20140194 Ver 1_Mitigation Information_20140227

PART 5
20140194
Roses Creek Stream Mitigation Site
RFP# 16- 005297: Cataloging Unit 03050101 of the Catawba River Basin
TECHNICAL APPROACH
5.1 Project Goals and Objectives
Roses Creek is located within the Irish Creek
Watershed. A Local Watershed Plan has not
been developed for this Targeted Hydrologic
Unit; however, the Western Piedmont Council
of Governments (WPCOG) has completed a
Watershed Restoration Plan for the Lake
Rhodhiss watershed, which includes the Irish
Creek and ultimately Roses Creek watersheds.
The Hunting Creek watershed and Muddy
Creek watersheds are adjacent watersheds with
documented Watershed Plans. NCDWQ
completed a Catawba River Basin Plan in
2010 (NCDENR, 2010b). Map 7 provides a
Watershed Planning Contextual Map for the
Site.
C—
bi Np.A l.s-�yfm.. r G.rnr
�C�
- aoN
ti, Y %
'w� �,� .►aaax crest wmasn� `
';,,t, C—d
5.1.1 Lake Rhodhiss Watershed
Restoration Plan
The Lake Rhodhiss Watershed Restoration Plan was reviewed to determine significant stressors within
the Targeted Hydrologic Unit (WPCOG, 2009). According to the plan, Lake Rhodhiss is listed on the
303(d) list for pH values greater than the state water quality standard. Lake Rhodhiss has also long been
recognized as a nutrient rich reservoir. Strategies recommended to reduce nutrients from agricultural
impacts include:
• Erosion reduction/nutrient loss reduction in fields,
• Sediment/nutrient delivery reduction from fields,
• Stream protection from animals,
• Proper animal waste management,
• Agricultural chemical (agrichemical) pollution prevention, and _
• Wildlife and forest management. D @ORB
Further, the plan recommends agricultural management techniques such as the following B
• Controlled livestock watering, �.
• Grazing controls, �l_�d 7 2014
• Stream bank stabilization, and
• Nutrient management. ' ®,
5.1.2 Hunting Creek Watershed Plan
The Hunting Creek Watershed Plan was reviewed to determine significant stressors and identify planning
goals within a nearby Targeted Hydrologic Unit (Carolina Land and Lake Resource Conservation and
Development Council 2011). Hunting Creek Watershed is part of the Upper Catawba River Basin in
central Burke County. According to the Watershed Plan, Hunting Creek is listed on North Carolina's
303(d) list of impaired streams due to compromised ecological and biological integrity. The finding was
based on fish community samples being absence of pollution intolerant fish and a high percentage of
diseased fish. The Hunting Creek Watershed restoration plan is to improve water quality so the fish
communities will improve. The plan recommends four main management measures:
• Stormwater BMPs (onsite detention and infiltration of runoff protects adjacent streams from
increased water volumes and velocities leading to stream bank erosion),
Engineering

Roses Crcdk8trearn Miifgaiion�Site
P*A6A5297:'CatAlbgin Unit 01050101 of the Catawba River Basin
. - . - . Cataloging _g Vig -_ -_ - - _ Catawba --- _ ---
, gtreait-,6ha-n-n-e*l,feFstciraiiiiiiI and riparian,grea enhancement (reestablishin g the proper dimension,
-,
pattern and,profile ,to :-the stream channel will result in reduced §tream,bank erosion,. uqpf6_v%,;0Ud
sed '#qsp6rt"arfd'beiter-,in-sfream habitat conditions. Rey"egetation.of -the, riparlan­area Will •
reestablish air awe's ability t6,-filtbt-gtdimentaidlothet,,p6ultAitgbn!itdtihg-tc# upland,
areas),
Protect intact ­forests , (protecting undev6lbpdd, private; ,forested 'I ids -wi i�n§ ure - tI
Ibh9A&in
health df,the watershed),•and
9, Local government, programs and practices° (some of which are -.-in:place.ih,Buike,'Cdu-nty,),.
S.13 Muddy 064' W4tdMe&R010
The-Muddy Creek Watershed Restoration Initiative's Feasibility Report and 'Restoration for the
Mpit4y :Creek Watershed was ilsoreVie reviewed to determine significant siressors and Identify, planning,igbAls
was . ­ W-14 __ _ significant - - Partners' - 41
Wiffiffie nearby TargdtWHY'&c4bgic,U4t, (Wddy,Ud& Restoration Partners 266R. �1\4� t
tii� s-in
the -Uffie 'U' er'Cataiba- River basin �in westem'Buike Count County. Muddy. Creek is,
pper yand easterii.M6Dowell-
i#io4ifed. -Fish
- . afdVeiihic,nacrdinverti e"b"r' afe d
hta indicate 'Tdir.. to �'gqqd-faie water—,quality. :,-d
repofviididztes.,high colif6ith 1 evelg; widespread' Habitat degradation; imp'air'ed streamfuncaon4ItY; And
:
severe -,
entrenchment impact, the stream's ability to meet water, quality standards. =The -Muddy.
Creek Resioration.Partners are working to :accomplish two main goals: 1) -improve watek. -quility-dri, the
Middy Qfdk Watefshd&to�thd,degfed tliat,lt-pronotes a r phy4ai"dc, troutfstiery,ii,the-.0
Etawba:River,
below , Lake 'James,,and,2)la6lieve.a,Staite of NClully,supporting4esignation for all water. -ccurstsJhAhe:.:
watershed. Thc*f6storaiion plan 'recommends :four primary conservation, solutions, to the. sedimentation= .-,-,
iind lagUing the watershed:
© Natural chaiindl -design stream restoration,
Riparian•ref6testationi,
Livestock dkdliisioii, afid
Ribqrian'biiff&,,-Dreservdiidn.
5.L4 Catawba River Basin Plan
The •20,10 NCDWO Catawba--River Basin Plan: Catawbakivcr Headwaters, Subbasin HUG 03050101-
discusses :the S.bii.,add Water Consdiyatibli Distiridi's (SWCD) OftioletAd str6afth bafik-.,siabili;KiaJkqh
projects on five farms -through.thc Emergency, Watershed Protection. Program (W' AENk,.201 0b)., •.The­-,.*.".-,.
efforts by SWCD are correlated to improved ratings within the watershed.
Rose CreASireaYnMidg4ti6MGoals
The folloxiing,,godls-.and'objectives were.developed,,,to ad•dss,th6.,pfiiiiary issues wiffifti the•§7ub- bd-sin.Add'
assist'EEP in 1neeting theirplanning goals.
The primary-god1s,ofthis strelam• ,r,estoratibii,proj6dt'f6cus;6n:
1. Reducing: water quality .
stressors,
2 'Pr,dVidihh/dOancitfg,tlb6d'-attefi-ffati
3 Restoring; and enhancing aquatic, semi-aquatic and riparian habitat., and
41. -ROstOjggAqd.,Ophanc_ing habitat connectivity wi6adj'accntnatural habitats,
These-goals, �wifibe�accompli'ghed through-,the;foftowing,-6bj'dctives:'
1 'Water quality stressors and ,pr6iiidiiig/ciiha7n-cihgfftood-.attdtiijAii6fi will e,,dirdctly Odd -to thd
following:
4) Resioling the existing degraded, sitaighiened•.and deeply incised/entreAched, streams as
primarily -a Prio-rit y I xestoratioh where bank-fuid and lafgcf 'flows can access 'thd
'
q9odplain allowing nutrients, sedimentation,, trash and debris from upstream, runoff to
'settle� ftom floodWdtOfs tbiffic c5itent- pfactical'. Priority 1l:fesVbrafion will be utilized t&tle
D � 16
EL
Efigineering,

Roses Creek StreamAtigation Site
RFP# I6- 005297_:, C;atalogU0 Catawba
the channels into the existing. landscape, presumably at the upstream and 'downstream
portions 'of the Site. Restoring a stable- ditnension, pattern, and "profile will. ensure the
channel; will ,transport' and, attenuate watershed flows and sediment ;loads withotit
ago4ofi1g;or degrading.
- b) Stabilizing selected. channel banks by relocating the channel, .excavating bankfull
Benches, placing stream structures-to reduce shearing forces on outside meander.bends,
and plad_ting,natiye yegctativc species to provide,soil stability; thus reducing. stream bank
stressors., .,-
-c) -Reduciag.point (i.e., cattle and. equipment. directly accessing the cliaiuiel) and non- point_
source •(i.e., storrnwater. runoff through pastures) pollution associated with on -;site-
agricultural operations' including h4yprodu_ction and cattle by exclusionary fencing from
the stream and riparian buffer.
d) Reducing. point. and non -point pollurion,associated with on =site agricultural .operations-by .
planting, a vegetative liuffer on stream banks and adjacent floodplims to treat' nutrient
enriched surface runoff -from adjacent pastureland;
e) Further, removing agricultural equipment and cattle by providing and/ Jim
agricultural Ocissings.
f) Restoring riparian buffers-'adjacent to the streams that,will attenuate floodwaters, in turn
. - reducingrstressors ,from ,, upstream, impacts. - -
2': Rcstoring,,aquatic, semi' - aquatic ,and'terrestrial''habitat,will be directly tied _to
A) Restoration of a sinuous gravel bed channel that promotes riffles and pools, and
accommodates benthic ,macroinvertebrate and ;fish propagation., Additionally, woody
materialsi,such,as log,structures, cover logs, overhanging planted vegetation and'toe wads
in submerged water, 'will provide-'a diversity of shading, bed 'form and foraging
opportunities for'aquatic organisms.
b) Restoring native vegetation to "the stream'channel banks and thc,adjacent riparian corridor
that is currently fescue grass will diversify :flora and, create a protected habitat corridor
f4* will, grovidd, An, abuMance of, available'Ioraging and cover`habitat'for a;multit(de of
amphibians,,reptiles „mamrimals• and ;b'ii ds_
3. Habitat restoration and Onpectivitycan be directly tied to:
:a) Removal of existing, .non - native fescue 'grass, and :replanting with native vegetation
chatacferistic 'of a, Pkdmont/Mountain Bottomland Forest.
b) ;Protection of the restored community will. ,a protected wildlife' corridor- between
the Site and the-upstream.and downstream mature riparian buffers and upland habitats.
b:2 P,0jecVDescr'ipti6n
5:2:1 Location
The Site is located approximately t,2 miles northwest "of downtown Morganton, NC. No air transport
facilities are located within ?d.five ;inile,radius,of the Site: See F,igure.l 'for, Vicinity'Map.,
From ;Raleigh or, eastern' NQ '1 -40, west to exit,1,03 for, US= 64Burkemonf "Avenue and turn right, go 0.7
milts; turn left.•onto Flemming Drive, go `l:l ,miles; continue onto Sanford. Drive; go -1.2 iniles, turn 1'eft
onto, NC= 1181N/N •Green.,Street, go'8:0 miles; turn left onto Fish Hatchery Road, ,go 2:4 miles; turn right
onto Old ;Table,,Rock'1Vlountaiii Road' (National Forest,Rd), go 0:4 miles; stay'rigfit onto Sisk Faun Road,,
and the sitewill.be in approximately 0.3.m`iles.
From Asheville or western NC' 1- 40east t'o exi_t 1,00 for Jairiestown Road and tum left, go 2.0 miles; stay
straight.on lndepend'encelBoulevard', go L.5 mile,; ,turn left on NC718IN%N .Green' Sireet,go 7A miles; turn.
deft' onto ,Fish Hatchery Road, 'go, '2.4 'miles; 'turn ►jght onto Old, Table Rock Mountain'-Road (Nati'onal
Forest Rd), go 0.4 miles; stay right onto•Sisk Farm Road, and site will be in approximately 4:3 miles:
Am mp?;;, , 17
Eh91neelring

Roses Creek Stream Mitigation Site
RFP# 16- 005297: Cataloging Unit 03050101 of the Catawba River Basin
5.2.2 Existing Site Conditions
Existing conditions Site photographs can be found in Appendix A.
providing in Map 4A through 4D.
Channel Stability Mapping is
Field visits were conducted on August 8th, 15th and 21st of 2013.
The team, including 3 engineers and 2 biologists, walked the entire
site making visual assessments, notes on the existing condition of the
channels and potential for mitigation. Morphological data was
collected on Roses Creek, and UT's 1 through 3. Two sets of bank
pins were installed in Roses Creek to support future design efforts
and verify visual observations. Two 5- gallon buckets were installed
on the lower third of two point bars of Roses Creek (on the upstream
portion of the channel and downstream portion of the channel) to
capture entrained sediment. during high flow events. This
data will assist in validating sediment transport
computations during the design phase. A representative
pebble count was performed on Roses Creek to classify bed
material. Cross sections were collected across each reach
of Roses Creek and UT's 1 through 3 to provide
morphological data in the proposal phase. Additional data
will be collected during the design phase.
Installation of Bank Pins
5.2.2.1 Channel and Floodplain Characteristics Sediment Bucket Installation
Site floodplain alteration and water quality stressors are
shown on Map 5. Pre - monitoring feature locations are shown on Map 6.
Roses Creek
Roses Creek lies within a well - defined alluvial floodplain along the
western edge of the Piedmont Ecoregion. Elevations range between
1240 ft MSL at the point at which Roses Creek enters the Site and
1216 ft MSL at the downstream end of the Site. Roses Creek enters
the Site as a fourth order tributary (USGS 1984) and flows west to east
approximately 3,500 feet before exiting the Site. Roses Creek's
drainage area is approximately 3,309 acres (5.2 square miles) at the
downstream terminus of the Site (Figure 2).
Roses Creek is a gravel/cobble bed stream that is actively eroding due Wide Historic Floodplain
to 1.) a lack of stream bank and riparian vegetation and 2.) cattle t.
accessing the stream for shading and as a watering source. Hoof
shear is evident from the upstream beginning of the Site to the
downstream terminus of the Site. Hoof shear along the channel bank
is evident by viewing aerial photography of the Site on several of the
attached figures. Channel bed form displays several well defined
riffles and pools, however substantial loads of fine sediments from
bank scour has begun to inundated riffles and fill several pools.
Substantial amounts of fecal matter are assumed to be entering the
channel due to direct and in- direct (i.e. through the non - vegetated Cattle Access
riparian buffer) inputs. Evidence of this includes visual observation of
cattle in the stream channel during site visits and fecal matter along stream banks and within the stream
channel.
�c� 18
Engineering

Roses Creek Stream Mitigation Site
RFP# 16- 005297: Cataloging Unit 03050101 of the Catawba River Basin
Lack of Riparian Vegetation
Mid - Channel Bar
Active Erosion of Banks
Down- valley migration is common throughout the Site as evidenced by 1.) riffles that often occur within
arcs of meander bends, 2.) numerous tortuous meander bends that display evidence of active avulsions 3.)
the substantial shift in location of many meanders within the Site as evidenced by historical aerial
photography (Map 1 through 1 D) and 4.) by massive, newly formed bars dominated by fine sediments.
The large majority of the channel displays little to no deep rooted bank or riparian vegetation. When a
treed buffer is present, it is commonly only one tree wide, with vegetation typically sparse at best. Many
of the trees within the one -tree buffer have been undercut because the channel has incised below the
rooting depth, leading to numerous fallen trees within the Site. The lack of a mature vegetated buffer and
the substantial influence of hoof shear have led to mass wasting of channel banks along large portions of
the channel in both arc and tangent sections. Maps 4A through 4D depict a channel stability analysis for
Roses Creek. The analysis focuses on determining portions of the channel that display moderate to high
bank stress and correspondingly details minor to substantial bank erosion. It should be noted that the
large majority of Roses Creek contains channel banks that depict moderate to substantial bank erosion.
Morphological data appears to confirm that the channel is in a state of flux. Four riffle cross- sections
were collected along Roses Creek within distinct reach types that are typical of the entire Site. This data is
used to display overarching morphological characteristics of the Site. It is noted that of four cross - sections
collected along riffles, there are four different channel classifications (E4, B4, C4 and F/134). All four
cross - sections display morphological conditions that indicate a trend toward instability. Cross - section 1 is
classified as an E4 type channel, displaying a width -to -depth ratio of 6.18 and entrenchment ratio of 5.76.
This section of the channel is abutted against a hill slope on the left bank and has no overbank access to
its historic floodplain, causing high shear against Roses Creek: XS 1 wwt.t
the hill slope. The channel has moved laterally o trD6eM RRl10: 616
p Y y —�pmd faRrenlhneM RMb: 5.76
BRR: 3.5
the point at which it cannot migrate any further 1145.0 --
toward the left side of the valley (because of the 1140.0
hill slope), causing the channel to narrow (hence E - - --
type classification) and create a massive 113.0.0
depositional bar on the inside (right bank) bend. ,115.D
The depositional bar can be seen in the cross- 1010 :1010 ' °� 60.6 w10 1000 >_ °.° ' " °° 160.0
DNtanm MI
section on the right bank. The channel in this
section is unstable as it is eroding the hill slope on
the right bank and is incised to the point that it has
abandoned its historic floodplain as evidenced by a
bank- height ratio of 3.5.
Cross- section 2 is classified as a B4 type channel,
but has over widened as evidenced by a width -to-
depth ratio of 24.6 and mass wasting on the banks.
Engineering
1140D
_ 1136.0 ©OOIGfUII
1� it36D --
y 1136.0
1�3
ussD
1130D _
0.0 1010 10.0 30.0 6010 50.0 60.0 70.0 60D 90.0 100.0
Dbt— (R)
E

Roses Creek Stream Mitigation Site
RFP# 16- 005297: Cataloging Unit 03050101 of the Catawba River Basin
The channel has incised to the point that it has abandoned its historic floodplain as evidenced by an
entrenchment ratio of 1.92 and bank - height ratio of 1.8. Roses Creek flows through a wide, well - formed
alluvial floodplain. It would be anticipated that in undisturbed conditions entrenchment ratios of Roses
Creek should be much higher (meaning that flood flows have greater access to its floodplain) with bank -
height ratios approaching 1.0. Existing cross - sections of the channel clearly show that the bankf ill
elevation is well below the historic floodplain elevation (i.e. existing top of ground.
Cross - section 3 is classified as C4 type channel that
displays a width to depth ratio of 21.9, which would
indicate that the channel has begun to over widen
(as evidenced by substantial bank scour).
Additionally, the entrenchment ratio is 2.23,
meaning above bankfull flows arc somewhat
confined. Additionally, this reach displays a bank-
height ratio of 2.3, indicating that the channel has
incised well below the historic floodplain. These
arc indicators that even though the channel is
classified as a C type stream, which is commonly
associated with stable channels, it is in as state flux
in which it is over widening and has abandoned its
historic floodplain.
Cross- section 4 is classified as an F /G4 type
Roses Creek: XS 3 "'"�"°"` `.9
WMtlMrO4yM MID: 11.9
-*--Greub Mv«d■ WW.W:113
MR 13
113!.0 Boolduil
11iiA
1333.0 - —
11D.9
1119.0
1118.0 — -- -'– -- --
112.0
OA 10.0 10A 30.0 40.0 solo 6" 70A 80.0
bl 4 I",
°Moh9 Hc4
Roses Creek: XS4
walnaawolh Mb: lea
�aro�ne lMrtdtl MMln: 137
MR 7A
,111.0
lln.0 a.lactun
fi unA
11DA
1119.0
S1L.0
1117.0 – '� - --+
OA 100 20A 30.0 . 40.0 - SOA 6 70.0 90A Ron
Dbt— IAI
channel with a width -to -depth ratio of 73.6 and entrenchment ratio of 1.37. This cross - section is typical
of several reaches through the Site which have experienced substantial over widening due to mass bank
failure coupled with cattle access to the stream that has eroded banks and denuded the riparian buffer of
deep rooted vegetation which would allow for soil stabilization along the stream. The channel is in the
process of widening to the point that flow has been split between a high bar in the channel on large flows,
creating, and functioning like a D (braided) system. Additionally, like other reaches described above, the
channel has abandoned its floodplain as evidenced by a bank - height ratio of 2.0.
Morphological data of the existing conditions of
Roses Creek confirms that the channel is in a state
of flux. It appears that the channel is incising
through the landscape and beginning to over -
widen in an attempt to scour a floodplain at the
bankfull elevation. The successional trend of
Roses Creek is anticipated as follows:
C» B» F» C
F/D- Channel Section
UT 1 and UT 2
UT land UT 2 are similar stream channels through the Site. Both channels are first order perennial
streams dominated by silt and sand with minor influences of small gravel that are significantly altered
headwater systems. The channels have drainage areas of 35 acres (0.06 square miles) and 47 acres (0.07
square miles), respectively, at their confluence with Roses Creek (Figure 2A). DWQ stream classification
forms were completed near the upstream Site limits of both channels, revealing scores of 30 (UT 1) and
33.5 (UT 2) indicating that both channels are considered perennial streams.
ICAA� 20
Engineering

Roses Creek Stream Mitigation Site
RFP# 16- 005297: Cataloging Unit 03050101 of the Catawba River Basin
Both channels have been straightened and channelized creating a relatively uniform plan and bed form.
UT 1 has one agricultural crossing in the middle of the Site that has silted in and is no longer fully
functioning. UT 2 has two crossings (residential crossing and agricultural crossing) in the upstream limits
of the Site. Immediately downstream of the residential crossing is an agricultural crossing within the
pasture. From the agricultural crossing to the mainstcm of Rose Creek, the stream has been manipulated
to run parallel to Sisk Farm Road.
Cattle have access to the channels throughout the entire reach of UT 1 and through the large majority of
UT 2 with the exception of the upstream 300 feet, which is located outside, of the pasture, but has a
regularly maintained buffer. Substantial hoof shear is found along the channel banks leading to over
widening of the channel in wading areas and over widening of the channel where. concentrated cattle and
agricultural machinery crossings are evident. Fecal matter from the on -site cattle operation is evident
throughout the channel and its riparian buffer.
Channel bank and riparian vegetation is virtually
non - existent with the exception of few scattered
trees along portions of the channel. UT 2 has no
trees on the channel banks downstream of the
residential and agricultural crossings. The lack of
deep rooted vegetation has allowed for the erosion
and incision of the channel in several sections of the
Site.
Morphological data collected on UT 1 and UT 2
reveals similar channel types, depending upon reach
conditions. Both channels display B5 and F5 type
channel characteristics. It is important to note that
these channels have been modified and maintained
historically and therefore do not display any natural
plan form variables or substantial variation in bed
form. So, although B type channels are commonly
indicative of stable streams that is not the case with
UT 1 and UT 2. B type stream sections of both
channels display very low width -to -depth ratios of
3.14 (UT 1) and 7.24 (UT 2). Additionally, their
corresponding entrenchment ratios are 1.70 (UT 1)
and 1.46 (UT 2). The cross - sections clearly depict
that both channels have incised into the landscape
and have abandoned their historic floodplains (top
of ground). Data suggests that although both are
classified as B type streams, they are quickly
trending towards G type systems where width -to-
depth and entrenchment ratios are very low (less
than 12 and 1.2, respectively).
ftVdS.t1W F5
Upstream XS W1fMto0gt6FbeN::,.1
-,-OI d U.Nnt�.W11..t1.: 111
8NN aD
9610 Bu➢Whll
9310
9210
0.0 6.0 10.0 1510 2010 25A 1" 5S.0 40.0 4510
9bta N
IS
UT 1: Downstream XS wrt� : >o.pa �uux 5la
-G-.J 6.en,nd.n M eric 1.70
Oft 21
9610 B.nkfull
97.0 --
F
%D
9510
94.0 -- - _ - -- --
93.0 T -T -�
0.0 510 1010 1510 20.0 2510
Cl.wi on: FS
UT 2: Upstream XS Wifthw4MO01Ytl.: 18.12
�Gmu.9 Fi4r.M.n.M 9atb: 1.as
/nk 5.75
97➢
960 Bankfull
C 9510
9410
9310 - - --
• 9310
'� 9110
9010
.90
0.0 5.0 1010 15.0 20.0 2510 30.0 9510 400
OW.- (AI
rcctl° l iUT 2: Downstream XS F nhn ln
-rt- G- M BMIC 214
9510 - B,➢kfun - - - -- -
r 94.0 a�. -.--
r 9310
92.0
Some sections of both channels are classified as F 900
type systems. These sections of channel arc 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 5.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 26.0
(ft)
commonly over widened as evidenced by width -to-
Dist- depth ratios of 24.1 (UT l) and 18.12 (UT 2) and incised into the landscape (i.e. they have abandoned
their historic floodplains) as evidenced by entrenchment ratios of 1.33 (UT 1) and 1.46 (UT 2). These
I
Engineering
21

Roses Creek Stream Mitigation Site
RFP# 16- 005297: Cataloging Unit 03050101 of the Catawba River Basin
over widened portions of the channels can be directly attributed to cattle wading, concentrated cattle
movement through portions of the channels and access to the channel by agricultural machinery.
UT 3
UT 3 is a first order perennial sand/silt bed
headwater stream, with influences of small gravel,
that has been manipulated to run along the toe of the
valley slope causing a diversion from the valley fall
and split flow in the channel. UT 3 has a drainage
area of 10 acres (0.015 square miles) at its
confluence with Roses Creek. A DWQ stream
classification form was completed on the channel
upstream of the Site and received a score of 34,
signifying that it is a perennial stream. The
landowner has stated that the stream is spring fed
and flows continuously year round.
UT 3 has one crossing near the confluence with
Roses Creek. Cattle have access to UT 3 and it is
evident that it is used as a watering source by the
cattle. Anthropogenic disturbances relegated the
channel to the toe of the valley and away from its
historic flow path. Morphological data reveals that
the channel's invert is substantially higher than the
fall of the valley due to modifications. Additionally,
there appears to be substantial seep from base flow
of the channel through an adjacent spoil berm and
into a natural low crenulation. This seepage from
the channel has created a linear wet slough adjacent
to the spoil berm.
UT 3: Middle XS °2.r°"" `�
Wr1MO4ip/9 9aW: OA7
—0-0 FgY..d.e.N btlw Ill
9M 210
102.0 AmkPoll Spa
100.0 BU,
bD
%lo
90.0 swd
92.0
0.0 10.0 1010 1010 40A 50.0 SOD
06t_ In) -
UT 3: Downstream XS
— GYY.YYI
t1Y.arOt101Y 85
9NlW>UgoY MO : lif3
ftald' YWY Sato. 193
0119: 3.6
".a
9510 - d°�I
9.10
9310
Ulu
OD 1010 20.0 304 40.0 solo 60.0
Dk.. (ft)
Morphological data collected on the channel classifies the channel as either a B5 or G5 type channel
through the Site, depending upon the reach. It is of important note that the channel has been manipulated
and does not display any natural meander geometry or bed form variation that would typically be seen in
an undisturbed system. The channel was straightened and channelized out of it natural valley, therefore
its morphological data depicts the bankfull elevation entrenched within the channel banks. Width to
depth ratios are inconsistent through the Site, ranging from 6.47 in G type sections of the channel to 14.53
within B type sections of the channel. This variation is not a natural variation of channel dimension,
rather evidence of anthropogenic disturbances. Entrenchment ratios between the cross- sections remains
fairly consistent, ranging from 1.21 in G type sections of the channel to 1.95 in B type sections of the
channel.
Biological Impairment
As noted above, all streams on the Site have various physical
impairments that include:
Substantial fine and coarse sediment loads from bank failure
and mass wasting,
Loss of physical habitat in bed form due to anthropogenic
manipulation of meander geometry,
Continual maintenance of riparian buffers and denudation of
deep rooted vegetation from those buffers,
Engineering
22
UT 3: Upstream XS
P
o41pM 92.11.: 1.51
W"'., *WhRd1.:
- - �Grawl
fil—d 110rti0: 142
9M6 29
1010
Spoll Berth �—
IOLO
hllofV111cy
Imo
Wet
sea
9010
Sou
n10
--
00
SL 10.0 15.0 1010 2310 5010
SAO .44A - 4SD son
ObI.- nn
UT 3: Middle XS °2.r°"" `�
Wr1MO4ip/9 9aW: OA7
—0-0 FgY..d.e.N btlw Ill
9M 210
102.0 AmkPoll Spa
100.0 BU,
bD
%lo
90.0 swd
92.0
0.0 10.0 1010 1010 40A 50.0 SOD
06t_ In) -
UT 3: Downstream XS
— GYY.YYI
t1Y.arOt101Y 85
9NlW>UgoY MO : lif3
ftald' YWY Sato. 193
0119: 3.6
".a
9510 - d°�I
9.10
9310
Ulu
OD 1010 20.0 304 40.0 solo 60.0
Dk.. (ft)
Morphological data collected on the channel classifies the channel as either a B5 or G5 type channel
through the Site, depending upon the reach. It is of important note that the channel has been manipulated
and does not display any natural meander geometry or bed form variation that would typically be seen in
an undisturbed system. The channel was straightened and channelized out of it natural valley, therefore
its morphological data depicts the bankfull elevation entrenched within the channel banks. Width to
depth ratios are inconsistent through the Site, ranging from 6.47 in G type sections of the channel to 14.53
within B type sections of the channel. This variation is not a natural variation of channel dimension,
rather evidence of anthropogenic disturbances. Entrenchment ratios between the cross- sections remains
fairly consistent, ranging from 1.21 in G type sections of the channel to 1.95 in B type sections of the
channel.
Biological Impairment
As noted above, all streams on the Site have various physical
impairments that include:
Substantial fine and coarse sediment loads from bank failure
and mass wasting,
Loss of physical habitat in bed form due to anthropogenic
manipulation of meander geometry,
Continual maintenance of riparian buffers and denudation of
deep rooted vegetation from those buffers,
Engineering
22

Ads7ds Creek $ftam MitigitioftSite.
R,FP#J6,,'005297: Ca"16ginguniti,03050V0I dfthe Catawba River- 'Basin
®. fecAl,loading,'intothc�channdls from.,unabated access ofcattie,
6 liQpf�sheavd'channel -banks dt&bed,,f6rm' from ,cattle.-,a:e&,dss1 and wading, and
G AgridiituralmaAihery. access,.
z
Thcsc,p4yshbal ;impdirpents will R haVe ia. substanti�l effect, on W,4tdr','
quality and hiologicaL'itfte ty of the
Site: ES:6ts,,dfphj(slbal impairment'ifid . I . ud6_:
Siltirig, 6fh4bitAt f6rli'sh spe_669 and othWma6r6behth6s,ih the•, ftrbam, 6h Is-,
]Ldss,df essential:bed-forihfe4-tilrg$;
lhtroduction , of- nutrients' o, all, on-M aijitbiiance bfh4y produdimg -fi' e Ids
a dj dq&ntAo,stream channels,
Introdiiefibn of various pOI wtantkto­,-th6 str�7 bh I& dirqugh .grl It ural
ma6hiqqy
crossings,
q Ihiroductibn of 'fecaf,VoILu 'ffi" treaffi,Aail6i�,-- aZiiilecrossingsiand, wading,
(an
-I 'fediLi6es 'the ability of
0 Abandonment, of floodplain n
= - 160 Site to
"and- stdre,,putniebts.,an ipq tan j4pyt-ki,
_Denudation. riparian vegetatfon,.-�q diices::p6te fial Woody debris, iqputs� to the
q enudaiion, of riparian 'vegetation:- je n
jan
e D e nudat ion of riparian vege t at t on reces, semi- aquatic terrestrial corridors throu gh
gh
-Historical Presence,of Streams.
' ible.,4.-Eilsting°C'enditioiis,
ReltA
Historical Vresence
Draina g�:
-hic
'Geothorp
Impairmen
Area
Acres
tion
Topologicalcrenul , atibns in'the
35,
Straiifitened-,
valley .'(QSO9)-,(Flgure! LADAR
dh-- hied, entrenched," -
to ica in
p�ja
,-
caftkandt,equipinent,
­f:bi6aks�wiffii -Roses-
CreekTloodplain,(Map 2) ;;Linear
__access; T
sc4ls'tlirough,topqgr4plicl
crenuiafidni,(-Pi'g-u`-r-e' 4)
T 2
'TopqI6&al creinfilitti 6m,,iriAhe,
47.
BS =T5"
S"igh&hdd4rO
valley :(USGS).(Figure XiDA R
chaiii
"
-, ;_ljqpogrq
Ohicdl,breaks:within Roses
rq h
;,L'ijiedr
n cattle'
j
Q§�difougfi't?pograp ic
­AJT,3-'-�
�"-�T,6p-6]6gi�il'cee-nula'ti'6n-s,"m, e
'th
S
85—G5,
�,1,5tTiiihb 6diiid�
-valley,(USGS) (Fi IDAR,
uYel
channelized aloe wall
phical breal mwitlflii'Roses.
wAi§Plvflow j 14fg eleft-'
rCfeekfloo4JACnN j';LneJr
-
bajk4q entrenched;
il tfirough:topogfdphic�
'w s
cattle =and ddWbrWe-nt
crenidatibris (Fi&r--e4j,
:Roses
'BI lind,strephi.-on-USOS anid,spif
13K
B4,,-C' 4, F/D4
;;Entrenched,; cdtIbcphd
_4
Creek
survey, MDAk,'showsfopiographical
�equipinid6t4ccess,,
breaks.
' actively eroding,
g A--
irf9
r4 -
liffics, 'tiiid channel bars,
'g
23'

Roses Creek Stream Mitigation Site
RFP# 16- 005297: Cataloging Unit 03050101 of the Catawba River Basin
5.2.2.2 Beaver Dams
No beaver activity has been observed within the Site.
5.2.2.3 Existing Riparian Buffer vegetation
The majority of buffer along Site streams is currently used as active cattle pasture and is dominated by
grasses. Woody vegetation is sparsely scattered along the stream banks of Roses Creek and consists of
common bottomland species such as river birch (Betula nigra), tulip tree (Liriodendron tulipifera), tag
alder (Alnus serrulata), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciva), sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), black
walnut (Juglans nigra), and buckeye (Aesculus sp.).. Privet (Ligustrum sinense) is also common along the
stream banks.
5.2.3 Watershed Conditions and Land Use
The Site is located within the 03050101060030 14 -digit Hydrologic Unit, which is also an EEP Targeted
Hydrologic Unit for Cataloging Unit 03050101 of the Catawba River Basin. The Site contains Roses
Creek (Index # 11- 35 -3 -6) and three unnamed tributaries to Roses Creek (UT 1, UT 2, and UT 3). Roses
Creek is classified as a Water Supply Watershed (WS -Ill), as it is part of the headwaters that feed Lake
Rhodhiss. Roses Creek is also a designated trout water (NCDENR, 2012). There are no 303(d) listed
waters at the Site. Map 8 shows adjacent and proximal planning elements to the Site.
The Western Piedmont Council of Government (WPCOG) completed a Watershed Management Plan in
2009 for the Lake Rhodhiss watershed and surrounding watersheds. Lake Rhodhiss is listed on the
303(d) list of Impaired Surface Waters and has long been recognized as a nutrient rich reservoir. The
following management strategies have been developed to address nutrient loading in the watershed in
regards to agricultural non -point source pollution:
• Restoration of unstable and eroding streams
• Revegetation of riparian areas
• Conservation tillage
• Livestock exclusion
• Use of soil sampling and analysis
• Use of ground cover
• Use of drip irrigation and in line fertilization
• Proper disposal of animal wastes
Roses Creek flows into Simpson Creek which flows into
Irish Creek. According to the Lake Rhodhiss Watershed Management Plan, land use within the Irish
Creek subwatershed is primarily forest and open space or pasture. Agricultural operations in the
subwatershed include ornamental nurseries, grain crops, and livestock operations. Additionally, the Table
Rock Fish Hatchery was built by the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission in the Irish Creek
subwatershed in 1946.
Land use within the Roses Creek watershed upstream of the Site is dominated by forested land (97
percent). Pasture on the Sisk Farm and adjacent properties accounts for approximately 3 percent of the
watershed. The remainder of the watershed (less than 1 percent) is comprised of small residential
properties, roads, and parking lots (Figure 3).
5.24 Geology
The Site is located in the Alligator Back Formation (Gneiss) of the Blue Ridge Belt (NCGS 1985). The
Alligator Back Formation (Gneiss) is characterized by finely laminated to thin layered gneiss and includes
schist, phyllite, and amphibolitc.
ICAA� 24
Engineering

Roses Cidek Stream Mitigation- Site
R,FP#- 14-005297: Catalogihg,Unif 030501011,,of the Cbttawba River'Basin
The Sitd, is ,located' p;thpywestem.boundary of the Pi&dhiohf:.E6 &d 1 o
fi j!6ISQS'IM
): QVerlhepast
,*i"yee§ most of ,thdPiddni6iiC§ 6fgm -I forests were converted. to A land but,
due -to Iii
0 erosion
rates and deelinin 9 soil, fertiliiymuch of the ­eooregibrvbecame reforestereforested: Within ithc last SO: vears -the,
d en,,6nc growing monthas be of'the, fasi&-if - 4n. tfie%bdtift resti dii g'ih jconversion df-f6fest and
growm rpg!ons n
farijilandfib. a6v,'edoied,dndvater uses.,' (USES, 2012).
Elevations. wfthinihe project, area rangq.froni 1211 f6d Above hibzffi,sea:1e7V61 (NIS P .,at the - upstream
tt0t.'0f__,LTT.,- -,-t -2T6'feet'MSL:attbe downstream ciAof.Roses Erdek,(L !DAR,,-2'00
-p
8 �series- areas proppsewfor inifigafibil,'inclJ4,the,
Soil A�pict6dJih the, Buike-County Survey that,dre,withim
descnp#0nsj., w:.Ste. Figure4for, So"
TfandlilainAdj4pent --fo-R6ses C reek�and UT 3
vcM?t slopes (CvA). — These are, vqry, .0eepj,-,WeR�--.
flooded,', percent ar
draihed,goi
I'khavf6r-med in 'loa-my 611tiViani6irfloodo'lAins ihAe southem,AppAlachia'n,Moi n tainis.
deO 4,611
Foni4,166Y-'ps1in �Co�yplg_x; flbWM tb 5 percent 44,6��, (F,�4 __ -1 _i. -.:.,
0, perc Fo6tAflo&-:soils are, Very
ihavlsloki#y ()k,,sandy.,i�'fhd�upp�kpart',aLad,g;indy�!
-diali6�6soks-,* 'a-i',-,i"ormed4'1*n,tedthi,--alliiviifth sandy- skeletal -ins
i c' lower part.:,`Qstin, soils;, are vey,deep­ well and-mbd6tately well ; &affied g6irs f bined-'im, coarse: - -
-teitiffi 01 41WAUM containing Jar t iahodnts;bfjsidd, gravel,. dddc6bbf6s., Me alluvium. h6s,wA§h;m-fi
ncaiffi--- 'I 'E ,,.in - r&sfdttuih. iand c6 ­hic,-ai�d i� &S,
-at-. fordidd llii*ijum wcafftered from ffietaffibrp gpcoi�s,,ro
Fontifflora,,and Ogtiri•,soils, areJound on-floodphiffis of streams in the &uthdn Appalachiah-Mbuntaids,
and'Piedmont -foothills,.
-Uplands Adjacent to Roses Creek'-Floodpla4 UT and.UT-2
Bwnisier,76& M, I to 6',percenrsIbpz-s (&2B) = Theg&'sioils, are -very deep, moderately Well drained or
1- ffo&,:61dypyalfmiiuiW. These ardI"iddHV-fbun&,,on,Mre-am
App-, pi-
-h
terraces 'init 0,,TiedufbnI.
Wed- 6p
o 0i �s are, very e
drained soils -Mrmed, fto felsi d- 10.,ma i
c, igneous ;an :high
= grade- metamorphic rocks_ iguch`=as -inida
gneiss; hornblende gneiss;-.and, a­
hibohte.- soik,ade f6fnd• and
ridges.
Rhodhiss'samdy,,IoaM;-25� 'to --45.,P? r -hVsIqpgq (flh_p —These "soil's are vpy dee'
t Well drained soil's:
fbrmedftorn,rc:sidu-qtn from f6liii,_qy-,stA IM18L Thege;§6ifs,akely p iddilyfouhd hiNlopes and,iidges,
iii,the Piedmont uplan&.-
VnisgOw"s Mam, Ztb� 15wrcew,sl�p
0�# - - -esMnBlbnQ) —Tbese soils-,,are very,deep,and well drained.
Theyam,typicallyfound on mountain,166tsIblies; alluvial, fans, or strearn'terraces.
5.'2.4 _Wiiter�Rij6urcas
Roses'Cre&(Streanidiadex #'l;1,-3573,,--6)"flows,into-•SitngsqRq,:Cte6k, which"flows �intojnslf, Crcdk-',.,Which
flows ifitd Wari ior.Fork; Whi6h flcW& li", the,,CAtAwba'.IA-1V0° A& f 0kiddtdly- 16 :miles sdutfidagt, of-the,
,'Site,. Rdg-cs,(frdek-!l'-S,;classified,,as WS7HI ,Ti. Roses,-Creek.is,�noton.thc,,,2012'3 63" '(4).list and,there, are,- no
11high,quaility waters of the Site (NME, 9, ZO, artiedifibbitarics, iake,,on the,cla -sifidifibn of the
N12 14 Unni
nearest named sttearn;, tfiercf6fe;`IfT'1_, UST 2; ;JhdVT-Tat ihe'gite aq afso blassified4s W_'S-,_I_1j_;, V,•.
'25,
Engineering

R6s6s,Cfddk-',Siieam,Nfi'tilzation,'Site
RIT# I&- 005 �91 ; Cataloging,Uhi 6160101 ofiaeaC A i Ri v Of Basin
ifi
A�cfassification of, ,WS*-Iii,gigniPie-s wdt6rg,Lisedads,s6f]tdes!bf,viatersupply fordfidkiiig,
- l Ouliha
y'df,f6of
processing purposes' where z more ,protectiveWS-1 or TI classification 'is not �fea lbie., T 6se waters are;
also ,p
uses §d&'dis s&;dftdaty-,'rddreatj6n, fikhil)gjand - -A—lif- - -bpagation., A
qqy4uc., " e'pj -
'clasgifibation df-Tf,9ipiri s;a,'suonlementAl crasidicAti6h W'- iefided,td prdtdct, fi�6shWafidrs,foflfdtgraf, trout
'iv, cifstocked, q ,d Ove :round"basi'sj(NC EN , 0112-5,
pfqpAgattipwand gjry al ift fi at I? R 1
Water,Q Quality Plan,
ccording, to the'261 0 Gatawba..Alver Basi ty Roses- Creek,
Natqr!qWli ;. `bowe _er' 1rfih,Cieek' (from Roses Creek to Warrior. Fork) feceivkd;a U§e-.Si!pioft.RatJi '6f
Iri'sh,CrV6kpteNibigly,!fe(6ived'a,fiih, community rating o F
air� iil 'andl,20034nd, was
-.-p'l@iccdi-onthe.,2006'Tmpaited Waters list. Since,2003,fhe gofi and Water:' ribfI(SW'Cl))
Cojfsefviltion, i§t
P
-on five fArms through the Emergcney, -.,Watti-shed��'ProtectioiI
-las, completed' stream. restoration projects
T)iese projects included tM removal, f- flood debris, restoration, of .the -cidndeL,profile,
-"s I tru'--'-- and vegetative giabiliiafibn, and in one .case -reconstruction -6flivesto6k-ekdlusibn fda6iia."The-
$W c rpgiqngj
outreach project to proroie:an& edbqate-•the, agricultural _cdmMii iity,,about
C oA§&rV -'�c _'I -crdf -efforts -Ifisfi-,Creek,fe.
.4tion OeLbfi elf. jIhhdsi_Duc to sigbifi�ant
-_'.A&Ex6611brit� ratingjo-2007;therefbre, the,creek, was.,removed1rotn' thc list4h,,201 0, "(NQ%ENF'4,1914
7
Thereare,no,.protected properti'eg.,adjaicent,;to'the.,Sitd The, " parcels to the mest�,of the-SU64r&o".
--,Bdtty:'St)airihour-.Wilfiaam (P . ff-06736661f) gnd,Tdn,,, -AA go va..Spainh6un(FIN #---T�,76,7.376552)jJhe. -
IN v d ii
-s(�uth,of�tho,Site,i�,dwhpd�yR'6ertdhdMartb4,Si4,,(��PINW'I',76744
paircel, to-,th'c 1497);:- hb-P& 61,to the,
east .of the Site i&-ownedby the. W'M. Brinkley Sr. Trustee, et. al. (PIN #41,6773 3-'91,1,);.and Aie, pdf&ef to
-of�,'t�e;Site,"is,owided��y:Gten�and�Mar
Abe'.norf,h y Chapman (PIN # 1768503842).
F
12.8, furisdiefionatStredifts,and Wetlands
Creek (UT 1, 2, 3) 'are located Within, ithc.,,Sfte�'.'s proposed,
tribuiaries to Roses ;Three .unnamed-
consayafidif easement. A NCDWQ Sifeajffa',Idefiiificaiion.f?6rrii,(.Ki)RqpI .2610a), was .completed for
d- I
each ATT. -11T I scored a,, 10.6; tJT-,,-2 koied, a 31-5. and UT 3, $�corqd'a 34 dil ,the , Sire m, dpnfifi'eAti6n:..
Form,(A,pp-6qdix;B)., A-'§fream-isiddn9idercd,at Icast- intermittenOf less than or equal to,19 -qr,,perenniatifc ,
A hi's-Ai6vbeen coh*I_etdd_tjr the, Si Yer con �h e difibns3onAhi�,�
ow
b6dfi asscs­ -.ektbdt'.df potential wetlands. 'Weiland indicators, sti6--aCs hydijc;
fiydropbyti6-vegetation_,, a-ndI',--

Aoses'Creek StreamMifigation Site
RFP.# 16- 005297: Cataloging Vini t 05050101 of thd'CatziWba River Basiif
Table 5. Federally Listed Threatened or"Endangered Specleslfor,Ourke County, NC
CommonAame
'Scientific
'Federal
State
HAbitaf.Pres6ni
Niffic
'Status,
Status
Dwarf-flowered
Hexastylis
T
T
Yes (north facing slopes,adjaceiiWT 3);
heArtl'edf
nanifld)-a
Aexastylis
�Aani)7pra•grows in' cidic,§dils'4lpqg
-
17
bluffs:and.adjacent. slopes, in boggy
areas next-0 -streams and creekhead
.s,,and along
'dietslop es,.of nearbYlidsides,and ravines�
Siftiall Wh6rled
Isolria
'T.
T_'.­
No"mostoftenassociated with
gogopia,
mede*Wj
Pelifively open, areas'X­,dediduous
hiddwbods: either beech-birch-rdaple or oak-
hickory. 'Thexspectrum of habitatsificludes,dry,,
:fbft woodW slo pes*Q+m6ist strdambanks.
Helle?s
Liatris,hillepi - .­
T
T
'N q;,grows, - -'high elevition,ledges of rock
blazingstar
outcrops; Ihshallow acid soils where it is
xposed,to fah sunlight-,,,
-Mountain golden
Hudsonia
T
T. -
No;:occurs�on open wind'-swept rock,ledges
heather'..
montana
Whiteirisdtle
,rinchtu
&sy
E
E
f4o; , , rich. basic 96ils'piqbably
'o
dichotomum
•
bblite; grows ows in
cleafifija§ and edges oiuplandtwoods
Rock,gnomc
Gym�ioderma
E
"E.'
occurs n ireii�6fhikh'humidiiy, either at
lichen
liheare
'hig�� qicvtiqt or in -deep gorges;,usually'found''
onx6i'tidAl rock faces where seepage occurs
Bog turtle
Clemmys,
T(SIA)
Yes; bog turtles inhabit,sh0low, spring-fed
rriuhlenbergii
f6iis, §Pfi4gfium7bq hy
gs� s)kLarnps,mars
meadows,, and pastures which havel.s6ft, muddy
I
bottoms cool, st ow%flawiftg
rj, en:
w t ff
bf1ri ts; d 6pe n.-canopies-,
i — ihreatened;,e—Endangereq;,'I'(S IA) —1breatened'duc to,Similanty,,ot-,Ajj
5.2.10 .Cultural Resources
t
Natural 'HerjM,Prd.eram
Basedl,on A review of"fie-WiP database, ihere;are no Si gniticant Natu'r' al within one mile_
radius of the Site:(NCDENR, 2013). However, the'Sife is surrounded by`the­'Pi'sgah National Forest.
Stale Historic Preservation Oeke
Based,on a -reView of 'records from ifie,Siate_Hi'stonc,Preservition Offiice; ­ifie are no properties listed on
the, National - Rdgikef"withift A one mile radius of the Site (&C-SAPO, 201'0); However, the ,Sisk Farm is
included on the,Study.List, for NC (Site ID' BK0090). Inclusionih the Study-List does not guarantee that
Aie Sitc4s,cligible -folisting, of the'Ndfongl ;Rqigter and State J'aW ddeg not rovjdd,'Pjotebjion
f0j:
i
tqpdftie s thdt,dte d6termiiiedefigiblc,btit;not listed, in t h
cNationa]'Register. The Project is not expected
to. affect buildings .or 'homes located on -the- Sisk Farm. however, ICA- will .coordinate with NCSHPO
d4fiLig preparatiomof the CategoiicFafEk6lusidn document and,addrie-ss•-any c6innithtsAtIliat iiind.
5.2.41, Floq4p1gin Compliance
Review of,thd FW*Ain Mapping P-r6gtainwebsit& and the effective.Flood,Insurance Rate Map (FIRM)
-nainstem of 'Roses 6re6k -is.
Map Number 3710.1'76600J Effective Date, September- 5-1 2007 indicates, the i
within, a2pnd AE ankp4q, of A, detailed ;stud�,,, Th&ef6te a,A90:--RAS analysis Will'be pi-epared, add4s a
27
Engineering

Roses Crcck Stream Mitigation Site
RF,P# 16'-'005207: Cataloging Unit 03050101 of the Catawba River Basin
result of, the•.Liniitej Detailed .Flood Study a,CLOMRafidlbf LOMB will be -req#eCas part of this
project. Cross- sections 267'. 2,7.8 and 288 are, within the project boundaries. Base, flood eleyaiions. on site
are shown—as-1222t6 4237. UT 1, UT-2 and•UT3,are,not;modeled.
5.2:12, ConslrdM6
Roses Creek �_ The clianfidl-will tie into existing:blqvdfidii.s at the upstream and d-Ownst.ream, extremities of
the project as.meft as,at,thc cxistinglIxoad/driveway crossing. The existing single span bfiq$d-,bbFisi§ts.of,a
timbe Wahk-deck on rough, ,cut,'tiniber,Nea s sup
_-T P in- ported, by vertical concrete abutments; The=,bridge
crossing: ihg, is and '10 feet long and drosses the thannO at the existing top bf'.bank.., _.Any_
up e will maintain or raise the .1 w dhotdiel&vilfio-n�bf-z�.the-���,..--,;
.grades _the�llandowner may perform to,the'bn. 9 .6
UT'l_--T.be-}tiibut4ry.',sur)stream elevation is controfled,by an agricultural.path and culverted
Tbe,:downstream=eley a tfoh- will de. into Creek. Qp� existing crossing, wilbe_'replaced;=_
Th
ross hg-ishnfidi djo id ary
pdt� :bq�a:clilVdrtfend&,d'�i�ii�bbdi� &sViih. gates At the. caseffentbound_
u -the outlet device of the, upstream poA&_- The
_UT, 2 —The trib
ptarys'upstream elevation is controlled by
dowibstfeath-,,eidvati'oh-twill• tfe!-inib,,,the, Roses Creek. There is an cxiftifig
crossmg-thiit-is --to be.maihtained-.%., One additional crossing.•is required near-Rosles,.Creeks.0 -allow-- the:,:--
sJaciliiy-_withoVt. requiring an additional,-, crossing -.on - the Rosc,: Creek.
-landowner :'6i at --bi
o
per- 0.
-crossing beiiig-� gToposed;-,.Otiliibsza.- culvert' ;dndt!a fenc& on the ,cattle side.
requite, iencing<along.the driveway.-
UT'3 - Additional casement is proposed, 6 constraints, on UT'3. Currently;, -the:
landowner and cattle .utilize ,this crossing to access;a smd1l,pasttwe,6ri the 'south side for ,-.:
grazing,purpos cs.
The proposaF includes. purchasing slightly more easement to remove 'this pasture from use .and thus: '-.--..
rpin.pve the need- for a' .stream crossing. Both, UT 3 and Roses. Cre6k,will benefit from the additional -
buffer.
53
The Proposal d6cihndJnts'thr6d-(3) MitigatiMO-tibhs that ICA Engineering bagAdtermmt d may best suit--
p
the EEP's goals' for�the•pfdposed,catdloging unit. 'TheiMitigation,Options,arcddtAdd.h.sfollows:
The Proposal documents -three: (3) Mitigationb ptions thatICA Engineering has,determied'. ima best`suit.,,.
z - . ­ .,-
the EEP!s, goEdgfor the proposed - cataloging unit. 'The'M itigifiqn Options° are detailed as follows:
The proposed miti'gat'ion fgation includes, the,.three options. The mitigation optibris include various, piftntiat
mitigation Meth6ds to 'Rose Creek -and UT's 1 thr6u 9 h 3. The potential mitigation. methods for each
-
cbar;Ln'cfaredetaf1ab6l6*. See Map-3A through 3C f8r,Pfbp6ged'�&tigiti6h,M-a--p-s-.
Roses C&&--_AeW&dtion-
kest-oratibn of , 116se-s,t-reek is prbp6sed in all three ififfigatio-n- options. The' channel is severely de&ddd
for, the, I 419 _c maj_orfty,ofthc Site,,-exhibiting massive �amounis .oPsedim- ent, (from c-
fianncis �andlnve4j, and
hur!ehtTftdMcattle) f620ing to 664ite and doWhgiffearn receiving waters. P ropo 6 d mitikAtion aefivifies
-on Roses Creek includes restoring bank height, ' ratios ' to -1,.0 - through- Priority restoration; meandering the
,channel -away from eiisting,hi 9 h '(hill)'bafiks and back to 'the tow point of the valley, providing bankfull
Benches (minimum infinutri of 1''5. feet) as restored channels tie to, flie, existing= channel at the --u - ireatn and
channels w - -.1 - - - - .- --- . - . - _p� -
downstream extents, restoring natural location and spacing of rAfte-podl scqucficcs, ibstallati6ii oflog and
rock'strilctures for - grade confiol and habitat improvement, restbration'of a vegetated- riparian biffer., and
removal :of agriculturil,operation from the channel .,ah6riparian buffer thtouA fencing. The proposed
pe-, 28
Ehg1fideVinij

Roses' Creek Stream Mitigation Site
•RFP #' 16= 005297: Cataloging Unit 03,050.101 of the Catawba River Basin
restoration limits all ;agricultural operations to the- existing road crossing: By providing a, dry gated
.crossing on UT 2 and;cattle movement plan-to the landowner, the proposed restoration includes removing,
all agricultural operations from Roses Creek without- the need for an additional crossing. Currently the
Oak Hill Fire. department.has the ability, io -.utilize Roses Creek. at.the driveway crossing as a water' intake,
point for•tlieir fire engine. A concrete slab. has, been placed, in the channel to create scour for the, intake.
The• proposed. mitigation, plan. will remove the ,concrete,slabs and place a rock cross =vane iii its place, to,
allow for natural scour toallow the 'fire department °wafer- intake in times of need. Per discussion with,the
local Chief-(Winters),'the concrete structure may be replaced -with a -vane type structure. Ite Water'Point
-is a state certified water point;_ however, there'is�_not'an� - ment- :•(personal communication, August 26;
_ .
20.1,3).
-- Y It is anticipated -that restoration. of a, stable- dimension; pattern:and profile will provide, uplift in phy §ical
-_ - - . -- chemical and biological function 'to- Roses ,Creek•,aud' downstream- receiving waters by 1.) substantially
reducing sediment. (both' fine• and.coarse)- {loads• from_the chanueLbank and= invert, 2:) creating stable and
_.. . productive 'in; stream habitat through a;more,natural plan for geometry: fKat promotes - riffles aiid pools; 3')
introducing, woody" materials; into the, channel such as; vegetated >soil lifts;' toe" wads; and'aog'structures "thaf
will provide.refuge habitat for,_fish and,semiaquatic species;, foraging habit.•for macrobenthos; channel
s
..depth variability„ stream shading and' nveit_`stabilization 4.); conifdeting1igher "than bankf dl' flows ,to'its
:. abandoned floodpl"ain through PI rest6rati6v- will' decrease channell•shear stress; = promote attenuation of
flood` waters across the -btoad 'floodplain; drop ,and store auspended:;solids° on the floodplain; filter'
- -- -` = nutrients; pesficides and otherpollutants; and rcliydratc,the riparian buffer- f&AU'dw for grater': V dwat '
:. • - and.surface water, storage,and:interaction. = :-
Restoration of a riparian buffer through Roses'Creek'.s easement area will promote terrestrial, -aquatic and
semiaquatic foraging, propagation; and, cover habitat; will connect Roses Creek's ri parian corridor with
- . upstream and' downstream wooded riparian, buffers; and will --enhaned--the floodplains ability to uptake
nutrients and settle.otherpollutants -feom above'bankfull events.
Roses Creek — .Enhancement I' -
Mitigation Option 2 proposes Eriliancemcnf I of Rosen Creek through downstream portions of theSite .in•
at section that currently exhibit's- tortuous ineaiiders. Proposed mitigation activities include- cxoluding'
-- :catthe`.through fencing, planting, a native.,riparian buffer land -restoring a= stable dimensiorrAnd,profile
- 2. through this portion of the channel that currently displays a riffle =pool complex'that,is migrating down
-valley;- :heaving,fifllesin meander!bends and pools filling with- -sedinieritArom:upstream,;and- adjacent -batik,
= erosion:-4t-is anticipatedthatsignificant -cross-sectional manipulation through channel• sloping --soil lifts
,and potential radii changes will be required to, stabilize the channel's banks:- Profile- modifrcitiori-iin ^the=
'foiin of Construction ,of.nffles:andpools:iu,proper morphological' locations -will'be-required.-- Constructed
1- Affles:fhai utilize .natural channel materiat,and channel structures ;such, as log and rock vanes can be
expected.
It:is atiticipatedthat restoration' of ;A stable dimension and profile w- ill- provide,uplift in :physical- chemical'
'and biological function, to Roses Creek and downstream ,receiving waters liy l;.) substantially reducing
sediment loads' fi=om the channel bank ,and invert',. 2.)l creating ,stable 'and productive in- stream habitat
through a more natural plan forgeometfy that promotes riffles and pools; 3:) introducing•wood' material` -s
into the channel such as vcgcfat'ed soil- _lifts;_ todwads;'and,log 'structures that will provide refuge habitat
for fish and semiaquatic species, foragingr habit for• macrobenthos; channel depth variability stream
shading and.invert stabilization.
Restoration. of a riparian buffer will ,promote terrestrial, aquatic and semiaquatic foraging, propagation,
and coycr babiiat; will connect'' Roses Creek's riparian corridor -with upstream and downstream, wooded
.29
E 9nglheeronq

Roks Creek Stream Mjfig4tj
kft,'Site
10#46-- 00520,7:,`Catal giiig,U-r�tO365,0'1,,�ol,of,theC.'
-9 . - - Catawba
riparian buffers;, and will _enhance ,the floodolains ability ,to ,uptake nutrients and settle „oilier pollutants
from ibqvq Wgh-4o events:
ents.
'Roses�tcreek--,Enii,itcemejif,iii,
Th_d.-dqwnstredff-,'ni6st 8'6.feet,,of,,-Xqsp§ Crqpkjs prqposed�for,,Fnhaff6ement--Il� by-excludihg', cattle through
-fihg,,aAa4ve ;Afltfirde-:blltigiiticihcO-Pti6:ds This �fc ch'i,
,r6ridihg, dfid.,Plin arian s Px9miq
",,.Ejjbancefnejit,-11',-,iif:dU:--,6pti'ohLs 'because the morph6iogicaCco'n-ditions are relAtively bt
Ptd - tj owev h , - I _
H p bu� is sparse;. "Excl usiona prping1 xemove,cat
ld,fron,
th e streams aAj n” p ana dfer,Wli i -af i 6wfor - A j
channel to - r-nd ah'i nh tain'- A,, stable dimension; jp—a,ft
em. an
profile while,rcffioVi6g1Vatev-q it y stres
sors reWed to the effects of 16e, cattle o peration. Planting -a.-
-
"b Lffei Win�iiefeasmg,fittrdtibn,6f i1i mtg throu h ttfeiestore d rindrp buffer,and wil enhariee,
ieffegirial. and-,ser.rii-aqUatic~babitat4:--
UTA Restorati6fi.,
proposed - -,'f restorati6h df pattern; ,pfofilb,, dimension ,aiid,-iipar".,bfffet in Optio#s:j -:246r,'
its,,entitd lengih-Within tMe Sites -'The ,existing channel display lift 1ilgW
little no stable y 'functioning. -- -
reaches "w`ithin =Elie - Site. _and 'i's highly - entrenched within ibb landscape.- Ad_ ditionally. OT I 4s highly!'
impactd-,",by-cat& and: human- ifiinip:dtatibn.,ands, &igpjay-s� virtually ,no deep Mooted fipafiamv60tatibn_­ :-
Prop6s dmiiigation�-- ac&ifi6s, on.Roses Cre&Jn6W&s restoring a stable dimensibn, pattern, i3rdfild.and.'
riparian buffei-'.throiigb-Piiority I,,r;egforati'on.. :T1id--dhannerWiU.,6q jqstqteO: ffoirrits current- straight iline .-.
,path4bdck,,'io,i6&-)Iow-polnt:bf the'natuid valley., '. One - §ectioii,6f 'the clidnneVs- historic tneaiidi
been identified in `the upstrearri'vollfions'df -the Site and will'be,'restored"backAo, Ahis location. A morer',
natural riffle-,po6l,se-q4(Acp 00 ftitan c , cometryvill be,restdre to, UT'I. The installation, of soilAi-fts',
brush toes, Jog, siW .and rock A ps,w h erc,needed, dfee aftti6patdd'to Ibe, utihiM in the; degigh to stabilize
chamdl'bdnks;and,inveit ,,',Exclusionary fencin 9 is;,pyop4?sed;io'removc,,cattfetfrom the,strearn channef,and
riparian' buffer:
It is aitic1P afied,thdv restoration-of a stable, dimension,
pattern ;and prof le will, provide uplift; Thy ` §icdI
chemical and, bi6logical 1uh&ti'O-D'Vq UTA and Roses,Crecks,by, 1) 4tib4taiffidlly reducihiz� fine sedinient
loads fromstlie, channel banks and =invert (due.to- scour,aud.hoof`sli'ear from cattle }; 2-,,),cKqqqng4tabIe, and
.ProductiVeLin-'stream,h biiat,,tbLrough,-,a,more natural ,,O.I'ah-foiba,g66nictry ,that p-i6nidfdg�,'riMes, ,and,p l§j
-3'.)in't-rod4c"mg-woody,maieiiAfs,•into-,'the6hann6l,sfich--as-,,veii6tatbd' soil lifts ;,briiih,toes,;iindjog,s-th!4btures,
depth. vafia>i „ stream, :shading andAu'verVstabitization 4-) co fedT­ 9. "h1 iCT­th­ W balUdIl" flows 46;its,
abandoned, fjoO4plainAhrougb,--P1 restoration m4ff-debrease•,6annel shear' stress; ,T)r6tnbt'e attenuation of
jflo6d Mtees; ,adrd§§ -the. broad- -floodDIdin drop hnd store; 'suspended solids on, the -Mbd[bladh. filter
'nuteients, pesticides and, otherpollutants,,and rehydr6tefhe fipan-'aftbifffef, to:d . lI6W'fqf gfdtdY grdiftidWatdf
and sur&qezwaferstcrage
�pd interaction,
Restoration of 'a riparian,, bufferthrough,Rosds Creek-` s,,easement,arewwAi prombte�teiRekfialj 6--adfic4nd
,5pMt4qpti.q-fg!�qging,-,.prop.4g'iiion. �andicover2,habftat; will conffecf•to Roses,Creek,s,.riparian:;lcoiTidor-,a:nd,
Will CiUi"&d the- lfloodp-lains kil :to ,uptake nutrients and `settle Otkdr • pQjI _ iqtaht&
Offi,atm- e ibankfull
ev6hts'.
One ;existihg crossing will be remomed and replaced- with Ad uptfittdd' crossing that ttfdeqlyatej y coveys'
,
:flows �ar�daticiws'for-�caiite,crossi4gs�thro'g Ahe buffir wi&ut:i�pacfingJhe, siream,dhannel or, restored,
vegetation:
. .- - . - ­ -1 - - - - _ u-, h
UT I— Tjihanceinen•l
Optiob_8 proposes s-e's- 'Efiliancenierit' 1 Tor •he jcntircty• of UT, I with iii, they Site:, it 'is anticipated' ,fhat-
' - 7�
-Efthanicemietit, I mitigation will aim to, manipulate the- existing cbantiel,to- create a istiible,dimeihsidn and,
30,
En, gl'neeering

Roses-Creek Sfream,Mitigation Site
RFP#- 16-005297; Cataloging Unit 0,3050101 of the Catawba River Basin
profile that conveys flows and sediment through the Site without displaying teaches 'that aggrade,or
degrade, Asmis seen in 'the. existing, conditions. Additibnally�, exclusionary fe7hcijkg, will be installed to
reffi6ve•cattic,from the streamefiannel . and adjacedt'restored,,riparian buffer. It s<anfidipated that,channel
dimension and profile will be restored -to, a•more natural,pool -i I I spacing; ­ - and m be manipulated, to
to-�pbp spacin& Ap - may
ihe extent practical 'enough to invert 6 rdi§&,dhkfuidI i6ve , an allow b5hMIL 116*9 to access the abandoned
&odplain..- .-Restorafibn,,jf- 6fidnhdl,ptofilesand.,dimensibn,WilI
_hq�fidedjby,- the use of channel, ,structures
such ias 'log sills. drop structures; brushloes�and'sdil lifts.
It is,anficipated that restoralion,of'a stable, dimensibn,and proffle.,v�,ill,ppqvi4e,� in- physical chemical'
waters �b J. db
and biological fandion to. UT Ladd dowristreAtt, receiving. wa .
-S aUy, reducing sediftient
lbads, -fthi"the channel bank and, invert, 2.) creating stable and- productive JITY-:stream habitat through A
more natural plan for geometry, that promotes riffles: and pools, ihko
_duei4g-,woo4y materials into the
-y getiie& soillifts, brush toes; and log structures -that-AlLgTq -refuge
channel such as . C_ - P
yidel, habitat for fish
and serniaqpatic species,, for aging habit for macrobenthbs, stream-shading and,
.--invert stabilization.
-Restoration of a riparian buffer will promote terrestrial, aquatic. and• semiaquatic, foraging, propagation,
and will.conned UT I's rip ..-With, Roses C-te6Vs,woodcd riparian buffers and !,
. riparian corrid 0 r,
in d w
will enhance; thefl'oodplamis abilit Ao, uptake puthents,.Afi settle, other - .pollutants: above high, flow
ability
..to'
Qpq existing crossing,'will,0e, removed and replaced With, an Up-,fitttd-.dfoss_ihg--that,-ade-"tely coveys
.q
flbWs afid;alIoWsfdr,cfitffe crossings through the he buffer without, impactingtthe st#aml chann6l,orrestored
i.ng
vegetation.
_U T 2 - Restoration
Restoration of UT'2?s dim6ision,paftern, profile and riparian buffer ,indaddition-to,ex-clusionky,f6ncing is
proposed in Opfibns I and 2. UT 2 will 6e restored through the pasture- within -the Site, beginning at the
upstream- agricultural dfbssifigy and, ending at its convergence, with Roses Creek. The current channel has
been, modified and moved from its natural valley 'position to ,a point at which .it--flOws.adjacent io the
existing s6ilroad.. BaWcfull.flows are entrenched mi'the landscape afid,arc iband6ndd from the,historic
floodplai
-
causing hikh,stress bn the channel -banks. The channel will be.restoredback.to.the,-Iow:poiot.of
the valley and moved 1 away from the' soil, road that currently flows alofig.,the left b of the, channel'
-ManipqlAtiq.riof thd channel, rip�iridfi lhAiffer restoration, and �exclusionafY fcFndiiig *iIijbii.hic ddtails`fistdd
•in- UT-1 = •Re§toratioh, Additib-nallyjimetional uplift will -mimic those detailed. in, U.T.1 — Restoration..:-
One,culvert,crossiig...wilt-,be installedatthe downstream end ,of-UT.2 thdtwilLadcquatcly covey. flowsabd:_�_
allows f6r�dattlecr6ssingg-throughtlid buffer without impacting tbe•9tf&am chAnh6l.6t,liest6f6d,Vegetatiohr.•
-of-th&duIvdttat this i6catibn allows.t6r,no addit"
Plac ffierit ion6l crossings over Roses,,Creek.
U.T-11 = Enhancement-1
.Alklifee-options detail v-ar-lous,,i6ngths,,of-EAancement,l on; ur,2. Options I and2 detail; Enhancement l'
of, "a portion, of UT 2 immediately, upstream Of :the existing P culy6fidd �rosssingg. Option 3 detail's
Enhancement I bn-,a Opftioh,bf UT I i m-imedidte 1V 0§tfeaffi i .of the ng. culverted. crossings, while also
completing Enfiancemer�t"Li mitigation ,aciivities on'the channel for its entirety 'through the pasture ,to ,its
,
convergence with Roses, Creek-. TM,aisfing4dil -road would ibe xeVired to ti6jj(& d outside 00
T. .
riparian Waffir zone. Manipulation of the, channel, riparian ;buffer restoration and exclusionary fencing
will mimic details listed 'in OT' I —Enha:ncienfent .1. Additionally,,, fikctional uplift will mimic those
deiailed.int�r--I,-Enhaifce-md-nt,'I. One culvert crossing will beiiistAllcd at, ifie'down9tream, end of UT 2
that will adequately covey flows and allows for cattle crossings* through the, buffir-without impacting-the
stream channel Or- restored vegeiaiian. - Placement of the culvert- at this location, alldW9, for no additional
Creek:
31
Kngoneerong

Roses Creek,Stream Mitigation Site
RFP#- 16-005297:, Cataloging'Unit 03050101 of the Catawba River Basin
Ail three mitigation options propose -.Enhancement, M on. UT • •from, 'the upstream, limits of the
conservation- casement, to a point gPpq9jigikfqly 56, feet u p stream of 'flip first,culveried, crossing.
fimi y
,,dctiVitid9 will in6lddO,,,plEfiitfiig, of a native :nVA existing hight'-
'maintained'buffers, removal ofinvasive speciesadjacent-to the,channel land- stabiffizAtion-o T any I areas, of
'Bank siabilization - will' by �gloDe,
the existirig,'6haiinel that display V44 wcss I -or scour., wi
stabilization, -vegetative plantings and/6r brush -toes- and soil lifts. Planting A hpaii'd-h-, buffki will
:increasing filtration' of 'nutrients through the testored:nparian-buffer and wiftxnhance� terrestrial and serni-
aquaiit,hahiiiat.
UT _3 - Restoration
moipaiatio-ri,df the channel, riparian buffer rb§tUfAfiofi And exclusionary fencing Will mimie Aetail SL IiSiod
in UTT— kestoration. AdditionaUyi:fil#ctionaliiphft-wiU mimib,those detailed in UT 1, — Restoration.
All tbfee:mitikatidh qPtibris,,pr6pose td restofe,.UT Ifdpitg dntJi&y_-through,thc,Sit'e. U T3-is _,dheadwater;
spring,f6d dhannel; that has been, moycd,from,-its,natural -vaUcy.positibn to the toe of'slbpe,, of-thd adjacent,
hill slope along,ihe -adjacent pasturc,. -A largc,§poil; berm, is situated betweentheleft bank. of UT 3,and, the
low point' of the valley; Which hag;dau.s6d base -flow ,seep from the chann&to a,wetlslou
gh adjacent to the
spoil berm. The-proposed rdstorationrincludes meandering the .-channel,alongithe natural valley ina single-,
thread.channel. Dimension and profile. will, be restored .with- an. appropriate rriffle-l)ooI sequence through
the IoW:pdiht -of, the- -valley.. All agricultural Operatidds inc i i fg grazing cattle Will,b fei6ed out of the
tributary,. One channel crossing wiiI.be r_emovdd-frbm-.use.bedausc-tk adj4defitpasture (off of tight bank
(east,bank-)) will be purchased as part of the conservation easement and removed, from ,agricultural use
and plantedwith native riparian vegetatiom Manipulation of,the chann&,,ripgrian buffer restoration and
exclusionary'
.XcIiisi . onary fencing Will M"IMICde't'dil-s listed .*in UT � Restoration. Additionally, uplift_, Will
__ - - Y, functional I -
mimic those detailed in UTI — Restoration.
All Oofiord!
p
Priority 4, restoration, will, be utilized throughout,the site to, the extent - . ractfedl. All channels will be
constrained by tic .in elevations upstream ,and. downstream. The�mainstem will also tie into the existing
profile at.thp,r6ad/dfiveway crossing.
.,Several in- stream woody, structures such•as densely yegetated,soil-lifts; 4oe; wads -Tog,sills,and.cover logs,
are antitiptitdd to bd incorporated into the• channel design. -The. final baAdull -channel size will tie
.:._..-.determmied. during, the Mitigation Plan; however prelimiq'ary data suggests 'that- the ,channels will be-
.-dpsignedtas,moderately'low width -to -depth ratio�C type channels that convey the banlcfiiil -discharge.
-A
.Alt,of-,� the,,, channels have area.suft'd'ient f6maintain:perenniat flow under n6ftAl
:rAffi, conditions. According to the; s 'conducte streams do the-'Eastem 'Blue .Ridge
study -4 �yNC13WQ,
Foothills "th & - ----- gfeafet than 9.8 -acres hhVe�a ftni'al probabili. 90 ,percent: Streams:in
o wi amap�afeaCs
p&re
the Northern Oder Piedmont with,drdinage areas",gre6ter than 41.3 abre&ILive a 90 ,percent perennial.
probability, (FH%�j2608). UTLand LJT'3�bave dfainage.�a�eas of',35.and 10,jc�pecti'vcl . 'LJ-T'3 -has the
- - - - . ­ I _ ­ ___ - __ I _ - * .1 .- - - I ­ � y
srft4llest drainage area (10 acres); howOdr, it :is spring ifed. All three ,tributaries Wdfc flowing Whdn
observed.during,field visits on-August 8; 2013 and'August 21, 201-3.
A riparian, buffer populated with.nativ.e. vegetative- species will be piovided. on, each side of the channels
through the Site. The buffer width includes, the required 301 stream buffer for a mountain buffer,
a-ppji&4ble tij* Burke Coiifityi ICA Engineering Will flag. and survey all trees 12" -and greater. Within the
buff6r to ;ensure protection of mature vegetation during design and subsequent, construction. Any portidii
32
EnSigheering

Roses Creek Stream Mitigation Site,
RFP# 16- 005297: Cataloging Unit 03050101 of'the Catawba River Basin
of-the existing buffer that isremoved io facilitate restoration,of the channels will be replanted with native
vegetation characteristic of a Piedmont/ Mountain 'Bottomland:Forest'(Schafale & Weakley 1990).
The desired.-plant community and species types will ,be established -by utilizing,a reference forest system,
but,may inclu&species found; within the wooded forest alongthe existing channel andjupstream;of Roses
Cieekand the UT's: .Planting 'densities of bare- .root, species, at .approximately 700 trees,.per;acre are
:anticipated for the restored vegetative buffer. Soil amendment's may, be added duiing:and- following'
construction to promote grass and tree growth within the disturbed areas on -site. Signs will = -be posted-
: - along_the .-easement boundary to clearly demarcate the,easement boundary�for the land "owners,
- • . _ � : Stream,.Crossin�..; ' �� .- - , . _. : .
.;Roses. Creek -- There 'is one existing`bridge,over Roses Creek (Sisk Farm,Road) that;is to remain in:place
(KjjP_L3A h 3C): The existing bridge crossing is '15 feet wide and 20 feet; lopg. The,- single.span
:: bridge• consists- of .a timber- plank decking on rough cut timber, beams suppoited:by: vertical - cohcrete-
abutments: ; :The,czi`sting!bridge,.crosscs the channel at 'the existing`top of bank �andyany,upgrades that:the
'landowner• may perform will maintain or, raise the low chord elevation of'the bridge, 'By providing the = _ • -
,..: = landowner .access across - .the:.tributaries and ,at the existing road/driveway, 'no- additional crossings .over,
- Roses Creek! are being- - proposed ;Agricultural operations `including equipment` and -'cattle will iio-.longer
:- -- ,- -=have direct .access- to-Roses Creek: _ • ..__
All crossings will: :bc = for - :..driveway;, ,farm equipment and/or cattle. ,access, and 'are,. anticipated =.to . be
. -dry/culverts.• , Crossings will• -be fenced : and. gated to restrict .cattle access. No -ford' °crossings --are
anticipated:. Approkirnately tlircc percent of'the - `- ct�will be, segmented by-cfossings.
The proposed site will - contain four.(4) stream crossings: one crossing on,. Roses` Creek, one crossing on.
UT l-arid'two,crossings,:on UT 2.,The cfoss rig on UT 3,will be'removed.
UT 1 —The existing crossing-on UT 1- will be re- established approximately 200 feet upstream of -Roses
Creek (Map 3A, 3B and 3C). The- proposed',e ossing will be with;a corrugated,metal pipe culvert.crossing
approximately- 40=feet in'leugth..-- The'1°andowner, intends to use the crossing as; cattle access for adjaccinti
pastures; `therefore, fences will be installed; along the crossing to •restrict- cattle access to UT 1.-- Gates will -
also bc'installed,at each end _of the crossing:-
UT 2 — On crossing -on UT-2, will be= established approximately 100. feet upstream of Roses -Creek, to
allow eattle.3moverimeritt.betweeii •pastures without crossing tiie inainstetn of Roses Creek., Tlie 40. fogt
wide corrugated' metal, pipe: culveit3 crossing:will. be fence and gated., The existing driveway, and cfossing
will be maintainedhe- established 600 feet= upstream of Roses 'Creek (Map 3A through 3C). The,
agricultural crossing will be- approximately -:55' fief -wide corrugated metal pipe •culv-crt crossing. The,.
agricultural, portion. of this 'crossing• will'b'e- fenced- and gated. The driveway portion will not requite
fencing`or gates.
UT 3 — The crossing -on UT-3 will be ^removed.as part of iherproposed restoration. The,proposal'�includes
purchasing slightly more. easement than required'to obtain a, small pasture on the south side, of UT 3: By
acquiring,'the pasture, the-crossing,on`UT 3'becomes unnecessary. Both UT 1and;the;mainstem of Roses
Creek will;benefiffrom the•additional buffer.,
Cattle Mangeement.Plan
There are four main pastures on the property-, ICA Engineering developed .­a Cattle Ivlanagement'Plan
With the landowner such that the landowiuer,can.prov`ide water -to cattle and effetti'yely rotate pastures
without allowing -cattle direct access to.R'oses .Creek and' UT's ,l through 3. The landowner- will install.
offline water. devices for the cattle -in all four. pastures. The cattle will•be allowed to graze in one of,the'
1,C 3.3'
Eng0n6 eB'i ft

Roses Creek Stream.Mitigdtion Site
R,FP#* 1,6-005297-.- Catalogifig,UAit 03050161 -of the Catawba River Basin
pastures ,ata time and -rotated to, the next p4sture,, by. is is'eries fof 'basement and driveway gates. Gates .will'
be, installed on both sides 6f-,Sisk Faim 96-ad's bridge - bvdf Roses Greek as Well atdacktribiita�y drossffig.
To best accomplish the projecOs goals, thc•smail.gta�zing pasture on the.south side of 'UT 'UT 3 is proposed to
be, 'Included -M'- the, Conservation EasdAfent and• removed from the existing available pastures; thus the •
crossft4dn U T3 will be.rehioved.
The:-'pr9pbs­ed fencing meets; the Barbed Wfre Fence S pe6 i fica on,.02 eO on, EE P
's,b6ttal,
developed by the US D- epartment of Agriculture -(USDA) Natural Resources- Conservation ge-tvidd
2012), Per the, specification, -the barbed wile fence -proposed is•a--rfbur-staAd; fence along all
.pastures. A three ,"strand fence ndy;hd utilizedalonifdrice lines only utilized, for, tfidp kp ose, of
rotating,
"cattle into pastures. Fence posts are Allowed,at 12 foot spacib&
EaSdne?ft.BOiMddrV P?Weedon
= >__ �.A fence will -be ,piaccdon,th& land owner's side of the easement boundary: -M -.Will'b6'� rovided- in;
*kiiik -P
the f I _--
qrm_�()f sfpagp and fencing, will demarcate. the bounds, of the conservatiow,easemptiv Yith the
7
OX cdption ,ihdUfkrca bori6n6fUT2whcrc�ign 9 w i
c utilized (fdncing.isfiot-,p
-.Ihvdsivt,-Reinovdl -and Riparian Le Zetahon Plan
:-:--:.Inv6giVc.and = nuisances Dci-,icis such as Chinese privet will be clear -to ;-aiid.-tr6atq,.,-if-pe�pes�s�..-to-..-.-.,
-0d,
cnsure--that-re7colonizati6n-,is.deterred.
-.ill l.,and--it§
planting - ,plan. w .:bd completed that reintroduces native species zones alon&. ft ,chahne
­assoc ti ure,&
associated, that currently hav6jittl&vegeta on or are dominated by, past'
-dM
The vegetated lb r wiU,extend through the required 30 foot stream buffer to the propoged -conse atio
ry ft
easement boundary. Voget channel banks will be specieS.that,,rpqt- quickly to, -
.__ __ ., _nt _Vegetation to planted' the
helv addstabilit-to-the-alidady disturbedsdils,in and adjacent to thd, dhaddel. Vegdatioji,f6.be pidtit6d'ih
_,y
the: f1bodplain zone will be characteristic of a Piedmont/Mountain Bottoniland Forest (9chafate
Weakle y 1.990 ). Plantings will ,focus on• vegetation which will provide long -terhi foraging °and habitavfor
Planting,of a:.'n'parian buffer zone on -site will benefit both -aquatic and terrestrial flora, and -fauna �as---­­­
-
existing WO 6 t stream banks is sparse. A.mature, veizetated,buffer -zone will, filter
__0�4y k/ ge atibn along the
nutrients from, sheet flow. and overbank flows" provide cover and fof4ging areas- for terrestrial -animals;
-i'& --a y of local vc etafibn that will voluntarily rootz insidq, of,,thc.-u is b d
easement;: provide prov -.npwhabftat-.-fbi diversity nd tur 0
__g
woody: ftrisjcs,the re§t6r6d stream
chandel to To
promote, 'aq#E_ttic'hfo•_ p pagatiOn and -.:
-coyer;,and,provide asWildlife-corridor,for teitestridl'.gnimgLs;.aniphibians,,and aquafic�fauna:. ­
Pr-Opoied Midg-a-ti6i,
T-4is,,pTop6sal,,details:Uiice,Mitigation 0
ptjom,that are described below:
Rosds Creek _ Rdstofd%difnensio4,.,pAttern, prdfilc and riparian, l5uffor•and LCO[t - tie exclusion (fencing) toy=
3,456' existing 'feet (2;168 restored feet) of Roses Crock. Enhancement H 'through cattle excipision,
(fe_aq g),4,ndbpffer-,pjptiiig§ of, 86 existing feet ofRoses'Creek.
UT 4 Restore -dimension, pattern, profile and riparian buffer and cattle exclusion (fencing• to 870
existing linear feet of OT 1' (873- restored feet).
UT 2' - Restore 'diinensibn,,pattein, profile and riparian, buffor:and, catile,exclugion'to-630 existing- linear
feet (715 restored feet). 8ii-h-ancefficnt fihrough dimension, profile an,d,iipariari baffer- restoration of 519
.34
Engineering

Rosbs•Creck.Strcam•tigation Site
'RE-P# 16-005297: Cataloging Ui2it 03050101 of the CatawbaRivd, Basin
existing linear feet. Enhancement, 11 through '..invasive species removal ,and' riparian buffet restoration, of
336 eki�g.tifig*dat,fedt.
UT 3, - Resforc dimension, pattern; "pro;�lq and riparian buffer and cattle exclusion (fencing) to 3,81
dxistin ,ket.(398 restored feet) qftj-T-.3.,
0 lian I
Roses , C-7ree k, - 'Restore dimension, pa:ttem,.,profife,and'n-;pari-an,, buffer ,and cattle ,exclusion (fencing) to
2,773 &iskog fdet-(2; 835 resiorcd.-f6c -:oPRqscs-.Crcck. Enhancement I through addition of-structures;
dimension adjustments, bank- w,6rL:dnd ;riparian buffer restoration of 661 dkisfing, tiAear feet.'.
Enhancement II through cattle exclusion,- (fencing), and bLiffir plantings of 168 existing feet of Roses
Creek.
UT I - Restore dimension, pattern-;:py6fj e -..and: riparian• buffer and cattle exclusion (fencing) to 870
existing lihear. feet of UT 1' (0-3- restored feet): .
UT 2 -'Restore ,dimensibn;,,,p4ttem;,.prdfile,and-rilDarian-buffet- and, cattle, exclusion,to 630 existing linear
feet-,Q 16. restoredfbet-V Xnhancemqrit-J, through imension- prqf1jptand,.ripArian buffer, restoration of 59
rough I - - I - -
cxi§tiiig, linear feet . Enhancement 11: throPgh.invasivIe species- remQyal and :riparian buffer restoration of
336 existing 71inear f6et.-.
UT 3 - Restore dimension, pattern, prpfild and - riparian buffer and -.cattle 'exclusion (fencing) to 381
existing.fe6t'(388,restored,feet).-ofUT'3.
-Option 3,
Roses -Creek—Restore dimension, patteth-,profile.and riparian.buffer and cattle exclusion. (fenci ng) 'to
3,374 existing feet (3,2.34 restored feet) of -Roses, Crcdk. Enhancement II ihrough cattle exclusion
(fencing) 40 buffer plantings of 168 existing feet of Kbses= Creek%
'UT I —En-hancement"I'through proAdin g an app ropnate.dimension, and restoring, the-profile and riparian
buffer of,916-existing Iftidarafeet.
UT, 2'- EiLhancement I through prpyiding p, apprqpriate'dirnensiowandring . .profile, to therqfile, and riparian
buffer of VS ,d istfiiia linear feet, -Enhancement -11,411t6*gh- ifiVasiv'e-, 's'p-Ac-�'tq's,r-dfi-joval,arid,rigatiam Wfitir•
restoration on- of 336 existing. Ifficarfeet.,
UT- 3 -- Restore dimension; pattern, profile AM iipafiae-.,buffer.,;irid--ciffle-di,luti67n (fencing) to 38,1
existing feet (388 restored feet) of UT 3.
TU,following, table detAlsi4the credits anticipated from 'tht,'Pr6posed Mftig4t im,-The estiniWdiarhodfi-t
prescnfcd,in' this proposil has been.rounded down to ensurethat the,contrabfican be fulfilled as proposed.
IC, 35
Englot6dring

Roses "Creek Stream Mitigation Site
M.416-00529T.Cataloging 0 Unit 3050101 of Catawba River,B�sin
- - I
'Table 6. Proposed
str e_ Am ­­76forafton
-1.1TE-nhancement
(SMU).
I — 1.5.q
omu)
Ehhancement"11 ­23:4'
(SMU).
Op-TIOW!
lif
87Z
UT 1
•675
.
39,
1.3-4•
UT 3
. . . .
389
........
ROSES CREEK
3� �168
34
Utal (SMU)
-_53,10
UT 1
872
,UT-2
0,5
134
UT3-
ROSES b&kk
2835
A . 00.
767
Tdtal,(SW
UT I
UT 2
476
134
UT 1
388
ROSES CREEK
3234
67
Totaki(sm-U) 4865,-
5.3 CurfenUOW6erMp. and,Lodg- Terni Protection-
' The Site,-is,compnised.of one property,owned by,,Robeft'h.-'8iskaiid''marthiiim,. "Si- . sk, (PIN'# 1176,74,79652).
Long term protection of the property is pr9posdd, through a conservation easement: The conservation
g
easeffd-titigp'fopggqdtbbettdTigfertedtdthdState:bfNdith,iC-a*'r-o-lia;k. Att,�ichediii-Ap'pe;i4ixCi$asigned
he EEP
and recorded Purchase Agreement -between the, propert�. owners and 10A Engineering and ;t,
LandownerAuthomation Form.
5.6 Project Phasing
The ptop--oged.'u,�roiedt,_schedule -is 't)resented below; This schedule does not account -for delkys due to
weather, resource ageney, coordination delays thf6ugb,pdftfiittifig'& dfiy otherma tsl�evond-ffic,control
ofthe ICAEngineering.Team.
36
L L
Engineering

Roses Creek Stream Mitigation Site
RFP# 16-0.05257: Cataloging Unit )03050'101 of the Catawba River Basin
Table 7.,. )Project Schedule
Task
Project Milestone
Months from Contract'Exeeuti6n
V
Document', and'Public'.MeeiinR
2
,4',
_CE
Submit Rec_ordedConservation Easeme& on the Site
6
NfitikafionTlailApproved by EEP
10
MitigafionSfie Earihwork, Completed
115
5;
:Mi�gafion,Siti�,Pt4diiilg and, Ins61lati6ii�dfMonit6i-
itigt
16
Devices
_.B4s6line,
Mohitbrin Report (inqjuding; As,7,Built
Drawings) Approved.by'EEP
7•
Submit.M6nit6_ring_,'Report #1 to EEP - (meets success
December I" fdllbwing
cfit6fia)
imoleinentation
-8,
SOm�-it'Moni t?,Report #2,tb EEP (meets success-
r�gRep
'Decembei 1' 2 years 6116wigg-
na),­
implemen ation
9
StibmAlAo"fi itoriZ Rdpott #3 to EEP (meets success,
Decembei 1q. 3`v6drs f6116wink-
implemerita ion-
1q__
Subihit Monitoring Report #4 to EE• (meets success-
Dereifivir'l'% 4--ve6r§�f6il6wiifg -
.criteria )-
7-imptementitidi-H
Submit-.&f6nif6ring-.Report-. W5:to'EEP (meets success
D6cemb .1.q'-5-kears-_following:_-_.
criteria)...':
irriplementation
1-2.-.
Submit 'Mo-iiitoring,geport.#6joI EEP (meets success-
December 1 "; 6'years'followmig-
I
P.cfitefia)t Z,
imptementation-
13,.,,Subiiiit-
,,Nlofiii6iiiig+Repoit,#7, to EEP (meets success,
December 15% 7 years,fbllbwing�:
criteria comp e 6ject
16t',pr­ 'Ci6sie-flat,
implerfientation
-�rk. is c mpletibn of each
The -§eope&:q -.W qmpn.'s;&qf thifteentasks, each with a detailed deliverable. Co
task will be considered completion ofa,ProieciMilestoneas:notedin the -Project Schedule-.-
'Task ,1— On -site Meetft, GE'Documeg-and Public, Meeting
ICA Engineering will,coiiduct'l-an on -site meeting, with regulatory agencies and EEP to. dPC*- cuss the basic
-
pdhcOots of Jhc. proposed. ThiftigAtio n- plat And identify concerns or issues related, to :that_-1Dlan-..,lCA
Engincering,_will.a4dress 61-,,concerns-pribr•to completion of Task,-!'.
An cnvftonmental:scfe6ihg,6f;the Site.-will, be completed As part,ofthe scope of work. 'This will, include.-,
the identification for. potential. protected- ;species, archaeological sites, historical, architecture structures,..
and 'en-virbrumental.. contamination, the Site. The screening will, be conducted 'in a, manner to
- - ---------- - - - ---ni4g- will, - manner - -
ddt&rtdihe Whethet, the mitigation. will significdntly impact cultural, -historic, or, recreational resources.
Thc-cnviromnental:screen.i4g-will .be:prqvidedito EEP•in-the format of the Categorical, Exclusion Form for
'Ecpsysiem,Enhan'cethe 't,PTq&Fanj,,Prqjects­,7
Version 1.4 for the Site.
The1CA,Engineerin
,g Team will publish a, PublicNoticc,in tnewspaper serving the area surrounding the
Site that gives its tdbdti6n.and,,Iin'eflyd6s-6rilYts the actiVities-"tb- lie performed, 6jithe Site., A,16-d
comment period Will be, observed.- 'Based upon public response and dire6tion from EEP; the ICA
Engineering Team wili,6onduct a,Citizens.Information Wbrkshopj jfiiecessary_ to answer :questions about'
the project. A. copy of the Public Notice and all comments, �r&ci'-Vcd (of documentation justifying not
scheduling-a.Public Meeting) will be�subrnitted as part of the deliverables for-Task 1.
Task 2--Submft, Record' ed Con servation,Easement,6n,the,Siti?
The Site will be pro -te clea'in perpetuity petui through a Conservation ,Easement ,(EEP Conservation Easement
Template dge&07/05/2012,): A topographic survey .of the, Site: will be Obtained,mbidh will' be used to
identify the location of the existing stream channel as well as the existing ground features. The location
Am. 37
Eng hee✓lng

Roses Creek Stream Mitigation Site
RE;P# 16= 005297: Gataloging,Unit 030501'0 =1' of the =Catawba'Fiver Basin
•of sthe ,existing features will be utilized in conjunction with a,' prehminary-,stream alignment to set the
Conservation Easement: The Conservation Easement will be :set to, provide a_minimuM 30' buffer from
the proposed top of bank.
The 'Conservation Easement -will ensure that future activities including agriculture, -mining, dredging;
timbering, and building will not occur on the'.restored' Site. The'Conservation Easement will be- recorded
- �at the Burkc County'Register, of Deeds -and ,coiivcycd' to lfic State of North Carolind, Or guidelines
detailed in the 07/05/1.2 'version of the Full Delivery 'Requirements for Completion of Survey foi
'Conservation 'Easements. =Prior 'to _recordation, -ICA Engineering willlprovidc.oEEP with 'the ,attorney's
report; +on title, Title tattomey'is "Schedule A ", ,preliminary survey; ,and ` dra ft-Observation easement for
: review..' Surveys will be ,geo- referenced and provided fo''EEP, iu Adobe: - Acrobat; AutoCAD (.dwg), and
ArcGIS formats.
Task 3 - -= Mitigation Plan Approved by
- -- A_Site•Specific Mitigation Plan will be developed which follows the •outline detailed.in'EER=Mitigation-
Plari-:Temp.LAC- veision2:2 adopWdJdfie 8, 2012 aiid Mitigat'iori:Plan,Guidance Topics fUersion.l.0 dated
October l 2010. The`P;lan will,provide a detailed description;of the goals and objecti'ves,of the;project
includingjocation _informafion; general watershed; existing• conditions, stream, - reference
.- studie's•:and'a restoration plan. The Site Specific Mitigation 'Plan will be submitted, to SEEP= for- review;-
coiiiment; .and approval. ICA Engineering will - submit `three hard copies and one-.pdf-file=on=a=compact-
disc,of the- "Drafft'-' .Mitigation Plan. After EEP •approval, ICA Eng_ ineering will. submit =three hard copies - -- -
and:one .pdf file of the "'Final.Draft" Mitigation Plan to•bd posted for review by the IRT..Once approved -
-.'by °the 1RT, ICA :Engineering will complete the Pre - Construction Notice" (PCN) ,form1,fbr, the 'Site •and. =.
provide the Final. Mitigation'Plawand the PCN form.to.EEP. ICA.Engineering will subinit-four,competed:
PCN forms with. EEP named -as `the pefthitee And .ICA, Engineering; as the agent;, eiglit hard copies and
three compact discs with ,thc :pdf'filcs of the "Final?" Mitigation Plan ,and' the PCN. Tlie:Site •Specific
Mitigation Plan will Include a completed FEMA•Fl`oodplainvChecklist. ;
I CA, 1✓ngineering will provide - financial assurance' (a•perfo"rmancc bond for ;100% of,the-total value�bf the: =
contract'or'a.L'eiter of Credit or Casualty Insurance), as part of the deliverable for Task '3,: -�This-fman6al-- --
assurance -will remain 4*,effectuntil ICA Eng_incefing;h received written.norificat_i_on_.frorim'-EEP:that!the:-
f0fiirements ofTask;&have been met.
- Tdsk,.4°— Mitigbti6n:Site Eartkw6rk'C6mpleted Zia, peinvts necessary for: - restoration of the .Site will be-obtained;prior to construction: - It'A -anticipated• USACE, Section 40-4 (Nationwi(fe Permit., #2Z) permit;, a NCDWQ 401 Water - Quality. -Certification; .,:•)_. _:_=
a NC' - Diaision of Land! - .Quality` Sedimentation and' Erosion Control ,permit, and �FEMA F1'oodplain " - - -
Certification will 'need to bc,obtained. G'ne copy, ofall applicable,permits will be�"ubtriittM to: EEP -prior
to implementation of,earthwork. - .- -
Inipleriientation.:of the approved Site Specific Mitigation .Plan will b-cgin once permits are acquired.•
`Construction.of•thc -Site will be accomplished ,througb•a•cooperative effort between. tlie ICA Engineering
Team and; air experienced 'stream restoration contractor: Utilizing an experienced stream restoration
contractor. assures quality construction, economical construction; -as well as the '.know -ho-w in stream -
�restoraiion .consiiuciion.techiiiqucs:. The ICA Engineering•Team;.will be.onsite.throughoutthe °duration :of .
construction, to .ensure compliance, -with' the plans:and,specifications: 'ICA Engineering will' notify EEP' in
writing•of the'Task 4 completion date and •will sub mit'an invoice.
Task S -- Mitigation Site Planting and Installation of-Mbnitorink Devices
Planting of•the Site will be completed according to ?the planting plan within,the Final Mitigation Plan. At
this time, monitoring devices/plots, will be installed according, to •the •CVS -EEP Protocol for •Recording.
{jam' 38

Roses Creek 9treamUtigation Site
RFP#-I 6-00529,7:. Cataloging Qnii 63050.101 of the Catawba River Basin
Vegetation - VersiM4.0. Formal- monitoring,wiU 'begin, sik,months after,the cornipletion, of the, planting
activities'. ICA Enginccfing, will ,notify EEP `in writing of Task 5 completion date and Will submit an
invoice.
Task 6- Baseline Monitoring Document. Approved. by EEP
A, --,
.A Baseline Nfo dit6rifig Documenf-willbe developed in accordance •with the EEP'Baseline Monitoring
Report, Template, and Guidance .-Docum6nt VersTon-2.0 dated I0/,14/2010. A vegetation -monitoring plan
will b6 A. coop6nent of the mitWitidn plan •hd Will foll• the CVS-EEP Protocol for, Recording
Vegetation - Version,4.0., .-.A-,-set.of.A-s:,Built-Drawings for the.Site -will. be prepared as well. The As-
Biiilf'information,will'be-coller,iW dyTingand after ,wnsiractiaii through e .
4 qofnbiniit�dfi offiedlin plans,
marked. up during "q"o-n"s't"i'U--ct-io'-n,,:a-n'd,-fi ys T-he,Basi3lihe,Monitoring,,-Dbcument andthe As -Built
"Drawings will be submitted to -EEP. - 1eA-Engiheering- will submit three hard copies of the "Draft"
Baseline Monitoring Pocument and,'Oraft!' Record, Drawings. Following, approval of- the draft, ICA
Engineering will subi lit ,three,-h -aid -c_ppi_e_i','.an'd_ r`o'ne.-,.pdf file on a, compact disc of the �'Finar' Baseline
Monitoring Document-and the'Recoid-"Dirawings.-
Tasks 7, ort.to EEP
The Site will --be, monitored as.- outlined do -. the- -Baseline --Monitoring Document inorder'to assess the- -
success fo low the format s
success of the •restored Site and, the Monitoring Report • vh I establi" h6d'in the EEP--
a4i 8,- Jdi2. TfiC-:Sitcw_ilI,,be m6nitored-,annuilly,
Monitofitig 1zbpdrt-TqWPlate­,Vdt§i6n opte une, •
for a duration of 7-ye'ars. -AnnuE ' il-monitoring reports -wilL be -produced and 'submitted. to EEP by
December I" of theyezir for which, monitqfiiig'Ny'a*s':-conductod;-.'Tbe seventh year monitoring report will
mclu'd_d a Closeout kcooif that provides-: an -as§essment, of the monitoring data collected from the entire
monitoring period., At the, end of.-the,monitoring:period,ICA. Engineering, will provide a -project Closeout
Report 46 EEP that, f6flows the f6hfat established, in the, EEP Clbsebut Report Template - Version '1 ;2
dated' Ji1nc8;_._._,2 ,ICA Eni- rin,'w-i'ft,iubmit,t&ee'hard,cQpiesand,.one-pdfformatt6d copy on,a
compact disc of 'the yearly'Monitoring'Rqport.
5.7 9dc:cess'CHt6r-in
The in ,Performance, standards shall be- consistent-, With the:,revirements described F6deig rule f0f
compensatory mitigafion, -project', sites-'as-desctified! in the'­Federal' Register- Tiile 33 'Navigation and
Navigable Waters 'Volume 3 'Cha:pt'&,-r-2Sbctibn--6332.5*"piir-agia.'pifs(-d-)aiid
5.7.1. Sireams•
The .restored stream rcadh&s are proposed to lie monitored for aeometric.,activity. Annual fgl/wixiter.
monitoring Will includd,&velopmertf of 6hann Lcrbsis-sections on: kiffies-and 0991,5•,and a water surface
pf6filb,df the dhandel-iii addition to, visual 6bservati6h of 'd , hahriel,gtability,
Siream,•imension
-General maintenance of a-stable cross - section ,and ,hydrofogic access to the floodplain features ,over the
course of the monitoring period will, generally represeint success ,-,in, dimensional !stability. Some changes
indimensioll (such ,as lowerin offiankfulfwi&h-to-dewh ratio) should be, Riffle sections
g P - - _': - - 1.0 ­ I - __1 - -
should, g6heraffy maintain Bank H_ eight.ratio,approaching - 1.2, with some variation, in this ratio
naturally, occurring,,and display an"entrenchmentrati6 of no -les& than 2.2. T661,se fians, naturdfly adjust
ii b
based 6n- rebdrit. fl6W,9, itrid- time, - et- *e&h AdWs;• thEf6fdrt; -more leeway, on P661 section geometry is
expected.
39
Engineering

Roses Creek Stream Mitigation Site
RFN 1,6-005297:'C-atalogiilg,'U4t.b3056101 of the Catawba River Basin
Stream Pattern and'Pfofile
Pattem,feitures should 'show little adjustment' over the standard 7 year moniforing.,pefiod. The profile
should not d6hidiistrate significant- trends; towards degradation or4ggradation.. over, a signifibant pqrtion:of
a,reach.
Sdbsttateiand SediinentIrgftort
there,shodij be an absence -of - any tsignificant, -trend-i . in the aggradational or depositional potential of'the
channel.
Hydraulics
A, minimum of two bankfull events inusf b& dbodnfented witb1h.the 7 year•monitoring period. The two
baiikfall,events -halt oddut-within sdp&�itd years.
pars.
5.7,:2
YegOtdtidh
Vegetation reqlAremefits'state that.-thdrd- ffi kbd-a,ftiini ffuimi`-6f. 320,plantied "stems per acre smy, ivilig after
year three, 260 stems per acre after year five;! and-,1-10 •stems per acre after year seven. Should ,the
pOrfdniiance criteria outlined -above 1iot-be-inef during,-the -- ;monitoring period, ICA 'Engineering -win
provide- EEP with 'theif--.-rcrncdihtioh, pf6p6sAI,-d6tai'g­ -c6rre�ctive, actions ,and/or maintenance actions
proposed andidn.iMpldiiieiitation�scheduld foe said'adt-o'ns',,-plamfied','to ineetAhe,critcria. Upon.review arid'.-,
approval of said corrective measures by- EEP,'-1CA,Fhgineering will imp I 6 ment th e necessary "corrective
`
5-7-3
Noxious Species
Noxious -specie's will be identified _and controlled so-that nouebeconie dominant or alter, the desired
community structure: of thc;proposed Site. If-noxious 'plants,,are,,iddntified as a Ptobiciti, in ,the proposed
Site, ICA. Engineering "will dev6lo p a species-specific - control-* plan for approval by 'EEP prior to
implemchtatl6ft.
Through coordination, with EEP dining the 7-year monitorin&period, ICA Engineering; where necessary,
,W,ill,re 6ve. treat-. of otherwise rta�h4g'd-,�undesirable ,pjaht-6r-4Ain�aI species; -including_ physical removal,
,use- of heibicidf -e�., -live trappjhg,,d6fifldiitfg,wit&9-3,dr",ii&ts.'
All vegetation removal 'from the, Site shall be done by xn�qqbanjcal means only, unless 'EEP has first.
:authorized the use of herbicides of-dlka&ci&s for the -contf6l 4-pIants iii--or'.immediately adjacent• to the
affected areas.
5.74 Sueeess Criteria MethodolOgieswod Reporting
1166 toting of the Site,ivill be perforbidd until sUcess'cfitefid-af&met as-dcfincd in the restoration plans
and the permits: Results will 'be documented on an annual basis,-With tbe,ass6diatcd,rcports isubhiitted to
BEP as' evida- de thai-g oalsare be_" 19 achieved. 'Both.ICA, En
gineefing and EEP,in,.coordihation,withthe
apptqpriate,tegulato'i-y agencies -will determine Whebi the, ppifbfmancestan40s, have been.,achicved affhe
Site; If standards are not. met, ICA Engineering will perffirm ': appropriate remedial activities to satisfy
ohitorinkbf the Site demonstrates thaf'the, Site is -,&4eqc!�sjuj'b year five and no concerns
. - - - ­ -_ " , Site , --- .,y
bave'been'identiffied, C�A,Engiiieen.iigw,'ill'propbs-d to. t6rtnifidti�,-rfibijit6ft4,6f,'thc'Site,,ah7d. forego the
monitoringroq restoration �irernents of -years six and seven. In generO, the restoration success-efita, and required
neffied4tion --acti phs, are bias6d on` the Skednz Mitigation 67uidefitfes, ('USAGE et al, 2063) and the
Ecosystem Eiihance­men'i Program Monitoring 'Requirements dnd P rformance Standards for stream
dtidl6i-;Wetland-Mitigqtioll,,(NCDE-.NR.201,1').
40
1C
9n,g,iheer1n'q

Rose_ s Creek Sirdam.'Mitigation,fSite.
RFP -,Catalogih !Uilit03O5Ol,Ol,of�the!Cat5w&aR-ivefBagiii,
167005297.
175 Frequency
All .monitoring reports will be submitted to EEP's:designated representative for coordination with the
appropriate re _gu_
a t o
ryagenctes'byTdcbmV& I"' of 4dadft year: The year of construction may have two
submittals, ,one 'being the As-Built ,drawings and ,thc sccond,-bcing ihe First.
Yeaf Annual -Monitoring
g6p;9q: If monitoring reports indicate any deficiencies in achieving the success criteria on schedule, a
_remedial ,actioh 01 r6 ,Implementation th
46, Will be inchiddd in the annual monitoring: reports. IrnpI .-i _n of the remedial
plan will; be ICA Engineering's responsibility: IGA Engineering Will bd.aVailable- jo coordinefte, any
agency site visits.� both bef5re and', after restoration activities have been completed..
y Wgetative
will bd,cofidifdted,duri;lg,thd-siimmer-ih6iithg of each mohiton , ng_yc ar:
.5-n8- Nfirenceg
Carolina Land. and Lakes Resource- Conservation and Development Council, - 2011. Hunting _Creek
-,WaibfshedPlafl.,February 2011.
reek/HuhtihgC
C rk%20W;shedPIaA: Egbinox.pdf
T fa l` ,Higliway^ Ad iiiinistration (FHWA). 2008. Mapping H6ad*aier =Streams:, Interuoitterif and=
2008-­- ;
Perennial-Headwater, Stream, Model Development - and Spatial Application. January -- ;29,,
Prepared, by -North Carolina hna Division of Water Quality, Coritact:7.1'efiarin Russell::,.,,
-6 /c -,file?uufii�-55649e8i�,,I,beb,4bd3'- 969a-
�i�"In'c'&n'f':rg /document fibraiy/get
_ce66"c 90564�Mdpld= M364,
'Mtlddy'Qr6ek- Restoration Partners. 2603. Feasibility Rep_ ort and Restoraifon'Plan for the Muddy_ creek
.Wdidkihed-.,,Ddcembei'1003.
�+httpa /iVww:neeo:neO erviccs/lwps/muddy creek/Muddy Creek plan 2003:1)d
North Carblifid-1koartmefit of Efivif6hinent and Natural Regources (NCDENR). Division of Water.
-Quality; 2010a. Methodology, for Identification of-Intermittent and Perennhil,Streams and their
e?�S!ion -434::- North, Carolina Department �of Environment and Natural Resources,
Divigi6ii--of WAtef Quality. RaIdighjNC-.
NQRENAt PjVi'&ii)n_ of:Waf6r­Qp4tq,,2Q12'. NC'Water Quality y Classifications. Wcbsitc accessed-on
S.eptember,6•2011. L.'a"su,iindaidd,oh February 14j, 20112.,
librarykQet file?udid 393e868d-5'a4'cA_'cfI-.b'I' ba-
4b"-c54cdf.79d]-&• oiijild-=38364-
NCDEN-R-'Dfvisi*.'o*n'bf,Wdtcr Resburces.,20,10b. Catawba River Basin Plan: �OatawbaR!ver,"'H*eadwaters,'
--subba'shl'140 gh
C'0365010I.Ralei , NC.
NCDENA. 'Ecd9ystehi;,Ehhancement Program,(EEP)..201 1. Ecosystem En­hahcemehtl Pfogidni
Monitoring Requirements and, Performance Standards for stream and/or Weiland Mitigation.
library -/Vet filc?n I id---_1169.848&fold&i1d='2288101&ifqi-ne
NC-DENR-Natural Heritage Prog-rdm.. 2011 North Carolina N-aturdlHeritage-Program Online •atd6ase.
2013. Accessed onSeptember,9,2013. Last-updated on July 2,2013.
http:/hkiwiA,:hcli ip.orWweb/rihp--/dAL-ibase-searcb
North - Carolina Geological Stirvey (NCOS), 1985. Geologic M p, of North Carolina•
41
C_
FEngineering

Roses Creek-Sirephl Mitigaii-onfSke
RIFP#-i6-bo629.7.,i,-,dtaib.gi,ig unit 0050101 of:tfid,CWN0andv,d Basin
I
North �Car-61ink- State 'Historic Preservation Offide,(NiCSAPO). MO. The kf8tudy, List"-' and The National
Register of Historic Places in North Carolina. Website accessed on September '10, .2013. Last
updated or► August 30, 2(11.0: _pomc r-.,g v t i . t
Rosgen-,.Pavid, 1996. Apphed,_RiveuMorpholq gy, . Wil
ifland Hydrology; 4 P4gpsgSprings- Colorado.
,86hafale, Michad,P W ., eakley,Alan,S. Classification of the 'Natural Communities of North Carolina:
1990. 'Nor&C a idlina Natural H erita& • Program,'RUleikh,NC.
_Ijg-Ari*- (-,:or y (USEPA), NGW-RiG, pad-
_ps;of.Eh_' e .'SACE), US Envirommentdi'Pr6tection Agency gine* rs (U
-NCDWQ _,-7063, Stream-,MiiiaaiionGiiidelineg. April
2001
Re
'Sj)cpar(mpni,�f)kj�i&ult 4, J Natural' gourccs�Coiiscrvation�qrvipe. S il'$jiry
U. Web 6
Mrmus
htV;AV0bsoil9'ury­e-­v' ­­&.- -1Ai0/.WebS6ilSurvey
gqv_ p
n -.�'_'
USDA, 200.7.. C onstructiph SpAciffcation f�arbed Wire.. Available under Barbed Wire-Fe ce NRCS_`
$pecificatio
United. States. Ge6lo&it'Sarve -(USOS);,1954., Oak-Hill Quadrangle, North Carolina, Tj MihiiW.Seri6s-!-­:-.-:
-,(To
,pdgr
4p 6) -W
44j4gtbfi;"D. C�
USGS, 2012., Piedmont:- Website,,accessed on Last jipqatqd.on,0qccmbcr 13,.2012.:.',
http ,//Ian de7o
Westemy,iedmont CouIncil'of Governments (WPCOG). 2009: Lake Rhodhiss Watershed Restoration
.Plan (Yina]'Dr ft
Winters Chief-JaMes;,personat communication;- August 26, 2013.
AMMMIIN6 42,
Engineering

DA U T 1 = 34.89 Acres
sDA UT 2 = 47.17 Acres
I,LL
M
4
"'% 111 � n ► ~- , r '
Parcel Boundary
UT 1 A•
�.. -.
UT 2 DA
UT 3 DA

: ❖: O:•. � � �. • '�` _tom_
CO CD 0
CD
CD
\ZM\%
\,j
X/
X
•!! 1111 � 1 il'�1. Il I I � i 1 /!! ! +�/1 / </� � - -_
—
i� /!�!)
j%//� % //� ) .
\1 \�It
\ \ \\ \� \ \�i \ \ \\ \\ \ It I (I I l c
fI(
It I
p
\ \\\
U7 3
_ _ _

r.
UT 1

\,
�.
s'
G
�di
r :.�
'��
V'
t Z ,:

r,
UT 1
UT 1