Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20221253 Ver 1_SAW-2022-00530 Draft Prospectus_20220405FRENCH 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 rholz@restorationsystems.com 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 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 RESTORATION SYSTEMS FRENCH BROAD 05 UMBRELLA MITIGATION BANK DRAFT PROSPECTUS — SLIDING KNOB MITIGATION SITE SAW-2022-00530 Sponsored by: RESTORATION SYSTEMS LLC Prepared for: The North Carolina Inter -Agency Review Team for distribution and comment Sponsored by: Restoration Systems, LLC �ZS 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 2 1.6 FEMA 4 2 SITE WORK PLAN & PROPOSED MITIGATION CREDIT 4 3 REFERENCES 5 List of Tables Table 1: Sliding Knob Site Soils 2 Table 2: Sliding Knob Existing Stream Flow Regime 2 Table 3: Sliding Knob NC SAM Summary 3 Table 4: Sliding Knob NC WAM Summary 4 Table 5: Sliding Knob Work Plan Summary 5 Attachments A: Figures, Photos, & Landowner Authorization Form Figure 4A: Sliding Knob Site —Topography and Drainage Area Figure 4B: Sliding Knob Site — Existing Conditions and Soils Figure 4C: Sliding Knob Site — LiDAR Figure 4D: Sliding Knob Site — 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, Sliding Knob Mitigation Site SLIDING KNOB MITIGATION SITE The Sliding Knob Mitigation Site ("Site") is characterized primarily by forested slopes with some open pasture/grassy areas. The main hydrologic features include five unnamed tributaries (UTs) to Friezeland Creek, and adjacent floodplains. The proposed conservation easement area contains approximately 8.7- acres (Figures 6A and 6B). 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 3,040-feet NGVD at the upper reach of UT 3 to a low of approximately 2,640-feet NGVD at the outfall of UT 5 (Figure 4A). This Site's combined watershed totals approximately 0.41-square miles (0.10 square miles for UT 1 and 0.31 square miles for UT 4) (Figure 4A). The watershed is dominated by forests with sparse pastureland and residential property. Impervious surfaces account for less than five percent of the upstream land surface. Land use at the Site consists primarily of forests and livestock pasture. Livestock has access to most Site streams; however, valley slopes inhibit livestock access to a significant portion of the stream reaches. Streams along the southern Site boundary (UT-4 and UT-5) have a fence erected to eliminate livestock access; a portion of the easement along this reach is forested. Riparian zones in the upper portion of the Site are forested and primarily composed of woody mountainous vegetation. Riparian zones in the lower, pasture -dominated portion of the Site are composed mainly of herbaceous vegetation that is sparse and disturbed due to bush hogging and grazing. 1.2 Water Quality The Site is located within USGS 14-digit HUC 06010105120010 (Figure 2) and NCDWR Subbasin 04-03-04. Topographic features of the Site drain to Friezeland Creek (Stream Index Number 6-118-10), which has been assigned a Best Usage Classification of C Tr (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. The supplemental classification TR is intended to protect freshwaters with conditions that can sustain and allow for trout propagation and survival of stocked trout on a year-round basis. Site streams are not included on the 2020 Final 303(d) lists of impaired waterbodies (NCDEQ 2020). 1.3 Vegetation The Site is characterized by active cattle pastures surrounded by a mixture of disturbed and mature forested areas. The fields are dominated by fescue (Festuca sp.) and clover (Trifolium sp.) mixed with a variety of herbs, including aster (Symphyotrichum spp.), blackberry (Rubus spp.), and multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora). Wetland areas located within pastures are dominated by fescue, rushes (Juncus spp.), sedges (Carex spp.), violet (Viola spp.), and docks (Rumex spp.). The forested portion of the Site is comprised of tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), American beech (Fagus grandifolia), white pine (Pinus strobus), black cherry (Prunus serotina), red oak (Quercus rubra), white oak (Quercus alba), and Eastern hemlock (Tsuga Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 1 Phase 1— Prospectus, Sliding Knob Mitigation Site canadensis) in the canopy. The sub -canopy and shrub layer consist of rhododendron (Rhododendron maximum), blackberry, multiflora rose, and saplings of canopy species. 1.4 Soils Based on Web Soil Survey mapping (USDA 2021), proposed conservation easement areas associated with the Sliding Knob site contain two soil complexes (Figure 4B and Table 1): Buladean-Chestnut complex (Typic Dystrudepts), and Toecane-Tusquitee complex (Humic Hapludults). Table 1: Sliding Knob Site Soils Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Hydric Status Description BnE and Buladean-Chestnut Non- BnF complex hydric This series consists of stony soils found along slopes and mountain ridges. Slopes range from 15-30 percent for BnD soils, 30-50 percent for BnE soils, and 50-95 for BnF soils. This series is well -drained and is associated with mountain flanks, side slopes, and summits. This series consists of well -drained soils on very bouldery TsD, TsE, Toecane-Tusquitee Non- drainageways, coves, and fans. Slopes range from 15-30 percent. andTuD complex hydric The parent material is cobbly and stony colluvium derived from igneous and metamorphic rock. 1.5 Hydrology Two of the five UTs are depicted as perennial on the latest USGS mapping, while the other three are not depicted on USGS mapping (Figure 4A). However, on -site investigations using NCDWQ stream forms (Table 2) suggest UTs 2, 3, and 4 are 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: Sliding Knob Existing Stream Flow Regime Stream Stream Length Stream Order USGS Stream In -field Stream Classification Classification UT-1 1,515 2nd Perennial Perennial UT-2 211 1" Not mapped Intermittent UT-3 506 1ST Not mapped Intermittent UT-4 366 1ST Not mapped Intermittent UT-5 1,761 2nd Perennial Perennial Total 4,360 Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 2 Phase 1— Prospectus, Sliding Knob Mitigation Site Table 3: Sliding Knob NC SAM Summary NC SAM Function Class Rating Summary UT 1 UT 2 UT 5 Reference (1) HYDROLOGY HIGH LOW HIGH (2) Baseflow HIGH HIGH HIGH (2) Flood Flow HIGH LOW HIGH (3) Streamside Area Attenuation MEDIUM MEDIUM HIGH (4) Floodplain Access HIGH HIGH HIGH (4) Wooded Riparian Buffer LOW LOW HIGH (4) Microtopography NA LOW NA (3) Stream Stability HIGH LOW HIGH (4) Channel Stability HIGH MEDIUM HIGH (4) Sediment Transport HIGH LOW HIGH (4) Stream Geomorphology HIGH MEDIUM HIGH r(1) WATER QUALITY MEDIUM MEDIUM MEDIUM (2) Baseflow HIGH HIGH HIGH (2) Stream -side Area Vegetation MEDIUM LOW HIGH (3) Upland Pollutant Filtration LOW LOW HIGH (3) Thermoregulation HIGH LOW HIGH (2) Indicators of Stressors YES YES YES (2) Aquatic Life Tolerance HIGH HIGH HIGH (1) HABITAT MEDIUM LOW HIGH (2) In -stream Habitat HIGH LOW HIGH (3) Baseflow HIGH HIGH HIGH (3) Substrate HIGH LOW HIGH (3) Stream Stability HIGH MEDIUM HIGH (3) In -Stream Habitat HIGH MEDIUM HIGH (2) Stream -side Habitat LOW LOW HIGH (3) Stream -side Habitat LOW LOW HIGH (3) Thermoregulation MEDIUM LOW HIGH OVERALL MEDIUM LOW HIGH Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Phase 1— Prospectus, Sliding Knob Mitigation Site Page 3 Table 4: Sliding Knob NC WAM Summary NC WAM Sub -function Rating Summary WAM 2 WAM 3 WAM 4 Reference 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 LOW LOW MEDIUM (1) WATER QUALITY LOW LOW HIGH (2) Pathogen change LOW LOW LOW (2) Particulate Change LOW MEDIUM HIGH (2) Soluble change LOW LOW HIGH (2) Physical Change LOW MEDIUM HIGH (1) HABITAT LOW LOW HIGH (2) Physical Structure LOW LOW HIGH (2) Landscape Patch Structure LOW LOW LOW (2) Vegetative Composition LOW LOW HIGH 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 0.41-square mile watershed is expected to average 16.7- CFS. Based on empirical evidence a bankfull discharge of 16.7-CFS is expected to occur approximately every 1.3 to 1.5 years (Rosgen 1996, Leopold 1994). 1.6 FEMA Inspection of the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map 3700875400J, Panel 8754, effective June 2, 2009, indicates that Sliding Knob streams are not located in a Special Flood Hazard Area. The project should not alter FEMA flood zones, and therefore, a CLOMR is not expected. 2 SITE WORK PLAN & PROPOSED MITIGATION CREDIT A summary of the actions proposed at Sliding Knob is provided in Table 5 and in Figure 4D. In general, proposed activities involve Stream Restoration, Stream Enhancement II, and Stream Preservation. Stream and wetland restoration and enhancement will occur in reaches of streams that have been impacted by straightening, clearing of vegetation, livestock grazing, and other historic land uses. Stream preservation has been limited to the upper reaches of streams confined by steep valleys. Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 4 Phase 1— Prospectus, Sliding Knob Mitigation Site Table 5: Sliding Knob Work Plan Summary Stream Approx. Final Reach Length (LF) Mitigation Activity UT-1 1,515 Stream Enhancement II UT-2 221 Stream Restoration UT-3 532 Stream Restoration UT-4 371 Stream Restoration, Enhancement II UT-5 1,761 Stream Enhancement II, Preservation Total 4,400 3 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. 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-d475ea7ad1fa&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 5 Phase 1— Prospectus, Sliding Knob Mitigation Site ATTACHMENT A — FIGURES, PHOTOS, & LANDOWNER AUTHORIZATION FORM Figure 4A: Figure 4B: Figure 4C: Figure 4D: Sliding Knob Site —Topography and Drainage Area Sliding Knob Site — Existing Conditions and Soils Sliding Knob Site — LiDAR Sliding Knob Site — Proposed Conditions Existing Conditions Photos Landowner Authorization Form Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 6 Phase 1— Prospectus, Sliding Knob Mitigation Site N Legend Sliding Knob Easement = 8.7 ac —Existing Streams = 4,360 ft .,,UT 1 Drainage Area = 0.10 sq mi (61.1 ac) 1 UT 2 Drainage Area = 0.02 sq mi (14.0 ac) UT 3 Drainage Area = 0.02 sq mi (13.4 ac) L .,UT 4 Drainage Area = 0.31 sq mi (200.0 ac) UT 5 Drainage Area = 0.01 sq mi (9.2 ac) 3,000 Feet • NIL I • t c ' 4 1 • • 4 4. Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic So,ciety, i-cubed Axiom EnvKunmenlal, mc. Prepared for: ES RESTORATION SYSTEMS I TLC Project: French Broad 05 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Madison County, NC Title: SLIDING KNOB SITE: TOPOGRAPHY AND DRAINAGE AREA Drawn by: WGL Date: Scale: JAN 2022 1:8,000 Project No.: 21-001.05 FIGURE 4A Legend Easement = 8.7 ac Perennial Streams = 3,089 ft Intermittent Streams = 1,271 ft Existing Wetlands = 2.0 ac o Wetland GPS Points Powerline ------ Roads NCDWR Form NCSAM Form NCWAM Form Madison County Parcels NRCS Soil Map Units 20-foot Contours 0 Note: For every GPS point taken, approximately 5 soil borings were collected. 125 250 Soil Map Unit AcD, ArE, ArF BnD, BnE, BnF DeA TrC, TsD, TsE, TuD 500 750 • Soil Series Ashe-Cleveland-Rock Outcrop Complex Buladean-Chestnut Complex Dellwood-Reddies Complex Toecane-Tusquitee Complex Hydric No No Class B Class B NCSAM Form #1 Score = LOW 1,000 Feet NCDWR Form #2 Score = 15.5 NCSAM Form #2 Score = MEDIUM NCDWR Form #1 Score = 23.75 Perched culvert NCWAM Form #3 Score = LOW T7 NCDWR Form #4 Score = 23.5 NCWAM Form #4 Score = HIGH NCWAM Form #2 Score = LOW NCDWR Form #3 Score = 29.5 NCSAM Form #3 Score = HIGH Axiom EnviranT'Cnlco. Ind, Prepared for: FPS RESTORATION SYSTEMS I LLC Project: French Broad 05 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Madison County, NC Title: SLIDING KNOB SITE: EXISTING CONDITIONS AND SOILS Drawn by: JMH Date: JAN 2022 Scale: 1:2360 Project No.: 21-001.05 FIGURE 4B Legend Easement = 8.7 ac ■ Existing Streams = 4,360 ft Digital Elevation Model Elevation (ft) - High : 3610 - Low : 2587 Axiom Envirarin'cniaL ins, Prepared for: FPS RESTORATION SYSTEMS I LLC Project: French Broad 05 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Madison County, NC Title: SLIDING KNOB SITE: LiDAR Drawn by: Date: Scale: Project No.: JMH JAN 2022 1:2360 21-001.05 FIGURE 4C Legend Easement = 8.7 ac ▪ Stream Restoration @ 1:1 = 856 ft Stream Enhancement II @ 2.5:1 = 573 ft ▪ Stream Enhancement II @ 5:1 = 402 ft Stream Enhancement II @ 7.5:1 = 2,160 ft Stream Preservation @ 10:1 = 409 ft Wetland Enhancement @ 2:1 = 1.84 ac Wetland Preservation @ 10:1 = 0.17 ac Roads Powerline 1) Move stream into natural valley position 2) Re-establish geomorphology and riffle - pool sequence Baseline Credit Calculation Mitigation Restoration Enhance II Enhance II Enhance II Preservation Footage 856 573 402 2160 409 1 2.5 5 7.5 10 Ratio Total 1 1 1 1 1 SMUs 856.1 229.1 80.4 288.1 40.9 1494.6 1) Move stream into natural valley position 2) Re-establish geomorphology and riffle - pool sequence Upgrade roads Upgrade culvert Axiom Env*unr.en9a1, inc, Prepared for: FPS RESTORATION SYSTEMS I LLC Project: French Broad 05 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Madison County, NC Title: SLIDING KNOB SITE: PROPOSED CONDITIONS Drawn by: JMH Date: JAN 2022 Scale: 1:2360 Project No.: 21-001.05 FIGURE 4D LANDOWNER AUTHORIZATION FORM PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRITION: Deed Book: 3/ t Page: 3 9 Parcel ID Number: ' 7S Y s t/ s S 8 O County: M^ d ; s o v, Street Address: / (p /(p la Ins iUi 6 ? i-1 # 5 tt tf rs du, e, iV 7 /g Property Owner (please print): 13 - 6 y Tit rn m 6 ?ti 6 k e �a 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) Property Owner Telephone Number: � D' - /p °1 ? D._ 3 111 We hereby certify the above information to be true and accurate to the best of our knowledge. 940, (Prope y Owner Authorized Signature) (Date) ATTACHMENT B - BASELINE ASSESSMENT FORMS Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Attachment B Phase 1— Prospectus, Sliding Knob Mitigation Site Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1 SAM #1 Stream Site Name Sliding Knob - UT2 Date of Assessment 11/30/2021 Stream Category Mal Assessor Name/Organization Lewis/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 HIGH HIGH (2) Flood Flow LOW LOW (3) Streamside Area Attenuation MEDIUM MEDIUM (4) Floodplain Access HIGH HIGH (4) Wooded Riparian Buffer LOW LOW (4) Microtopography LOW LOW (3) Stream Stability LOW LOW (4) Channel Stability MEDIUM MEDIUM (4) Sediment Transport LOW LOW (4) Stream Geomorphology MEDIUM MEDIUM (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 HIGH HIGH (2) Streamside Area Vegetation LOW LOW (3) Upland Pollutant Filtration LOW LOW (3) Thermoregulation LOW LOW (2) Indicators of Stressors YES YES (2) Aquatic Life Tolerance HIGH NA (2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA NA (1) Habitat LOW LOW (2) In -stream Habitat LOW MEDIUM (3) Baseflow HIGH HIGH (3) Substrate LOW LOW (3) Stream Stability MEDIUM MEDIUM (3) In -stream Habitat MEDIUM 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 #2 Stream Site Name Sliding Knob - UT 1 Upper Date of Assessment 11/30/2021 Stream Category Mb1 Assessor Name/Organization Lewis/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) NO 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 MEDIUM (4) Floodplain Access HIGH (4) Wooded Riparian Buffer LOW (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 (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 LOW HIGH YES HIGH NA (1) Habitat MEDIUM (2) In -stream Habitat HIGH (3) Baseflow HIGH (3) Substrate HIGH (3) Stream Stability HIGH (3) In -stream Habitat HIGH (2) Stream -side Habitat LOW (3) Stream -side Habitat LOW (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 #3 Stream Site Name Sliding Knob - UT5 Ref Date of Assessment 11/30/2021 Stream Category Mb2 Assessor Name/Organization Lewis/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) NO 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 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 (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 HIGH HIGH HIGH YES HIGH 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 HIGH (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 Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0 WAM #2 Wetland Site Name Sliding Knob - WAM 2 Date of Assessment 11/30/2021 Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization Axiom, Lewis, Harris 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 Function Hydrology Water Quality Habitat Function Rating Summary Function Hydrology Water Quality Habitat Sub -function Surface Storage and Retention Sub -surface Storage and Retention Pathogen Change Particulate Change Soluble Change Physical Change Pollution Change Physical Structure Landscape Patch Structure Vegetation Composition Metrics Condition Condition 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 Metrics Condition Condition Condition/Opportunity Opportunity Presence (Y/N) Condition YES NO YES NO NO NO Rating LOW LOW LOW LOW NO LOW NA NA LOW LOW NO LOW LOW NO NA NA NA LOW LOW LOW 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 Sliding Knob - WAM 3 Date of Assessment 11/30/2021 Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization Axiom, Lewis, Harris 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 Function Hydrology Sub -function Surface Storage and Retention Sub -surface Storage and Retention Metrics Condition Condition YES NO YES NO NO NO Rating LOW LOW Water Quality Habitat Function Rating Summary Function Hydrology 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 Metrics Condition Condition Condition/Opportunity Opportunity Presence (Y/N) Condition LOW LOW NO MEDIUM NA NA LOW LOW NO MEDIUM MEDIUM NO NA NA NA LOW LOW LOW Rating LOW LOW LOW NO LOW Overall Wetland Rating LOW NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0 WAM #4 Wetland Site Name Sliding Knob - WAM 4 Ref Date of Assessment 11/30/2021 Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization Axiom, Lewis, Harris 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 Function Hydrology Sub -function Surface Storage and Retention Sub -surface Storage and Retention Metrics Condition Condition YES NO YES NO NO NO Rating HIGH MEDIUM Water Quality Habitat Function Rating Summary Function Hydrology 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 Metrics Condition Condition Condition/Opportunity Opportunity Presence (Y/N) Condition LOW LOW NO HIGH NA NA HIGH HIGH NO HIGH HIGH NO NA NA NA HIGH LOW HIGH Rating HIGH HIGH HIGH NO HIGH Overall Wetland Rating HIGH Form 1 1 ,U5 NC DWO Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 u(T - l p/ ; rot 1 Date: 0, ' 0,0 / To IA Project/Site: 4I1; /0.- K` 0142 Latitude: 3`5' : 3G Gil Evaluator. lk4er.44 r y-/,,,,t County: my i.444,7 Longitude: _ Fa. g43 ID` Total Points:Stream is at least intermittent ff 9orperennial O Y 3 n 2 . 7 Stream Deterrn[nation circle one) Other (MAtil y#)10$ e.g. Quad Name: Ephemeral s(n ittent erenniai A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = (V.') ) Absent Weak ' Strong Moderate .- 1e Continuity of channel bed and bank 0 1 20 3 2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 0 1 r t 3 3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool, ripple -pool sequence 0 () 2 3 4. Particle size of stream substrate 0 1 3 ti 5. Active/relict floodplain 'b 1 2 3 6. Depositional bars or benches 0f"1-. 2 3 7. Recent alluvial deposits 0- (3) 2 3 8. Headcuts 0) 1 2 3 9. Grade control 0 0.5 1.5 10. Natural valley 0 0.5 1 ''1•.5 11. Second or greater order channel Yes = 3 aroma! atones ere not rated; see discussions in manual B. HvdroloDv (Subtotal = � ] 12. Presence of Baseflow 0 0 2 3 13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 0 -) (I- 2 3 14. Leaf litter 1.5 1 a 0 15. Sediment on plants or debris sp. ' 0.5 1 1.5 16. Organic debris lines or piles 0 (6.5 1 1.5 17. Soil -based evidence of high water table? No = 0 i Y`es = 3 ) C. Biology (Subtotal = L . 7 `1 18. Fibrous roots in streambed 3 2 (i 0 19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 3 (.2) 1 0 20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 0 1 Cr, 3 21. Aquatic Mollusks 0 1 2 3 22. Fish d:t 0.5 1 1.5 23. Crayfish 4C0 0.5 1 1.5 24. Amphibians 0 0.5 10 1.5 25. Algae V 0.5 1 1.5 26. Wetland plants in streambed :FACW = 0.1S OBL = 1.5 Other = 0 *perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual. - --- Notes: 540......e ' t 1 2 , ca,/,--..•r.3 e' Sketch: ten Form 2 NC DWO Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 Date: t) ( J 3a I l Project/Site: 0,r, 01,'n lemob Latitude: 35. f c I LG Evaluator. NI t t�U County: l44v1>Ss�'! Longitude: _ f'Z $'G gig Total Points: Stream is at least intermittent if z 79 or perennial ifz 30 5 • Stream Determination (circle one) Ephemeral ermitten Perennial Other 5aNdy ,mush e.g. Quad Name: i A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = S , 5 ) Absent Weak Moderate Strong 18. Continuity of channel bed and bank 0 2 3 2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg C 1 2 3 3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool, ripple -pool sequence 1 2 3 4. Particle size of stream substrate 0 [` 2 3 5. Active/relict floodplain 0 2 3 6. Depositional bars or benches 0} 1 2 3 7. Recent alluvial deposits L) 1 2 3 8. Headcuts 0 2 3 9. Grade control CID 0.5 1 1.5 10. Natural valley 0 0.5 1 1 `, 11. Second or greater order channel No = 0 Yes = 3 �✓ artificial ditches are n rated; see discussions in manua B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal = 12. Presence of Baseflow 0 1 2 13. Iron oxidizing bacteria (4) 1 2 3 14. Leaf litter 1.5 ® 0.5 0 15. Sediment on plants or debris 0.5 1 1.5 16. Organic debris lines or piles `0J 0.5 1 1.5 17. Soil -based evidence of high water table? `" No = 0 1 s C. Biology Subtotal = 18. Fibrous roots in streambed 3 2 1 19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 3 2 1 20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 0 1 3 21. Aquatic Mollusks qP 1 2 3 22. Fish 0.5 1 1.5 23. Crayfish - i 0.5 1 1.5 24. Amphibians 0.5 1 1.5 25. Algae 0 0.5 1.5 26. Wetland plants in streambed FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0 *perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual. Notes: Sketch: 5 4rt c u on 1 3 Irr i 1✓'Ei ce.c L.0 6.4% °L4 %u.A.>s ilk 0.71/4- -Vr A k,,,ki, h of 4, c*u i ACI(0 cute Or p loicti,f'epi 'tot kqc.i 3/4-4-o( ivt s..E. 4 API 1'44% Form 3 NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 zP �.�� `"T-3 Date: l l (' O j 1,0 2� Evaluator. kok r r.5' •. 5 / A- •". Project/Site: S iia'Aw kr+els County: Total Points: Stream Is at least intermittent 29.5 If 219 or perennial if 2 30• A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = [L •') ) 18 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 = a Latitude: 5, 7 31 3 =-/ Longitude: . 4/1. g 4-6 400' Stream Determination (circle one) Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial Other scva y Must e.g. Quad Name: Absent Weak Moderate Strong 0 3 0 - Cr 0 1 m 3 0 3 0 - Q 0 Q CO 3 - 0 1 m 3 0 (1) 2 3 0 Cf7, 2 3 0 1 C?J 3 0 (0.0 1 1.5 0 L 0.5 & 1.5 (ICJo= fl, Yes=3 12. Presence of Baseflow 0 1 2 Caf 13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 0 0 2 3 14. Leaf litter 1.5 1 --5) 0 15. Sediment on plants or debris C9% 0.5 1 1.5 16. Organic debris lines or piles 0 1.5 •r 1 1.5 117. Soil -based evidence of high water table? No = 0 C9es =_,1.-' C. Bioloav (Subtotal = 18. Fibrous roots in streambed 3 C21 1 0 19. Rooted upland plants in streambed (3) 2 1 0 20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 0 1 orY) 3 21. Aquatic Mollusks _ 0 <9 2 3 22. Fish @J 0.5 1 1.5 23. Crayfish ® 0.5 1 1.5 24. Amphibians ® 0.5 1 1.5 25. Algae (02 0.5 1 _ I 1.5 26. Wetland plants in streambed FACW= 0.75; OBL = 1.5 (Other =, 07 "peremial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual. Notes: Ir....kA 1 OE cm.41 S j1:f5 . iL .)-.e 4`{y , S4.s.i\ Sketch: Form 4 NC DWO Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 P (-. `f - I Date: i t / p 1.0 2, ProjectlSite: 5l406,4i vas Latitude: 34-. 7 3 9 p ram' Evaluator. A...x: D r„,, / 14,F rr,S/ L et,' County: M,, ,,s.„? Longitude: - 8 2 . g 5-0 ob`I Total Points: Stream is at least intermittent 1 cif a 19 or perennial ifa 30* 1.../5 J • Stream Determin, ircle one) - erennial Other ga e.g. Quad Name: 4.,f °�" / Mu �� _Ephemeral jy. A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = `1..,5 ) Absent Weak Moderate > .. Strong 1a Continuity of channel bed and bank 0 1 2 3 2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 0 1 C2% 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 0 6') 2 3 6. Depositional bars or benches 0 (17 2 3 7. Recent alluvial deposits 0 d•3 2 3 8. Headcuts c0- ' 1 2 3 9. Grade control (0 0.5 1 1.5 10. Natural valley 0 0.5 1 ['j7 11. Second or greater order channel C No = 0 Yes = 3 not rated; see discussions in manua B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 7 12. Presence of Baseflow 0 1 2 3.) 13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 67) 1 2 3 14. Leaf litter 1.5 1 t•05 0 15. Sediment on plants or debris '0 0.5 1 1.5 16. Organic debris lines or piles 0 415; 1 1.5 17. Soil -based evidence of high water table? No = 0 Wes = 3 J C. Bioloav [Subtotal = 18. Fibrous roots in streambed 3 2 �_-,) 0 19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 3 2 (1) 0 20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 0 6,7 2 3 21. Aquatic Mollusks 0 (1f 2 3 22. Fish ® 0.5 1 1.5 23. Crayfish 0 0.5 1 1.5 24. Amphibians 0.5 1 1.5 25. Algae . b 0.5 -- , 1 1.5 26. Wetland plants in streambed FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0 *perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual. - Notes: CG,t,.j h,.tt-tk( Sketch: