important farmland.(When a site visit or land evaluation system design is needed,NRCS will respond within 30 working days.
Step 4-For sites where farmland covered by the FPPA will be converted by the proposed project,NRCS will complete Parts II,IV and V of the form.
Step 5-NRCS will return the original copy of the form to the Federal agency involved in the project,and retain a file copy for NRCS records.
Step 6-The Federal agency involved in the proposed project will complete Parts VI and VII of the form and return the form with the final selected site to the servicing
NRCS office.
Step 7-The Federal agency providing fmancial or technical assistance to the proposed project will make a determination as to whether the proposed conversion is consistent
with the FPPA.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THE FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING FORM
(For Federal Agency)
Part I: When completing the "County and State" questions, list all the local governments that are responsible for local land
use controls where site(s) are to be evaluated.
Part III: When completing item B (Total Acres To Be Converted Indirectly), include the following:
1. Acres not being directly converted but that would no longer be capable of being farmed after the conversion, because the
conversion would restrict access to them or other major change in the ability to use the land for agriculture.
2. Acres planned to receive services from an infrastructure project as indicated in the project justification (e.g. highways,
utilities planned build out capacity)that will cause a direct conversion.
Part VI:Do not complete Part VI using the standard format if a State or Local site assessment is used. With local and NRCS
assistance, use the local Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA).
1. Assign the maximum points for each site assessment criterion as shown in § 658.5(b) of CFR. In cases of corridor-type
project such as transportation, power line and flood control, criteria#5 and #6 will not apply and will, be weighted zero,
however, criterion #8 will be weighed a maximum of 25 points and criterion#11 a maximum of 25 points.
2. Federal agencies may assign relative weights among the 12 site assessment criteria other than those shown on the
FPPA rule after submitting individual agency FPPA policy for review and comment to NRCS. In all cases where other
weights are assigned, relative adjustments must be made to maintain the maximum total points at 160. For project sites
where the total points equal or exceed 160, consider alternative actions, as appropriate, that could reduce adverse
impacts (e.g. Alternative Sites, Modifications or Mitigation).
Part VII: In computing the"Total Site Assessment Points"where a State or local site assessment is used and the total
maximum number of points is other than 160, convert the site assessment points to a base of 160.
Example: if the Site Assessment maximum is 200 points, and the alternative Site "A" is rated 180 points:
Total points assigned Site A 180 X 160 =144 points for Site A
Maximum points possible — 200
For assistance in completing this form or FPPA process, contact the local NRCS Field Office or USDA Service Center.
NRCS employees, consult the FPPA Manual and/or policy for additional instructions to complete the AD-1006 form.

North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M.Bartos,Administrator
Governor Roy Cooper Office of Archives and History
Secretary Susi H.Hamilton Deputy Secretary Kevin Cherry
October 8,2018
Matt DeAngelo
RES
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh,NC 27605
Re: Monkey Wall Mitigation Site,Mitchell County, ER 18-2693
Dear Mr. DeAngelo:
Thank you for your letter of September 11,2018, concerning the above project.
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which would be affected by
the project. Therefore,we have no comment on the project as proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR
Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-807-6579 or
environmental.review@a,ncdcr.gov. In all future communication concerning this project,please cite the above
referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
122,u2AL. )1111_t_dkk‘a-tcic-61-6-
Ramona M. Bartos
Location:109 East Jones Street,Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address:4617 Mail Service Center,Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax:[phone]-6599

iArlrnm r,��. Office of the Chief
ap�
A�StY 1 g 44,,= Bill John Baker
GWY.0 DBP Principal Chief
�@ �0- 0P Gh.dSSaYeWr
o �/�� a s CHEROKEE NATION® O°E0G.3
1.4 "Of* P.O.Box 948•Tahlequah,OK74465.0948•918453-5000•the.okeamg
S.Joe Crittenden
-e — -. Deputy Principal Chief
.39 tf0 off. KG.•.JErYcOY
•,'60000 WPJI DLd'A O EOG.FJ
November 26, 2018
Kim Browning
United States Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
Mitigation Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27584
Re: SAW-2018-01162, Monkey Wall Mitigation Site
Ms. Kim Browning:
The Cherokee Nation (Nation) is in receipt of your correspondence about SAW-2018-01162,
Monkey Wall Mitigation Site, and appreciates the opportunity to provide comment upon this
project. Please allow this letter to serve as the Nation's interest in acting as a consulting party to
this proposed undertaking.
The Nation maintains databases and records of cultural, historic, and pre-historic resources in this
area. Our Historic Preservation Office reviewed this project, cross referenced the project's legal
description against our information, and found no instances where this project intersects or adjoins
such resources. Thus, the Nation does not foresee this project imparting impacts to Cherokee
cultural resources at this time.
However, the Nation requests that the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) halt all
project activities immediately and re-contact our Offices for further consultation if items of cultural
significance are discovered during the course of this project.
Additionally, the Nation requests that USACE conduct appropriate inquiries with other pertinent
Tribal and Historic Preservation Offices regarding historic and prehistoric resources not included
in the Nation's databases or records.
If you require additional information or have any questions,please contact me at your convenience.
Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.
Wado,
41'(/( 4Thijhr
Elizabeth Toombs, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer
Cherokee Nation Tribal Historic Preservation Office
elizabeth-toomb [e-mail]
918.453.5389

Or tiye,
United States Department of the Interior
.' t FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
• - Asheville Field Office
441CH 3 aAq 160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville,North Carolina 28801
October 12, 2018
Matt DeAngelo
RES
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, North Carolina 27605
Dear Mr. DeAngelo:
Subject: Monkey Wall Mitigation Project; Mitchell County, North Carolina
Log No. 4-2-18-486
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed the information provided in your
correspondence dated September 11, 2018, wherein you solicit comments regarding potential
impacts to federally protected species that may result from the proposed project. We submit the
following comments in accordance with the provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 661-667e); the National Environmental Policy Act(42 U.S.C. §4321
et seq.); and section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C.
1531-1543) (Act).
Project Description
According to the information provided, the proposed project is still in the scoping phase, but
aims to restore/enhance approximately 3,617 linear feet of an unnamed tributary to Big Rock
Creek near Bakersville, North Carolina to generate mitigation credits in the French Broad River
Basin. The site is currently dominated by agricultural land use (pasture). Project objectives
would include livestock exclusion, invasive species management, riparian planting, and
streambank stabilization. You indicated that 21.6 acres would be maintained under a
conservation easement.
Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Species
According to Service records, suitable summer roosting habitat may be present in the project
area for the federally threatened northern long-eared bat(Myotis septentrionalis). However, the
final 4(d) rule (effective as of February 16, 2016), exempts incidental take of northern long-eared
bat associated with activities that occur greater than 0.25 miles from a known hibernation site,
and greater than 150 feet from a known, occupied maternity roost during the pup season (June 1
—July 31). Based on the information provided, the project(which may or may not require tree
clearing) would occur at a location where any incidental take that may result from associated
activities is exempt under the 4(d) rule. Although not required,we encourage you to avoid
any associated tree clearing activities during the maternity roosting season from May 15—
August 15 if possible.

According to our records and a review of the information presented, no other federally protected
species or their respective habitats occur within the project area. Please be aware that in
accordance with the Act, it is the responsibility of the appropriate federal agency or its
designated representative to review its activities or programs and to identify any such activities
or programs that may affect endangered or threatened species or their habitats. If it is
determined that the proposed activity may adversely affect any species federally listed as
endangered or threatened, formal consultation with this office must be initiated.
A population of eastern hellbenders (Cryptobranchus alleganiensis) occurs in the project's
receiving waters (Big Rock Creek). This is a federal species of concern and is not currently
afforded legal protection under the Act. However, employing proactive conservation measures
on its behalf may help preclude the need to list it in the future. Like most aquatic species
Hellbenders are sensitive to perturbations to physical habitats and water quality. We offer the
following recommendations in the interest of protecting this and wildlife resources:
Stream Channel and Bank Restoration
A natural, stable stream system is one that is able to transport a wide range of flows and
associated sediment bed load while maintaining channel features and neither degrading nor
aggrading. Alterations to the dimension, pattern, or profile of the stream channel as well as
changes to streambank vegetation, floodplains, hydrology, or sediment input can significantly
alter this equilibrium. Accordingly, we recommend the following:
1. Only the absolute minimum amount of work should be done within stream channels to
accomplish necessary reconstruction. The amount of disturbance to in-stream and
riparian areas should not exceed what can be stabilized by the end of the workday.
Restoration plans should account for the constraints of the site and the opportunities to
improve stream pattern, dimension, and profile with minimal disturbance.
2. Reconstruction work should follow natural channel design methodologies that are based
on the bank-full, or channel-forming, stage of the stream. Bank-full stage maintains the
natural channel dimensions and transports the bulk of sediment over time. Natural
channel conditions should be identified using a reference reach(nearby stream reaches
that exemplify restoration goals). Restoration design should match the pattern,
dimension, and profile of the reference reach to ensure the project's success. The Service
is available to assist with the identification of reference reaches.
3. All work in or adjacent to stream waters should be conducted in a dry work area to the
extent possible. Sandbags, cofferdams, bladder dams, or other diversion structures
should be used to prevent excavation in flowing water. These diversion structures should
be removed as soon as the work area is stable.
4. Equipment should not be operated in the stream unless absolutely necessary. Machinery
should be operated from the banks in a fashion that minimizes disturbance to woody
vegetation. Equipment should be: (a)washed to remove any contaminant residue prior
to project construction, (b)in good working order, and (c) checked to ensure there are no
2

leaks of potential contaminants (such as oil or other lubricants)prior to and during
construction.
5. Streambanks with deep-rooted woody vegetation are the most stable, and stream
restoration efforts should incorporate the use of native vegetation adapted to the site
conditions. Live dormant stakes (such as black willow) may be used to reestablish root
structure in riparian areas.
In areas where banks are severely undercut, high, and steep, whole-tree revetment or rock
may be used as a stabilization treatment(small rock, gravel, sand, and dirt are not
recommended due to their erosive nature), and it should not extend above the bank-full
elevation (the elevation of the channel where the natural floodplain begins).
Deep-rooting woody vegetation should be established along banks where any channel
work is accomplished. Tree and shrub plantings should be spaced at intervals no greater
than 10 feet along banks. Vegetated riparian zone widths should be as wide as practical
but should extend at least 30 feet from the stream channel.
6. Adequate measures to control sediment and erosion must be implemented prior to any
ground-disturbing activities in order to minimize effects on downstream aquatic
resources. In North Carolina, non-cohesive and erosion-prone soils are most common in
the felsic-crystalline terrains of the mountain and upper piedmont regions. Therefore,
reconstruction work should be staged such that disturbed areas would be stabilized with
seeding, mulch, and/or biodegradable (coir) erosion-control matting prior to the end of
each workday. No erosion-control matting or blankets should contain synthetic
(netting) materials as they trap animals and can persist in the environment beyond
their intended purpose. Matting should be secured in place with staples; stakes; or,
wherever possible, live stakes of native trees. If rain is expected prior to temporary seed
establishment, additional measures should be implemented to protect water quality along
slopes and overburden stockpiles (for example, stockpiles may be covered with plastic or
other geotextile material and surrounded with silt fencing).
If you have not done so already, we encourage you to contact the North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission regarding potential impacts to state-protected natural resources.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to provide these comments. Please contact Mr. Byron
Hamstead of our staff at 828/258-3939, Ext. 225, if you have any questions. In any future
correspondence concerning this project, please reference our Log Number 4-2-18-486.
Sincerely,
- -original signed- -
Janet Mizzi
Field Supervisor
E.c. Andrea Leslie; NCWRC
3

302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Or es
Raleigh, NC 27605
Corporate Headquarters
5020 Montrose Blvd.Suite 650
Houston,TX 77006
Main:713.520.5400
October 5, 2018
Elizabeth Toombs
Cherokee Nation-Tribal Historic Preservation Office
PO Box 948
Tahlequah, OK 74465
Subject: Project Scoping for Monkey Wall Mitigation Project in Mitchell County
Dear Ms. Toombs,
The Monkey Wall Site has been identified by Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC(RES)to provide
compensatory mitigation for unavoidable stream impacts through the North Carolina Division of
Mitigation Services (NCDMS). The proposed project involves the restoration and enhancement of 3,617
linear feet of stream.
RES requests review and comment on any possible issues that might emerge with respect to tribal
resources and/or sites of religious importance to American Indians associated with a potential stream
mitigation project on the Monkey Wall Site (maps with approximate limits of conservation easement is
attached).
A review of the N.C. State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)HPOWEB GIS Service database
(http://gis.ncdcr.gov/hpoweb/; accessed September 13,2018)was performed as part of the site due
diligence evaluation. The database did not reveal any listed or potentially eligible historic or archeological
resources on the proposed properties or within a one-mile radius. In addition,the majority of the site has
historically been disturbed due to agriculutral practices, specifically pastureland.
We ask that you review this site based on the attached information to determine the presence of any
valued tribal resources.We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation.You may
return the comment to my attention at the address below,or via email. Please feel free to contact me at
[e-mail] with any questions that you may have concerning the extent of site disturbance
associated with this project.
Sincerely,
ANIK
Matt DeAngelo l Ecologist
res.us

302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Or 5
Raleigh, NC 27605
Corporate Headquarters
5020 Montrose Blvd.Suite 650
Houston,TX 77006
Main:713.520.5400
September 24, 2018
Miranda Panther
Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians -Tribal Historic Preservation Office
PO Box 455
Cherokee,NC 28719
Subject: Project Scoping for Monkey Wall Mitigation Project in Mitchell County
Dear Ms. Panther,
The Monkey Wall Site has been identified by Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC(RES)to provide
compensatory mitigation for unavoidable stream impacts through the North Carolina Division of
Mitigation Services (NCDMS). The proposed project involves the restoration and enhancement of 3,617
linear feet of stream.
RES requests review and comment on any possible issues that might emerge with respect to tribal
resources and/or sites of religious importance to American Indians associated with a potential stream
mitigation project on the Monkey Wall Site (maps with approximate limits of conservation easement is
attached).
A review of the N.C. State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)HPOWEB GIS Service database
(http://gis.ncdcr.gov/hpoweb/; accessed September 13,2018)was performed as part of the site due
diligence evaluation. The database did not reveal any listed or potentially eligible historic or archeological
resources on the proposed properties or within a one-mile radius. In addition,the majority of the site has
historically been disturbed due to agriculutral practices, specifically pastureland.
We ask that you review this site based on the attached information to determine the presence of any
valued tribal resources.We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation.You may
return the comment to my attention at the address below,or via email. Please feel free to contact me at
[e-mail] with any questions that you may have concerning the extent of site disturbance
associated with this project.
Sincerely,
ANIK
Matt DeAngelo l Ecologist
res.us

302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
r es
Raleigh, NC 27605
Corporate Headquarters
5020 Montrose Blvd.Suite 650
Houston,TX 77006
Main:713.520.5400
October 5, 2018
Sheila Bird
United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians in Oklahoma-Tribal Historic Preservation Office
PO Box 746
Tahlequah, OK 74465
Subject: Project Scoping for Monkey Wall Mitigation Project in Mitchell County
Dear Ms. Bird,
The Monkey Wall Site has been identified by Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC(RES)to provide
compensatory mitigation for unavoidable stream impacts through the North Carolina Division of
Mitigation Services (NCDMS). The proposed project involves the restoration and enhancement of 3,617
linear feet of stream.
RES requests review and comment on any possible issues that might emerge with respect to tribal
resources and/or sites of religious importance to American Indians associated with a potential stream
mitigation project on the Monkey Wall Site (maps with approximate limits of conservation easement is
attached).
A review of the N.C. State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)HPOWEB GIS Service database
(http://gis.ncdcr.gov/hpoweb/; accessed September 13,2018)was performed as part of the site due
diligence evaluation. The database did not reveal any listed or potentially eligible historic or archeological
resources on the proposed properties or within a one-mile radius. In addition,the majority of the site has
historically been disturbed due to agriculutral practices, specifically pastureland.
We ask that you review this site based on the attached information to determine the presence of any
valued tribal resources.We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation.You may
return the comment to my attention at the address below,or via email. Please feel free to contact me at
[e-mail] with any questions that you may have concerning the extent of site disturbance
associated with this project.
Sincerely,
ANIK
Matt DeAngelo l Ecologist
res.us

Megan Engel
From: TERM Bob White
Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2019 9:13 AM
To: Megan Engel
Subject: FW: Monkey Wall Task 1
Attachments: Monkey Wall_100069_ERTR_2019.pdf
From:Tsomides, Harry<[e-mail]>
Sent:Tuesday, February 5, 2019 11:17 AM
To: Bob White <[e-mail]>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Monkey Wall Task 1
Bob
Attached is the final ERTR with the signature page included, for your files.This task is complete. If you have not invoiced,
please do so.
Have a great day!
Harry Tsomides
Project Manager
Division of Mitigation Services
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Tel. [phone]
[e-mail]
5 Ravenscroft Drive
Suite 102
Asheville, NC 28801
`Not Al j Compares.�..
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
i

Appendix L — DMS Floodplain
Requirements Checklist

•
osstem C P •J
F �� r J�
N*C �.
E a ement ~NOHRTH{ IROI I" \
EEP Floodplain Requirements Checklist
This form was developed by the National Flood Insurance program, NC Floodplain
Mapping program and Ecosystem Enhancement Program to be filled for all EEP projects.
The form is intended to summarize the floodplain requirements during the design phase of
the projects. The form should be submitted to the Local Floodplain Administrator with
three copies submitted to NFIP (attn. State NFIP Engineer), NC Floodplain Mapping Unit
(attn. State NFIP Coordinator) and NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program.
Project Location
Name of proj ect: Monkey Wall
Name if stream or feature: Unnamed Tributaries to Big Rock Creek
County: Mitchell County
Name of river basin: French Broad River Basin
Is project urban or rural? Rural
Name of Jurisdictional Mitchell County
municipality/county:
DFIRM panel number for Panel: 0855
entire site: Map Number: 3710085500J
Effective Date: February 4, 2019
Consultant name: Resource Environmental Solutions
Phone number: 919.821.8404
Address: 302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
FEMA_Floodplain_Checklist_MonkeyWall.docx Page 1 of 4

Design Information
The Monkey Wall Stream Mitigation Project (Project) is in in the French Broad River
Basin and comprised of two unnamed tributaries. The Project is located within a rural
watershed in Mitchell County, North Carolina approximately two miles northwest of
Bakersville, NC. The Project lies within the French Broad River Basin, North Carolina
Division of Water Resources(NCDWR) sub-basin 04-03-06, and United States Geological
Survey (USGS) 14-digit hydrologic unit code (HUC) 06010108060010. The
Project proposes to restore, enhance and preserve 3,514 linear feet (LF) of stream and
provide water quality benefit for 86.6 acres of drainage area. The stream mitigation
components are summarized in the table below. The purpose of the Project is to meet
water quality improvements addressed in the River Basin Restoration Priorities and
improve overall stream health.
Reach Existing Length Mitigation Type
G1-A 278 Preservation
G1-B 120 Enhancement II
G1-C 1,521 Restoration
G2 1,595 Restoration
FEMA_Floodplain_Checklist_MonkeyWall.docx Page 2 of 4

Floodplain Information
Is project located in a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA)?
E Yes 0 No
If project is located in a SFHA, check how it was determined:
Redelineation
I—Detailed Study
I—Limited Detail Study
I—Approximate Study
I—Don't know
List flood zone designation: Zone X(outside 0.2%floodplain)
Check if applies:
AE Zone
©Floodway
C Non-Encroachment
©None
I—A Zone
©Local Setbacks Required
0 No Local Setbacks Required
If local setbacks are required, list how many feet:
Does proposed channel boundary encroach outside floodway/non-
encroachment/setbacks?
©Yes ©No
Land Acquisition (Check)
7 State owned (fee simple)
7 Conservation easment (Design Bid Build)
Conservation Easement(Full Delivery Project)
Note: if the project property is state-owned, then all requirements should be addressed
to the Department of Administration, State Construction Office (attn: Herbert Neily,
[phone])
FEMA_Floodplain_Checklist_MonkeyWall.docx Page 3 of 4

Is community/county participating in the NFIP program?
D Yes O No
Note: if community is not participating, then all requirements should be addressed to
NFIP (attn: State NFIP Engineer, [phone])
Name of Local Floodplain Administrator:
NA
Floodplain Requirements
This section to be filled by designer/applicant following verification with the LFPA
F No Action
E No Rise
E Letter of Map Revision
r Conditional Letter of Map Revision
/l1T ATl\
Other Requirements
List other requirements:
Comments:
Name: PgSIE Signature:
Title: .514C-1/4 CE,2 Date: /0/23 A9
FEMA_Floodplain_Checklist_MonkeyWall.docx Page 4 of 4