20180765 Ver 2_Year 3 Monitoirng Report_20220301

DocuSign Envelope ID: DB2078C8-1C66-4BD9-A600-EE24EBDCA9F8
CLeaer
An EnviroScience Company
ClearWater Environmental Consultants,Inc.
www.cwenv.com
February 28, 2022
Mr. David Brown
US Army Corps of Engineers
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
Ms. Kaylie Yankura
NC Division of Water Resources
2090 US Highway 70
Swannanoa, North Carolina 28778
RE: High Hampton Golf Resort, LLC Holes 7 and 8
Culvert Removal and Stream Restoration Site
Annual Monitoring Report— MY3
Jackson County, North Carolina
USACE Action ID No. SAW 2017-02281
DWR Project No. 18-0765-V2
Dear Mr. Brown and Ms. Yankura,
High Hampton Resort, LLC received after-the-fact authorization for 880 If of stream impacts
associated with removal of a culvert and stream restoration activities at a tract of land (PIN 7571-
96-2363) known as the High Hampton Resort at 1525 NC Highway 107 South in Cashiers,
Jackson County, North Carolina. This Year 3 Monitoring (MY3) Report is being submitted in order
to satisfy the conditions of the NWP 27 (SAW 2017-02281) issued on April 25, 2019 and DWR
401 Water Quality Certification (DWR# 18-0765-V2) issued on March 22, 2019.
Please do not hesitate to contact me at 828-698-9800 if you have any questions or comments.
Sincerely,
a—DocuSigned by: DocuSigned by:
2. U t 2,1d1t.
—AE92310EDC6E42D 0A79F7DC85EE4F7...
Britten Yant, P.W.S. R. Clement Riddle, P.W.S.
Biologist Senior Scientist
145 7`h Avenue West, Suite B
Hendersonville,NC 28792
828-698-9800 Tel

DocuSign Envelope ID: DB2078C8-1C66-4BD9-A600-EE24EBDCA9F8
High Hampton Golf Resort, LLC Golf Course
Holes 7 and 8 Culvert Removal
and Stream Restoration Site
Annual Monitoring Report
Monitoring Year 3 of 3
USACE Action ID No. SAW 2017-02281
N.C. DWR Project No. 18-0765-V2
Pr_ ti zj
-'. r:
r4 r,
•
•
. . �s.. w. r ~:A.
•
-T.F.
February 2022
Prepared By:
CLearWaer
An EnviroScience Company a
145 7th Avenue West, Suite B
Hendersonville, NC 28792

DocuSign Envelope ID: DB2078C8-1C66-4BD9-A600-EE24EBDCA9F8
Table of Contents
1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY 1
2.0 METHODS 2
3.0 GEOMORPHIC MONITORING RESULTS 2
4.0 VISUAL MONITORING RESULTS 8
5.0 MONITORING SUMMARY 10
6.0 REFERENCES 10
Monitoring Data
Geomorphic Assessment:
Table 1: Cross-Section Dimensions- Low Bank Stage
Table 2: Cross-Section Dimensions- "Bankfull" Stage
Cross-Sections 1-4 Photographs and Survey Plots
Visual Assessment:
Photographic Reference Photos (Photo Points 1-5)
Figures
Figure 1: Vicinity Map
Figure 2: USGS Topographic Map
Figure 3: Watershed Aerial Photograph
Figure 4: USDA Soils Map
Figure 5: Monitoring Features Map
Attachment A:
Memo from Andrew Bick, PE, Headwaters Engineering
to David Brown, USACE and Kevin Mitchell, NCDWR
RE: Stability Assessment and Stream Enhancements UTs to
Fowler Creek
High Hampton Resort, Cashiers, Jackson County, NC
i

DocuSign Envelope ID: DB2078C8-1C66-4BD9-A600-EE24EBDCA9F8
1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY
High Hampton Resort, LLC received after-the-fact authorization for 880 If of stream
impacts associated with removal of a culvert and stream restoration activities at a
tract of land (PIN 7571-96-2363) known as the High Hampton Resort at 1525 NC
Highway 107 South in Cashiers, Jackson County, North Carolina. This Year 3
Monitoring (MY3) Report is being submitted in order to satisfy the conditions of the
NWP 27 (SAW 2017-02281) issued on April 25, 2019 and DWR 401 Water Quality
Certification (DWR# 18-0765-V2) issued on March 22, 2019.
Approximately 880 linear feet (LF) of culvert was removed from an unnamed
tributary to Fowler Creek (referred to in the attached plans as UT1) at the High
Hampton Resort golf course, which is currently undergoing a renovation. The
banks of the daylighted channel were sloped and large stone was placed in the
bed and on the banks. Fowler Creek is in the Savannah River basin (HUC
03060102). The site is located in Jackson County, North Carolina and is accessed
from Route 107, just to the south of the town of Cashiers. A site vicinity map and
USGS topographic map are included as Figures 1 and 2. An As-Built survey
documenting baseline conditions was completed on February 25, 2019 and
summarized in a memo to the USACE and NCDWR in a memo dated March 5,
2019 from Andrew Bick, PE of Headwaters Engineering (Attachment A).
Monitoring Year 1 efforts were conducted on November 14, 2019, Monitoring Year
2 efforts were conducted on October 26, 2020 and Monitoring Year 3 efforts began
on February 1, 2022 and were completed February 10, 2022.
A digitized watershed boundary of the drainage area at the end of the 700 ft
monitoring reach shows a drainage area of 14 acres (ac), or approximately 0.02
square miles (mi2) (Figure 3). USGS web-based hydrology tool StreamStats
estimates the drainage area of UT1 to be 22 acres, or approximately 0.03 mi2. The
High Hampton project site is located in the southern Blue Ridge physiographic
province (NCGS 2004) in the Blue Ridge Belt in the Dqd (quartz diorite to
granodiorite) rock unit formation, dating to the Devonian period (359-419 million
years ago) (NCGS 1985). Soils within the project area consist of Udorthents and
Edneyville-Chestnut Complex (USDA Web Soil Survey, Figure 4).
The performance of the project will be evaluated for geomorphic and
visual components. The following are specific performance standards:
• Geomorphic Stability — Channel dimension, and profile, remains within the
range of natural variability.
• Visual Assessment— Minimal bed or bank erosion/scour from natural
channel adjustment.
High Hampton Golf Resort, LLC Golf Course Monitoring Year 3 of 3
Holes 7 and 8 Culvert Removal and Stream Restoration Site February 2022
USACE Action ID No. SAW-2017-02281 Page 1 of 11

DocuSign Envelope ID: DB2078C8-1C66-4BD9-A600-EE24EBDCA9F8
2.0 METHODS
ClearWater Environmental Consultants, an EnviroScience Company (ClearWater)
conducted geomorphic monitoring and visual documentation of a 700 LF reach
UT1 to Fowler Creek (hereafter referred to as UT1) as shown in the Project Vicinity
Map (Figure 1). Geomorphic monitoring of stream dimension included a survey of
four(4) stream cross-sections. The cross-section surveys are located as indicated
on the Monitoring Features Map (Figure 5), with three representative "riffle" cross
sections (XS1-3) and one representative "run" cross-section (XS4). The cross-
sections were monumented with permanent capped rebar pins and a wooden
stake on each bank to serve as a spatially referenced control. The cross-section
surveys were performed using a laser-level, reel tape, and stadia rod. Photographs
of each cross section facing downstream were taken on the day of monitoring. The
locations of these control pins were recorded with a sub-meter accuracy Global
Positioning System (GPS) device. Geomorphic data was analyzed using the
Reference Reach Spreadsheet for Channel Survey Data Management Version
4.2L. (Dan Mecklenburg, Ohio Department of Natural Resources).
Photographic reference points (photo-points) were used to visually document
stream conditions and include both a downstream facing photo and an upstream
facing photo at each photo reference point. Photo-points were established at five
(5) stations along the length of the 700 ft UT1 reach. The photo-points were
recorded with a sub-meter accuracy GPS and monumented with a wooden stake.
The photographer will make a reasonable attempt to capture the same perspective
in each photo-point location annually. Please refer to Figure 2 for the proposed
locations of all monitoring features.
The bankfull stage was determined using the North Carolina Mountain Regional
Curve (Harmon et al. 2000). Using a drainage area of 0.03 mi2, the regional curve
predicts bankfull cross-sectional area at approximately 2.0 square feet (ft2) with a
bankfull discharge of 7 cubic feet per second (cfs), mean depth of 0.4 ft and
bankfull width of 5.2 ft. Regional curve prediction at the extremely low end of the
range of data for streams, as in this case, is not as reliable as predictions for those
in the middle of the range (between 2-30 mi2). Local streams with similar watershed
size under reference conditions serve as a better comparison in this lower range.
3.0 GEOMORPHIC MONITORING RESULTS
Based on the comparison to a local reference reach and regional curve data, it
appears that the daylighted channel was constructed with low bank heights and
channel widths exceeding the corresponding theoretical bankfull stage predicted
by the North Carolina Mountain Regional Curve. Therefore, floodwaters from the
majority of rain events are expected to remain contained by the channel.
Geomorphic monitoring results are analyzed below at the low bank stage (Table
1) as well as at bankfull stage estimated based on regional curve data (Table 2).
It should be noted that the XS3 rebar pins were unintentionally removed by course
staff during 2021, therefore XS3 data was omitted from the MY3 geomorphic data.
High Hampton Golf Resort, LLC Golf Course Monitoring Year 3 of 3
Holes 7 and 8 Culvert Removal and Stream Restoration Site February 2022
USACE Action ID No. SAW-2017-02281 Page 2 of 11

DocuSign Envelope ID: DB2078C8-1C66-4BD9-A600-EE24EBDCA9F8
Low Bank Height
Due to the 0.03 mi2 contributing area of the watershed, flood events
reaching the low bank stage should be infrequent and exceptional.
Analysis of the MY3 surveyed riffle cross-sections corresponding to the low
bank height indicates an average cross-sectional area of 25.7 ft2 average
width of 12.5 ft and average mean depth of 1.8 ft. Cross section XS4 is a
run located in a flatter section of the reach with a slope of approximately
0.5% slope. Using corresponding riffle facet slopes and an estimate of flow
resistance coefficient of 0.05, average discharge rate was estimated to be
229.5 cfs at low bank stage. Shear stresses in the riffles at low bank stage
were calculated to be approximately 6.0 pounds per square foot (psf) on
average. With reference to Shield's equation, the predicted grain size for
threshold of motion (stream competence) was 429.5 mm, or roughly 14
inches, at the low bank stage. This corresponds to the "small boulder"
particle size which could be mobilized at the low bank stage.
Table 1.Cross-Section Dimensions with parameters calculated at low bank stage
Riffle Run
XS1 XS2 XS3 _ XS4
Units Parameter MY1 MY2 MY3 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY1 MY2 MY3
ft2 Cross Sectional Area 17.5 16.4 16.0 35.9 35.2 34.1 13.9 13.8 N/A _ 28.0 26.8 27.1
ft Width _ 12.7 12.5 12.5 16.9 17.5 12.5 8.9 10.0 N/A _ 12.8 12.8 12.4
ft Mean Depth 1.4 1.3 1.3 2.1 2.0 2.0 1.6 1.4 N/A 2.2 2.1 2.2
ft Max depth _ 1.8 1.7 1.8 2.9 2.9 3.0 2.2 2.2 N/A 3.0 2.9 3.1
ft/s Velocity 11.1 10.6 10.2 14.4 13.4 13.1 11.3 10.3 N/A 3.1 2.9 2.9
cfs Discharge Rate _ 195.3 173.1 162.4 516.8 470.5 448.2 156.4 142.1 N/A _ 86.0 76.9 77.9
lbs/ft2 Shear Stress 8.1 7.5 7.1 11.9 10.7 10.4 8.2 7.1 N/A _ 0.6 0.5 0.5
mm Threshold Grain Size 399.0 369.5 348.4 584.2 523.6 510.6 401.4 350.5 N/A 27.0 24.4 24.4
Facet Slope 15% 15% 13% 2%
Channel Slope 6.2%
Bankfull Stage
Using the hydrologic definition of"bankfull stage,"flood events reaching the
bankfull stage should happen with relative frequency, with a recurrence
interval of approximately 1.5 years. The bankfull elevation was calculated
based on a mean depth of 0.4 ft predicted by the contributing watershed
area of 0.03 mi2. The resulting bankfull elevations were below the observed
low bank height, with bank height ratios ranging from 2.9 to 3.9. The stream
is considered entrenched to moderately entrenched, with entrenchment
ratios ranging from 1.1-2.1.
Cross section dimensions corresponding to the bankfull stage resulted in
average cross-sectional area of 2.7 ft2 and average width of 8.4 ft. Using
the estimated bankfull stream dimensions, stream competence at this stage
was calculated at 86.7 (approximately 3.4 inches). While quantitative
analysis of streambed sediment size (i.e. Wolman pebble count) was not
performed, the observational estimate of average streambed particle size is
medium cobble.
High Hampton Golf Resort, LLC Golf Course Monitoring Year 3 of 3
Holes 7 and 8 Culvert Removal and Stream Restoration Site February 2022
USACE Action ID No. SAW-2017-02281 Page 3 of 11

DocuSign Envelope ID: DB2078C8-1C66-4BD9-A600-EE24EBDCA9F8
_ Table 2.Cross-Section Dimensions with parameters set at bankfull stage _
Riffle Run
XS1 XS2 XS3 XS4
Units Parameter MY1 MY2 MY3 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY1 MY2 MY3
ft2 Cross Sectional Area 4.0 2.9 2.6 2.9 3.1 2.5 2.1 1.8 N/A 3.2 2.8 3.0
ft Width 10.0 10.2 10.1 7.6 7.3 7.2 5.2 5.4 N/A 8.8 7.5 7.8
ft Mean Depth* 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.3 N/A 0.4 0.4 0.4
ft Max depth 0.6 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.5 0.6 N/A 0.8 0.7 0.8
Entrenchment Ratio 1.2 1.1 1.1 2.0 2.0 2.1 1.3 1.3 N/A 1.2 1.4 1.4
_ Bank Height Ratio 3.0 _ 3.4 _ 2.9 4.3 4.4 3.9 4.0 3.7 N/A _ 4.0 4.4 3.8
ft/s Velocity 5.1 4.1 3.7 4.9 5.1 4.4 4.9 4.4 N/A 1.0 1.0 1.0
cfs Discharge Rate 20.7 11.9 9.4 14.1 15.7 10.8 10.4 8.0 N/A 3.3 2.8 3.0
Ibs/ftz Shear Stress 2.5 1.8 1.5 2.4 2.5 2.0 2.36 2.0 N/A _ 0.1 0.1 0.1
_
mm Threshold Grain Size 125.0 _ 89.0 74.9 117.0 123.0 98.5 116.0 96.0 N/A _ 5.0 5.0 5.0
Facet Slope 15% 15% 13% 2%
Channel Slope _ 6.2%
*Mean depth set at 0.4ft based on the Mountain Rural Regional Curve for 0.03 sqmi watershed
Cross Section 1
993
991
x
0 989
m
w
987
985
983
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Station(ft)
--MY111.14.2019 --M92 10.26.2020 --MY3 2.10.2022
,rw R :. -- ..
•
•
•
�. . ��
•
•
y * 7
d r..
r l
sat r
..:-.
', �.f
y, • .:4 .., ... • , 4; . , Dc 1 10l:.2O22. 13 DO
.. � �`t -
High Hampton Golf Resort, LLC Golf Course Monitoring Year 3 of 3
Holes 7 and 8 Culvert Removal and Stream Restoration Site February 2022
USACE Action ID No. SAW-2017-02281 Page 4 of 11

DocuSign Envelope ID: DB2078C8-1C66-4BD9-A600-EE24EBDCA9F8
Cross Section 2
994
992
x
0 990
w
988
986
984
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Station(ft)
MY1 11.14.2019 —e—MY2 10.26.2020 t MY3 2.10.2022
t f
a, tip.
Wi I r.
J
I. r y I.
'ie..— -, --4. 414IP
It
.-.• , .
r.. :11):14o2miw-2-o22 12:37
"fit '
High Hampton Golf Resort, LLC Golf Course Monitoring Year 3 of 3
Holes 7 and 8 Culvert Removal and Stream Restoration Site February 2022
USACE Action ID No. SAW-2017-02281 Page 5 of 11

DocuSign Envelope ID: DB2078C8-1C66-4BD9-A600-EE24EBDCA9F8
Cross Section 3
999
997
x
0 995
w
w 993 .......1N....4,446,
X"."...41-149.6
991
��
989
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Station(ft)
—e—MY111.14.2019 —e—MY210.26.2020 —*—MY3 Omitted(LPIN and RPIN Removed)
� .r': 4
mr . sus:' : �► -
T, lir* illItis&%; 1,
-.w
Both rebar pins from XS3 were unintentionally removed by course staff during
2022, therefore XS3 data was omitted from the MY3 geomorphic data. Comparison
photographs of XS3 taken on October 26th 2020 (Left) and February 10th 2022
(Right) show little to no visual change and indicate strong stream stability.
High Hampton Golf Resort, LLC Golf Course Monitoring Year 3 of 3
Holes 7 and 8 Culvert Removal and Stream Restoration Site February 2022
USACE Action ID No. SAW-2017-02281 Page 6 of 11

DocuSign Envelope ID: DB2078C8-1C66-4BD9-A600-EE24EBDCA9F8
Cross Section 4
997
995
x
o0 993
v
991
989
987
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Station(ft)
t M5111.14.2019 --MY210.26.2020 tMY32.1.2022
_
%114 •
High Hampton Golf Resort, LLC Golf Course Monitoring Year 3 of 3
Holes 7 and 8 Culvert Removal and Stream Restoration Site February 2022
USACE Action ID No. SAW-2017-02281 Page 7 of 11

DocuSign Envelope ID: DB2078C8-1C66-4BD9-A600-EE24EBDCA9F8
4.0 VISUAL MONITORING RESULTS
Visual monitoring data indicated that the stream is stable and performing well with
no significant bank erosion or bed scour. No aggradation or degradation was
observed within the project reach. A wooden footbridge was added during MY1,
located near cross-section 4. The new bridge is visible in photo-point 5 facing
upstream.
•
;�.• - .,: _ �-
PP1 Facing Upstream Feb 10, 2022 PP1 Facing Downstream Feb 10, 2022
__.- '. i 4010415. 1
-"-- ',,�+`c "- : max,;,:'
a i
. ..
PP2 Facin• Upstream Feb 10, 2022 PP2 Facing Downstream Feb 10, 2022
"asv - r.' .
- ;''.. '',-, _ • 1._ - f -'
per.
•a te' ,r.;' '.r.'r - .,, •' A. "f � {. •• . •'x`
, : .-,,,,;.4- y:;0i+'4+?OY3`:iiite4.r. 02l1612't) ;.
, i- ' ,
PP3 Facing Upstream Feb 10, 2022 PP3 Facing Downstream Feb 10, 2022
High Hampton Golf Resort, LLC Golf Course Monitoring Year 3 of 3
Holes 7 and 8 Culvert Removal and Stream Restoration Site February 2022
USACE Action ID No. SAW-2017-02281 Page 8 of 11

DocuSign Envelope ID: DB2078C8-1C66-4BD9-A600-EE24EBDCA9F8
...‘41-':•,.{4,.kt....:.4., r:-.4:4..14e1 '/!'),FI -
.I."--/'_".,-.-.,.. ,.4—,..
...!..7.1...,;•,•''''• '-- ''''..4.;,-,-5'. .:,..,.T,
s Win'
,.,,1,-.4,-,-
,_. ..4.,0 Ir4.- i••4 i,$.7
- r 01'.192 13'2` . -IIIIN. .. I I O f 2 .2 t 3:18
•
..,,:„.
PP4 Facing Upstream Feb 10, 2022 PP4 Facing Downstream Feb 10, 2022
.., :-:�" .- ,_"_ -_ _ "-" V 4 'till'i I
..
• -7 ...,,,...y.sr. ,,,. . .
- .p• er' yA / ` ry
._.:...
-: ‘=:...."-
-1%,..,,--,-,,,--4r., — -, . .. -'!„.-....
..;•%,,,,-- _,....-, ,
, , , . , ....,..„.... ...7., '':.••:.;40, -• •.. ."0" -- ' -•••••,..,.....
•3' C.
4....
_. .iir'' •-I ioneOriii,.• - _ , , , -r.,.•,i. , 1 ionon-.)rie
►ate`r ''.` •
PP5 Facin• Upstream Feb 10, 2022 PP5 Facing Downstream Feb 10, 2022
High Hampton Golf Resort, LLC Golf Course Monitoring Year 3 of 3
Holes 7 and 8 Culvert Removal and Stream Restoration Site February 2022
USACE Action ID No. SAW-2017-02281 Page 9 of 11

DocuSign Envelope ID: DB2078C8-1C66-4BD9-A600-EE24EBDCA9F8
5.0 MONITORING SUMMARY
This report represents the third of three annual monitoring reports, as required in
the permit conditions for USACE NWP 29 (SAW-2017-02281) Issued May 6, 2019
and NCDWR Water Quality Certification Number 4134 issued March 22, 2019,
"ensuring that no streambank and/or streamed destabilization is occurring within
the restored reach." ClearWater concludes that the geomorphic and visual
monitoring data collected for MY3 indicate that the performance standards for
stability have been met.
6.0 REFERENCES
Harman, W.H. et al. 2000. Bankfull Regional Curves for North Carolina Mountain
Streams. In: Kane, D.L. (Ed.). Proc. AWRA Conf. Water Resources in
Extreme Environments, Anchorage, AK. Pp. 185-190.
NCGS (North Carolina Geological Survey). 2004. Physiography of North
Carolina. Map compiled by the Division of Land Resources. Raleigh.
NCGS 1985. Geologic map of North Carolina: North Carolina Geological Survey,
General Geologic Map, scale 1:500000.
Rosgen, D. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology. Pagosa
Springs, Colorado.
High Hampton Golf Resort, LLC Golf Course Monitoring Year 3 of 3
Holes 7 and 8 Culvert Removal and Stream Restoration Site February 2022
USACE Action ID No. SAW-2017-02281 Page 10 of 11

DocuSign Envelope ID: DB2078C8-1C66-4BD9-A600-EE24EBDCA9F8
FIGURES

DocuSign Envelope ID: DB2078C8-1C66-4BD9-A600-EE24EBDCA9F8
Hign Hampton UoIT course culvert Removal and Stream Restoration
.,, " -',-.,...:•.. ...5 --,.._
'u
11.1:1 641 -'
L, .FrF i
ft-
Cashiers t f
. Il
li
Il .• 4a�7P J`yL r r 4
III.!e' IN
Alil . tt
'ay
a
r
1P107 a
E:f011 l}'ti
I; 4
�'.1 i ii-,., 65116
+. Or aoe
lib I : .ti'
Wade Rd
/"1":R8'
.f Chirnne'l
i .
I i\ nd),,,, cle
P!rtriaU '
,-! ai
r
j K c
'"� b��e ti d,1 i t
Turkey 8ru5r , Do5 o o l..,,,1ppr:�r,
I
•:r Rir3'IP e'
IMO ea%1
•
107 J
,..,,j!)41,-Ill!' .
Ai i I ill I IVIIrr t
'r 1 n d
Legend
414i,. II
0 0.25 0.5 1
i- i Permitted Project Boundary Miles
Drawn by:AKT,12,-13.2019;CEC Project#918 '',
Jackson County, [LearWaLer Vicinity Map
North Carolina Figure 1
32 Clayton Street
Asheville,North Carolina 28801

DocuSign Envelope ID: DB2078C8-1C66-4BD9-A600-EE24EBDCA9F8
Hign Hampton UoIT course culvert Removal and Stream Restoration
.,, " -',-.,...:•.. ...5 --,.._
'u
11.1:1 641 -'
L, .FrF i
ft-
Cashiers t f
. Il
li
Il .• 4a�7P J`yL r r 4
III.!e' IN
Alil . tt
'ay
a
r
1P107 a
E:f011 l}'ti
I; 4
�'.1 i ii-,., 65116
+. Or aoe
lib I : .ti'
Wade Rd
/"1":R8'
.f Chirnne'l
i .
I i\ nd),,,, cle
P!rtriaU '
,-! ai
r
j K c
'"� b��e ti d,1 i t
Turkey 8ru5r , Do5 o o l..,,,1ppr:�r,
I
•:r Rir3'IP e'
IMO ea%1
•
107 J
,..,,j!)41,-Ill!' .
Ai i I ill I IVIIrr t
'r 1 n d
Legend
414i,. II
0 0.25 0.5 1
i- i Permitted Project Boundary Miles
Drawn by:AKT,12,-13.2019;CEC Project#918 '',
Jackson County, [LearWaLer Vicinity Map
North Carolina Figure 1
32 Clayton Street
Asheville,North Carolina 28801

DocuSign Envelope ID: DB2078C8-1C66-4BD9-A600-EE24EBDCA9F8
Hign Hampton uoit course uuivert Removal and Stream Restoration
—.....,_._-______,..j,(..---,----;\.„......, •,,,. , • • • . • ....--- ,-- ,,,v2- - -, ,
.• ' 1 . .) ,-,/ ,,,..-0 I / ...,_±.11.----'----\--,..,,,, -..---1'.r/ , .: ___'- -.4:4
Illiiiii_ta; .•
• .... .1 ,?:, ...• • '. . Li--.__ ._,. ,,_ • , . N.... ...._ ...
■ f11 y / ■J
'\\N,--\-.1) _\\\_ ,),..„. *,. \.',.-__. Li_
--7 p
1 e + ,_ _ ..„\y ► r ti p.
„ It ..... ..,. ..
--:‘,.
":7 i
' �■ ',(: • ■ Ili 4' :•�� �f i 1 Iv
�S-
v ; . ,,
) 1)
* •
, j GPJdER_�, 9
• -, Cashiers " 4 A�fir_. I .
,„— ....- .i '`..=.7"..; • \
,,; .t 412i1 4....i-
, IN
1 "---,,F .r.c---- /
de...;----'' ■
■ ■• ��� :ram+d. % 1,.... • L • f j �►•cc •- .11... '1 ..+-1; 1.-.•.°i
• !
•
J
— , . • = •
-- . C ....it__.
_e-
,i, sit
.0% . ...-
.< i cil ' L , .-1 '-• 4%* • • l s, 1.:* * +Ail.'! ' %,..,
,NL"* c*\._ _ ->\. . ,, t
•
.'',"1-,.,'I /.1,---- .609' ---v. -:---.):. ‘,)k.'\ 'It . 4 -'-'sN/
-..\_.\
4. •
a ] 343 • CaNf
� .f 1-, . � 4lw
z-, ____ . __-• . \ . 7
_t( f___.
r—L-------,_=7"1" s . '0(14 4 c1}
_, i . _......5 - - .
...-f Cri:(44
i/iF'7 --
r'
ar.
' .... _ ------- ----_----/ \ ± '
h.
Legend .....1.--„:;----..„
■
' �t
'-'' r f` 0 0.25 0.5 1 3e
Permitted Project Boundary `
i______� ____, Miles
--.,Drawn by:AKT,12.13.2019;CEO(9(gjec ��ft + L1\$- ' --- \ �.,...1�'
Jackson County, CLear\ater USGS Topographic Map
North Carolina Cashiers Quad
32 Clayton Street Figure 2
Asheville,North Carolina 28801

DocuSign Envelope ID: DB2078C8-1C66-4BD9-A600-EE24EBDCA9F8
Hlgn Hampton uoit Lourse cuivert Removal and Stream Restoration
. _. : : `' -�,.• •,+ ..n ', . Yam; �..
,.•.. f
tit.ti5
r. c_ :' .,-L • l-ttio,, 4.#, ,,. ,,;,/* ...ho & ‘ ',. , .1 : ' ,_. \‘ '', '.....51 " \
*.".*.s .,Iii.
a..If
.4
a'4'. • (b- �yT w '\ i
4+1.L a. S /,PItt Allb .
4
. , ; i, -.0..4,:. 4 .., , •044° ' -!". ' i ' ' if°''1.r-- .'
i r : : } 4 .Ir•.
,...w ior lie.:
.,,_
4,..."-, i ), -. Akfl*Al4v,'. ' - ..
prop :v -
:. 'II,i" • if.. -. •• i' 14 /.0
l? ' .,.. •:Oast mil'; .. s • /110 _.:G ,. _ ..
�: e
.' ' ' - - .: 4 Att.' 4 .441r1
:,,,,, , .
k
�., f•'r�... _�.• ':1 Arty,.{.° 7{! � Ip• ' ` ,.R�
w-
..:41,:ti-.14.... ,,,,ii,..,...,,-*,.:•:,."'-)r -.4-`-..!Si.r.:,' :',:' ,. it.1., ,-. a'. r 1: sl
_, • a :,�:. 'ice. „• `..i ' � �
4f N
r Legend ;� ' ,,I(L,'ll,';�: �. "•��' ;;
a e•, p�' ;
L----I
Permitted Project Boundary `�f, itl'I �.ii. ' „'H
11� + '
, n= UT1 to Fowlers Creek Watershed (14 AC) - :,
� :$;° ;ii .I r* ;� " 1.'
I ', 0 100 200 400
Monitoring Reach ;ir`a _''�R '. {'';" lf
,�j , ,.i ,,: , Feet
IL!
Jackson County, CLear\ater Aerial Photography
North Carolina NCCGIA(2019
32 Clayton Street Figure 3
Asheville,North Carolina 28801

DocuSign Envelope ID: DB2078C8-1C66-4BD9-A600-EE24EBDCA9F8
Hign Hampton uoit course uuivert Removal and Stream Restoration
^ ; % "x
.iti 3'.' .. .,5,. . • -
rdij
r;S.. ...„ - .,•' , \ ..
t0 �'
•
x: 1F'',, , 'P4' .� .t ." -`_ ` fir'.
"' ;' ' 67`ryr �. i A c
r d.
' j .i�: :�.. .`.'.i Il'�
ie.
;til. i I
„1 •
/ ..
BSI ` •_ •• --- `_. .
•.r�. ...'A°y,.s�3�•'i.•Yois. 1i • ,I. e. .. . b. �.9.�.'• . .
..f dC _r-- :' "[` j ,
y i 1'. ' q r „y R.'. t
•i. A..7 ..01i.
���ppp i s �
jt.it.:;•:,..,..jAP. .. .., ' .•:.4. - ...."..L1...':',A,.•;'.',-.„.. ..:: . -•.,4.:*:iitte'..' •ic'S.'0.1• i f•ri!•••-- .'••.•:'‘1:—;,'•.tr•..,: ...•.•:;': ..',..,•i::.4"' V. ••' :7 '...•Ii:: ••• 1..... ••. . . •• • •• ::'
''..t'i•... .r. !' , ''': 74:74*"... .t.,i;.• ,..::..';4:7.,• •'• i•ii•i'.1 lii' . .•WI i H'.!.. ..4i'.44'.11.* :: ' :•..... . ... .0k
,,,,o,
. . i i.','.I• ' ' • , •'' . `14-'.••..LA..;.:.-v• •—.. .; -AL. . •••• :_' ..-. •• ' 3.i 4, r.i •.2 lt• ,... , : .,: .. r ,.. ,.. . :...:• ..,,......i.;.. . _ ,.,,... ,.4...v.,
•
•
•
- . : 4- . •. Fl 4 rr t, , . : : ; ,' �. ,. -Legend . � \,. T} •• *ems,• F
{
Permitted Project Boundary .' +,:°fin 1:f:. i;:;°'''i ' `; ,:
Monitoring Reach ';. C „' t:.�' L A �. `'fyx- , r�
Soils• fit 4.r lj �y f . i:' t � . . 1
EdC; EdD - Edneyville-Chestnut Complex '.' :4 I �"4,:.r: . , �=+ '• I•;, . '' .4 ' ;
le � ¢r '•..
�': 3'` 0 100 200 400
Ud - Udorthents, loamy 1,i. •1' .., ' : '' + I Feet
. _.. _
Jackson County, CLearWaLer USDA Soils Map
North Carolina NRCS Web Soil Survey
32 Clayton Street Figure 4
Asheville,North Carolina 28801

DocuSign Envelope ID: DB2078C8-1C66-4BD9-A600-EE24EBDCA9F8
Hign Hampton uoit course uuivert Removal and Stream Restoration
s. h y , N
{ v 1i"1
,ice vN\N*4: .
/ r iilif\' P5 ®
kr A' '
•
/ XS4 -- —
i
r , � i XS3
i '
i K PP4 O
/ 1
PP3 a z
i O .
• ► .
/ XS2
i
i PP2
i /.
/ ,/-
/ XS1 /
— N
r-
i PP1 i
j 0 /'i-
i
0 50 100 200
,-
/
i i �� Feet
\ i
= „} *. Legend
► �
/ , ' •
r
i Permitted Project Boundary
— —
Monitoring Reach (UT1 to Fowlers Creek) .
Cross-Section (XS)
C Photgraphic Referece Point(PP)
Drawn by:AKT,12.13.2019;CEC Project#918
t
Jackson Count , CLearWaLer Monitoring Features Map
Y Figure 5
North Carolina
32 Clayton Street
Asheville,North Carolina 28801

DocuSign Envelope ID: DB2078C8-1C66-4BD9-A600-EE24EBDCA9F8
ATTACHMENT A:
Memo from Andrew Bick, PE, Headwaters Engineering
to David Brown, USACE and
Kevin Mitchell, NCDWR
RE: Stability Assessment and Stream Enhancements UTs
to Fowler Creek High Hampton Resort, Cashiers, Jackson
County, NC

DocuSign Envelope ID: DB2078C8-1C66-4BD9-A600-EE24EBDCA9F8
Headwaters Engineering, PC
NCBELS Lic. No. C-4500
MEMORANDUM
TO: David Brown,US Army Corps of Engineers
Kevin Mitchell,NC Division of Water Resources
FROM: Andrew Bick, PE
DATE: March 5, 2019
RE: Stability Assessment and Stream Enhancements
UTs to Fowler Creek
High Hampton Resort, Cashiers, Jackson County,NC
Approximately 880 linear feet(LF) of culvert was removed from an unnamed tributary to Fowler
Creek(referred to in the attached plans as UT1) at the High Hampton Resort golf course, which
is currently undergoing a renovation. The banks of the daylighted channel were sloped and large
stone was placed in the bed and on the banks. A subsequent sediment removal effort was
completed at the request of DWR.
UT2 is located about 1,700 LF east of UT1 in the#2 fairway. The Corps and DWR expressed
concern with the height of the drop at the beginning of the UT2 channel at a headwall where two
culverts discharge, specifically with regard to stability and aquatic organism passage.
The purpose of this memo is to document as-built surveys completed by ClearWater
Environmental Consultants (CEC), to summarize our analysis of channel stability based on this
survey and our observations of the site, and to present proposed stream enhancements.
As-Built Surveys
In February 2019, CEC staff completed total station surveys of the daylighted UT 1 channel and
UT2 near the headwall. The surveys were based on a local datum. The UT1 survey included
points along the top of both banks, the thalweg and water surface, four cross sections and several
ground points. The UT2 survey collected points along the thalweg of the channel and at a
transect immediately downstream of the headwall. The attached plans show the results of the
surveys superimposed on 2015 aerial imagery,which was collected prior to the stream
daylighting.
The plan view of UT 1 indicates a relatively straight alignment through roughly the low point of
the valley between a culvert under a cart path at the upstream end and a sediment trap at the
downstream end. The profile data indicate a slope of approximately 6 percent; the relatively
straight alignment would be expected for a slope in this range. The slope over the downstream
200 LF is noticeably flatter than the upstream 500 LF, apparently in response to the effects of the
sediment trap, which is currently a 3-foot tall riprap check dam. (In late January 2019,
Headwaters Engineering completed a laser level reference reach survey of UT1 downstream of
1

DocuSign Envelope ID: DB2078C8-1C66-4BD9-A600-EE24EBDCA9F8
the sediment trap in order to support a design to remove the trap and create a stable transition to
a bedrock slide immediately downstream of the trap.)
Cross section surveys through the daylighted reach of UTI indicate a relatively narrow and deep
channel, with width-depth ratios of 10 or less. Bank heights range from 2.4 to 3.2 feet and top
widths range from 11 to 20 feet. Cross section plots with dimension parameters are attached. As
shown on the attached photos, the bed and banks contain abundant riprap, generally ranging in
median size from 8 inches to more than 24 inches.
The UT2 survey indicates a drop of 1.8 feet from the invert of the north culvert to the thalweg
and a relatively flat slope of 1.8 percent from this point downstream. The cross-section survey
shows a relatively large channel with 3.4:1 side slopes and a maximum depth of 3.7 feet.
UT1 Stability Analysis
We used the USGS web-based hydrology tool StreamStats to estimate the drainage area above
the subject reach of UT1 and found it to be 22 acres. A digitized watershed boundary using the
Jackson County contours indicated a slightly smaller drainage area. Land use in the watershed
includes forest, the golf course and low density residential.
The North Carolina Mountain regional curve predicts a bankfull discharge of about 8 cubic feet
per second(cfs) for a 22-acre watershed. Previous experience indicates that regional curve
predictions at the extreme low end of the drainage area range such as this are not as reliable as
those in the middle of the range (between 2 and 30 square miles). Analysis of the surveyed riffle
cross sections indicates the discharge corresponding to the low bank stage is on the order of 140
to 200 cfs. The reference cross section survey by Headwaters in the relatively undisturbed
reference reach indicates a bankfull discharge of about 60 cfs.
Based primarily on a comparison to the reference reach cross section, it appears that the
daylighted channel was constructed deeper and wider than would have been designed based on a
natural channel design approach. Analyses of the as-built cross sections indicate shear stresses
in the riffles on the order of 5 to 6 pounds per square foot(psf). With reference to Shield's
equation, the predicted grain size for threshold of motion ranges from 240 to 300 mm, or 9 to 12
inches. Analysis of the reference cross section flowing full at a discharge of about 150 cfs
indicates a shear stress and threshold grain size similar to those of the constructed channel (4.8
psf and 230 mm, respectively).
We are aware of the daylighted channel being subjected to multiple flood events since it was
constructed and there does not appear to be bank erosion or bed scour. In our experience,
constructed streams are typically weakest immediately after construction and become more
resilient with time. The large stone in the channel and on the banks does not appear to have been
mobilized during any of these recent storms, and calculations indicate that even when flowing
full (well above the predicted"bankfull" discharge), the majority of the bed and bank materials
would not be mobilized. The proposed boulder steps at the downstream end of UTI will provide
additional grade control. A visual monitoring program over the next two to three years will
likely provide the data necessary to evaluate long term stream stability.
UT2 Perched Conditions
The concern expressed for UT2 is the high drop from the culverts to the receiving channel. The
proposed boulder step downstream of the headwall will reduce the drop height to about 9 inches,
and the proposed pool between the step and the headwall will help dissipate energy and promote
2

DocuSign Envelope ID: DB2078C8-1C66-4BD9-A600-EE24EBDCA9F8
better aquatic organism habitat. As with UT1,the UT2 channel has been subjected to multiple
large floods and we have not observed stability issues even without the energy dissipation effects
of the proposed pool and step. A visual monitoring program seems appropriate for UT2 as well.
Closure
Based on our review of the data and our calculations,we do not recommend any repairs or
modifications to UTI at this time beyond the sediment trap removal and boulder steps at the
downstream end. For UT2,the proposed boulder step and pool should address energy
dissipation and aquatic organism passage concerns.
If you have any questions, please call me at 828.606.0306.
Attachments:
Stream Enhancement Plans
Cross Section Plots and Shear Stress Calculations
Photos
•
)611
4)
•r a@@i 1'•'
7