20221252 Ver 1_SAW-2022-00528 Draft Prospectus_20220405

FRENCH BROAD 05 UMBRELLA MITIGATION BANK
DRAFT PROSPECTUS
Sponsored by:
RESTORATION SYSTEMS LLC
Prepared for:
The North Carolina Inter -Agency Review Team;
for distribution and comment
Sponsored by:
Restoration Systems, LLC
�S
RESTORATION
SYSTEMS I LLC
POC: Raymond Holz
Ph: 919-755-9490
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 211
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
March 2022
Prepared by:
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
POC: Grant Lewis
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603

Table of Contents
1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Project Objectives 1
1.2 Bank Sponsor and Contact Information 2
2 ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATION 2
2.1 Umbrella Mitigation Banking Instrument 2
2.2 Credit Determination 2
2.3 Credit Release Schedule 3
3 GEOGRAPHIC SERVICE AREA AND USE OF CREDITS 3
4 WATERSHED CONSIDERATIONS 3
4.1 Watershed Environmental Concerns and Mitigation Needs 3
4.2 Bank Site Selection 4
5 OWNERSHIP, EASEMENT HOLDER, AND LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT 4
6 QUALIFICATIONS OF SPONSOR 5
7 ECOLOGICAL SUITABILITY OF SITES 5
8 FINANCIAL ASSURANCES 6
9 MITIGATION PLAN 6
9.1 Reference Data 6
9.1.1 Stream Reference 6
9.1.2 Reference Forest Ecosystem 6
9.2 Design Approach 7
9.2.1 Stream Restoration 7
9.2.2 Stream Enhancement I 7
9.2.3 Stream Enhancement II 8
9.2.4 Stream Preservation 8
9.2.5 Wetlands 8
9.2.6 Riparian Restoration 8
9.3 Site Work Plans 9
9.3.1 Belt -width Preparation and Grading 9
9.3.2 Channel Excavations 9
9.3.3 Channel Plugs 10
9.3.4 Channel Backfilling 10
9.3.5 Stream Crossings 10
9.3.6 In -stream Structures 11
10 MONITORING PLAN 11
10.1 Stream Monitoring 12
10.2 Wetland Monitoring 12
10.3 Vegetation Monitoring 12
10.4 Visual Monitoring 12
11 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT AND REMEDIAL MEASURES 12
11.1 Stream Instability 13
11.2 Vegetation 13
11.3 Invasive Species 13
12 HISTORICAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS 13
13 ENDANGERED AND PROTECTED SPECIES 13
13.1 Carolina Northern Flying Squirrel 14
13.2 Roan Mountain Bluet 14
13.3 Spreading Avens 14
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Table of Contents
Phase 1— Prospectus

13.4 Blue Ridge Goldenrod 14
13.5 Appalachian Elktoe 14
13.6 Gray Bat 14
13.7 Slabside Pearlymussel 14
13.8 Northern Long -Eared Bat 14
13.8.1 Preliminary Biological Conclusions 15
14 ASSURANCE OF SUFFICIENT WATER RIGHTS 15
15 CONCLUSIONS 15
16 REFERENCES 16
17 FIGURES 18
List of Tables
Table 1: Phase 1 Site Summary 1
Table 2: Hydrological Function Objectives and Proposed Actions 1
Table 3: Water Quality Function Objectives and Proposed Actions 2
Table 4: Habitat Function Objectives and Proposed Actions 2
Table 5: Population Growth in French Broad 05 4
Figure 1:
Figure 2:
Figure 3:
Appendix A:
Appendix B:
Appendix C:
List of Figures
Site Locations Map
Hydrologic Unit Map
Geographic Service Area Map
Gentry Branch Mitigation Site
Davis Cove Mitigation Site
Sliding Knob Mitigation Site
Appendices
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Table of Contents
Phase 1— Prospectus

1 INTRODUCTION
Restoration Systems, LLC ("Bank Sponsor") proposes to develop three -stream and riparian wetland
mitigation sites (collectively referred to as "Phase I Sites") under the to -be -developed Restoration Systems
French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank ("the Bank"). Phase I Sites include Gentry Branch, Davis
Cove, and Sliding Knob — all located in Madison County, North Carolina (Figure 1; Table 1). The proposed
umbrella structure of the Bank is designed to initially permit Phase 1 Sites while allowing for the
establishment of future mitigation bank parcels not yet identified.
Table 1: Phase 1 Site Summary
Site Coordinates
Hydro
Status*
Existing
Length (LF)
Mitigation Type
Approx. Final
Length (LF)
Gentry Branch
SAW-2022-00528
Davis Cove
SAW-2022-00529
Sliding Knob
SAW-2022-00530
35.789956, Per/Int
-82.825390 Cold Water
35.758804, Per/Int
-82.878620 Cold Water
35.737648, Per/Int
-82.850275 Cold Water
13,088
16,842
4,360
Restoration,
Enhancement,
Preservation
Restoration,
Enhancement,
Preservation
Restoration,
Enhancement,
Preservation
13,707
16,491
4,400
Totals 34,290
34,598
* Per = perennial; Int = intermittent
The purpose of the Bank is to provide stream and wetland mitigation credits to compensate for impacts
to Waters of the United States and/or State Waters within the service area, Hydrologic Unit 06010105
(French Broad 05, Figure 2). The proposed Bank's structure, operation, and management are detailed in
the main prospectus document. Existing conditions and proposed site work for Phase 1 Sites are described
by site in the attached appendices: Appendix A (Gentry Branch), Appendix B (Davis Cove), and Appendix
C (Sliding Knob).
1.1 Project Objectives
The overall objectives of the Bank are to restore or otherwise improve the following functions: 1)
hydrological, 2) water quality, and 3) habitat. Tables 2-4 provide an overview of the Bank's Phase 1
objectives and the specific actions proposed to accomplish them.
Table 2: Hydrological Function Objectives and Proposed Actions
Functional Improvement Objectives Proposed Actions
Floodplain Connectivity
Floodplain Resistance
Stream Stability &
Sediment Transport
Surface and Subsurface Storage and
Retention
Reconnect channels with historic floodplains
Plant woody riparian buffers; increase microtopography
Reconstruct stream channels, sized to convey bankfull discharges
and watershed sediment supplies
Channels constructed or raised to historic floodplain elevations;
increased floodplain hydraulic resistance by planting woody
vegetation and increasing microtopography
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 1
Phase 1— Prospectus

Table 3: Water Quality Function Objectives and Proposed Actions
Functional Improvement Objectives
Proposed Actions
Remove Pollutant Sources
Cattle exclusion
Upland Pollutant Filtration
Plant woody riparian buffers; construct marsh treatment features
intercepting overland flows
Floodplain Biogeochemical Processing
Increase floodplain connectivity, plant woody riparian buffers;
increase microtopography; construct marsh treatment areas
Thermal Regulation
Plant woody riparian buffers to provide shade
Table 4: Habitat Function Objectives and Proposed Actions
Functional Improvement Objectives
Proposed Actions
In -channel Habitat
Construct stable channels, geomorphology designed to increase
hydraulic and bedform habitat heterogeneity
Riparian Habitat and Structure
Plant native, woody riparian buffers to provide foraging, nesting, and
cover for terrestrial species as well as refugia for aquatic species
1.2 Bank Sponsor and Contact Information
Restoration Systems, LLC
Raymond Holz
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 211
Raleigh, NC 27604
[e-mail]
919.604.9314
2 ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATION
2.1 Umbrella Mitigation Banking Instrument
The Sponsor proposes the Bank under an umbrella mitigation banking instrument ("UMBI"). As proposed,
the UMBI would allow for multiple phases. Phase I is described in this prospectus and, if approved, will
serve as the Bank's first source of mitigation credit. The Sponsor also proposes the incorporation of
additional sites not yet identified but within the Geographic Service Area (Section 3) into the Bank,
following Interagency Review Team ("IRT") review and approval.
2.2 Credit Determination
Credit for Phase I, and all additional phases, shall be based on the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
most current mitigation credit determination methodology. Presently, the USACE is utilizing CFR part 332
(Compensatory Mitigation for Losses of Aquatic Resources) along with Wilmington District Stream and
Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update (IRT 2016) to quantify mitigation project credit potential. If
other methods are released and become de facto requirements for stream mitigation projects in the
USACE, future phases will utilize these methods as appropriate.
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 2
Phase 1 — Prospectus

2.3 Credit Release Schedule
Credits generated by actions described and approved in the Bank's final UMBI shall be released in
predetermined increments according to the milestones agreed to by the Sponsor and the IRT in the UMBI's
credit release schedule. The Sponsor will use the credit release schedule detailed for stream mitigation
banks in IRT (2016).
3 GEOGRAPHIC SERVICE AREA AND USE OF CREDITS
Located within the Blue Ridge level III ecoregion and the French Broad River basin, the Bank's geographic
service area ("GSA") is defined by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) 8-digit Hydrological Unit
Code ("HUC") within which the Bank's sites are located, the French Broad 06010105 (Figure 3).
The Bank's credits are proposed to be used to offset unavoidable, permitted impacts within the Bank's
GSA. Use of the Bank's credits outside of its GSA may be permissible with approval by the USACE, which
will be considered on a case -by -case basis.
4 WATERSHED CONSIDERATIONS
4.1 Watershed Environmental Concerns and Mitigation Needs
The French Broad River basin spans over 2,800 square miles and drains to the Gulf of Mexico via the
Tennessee, Ohio, and Mississippi Rivers. In North Carolina, the basin comprises three major drainage
areas: the Upper French Broad, the Pigeon River, and the Nolichucky River subbasins, and contains all or
portions of Avery, Buncombe, Haywood, Henderson, Madison, Mitchell, Transylvania, and Yancey
Counties.
The estimated population for the basin is just over 427,000, based on 2000 census data. Population
growth is highest in Buncombe and Henderson Counties, and these areas are experiencing rapid growth
while the rest of the basin is undergoing moderate growth (NCDWQ 2011). General basin -wide
recommendations to preserve water quality in these expanding areas include encouraging low -impact
development, stormwater runoff control measures, a greater emphasis on wastewater collection systems,
and agriculture BMPs. In addition, lands should be prioritized to conserve both habitat and protection of
water quality.
Phase 1 Sites are in the Upper French Broad subbasin, encompassing 1,658 square miles, making it the
largest of the three French Broad subbasins. In addition, this is the most populous subbasin, mainly
because the land is less sloped, and the soils are more suitable for development and agriculture. As a
result, urban development and agricultural activity are concentrated in valleys near waterways and, in
many cases, up to stream banks.
Between the 2000 and 2020 censuses, the basin's population grew considerably, with counties growing
between 10 percent (Mitchell) and 30 percent (Henderson). According to recent population estimates,
the general population growth trend will continue, which indicates Buncombe and Henderson counties
are all growing at or faster than the state's 9.48 percent (Table 5) (USCB 2021). Data suggests land
development activities will increase in frequency, as will aquatic ecosystem impacts related to such
development. Therefore, there is an immediate and prolonged need for compensatory stream mitigation
in the watershed. Of further benefit, aquatic ecosystem restoration projects can reduce nutrient loading
in sensitive downstream receiving waters.
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 3
Phase 1— Prospectus

Table 5: Population Growth in French Broad 05
Municipality 2010 Population 2020 Population Percent Increase
Asheville 83,393 94,589 13
Hendersonville 13,137 15,137 15
Marshall* 872 777 -11
Madison County 20,764 21,193 2
Buncombe County 238,318 269,452 13
Henderson County 106,740 116,281 9
*Town of Marshall experienced a population decline over the 10-year period.
4.2 Bank Site Selection
Based on the analysis presented in Section 4.1, the French Broad 05 was targeted as a watershed in need
of stream and riparian wetland mitigation. The Sponsor and its consultant, Axiom Environmental, Inc.
(Axiom), searched for sites possessing stream and riparian wetland restoration and enhancement
opportunities. Identified sites were prioritized based on geomorphic condition and land use, and the
necessary landowners were contacted to gauge their interest in participating in a mitigation project. Sites
with willing landowners were then pursued further. As real estate in the area is generally well subdivided,
many of the identified opportunities are not currently feasible because such sites require the cooperation
of several landowners to achieve sufficient ecological and economic scale. Therefore, the selection of the
Phase I properties was based on a combination of geomorphic conditions, land use, and the willingness
of landowners to participate.
5 OWNERSHIP, EASEMENT HOLDER, AND LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT
The Phase I properties are currently owned by the following people or organizations:
• Gentry Branch (PIN 8754843880) — Nancy Baker, Ted Baker, Jr. and Melba Baker, and Kenneth
Baker and Lucille Baker
• Davis Cove (PIN 8766-44-1702) — Veda Davis
• Sliding Knob (PIN 8754843880) — Patsy Buckner
Hereafter, these owners will collectively be referred to as "the Landowners."
The Sponsor and the Landowners have executed separate Agreements for Purchase and Sale of
Conservation Easements covering approximately 167 acres along Gentry Branch, 32 acres along Davis
Cove, and 8.7 acres along Sliding Knob. Following USACE approval of the UMBI and the Phase I Site
Mitigation Plans, the Sponsor will exercise its rights provided under the above -referenced agreements.
All sites governed by the Bank will be protected in perpetuity by a conservation easement approved by
the USACE. At a minimum, conservation easements will be written to prohibit incompatible uses that
might jeopardize the objectives of the Bank. As Grantee of the conservation easement, the Sponsor will
first acquire the easement and then assign it to a qualified easement holder to be held in perpetuity.
Potential easement holders include but are not limited to the North Carolina Wildlife Habitat Foundation,
Broad Water Innovations, or the North Carolina State Property Office. The Sponsor will provide the
Easement Holder with a financial sum in an amount agreeable to both parties.
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 4
Phase 1 — Prospectus

Easements will be stewarded in general accordance with the guidelines published by the National Land
Trust Alliance. Specific responsibilities include:
• Conservation easement compliance — annual inspection of a site
• Site visit coordination with the landowner when possible
• Annual compliance reports are sent to the landowner when possible
• Violations and potential violations are addressed following protocols outlined in the conservation
easement.
The Sponsor will be responsible for site management actions during the operational period. Following a
site closeout, the Long -Term Manager would assume long-term management obligations. Site design and
construction will ensure sites are self-sustaining. As a result, long-term management activities will be
limited to routine boundary inspections and, when necessary, marking easement boundaries to provide
clear identification of conservation areas. The Long -Term Manager and Easement Holder will likely be the
same entity. The Sponsor will provide the easement holder with a financial sum in an amount agreeable
to both parties.
6 QUALIFICATIONS OF SPONSOR
Restoration Systems (RS) is an environmental restoration, mitigation banking, and full -delivery mitigation
firm founded in 1998. The firm was formed to improve the quality of environmental restoration and
mitigation by locating and acquiring the best available sites, planning restoration using proven science,
and constructing sites with the most qualified contractors. RS staff has been involved in environmental
mitigation and mitigation banking since 1992, and their Project Managers have more than 80 years of
experience in resource evaluation, environmental restoration, and mitigation implementation.
Corporate experience with the principals began with the completion of North Carolina's first full -delivery
mitigation project in 1997, the Barra Farms Mitigation Bank (623-acres), and in 2001 with the Bear Creek —
Mill Branch Mitigation Bank (450-acres) and Sleepy Creek Mitigation Site (550-acres). To date, RS has
permitted 81 compensatory mitigation sites in North Carolina, including 55 for the State's In-Lue-Fee
program, the Division of Mitigation Services, and nine stream and wetland compensatory mitigation banks
under the 2008 Federal Compensatory Mitigation Rule. These projects total over 470,000 I.ft. of streams
and 740 acres of wetlands, and 2,700 acres of eased property.
7 ECOLOGICAL SUITABILITY OF SITES
Primary considerations for selecting the Phase I Sites included the potential for protection/improvement
of water quality within a region of North Carolina under development and livestock/agricultural pressure.
More specifically, considerations included desired aquatic resource functions, hydrologic conditions, soil
characteristics, aquatic habitat diversity, habitat connectivity, compatibility with adjacent land uses,
reasonably foreseeable effects the mitigation projects will have on ecologically important aquatic and
terrestrial resources, and potential development trends and land -use changes.
Restoration, enhancement, and preservation work proposed at Phase 1 Sites (Appendix A, B, & C) will
reduce existing nutrient and sediment loads to downstream waters. In addition, restoration work will
improve in -channel aquatic and riparian habitats.
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 5
Phase 1— Prospectus

8 FINANCIAL ASSURANCES
For each site, the Sponsor will provide financial assurances in a form acceptable to the IRT and sufficient
to ensure completion of all mitigation work, required reporting and monitoring, and any remedial work
that may be required according to the final UMBI and site -specific Mitigation Plan.
Before the first Phase 1 credit release, as well as all additional sites permitted under the proposed UMBI,
the Sponsor shall furnish a financial assurance instrument covering all reasonably anticipated costs
relating to construction, operation, monitoring, maintenance, and any remedial measures associated with
each bank parcel. This instrument shall consist of either a Performance Bond underwritten by a surety
company licensed to do business in North Carolina with a Best's current rating of not less than "A-, "or a
casualty insurance policy in an appropriate form to be approved by the USACE in compliance with current
USACE policy and guidance documents. The total value of such a bond or policy will be based on
reasonably expected costs associated with approved Mitigation Plans, plus a reasonable contingency,
which collectively shall be sufficient to ensure the project will be successfully completed in accordance
with applicable performance standards.
If performance bonds are utilized, the initial performance bond shall be replaced following completion of
construction and USACE approval of the as -built report. The Sponsor shall then furnish a replacement
monitoring bond to be valued based on reasonably anticipated costs associated with project monitoring
and maintenance. Once all performance standards have been met, the Sponsor may withdraw monies
from or otherwise terminate the financial assurance instrument described in this paragraph.
9 MITIGATION PLAN
The primary goals of the Phase I mitigation plan include: 1) reducing and/or eliminating non -point source
pollution associated with heavy livestock and agricultural activities; 2) improving water quality functions
by restoring native, woody riparian vegetation adjacent to Phase I channels; 3) improving floodplain
function by increasing hydraulic resistance to floodwaters; 4) improving aquatic habitat through channel
stabilization and increased habitat heterogeneity; and 5) improving near -channel habitat for terrestrial
species and refugia for aquatic species through the restoration of native, woody riparian vegetation.
Site -specific information for Phase 1 Sites is provided in Appendix A (Gentry Branch), Appendix B (Davis
Cove), and Appendix C (Sliding Knob). Common mitigation plan data, methodologies, monitoring
protocols, cultural resources, and endangered/protected species are detailed in Sections 9-13.
9.1 Reference Data
9.1.1 Stream Reference
At this time, site -specific reference streams have not been identified. However, relatively undisturbed
sections of streams in the proposed preservation reaches of Phase 1 Sites have been identified. Data
collected at reference sites included cross -sectional data, benthic macroinvertebrate collections, and
hardwood forest composition, was utilized to approximate mitigation potential of Phase 1 Sites. These
reference reaches have been compared to regional curves for the Mountains of North Carolina (Harman
et al 2001), allowing for a comparison of existing, disturbed conditions to relatively undisturbed reference
conditions at the proposed Phase 1 Sites.
9.1.2 Reference Forest Ecosystem
According to Mitigation Site Classification ("MIST") guidelines (USEPA 1990), Reference Forest Ecosystems
("RFEs") must be established for restoration sites. RFEs are forested areas used to model restoration
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 6
Phase 1— Prospectus

efforts in relation to soils, hydrology, and vegetation. RFEs should be ecologically stable climax
communities and should represent believed historical conditions of the restoration site. Data describing
plant community composition and structure are collected at the RFEs and subsequently applied as
reference data for the design of each Phase 1 Site.
Reference vegetation communities for Phase 1 Sites have not been identified. A site -specific reference
forest will be located during detailed mitigation plan development, with tree and shrub species identified.
In addition, other relevant species descriptions for Mountain Alluvial Forest and Montane Oak -Hickory
Forest (Schafale and Weakley 1990) will be used to develop a final RFE. Species that may occur in these
vegetative communities are listed in Table 6.
Table 6: Reference Forest Ecosystem Species
Mountain Alluvial Forest Montane Oak -Hickory Forest
(Floodplains and Riparian Forest) (Upland Side Slopes)
Canopy Species Understory Species
Canopy Species
Understory Species
Pinus strobus Cornus florida
Quercus alba Carpinus caroliniana
Platanus occidentalis Lindera benzoin
Robinia pseudoacacia Rhododendron sp.
Acer rubrum Rhododendron
periclymenoides
Quercus rubra Euonymous americana
Prunus serotina
Liriodendron tulipifera
Tsuga sp.
Acer rubrum
Carya
alba/tomentosa/glabra
Liriodendron tulipifera
Pinus taeda
Pinus virginiana
Quercus alba
Quercus montana
Quercus rubra
Acer rubrum
Oxydendrum arboreum
Nyssa sylvatica
Amelanchier arborea
Pinus taeda
Cornus florida
9.2 Design Approach
9.2.1 Stream Restoration
Stream restoration is are designed to restore stable, meandering streams that approximate
hydrodynamics, stream geometry, and local microtopography relative to reference and on -site conditions.
Restoration of Phase 1 Sites will be mainly Priority I (with the exceptions of Priority 2 at tie-in locations)
restoration throughout. Within Priority I restoration areas, bankfull elevations will be raised to meet the
adjacent valley floodplain elevation. Stream Restoration is expected to entail 1) channel excavation, 2)
channel stabilization, 3) channel diversion, and 4) channel backfill, further detailed in Section 9.3 — Site
Work Plans.
In portions of Phase I Sites, the use of restoration may not be necessary to improve a system's ecological
function. In such cases, enhancement activities will be implemented. For the purposes of the UMBI,
Stream Enhancement I and Stream Enhancement II are defined per USACE (2016).
9.2.2 Stream Enhancement I
Stream Enhancement I is expected to include cessation of agricultural activities (including row crop
production, hay production, and/or livestock grazing), removal of invasive species, raising the channel bed
elevation to reconnect bankfull stream flows to the abandoned floodplain, and planting with native,
woody species. Stream Enhancement I will generally entail the alteration of stream channel dimension
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 7
Phase 1— Prospectus

and profile as the channel is lifted to the historic floodplain elevation. These measures are expected to
facilitate stream dynamics associated with a natural, relatively undisturbed stream in the mountain region
of North Carolina.
9.2.3 Stream Enhancement II
Stream Enhancement II is expected to include the cessation of agricultural activities (including row crop
production, hay production, and/or livestock grazing), removal of invasive species, and supplemental
planting with native, woody tree species. Stream enhancement II will extend a minimum distance of 30-
feet from the top of stream banks. These measures are expected to facilitate stream recovery and prevent
further degradation of the streams.
9.2.4 Stream Preservation
Based on the mitigation rule (33 CFR Section 332.3 - General compensatory mitigation requirements),
preservation may be used to provide compensatory mitigation if the following criteria are met.
1. The resources to be preserved provide important physical, chemical, or biological functions for
the watershed.
2. The resources to be preserved contribute significantly to the ecological sustainability of the
watershed.
3. Preservation is determined by the district engineer to be appropriate and practicable.
4. The resources are under threat of destruction or adverse modifications.
5. The preserved resources will be permanently protected through an appropriate legal instrument.
9.2.5 Wetlands
Areas of jurisdictional wetlands were delineated at each of the Phase 1 Sites. Wetland re-establishment,
rehabilitation, enhancement, and preservation will generate riparian wetland credit at agreed ratios.
Wetland re-establishment of drained hydric soils is designed to restore a fully functioning wetland system,
provide surface water storage, nutrient cycling, remove imported elements and compounds, and create
a variety and abundance of wildlife habitat. Rehabilitation and enhancement of existing wetlands will
improve their physical, chemical, and/or biological characteristics and result in a gain of wetland function
but not in wetland acres. Wetland preservation will permanently protect high -functioning jurisdictional
wetlands.
9.2.6 Riparian Restoration
Restoration of floodplain forest and streamside habitat allows for the development and expansion of
characteristic species across the landscape. Ecotonal changes between community types contribute to
diversity and provide secondary benefits, such as enhanced feeding and nesting opportunities for
mammals, birds, amphibians, and other wildlife.
Planted streamside trees and shrubs will include species with high value for sediment stabilization, rapid
growth rates, and the ability to withstand hydraulic forces associated with bankfull and overbank flow
events. Streamside trees and shrubs will be planted within 15-feet of the channel throughout the meander
beltwidth. Shrub elements will be planted along reconstructed stream banks, concentrated along outer
bends.
Deeply rooted riparian vegetation will be restored as needed at all Phase I and future sites. Planting
vegetation on cleared stream banks is proposed to reestablish native/historic community patterns within
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 8
Phase 1— Prospectus

the stream corridor as well as associated side slopes and transition areas. Revegetating floodplains and
stream banks will provide overall system stability, shade, and wildlife habitat. In addition, viable riparian
communities will improve system biogeochemical function by filtering pollutants from overland and
shallow subsurface flows and providing organic materials to adjacent stream channels.
Variations in vegetative planting will occur based on the topography and hydraulic condition of soils.
Vegetative species composition will be based on RFEs, site -specific features, and community descriptions
from Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina (Schafale and Weakley 1990).
Community associations to be utilized include 1) Montane Alluvial Forest, 2) Montane Oak -Hickory Forest,
and 3) Streamside Assemblage. A list of species organized by Schafale and Weakley (1990) communities
is presented below. This list is for planning purposes only. Final planting may include some or all of the
species below. In addition, other species may be added if appropriate and available.
Montane Alluvial Forest
1. Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis)
2. Eastern hemlock (Tsuga canadensis)
3. White oak (Quercus alba)
4. Tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera)
5. River birch (Betula nigra)
6. Hornbeam (Carpinus caroliniana)
7. Smooth alder (Alnus serrulata)
8. Sweet birch (Betula lento)
9. Witch -Hazel (Hamamelis virginiana)
Stream -Side Assemblage
1. Black willow (Salix nigra)
2. Buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis)
3. Shadbush (Amelanchier arborea)
Montane Oak -Hickory Forest
1. White oak (Quercus alba)
2. Red oak (Quercus rubra)
3. Chestnut oak (Quercus montana)
4. Mockernut hickory (Carya tomentosa)
5. Pignut hickory (Carya glabra)
6. Tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera)
7. Flowering dogwood (Corpus florida)
8. Black Gum (Nyssa sylvatica)
9. Sourwood (Oxydendrum arboretum)
9.3 Site Work Plans
9.3.1 Belt -width Preparation and Grading
Care will be taken to avoid the removal of existing, deeply rooted vegetation within the belt -width
corridor, which often provides channel stability. Material excavated during grading will be stockpiled
immediately adjacent to abandoned channel segments and ultimately used as backfill for abandoned
segments following stream restoration.
Spoil material may be placed to stabilize temporary access roads, minimizing the underlying floodplain's
compaction. However, all spoil will be removed from floodplain surfaces upon completion of construction
activities.
After the preparation of the corridor, the design channels and updated profile surveys will be developed,
and the locations of each meander wavelength will be plotted and staked along the profile. Pool locations
and other channel features may be modified in the field based on local variations in the floodplain profile.
9.3.2 Channel Excavations
Channels will be constructed within the range of values developed during detailed planning. Regional
curves and/or reference stream reaches will be used to develop various stream geometry attributes.
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 9
Phase 1— Prospectus

Stream banks and local belt -width areas of constructed channels will be immediately planted with shrub
and herbaceous vegetation to initiate stability, preventing unintended erosion. Deposition of shrub and
woody debris into and/or overhanging the constructed channels will be used to further increase each
channel's resistance to shear stress. Particular attention will be directed toward providing vegetative
cover and root growth along the outer bends of each stream meander. Live willow stakes will be
purchased and/or collected on -site and inserted through the root/erosion mat into underlying soils.
9.3.3 Channel Plugs
Impermeable plugs will be installed within abandoned channel segments. Plugs will consist of low -
permeability materials or hardened structures designed to be of sufficient strength to withstand the
erosive energy of surface flow events. Dense clays, imported from off -site if necessary, will be compacted
within each channel for plug construction. Each plug will be a sufficient width and depth to form an
embedded overlap in the existing banks and bed.
9.3.4 Channel Backfilling
After impermeable plugs have been installed, abandoned channels will be backfilled. Stockpiled materials
will be pushed into abandoned channels. Suitable material used for backfilling may be derived from on -
site or off -site sources. Topsoil and vegetation debris (e.g., root mats, shrubs, woody debris, etc.) will be
redistributed across the backfill area upon completion.
9.3.5 Stream Crossings
Landowner use will necessitate the installation of pipe, bridge, or ford crossings to allow access to portions
of property otherwise isolated by mitigation activities. Specific crossing types have not been determined
for Phase 1 Sites. A general approach for each type is detailed below.
Pipe Crossing
Pipe crossings would be constructed with a suitably sized baseflow pipe to allow for stormwater flows.
Smaller floodplain pipes would be installed to enable overflow discharge from the upstream floodplain to
pass freely to the downstream floodplain. Materials will include hydraulically stable rip -rap or suitable
rock. The crossing would be large enough to handle anticipated vehicular traffic. Approach grades to a
piped crossing would be at an approximate 10:1 slope and constructed of hard, scour -resistant crushed
rock or other permeable material, free of fines. If necessary, fencing would be installed on the roadbed to
restrict livestock access to the site.
Bridge Crossing
Bridge crossings would span beyond the proposed bankfull width and at a height to allow for stormwater
flows. If appropriate, adjacent floodplain pipes would be installed to enable overflow discharge from the
upstream floodplain to pass freely to the downstream floodplain. Hydraulically stable rip -rap or suitable
rock would be placed along the stream banks under the bridge to prevent scour and erosion. The crossing
would be large enough to handle anticipated farm and livestock use. Approach grades to a piped crossing
would be at an approximate 10:1 slope and constructed of hard, scour -resistant crushed rock or other
permeable material, free of fines. If necessary, fencing would be installed on the roadbed to restrict
livestock access to the site.
Ford Crossings
On very low -volume roads and trails, ford crossings can be more appropriate than pipe and bridge
crossings. Designed to be overtopped by high flows, debris, or ice -laden flows. The roadbed of a ford
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 10
Phase 1— Prospectus

crossing can be armored to prevent erosion from vehicular use and significant storm events. Appropriately
sized rocks (boulders) are firmly placed on the downstream side of the crossing to reduce scour and
dissipate energy. Approach grades to a ford crossing would be at an approximate 10:1 slope and
constructed of hard, scour -resistant crushed rock or other permeable material, free of fines.
9.3.6 In -stream Structures
In -stream structures for grade control and habitat are essential for successful stream restoration. In -
stream structures may be placed in the channel to elevate local water surface profiles, potentially
flattening the water -energy slope or gradient. The structures will likely consist of log/rock cross -vanes or
log/rock j-hook vanes designed primarily to direct stream energy into the center of the channel and away
from banks. In addition, structures will be placed in relatively straight reaches to provide secondary
(perpendicular) flow cells during bankfull events.
Log vanes may also be used to direct high -velocity flows during bankfull events toward the center of
constructed channels. Log vanes will be constructed utilizing large tree trunks harvested on -site or
imported from off -site as necessary. Tree stems harvested for a log cross -vane arm must be long enough
to be embedded into the stream channel and extend several feet into the floodplain. Logs will create an
arm that slopes from the center of the channel upward to each stream bank at an angle of 20 to 30-
degrees. A trench will be dug into the stream channel that is deep enough for the head of the log to be at
or below the channel invert. The trench is then extended into the floodplain, and the log is set into the
trench such that the log arm is below the floodplain elevation. If the log is not of sufficient size to
completely block streamflow (gaps occur between the log and channel bed), a footer log will be installed
beneath the header log. Support pilings will then be situated at the base of the log and at the head of the
log to hold the login place. Once these vanes are in place, filter fabric is toed into a trench on the upstream
side of the vane and draped over the structure to force water over the vane. The upstream side of the
structure is then backfilled with suitable material.
Drop structures will be necessary at the outfalls of some constructed channels to match preconstruction
elevations. Drop structures will be constructed out of suitable natural materials, depending upon
anticipated scour from the restored stream channels. The structures will be constructed to resist erosive
forces associated with hydraulic drops.
10 MONITORING PLAN
The Bank's performance standards and monitoring plan will be based on the IRT (2016) guidance
document titled Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update. Monitoring
will occur over seven years, as outlined in Table 7. Additional monitoring, aside from site -specific
performance standards, will occur to identify areas under an IRT-approved Adaptive Management or
Remedial Action Plan (Section 11).
Table 7. Monitoring Schedule
Resource
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Streams
x
x
x
x
x
Wetlands
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Vegetation
x
x
x
x
x
Visual Assessment
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Report Submittal
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Phase 1 — Prospectus
Page 11

10.1 Stream Monitoring
Stream monitoring protocols will be developed for all reaches involving Stream Restoration, Enhancement
II, and Enhancement I with in -channel work. Protocols will include a collection of the following:
longitudinal profile (collected as part of a sites' as -built surveys), permanent channel cross -sections, and
crest gauges to monitor frequency and magnitude of bankfull events. Visual assessments will be
conducted by walking the length of each channel. Preconstruction and post -construction photographs will
be compiled.
10.2 Wetland Monitoring
Groundwater monitoring gauges will be installed to take daily measurements after hydrological
modifications are performed. Sampling will continue throughout the entire year. In addition, an on -site
rain gauge will document rainfall data for comparison of groundwater conditions with extended drought
conditions.
10.3 Vegetation Monitoring
Restoration monitoring procedures for vegetation are designed in accordance with CVS-EEP Protocol for
Recording Vegetation Level1-2 Plot Sampling Only (Version 4.2) (Lee et al. 2008), or the latest NC Division
of Mitigation Services data entry tool. Permanent and random vegetation plots, measuring 100 meters
square) would be established to sample two percent of a site's planted area. In each sample plot,
vegetation parameters to be monitored and reported include species, count, height, date of planting, and
grid location of each planted stem. Volunteer species encountered during monitoring will be counted,
identified to species level, measured, and recorded.
After planting has been completed in winter or early spring, an initial evaluation will be performed to
verify planting methods and determine initial species composition and density. If necessary, supplemental
planting and additional site modification would be implemented. Baseline vegetation data would be
reported in a Baseline Monitoring / As -built Report.
During the first year, vegetation will receive visual observation periodically to ascertain the degree of
overtopping of planted stems by nuisance species. Year 1 quantitative sampling will occur at a minimum
of six months after the initial planting. During monitoring years 2-7, quantitative vegetation sampling
would be performed between July 1 and leaf drop.
10.4 Visual Monitoring
Visual monitoring of general site conditions that may or may not be part of stream and vegetation
monitoring protocols will be conducted at least twice during each monitoring year. One visual inspection
can be completed during the stream and/or vegetation monitoring. The other inspection will occur
independently and must be separated by at least 5 months. Monitoring will be conducted by traversing
the entire site to identify and document areas of low stem density, poor plant vigor, prolonged inundation,
native and exotic invasive species, beaver activity, excessive herbivory, easement encroachment,
indicators of livestock access, and other areas of concern.
11 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT AND REMEDIAL MEASURES
If monitoring results indicate a site will not meet one or more of its performance standards, an adaptive
management plan will be developed and remedial actions implemented following notification and
approval by the Bank's USACE project manager. Adaptive management and remedial measures are
discussed in general below and will be developed further in each Bank Parcel's Mitigation Plan.
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 12
Phase 1— Prospectus

11.1 Stream Instability
If stream monitoring and/or visual monitoring identify stream stability problems that worsen or otherwise
threaten other portions of a mitigation site, repairs will be made as necessary. Persistent problems will
be evaluated to determine if design or construction are contributing factors. Should such systemic
problems be identified and reasonably determined to be unfixable, the IRT may decide to adjust a site's
mitigation credit potential.
11.2 Vegetation
Vegetation remedial action may include replanting and, if needed, corrective measures based on a
determination of potential reasons for mortality (e.g., portions of a site are too wet for planted species).
Low vegetation vigor remedial action may include but is not limited to deep ripping, replanting (same or
similar species), mowing, herbicide application, fertilization, and replanting with other species possessing
condition -specific tolerance.
11.3 Invasive Species
If invasive or otherwise undesirable species —as defined in an appendix to the NC SAM Users Manual (NC
SFAT 2014)—reasonable efforts will be made to eradicate or otherwise control the growth and
distribution of the species across the mitigation site. Such actions may involve herbicide applications,
mechanical and/or hand removal, or prescribed burns.
12 HISTORICAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS
An in -person and digital review of Phase I Sites was conducted during the summer and fall of 2021 to
ascertain the presence of structures or other features that may be eligible for inclusion on the National
Register of Historic Places. No structures were identified within proposed easement boundaries; however,
coordination with State Historic Preservation Office will occur during the Mitigation Plan development to
determine if any significant cultural resources are present. This review would include coordination with
any American Indian groups through the USACE project manager
13 ENDANGERED AND PROTECTED SPECIES
The United States Fish and Wildlife Service does not list any protected species as occurring in Madison
County (USFWS 2021) (Table 8). If present, these species are likely to benefit from the restoration efforts.
Table 8: Federal Species of Concern, Madison County, NC
Common Name
Scientific Name Potential Habitat Present
Carolina northern flying squirrel
Roan Mountain bluet
Spreading avens
Blue Ridge goldenrod
Appalachian elktoe
Gray bat
Slabside Pearlymussel
Northern Long -Eared Bat
Glaucomys sabrinus coloratus
Hedyotis purpurea var. montana
Geum radiatum
Solidago spithamaea
Alasmidonta raveneliana)
Myotis grisescens
Pleuronaia dolabelloides
Myotis septentrionalis
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 13
Phase 1 — Prospectus

13.1 Carolina Northern Flying Squirrel
The Carolina flying squirrel typically occurs in spruce -fir forests and mature hardwood forest adjacent to
spruce -fir forests at elevations above 4000 ft (Weigl 1987).
13.2 Roan Mountain Bluet
Roan Mountain bluet is endemic to the high Blue Ridge mountains of North Carolina and Tennessee,
mostly from 4200 to 6300 ft in elevation. It grows in crevices of rock outcrops as well as in thin, gravelly
soils of grassy balds near summit outcrops (Weakley 1993).
13.3 Spreading Avens
Spreading avens usually occurs at elevations greater than 5000 ft in mountain grass balds or in grassy
clearings in heath balds as well as in crevices of granitic rock; it cannot tolerate shading or crowding (Kral
1983).
13.4 Blue Ridge Goldenrod
Blue Ridge goldenrod is found on rocky summits above approximately 4000 ft elevation in the mountains.
Typically found in full sun, this plant may be found rooted in fine sands that have accumulated in cracks
and pockets of granitic rocks or bluff ledges, or associated with grasses and sedges on grass balds
contiguous to rock outcrops (Kral 1983).
13.5 Appalachian Elktoe
Suitable habitat for Appalachian elktoe is well -oxygenated riffle areas with sand and gravel substrate
among cobbles and boulders. Current is usually moderate to swift and depth is no more than 3 feet (0.9
meter) (Parmalee and Bogan 1998).
13.6 Gray Bat
Gray bats roost in large limestone caves year-round, but migrate from summer maternity colonies and
bachelor roosts in late summer to caves used for hibernation. Maternity roosts are typically located in
caves with large flowing streams (Handley 1991). Roosts are located near large permanent water bodies,
such as rivers and reservoirs, over which gray bats forage. North Carolina is on the periphery of the range
for gray bat, and, in North Carolina, this species is known from a single individual which had been tagged
in Tennessee and probably represents a vagrant (Webster et al. 1985).
13.7 Slabside Pearlymussel
The slabside pearlymussel is primarily a large creek to moderately -sized river species. It generally is found
in gravel substrates with interstitial sand, with moderate current, at depths less than 1 meter deep in
moderate to swift current velocities. This species requires flowing, well oxygenated waters to thrive
(USFWS 2021).
13.8 Northern Long -Eared Bat
A review of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Asheville Ecological Services Field Office
web page ( ) on November 10,
2021 indicates that the Site watershed is outside an area where incidental take may be a special
consideration. Further coordination with the USFWS will occur throughout the project in support of this
species; however, at this time no additional surveys are expected for the Northern Long Eared Bat.
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 14
Phase 1— Prospectus

13.8.1 Preliminary Biological Conclusions
Only two species on the county list have habitat within or adjacent to the proposed Bank Site boundaries:
Appalachian elktoe and Northern long-eared bat. Surveys for Appalachian elktoe will occur prior to project
initiation. As described above no further surveys for Northern long-eared bat are expected.
14 ASSURANCE OF SUFFICIENT WATER RIGHTS
In the State of North Carolina, water rights are owned by the State (General Statute 142-211 (NC GS §
143-211(a)). Developed using the "riparian rights" doctrine, water law in North Carolina entitles a riparian
landowner to the natural flow of a stream running through or along their land. The landowner has the
right to make "reasonable use" of the watercourse, meaning the landowner may use the water as long as
their use does not interfere with the reasonable use of another downstream riparian landowner.
Native waters supplied through rain events, surface runoff, overbank flooding events, and groundwater
will sustain the Site's hydrology. Restoration of the Site will not result in the impoundment of streams.
Native waters will be allowed to flow downstream for use by other riparian landowners. Upstream land
use is almost entirely agricultural. There is no concern of upstream land activities having an adverse effect
on the Site's hydrology.
15 CONCLUSIONS
Restoration Systems, LLC is pleased to offer the French Broad 05 Umbrella Mitigation Bank ("the Bank").
The proposed umbrella structure of the Bank is designed to initially permit the establishment of two
stream mitigation sites, comprising Phase I, while enabling the establishment of future mitigation sites
not yet identified. Phase I consists of the following sites in Madison County, North Carolina: 1) Gentry
Branch, 2) Davis Cove, and 3) Sliding Knob (Figure 1; Table 8).
Table 8: Mitigation Bank Site Summary
Stream Site
Hydro Status* Existing
Length (LF)
Mitigation Type
Approx. Final
Length (LF)
Gentry Branch Per/Int
Davis Cove Per/Int
Sliding Knob Per/Int
13,088
16,842
4,360
Restoration, Enhancement II,
Preservation
Restoration, Enhancement II,
Preservation
Restoration, Enhancement,
Preservation
13,707
16,491
4,400
Totals
34,290 34,598
* Per = perennial; Int = intermittent
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 15
Phase 1— Prospectus

16 REFERENCES
Griffith, G.E., JM Omernik, J.A. Comstock, M.P. Schafale, W.H. McNab, D.R. Lenat, T.F. MacPherson, J.B.
Glover, and VB Shelbourne. 2002. Ecoregions of North Carolina and South Carolina. US Geological
Survey, Reston, Virginia.
Handley, C.O., Jr. 1991. Mammals. Pp. 539-616 in: K. Terwilliger (ed.), Virginia's Endangered Species:
Proceedings of a Symposium. The McDonald and Woodward Publishing Company, Blacksburg, Virginia.
672 pp.
Harman, W.A., GD Wise, D.E., Walker, R.M, Cantrell, M.A., Clemmons, M., Jennings, G.D., Clinton, D.,
and Patterson, J. 2001. Bankfull Regional Curves for North Carolina Mountain Streams. North Carolina
State University, Raleigh, North Carolina.
Kral, R. 1983. A Report on Some Rare, Threatened, or Endangered Forest -related Vascular Plants of the
South. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Region, Atlanta, GA. Technical
Publication R8-TP 2. 1305 pp.
Lee, M.T., R.K. Peet, SD. Roberts, and T.R. Wentworth. 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation.
Version 4.2. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Ecosystem
Enhancement Program. Raleigh, North Carolina.
Leopold, L.B. 1994. A View of the River. Harvard University Press. Cambridge, MA. 298 pp.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2020. National Climate Data Center's (NCDC)
Climate Data Online (CDO). http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cdo-web/
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2011. French Broad River Basinwide Water Quality
Plan. (online). Available:
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Water%20Qua1ity/Planning/BPU/BPU/French Broad/French%20Broad%20P1
ans/2011%20Plan/French%20Broad%202010%20Plan.pdf
North Carolina Division of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ). 2020. NC 2020 Category 5 Assessment "Final
303(d) List" (online). Available:
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Water%20Quality/Planning/TMDL/303d/2020/NC 2020 INTEGRATED REPO
RT.pdf
North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR). 2013. North Carolina Water Bodies Report
(online). Available: http://portal.ncdenr.org/c/document library/get file?uuid=10c60296-dcc8-439f-
a41c-d475ea7ad1fa&groupld=38364
North Carolina Stream Functional Assessment Team (NC SFAT). 2014. NC. Stream Assessment Method
(NC SAM) User Manual (Version 2). 178 pp.
Parmalee, P.W. and A.E. Bogan. 1998. The Freshwater Mussels of Tennessee. University of Tennessee
Press, Knoxville. 328 pp.
Rosgen, D. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology (Publisher). Pagosa Springs, Colorado
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 16
Phase 1— Prospectus

Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina:
Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, North
Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. Raleigh, North Carolina.
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), United States Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA), North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC), Natural Resources Conservation
Service (NRCS), and North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2016. Wilmington District
Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2006. Soil Survey of Madison County, North Carolina.
Soil Conservation Service.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2021. Web Soil Survey (online). Available:
http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx [September 2021].
United States Census Bureau (USCB). 2021. Population estimates V.2021.
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/buncombecountynorthcarolina
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1990. Mitigation Site Type Classification
(MiST). EPA Workshop, August 13-15, 1989. EPA Region IV and Hardwood Research Cooperative, NCSU,
Raleigh, North Carolina.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. (USFWS 2012). Slabside Pearlymussel Fact Sheet.
https://www.fws.gov/daphne/Fact_Sheets/Slabside%20Pearlymussel%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf
Weakley, A. S. 1993. Rubiaceae (Madder Family): Houstonia (Bluet). Pp. 362-364 in: Guide to the Flora of
the Carolinas and Virginia: Working Draft of 27 August 1993.
Webster, W.D., J.F. Parnell, and W.C. Biggs, Jr. 1985. Mammals of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Maryland.
The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 255 pp.
Weigl, P.D. 1987. Glaucomys sabrinus coloratus (Handley), Northern Flying Squirrel. Pp. 12-15 in: M.K.
Clark (ed.), Endangered, Threatened, and Rare Fauna of North Carolina: Part I. A Re-evaluation of the
Mammals. Occasional Papers of the North Carolina Biological Survey 1987-3. 52 pp.
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 17
Phase 1— Prospectus

17 FIGURES
Figure 1:
Figure 2:
Figure 3:
Site Locations Map
Hydrologic Unit Map
Geographic Service Area Map
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 18
Phase 1— Prospectus

FOREST
,4.
Gentry Branch
35.789956, -82.825390
."Canton:
frt
,.';a...(:�:'..�-�;��
OpyrgAc® 20103=National•Gegraphic Society; i=cubed
Axiom Environ+nenlai, Pnc,
Prepared for:
RESTORATION
SYSTEMS f LLC
Project:
French Broad 05
Umbrella
Mitigation Bank
Title:
SITE LOCATIONS
MAP
Drawn by:
Date:
Scale:
Project No.:
MLA
JAN 2022
1:175,000
21-001.05
FIGURE
1

USGS Hydrologic Unit 06010105
14-digit Hydrologic Unit Boundary
Mitigation Bank Easements
Gentry Branch
06010105100040
Davis Cove
06010105120010
Sliding Knob
06010105120010
ci I r 5
Cgpyright:(c) 2018 Garmin^
Axiom Environ+nen1ai, Pnc,
Prepared for:
RESTORATION
SYSTEMS r LLC
Project:
French Broad 05
Umbrella
Mitigation Bank
Title:
HYDROLOGIC
UNIT MAP
Drawn by:
Date:
Scale:
Project No.:
MLA
JAN 2022
1:350,000
21-001.05
FIGURE
2

Legend
Mitigation Bank Easements
Geographic Service Area
Gentry Branch
S ▪ yf
Copyright(c) 2018 Garniin-
Axiom Environ+nenlai, Pnc,
Prepared for:
RESTORATION
SYSTEMS f LLC
Project:
French Broad 05
Umbrella
Mitigation Bank
Title:
GEOGRAPHIC
SERVICE AREA
MAP
Drawn by:
Date:
Scale:
Project No.:
MLA
JAN 2022
1:350,000
21-001.05
FIGURE
3

Appendix A
Gentry Branch Mitigation Site
SAW-2022-00528
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Appendix A —Gentry Branch Mitigation Site
Phase 1— Prospectus

RESTORATION SYSTEMS FRENCH BROAD 05 UMBRELLA MITIGATION BANK
DRAFT PROSPECTUS — GENTRY BRANCH MITIGATION SITE
SAW-2022-00528
Sponsored by:
RESTORATION SYSTEMS LLC
Prepared for:
The North Carolina Inter -Agency Review Team
for distribution and comment
Sponsored by:
Restoration Systems, LLC
RS
RESTORATION
SYSTEMS I LLC
POC: Raymond Holz
Ph: 919-755-9490
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 211
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
March 2022
Prepared by:
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
POC: Grant Lewis
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603

Table of Contents
1 EXISTING CONDITIONS 1
1.1 Physiography, Topography, and Land Use 1
1.2 Water Quality 1
1.3 Vegetation 1
1.4 Soils 2
1.5 Hydrology 3
1.6 Fluvial Geomorphology 5
1.7 FEMA 5
2 SITE WORK PLAN & PROPOSED MITIGATION CREDIT 6
3 REFERENCES 7
List of Tables
Table 1: Gentry Branch Site Soils 2
Table 2: Gentry Branch Existing Stream Flow Regime 3
Table 3: Gentry Branch NC SAM Summary 4
Table 4: Gentry Branch NC WAM Summary 5
Table 5: Gentry Branch Work Plan & Mitigation Credit Summary 6
Attachments
A: Figures, Photos, & Landowner Authorization Form
Figure 4A:
Figure 4B:
Figure 4B-I:
Figure 4C:
Figure 4D:
Figure 4D-I:
Gentry Branch —Topography and Drainage Area
Gentry Branch — Existing Conditions and Soils
Gentry Branch — Inset Existing Conditions and Soils
Gentry Branch — LiDAR
Gentry Branch — Proposed Conditions
Gentry Branch — Inset Proposed Conditions
Existing Conditions Photos
Landowner Authorization Form
B: Baseline Assessment Forms
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Table of Contents
Phase 1— Prospectus, Gentry Branch Mitigation Site

GENTRY BRANCH MITIGATION SITE
The Gentry Branch Mitigation Site ("Site") is characterized by primarily forested slopes with some open
pasture/grassy areas. The main hydrologic features include Baker Branch, ten unnamed tributaries (UT)
to Baker Branch, and adjacent floodplains. The proposed conservation easement area contains
approximately 167-acres (Figures 4A, 4B, and 4B1).
1 EXISTING CONDITIONS
1.1 Physiography, Topography, and Land Use
The Site is located in the Southern Crystalline Ridges and Mountains ecoregion. Regional physiography is
defined by rough, dissected ridges and mountains with high -relief slopes and well -drained, acidic, loamy
soils occurring primarily on Precambrian igneous and metamorphic rocks (Griffith et al. 2002). On -site
elevations range from a high of 3,920-feet National Geodetic Vertical Datum ("NGVD") at the upper reach
of Baker Branch to a low of approximately 2,840-feet NGVD at the site outfall (Figure 4A).
The Site drains an approximately 0.38-square mile (241-acres) watershed (Figure 4A). The watershed is
dominated by forest with sparse pastureland and a residential property. Impervious surfaces account for
less than five percent of the upstream land surface.
Land use at the Site is characterized by forest and hay fields. Livestock were contained within the property
in the past; however, no evidence of recent livestock use is apparent. Riparian zones in the upper, forested
portion of the site are primarily composed of woody mountainous vegetation. Riparian zones in the lower,
pasture dominated portion of the site are primarily composed of herbaceous vegetation that is sparse
and disturbed due to bush hogging and regular land -management activities.
1.2 Water Quality
Gentry Branch is within USGS 14-digit HUC 06010105100040 (Figure 2) and North Carolina Division of
Water Resources (NCDWR) Subbasin 04-03-04. Topographic features of the Site drain to Baker Branch
(Stream Index Number 6-108-03), which has been assigned a Best Usage Classification of C (NCDWR 2013).
Streams with a C designation are protected for uses such as aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing,
wildlife, secondary recreation, and agriculture. Secondary recreation includes wading, boating, and other
uses not involving human body contact with waters on an organized or frequent basis.
NCDWR has assembled a list of impaired waterbodies according to the Clean Water Act Section 303(d)
and 40 CFR 130.7, which is a comprehensive public accounting of all impaired waterbodies. An impaired
waterbody is one that does not meet state standards, including designated uses, numeric and narrative
criteria, and anti -degradation requirements defined in 40 CFR 131. Baker Branch, within and adjacent to
the Site, is not listed on the final 2020 303(d) list (NCDEQ 2020).
1.3 Vegetation
The Site is characterized primarily by a mature forest community with portions of fallow fields and
pastureland. The fields are dominated by fescue (Festuca sp.) and clover (Trifolium sp.) mixed with a
variety of herbs including horse nettle (Solanum carolinense), crown beard (Verbesina sp.), sunflower
(Helianthus spp.), goldenrod (Solidago spp.), and aster (Symphyotrichum spp.) with elderberry (Sambucus
canadensis), blackberry (Rubus spp.), and Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense) common along the woodland
edges and streams. Small wet areas located within pastures are dominated by rushes (Juncus spp.), sedges
(Carex spp.), ironweed (Vernonia noveboracensis), and Joe-pye-weed (Eutrochium fistulosum).
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 1
Phase 1— Prospectus, Gentry Branch Mitigation Site

The forested areas consist of of tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), white pine (Pinus strobus), sweet
birch (Betula lento), white ash (Fraxinus americana), black cherry (Prunus serotina), black walnut (Juglans
nigra), red maple (Acer rubrum), red oak (Quercus rubra), Eastern hemlock (Tsuga canadensis), black gum
(Nyssa sylvatica), and Fraser magnolia (Magnolia fraseri) in the canopy. The sub -canopy and shrub layer
consists of witch hazel (Hamamelis virginiana), striped maple (Acer pennsylvanicum), sassafras (Sassafras
albidum), rhododendron (Rhododendron maximum), Northern spice bush (Lindera benzoin), strawberry -
bush (euonymus americanus), blackberry, and saplings of canopy species. Herbs and vines include
Christmas fern (Polystichium acrostichiodes), pipsissewa (chimaphila maculata), Dutchmans's pipe
(Aristolochia macrophylla), greenbriar (Smilax spp.), muscadine (Vitis rotundifolia), and poison ivy
(Toxicodendron radicans). Forest vegetation within the more mesic streamside areas support a similar
canopy and shrub layer with an herb layer including species such as wood -nettle (Laportea canadensis),
golden ragwort (Packera aurea), foam flower (Tiarella cordifolia), aster, and orange jewelweed (impatiens
capensis).
1.4 Soils
Based on Web Soil Survey mapping (USDA 2021), proposed conservation easement areas associated with
the Site contain six soil series (Figure 4B and Table 1): Ashe-Cleveland-Rock outcrop complex (Typic
Dystrudepts), Buladean-Chestnut complex (Typic Dystrudepts), Evard-Cowee complex (Typic Hapludults),
Porters-Unaka complex (Humic Dystrudepts), and Toecane-Tusquitee complex (Humic Hapludults),
Tusquitee-Whiteside complex (Humic Dystrudepts).
Table 1: Gentry Branch Site Soils
Map Unit Hydric
Symbol Map Unit Name Status
Description
Arf
BnD, BnE,
BnF
EvD2,
EvE2,
EwD, EwE
Ashe-Cleveland- This series consists of very bouldery, somewhat excessively
Rock outcrop Non-hydric drained soils on mountain slopes and ridges. The depth to the
complex water table is usually more than 80 inches.
This series consists of stony soils found along slopes and
Buladean- mountain ridges. Slopes range from 15-30 percent for BnD soils,
Chestnut Non-hydric 30-50 percent for BnE soils, and 50-95 for BnF soils. This series is
complex well -drained and is associated with mountainflanks, side slopes,
and summits.
Evard-Cowee
complex
PwD, PwE, Porters-Unaka
PxF complex
TsD
Toecane-
Tusquitee
complex
This series consists of well -drained soils found on mountain
slopes and ridges. Slopes range from 15-30 percent for EvD2 and
Non-hydric EwD, and 30-50 percent for EvE2 and EwE. The parent material
for this series is residuum weathered from amphibolite and
gneiss.
Non-Hydric
Non-hydric
This stony series is found on mountain ridges Slopes range from
15-30 percent for PwD, 30-50 percent for PwE, and 50-95
percent for PxF. Soils are well -drained and the parent material is
from biotite granitic gneiss.
This series consists of well -drained soils on very bouldery
drainageways, coves, and fans. Slopes range from 15-30 percent.
The parent material is cobbly and stony colluvium derived from
igneous and metamorphic rock.
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 2
Phase 1— Prospectus, Gentry Branch Mitigation Site

Table 1: Gentry Branch Site Soils (continued)
Map Unit Hydric
Symbol Map Unit Name Status
Description
Non-hydric, This series consists of well -drained soils on primarily concave
Tusquitee- may slopes like coves, drainageways, and fans. Slopes are typically 8-
TwC Whiteside contain 15 percent. Parent material is colluvium derived from igneous
complex minor and metamorphic rock. Soils may contain Sylva inclusions in
inclusions depressions or drainageways.
1.5 Hydrology
Site streams are depicted on USGS mapping as intermittent (Figure 4A). However, on -site investigations
using NCDWQ stream forms (Table 2) suggest Baker Branch and most of its tributaries are perennial. Two
unnamed tributaries, UT 3 and UT 5A, have been classified as intermittent. NC SAM and NC WAM on -site
determinations have concluded that the stream and wetland functional characteristics range from low
ratings in the disturbed areas to medium and high ratings in the forested areas (Tables 3 and 4).
Table 2: Gentry Branch Existing Stream Flow Regime
Stream
Stream Length Stream Order
USGS Stream In -field Stream
Classification Classification
Baker Branch 3832
UT-1 1031
UT-2 577
UT-3 631
UT-4 464
UT-4A 48
UT-5 2040
UT-5A 43
UT-5B 642
UT-6 1926
UT-7 105
UT-8 649
UT-9 423
UT-10 677
3rd
2nd
1st
1"
2nd
1"
2nd
1"
1"
1st
2nd
1"
1"
1st
Intermittent Perennial
Not mapped Perennial
Not mapped Perennial
Not mapped Intermittent
Intermittent Perennial
Not mapped Perennial
Not mapped Perennial
Not mapped Intermittent
Not mapped Perennial
Not mapped Perennial
Not mapped Perennial
Not mapped Perennial
Not mapped Perennial
Not mapped Perennial
Total 13,088
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 3
Phase 1— Prospectus, Gentry Branch Mitigation Site

Table 3: Gentry Branch NC SAM Summary
NC SAM Function Class Rating Summary
UT 2
UT 3
UT 6
(1) HYDROLOGY
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
HIGH
LOW
LOW
(4) Floodplain Access
HIGH
LOW
LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
MEDIUM
LOW
HIGH
(4) Microtopography
NA
LOW
NA
(3) Stream Stability
MEDIUM
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Channel Stability
HIGH
MEDIUM
LOW
(4) Sediment Transport
MEDIUM
LOW
HIGH
(4) Stream Geomorphology
MEDIUM
LOW
HIGH
�(1) WATER QUALITY
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
HIGH
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
(2) Stream -side Area Vegetation
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
NO
NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(1) HABITAT
MEDIUM
LOW
HIGH
(2) In -stream Habitat
MEDIUM
LOW
HIGH
(3) Baseflow
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
(3) Substrate
MEDIUM
LOW
HIGH
(3) Stream Stability
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
HIGH
(3) In -Stream Habitat
MEDIUM
LOW
HIGH
(2) Stream -side Habitat
MEDIUM
LOW
HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
LOW
HIGH
OVERALL
MEDIUM
LOW
HIGH
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 4
Phase 1— Prospectus, Gentry Branch Mitigation Site

Table 4: Gentry Branch NC WAM Summary
NC WAM Sub -function Rating Summary
WAM 1
WAM 2
WAM 3
Wetland Type
Headwater Forest
Headwater Forest
Headwater Forest
(1) HYDROLOGY
LOW
LOW
HIGH
(2) Surface Storage & Retention
LOW
LOW
HIGH
(2) Sub -surface Storage and Retention
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(1) WATER QUALITY
LOW
LOW
HIGH
(2) Pathogen change
LOW
LOW
LOW
(2) Particulate Change
LOW
LOW
HIGH
(2) Soluble change
LOW
LOW
HIGH
(2) Physical Change
LOW
LOW
HIGH
(1) HABITAT
LOW
LOW
LOW
(2) Physical Structure
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
(2) Landscape Patch Structure
LOW
LOW
LOW
(2) Vegetative Composition
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
OVERALL
LOW
LOW
HIGH
This hydro-physiographic region is characterized by moderate rainfall with precipitation averaging 51.1-
inches per year (based on data provided by NOAA 2020). Site discharge is dominated by a combination of
upstream basin catchment, groundwater flow, and precipitation. Based on regional curves (Harman et al.
2001), the bankfull discharge for a 0.38-square mile watershed is expected to average 15.8-cubic feet per
second (CFS). Based on empirical evidence a bankfull discharge of 15.8-CFS is expected to occur
approximately every 1.3 to 1.5 years (Rosgen 1996, Leopold 1994).
1.6 Fluvial Geomorphology
Currently, channels targeted for restoration are characterized as entrenched and/or incised G-type or F-
type channels with little to no sinuosity, little to no riffle -pool morphology, oversized cross -sectional areas,
and no access to floodplains during high discharge events (Bank Height Ratio [BHR] range > 2.6 to 6.4).
Sinuosity was measured at 1.05 from topographic surveys, aerial photography, and visual observation
during field surveys.
In general, sediment and nutrient inputs, channel incision and straightening, removal of cobble substrate,
aggradation of silt and sand, and removal of woody vegetation have impacted lower Gentry Branch site
streams.
1.7 FEMA
Inspection of the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map 3700876600J, Panel 8766, effective June 2, 2009,
indicates that Gentry Branch streams are not located in a Special Flood Hazard Area, and the project
should not alter FEMA flood zones. Therefore, a "Conditional Letter of Map Revision" (CLOMR) is not
expected for this Site.
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 5
Phase 1— Prospectus, Gentry Branch Mitigation Site

2 SITE WORK PLAN & PROPOSED MITIGATION CREDIT
A summary of the actions proposed at Gentry Branch is provided in Table 5 and in Figures 4D and 4D-I. In
general, proposed activities involve Stream Restoration, Stream Enhancement II, Stream Preservation,
Wetland Rehabilitation, Wetland Enhancement, and Wetland Preservation. Stream and wetland
preservation have been limited to the Site's upper reaches confined by steep valleys. It should be noted
that wetlands occur in headwater areas suitable for preservation; however, these wetlands will be
quantified once approved PJD has been conducted for the Site. Stream and wetland restoration and
enhancement occur in lower reaches of streams that have been impacted by straightening, diversion,
clearing of vegetation, and other historic land uses.
Table 5: Gentry Branch Work Plan & Mitigation Credit Summary
Stream Reach
Approx. Final
Length (LF)
Mitigation Activity
Baker Branch 3,832 Stream Enhancement II, Preservation
UT-1 1,654 Stream Restoration, Preservation
UT-2 467 Stream Restoration, Enhancement II
UT-3 737 Stream Restoration
UT-4 464 Stream Preservation
UT-4A 48 Stream Preservation
UT-5 2,040 Stream Enhancement II, Preservation
UT-5A 43 Stream Preservation
UT-5B 642 Stream Preservation
UT-6 1,926 Stream Preservation
UT-7 105 Stream Preservation
UT-8 649 Stream Preservation
UT-9 423 Stream Preservation
UT-10 677 Stream Preservation
Total 13,707
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 6
Phase 1— Prospectus, Gentry Branch Mitigation Site

3 REFERENCES
Griffith, G.E., J.M. Omernik, J.A. Comstock, M.P. Schafale, W.H. McNab, D.R. Lenat, T.F. MacPherson, J.B.
Glover, and V.B. Shelbourne. 2002. Ecoregions of North Carolina and South Carolina. U.S. Geological
Survey, Reston, Virginia.
Harman, W.A., G.D. Wise, D.E., Walker, R.M, Cantrell, M.A., Clemmons, M., Jennings, G.D., Clinton, D.,
and Patterson, J. 2001. Bankfull Regional Curves for North Carolina Mountain Streams. North Carolina
State University, Raleigh, North Carolina.
Leopold, L.B. 1994. A View of the River. Harvard University Press. Cambridge, MA. 298 pp.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2020. National Climate Data Center's (NCDC)
Climate Data Online (CDO). http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cdo-web/
North Carolina Division of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ). 2020. NC 2020 Category 5 Assessment "Final
303(d) List" (online). Available:
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Water%20Quality/Planning/TMDL/303d/2020/NC 2020 INTEGRATED REPO
RT.pdf
North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR). 2013. North Carolina Water Bodies Report
(online). Available: http://portal.ncdenr.org/c/document library/get file?uuid=10c60296-dcc8-439f-
a41c-d475ea7adlfa&groupld=38364
North Carolina Stream Functional Assessment Team (NC SFAT). 2014. N.C. Stream Assessment Method
(NC SAM) User Manual (Version 2). 178 pp.
Rosgen, D. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology (Publisher). Pagosa Springs, Colorado
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2006. Soil Survey of Madison County, North Carolina.
Soil Conservation Service.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2021. Web Soil Survey (online). Available:
http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx [September 2021].
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 7
Phase 1— Prospectus, Gentry Branch Mitigation Site

ATTACHMENT A — FIGURES, PHOTOS, & LANDOWNER AUTHORIZATION FORM
Figure 4A:
Figure 4B:
Figure 4B-I:
Figure 4C:
Figure 4D:
Figure 4D-I:
Gentry Branch —Topography and Drainage Area
Gentry Branch — Existing Conditions and Soils
Gentry Branch — Inset Existing Conditions and Soils
Gentry Branch — LiDAR
Gentry Branch — Proposed Conditions
Gentry Branch — Inset Proposed Conditions
Existing Conditions Photos
Landowner Authorization Form
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Attachment A
Phase 1— Prospectus, Gentry Branch Mitigation Site

Legend
=Gentry Branch Easement = 167 ac
— Existing Streams = 13,088 ft
Baker Branch Drainage Area = 0.24 sq mi (153 ac)
n UT2 Drainage Area = 0.14 sq mi (88 ac)
Upper UT 2 Drainage Area = 0.05 sq mi (32 ac)
UT 1 Drainage Area = 0.08 (49 ac)
Upper Baker Branch Drainage Area = 0.08 sq mi (54 ac)
UT 6 Drainage Area = 0.05 sq mi (30 ac)
UT 5 & UT 7 Drainage Area = 0.05 sq mi (29 ac)
3 Na onal Geographic Society, i-cubed
Mom EnvKonmenlal, mc.
Prepared for:
RS
RESTORATION
SYSTEMS I TLC
Project:
French Broad 05
Umbrella
Mitigation Bank
Madison County, NC
Title:
GENTRY
BRANCH SITE:
TOPOGRAPHY
AND
DRAINAGE AREA
Drawn by:
JMH
Date:
Scale:
Project No.:
NOV 2021
1:8000
21-001.05
FIGURE
4A

Legend
Easement = 167 ac
• NCDWR Form Locations
• NCSAM Form Locations
• NCWAM Form Locations
Cross Sections
Perennial Streams = 12,414 ft
Intermittent Streams = 674 ft
Existing Wetlands = 1.07 ac
Wetland GPS Points
Existing Powerline
Existing Road
Madison County Parcels
NRCS Soil Boundaries
20-foot Contours
1
V /
UkF
Note: For every GPS point
taken, approximately 5 soil
borings were collected.
Note: Additional wetland pockets occur in upper headwater areas
NCSAM Form #3
Score = HIGH
100
100
99
99
98
97
97
96
96
NCDWR Form #2
Score = 27.5
NCDWR Form #1
Score = 23
Cross Section 2 - UT 3
Abkf
10
NCSAM Form #2
Score = LOW
15
DA = 0.01 sq mi
Abkf= 1.0 sq
Wbkf.3.4ft
Dbkf= 0.3ft
Dmax= 0.5ft
Wbkf/Dbkf = 11.6
FPA=5ft
ENT= 1.5
LBH. 1.7ft
BHR 5.6
D-typa
20
2
BnD
Cross Section 1 - UT 2
10 15
DA. 0.14 sq ml
Abkf=5.9 se ft
Wield. 9.9ft
Dbk = 0.6 ft
Dmax =0.0ft
WbkHObkf=16.3
FPA=13fl
T=1.2
LBH=1.6fl
BHR 3.6
F-type
25
NCWAM Form #1&2
Score = LOW
Soil Map Unit
Arf
BnD, BnE, BnF
EvD2, EvE2, EwD, EwE
PwD, PwE, PxF
TsD
TwC
NCWAM Form #3
Score = HIGH
NCSAM Form #1
Score = MED
Soil Series
Ashe-Cleveland-Rock outcrop
Buladean-Chestnut complex
Evard-Cowee complex
Porters-Unaka complex
Toecane-Tusquitee complex
Tusquitee-Whiteside complex
Hydric
No
No
No
No
No
Class B
Axiom Environmenlai, Pnc.
Prepared for:
RESTORATION
SYSTEMS r LL.
Project:
French Broad 05
Umbrella
Mitigation Bank
Madison County, NC
Title:
GENTRY
BRANCH SITE:
EXISTING
CONDITIONS
AND SOILS
Drawn by:
JMH
Date:
OCT 2021
Scale:
Project No.:
1:4200
21-001.05
FIGURE
4B

Legend
Easement = 167 ac
Perennial Streams = 12,414 ft
Intermittent Streams = 674 ft
Piped Stream Channel
Existing Wetlands = 1.07 ac
Wetland GPS Points
1--1- Existing Powerline
Cross Sections
Existing Road
• NCDWR Form Locations
• NCSAM Form Locations
• NCWAM Form Locations
NRCS Soil Boundaries
20-foot Contours
100
100
99
99
98
NCDWR Form #2
Score = 27.5
Soil Map Unit
Arf
BnD, BnE, BnF
EvD2, EvE2, EwD, EwE
PwD, PwE, PxF
TsD
TwC
Soil Series
Ashe-Cleveland-Rock outcrop
Buladean-Chestnut complex
Evard-Cowee complex
Porters-Unaka complex
Toecane-Tusquitee complex
Tusquitee-Whiteside complex
Hydric
No
No
No
No
No
Class B
Cross Section 2 - UT 3
DA •0.01 sq mi
Abkf= 1.0 sq ft
Wbkf= 3.4ft
Dbkf = 0.3 ft
Dmax=0.5ft
Wbkf/Dbkf =11.6
FPA=Sft
ENT =1.5
LBH=1.Tft
BHR=5.6
GOype
NCDWR Form #1
Score = 23
NCSAM Form #2
Score = LOW
NCWAM Form #3
Score = HIGH
Stream Diversion
Note: For every GPS point
taken, approximately 5 soil
borings were collected.
NCSAM Form #1
Score = MED
0 0
Baker Branch
NCWAM Form #1&2
Score = LOW
101.0
100.0
99.0
98.•
97.0
96.0
95.0
94.0
0
Cross Section 1 - UT 2
DA=0.14 sq ml
AMR=6.9 sft
Wbkf=9.9ft
D f=0.6ft
Dmax=0.9ft
Mkt/Mkt =16.3
ft
ENT =1.2
LBH =1.6ft
BHR=2.6
F-RPe
Axiom Environ+nenlai, Pnc,
Prepared for:
FPS
RESTORATION
SYSTEMS r LLC
Project:
French Broad 05
Umbrella
Mitigation Bank
Madison County, NC
Title:
GENTRY
BRANCH SITE:
EXISTING
CONDITIONS
AND SOILS
Drawn by:
JMH
Date:
Scale:
Project No.:
NOV 2021
1:1450
21-001.05
FIGURE
4B-I

Legend
Easement = 167 ac
Existing Streams = 13,088 ft
Elevation (ft)
High : 3933
Low : 2785
Axiom Environ+neniai, Pnc,
Prepared for:
RESTORATION
SYSTEMS r LLC
Project:
French Broad 05
Umbrella
Mitigation Bank
Madison County, NC
Title:
GENTRY
BRANCH SITE:
LiDAR
Drawn by:
JMH
Date:
Scale:
Project No.:
OCT 2021
1:4200
21-001.05
FIGURE
4C

Legend
Easement = 167 ac
•
Stream Restoration = 1,575 ft
Stream Enhancement II (7.5:1 Ratio) = 1,779 ft
Stream Preservation = 10,352 ft
Wetland Rehabilitation = 0.18 ac
Wetland Enhancement = 0.67 ac
Wetland Preservation = 0.22 ac
Existing Powerline
Existing Road
Note: Wetland Preservation is available in
wooded headwater areas.
Mitigation
Restoration
Enhance II
Preservation
Figure 4D-I
Footage
1575
1779
10352
1
7.5
10
Ratio
Total
1
1
1
SMUs
1575.0
237.2
1035.2
2847.4
Aram Environ+neniai, Pnc.
Prepared for:
RESTORATION
SYSTEMS r LLC
Project:
French Broad 05
Umbrella
Mitigation Bank
Madison County, NC
Title:
GENTRY
BRANCH SITE:
PROPOSED
CONDITIONS
Drawn by:
JMH
Date:
OCT 2021
Scale:
Project No.:
1:4200
21-001.05
FIGURE
4D

Legend
•
Easement = 167 ac
Stream Restoration = 1,575 ft
Stream Enhancement II (7.5:1 Ratio) = 1,779 ft
Stream Preservation = 10,352 ft
Wetland Rehabilitation = 0.18 ac
Wetland Enhancement = 0.67 ac
Wetland Preservation = 0.22 ac
Existing Powerline
Existing Road
Powerline to be removed
Mitigation
Footage
Ratio
SMUs
Restoration
1575
1
1
1575.0
Enhance II
1779
7.5
1
237.2
Preservation
10352
10
1
1035.2
Total
2847.4
Backfill Ditch
Backfill ditch and
remove pipe
Baker Branch
Remove structures
Divert channel to
historic floodplain
Axiom Environ+neniai, Pnc,
Prepared for:
RESTORATION
SYSTEMS r LLC
Project:
French Broad 05
Umbrella
Mitigation Bank
Madison County, NC
Title:
GENTRY
BRANCH SITE:
PROPOSED
CONDITIONS
Drawn by:
Date:
Scale:
Project No.:
JMH
NOV 2021
1:1450
21-001.05
FIGURE
4D-I

DocuSign Envelope ID: 09FB7C3A-0A20-4CDA-9D4B-1935DBE054A8
LANDOWNER AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRITION:
Deed Book: 237
Page: 73 County: _Madison
Parcel ID Number: 8766-44-1702
Street Address: 50 Gentry Branch Road, Marshall, NC 28753
Property Owner (please print): Nancy Baker, Ted Baker, Jr. and Melba Baker, and Kenneth Baker and
Lucille Baker
The undersigned, registered property owner(s) of the above property, do hereby authorize
JD Hamby
of Restoration Systems
Grant Lewis of Axiom Environmental
to take all actions necessary for the evaluation of the property as a potential stream and wetland mitigation
project, including conducting stream and/or wetland determinations and delineations, as well as issuance
and acceptance of any required permit(s) or certification(s). I agree to allow regulatory agencies, including
the US Army Corps of Engineers, to visit the property as part of these environmental reviews.
Property Owners(s) Address: (if different from above)
see below
Property Owner Telephone Number:
We hereby certify the above information to be true and accurate to the best of our knowledge.
DocuSigned by:
aify wit,iax aA,ViSfy OK, k(A,44 eF iv o btu(
'-AB02507EE1AA473...
1/11/2022 1 8:16
(Property Owner Authorized Signature) (Date)
CDocuSigned by:
awe 1f . Craig ew lkttal f or ktAAAA, 02 Iptitt, batt,r klAAAJA, (Ul t,l,Lia batt,r
093E66EF4B30422...
Nancy Baker - 11 Cedar Hill Rd, Asheville NC 28806
Ted & Melba Baker - 151 Kennedy Rd, weaverville NC 28787
Kenneth & Lucile Baker - 26 46 ulster Ct, waldorf Maryland, 20602
1/12/2022 1 1:5

ATTACHMENT B - BASELINE ASSESSMENT FORMS
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Attachment B
Phase 1— Prospectus, Gentry Branch Mitigation Site

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
SAM #1
Stream Site Name Gentry Branch - SAM UT 2 Date of Assessment 211007
Stream Category Mb2 Assessor Name/Organization Keith/Axiom
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
YES
NO
YES
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology HIGH
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Flood Flow HIGH
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation HIGH
(4) Floodplain Access HIGH
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer MEDIUM
(4) Microtopography NA
(3) Stream Stability MEDIUM
(4) Channel Stability HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport MEDIUM
(4) Stream Geomorphology MEDIUM
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(1) Water Quality
(2) Baseflow
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Indicators of Stressors
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
MEDIUM
HIGH
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
NO
MEDIUM
NA
(1) Habitat MEDIUM
(2) In -stream Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Baseflow HIGH
(3) Substrate MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability HIGH
(3) In -stream Habitat MEDIUM
(2) Stream -side Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Stream -side Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation MEDIUM
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(2) Intertidal Zone NA
Overall MEDIUM

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
SAM #2
Stream Site Name Gentry Branch - SAM UT 3 Date of Assessment 211007
Stream Category Mal Assessor Name/Organization Keith/Axiom
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N) YES
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N) YES
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Intermittent
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology LOW LOW
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow LOW LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW LOW
(4) Floodplain Access LOW LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer LOW LOW
(4) Microtopography LOW LOW
(3) Stream Stability LOW LOW
(4) Channel Stability HIGH HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport LOW LOW
(4) Stream Geomorphology LOW LOW
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA NA
(1) Water Quality MEDIUM MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation MEDIUM MEDIUM
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration MEDIUM MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation MEDIUM MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors NO NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance MEDIUM NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA NA
(1) Habitat LOW LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat LOW MEDIUM
(3) Baseflow MEDIUM MEDIUM
(3) Substrate LOW LOW
(3) Stream Stability MEDIUM MEDIUM
(3) In -stream Habitat LOW HIGH
(2) Stream -side Habitat LOW LOW
(3) Stream -side Habitat LOW LOW
(3) Thermoregulation LOW LOW
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA NA
(2) Intertidal Zone NA NA
Overall
LOW LOW

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
SAM #3
Stream Site Name Gentry Branch - SAM UT 6 Date of Assessment 211007
Stream Category Mb1 Assessor Name/Organization Keith/Axiom
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
YES
NO
YES
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Flood Flow MEDIUM
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW
(4) Floodplain Access LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer HIGH
(4) Microtopography NA
(3) Stream Stability HIGH
(4) Channel Stability HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport HIGH
(4) Stream Geomorphology HIGH
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(1) Water Quality HIGH
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance MEDIUM
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA
(1) Habitat HIGH
(2) In -stream Habitat HIGH
(3) Baseflow HIGH
(3) Substrate HIGH
(3) Stream Stability HIGH
(3) In -stream Habitat HIGH
(2) Stream -side Habitat HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(2) Intertidal Zone NA
Overall HIGH

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet WAM #1 and #2
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name GA 29 and GC 04 Date of Assessment 211007
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization Perkinson/Axiom
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N)
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
Sub -function Rating Summary
YES
NO
NO
YES
NO
NO
NO
Function Sub -function
Hydrology
Surface Storage and Retention
Sub -surface Storage and
Retention
Metrics
Condition
Condition
Rating
LOW
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Habitat
Pathogen Change
Particulate Change
Soluble Change
Physical Change
Pollution Change
Physical Structure
Landscape Patch Structure
Vegetation Composition
Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
Condition
Condition
Condition
LOW
LOW
NO
LOW
NA
NA
LOW
LOW
NO
LOW
LOW
NO
NA
NA
NA
LOW
LOW
LOW
Function Rating Summary
Function
Hydrology
Water Quality
Habitat
Metrics
Condition
Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
Condition
Rating
LOW
LOW
LOW
NO
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
WAM #3
Wetland Site Name GC 26 Date of Assessment 211007
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization Perkinson/Axiom
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N)
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
Sub -function Rating Summary
YES
NO
NO
YES
NO
NO
NO
Function Sub -function
Hydrology
Surface Storage and Retention
Sub -surface Storage and
Retention
Metrics
Condition
Condition
Rating
HIGH
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Habitat
Pathogen Change
Particulate Change
Soluble Change
Physical Change
Pollution Change
Physical Structure
Landscape Patch Structure
Vegetation Composition
Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
Condition
Condition
Condition
LOW
LOW
NO
HIGH
NA
NA
HIGH
HIGH
NO
HIGH
HIGH
NO
NA
NA
NA
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function
Hydrology
Water Quality
Habitat
Metrics
Condition
Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
Condition
Rating
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
NO
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating HIGH

Form 1 i t T 3
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: in 202
Project/Site: G r N r , a r
Latitude: 3 Si 790 is 9 $
Evaluator: x i a
County: frfaat r.5 001
Longitude: -6-4"..*.,- 21-,
8 8
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent
if>_ 19 or perennial if>_ 30*
Z
Stream Determination circle one)
Other 5 f' 1'
e.g. Quad Name:(tree,
Ephemeral, ntermitten Perennial
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = S • 5
Absent Weak I Moderate
Strong
la Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
® 3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
IS1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
�{1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2 3
5. Active/relict floodplain
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
!�
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
3j
2
3
9. Grade control
CID
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
_
16.)
11. Second or greater order channel
N6-= tl
_ Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal =
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
(7)
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
_
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
;'1 7
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
(09
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
(0-5
0.5
1 1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yekc; 3-
C. Biology (Subtotal = 4 ,
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
S
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
Q
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
aC7
1
2
3
22. Fish
CD
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
I
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0-5
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL r 1.-g) Other = 0
"perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch: S koilc Sli

Form 2
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: (/0 0
Evaluator. A.,
Project/Site: e44 ru
County: it(q,J 1 S per'
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent
if a 19 or perennial 'fa 30*
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = r
1 a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
4. Particle size of stream substrate
5. Active/relict floodplain
6. Depositional bars or benches
7. Recent alluvial deposits
8. Headcuts
9. Grade control
10. Natural valley
11. Second or greater order channel
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal =
12. Presence of 13aseflow
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
14. Leaf litter
3
T
Latitude: 36- 70 6,3
Longitude: _.
2. S 28 9
Stream Determination (circle one)
Ephemeral Intermitter Perennial
Other SPriA 6re�
e.g. Quad Name:
Absent
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.5
J
Weak
1
1
1
1
1
0.5
1
1
Moderate
15. Sediment on plants or debris
16. Organic debris lines or piles
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
C. Biology (Subtotal = 5` ) •
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
21. Aquatic Mollusks
22. Fish
23. Crayfish
24. Amphibians
25. Algae
26. Wetland plants in streambed
0
0
3'
3
0
0
0
0
0
No = 0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch: 4 eoP-e.4
�C mpl&1
0.5
2
2
1
1
0.5
0.5
0.5
2
2
2
2
2
2 ,
1
1
2
2
0.5
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
Yes =3
Strong
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
1.5
1,'
"S'es=3.
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = Q.
) 1,,_,44../C f Oti -5e
3
0
1.5
1.5
0
0
3
3
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5

Appendix B
Davis Cove Mitigation Site
SAW-2022-00529
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Appendix B — Davis Cove Mitigation Site
Phase 1— Prospectus

Appendix C
Sliding Knob Site
SAW-2022-00530
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Appendix C—Sliding Knob Mitigation Site
Phase 1— Prospectus