20081296 Ver 1_Mitigation Bank Proposal_20080825

Natural Resource
Restoration & Conservation
July 18, 2008
?g 6
I. J
?,?
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers a @ r,;?
Asheville Regulatory Field Office g 6'T9 "
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208 5 ??g
AU 0
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
ATTN: Loretta A. Beckwith, Regulatory Project Manager ANDSaNDS-f MVyAI.tRBRMCH
Chair, Interagency Review Team
SUBJ: Prospectus for the Ratcliffe Cove Mitigation Bank, Haywood County
Restoration Systems, LLC (RS) is pleased to present the enclosed Prospectus for the
proposed Ratcliffe Cove Mitigation Bank located near Waynesville in west-central
Haywood County within French Broad River Basin, cataloging unit 06010106 (Figs 1-3)
Please note that part one of the Prospectus is prepared in the format of the Mitigation
Banking Instrument (MBI) template developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
found at httD://www.saw.usace.army.mil/WETLANDS/Miti2ation/mitbanks.html. This
approach is taken on the recommendation of Wilmington District staff to facilitate a more
timely transition from Prospectus to MBI following the review, public notice and
approval of the Prospectus notwithstanding any changes the Interagency Review Team
(IRT) may recommend. Although the Prospectus follows the MBI template fairly
closely, some changes or deletions were necessary to stay in conformance with the new
federal mitigation rule, which became effective in June 2008.
RS has attempted to gain a working understanding of the goals and expectations set
down in the new Mitigation Rule. For example, we are aware that the prospectus will be
subject to a 30-day review for completeness and subsequently put on a 30-day public
notice. Within 30 days of the end of the public notice, the District Engineer (DE) will
issue an "Initial Evaluation Letter" apprising the sponsor of the proposal's potential to
provide compensatory mitigation for Department of the Army (DA) permits. In our
minds, this means that RS should be ready to move beyond the prospectus into the
mitigation banking instrument (Instrument) preparation phase of work within 90 days of
the DE's receipt of the prospectus (assuming that the Initial Evaluation Letter was
positive.)
RS is excited to submit this Prospectus to you for distribution to the IRT and we look
forward to putting forth our best efforts to provide the best quality wetland and stream
mitigation complex that will provide the utmost in functionality for the benefit of the
entire 8-digit watershed and beyond.
Pilot Mill • 1101 Haynes St., Suite 211 • Raleigh, NC 27604 • www.restorationsystems.com • Phone [phone]- Fax [phone]
Page 2
July 18, 2008
Loretta Beckwith, USACE
In support of your effort to get the document to the members of the IRT, I am enclosing
the original and 5 copies. A list of all adjacent property owners' names and addresses are
also included for your use during the public notice process.
We are hopeful that you will contact me right away if you have questions or comments
before the public notice is executed. Thanks for your time and cooperation.
Sincerely,
44OW,
M. Randall Turner
Enclosures
cc: William T. Walker, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Asheville
Directions to the Bank: N
Take exit 27 off Interstate 40 j ust north of Clyde
Travel on US 74W/23S/19S for - 3 miles
Take exit 104 for Lake Junaluska towards Waynesville and travel - 1 mile
Turn left on Francis Farm Road (just after Junaluska School)
The Bank is on the right after a sharp bend in the road
Point in center Site
Latitude: 35.5061 ON, Longitude: 82.9549 °W
w- 1tStQsg?
'NG 1g12I74 - _
A
- dk,
The Bank
W
a j
svlle
y `T.
-
.
rp „
µy4•. -. 1. ..: '.`f'"?,,v
1
E:
E
m - (1Aj
0 1 mi. 4 mi. ,J .. -:... . -
1:158,400
Source: 1977 North Carolina Atlas and Gazetteer, p.52.
t
Own. by:
"; 2125 Rowland Pond Drive THE BANK LOCATION ckd by: CLF FIGURE
Willow Spring, NC 27592 WGL
[phone] RATCLIFFE COVE MITIGATION BANK
[phone] fax Cate:
Haywood County, North Carolina January 2008
?'rnwnmeNx me 11 Project: 05-002.45
5 mi. 0 5 mi. 15 mi. +L/
1:625,000
Source: Hydrologic Unit Map -1974 State of North Carolina
Own. by:
CLF FIGURE
2126 Rowland Pond Willow Spring. NC 27592 e HYDROLOGIC UNIT MAP Cktl by:
WGL
[phone]
[phone] fax RATCLIFFE COVE MITIGATION BANK Date:
2
05-002..45
Haywood County, North Carolina Project anuary
45
05-0

1 t.,, i `Fx t? v ?`< r LL . -. p i ' • • i? i- '.'y, •. •;" ?f jr
1-2 -7
Q bj fn?? / / ? ? . ? _T , v ?? 1 i /.i:,,i - ,/ /.i ? •7 ?: !r / ?`? ? ? ` _?_ ??,?1 r f
t?Ss t? j t s•
'
% 11

? •.L
.
?f
?
?
f
?'
'
'
?
1
y ._
_.,r
t.'-'^
i
J
'y 1'
?bti l ?
p ?•?
x
??.i
\i 1
h

16
_.!
/
) 1
?
'
t
(} 1
f
? ? ! I ,+? f 1 /tea `
! l1 ,•Sr
'\
?

.. 1 A l ' [[ ??g • . 4h. `?? ?r ? "ti's e= T j k ?. }- 7 .r`"'" ??--??' ?
r' T ` , Y•. ! v. ??' .? < .. / l?
• 1 .???,.
?
?"7 f
"N
t
l
1
?T
^J
?
•
?
l?
r .
,....
rti
.
i<
?.ri
of ..
?
?
1/t ,C
?• us ?. E yf'
J
fir
?'
`
? 1
?-
`
, a
?
,?
'Y /? ?
, `? rf
11 o
°'
'
?- i
c
? ?z?*'
i
?
' ?
? J`+' ?
?
J
f
1 ? 1, t /?
1 `ti
t '
?
`
?
v
•,./
?
,
.
r
I
?
i 1
'.
t?,
?,?
.?" K
??y
?
III[ y'`¢Yy??../' "'?slr•-4i!'-'.'. r.` ,r ?,s
p ., ?L ` ?\
??? Y{C 1?f?1??
?14tf -' ?"T?•r- ?',
`
1
`?R ...?.- f;L?, wi' y ? ! _
V'?{'?,`?_r'C-•h'?. .?? >'..? ?.1e? ?et?? ..._. kY
\ e
4
44
Legend

Drainage Area = - 3.9 square miles
Feet Parcels
' 0 650 1,300 2,600 3,900 5,200
Easement = -24 acres i
11 V.- A
Dwn, By. CLF FIGURE

and Pone Dr.. TOPOGRAPHY AND DRAINAGE AREA
A 2126 Rowl
(919) 215 1 93 C 27592 RATCLIFFE COVE MITIGATION BANK Date: wGL
3
[phone] (fax) HaYwood CountY! North Carolina Project:

05-022.45
Ratcliffe Cove Adjacent Landowners
Dennis & Tammy Francis
427 Francis Farm Rd
Waynesville, NC 28786
J. N. & Nancy M. Hyatt
1425 Francis Farm Rd
Waynesville, NC 28786
Charlie Jack Arrington
48 Sheriff Dr
Waynesville, NC 28786
George L. Carpenter
216 Carpenter Way
Waynesville, NC 28786
James Harley Francis, Jr.
P.O. Box 117
Lake Junaluska, NC 28745
Haywood County Courthouse
Haywood County
Waynesville, NC 28786
Thomas Joseph Daily
633 Seibert Rd
Waynesville, NC 28786
M n g g @ g UI\' 79, §
G 2 5 2008
US Army Corps PUBLIC NOTICE ClEw DSO p RBW44w
Of Engineers VOL
Wilmington District 08 1^ 9 6
Issue Date: 22 August 2008
Comment Deadline: 22 September 2008
Corps Action ID #: SAW-2008-02293
The Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers (Corps) has received a prospectus describing the
establishment of a stream and wetland compensatory mitigation bank, known as Ratcliffe Cove
Mitigation Bank for Federal and State permits as described below:
Bank Sponsor
Restoration Systems, LLC
This public notice does not imply, on the part of the Corps of Engineers or other agencies, either
favorable or unfavorable opinion of the work to be performed, but is issued to solicit comments
regarding the factors on which final decisions will be based. Specific plans and location
information are described below and shown on the attached plans. This Public Notice and all
attached plans are also available on the Wilmington District Web Site at
www.saw.usace.annv.mil/wetlands. The complete prospectus and mitigation plans are also
available at the Asheville Regulatory Field Office.
WATERWAYS AND LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED WORK: The proposed bank site is
located approximately 0.5 mile northeast of Waynesville in central Haywood County and
encompasses approximately 24 acres of land that is currently utilized for livestock grazing.
Coordinates for the site are 35.5061 north and 82.9549 west. The main hydrologic features of
the proposed bank include Ratcliffe Cove Branch, four unnamed tributaries to Ratcliffe Cove
Branch, and associated floodplains. The proposed bank is located in the Broad Basins portion of
the Blue Ridge Ecoregion of North Carolina within Untied States Geological Survey (USGS)
Cataloging Unit 06010106 (North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) subbasin
number 04-03-05) of the French Broad River Basin.
PROPOSED WORK AND PURPOSE: The bank sponsor proposes to establish, design,
construct, and operate a stream and wetland compensatory mitigation bank in central Haywood
County, North Carolina.
As stated by the sponsor, the primary goals and objectives of this proposed mitigation bank are
to improve water quality, enhance flood attenuation and restore aquatic and riparian habitat.
Specifically, the sponsor proposes to restore 5,660 linear feet of stream channel, enhance 296
linear feet of stream channel, restore 0.9 acre of riverine wetlands, enhance 0.8 acre of riverine
wetlands, plant a native woody riparian buffer, and protect the proposed bank site in perpetuity
with a conservation easement. The sponsor states that the goals and objectives would be
accomplished by: 1) removing non-point sources of pollution associated with agricultural
activities, 2) reducing sedimentation within onsite and downstream receiving waters, 3)
reestablishing stream stability and the capacity to transport watershed flows and sediment loads
by restoring stable dimension, pattern and profile, 4) promoting floodwater attenuation by
reconnecting bankfull flows to abandoned floodplains, restoring entrenched tributaries, restoring
depressional floodplain wetlands, and revegetating floodplains, 5) improving aquatic habitat by
enhancing stream bed variability and the use of in-stream structures, 6) providing wildlife
habitat. The sponsor states that the proposed bank will be protected in perpetuity by a
conservation easement. The applicant states that upon completion the proposed bank would
offer 5,778 Stream Mitigation Units and 1.3 Riverine Wetland Mitigation Units.
The proposed 24-acre bank site is currently utilized as pasture land for livestock grazing. Cattle
have indiscriminate access to onsite streams and wetlands, resulting in degradation of stream
banks through vegetative cropping and hoof shear. Riparian vegetation adjacent to restoration
/enhancement reaches of onsite streams is sparse and disturbed due to livestock grazing, bush
hogging, and regular maintenance activities. The proposed bank site encompasses 5,590 linear
feet of stream channels including Ratcliffe Cove Branch and four (4) unnamed tributaries.
Approximately 1.7 acres of the proposed bank site are underlain by hydric soils. Hydric soils
are located within floodplains adjacent to onsite streams. Extensive floodplain manipulations
associated with stream ditching and straightening, deforestation, floodplain drain tile, and
compaction due to livestock trampling have effectively removed groundwater hydrology from
some of these areas impacted by stream channel entrenchment, ditching, excavation and removal
of vegetation. The enclosed map shows the approximate location of proposed restoration and
enhancement activities.
The proposed primary geographic service area is the French Broad River Basin 8-digit HUC,
06010106.
This mitigation bank may be considered one of a number of practicable alternatives available to
applicants to compensate for unavoidable stream and wetland impacts associated with permits
issued under the authority of Sections 404 and 401 of the Clean Water Act for projects located
within the prescribed geographic service area.
Oversight of this wetland and stream compensatory mitigation bank will be by a group of
Federal and State agency representatives collectively referred to as the Interagency Review Team
(IRT). The IRT shall be chaired by the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and
is comprised of representatives from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, N.C. Division of Water Quality, and the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission.
The actual approval of the use of this mitigation bank for a specific project is the decision
of the Corps of Engineers pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The Corps provides
no guarantee that any particular individual or general permit will be granted authorization to use
this wetland compensatory mitigation bank to compensate for unavoidable wetland impacts
associated with a proposed permit, even though mitigation from this bank may be available.
-2-
AUTHORITY: A Public Notice regarding proposed mitigation banks is required pursuant to the
rules published in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) for Compensatory Mitigation for
Losses of Aquatic Resources (33 CFR 332.8(d)(4)).
FEDERAL EVALUATION OF PROPOSAL: The Corps of Engineers is soliciting comments
from the public; Federal, state, and local agencies and officials; Indian Tribes; and other
interested parties in order to consider and evaluate this proposed mitigation bank. Any
comments received will be considered by the Corps in evaluating this proposal. Comments are
used to assess impacts on endangered species, historic properties, conservation, economics,
aesthetics, general environmental concerns, wetlands, cultural values, fish and wildlife values,
flood hazards and flood plain values (in accordance with Executive Order 11988), land use,
navigation, shore erosion and accretion, recreation, water supply and conservation, water quality,
energy needs, safety, food and fiber production, mineral needs, considerations of property
ownership, and, in general, the needs and welfare of the people.
Preliminary review indicates that: 1) An environmental impact statement will not be required; 2)
No species of fish, wildlife, or plant (or their critical habitat) listed as endangered or threatened
under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (PL 93-205) will be affected; and 3) No cultural or
historic resources considered eligible or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of
Historic Places will be affected. Additional information may change any of these preliminary
findings.
Written comments pertinent to the proposed work, as outlined above, will be received in this
office, Attention: Lori Beckwith, Asheville Regulatory Field Office, 151 Patton Avenue, Room
208, Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006, until 5:00 p.m., September 22, 2008.
-3-
Directions to the Bank:
Take exit 27 off Interstate 40 j ust north of Clyde
Travel on US 74W/23S/19S for - 3 miles
Take exit 104 for Lake Junaluska towards Waynesville and travel - 1 mile
Turn left on Francis Farm Road (just after Junaluska School)
The Bank is on the right after a sharp bend in the road
Point in center Site
Latitude: 35.5061 °N, Longitude: 82.9549 °W

4 - E

,
_ F
a
? -7
P

N.

j! .1 w?

Z
t c°,
C
The Bank k:

A
Fi?
a 5 :'
r z r ...+. ... 2 t.. r x. '5..:. T f
-V IV
77
'! -
'?_ -
r
- -75
s!- 0 1 mi. 4mi.
a`^ Y
^,?t 1:158,400 .: _ ! .s,
Source 1977 North Carolina Atlas and Gazetteer, p .S2.
r- Dwn. by., CAF
FIGURE
2126 Rowland Pond Drive THE BANK LOCATION Ckd by.
(919) 15-1 69,3 C27592 RATCLIFFE COVE MITIGATION BANK wc?
Cate:
[phone] fax
Haywood County, North Carolina January 2008
AW=S.V ..... M ? 11 ?`OleCt 05-002.45
,i2c lo?au"r-, ???

a
IN
F+ _
,,? I I?O _ s' ? ?J?f^5??? ?? ? i ` ? jr??r?,.?'?"'?F`rf F'I-r'??5 .
yS 'i ??77 i ¦w 'b-, J i r ?t. .? ?,rt 3.J - r r f. x ? l1?? ?F?•Y?,>'r?l :
'yam'/ / \ a f. 1 .:?-? ( ? ?. .. ( ? .
?
C
'
'•
/
?..?r
.. e? II,
? ?`xal ?. ?
/
y
??
r? ???, u
;;tom' _ r`.? ?•-.,:-SV.-"f a.:• ?,
.
?-•w .
y
,
.
1¦' _f
l'. `• i `\ ,
° r I ?
.
?'
/• t.,
'/ 1.fl+ T
/ cs? -v?
a
5
??
,a
?. i
? : ¦
3 `•? may. i C t o R?'

?T??{ #?-C f? PL ? c: v-J l r•- L 7 ? a CL tr.,.?
f? ? rt??'? ??
r-
'
,?` \.•,?I 't f ?\,?,?:r i 1 ? +• fir,
./?~ R`COY 47 F l????'?`'?-rte ? •(a ? ?'?i
??? ??+?. ? ,? `\ {?,
?p
/"'?'•r iC
?
\ , /???.,,
? yt?
y
{ ?
I
`
-
?_; _ r j[
?
?.
3'
R 1i.
.. .?f'
S,.} R ;1 .
'?4??-f?t' . Ji W2 • '??l3cl /..r'I{+'??, .. "A _ ?. ?; 'iy? E`.4 u-'r? j }?'? _ / k,
?r? -ra-..?'*1 /,4d(tlx.'° Et r??, f' / ? .?if `?rf
3. ).?': 't
` i?¦.?'"?? ?4 Cam-' J,?y•?_ F A?'?`1
?..
? 1
C
f
?
i
P F 4
:
?r ?.:
41
`
S
?
?1
?
?ry
i
x
_ - ?i?-? ti• '' ° ?. r`' I) yr ???, ys.(? { t -f t'?f?--1f l,r
l v\
-?+ 1. ? / ••r? e?• r 4' 1 a - rte. ,;;i,F ??,r ? ? s\ `S
•? .t?,?.fj? e¦?.i I•I 1 ??\. ?' ? ? • ? f? #\-„???,r?rZ€; ?ia?`t>` /??„t"?f L? }" ? \ E:
-t 5 ?. qq o ?. q TVI ah f /.'?T. E I ? L + ,c^T'^-' ` F. ?, ,
t
V t ??. a I
-" ` } fi ,P t

.
J i.{\
?
_ ? ??kt? •.3i !l I ??'vs ?r?.` ?7j? i I ??!`j"? ?? ??? •.. s.
?Q .
3
+++---
?
?
?..
)
?
?
?
L
?.
r .
!".
''.?'
?`.?`
.t".,T
?i
e?Y?.., ?
?•' •'1i?4 t?? r'l f
v`- ,J-'• •¦?!. r?.i??/•F
F?II I
t / /?) / ?.[ t• r#' . c'{ ? -'! 'Cs?r?+J?F 1?•'?'?-!'-/ ? ?1,,;,=-f /x.1.1. ? 1?./f i+,.r'^". ?f
? 1 ` 1 `?' S: •V?'',\ '?"- J f? _ !, /` S'?.? ?? fl •'\ -.'i'1.` t t'li ?E K'C1. ?t\
'..
-•?-.?:.
• /?.r < r,,?.-
?. ?•
?
?'
`
?
te
'
r
?.
?, ,
?r..?,r.?,?
/
r ? .?
?. -
.,x ' 1 ??\ t i •? .yc.,., i'?t, - /? 'cam:...: i - a-•--.?.--_
1
1 ??
?
1
!
,?
..C•'..r \ ?
Legend
C3Drainage Area = - 3.9 square miles

zz?mi Feet - r?<1Y1: %-' Q Parcels
ti
0 650 1,300 2,600 3,900 5200
,
Easement = -24 acres
r
- Dwn. By: CLF FIGURE
2126 RovAand Pond Dr. TOPOGRAPHY AND DRAINAGE AREA
willow Spring, NC 27592 Date:
[phone] RATCLIFFE COVE MITIGATION BANK wGL
[phone] (fax) Haywood County, North Carolina P
t
rojec
:
05-022.45
? c_kj Y--ItL, A b'- 4

6-2 c%ES ccJ,-e. 2 a7(- ?
Dwn. By CLF FIGURE
2126 Rowland Pone Dr.
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND SOILS Date:
Willow Spring, NC 27559 92 A
[phone] RATCLIFFE COVE STREAM RESTORATION SITE wGL 4
- [phone] (fax) Project:
Haywood County, North Carolina
05-022.45

En cias U'r'e' `tai
Dwn' By' CLF FIGURE
2126 Rowland Pond Dr. PROPOSED CONDITIONS
Willow Spring, NC 27592 RATCLIFFE COVE MITIGATION BANK Date: ///???
[phone] WGL
[phone] (fax) Haywood County, North Carolina Project: 6
v
05-022.45

PROSPECTUS

Ratcliffe Cove Mitigation Bank
Haywood County, North Carolina
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
(Sponsor) (Environmental
Consultant)
Restoration Systems, LLC Axiom Environmental, Inc.
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 211 2126 Rowland Pond Drive
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 Willow Spring, North Carolina 27592
008
July 2008 ID
PUG252 ?
Introduction
Part I of the prospectus contains a two part narrative including the Introduction and
the General Provisions. The Introduction is formatted to respond directly to 33 CFR
Parts 325 and 332 section 332.8 (d)(2) of the new federal mitigation rule; the General
Provisions essentially convey information in the format of the recommended mitigation
banking instrument (MBI) template found on the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers web
page (see cover letter). Part 11 of the prospectus is the Mitigation Plan. The Mitigation
Plan provides detailed information on goals, methods, existing and proposed conditions
and other technical information including preliminary design concepts, regulatory issues,
etc.
Objectives of the Bank
The primary goals of this mitigation bank project are focused on improving water
quality, enhancing flood attenuation, and restoring aquatic and riparian habitat, which
will be accomplished by:
1. Removing nonpoint sources of pollution associated with agricultural activities
including a) the exclusion of livestock from streams, stream banks and
floodplains, b) elimination of fertilizer and pesticide application into and adjacent
to streams and wetlands, and c) establishment of a woody buffer adjacent to
streams and wetlands to treat and/or filter out sediment and pollutants from the
adjacent landscape.
2. Reducing sedimentation within onsite and downstream receiving waters through
a) reduction of bank erosion associated with hoof shear, vegetation maintenance,
and operation of motorized equipment up to stream banks and, b) planting a
diverse woody vegetative buffer adjacent to The Bank's streams.
3. Reestablishing stream stability and the capacity to transport watershed flows and
sediment loads by restoring a stable dimension, pattern, and profile supported by
natural in-stream habitat and grade/bank stabilization structures.
4. Promoting floodwater attenuation through a) reconnecting bankfull stream flows
to the abandoned floodplain terrace, b) restoring secondary, entrenched tributaries
thereby reducing floodwater velocities within smaller catchment basins, c)
restoring depressional floodplain wetlands, thereby increasing the storage
capacity for floodwaters within The Bank, and d) revegetating floodplains to
increase frictional resistance on floodwaters crossing The Bank.
5. Improving aquatic habitat for benthic macroinvertebrates and other species by
enhancing stream bed variability and the use of in-stream structures.
6. Promoting an overall ecological lift by shading/cooling surface waters with buffer
plantings, thereby increasing dissolved oxygen, filtering nutrients, reducing
sediment input, reducing downstream flooding, increasing variability of bed
morphology through maintenance of perpendicular flow vectors and restoring
aquatic and terrestrial habitats for fisheries and wildlife.
The Bank's mitigation plan includes 1) construction of a stable, riffle-pool stream
channel, 2) restoration and enhancement of historic wetland functions. 3) enhancement of
water quality functions (reduce nonpoint source sedimentation and nutrient inputs), 4)
restoration of a natural woody riparian buffer along The Bank's stream reaches, 5)
restoration of wildlife habitat associated with a riparian corridor, and 6) establishment of
a permanent conservation easement which will provide perpetual protection for all
restoration and enhancement activities.
Establishment and Operation of the Bank
The Bank will be established following completion of a series of processes that are
considered to be standard practices in the mitigation banking industry:
• GIS-landscape- level site evaluation
• Landowner contact & Site Reconnaissance
• Technical investigations of-
• Soils, site hydrology, site streams, other drainage features, plant
and animal communities, rare species and rare habitats, etc.
¦ Site restoration/enhancement/preservation potential
¦ Consideration of current and future watershed conditions
• Land Acquisition
• Development of mitigation plan including design
• Submit prospectus to District Engineer (DE) for approval
• Submit MBI to DE for approval
• Implementation
• Monitoring
Operation of the bank will be managed by Restoration Systems, LLC (RS) throughout
construction and monitoring. RS will be totally responsible for the bank bank's success
and for the sale of credits in accordance with approved credit release schedule.
Proposed Service Area
The primary Geographic Service Area (GSA) is the French Broad River Basin 8-digit
Cataloging Unit, 06010106; however, the recent Wilmington District Public Notice (June
3, 2008) affirmed that "use of the bank for impacts located outside the GSA may be
considered on a case-by-case basis during the permit evaluation process."
Need for and Technical Feasibility of Bank
French Broad 06 is a relatively small drainage area within the French Broad River
Basin. The service area includes numerous small cities and towns such as Waynesville,
Clyde, Maggie Valley and Lake Junaluska, but the entire area is rapidly developing as a
tourist and retirement destination. Construction of second homes, residential
communities and services is expected to proceed at a moderate pace well into the future.
Technical feasibility of the bank is a certainty based on the results of vigorous site
investigations by licensed soil scientists and biologists. Standard, Rosgen-based methods
will be used to implement improvements to the Bank stream reaches.
Sponsor's Qualifications to Successfully Complete Bank
RS has been a preeminent force in the development of successful aquatic mitigation
sites in North Carolina for more than 10 years. RS's track record in selecting high
quality sites and using highly skilled technical designers and experts is well-
4
demonstrated. RS has designed and implemented more than 25 wetland, stream and
riparian buffer mitigation sites in Maryland and North Carolina, representing more than
5,000 acres of wetlands and 25 miles of streams. Furthermore, RS provides full
financial surety for every project through every phase of work and each site is
inspected by staff at least quarterly in addition to requisite technical monitoring.
Site's Ecological Suitability to Achieve the Bank's Objectives
Site is characterized by rolling hills where hay is produced and cattle are grazed,
residences and outbuildings, and historically modified streams and wetlands. Relatively
modest alterations to site streams and other features will result in measurable ecological
gains in aquatic functions and values. Furthermore, agricultural practices will be
precluded from future encroachments into aquatic sites.
Credit Release Schedule
RS proposes to use the credit release schedule prescribed by the agencies in a
Department of the Army (DA) public notice, dated June 3, 2008; however, RS reserves
the right to modify the credit release schedule in the future should changes be approved
by the DA or the Interagency Review Team (IRT).
Table 1. Proposed Credit Release Schedule
Task Completion Verification % of Credit Release
Wetlands Streams
I (Preconstruction)* Execution of MBI 15 15
II (Construction) Site Ins ection b USACE 15 15
III (1S` Year Monitoring) Monitoring Report 10 10
IV (2" Year Monitoring) Monitoring Report 15 to
V (3I Year Monitoring) Monitoring Report 20
VI 0 Year Monitoring) Monitoring Report 10 10
VII (5` Year Monitoring) Monitoring Report 15 15**
Total 100 100
* Task I includes the execution of the MBI, MBRT approval of the Mitigation Plan, delivery of financial
assurances, recordation of the conservation easement, and delivery of the title option to the MBRT.
** The release of 15 percent is contingent upon two bankfull events during the five-year monitoring.
More than 5600 linear feet of degraded stream will be restored and more than 296
feet will be enhanced, using Level II methodologies. Furthermore, 0.9 acre of riparian
wetlands will be restored and 0.8 acre will be enhanced.
Table 2. Quantification of Proposed Mitigation
Proposed Mitigation Activity Proposed Mitigation Quantity Proposed Units (Credits)
Streams (linear ft) Wetlands (ac) Streams (SMUs) WetlandS(WMUS)
Stream Restoration 5660 5660 r,-

Stream Enhancement (Level 11)
296 <?i >
118 .
Riparian Wetland Restoration 0.9 0.9
Riparian Wetland Enhancement 0.8 rys' " 0.4
. ; . ,. Total. 5778 Total: 1.3
General Provisions
The goal of the Ratcliffe Cove Mitigation Bank (The Bank) is to restore or
enhance first-, second-, and third-order streams, and to restore and enhance
riparian wetlands, including their collective functions and values to compensate
for the loss of similar regulated resources for unspecified, future and unavoidable
impacts to wetlands and/or streams, as authorized by Clean Water Act Section
404 permits in circumstances deemed appropriate by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers District Engineer (DE) after consultation, through the permit review
process, with members of the IRT.
2. Use of credits from The Bank to offset impacts to aquatic resources authorized by
Clean Water Act permits must be in compliance with the Clean Water Act and
implementing regulations, including but not limited to the 404(b)(1) Guidelines,
the National Environmental Policy Act, and all other applicable Federal and State
legislation, rules and regulations. This agreement has been drafted following the
publication of new federal rules, 33 CFR Parts 325 and 332, which became law in
June 2008.
The IRT shall be chaired by Loretta A. Beckwith, hereafter referred to as the DE,
the representative of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District.
The IRT shall review monitoring and accounting reports as described below. In
addition, the IRT will review proposals for remedial actions proposed by RS, or
any of the agencies represented on the IRT. The IRT will work to reach
consensus on its actions, but the responsibility for making determinative decisions
rests with the DE.
4. The Corps, after consultation with the appropriate Federal and State review
agencies through the permit review process, shall make final decisions concerning
the amount and type of compensatory mitigation to be required for unavoidable,
permitted wetland impacts, and whether or not the use of credits from The Bank is
appropriate to offset those impacts. In the case of permit applications and
compensatory mitigation required solely under the Section 401 Water Quality
Certification rules of North Carolina, the N.C. Division of Water Quality
(NCDWQ) will determine the amount of credits that can be withdrawn from The
Bank.
5. The parties to this agreement understand that, in accordance with the new federal
rule, credits derived from approved mitigation banks are preferable to the use of
ILF or on-site (developer-sponsored) mitigation where practicable.
6. The Bank is a 24 acre portion of an active farm in west-central Haywood County,
which is utilized for the growth of hay crops and the grazing of livestock.
Approximately 5600 linear feet of stream associated with Ratcliffe Cove Branch
and unnamed tributaries, as well as 1.7 acres of hydric soils exhibit mitigation
potential within The Bank. These areas are heavily used by livestock and are
subjected to frequent applications of fertilizer and pesticides, which collectively
6
causes sedimentation to streams and represents sources of toxic and eutrophic
input to streams. Historical land use practices, including the maintenance and
removal of riparian vegetation, and the relocation, dredging, and straightening of
onsite streams has resulted in degraded water quality, unstable channel
characteristics (stream entrenchment, erosion, and bank collapse), and reduced
storage capacity/floodwater attenuation. A more detailed description of the
baseline conditions on the site is contained in the enclosed Mitigation Plan.
7. RS will perform work described on pages 9-13 of the Mitigation Plan, including:
• Restoration of approximately 5600 linear feet of stream channels
• Enhancement (Level II) of approximately 296 linear feet of degraded stream
channel;
• Establishment of vegetated buffers on both sides of affected stream channels;
• Restoration of 0.9 acre of forested riparian wetland by: (1) restoring active
floodplain attributes through stream restoration/enhancement methods, (2)
reducing the draw-down effect of nearby channels, and (3) reestablishing a
wetland plant community;
• Plant approximately 24 acres of woody vegetation within wetland and non-
wetland, riparian communities. In addition, substrate modifications will be
made to areas that are highly compacted from historical equipment and
livestock usage, and to add microtopograhpic variation in the land surfaces to
facilitate slowing and trapping surface water flows and accumulations.
8. The purpose of this work, and the objective of The Bank, is to:
• Remove nonpoint sources of pollution associated with agricultural activities
including a) cessation of equipment operations and maintenance activities
from streams, stream banks, and floodplains; b) cessation of broadcasting
fertilizer, pesticides, and other agricultural materials into and adjacent to The
Bank streams and wetlands; c) exclusion of livestock from riparian zones by
installation of wood post and wire fencing along the boundaries of the
conservation easement; and d) provide a vegetative buffer adjacent to streams
and wetlands to treat surface runoff, which may be laden with sediment and/or
agricultural pollutants.
• Reduce sedimentation within onsite and downstream receiving waters through
a) reduction of bank erosion associated with vegetation maintenance, and use
of agricultural machinery, and b) planting a forested vegetative buffer
adjacent to The Bank streams.
• Reestablish stream stability and the streams' capacity to transport watershed
flows and sediment loads by restoring a stable dimension, pattern, and profile
supported by natural in-stream habitat and grade/bank stabilization structures.
• Promote floodwater attenuation through a) reconnection of bankfull stream
flows to the abandoned floodplain terrace, b) reduce floodwater velocities
within smaller catchment basins by restoring the secondary, entrenched
tributaries, c) restore depressional floodplain wetlands, thereby increasing the
7
practicable. If such event occurs before the final availability of all credits for sale,
RS shall take remedial action to restore the property to its condition prior to such
event, in a manner sufficient to provide adequate mitigation to cover credits that
were sold prior to such delay or failure to compensate for impacts to waters,
including wetlands, authorized by Department of the Army permits. Such
remedial action shall be taken by RS only to the extent necessary and appropriate,
as determined by the DE.
12
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Restoration Systems, L.L.C. (Restoration Systems) proposes the establishment of a stream and wetland
mitigation bank at the Ratcliffe Cove Site (The Bank) approximately 0.5 miles northeast of Waynesville,
in central Haywood County. The Bank is located within the French Broad River Basin in 14-digit United
States Geological Survey (USGS) Cataloging Unit and Targeted Local Watershed 06010106030020
(North Carolina Division of Water Quality [NCDWQ] subbasin number 04-03-05).
The Bank encompasses approximately 24 acres of land that is utilized for livestock grazing.
Approximately 5590 linear feet of stream (will be increased to 5956 linear feet after project completion)
associated with Ratcliffe Cove Branch and its tributaries, as well as 1.7 acres of hydric soil exhibit
mitigation potential within The Bank. These areas are accessible to livestock and are routinely cleared,
resulting in local disturbances to stream banks and wetland soil surfaces. Additional land use practices
including the maintenance and removal of riparian vegetation, and relocation, dredging, and straightening
of onsite streams has resulted in degraded water quality, unstable channel characteristics (stream
entrenchment, erosion, and bank collapse), and reduced storage capacity/floodwater attenuation.
The primary goals of this stream and wetland restoration project focus on improving water quality,
enhancing flood attenuation, and restoring aquatic and riparian habitat, which will be accomplished by:
1. Removing nonpoint sources of pollution associated with agricultural activities including a)
excluding livestock from streams, stream banks, and floodplains; b) eliminating the broadcasting
of fertilizer, pesticides, and other agricultural materials into and adjacent to streams and wetlands;
and c) establishing a vegetative buffer adjacent to streams and wetlands to treat surface runoff
which may be laden with sediment and/or agricultural pollutants from the adjacent landscape.
2. Reducing sedimentation within onsite and downstream receiving waters through a) reduction of
bank erosion associated with hoof shear, vegetation maintenance, and agricultural plowing, and
b) planting a diverse woody vegetative buffer adjacent to The Bank's streams.
3. Reestablishing stream stability and the capacity to transport watershed flows and sediment loads
by restoring a stable dimension, pattern, and profile supported by natural in-stream habitat and
grade/bank stabilization structures.
4. Promoting floodwater attenuation through a) reconnecting bankfull stream flows to the
abandoned floodplain terrace, b) restoring secondary, entrenched tributaries thereby reducing
floodwater velocities within smaller catchment basins, c) restoring depressional floodplain
wetlands, thereby increasing the storage capacity for floodwaters within The Bank, and d)
revegetating The Bank's floodplain to increase frictional resistance on floodwaters crossing The
Bank.
5. Improving aquatic habitat by enhancing stream bed variability and the use of in-stream structures.
6. Providing terrestrial and aquatic wildlife habitat.
The Bank's mitigation plan includes 1) construction of a stable, riffle-pool stream channel, 2)
restoration/enhancement of historic wetland functions, 3) enhancement of water quality functions (reduce
nonpoint source sedimentation and nutrient inputs), 4) restoration of a natural woody riparian buffer along
The Bank's stream reaches, 5) restoration of wildlife habitat associated with a riparian corridor/stable
stream, and 6) establishment of a permanent conservation easement which will encompass all restoration
activities.
Ratcliffe Cove Mitigation Plan Restoration Systems, LLC
Restoration options outlined in this report are as follows:
Proposed Mitigation Units
Proposed Mitigation Quantity
(Credits)
Proposed Mitigation Activity
Streams Wetlands Stream Units Wetland Units
(linear feet) (acres) (SMUs) (WMUs)
Stream Restoration 5660 5660 <` .
Stream Enhancement (Level fI) 296 4-' - '` 118
Riverine Wetland Restoration 0.9 r " 0.9
Riverine Wetland Enhancement 0.8 0.4
s' Total: 5778 Total: 1.3
After completion of the project The Bank will offer 5778 Stream Mitigation Units and 1.3 Riverine
Wetland Mitigation Units.
Ratcliffe Cove Mitigation Plan Restoration Systems, LLC
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................... ...I
1.0 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... .. 1
1.1 Project Goals ...................................................................................................................... .. 1
2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS ............................................................................................................ .. 2
2.1 Physiography, Topography, and Land Use .......................................................................... .. 2
2.2 Water Quality ..................................................................................................................... ..4
2.3 Vegetation .......................................................................................................................... ..4
2.4 Soils and Land Form .......................................................................................................... .. 4
2.5 Jurisdictional Wetlands ....................................................................................................... .. 5
3.0 STREAM CHARACTERISTICS ................................................................................................... .. 5
3.1 Hydrology .......................................................................................................................... ..5
3.2 Stream Classification .......................................................................................................... .. 7
3.2.1 Dimension .................................................................................................................... ..7
3.2.2 Profile .......................................................................................................................... .. 8
3.2.3 Plan Form ..................................................................................................................... .. 8
4.0 RESTORATION PLAN ................................................................................................................. .. 9
4.1 Stream Restoration ............................................................................................................. ..9
4. 1.1 Reconstruction on New Location .................................................................................. 10
4.1.2 In-Stream Structures ..................................................................................................... 11
4. 1.3 Stream Reconstruction In-Place .................................................................................... 12
4.2 Stream Enhancement (Level II) .......................................................................................... 12
4.3 Wetland Restoration/Enhancement ..................................................................................... 13
4.4 Vegetative Planting ............................................................................................................ 13
5.0 MO NITORING PLAN ................................................................................................................... 14
5.1 Stream Monitoring ............................................................................................................. 14
5.2 Vegetation Monitoring ....................................................................................................... 14
5.3 Hydrological Monitoring .................................................................................................... 15
5.4 Biotic Community Changes ................................................................................................ 15
6.0 AVAILABLE CREDIT AND PROPOSED RELEASE .................................................................. 15
6.1 Credit Determination .......................................................................................................... 15
6.2 Credit Release Schedule ..................................................................................................... 16
6.3 Perpetual Maintenance of Mitigation Bank ......................................................................... 16
6.4 Nonproject Development Scenario ..................................................................................... 17
6.5 Corporate Experience ......................................................................................................... 17
7.0 JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS ......................................................................................................... 17
7.1 Waters of the United States ................................................................................................ 17
7.2 Rare and Protected Species ................................................................................................. 18
7.2.1 Federally Protected Species .......................................................................................... 18
7.2.2 Federal Species of Concern .......................................................................................... 18
8.0 CULTURAL RESOURCES ........................................................................................................... 18
9.0 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................. 21
APPENDICES
Appendix A. Figures
Ratcliffe Cove Mitigation Plan Restoration Systems, LLC
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. The Bank Location Appendix A
Figure 2. Mitigation Service Area Appendix A
Figure 3. Drainage Area and Topography Appendix A
Figure 4. Existing Conditions and Soils Appendix A
Figure 5. Existing Channel Cross-sections Appendix A
Figure 6. Proposed Conditions Appendix A
Figure 7. Typical Structure Details Appendix A
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Existing Stream Characteristics ................................................................................................. 3
Table 2. NRCS Soils Mapped within The Bank ...................................................................................... 5
Table ' ). Stream Geometry and Classification .......................................................................................... 6
Table 4. Proposed Mitigation Quantities vs. Mitigation Credits ............................................................. 16
Table 5. Proposed Credit Release Schedule ........................................................................................... 16
Table 6. Federally Protected Species listed for Haywood County .......................................................... 19
Table 7. Federal Species of Concern ..................................................................................................... 20
iv
Ratcliffe Cove Mitigation Plan Restoration Systems, LLC
MITIGATION PLAN
RATCLIFFE COVE MITIGATION BANK
RESTORATION AND ENHANCEMENT OF
RATCLIFFE COVE BRANCH, UNNAMED TRIBUTARIES,
AND ADJACENT PALUSTRINE WETLANDS
Haywood County, North Carolina
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Restoration Systems proposes the establishment of a stream and wetland mitigation bank at the Ratcliffe
Cove Site (The Bank) approximately 0.5 miles northeast of Waynesville, in central Haywood County
(Figures l and 2, Appendix A). The Bank encompasses approximately 24 acres of land that is utilized for
livestock grazing. Approximately 5590 linear feet of stream (will be increased to 5956 linear feet through
mitigation activities) associated with Ratcliffe Cove Branch and its tributaries, as well as 1.7 acres of
hydric soil exhibit mitigation potential within The Bank. These areas are accessible to livestock and are
routinely cleared, resulting in local disturbances to stream banks and wetland soil surfaces. Additional
land use practices including the maintenance and removal of riparian vegetation, and relocation, dredging,
and straightening of onsite streams has resulted in degraded water quality, unstable channel characteristics
(stream entrenchment, erosion, and bank collapse), and reduced storage capacity/floodwater attenuation.
Directions to The Bank:
? Take exit 27 off Interstate 40 just north of Clyde
? Travel on US 74W/23S/19S for - 3 miles
? Take exit 104 for Lake Junaluska towards Waynesville and travel - 1 mile
? Turn left on Francis Farm Road (just after Junaluska School)
? The Bank is on the right after a sharp bend in the road
? Point in center Site
Latitude: 35.5061 °N, Longitude: 82.9549 °W
1.1 PROJECT GOALS
The primary goals of this stream and wetland restoration project focus on improving water quality,
enhancing flood attenuation, and restoring aquatic and riparian habitat, which will be accomplished by:
1. Removing nonpoint sources of pollution associated with agricultural activities including a)
excluding livestock from streams, stream banks, and floodplains; b) eliminating the broadcasting
of fertilizer, pesticides, and other agricultural materials into and adjacent to streams and wetlands;
and c) establishing a vegetative buffer adjacent to streams and wetlands to treat surface runoff
which may be laden with sediment and/or agricultural pollutants from the adjacent landscape.
2. Reducing sedimentation within onsite and downstream receiving waters through a) reduction of
bank erosion associated with hoof shear, vegetation maintenance, and agricultural plowing, and
b) planting a diverse woody vegetative buffer adjacent to The Bank's streams.
3. Reestablishing stream stability and the capacity to transport watershed flows and sediment loads
by restoring a stable dimension, pattern, and profile supported by natural in-stream habitat and
grade/bank stabilization structures.
4. Promoting floodwater attenuation through a) reconnecting bankfull stream flows to the
abandoned floodplain terrace, b) restoring secondary, entrenched tributaries thereby reducing
floodwater velocities within smaller catchment basins, c) restoring depressional floodplain
wetlands, thereby increasing the storage capacity for floodwaters within The Bank, and d)
Ratcliffe Cove Mitigation Plan Restoration Systems, LLC
revegetating The Bank's floodplains to increase frictional resistance on floodwaters crossing The
Bank.
5. Improving aquatic habitat by enhancing stream bed variability and the use of in-stream structures.
6. Providing terrestrial and aquatic wildlife habitat.
These goals will be achieved by:
Providing 5778 Stream Mitigation Units.
o Restoring approximately 5660 linear feet of stream channel through construction of stable
channels, thereby reestablishing stable dimension, pattern, and profile.
o Enhancing (Level II) approximately 296 linear feet of stream channel through the removal of
livestock grazing and bank stabilization.
Providing 1.3 Riverine Wetland Mitigation Units.
o Restoring approximately 0.9 acre of riverine wetlands by reconstructing channels that exhibit
more natural, historic interplay with the floodplain, removing drain tile, removing livestock,
rehydrating floodplain soils, and planting with native woody vegetation.
o Enhancing approximately 0.8 acre of riverine wetlands by reconstructing The Bank's
tributaries within the floodplain, removing livestock, and planting with native woody
vegetation.
Planting a native woody riparian buffer adjacent to restored/enhanced streams and wetlands
within The Bank.
Protecting The Bank in perpetuity with a conservation easement.
2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
The Bank is characterized by pastureland, which is utilized for livestock grazing (Figure 4, Appendix A).
The main hydrologic features of The Bank include Ratcliffe Cove Branch, four unnamed tributaries to
Ratcliffe Cove Branch, and floodplains (Figures 3 and 4,
Appendix A). Ratcliffe Cove Branch (Main Channel)
drains an approximately 4-square mile watershed at The
Bank's outfall. Ratcliffe Cove Branch is a third-order
stream and its tributaries are first- and second-order
bank-to-bank stream systems, which have been dredged
and straightened and are characterized by eroding banks,
bimodal sediment transport, with little to no riparian
buffer (Figure 4, Appendix A).
Approximately 1.7 acres of The Bank's land area are
currently underlain by hydric soils, which have been impacted by stream channel entrenchment, drain tile,
casting of spoil in wetlands, compaction due to livestock trampling, and removal of vegetation. Soils
have been mapped by the Natural Resource Conservation Service (MRCS) as Cullowhee-Nikwassi
Complex and the Dillsboro series. Wetland restoration features within The Bank appear to be
characterized by hydric soils of the Nikwasi series.
2.1 PHYSIOGRAPHY, TOPOGRAPHY, AND LAND USE
The Bank is located in the Broad Basins portion of the Blue Ridge Ecoregion of North Carolina within
United States Geological Survey (USGS) Cataloging Unit 06010106 (North Carolina Division of Water
Quality [NCDWQ] subbasin number 04-03-05) of the French Broad River Basin. Regional physiography
Ratcliffe Cove 11itigation Plan Restoration Systems, LLC
is characterized by intermountain basins with low mountains, rolling foothills, and moderately broad
mountain valleys with moderate gradient streams over cobble and boulder-dominated substrates (Griffith
et at. 2002). Onsite elevations range from a high of 2640 feet National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD)
at the upstream ends of The Bank to a low of approximately 2600 feet NGVD at The Bank's outfall
(USGS Clyde North Carolina 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles).
The Bank provides water quality functions to a 4-square mile watershed at The Bank outfall (Figure 3,
Appendix A). The watershed is dominated by forest land, agricultural land, and residential development.
Impervious surfaces account for less than 10 percent of the upstream watershed land surface.
Onsite land use is characterized by pasture land for livestock grazing (Figure 4, Appendix A). Cattle have
indiscriminate access to onsite streams and wetlands, resulting in degradation of stream banks through
vegetative cropping and hoof shear. Riparian vegetation adjacent to restoration/enhancement reaches of
onsite streams is sparse and disturbed due to livestock grazing, bush hogging, and regular maintenance
activities.
The Bank encompasses 5590 linear feet of stream channels including Ratcliffe Cove Branch and four
unnamed tributaries (Main Channel and Tributaries 1-4). Table 1 gives characteristics of The Bank's
streams; the locations of each are depicted in Figure 4 (Appendix A).
Approximately 1.7 acres of The Bank are underlain
by hydric soils, which may have historically
supported jurisdictional wetlands. Hydric soils are
located within floodplains adjacent to onsite
streams. Extensive floodplain manipulations
associated with stream ditching and straightening,
deforestation, floodplain drain tile, and compaction
due to livestock trampling have effectively
removed groundwater hydrology from some of
these areas. These features are discussed in more
detail in Section 2.5 (Jurisdictional Wetlands).
Table 1. Existing Stream Characteristics
Stream Reach Stream Length
(linear feet) USGS
Stream Order USGS Stream
Classification
Main Channel 3720 third perennial
Tributary 1 135 first perennial
Tributary 2 870 second perennial
Tributary 3 300 not shown not shown*
Tributary 4 565 first perennial
Total 5590
* This stream is not depicted on the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles; however, based on field survevs the stream exhibited
characteristics of perennial streams during field investigations
Ratcliffe Cove Alitigation Plan Restoration Systems, LLC
2.2 WATER QUALITY
The Bank is located within the French Broad River Basin in 14-digit USGS Cataloging Unit and
Targeted Local Watershed 06010106030020 (NCDWQ subbasin number 04-03-05) (Figure 2,
Appendix A) (NCWRP 2005). Bank streams have been assigned Stream Index Number 5-16-14-1 and a
best use classification of B (NCDWQ 2007a). Streams with a designation of B are suitable for all
primary and secondary recreation including swimming, skin diving, water skiing, similar uses involving
human body contact with water where such activities take place in an organized manner or on a frequent
basis, aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation, and agriculture.
Secondary recreation includes wading, and boating.
NCDWQ has assembled a list of impaired waterbodies according to the Clean Water Act Section 303(d)
and 40 CFR 130.7, which is a comprehensive public accounting of all impaired waterbodies. An
impaired waterbody is one that does not meet water quality standards including designated uses, numeric
and narrative criteria, and anti-degradation requirements defined in 40 CFR 131. The Bank's tributaries
are not listed on the NCDWQ final 2006 303(d) list; however, The Bank's tributaries drain directly into
Raccoon Creek (Stream Index Number 5-16-14) which is on the 303(d) lists due to impaired biological
integrity (NCDWQ 2007b).
2.3 VEGETATION
The Bank is composed of agricultural land managed as pasture for cattle and disturbed forest. Disturbed
forest occurs along the upper reaches of Tributary 4. Vegetation is sparse and includes black walnut
(Juglans nigra), black willow (Salix nigra), dog fennel (Eupatorium capillifolium), and blackberry
(Rubits argutus).
Reforestation using hardwood species is proposed over the entire'Bank, including areas of pastureland
and disturbed forest. Forest communities may vary based on floodplain size, flooding regime, and/or
topographic variations. Species composition will mimic reference forests within undisturbed floodplain
up or downstream of The Bank and offsite reference forests. An ecological approach will be taken for
restoration of wetlands and riparian buffer plant communities; therefore, a varied forest structure will help
achieve habitat diversity.
2.4 SOILS AND LAND FORM
Soils that occur within The Bank, according to the Soil Survey of Haywood County, North Carolina
(USDA 1997) are depicted in Figure 4 (Appendix A) and are described in Table 2.
The Bank is predominantly underlain by soils of the Cullowhee-Nikwasi complex with restorable wetland
areas characterized by Nikwasi soils. Floodplain soils are grey to gley in color with oxidized
rhizospheres that have been impacted by plowing, land clearing, drainage due to drain tile installation,
and rerouting and incision of adjacent stream channels.
4
Ratcliffe Cove Mitigation Plan Restoration Systems, LLC
Table 2. NRCS Soils Manned within The Bank
Nonhydric
Soil Series Hydric
Status* Family Description
This series consists of nearly level, somewhat poorly drained
Cullowhee soils and nearly level, poorly drained and very poorly
Cullowhee- Aquic drained Nikwasi soils of narrow flood plains that are frequently
Nonhydric - Kaplumbrepts
Nikwasi Hydric Cumulic flooded. Slopes are generally between 0 and 2 percent. Depth to
complex seasonal high water table occurs at a depth of 1.5 to 2.0 feet in
Humaquepts Cullowhee soils and within a depth of 1.0 foot in Nikwasi soils.
Bedrock occurs at a depth of more than 60 inches.
This series consists of gently sloping, very deep, well-drained
Dillsboro Humic soils in coves, on benches, on toe slopes, and on high stream
loam Nonhydric Hapludults terraces. Slopes are generally between 2 and 8 percent. Depth to
seasonal high water table occurs below 6.0 feet. Bedrock occurs
at a depth of more than 60 inches.
" Class A- Hydric soils, Class B = Nonhydnc soils that may contain inclusions of hydric soils
2.5 JURISDICTIONAL WETLANDS
Jurisdictional wetlands are defined by the presence of three criteria: hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils,
and evidence of wetland hydrology during the growing season (Environmental Laboratory 1987).
Portions of The Bank supporting jurisdictional wetlands may originally have been characterized by
palustrine, forested wetlands which were seasonally flooded. However, onsite wetland areas have been
impacted by livestock trampling, deforestation, groundwater draw-down from stream channel incision,
floodplain drain tile, and excavation of the floodplain.
Within The Bank's boundaries, approximately 1.7 acres of floodplain are underlain by hydric soils
(Figure 4, Appendix A). Onsite hydric soils and wetlands are grey to gley in color with oxidized
rhizospheres and are compacted and pockmarked by livestock trampling. Livestock trampling, grazing
and regular maintenance have resulted in a vegetative community that is herbaceous in nature.
3.0 STREAM CHARACTERISTICS
The Bank's streams have been characterized based on fluvial geomorphic principles (Rosgen 1996).
Table 3 provides a summary of measured stream geometry attributes under existing conditions
(considered to be unstable) and a preliminary estimate of potentially stable stream attributes. Preliminary
estimates of stable stream attributes are based primarily upon data observations along the existing reaches
and measurements of two cross-sections within the Site. The location of each cross-section is depicted on
Figure 4 (Appendix A) and the cross-sectional data is provided in Table 3 and Figure 5 (Appendix A).
3.1 HYDROLOGY
This hydrophysiographic region is characterized by moderate rainfall with precipitation averaging
approximately 42 inches per year (USDA 1997). Drainage basin sizes range from 0.01-square mile to
3.9-square mile at The Bank's outfall.
5
Ratcliffe Cove Mitigation Plan Restoration Systems, LLC
'L
v
c0
_ r
x rq t-
00
r
00
?
R
L '7 R 7 L '?.' n
C
`

.R+ 40
O
? W)
h W)
[?
?
Oi
.".?
-
?
70
O
O
O
N
?
N
i. .
?
.
w C y u

•L L O 7 C >D O O N ? L O O V L y '7 N _.
Z OD op T
0 3 ? v
n
$
>
C . q 3
>
3 cuss"
>D N
? v v
?
y
c
u

? Z
N M 7 .
C r a _7 :n V v
C N =
a r
L x M N L
N O r h o0 N o0 h O - 00 O O _ N T
O _

C
O
rr1
N
N r-l
N
N
?'
O
7
N
-
_
O
O
F
y
L
? L
? L. O O

1 7
d 70
_ ?O r N M
_ O
7 ? N L a
L Irv.. L
1%
L
y ?p
? O C s
Z °
e y
eo c
3 `' ? c

O OJD
x
1^ 00 D v1 _ .? C j j .? v L
` y

G N .p O
. oo ` v
v
Q W i? C O O Gib ca ? v ? '.v.
:Q ? ,y
O L .v. ? Y O Lop L

? ti D 3 s 3

;L W a s ?

N
N
O -
M v1

h
O M ,p N '^ a Z m T
:IJ

N
OC
O
00
O
O
N
?.
O G
O
r1 O
N ?O
N N
N
N
?
N
T
N
?
-
O
O
.?
r L L C O O V _
u C-4

h a, v
A

? ?? v -?
C x 7 7p
• 7 C 7 V^ N 7 r^. O ',? 7 "? ;!1 G C^
O `C
O ? T A A R .v L

Z r; •C r T - r?i
N O ;n v L C
O _
= _
. O _
" L G.
Y!
s: N h _
Y.
?

C
... L cl

.
%?

=
?
V

c6
y c
p O u d?
S `
G y

:d

^¢a3?..
V
N
N
h
O
Y
O
?i

nQ
1
O
y
The Bank's discharge is dominated by a combination of upstream basin catchment, groundwater flow,
and precipitation. Based on mountain regional curves (Harman et al. 1999), the bankfull discharge for a
3.9-square mile watershed is expected to average 312 cubic feet per second, which is expected to occur
approximately every 1.3 to 1.5 years (Rosgen 1996, Leopold 1994).
3.2 STREAM CLASSIFICATION
Stream geometry and substrate data have been evaluated to orient stream restoration based on a
classification utilizing fluvial geomorphic principles (Rosgen 1996). This classification stratifies streams
into comparable groups based on pattern, dimension, profile, and substrate characteristics. Primary
components of the classification include degree of entrenchment, width-depth ratio, sinuosity, channel
slope, and stream substrate composition.
Historically, onsite stream reaches may have been characterized by C-type channels. C-type streams are
characterized as slightly entrenched, riffle-pool channels exhibiting moderate to high sinuosity (>1.2). In
North Carolina, C-type streams often occur in narrow to wide valleys with well-developed alluvial
floodplains (Valley Type VIII). C-type streams typically exhibit a sequence of riffles and pools
associated with a sinuous flow pattern. C-type channels are typically considered stable.
Onsite streams appear to be progressing through a common
evolutionary tendency found in streams of North Carolina. As
streams are dredged and straightened the water surface profile
tends to become oversteepened resulting in 1) the loss of
horizontal flow vectors that maintain pools and 2) an increase in
erosive forces to channel bed and banks. The lack of deep rooted
riparian vegetation and the introduction of livestock into the
channel appear to have exacerbated problems with erosion to
onsite channels.
Bed and bank erosion typically leads to channel downcutting and
evolution of a channel into a G-type (gully) channel. Continued
erosion eventually results in lateral extension of the G-type channel into an F-type (widened gully)
channel. The F-type channel will continue to widen laterally until the channel is wide enough to support
a stable C-type or E-type channel at a lower elevation and the original floodplain is no longer subject to
regular flooding.
The majority of onsite streams have been impacted by land clearing, erosive flows, livestock grazing,
hoof shear, and manipulation of the channels including dredging and straightening. Onsite streams are
expected to continue to erode and deposit sediment into receiving streams until a stable stream pattern has
been carved from the adjacent floodplain.
3.2.1 Dimension
Onsite indicators were utilized to determine bankfull channel cross-sectional areas of The Bank's streams.
The cross-sectional area was then utilized to determine the bankfull width, average bankfull depth,
maximum depth, and floodprone area of the existing channels. Using this method, a departure from
stability could be estimated based on a comparison of existing and proposed/stable dimension variables.
7
Ratcliffe Cove Mitigation Plan Restoration Svstems, LLC
During field investigations, two cross-sections were measured; locations are depicted on Figure 4 and
cross-sections are depicted in Figure 5 (Appendix A). Onsite indicators for bankfull were below the
regional ccurve estimates of bankfull, necessitating the use of reference stream data during the detailed
planning phase of the project. Regional curve estimates for bankfull are approximately 47.2 square feet
for a 3.1 square mile watershed and onsite indicators of bankfull measure 26.4 square feet.
The Main Channel is characterized by a range of stream dimensions and types including E-type and C-
type channel (Table 3). Although the Main Channel is classified by typically stable channel types (E- and
C-types), bank-height ratios of 1.5 indicate an incised channel. In addition, onsite indicators of bankfull
cross-sectional area measure 26.4 and 27.7 square feet for cross-sections 1 and 2, respectively; however,
the existing cross-sectional area is 77.6 and 63.5 square feet. The channel is starting to exhibit bank
erosion and increased destabilization due to land management practices and livestock impacts.
Based on field data collected at The Bank, onsite streams are characterized by channel
incision/degradation, oversized cross-sectional areas, and high bank-height ratios. Channel characteristics
have resulted in bank erosion below the effective rooting depth of existing riparian vegetation in
combination with erosive flow velocities. Measures to correct channel size (cross-sectional area) and
decrease bank height ratios will be targeted for this project.
3.2.2 Profile
Based on the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle, the onsite valley slope for restorable portions of
The Bank's stream channels measure approximately 0.0071 to 0.0235 rise/run (Table 3). Estimated
valley slopes appear typical for the Mountain physiographic region of North Carolina. Water surface
slopes were estimated by dividing the valley slope by channel sinuosity. Sinuosity was measured from
Geographic Information Systems (GIS) analysis of aerial photography and visual observations of the
stream channel during field surveys, and was measured at 1.03 for onsite stream channels.
Impacts to onsite streams such as straightening, downcutting, incision, and bank erosion have resulted in
oversteepening of the average water surface profile. In addition, impacts have removed most of the riffle
and pool morphology characteristic of stable streams in this region. Stream incision may have resulted in
excessive sediment deposition within pools, thereby steepening pool slopes and flattening riffle slopes.
Measures designed to flatten the average water surface profile and restore riffle/pool slopes to suitable
ranges are to be targeted on the onsite streams.
3.2.3 Plan Form
Analysis of aerial photography utilizing GIS was conducted to determine existing onsite plan form
variables. Existing plan form variables were compared to ratios of stable plan form based on fluvial
geomorphic methods (Rosgen 1996). Using this method, a departure from stability was estimated.
The Bank's streams have been straightened in the past, resulting in sinuosity measuring approximately
1.03 (thalweg distance/valley distance) (Table 3). Due to channel alterations, no distinct repetitive pattern
of riffles and pools occurs in the existing channel. In addition, values for belt-width, pool-to-pool
spacing, and meander wavelength were not measurable.
Based on plan form variables, The Bank's streams contain reaches that have been degraded by 1) bank
collapse, erosion, and incision; 2) straightening resulting in no repetitive riffle and pool sequence and
8
Ratcliffe Cove Mitigation Plan Restoration Systems, LLC
reduction in sinuosity; and 3) a subsequent reduction in the overall length of The Bank's channels.
Mitigation efforts along degraded channel sections will target restoration of riffle/pool pattern and
bringing pool-to-pool spacing and meander wavelength into suitable relationship -for this region.
4.0 RESTORATION PLAN
The primary goals of this mitigation plan include 1) construction of a stable, riffle-pool stream channel, 2)
restoration/enhancement of historic wetland functions, 3) enhancement of water quality functions (reduce
nonpoint source sedimentation and nutrient inputs), 4) restoration of a natural woody riparian buffer along
The Bank's stream reaches, 5) restoration of wildlife habitat associated with a riparian corridor/stable
stream, and 6) establishment of a permanent conservation easement which will encompass all restoration
activities.
Primary activities include 1) stream restoration, 2) stream enhancement (Level II), 3) wetland restoration,
4) wetland enhancement, and 5) riparian buffer restoration. The restoration concept as outlined in Figure
6 (Appendix A) is expected to:
• Restore 5660 linear feet of stream channel
• Enhance (Level II) 296 linear feet of stream channel along the upper reaches of the Eastern
Tributary and lower reaches of the Main Channel
• Restore 0.9 acre of riverine wetland
• Enhance 0.8 acre of riverine wetland
• Reforestation the entire Bank, approximately 24 acres, with native species
4.1 STREAM RESTORATION
This stream restoration effort is designed to restore a stable, meandering stream that approximates
hydrodynamics, stream geometry, and local microtopography relative to reference conditions. Geometric
attributes for the existing, degraded channel and the proposed, stable channel are listed in Table 3.
Stream restoration is expected to entail 1) belt-width preparation, 2) channel excavation, 3) spoil
stockpiling, 4) channel stabilization, 5) channel diversion to newly constructed channels, and 5)
abandoned channel backfill.
An erosion control plan and construction/transportation plan will be developed. Erosion control will be
performed locally throughout The Bank and will be incorporated into the construction sequencing.
Exposed surficial soils at The Bank are unconsolidated, alluvial sediments which do not revegetate
rapidly after disturbance; therefore, seeding with appropriate grasses and immediate planting with
disturbance-adapted shrubs will be employed following the earth-moving process. In addition, onsite root
mats (seed banks) and vegetation will be stockpiled and redistributed after disturbance.
A transportation plan, including the location of construction access routes and staging areas, will be
designed to avoid impacts to the proposed design channel corridor. In addition, the transportation plan
and all construction activities will minimize disturbance to existing vegetation and soils to the extent
feasible. The number of transportation access points into the floodplain will be maximized to avoid
traversing long distances through The Bank interior.
9
Ratcliffe Cove Mitigation Plan Restoration Systems, LLC
4.1.1 Reconstruction on New Location
Portions of The Bank characterized by an adjacent floodplain suitable for design channel excavation on
new location will be utilized to the maximum extent feasible. Primary activities designed to restore the
channel on new location include I) beltwidth preparation and grading, 2) channel excavation, 3)
installation of channel plugs, and 4) backfilling of the abandoned channel.
1) Beltwidth Preparation and Grading
The stream beltwidth corridor will be cleared to allow survey and equipment access. Care will be taken
to avoid the removal of existing, deeply rooted vegetation within the beltwidth corridor, which may
provide design channel stability. Material excavated during grading will be stockpiled immediately
adjacent to the channel segments to be abandoned and backfilled. These segments will be backfilled after
stream diversion is completed.
Spoil material may be placed to stabilize temporary access roads and to minimize compaction of the
underlying floodplain. However, all spoil will be removed from floodplain surfaces upon completion of
construction activities.
Auer preparation of the corridor, the design channel and updated profile survey will be developed and the
location of each meander wavelength will be plotted and staked along the profile. Riffle locations and
relative frequency will be staked according to parameters outlined in a detailed restoration plan and/or
construction plans. These configurations may be modified in the field based on local variations in the
floodplain profile, presence of bedrock, etc.
2) Channel Excavation
Once belt-width corridor preparation is complete, the proposed channel will be excavated to the average
width, depth, and cross-sectional area derived from reference reach studies and detailed measurements of
the onsite reach.
The stream banks and local belt width area of constructed channels will be immediately planted with
shrub and herbaceous vegetation. Shrubs such as tag alder and black willow may be purchased and
planted, or removed from the banks of the abandoned channel and stockpiled during clearing, and placed
into the stream construction area. Deposition of shrub and woody debris into and/or overhanging the
constructed channel is encouraged. Root mats may also be selectively removed from adjacent areas and
placed as erosion control features on channel banks.
Particular attention will be directed toward providing vegetative cover and root growth along the outer
bends of each stream meander. Live willow stake revetments and available root mats or biodegradable,
coir-fiber matting may be embedded into the break-in-slope to promote more rapid development of an
overhanging bank. Willow stakes will be obtained and inserted through the coir-fiber mat into the
underlying soil.
4) Channel Plugs
Impermeable plugs will be installed along abandoned channel. The plugs will consist of low-permeability
materials or hardened structures designed to be of sufficient strength to withstand the erosive energy of
surface flow events across The Bank. Dense clays suitable for plug construction may be imported from
offsite or extracted from existing materials and compacted within the channel. The plug will be
sufficiently wide and deep to form an imbedded overlap in the existing banks and channel bed.
10
Ratcliffe Cove Mitigation Plan Restoration Systems, LLC
The plug situated at the upstream terminus of the design channel, located below the stream diversion
point, may sustain high-energy flows; therefore, a hardened structure or additional armoring may be
considered at this location.
5) Channel Backalling
After impermeable plugs are installed, the abandoned channel will be backfilled. Backfilling will be
performed primarily by pushing stockpiled materials into the channel. Based on initial grading plan
estimates, sufficient backfill material is expected from channel excavation, floodplain grading, and soil
borrow areas. The channel will be filled to the extent that onsite material is available and compacted to
maximize microtopographic variability, including ruts, ephemeral pools, and hummocks in the vicinity of
the backfilled channel.
A deficit of fill material for channel backfill may occur. If so, a series of closed, linear depressions may
be left along confined channel segments. Additional fill material for critical areas may be obtained by
excavating shallow depressions along the banks of these planned, open-channel segments. These
excavated areas will represent closed linear, elliptical, or oval depressions. In essence, the channel may
be converted to a sequence of shallow, ephemeral pools adjacent to effectively plugged and backfilled
channel sections. These pools are expected to stabilize and fill in with organic material over time.
Vegetation debris (root mats, top soils, shrubs, woody debris, etc.) will be redistributed across the backfill
area upon completion.
4.1.2 In-Stream Structures
Stream restoration under natural stream design techniques normally involves the use of in-stream
structures for bank stabilization, grade control, and habitat improvement. Primary activities designed to
achieve these objectives may include 1) installation of cross-vane weirs and/or 2) installation of J-
hook/log vanes.
I) Cross-vane Weirs
Cross-vane weirs may be installed in the channel as conceptually depicted in Figure 7. The purpose of
the vane is to 1) sustain bank stability, 2) direct high velocity flows during bankfull events toward the
center of the channel, 3) maintain average pool depth throughout the reach, 4) preserve water surface
elevations and reconnect the adjacent floodplain to flooding dynamics from the stream, and 5) modify
energy distributions through increases in channel roughness and local energy slopes during peak flows.
Cross-vane weirs will be constructed of boulders approximately 24 inches in minimum width. Cross-
vane weir construction will be initiated by imbedding footer rocks into the stream bed for stability to
prevent undercutting of the structure. Header rocks will then be placed atop the footer rocks at the design
elevation. Footer and header rocks create an arm that slopes from the center of the channel upward at
approximately 7 to 10 degrees, tying in at the bankfull floodplain elevation. The cross-vane arms at both
banks will be tied into the bank with a sill to eliminate the possibility of water diverting around the
structure. Once the header and footer stones are in place, filter fabric will be buried into a trench
excavated around the upstream side of the vane arms. The filter fabric is then draped over the header
rocks to force water over the vane. The upstream side of the structure can then be backfilled with suitable
material to the elevation of the header stones.
11
Ratcliffe Cove Mitigation Plan Restoration Systems, LLC
2) J-hook Vanes/Log Vanes
The primary purpose of these vanes is to direct high-velocity flows during bankfull events towards the
center of the channel. J-hook vanes will be constructed using the same type and size of rock employed in
the construction of cross-vane weirs (Figure 7, Appendix A). Log vanes will be constructed utilizing
large tree trunks harvested from The Bank or imported from offsite. The tree stem harvested for a log-
vane arm must be long enough to be imbedded into the stream channel and extend several feet into the
floodplain (Figure 7, Appendix A). A trench will be dug into the stream channel that is deep enough for
the head of the log to be at or below the channel invert. The trench is then extended into the floodplain
and the log is set into the trench such that the log arm is below the floodplain elevation. If the log is not
of sufficient size to completely block stream flow (gaps occur between the log and channel bed) then a
footer log or stone footers will be installed beneath the header log. Boulders will then be situated at the
base of the log and at the head of the log to hold the log in place.
Similar to a cross-vane, the arm of the J-hook vane and the log vane (which forms an arm) must slope
from the center of the channel upward at approximately 7 to 10 degrees, tying in at the bankfull
floodplain elevation. Once these vanes are in place, filter fabric is toed into a trench on the upstream side
of the vane and draped over the structure to force water over the vane. The upstream side of the structure
is then backfilled with suitable material.
4.1.3 Stream Reconstruction In-Place
Reconstruction in-place is proposed for areas of The Bank where reconstruction on new location is not
feasible due to proximity to the upstream/downstream boundaries of The Bank, stream gradient, and
valley or easement constraints. The main objective of restoration in these reaches is to promote an
average bankfull channel depth of approximately 0.5 to 0.6 feet in tributaries and approximately 1.6 feet
in the Main Channel from the channel bottom to the floodplain surface and to reduce channel size to the
cross-sectional area depicted in Table 3. Primary activities designed to achieve these objectives may
include 1) installation of in-stream structures and 2) installation of a bankfull floodplain bench.
Bankfull Bench Creation
The creation of a bankfull, floodplain bench is expected to 1) remove eroding material and collapsing
banks, 2) promote overbank flooding during bankfull flood events, 3) reduce the erosive potential of flood
waters, and 4) increase the width of the active floodplain. Bankfull benches may be created by
excavating the adjacent floodplain to bankfull elevations or filling eroded/abandoned channel areas with
suitable material.
After establishing the bench, a relatively level floodplain surface is expected to be stabilized with suitable
erosion control measures. Planting of the bench with native floodplain vegetation is expected to reduce
erosion of bench sediments, reduce flow velocities in flood waters, filter pollutants, and provide wildlife
habitat.
4.2 STREAM ENHANCEMENT (LEVEL Q)
Stream Enhancement Level 11 is being proposed on approximately 296 linear feet along the upper reaches
of the Eastern Tributary and the lower reaches of the Main Channel (Figure 6, Appendix A).
Enhancement Level 11 is expected to include removal of livestock; removal of invasive species, if
necessary; and planting of native woody vegetation. Planting with native vegetation is discussed in detail
in Section 4.4 (Vegetative Planting).
12
Ratcliffe Cove Mitigation Plan Restoration Systems, LLC
4.3 WETLAND RESTORATION/ENHANCEMENT
Alternatives for wetland restoration/enhancement are designed to restore a fully functioning wetland
system that will provide surface water storage, nutrient cycling, removal of imported elements and
compounds, and will create a variety and abundance of wildlife habitat.
Portions of The Bank underlain by hydric soils have been deprived of sufficient hydrology by channel
rerouting and incision, vegetative clearing, livestock grazing, drainage by drain tile, and earth movement
associated with agricultural practices. These areas are characterized by herbaceous vegetation and
compacted soils due to livestock trampling. Wetland mitigation options will focus on the restoration of
vegetative communities, elevation of groundwater tables to jurisdictional conditions, and the
reestablishment of soil structure and micro-topographic variations within the existing floodplain.
Restoration of wetland hydrology and wetland soil attributes may involve l) excavation of elevated spoil
and sediment embankments, 2) backfilling of entrenched stream reaches, 3) removal of drain tile in the
floodplain, and 4) scarification of pasture soils prior to planting. In addition, the construction of (or
provisions for) surface water storage depressions (ephemeral pools) also adds an important component to
groundwater restoration activities. These mitigation activities are expected to result in the
restoration/enhancement of approximately 1.7 acres of jurisdictional wetlands at The Bank.
4.4 VEGETATIVE PLANTING
Deep-rooted, riparian vegetation will be restored within approximately 24 acres of The Bank. Planting
vegetation on cleared stream banks is proposed to reestablish native/historic community patterns within
the stream corridor, associated side slopes, and transition areas. Revegetating The Bank's floodplains and
stream banks will provide stream bank stability, give shade, reduce surface water temperatures, filter
pollutants from adjacent runoff, and provide habitat for area wildlife. The vegetated stream buffer will
extend to a minimum of 30 feet from the top of stream banks in both directions. Scarification of
floodplain surfaces may be required prior to planting.
Variations in vegetative planting will occur based on topographic locations and hydraulic conditions of
the soil. Vegetative species composition will mimic reference forest data and onsite observations.
Species expected for this project may include the following elements.
Piedmont /Mountain Bottomland Forest
1. Cherrybark oak (Quercus pagoda)
2. Swamp chestnut oak (Quercus michawdi)
3. American elm (Ulnurs americana)
4. Hackberry (Celtic laevigata)
5. Green ash (Frarinus pennsylvanica)
6. Shagbark hickory (Carya ovata)
7. Bitternut hickory (Carya cordiformis)
8. Southern sugar maple (.Acer barbatum)
9. Flowering dogwood (Cornus Florida)
10. Ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana)
11. American holly (Iles opaca)
12. Pawpaw (,4simina triloba)
Stream-Side AssemblaEe
1. Black willow (Salix nigra)
2. Tag alder (Alms serrulata)
13
Ratcliffe Cove Mitigation Plan Restoration Systems, LLC
Stream-side trees and shrubs include species with high value for sediment stabilization, rapid growth rate,
and the ability to withstand hydraulic forces associated with bankfull flow and overbank flood events.
Stream-side trees and shrubs will be planted within 15 feet of the channel throughout the meander belt-
width. Shrub elements will be planted along the reconstructed stream banks, concentrated along outer
bends.
Bare-root seedlings of species within the Piedmont/Mountain Bottomland Forest will be planted at a
density of approximately 680 stems per acre on 8-foot centers. Shrub species in the stream-side
assemblage will be planted at a density of 2720 stems per acre on 4-foot centers.
5.0 MONITORING PLAN
Monitoring of The Bank's restoration efforts will be performed for five years or until agreed upon success
criteria are fulfilled. Monitoring is proposed for the stream channel, riparian vegetation, and wetland
hydrology.
5.1 STREAM MONITORING
Annual monitoring will include development of channel cross-sections on riffles and pools, pebble
counts, and a water surface profile of the channel as outlined in interagency Stream Mitigation Guidelines
(USACE et al. 2003). The data will be presented in graphic and tabular format. Data to be presented will
include 1) cross-sectional area, 2) bankfull width, 3) average depth, 4) maximum depth, 5) width-to-depth
ratio, 6) water surface slope, 7) sinuosity, and 8) stream substrate composition. A photographic record of
preconstruction and postconstruction conditions will also be compiled.
Stream Success Criteria
Success criteria for stream restoration will include 1) successful classification of the reach as a
functioning stream system (Rosgen 1996) and 2) channel variables indicative of a stable stream system.
Visual assessment of in-stream structures will be conducted to determine if failure has occurred. Failure
of a structure may be indicated by collapse of the structure, undermining of the structure, abandonment of
the channel around the structure, and/or stream flow beneath the structure.
5.2 VEGETATION MONITORING
After planting has been completed in winter or early spring, an initial evaluation will be performed to
verify planting methods were successful and to determine initial species composition and density.
Supplemental planting and additional modifications will be implemented, if necessary.
During quantitative vegetation sampling in early fall of the first year, sample plots will be randomly
placed within The Bank as per guidelines established in CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation,
Version 4.0 (Lee et al. 2006). In each sample plot, vegetation parameters to be monitored include species
composition and species density. Visual observations of the percent cover of shrub and herbaceous
species will also be recorded.
Vegetation Success Criteria
Characteristic Tree Species include woody tree and shrub species planted at the site, observed within a
reference forest, or outlined for the appropriate plant community in Schafale and Weakley (1990). An
average density of 320 stems per acre of Characteristic Tree Species must be surviving in the first three
14
Ratcliffe Cove Mitigation Plan Restoration Systems, LLC
monitoring years. Subsequently, 290 Characteristic Tree Species per acre must be surviving in year 4 and
260 Characteristic Tree Species per acre in year 5.
5.3 HYDROLOGICAL MONITORING
Groundwater monitoring gauges will be installed to take measurements after hydrological modifications
are performed at the Bank. Hydrological sampling will continue throughout the growing season at
intervals necessary to satisfy the jurisdictional hydrology success criteria within each wetland restoration
area (USEPA 1990).
Hydrology Success Criteria
Target hydrological characteristics include saturation or inundation for 5-12.5 percent of the growing
season, during average climatic conditions. During growing seasons with atypical climatic conditions,
groundwater gauges in reference wetlands may dictate threshold hydrology success criteria. These areas
are expected to support hydrophytic vegetation; if wetland parameters are marginal as indicated by
hydrology monitoring, a jurisdictional determination of soils and vegetation will be performed.
5.4 BIOTIC COMMUNITY CHANGES
Changes in the biotic community are anticipated from a shift in habitat opportunities as the Bank
tributaries are restored. In-stream, biological monitoring is proposed to track the changes during the
monitoring period. The benthic macroinvertebrate community will be sampled using NCDWQ protocols
found in the Standard Operating Procedures for Benthic lvfacroinvertebrates (NCDWQ 2006) and
Benthic Macroinvertebrate Protocols for Compensatory Stream Restoration Projects (NCDWQ 2001).
Biological sampling of benthic macroinvertebrates will be used to collect preconstruction baseline data
for comparison with postconstruction restored conditions.
Benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring locations will be established within The Bank as well as up and
downstream of The Bank's restoration reaches. It is anticipated that postrestoration collections may move
slightly from the prerestoration conditions in order to take advantage of developing habitat niches (i.e.
riffles, vegetative cover, woody debris in channel, overhanging banks) that cannot be predicted prior to
restoration. Benthic macro invertebrate samples will be collected from individual reaches using the Qual-
4 collection method. Sampling techniques of the Qual-4 collection method consist of kick nets, sweep
nets, leaf packs, and visual searches. Collection procedures will be available for review by NCDWQ
biologists. Preproject biological sampling will occur during the spring of 2008 or 2009, depending upon
construction schedules, with postproject monitoring occurring in the spring of each subsequent
monitoring year.
Identification of collected organisms will be performed by personnel with the NCDWQ or by a NCDWQ
certified laboratory. Additional data collected will include D50 values and appropriate NCDWQ habitat
assessment forms.
6.0 AVAILABLE CREDIT AND PROPOSED RELEASE
6.1 CREDIT DETERMINATION
The Ratcliffe Cove Mitigation Bank encompasses Ratcliffe Cove Branch, its tributaries (Main Channel,
Western Tributary, and Eastern Tributary), and drained hydric soils. Onsite stream reaches have been
impacted by land clearing, livestock grazing, channel dredging and straightening, and erosive velocities.
15
Ratcliffe Cove Mitigation Plan Restoration Systems, LLC
In addition, The Bank soils have been impacted by stream channel rerouting and incision, installation of
floodplain drain tile, and compaction due to livestock trampling. Restoration options outlined in this
report are as follows:
Table 4. Proposed Mitigation Quantities vs. Mitigation Credits
Proposed Mitigation Quantity Proposed Mitigation Units
(Credits)
Proposed Mitigation Activity Streams
(linear feet) Wetlands
(acres) Stream Units
(SMUs) Wetland Units
(WMUs)
Stream Restoration 5660 5660
Stream Enhancement (Level 11) 296 118
Riverine Wetland Restoration 0.9 0.9
Riverine Wetland Enhancement 0.8 0.4
Total: 5778 Total: 1.3
After completion of the project The Bank will offer 5778 Stream Mitigation Units and 1.3 Riverine
Wetland Mitigation Units.
6.2 CREDIT RELEASE SCHEDULE
A credit release scenario is proposed that complies with the Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, EEP full-delivery program. Under this credit release scenario the credit release schedule is
based upon satisfactory completion of project milestones. Project milestones and percent of credit
released include the following:
Table 5. Pronosed Credit Release Cchedi le
Task Completion Verification
Percent of Credit
Release
I (Preconstruction)* Execution ofMBI 15
11 (Construction) Site Inspection by USACE 20
III (Planting and As-builts) Deliver of As-builts 20
IV (1' Year Monitoring) Monitoring Report 5
V (2"d Year Monitoring) Monitoring Report 5
VI (3`d Year Monitoring) Monitoring Report 5
VII (4th Year Monitoring) Monitoring Report 5
VIII (5`h Year Monitoring) Monitorin Report 25**
Total 100
L XbK i unciuues Me execution of me ivitst, mtsK t approval of me mitigation rian, delivery of ttnaneial assurances, recordation
of the conservation easement, and delivery of the title option to the MBRT.
** Denotes that the release of 25 percent is contingent upon at least one occurrence of a bankfull event during the five-year
monitoring period. In the absence of a bankfull event, release is limited to 15 percent with the 10 percent balance available
following the occurrence of a bankfull event.
6.3 PERPETUAL MAINTENANCE OF MITIGATION BANK
Restoration Systems currently holds an Option to Purchase the approximately 24-acre site. Upon
approval of the contract, Restoration Systems will execute the option and immediately place a
conservation easement over the subject parcels. Restoration Systems will remain the owner of the
16
Ratcliffe Cove Mitigation Plan Restoration Svstems, LLC
easement for the 5-year monitoring period. After the 5-year monitoring period, Restoration Systems will
transfer the conservation easement to a conservation organization approved by the MBRT.
6.4 NONPROJECT DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO
Currently the property is used as pasture. If the proposed stream restoration does not occur, the stream-
side buffer will continue to be maintained for pasture and livestock will continue to have access to The
Bank streams and wetlands.
Channel erosion is expected to continue under existing scenarios. Sediment from bank erosion is
deleterious to benthic macroin vertebrate habitat and can be expected to reduce fisheries populations in the
existing and downstream reaches. In addition, proposed mitigation activities will provide wildlife and
fish habitat, shade/cool surface waters (thereby increasing dissolved oxygen levels), filter nutrients,
reduce sedimentation, reduce downstream flooding, and increase bed morphology (habitat) through
maintenance of perpendicular flow vectors. The proposed project offers substantial ecological
improvement within and downstream from The Bank.
6.5 CORPORATE EXPERIENCE
Restoration Systems is an environmental restoration, mitigation banking, and full-delivery mitigation firm
founded in 1998. The firm was formed to improve the quality of environmental restoration and
mitigation by locating and acquiring the best available sites, planning their restoration using proven
science, and constructing them with the most qualified contractors. Restoration Systems staff has been
involved in environmental mitigation and mitigation banking since 1992. Project managers have more
than 80 years of experience in resource evaluation, environmental restoration, and mitigation
implementation. The company employs 17 permanent staff, with its main office in Raleigh, North
Carolina and a satellite office in Greensboro.
Corporate experience of the principals began with completion of the state's first full-delivery mitigation
project in 1997, the Barra Farms Mitigation Bank (623 acres), the subsequent Bear Creek - Mill Branch
Mitigation Bank in 2001 (450 acres), and Sleepy Creek Mitigation Site (550 acres). The firm then
performed all of the off-site mitigation (7500 linear feet of stream restoration and 10 acres of wetland
restoration) for the Piedmont Triad International Airport Authority.
7.0 JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
7.1 WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES
The Bank streams are subject to jurisdictional consideration under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as
waters of the United States (33 CFR Section 328.3). The Bank streams may be classified as riparian,
upper perennial with an unconsolidated bottom dominated by cobble/gravel (R3UB2/3) (Cowardin et al.
1979).
These waters are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and
will require permitting for implementation of proposed mitigation strategies. Therefore, Nationwide
Permit (NWP) 27 will be used for this project and is expected to authorize restoration activities proposed
within this mitigation plan. In addition, in accordance with Section 401 of the Clean Water Act,
application for 401 General Certification (GC) 3495 will be required.
17
Ratcliffe Cove Mitigation Plan Restoration Systems, LLC
7.2 RARE AND PROTECTED SPECIES
Some populations of fauna and flora have been in, or are in, the process of decline due to either natural
forces or their inabilil to coexist with human activities. Federal law (under the provisions of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended) requires that any action, likely to adversely affect a species
classified as federally protected, be subject to review by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS). Other species may receive additional protection under separate State laws.
7.2.1 Federally Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered, Threatened, Proposed Endangered, and
Proposed Threatened are protected under provisions of Sections 7 and 9 of the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended.
Based on the most recently updated county-by-county database of federally listed species in North
Carolina as posted by the USFWS at http://www.fws.gov/southeast/es/county%201ists.htm, ten federally
protected species are listed for Haywood County (Table 6).
7.2.2 Federal Species of Concern
There are 33 Federal Species of Concern (FSC) listed by the USFWS for Haywood County, North
Carolina. ESC are not afforded federal protection under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended, and are not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until they are formally
proposed or listed as Threatened or Endangered. An FSC is defined as a species that is under
consideration for listing for which there is insufficient information to support listing.
In addition, FSCs classified as Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or Special Concern (SC) by the state of
North Carolina are afforded state protection under provisions of the North Carolina State Endangered
Species Act or the North Carolina Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979, as amended. Table 7
summarizes the 22 FSC listed species that for Haywood County that are protected by the state.
8.0 CULTURAL RESOURCES
The term "cultural resources" refers to prehistoric or historic archaeological sites, structures, or artifact
deposits over 50 years old. "Significant" cultural resources are those that are eligible or potentially
eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. Evaluations of site significance are
made with reference to the eligibility criteria of the National Register (36 CFR 60) and in consultation
with the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO).
Field visits were conducted in December 2007 to ascertain the presence of structures or features that may
be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. No structures or features were observed within
the easement; however, coordination with the SHPO will occur prior to construction activities to
determine if any significant cultural resources are present.
18
Ratcliffe Cove Mitigation Plan Restoration Svstems, LLC
R > N v q
R o0 L
O c1 3 y ..
?i

r z z z
? z z z z z z
,
y

L

? v Q v
a
i (U (U
* C
u N
to N N N N
-M .- N
o0
C C C ca

F- w w w w w w F- w
o • 5 ? o ?
3 3 .3 ? a, c
V?
O
N ^
O O
?
a O `? U
ca O

V Ca

>

N ti

r
''- is i :r ? ?" U j
p N V U to
C
•
G y - ' a? ? N ? ? ? ca °0 b y
y o o c s c
? ' C > L
+
.+ C N N d. C N T ca v
3 ° U c
i ie C c
• U
__ N L 3 v N
O i
•= y O cC ti j 'Q L V 3
'II
a. X ?,,, vi y O vi ? O 'O N O ca O C > O ? 'O 5q
? C O ? "4 ` ? O • ? O
> c N ? ca N N ? ? O O

T cu
y i
> '
>
L U
lC c
a
U a
V
y
C C
flS G2
S
N O
A
i
'

°

c

c T

C(U l
O
C
°

to
U
w ..
N a a ' U 44+ L

c v

3

?
'c L

a
c
y
y.
r
? c .
•
V 8
• C
N b4 'C L
4j N >>

`?

Y 4? Ca U C.

? s o
U
y
C
? > c o o
ca C ` ? O ca ? >, ?

°? >> C U ?C
0
4 a -0 i C.
O M •L .n
CO a' O ?
LL
y Y

" 3 ap O ?'
Z
u y s ,S 3
y
i V
o Y
,.;
"i 'Z
p O
3 ^
` Q
s C
y = y
v ' -
G y
O `J aC y
Y o O
v ! y

I ?
I
r
pq
r

?
c
?. ? y
p c.
O c
y
L ? V ? ?
y O. .C

?
CE _
0
ca
v N
O
a?
Z C C E V
C v , d s ty`., s O
a
? ? ? p _ rV >, ea a C ? Y
v
o
V M
W o
cC a
U N v
i
W `?
C7 fl
= a
¢ V1 v1 ?
:Q
F
? -O y y r 00
L ? a a
?G :a r? C q
=y., L
y R ? .C C
N D
3 _ nr m m
v N M I O C
v y oo S
y L M n R
v - ?v 7 3
t v `v y ? t
c oq Q
3 R N
o y
a o ° v L
LE Y 9
R / n C A
N C oo? v;
v a ?r Q m c
O a
?Uu CR .10
:J N T
y G
d c ^ y ? R
o C. -'d ri
y y O O ?
C
L ? y
t
X C y y d?
N ° o
i y ? F v
C y
R L '? 00 7
s ? v 3 00
F ? p $ s
°
T
y c
_ m r
oh
C '? pp C y
R R R O
LLi C L N
Nu
C O R C
_O y J r p
... 'O 7 v'C J
p, 'C R y y G
C C ?6R1 ? ^C
V q R L G. y
c
A - N R y
`o R
?a y= u `v y ?
L G. ? :L m
N y
r
on ? y E
o c
R ?
° L 2
t ? ? L c1
'o q? C ¢ O .? ? Z
` 00
L y 0
u C a
y q ? ? y
C L C ? C.1 ?
c E 7 3
C `q R 2 - V,
7 U ?
C H C 7¢ y
... y R y L
y E u d 1
-- L
y C ? _
^0 J ]f1 y - y
i n ai 7 ?. =
V
O
? O
y
C
0
v
y
U
Table 7. Federal Species of Concern
Common Name Scientific Name Potential
Habitat* State
Status**
A liverwort Sphenolobopsis pearsonii No E
Piratebush Buckleya distichophylla No E
Tall larkspur Delphinium exaltatum No E-SC
Smoky Mountain mannagrass Glyceria nubigena No T
Gray's lily Lilium grayi Yes T-SC
Fraser's loosestrife Lysimachia fraseri Yes E
Divided-leaf ragwort Packera millefolium No T
Large-leaved grass-of-pamassus Parnassia granifolia No T
Rugel's ragwort Rugelia nudicaulis No T
Alabama least trillium Trillium pusillum var. o_arkanum No E
Southern Appalachian northern saw-
whet owl Aegolius acadicus pop. 1 No T
Olive-sided flycatcher Contopus cooperi No SC
Hellbender Cryptobranchas alleganiensis No Sc
Soutthern Appalachian red crossbill Loxia curvirostra pop. I No SC
Southern rock vole Nficrotus chrotorrhinus carolinensis No SC
Eastern small-footed myotis Myotis leibii No Sc
Northern long-eared myotis Wyotis sodalist No SC
Eastern Woodrat-Southern
Appalachian population Neotoma floridana haematoreia No Sc
Southern Appalachian black-capped
chickadee Poecile atricapillus practica No E
Southern water shrew Sorex palustris punctulatus No SC
Appalachian yellow-bellied sapsucker Spyrapicus varius appalachiensis No Sc
Appalachian Bewick's wren Thryomanes bewickii altus Yes E
Potential Habitat: Portions of The Bank under review for potential habitat are limited to areas which are proposed for earth moving activities
including restoration and/or enhancement reaches areas
" State Status E = Endangered. T = Threatened, SC = Special Concern
20
Ratcliffe Cove Mitigation Plan Restoration Svstems, LLC
9.0 REFERENCES
Cowardin, Lewis M., V. Carter, E.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classifications of Wetlands and
Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. U.S. Government
Printing Office, Washington D.C.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report
Y-87-1. United States Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Franklin, M.A, and Finnegan, J.T. 2004. Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Plant Species of
North Carolina. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation,
N.C. Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources, Raleigh. I I 1 pp.
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, Virginia, United
States Geological Survey (map scale 1:1,500,000).
Harman, W.A., D.E. Wise, M.A. Walker, R. Morris, M.A. Cantrell, M. Clemmons, G.D. Jennings, J.
Patterson, D. Clinton. 1999. Bankfull Regional Curves for North Carolina Mountain Streams.
N.C. State University, Raleigh, North Carolina.
Leopold, L.B. 1994. A View of the River. Harvard University Press. Cambridge, MA. 298 pp.
Lee, M.T., R.K. Peet, S.D. Roberts, and T.R. Wentworth. 2006. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording
Vegetation, Level 1-2 Plot Sampling Only. Ecosystem Enhancement Program, North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources. 11 pp.
LeGrand, H.E., Jr., S.P. Hall, and J.T. Finnegan. 2004. Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare
Animal Species of North Carolina. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks
and Recreation, N.C. Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources, Raleigh. 67 pp.
Martof, B.S., W.M. Palmer, J.R. Bailey, and J.R. Harrison III. 1980. Amphibians and Reptiles of the
Carolinas and Virginia. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 264 pp.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2001. Benthic Macroinvertebrate Monitoring
Protocols for Compensatory Mitigation. 401/Wetlands Unit, Department of Environment and
Natural Resources. Raleigh, North Carolina.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2006. Standard Operating Procedures for Benthic
Macroinvertebrates. Biological Assessment Unit, Department of Environment and Natural
Resources. Raleigh, North Carolina.
21
Ratcliffe Cove Mitigation Plan Restoration Systems, LLC
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2007a. North Carolina Waterbodies Listed by
County (updated 12/29/2007) (online). Available:
http://h'o.enr.state.nc.us/bims/reports/basinsandwaterbodies/Haywood.pdf [December 30, 2007].
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh, North Carolina.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2007b. Final North Carolina Water Quality
Assessment and Impaired Waters List (2006 Integrated 305(b) and 303(d) Report) (online).
Available: http://h2 o.enr.state.nc.us/tmdl/documents/303 d_Report.pdf [December 30, 2007].
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh, North Carolina.
North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP). 2005. French Broad River Basin Watershed
Restoration Plan (online). Available:
http://www.nceep.net/services/restplans/French_Broad_Plan.pdf [December 30, 2007]. North
Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh, North Carolina.
Palmer, W.M. and A.L. Braswell. 1995. Reptiles of North Carolina. The University of North Carolina
Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 412 pp.
Rosgen, D. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology (Publisher). Pagosa Springs,
Colorado
Schafale, M and Weakley, A. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina, Third
Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation.
Raleigh, North Carolina
United States Army Corps of Engineers, United States Environmental Protection Agency, North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission, North Carolina Division of Water Quality. 2003 Stream
Mitigation Guidelines.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1990. Mitigation Site Type Classification
(MiST). USEPA Workshop, August 13-15, 1989. EPA Region IV and Hardwood Research
Cooperative, NCSU, Raleigh, North Carolina.
22
Ratcliffe Cove Mitigation Plan Restoration Systems, LLC
APPENDIX A
FIGURES
Appendix A
Ratcliffe Cove Mitigation Plan Restoration Systems, LLC
Directions to the Bank: N
Take exit 27 off Interstate 40 just north of Clyde
Travel on US 74W/23S/19S for - 3 miles x
Take exit 104 for Lake Junaluska towards Waynesville and travel - 1 mile
Turn left on Francis Farm Road (just after Junaluska School)
The Bank is on the right after a sharp bend in the road
Point in center Site
Latitude: 35.5061 ON, Longitude: 82.9549 °W
Interstate 40
NC 19123!74.-r+ Canton
s +'
NG 23
Tie
The Bank
Waynesville yR}
X }
a`" 1
???..? 'f t ' s..y s•.h. ? ` t 'YF .? '?'C'PJ_. °?s r r " 1 w "y, a
jJ( b
%
{ 9
S.-
0 1 mi. 4 mi. „, - - r
1:158,400
a -
a
Source: 1977 North Carolina Atlas and Gazetteer, p.52.
m, •r` wadi: ?.. ? -
- -- Dwn. by:
2126 Rowland Pond Drive THE BANK LOCATION Ckc by, CLF FIGURE
Willow Spring. NC 27592 WGt.
i [phone] RATCLIFFE COVE MITIGATION BANK
[phone] `ax Cata?
Haywood County, North Carolina January 2008
05-002.45

N
• na! r.u1
%

:ft
P
? ?tn?; rwtTtidY'` 113'argh? 7 ' ? ? ^•r " •?

1 Y' fi i3eicy . ? {
7t tt6t - T ; ?il rfl:3Yt?ya :.r
.7
`
J l
y,
t. - `Apt ?? .. ?
? ? _
`i..?
.
ctY
'Ar
- t'?`e!•
?
?
, ? ??,
;
,.. .,
.
v
#
,.
fi
Bank Location E3
Targeted Local
n
r7
Watershed
f"f ,q Y 06010106030020

f at,

Bela , bb
''?IJJ
' r

,r
H E Q E
S

aM4i1. 1)
r ,
? ....
f

Pik
Hum at"

I A
S a
N
at) forest . -xr .7 -
l
I-RA {
r: 34? 'f ?ac.
5 mi. 0 5 mi. 15 mi.
1:625,000
Source. Hydrologic Unit Map - 1974 State of North Carolina
2126 Rowland Pond Drive
Willow Spnng, NC 27592
[phone]
[phone] fax

50%.-- 4AW
HYDROLOGIC UNIT MAP
RATCLIFFE COVE MITIGATION BANK
Haywood County, North Carolina
t-Lr FIGURE
by:
WGL
January 2008 2
lit: 05-002.45

?
?
?J
-
.
SJ?
t?. da. t_i F.'ly"
fi Y%?? ?.a 't?i? •: ??f`? `
7
,fYr 4
nobs'

'
`
?
r
°
/
"!.rt .•i
' ?. ,?,' -
'tom --
";???,., ;rr
-

W, f

tliffe?`ey 2Em r? f' I s i C k i1?
? 4• -"/ ? '`:1 ^"? r -, ?, i , \_k,p?, ? f. ?
f 1 ?
^ `
,,
.:cam

v -1,
.? I IU. .l ..ass ?•.?, t! // .(' y -_ r+ + `?? ?.l'
.` x y
17

?J 1? f ??` ?4 J F 7 1
`
???
4 rr
,
LL
/ /
I1 JJJ
I
•'. `?
/ { ?!
??
/?
• i
`~?
?r ?
t -' SFr(
f
K

/
\.
`
?
?. /
.
{ {
l-
d 1
- jr _ ^9r
t+ ?-
-
i '.
'?` 1
: -
ce
:
T -'?•
.
_
.
.
_
.iR
i
.

• h .
.
/ ?.. _.1_?.,,?
...
?
_
_
_.. ____°_
?..Z _? rte.-:.•-r ?I . 1( x ?"--
a? Legend
Drainage Area = - 3.9 square miles
Feet hfFlU`. Q Parcels
0 650 1,300 2,600 3,900 5,200??J Easement = -24 acres

Dwn. By CLF FIGURE
2126 Rowland Pond Dr. TOPOGRAPHY AND DRAINAGE AREA
Willow Spring, NC 27592
(919) 2151693 RATCLIFFE COVE MITIGATION BANK Date: WGU
[phone] (tax)
Haywood County, North Carolina
Project:
05-022.45

Dwn. By: CLF FIGURE
ANN& 2126 Rowland Pond Dr.
Willow Spring, NC 27592 EXISTING CONDITIONS AND SOILS Date:
[phone] RATCLIFFE COVE STREAM RESTORATION SITE wcL
[phone] (fax)
r? Haywood County, North Carolina Project:
05-022.45
11
Figure 5. Existing Channel Cross-sections
RATCLIFFE COVE MITIGATION BANK
Cross-section 1: Main Channel Riffle
Z Aef
.3
ROD (het)
DA= 3.1 square mile
Abkf = 26.4 square fee[
Aezktlng - 77.6 square feet
'S Wb16=19.2 fee[ __......_. t.'?'...?:..
Dbld =1.4 feet`
Dmaz = 3.3 feet
Wbkf/Dbld-14.0
200 feet
.6 ENT=10.4
411 3 i,' -k ,„
LOH =5.0f at
8H R . LS - 7CC. t"
0-type .....
-7
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Station (het)
Cross-section 2: Main Channel Riffle
p
I DA= 3.6 square mile
AI N= 27.7 square feet
_2
AezistlM =63.5 square lee[
W bN =15.0 feet
Dbld =1.3 feet
I Dmaz = 3.9 feet
.3 .._._ ____ _ .._....._ - _ _. .. _._. Wbkf/DbkfI I
FPA=100 feet
i ENT=6.7
L a H - S.7 feet
_._._ ?-. A, SHR .1.5
'._._... _...... _
ROD (het) i _
t:-type
III( g -. _.... __ _.___- _..,.... ._..... I ,?a?
loll
- Y
,. s.
- .a

10 LS 20 25 30 35 40
Station (feet)
% •
Dwn. By: CLF FIGURE
2126 Rowland Pond Dr. PROPOSED CONDITIONS
Willow Spring, NC 27592 RATCLIFFE COVE MITIGATION BANK Date:
[phone] WGL C
[phone] (fax) Haywood County, North Carolina V
Project:
05-022.45
--------------------------------------------------

III
-Z
>
LLI
cc!
c %.j

5: 95 LL OL)

? N Np

d
m,¢w w
?O°wO
o
Z g
$ ?o???s
W

_• '
4w u

o
? of w
fr77 ` g? ? T
a 5
u oz z > o ?I v ? ? A
1 ??
op F
2 d$? m
y;z
w ?
'

? 0, ?
i3

z
$2w o J z
?o
m? \ 1' /
;?iI U2? LL
iZ w LL? <U Z
3m m ? O_
Wz a ?3g w
x
g
= O 1
? y
p
W a
w?? _
I $
'

_
-'
_
oo H
x? o
?
- LL
¢ w w
F
a
N

°
? o? w

¢
11
33 g
? o

8
a z
?0
9
$
a 7
o
w
I\ - - e < e
p
\
\ w e
I,ig n i 4 3w ¢
U 4 N o_ Fj:
1. ¢
,
i
w
i
LLI

?? LL
r ?`i W
Q
wu
O °
2 (n
i s
Q

U cn

2
U

mo
v ?? r wo a
ao
??I
F-
F

?, __?? BI Z ww w
?
g
q
H
wf
:3
uZa oZ< I -9.
=$ i=

Y

Q c
0 0
Z

1'
:D

m z
O c
/ ? co O ?
O w J?fn
?? LL
m W Z
?
0 V
o w LL ?
?
w
o w
o a J Q O r
0 FO
{
Q Z LL
r r ? Z
c
m
'

'
L m
?
o v a
a