20221254 Ver 1_SAW-2022-00529 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

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

RESTORATION SYSTEMS FRENCH BROAD 05 UMBRELLA MITIGATION BANK
PROSPECTUS — DAVIS COVE MITIGATION SITE
SAW-2022-00529
Sponsored by:
RESTORATION SYSTEMS LLC
Prepared for:
The North Carolina Inter -Agency Review Team
for distribution and comment
Sponsored by:
Restoration Systems, LLC
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 5
3 REFERENCES 6
List of Tables
Table 1: Davis Cove Site Soils 2
Table 2: Davis Cove Existing Stream Flow Regime 3
Table 3: Davis Cove NC SAM Summary 4
Table 4: Davis Cove Work Plan & Mitigation Credit Summary 5
Attachments
A: Figures, Photos, & Landowner Authorization Form
Figure 4A:
Figure 4B:
Figure 4B-I:
Figure 4C:
Figure 4D:
Figure 4D-I:
Davis Cove Site —Topography and Drainage Area
Davis Cove Site — Existing Conditions and Soils
Davis Cove Site — Inset Existing Conditions and Soils
Davis Cove Site — LiDAR
Davis Cove Site — Proposed Conditions
Davis Cove Site — 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, Davis Cove Mitigation Site

DAVIS COVE MITIGATION SITE
The Davis Cove Mitigation Site ("Site") is characterized by disturbed forest and agricultural land used for
livestock grazing and hay production. The main hydrological features include eleven unnamed tributaries
(UTs) to Spring Creek. Reaches near the Site's outfall have been heavily modified for livestock and
agricultural production; UT-3 has been diverted to allow cattle access, and UT-4 has been piped
underground for hay production. The proposed conservation easement area contains approximately 32-
acres (Figure 4A).
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 3,200-feet NGVD at the upper reach of UT1 to a low of approximately
2,360-feet NGVD at the site outfall (Figure 4A).
The Site drains an approximately 0.42-square mile watershed at the outfall with smaller drainage areas
ranging from 0.03 to 0.29-square miles (Figure 4A). The watershed is forestland in the upper headwaters
with pasture and hayfields in the lower valleys. Impervious surfaces account for less than five percent of
the upstream land surface.
Land use at the Site is characterized by forest, hayfields, and livestock pasture. Riparian zones in lower
portions of the Site are primarily composed of herbaceous vegetation that is sparse and disturbed due to
livestock grazing, bush hogging, and regular land -management activities. A road network extends through
the upper reaches of the Site to allow access to the property by the landowner, firefighters, or other
emergency personnel. Roads are stable and constructed of earthen materials and have multiple culverted
crossings.
1.2 Water Quality
The Site is within the French Broad River Basin in USGS 14-digit HUC 06010105120010 (Figure 2) and
NCDWR Subbasin number 04-03-04. Site streams drain to Spring Creek, which has been assigned Stream
Index Number 6-118-(1) and a Best Usage Classification of C, Tr. 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 primarily by open pastureland utilized for cattle production surrounded by
mature forested mountain slopes. Pastureland is maintained for livestock grazing and hay production and
is dominated by fescue (Festuca sp.) and clover (Trifolium spp.). Other opportunistic herbaceous species
such as ragweed (Ambrosia spp.), wild geranium (Geranium maculatum), horsenettle (Solanum
carolinense), aster (Symphyotrichum spp.), goldenrod (Solidago spp.), hog peanut (Amphicarpaea
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 1
Phase 1— Prospectus, Davis Cove Mitigation Site

bracteata), and crown beard (Verbesina sp.), occur the along streamside areas and woodland edges of the
pasture. The forested portion of the Site is largely composed of hickory (Carya spp.), black walnut (luglans
nigra), tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), black cherry (Prunus serotina), red maple (Acer rubrum), red
oak (Quercus rubra), white oak (Q. alba), Eastern hemlock (Tsuga canadensis), sourwood (Oxydendron
arboreum), and white ash (Fraxinus americana) in the canopy. Subcanopy and shrub species include
striped maple (Acer pensylvanicum), basswood (Tilia americana), Sassafras (Sassafras albidum), yellow
buckeye (Aesculus flava), mountain maple (Acer spicatum), mapleleaf viburnum (Viburnum acerifolium),
doghobble (Leucothoe fontanesiana), and rhododendron (Rhododendron maximum). Herbs and vines
include Christmas fern (Polystichium acrostichoides), ebonly spleenwory (Asplenium platyneuron),
bloodroot (Sanguinaria canadensis), pipsissewa (chimaphila maculata), Dutchmans's pipe (Aristolochia
macrophylla), greenbriar (Smilax spp.), and poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans). Forested portions of the
Site where cattle congregate have little to no shrubs or herbs. These areas include scattered Christmas
ferns, false stinging nettle (Boehmeria cylindrica), and Japanese stilt -grass (Microstegium vimineum).
1.4 Soils
Based on Web Soil Survey mapping (USDA 2021), proposed conservation easement areas associated with
the Davis Cove site contain six soil series (Figure 4B and Table 1): Ashe-Cleveland-Rock outcrop complex
(Typic Dystrudepts), Buladean-Chestnut complex (Typic Dystrudepts), Eva rd-Cowee complex (Typic
Hapludults), Statler loam (Humic Hapludults), and Toecane-Tusquitee complex (Humic Hapludults),
Tusquitee-Whiteside complex (Humic Dystrudepts).
Table 1: Davis Cove Site Soils
Map Unit
Symbol
Map Unit Name Hydric Status Description
ArE and ArF
Ashe-Cleveland -Rock
outcrop complex Non-hydric
BnD, BnE, and Buladean-Chestnut
BnF complex
The Ashe-Cleveland complex consists of
moderately deep, somewhat excessively drained,
moderately rapid permeable soils on long and
narrow summits and irregular side slopes. Depth
to seasonal high water is greater than 6 feet.
The Buladean-Chestnut complex consists of
moderately deep, well drained, moderately rapid
Non-hydric permeable soils on long and narrow summits and
irregular side slopes. Depth to seasonal high water
is greater than 6 feet.
EvF2 Evard-Cowee complex Non-hydric
StB
Statler loam Non-hydric
The Evard-Cowee complex consists of moderately
deep, well drained, moderately permeable soils on
long and narrow summits and side slopes. Depth
to seasonal high water is greater than 6 feet.
The Statler soil series consists of very deep, well
drained, moderately permeable soils on concave
to planar toe slopes along low stream terraces.
Depth to seasonal high water is 4 to 6 feet from
January through December.
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 2
Phase 1— Prospectus, Davis Cove Mitigation Site

Table 1: Davis Cove Site Soils (continued)
Map Unit
Symbol
Map Unit Name Hydric Status Description
TaB, TaC, and Tate loam
Ta D
TsD, TsE, and Tusquitee-Toecane
TuD complex
The Tate soil series consists of very deep, well
drained, moderately rapid permeable soils on
Non-hydric footslopes and toeslopes along coves, colluvial
fans, and benches. Depth to seasonal high water is
greater than 6 feet.
The Tusquitee-Toecane complex consists of very
deep, well drained, moderately permeable soils on
Non-hydric head slopes, footslopes, and toeslopes along
colluvial fans, drainageways, and benches. Depth
to seasonal high water is greater than 6 feet.
A North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist conducted investigations of the Site for hydric soil and/or wetland
pockets that would be suitable for mitigation. Investigations indicate that there is insufficient acreage of
hydric soils at the Site for mapping or mitigation. At this time, no detailed soil mapping has been
conducted at the Site.
1.5 Hydrology
Davis Cove site streams are depicted on USGS mapping as perennial (Figure 4A). However, on -site
investigations using NCDWQ stream forms (Table 2) have identified additional intermittent streams. Six
unnamed tributaries have been classified as intermittent: UT 1A, UT 4, UT 5A, UT 5B, UT 6, and UT 7. NC
SAM on -site determinations have concluded that the stream functional characteristics range from low
ratings in the disturbed areas to high ratings in the forested areas (Table 3).
Table 2: Davis Cove Existing Stream Flow Regime
Stream
Stream Length Stream Order
USGS Stream In -field Stream
Classification Classification
UT-1 3496
UT-1A 88
UT-2 1940
UT-3 3885
UT-4 1047
UT-5 3635
UT-5A 261
UT-5B 241
UT-6 501
UT-7 821
UT-8 926
15t
15t
15t
3rd
15t
2nd
1st
1st
1st
1st
1st
Perennial Perennial
Not mapped Intermittent
Perennial Perennial
Perennial Perennial
Not mapped Intermittent
Perennial Perennial
Not mapped Intermittent
Not mapped Intermittent
Not mapped Intermittent
Not mapped Intermittent
Perennial Perennial
Total 16,842
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 3
Phase 1— Prospectus, Davis Cove Mitigation Site

Table 3: Davis Cove NC SAM Summary
NC SAM Function Class Rating UT 1
Summary
UT 3
Lower
UT 3
Preservation
UT 4
UT 5
(1) HYDROLOGY
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
(4) Floodplain Access
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
(4) Microtopography
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
(4) Channel Stability
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
(4) Stream Geomorphology
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
(1) WATER QUALITY
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
(2) Stream -side Area Vegetation
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
(1) HABITAT
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
(2) In -stream Habitat
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
(3) Baseflow
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
(3) Substrate
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
(3) In -Stream Habitat
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
(2) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
(3) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
OVERALL
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
The Site's main tributaries are depicted as perennial on the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle. No
streams were mapped as intermittent, however, UT 1A, UT 4, UT 5A, UT 5B, UT 6, and UT 7 exhibit field
characteristics of intermittent streams based on benthic macroinvertebrate samples, NCDWQ Stream
Identification Form [v4.11] scores, and evidence of stream flow during field visits.
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 0.42-square mile watershed is expected to average 17.0-CFS. Based on
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 4
Phase 1— Prospectus, Davis Cove Mitigation Site

empirical evidence a bankfull discharge of 17.0-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 have been severely impacted by livestock trampling with
sinuosity affected by bank erosion and hoof shear. UT 3 has been rerouted for agricultural purposes, and
a large section of UT 4 has been piped underground to create a pasture for hay production. In general,
underground piping, 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 Davis Cove
site streams.
1.7 FEMA
Inspection of the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map 3700874500J, Panel 8745, effective June 2, 2009,
indicates that Spring Creek, the receiving stream for Site drainage is mapped as a Zone AE flood area.
Work conducted at the Site is unlikely to affect flood zones in Spring Creek; however, coordination with
FEMA will occur throughout the design process. At this time, a CLOMR is not expected.
2 SITE WORK PLAN & PROPOSED MITIGATION CREDIT
A summary of the actions proposed at Davis Cove is provided in Table 4 and in Figures 5D and 5D-I. In
general, proposed activities involve Stream Restoration, Stream Enhancement II, and Stream
Preservation. Stream preservation has been limited to the upper reaches of stream confined by steep
valleys. Stream and wetland restoration and enhancement occur in lower reaches of streams that have
been impacted by straightening, piping, diversion, clearing of vegetation, livestock grazing, and other
historic land uses.
Table 4: Davis Cove Work Plan & Mitigation Credit Summary
Stream Approx. Final
Reach Length (LF)
Mitigation Activity
UT-1 3,496 Stream Enhancement II, Preservation
UT-1A 88 Stream Preservation
UT-2 1,940 Stream Enhancement II, Preservation
UT-3 4,038 Stream Restoration, Enhancement II, Preservation
UT-4 544 Stream Restoration, Enhancement II
UT-5 3,635 Stream Enhancement II, Preservation
UT-5A 261 Stream Preservation
UT-5B 241 Stream Preservation
UT-6 501 Stream Preservation
UT-7 821 Stream Preservation
UT-8 926 Stream Preservation
Total 16,491
Restoration Systems French Broad 06010105 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 5
Phase 1— Prospectus, Davis Cove 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 6
Phase 1— Prospectus, Davis Cove Mitigation Site

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

Legend
QDavis Cove Easement = 32.3 ac
—Existing Streams = 16,842 ft
i iUT 1 Drainage Area = 0.13 sq mi (80.3 ac)
UT 3 Drainage Area = 0.29 sq mi (187.4 ac)
UT 2 Drainage Area= 0.03 sq mi (21.6 ac)
Upper UT 1 Drainage Area = 0.08 sq mi (57.3 ac)
UT 5 Drainage Area = 0.16 sq mi (99.6 ac)
Upper UT 3 Drainage Area = 0.09 sq mi (54.8 ac)
UT 4 Drainage Area = 0.04 sq mi (23.7 ac)
z.7
f GT -i {
UT=1 A �' — \
Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, -cubed
Axiom Environmental. inc.
Prepared for:
�S
RESTORATION
SYSTEMS I LLC
Project:
French Broad 05
Umbrella
Mitigation Bank
Madison County, NC
Title:
DAVIS COVE SITE:
TOPOGRAPHY
AND
DRAINAGE AREA
Drawn by:
JMH
Date:
Scale:
Project No.:
NOV 2021
1:10,500
21-001.05
FIGURE
4A

Soil Map Unit
AcD, ArE, ArF
BnD, BnE, BnF
DeA
DrB
EvD2, EvE2, EvF2
StB
TaB, TaC, TaD
PxF
Soil Series
TsD, TsE
0 187.5 375
Ashe-Cleveland-Rock Outcrop Complex
Buladean-Chestnut Complex
Dellwood-Reddies Complex
Dillard loam
Evard-Cowee Complex
Statler loam
Tate Loam Basin
Toecane-Tusquitee Complex
750
Hydric
No
No
Class B
No
No
Class B
No
Class B
Existing perched culvert
1,125
1,500
Feet
NCSAM Form #1
Score = HIGH
NCSAM Form #5
Score = HIGH
NCSAM Form #3
Score = HIGH
NCDWR Form #2
Score = 32.5
NCSAM Form #2
Score = LOW
Figure 4B-I
NCDWR Form #1
Score = 24
NCSAM Form #4
Score = LOW
Legend
Easement = 32.3 ac
Perennial Streams = 13,881 ft
Intermittent Streams = 2,961 ft
Piped Stream Channel
Roads
NCDWR Form Locations
NCSAM Form Locations
Madison County Parcels
NRCS Soil Boundaries
20-foot Contours
Axiom Envi onmen1aI, Inc.
Prepared for:
RESTORATION
SYSTEMS I LLC
Project:
French Broad 05
Umbrella
Mitigation Bank
Madison County, NC
Title:
DAVIS COVE SITE:
EXISTING
CONDITIONS
AND SOILS
Drawn by:
JMH
Date:
SEP 2021
Scale:
1:4000
Project No.:
21-001.05
FIGURE
4B

Soil Map Unit
AcD, ArE, ArF
BnD, BnE, BnF
DeA
DrB
EvD2, EvE2, EvF2
StB
TaB, TaC, TaD
TsD, TsE
Soil Series
Ashe-Cleveland-Rock Outcrop Complex
Buladean-Chestnut Complex
Dellwood-Reddies Complex
Dillard loam
Evard-Cowee Complex
Statler loam
Tate Loam Basin
Toecane-Tusquitee Complex
:
Hydric
No
No
Class B
No
No
Class B
No
Class B
Existing perched culvert
NCDWR Form #1
Score = 24
s
62.5 125
NCSAM Form #2
Score = LOW
Stream re-routed
NCSAM Form #4
Score = LOW
250
375
500
Feel
Stream channel piped underground
Legend
Easement = 32.3 ac
Perennial Streams = 13,881 ft
Intermittent Streams = 2,961 ft
Piped Stream Channel
NCDWR Form Locations
NCSAM Form Locations
Madison County Parcels
NRCS Soil Boundaries
20-foot Contours
a
- -. : la .161.1i;
Axiom Envi onmenlaI, Inc.
Prepared for:
RESTORATION
SYSTEMS I LLC
Project:
French Broad 05
Umbrella
Mitigation Bank
Madison County, NC
Title:
DAVIS COVE SITE:
EXISTING
CONDITIONS
AND SOILS
Drawn by:
JMH
Date:
SEP 2021
Scale:
1:1600
Project No.:
21-001.05
FIGURE
4B-I

Legend
Easement = 32.3 ac
Existing Streams = 16,842 ft
Value
- High : 3440.36
- Low : 2300.22
Axiom EnvMonmenlal, Inc.
Prepared for:
RESTORATION
SYSTEMS I LLC
Project:
French Broad 05
Umbrella
Mitigation Bank
Madison County, NC
Title:
DAVIS COVE SITE:
LiDAR
Drawn by:
JMH
Date:
Scale:
Project No.:
SEP 2021
1:4000
21-001.05
FIGURE
4C

Legend
Easement = 32.3 ac
Stream Restoration = 1,477 ft
Stream Enhancement II (2.5:1) = 781 ft
Stream Enhancement II (7.5:1 Ratio) = 6,058 ft
Stream Enhancement II (10:1 Ratio) = 305 ft
Stream Preservation = 7,884 ft
No Credit
Roads
Preservation reaches will be protected
under conservation easement
Mitigation
Footage
Ratio
SMUs
Restoration
1477
1
1
1477.0
Enhance II
781
2.5
1
312.4
Enhance II
6058
7.5
1
807.7
Enhance II
305
10
1
30.5
Preservation
7884
10
1
788.4
Total
3416.0
Note: Internal road network is to remain for access
Figure 4D-I
a
Axiom Envionmenlal, Inc.
Prepared for:
RESTORATION
SYSTEMS I LLC
Project:
French Broad 05
Umbrella
Mitigation Bank
Madison County, NC
Title:
DAVIS COVE SITE:
PROPOSED
CONDITIONS
Drawn by:
Date:
Scale:
Project No.:
JMH
SEP 2021
1:4000
21-001.05
FIGURE
4D

Backfill channel and
reroute stream
--�
Fix perched culvert
ti
1) Remove underground piped channel
2) Bring stream up to floodplain elevation
and move it to natural valley position
Legend
Easement = 32.3 ac
Stream Restoration = 1,477 ft
Stream Enhancement II (2.5:1) = 781 ft
Stream Enhancement II (7.5:1 Ratio) = 6,058 ft
Stream Enhancement II (10:1 Ratio) = 305 ft
Stream Preservation = 7,884 ft
No Credit
Madison County Parcel Boundaries
a
Axiom Envuunmenlai, Inc.
Prepared for:
RESTORATION
SYSTEMS I LLC
Project:
French Broad 05
Umbrella
Mitigation Bank
Madison County, NC
Title:
DAVIS COVE SITE:
PROPOSED
CONDITIONS
Drawn by:
JMH
Date:
SEP 2021
Scale:
1:1600
Project No.:
21-001.05
FIGURE
40-1

LANDOWNER AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRITION:
Deed Book: 548
Page: 582 County: _Madison
Parcel ID Number: 8745734783 & 8745627482
Street Address: 75 Davis Cove Rd. Hot Springs, NC 28743
Property Owner (please print: Veda Davis
The undersigned, registered property owner(s) of the above property, do hereby authorize
JD Hamby
f 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: R a O - G ,Z9 - 3 r %
We hereby certify the above information to be true and accurate to the best of our knowledge.
,d IS/2I
(Property Owner Authorized Signature) (Date)

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

SAM 1 - UT 1 Reference
NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Davis Cove
Stream Category Mb2
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)
Function Class Rating Summary
Date of Evaluation 211008
Assessor Name/Organization Lewis/Axiom
USACE/
All Streams
YES
NO
YES
Perennial
NCDWR
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
(2) Baseflow
(2) Flood Flow
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
(4) Floodplain Access
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
(4) Microtopography
(3) Stream Stability
(4) Channel Stability
(4) Sediment Transport
(4) Stream Geomorphology
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
NA
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
NA
NA
NA
NA
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
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
NO
MEDIUM
NA
(1) Habitat
(2) In -stream Habitat
(3) Baseflow
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability
(3) In -stream Habitat
(2) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(3) Flow Restriction
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Overall
HIGH

SAM 2 - UT3 Lower
NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Davis Cove
Stream Category Mb1
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)
Function Class Rating Summary
Date of Evaluation 211008
Assessor Name/Organization Lewis/Axiom
USACE/
All Streams
NO
NO
NO
Perennial
NCDWR
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
(2) Baseflow
(2) Flood Flow
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
(4) Floodplain Access
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
(4) Microtopography
(3) Stream Stability
(4) Channel Stability
(4) Sediment Transport
(4) Stream Geomorphology
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
NA
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
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
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
YES
MEDIUM
NA
(1) Habitat
(2) In -stream Habitat
(3) Baseflow
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability
(3) In -stream Habitat
(2) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(3) Flow Restriction
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Overall
LOW

SAM 3 - UT3 Preservation
NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Davis Cove
Stream Category Mb2
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)
Function Class Rating Summary
Date of Evaluation 211008
Assessor Name/Organization Lewis/Axiom
USACE/
All Streams
YES
NO
YES
Intermittent
NCDWR
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
(2) Baseflow
(2) Flood Flow
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
(4) Floodplain Access
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
(4) Microtopography
(3) Stream Stability
(4) Channel Stability
(4) Sediment Transport
(4) Stream Geomorphology
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
NA
NA
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
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
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
NO
NO
HIGH
NA
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
(2) In -stream Habitat
(3) Baseflow
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability
(3) In -stream Habitat
(2) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(3) Flow Restriction
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Overall
HIGH
HIGH

SAM 4 - UT 4 Lower
NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Davis Cove
Stream Category Mb2
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)
Function Class Rating Summary
Date of Evaluation 211008
Assessor Name/Organization Lewis/Axiom
USACE/
All Streams
YES
NO
YES
Perennial
NCDWR
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
(2) Baseflow
(2) Flood Flow
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
(4) Floodplain Access
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
(4) Microtopography
(3) Stream Stability
(4) Channel Stability
(4) Sediment Transport
(4) Stream Geomorphology
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
NA
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
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
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
YES
LOW
NA
(1) Habitat
(2) In -stream Habitat
(3) Baseflow
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability
(3) In -stream Habitat
(2) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(3) Flow Restriction
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Overall
LOW

SAM 5 - UT 5 Middle
NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Davis Cove
Stream Category Mb2
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)
Function Class Rating Summary
Date of Evaluation 211008
Assessor Name/Organization Lewis/Axiom
USACE/
All Streams
YES
NO
YES
Perennial
NCDWR
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
(2) Baseflow
(2) Flood Flow
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
(4) Floodplain Access
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
(4) Microtopography
(3) Stream Stability
(4) Channel Stability
(4) Sediment Transport
(4) Stream Geomorphology
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
MEDIUM
NA
HIGH
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
NA
NA
NA
NA
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
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
NO
MEDIUM
NA
(1) Habitat
(2) In -stream Habitat
(3) Baseflow
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability
(3) In -stream Habitat
(2) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(3) Flow Restriction
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Overall
HIGH

Fot� i
uf
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
0 Y r; j4'I'1
Date: / D ' gfi 21
Project/site: D, J1S GeVC.
Latitude: 35 .7 5 6728
Evaluator. ( iA)4 L
County: , , k, 0,A
Longitude: --d 2,go i59-'f
Total Points:
Streami perenat nial if
if z 79 or perennia! if z 30* 2- y
Stream Detenninati circle one)
Other eo iN
e.g. Quad Name: a
p
Ephemeral ., ntermitten Perennial
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 7, S )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
19 Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
_i-}
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
/
J
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2j
5. Active/relictfloodplain
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
111011
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
i
Yes = 3
artnicial ditches are nat rated;
B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal = CO
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
a
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
.'
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
d5
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
C
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes 3
C. Bioloov (Subtotal =
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
C;
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
j-1
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
-0--':'
1
2
3
22. Fish
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
c113
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
I))
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:
Sketch:
sal ut i P �e a d, di i 5 V lr 1 w. A -ok lift 01_ g

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: t0 I / toll
Project/Site: Q as • , Ca,
Latitude: 3 5 , 753 5 711--
Evaluator: Peri`,�Sp,` / 4
-' ----x-
County: , `1 :Sum`'
Longitude: - 8 1.8 a- 617
o.
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent
if z 19 or perennial if >_ 30*
" S
Stream Determination (cir
Ephemeral Intermittent erenni
Other 1.- E tia'�
e.g. Quad Name: s i ›
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = t 9)
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1 a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
C S-'
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
e2''
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
3
-
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
(3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
(1l
2
3
8. Headcuts
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
15�
10. Natural valley
0 0.5
1
CL5
11. Second or greater order channel
0 0
Yes = 3
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal =
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
6:).
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
(0)
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
6)
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
*
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
(IP
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
(-Yes =
C. Biology tSubtotal = t . . 5 )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
CD
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
CD
3
22. Fish
i0 '
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
d)
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
25. Algae
C)
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: (A. .'t S hlti...., 41:; e'S ., 5 Vo-, c Ptic ,, 6-0 `1.5
i
Sketch:

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