20070181 Ver 3_401 Application_20070107

~ N G3 I N F E R J N G $~ H 1' `D R O G E O L O G'Y'
50 COLLEGE STREET, ASHEVILLE, NC 28801
TEL. [phone] Fac.828.281.3351
www.altamontenvironmental.com 2 0 0 7 0 1 8 1
January 26, 2007
Mr. Steve Chapin Ms. Cyndi Karoly
US Army Corps of Engineers NCDENR, Division of Water Quality
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208 401 Wetlands Unit
r~ ~t~, af'rt~
Asheville, NC 28801-5006 1650 Mail Service Center t",' , i ; ~~iV
Mr. Kevin Barnett
NCDENR, Division of Water Quality
Asheville Regional Office
2090 U.S. Highway 70
Swannanoa, NC 28778
Raleigh, NC 27699-1650
RECEIVED
Mr. David McHenry
NC Wildlife Resource Commission
20830 Great Smoky Mountain Expressway
Waynesville, NC 28786
Subject: Streambank Stabilization
DWR Project 02-Wheat Creek / Covil Property
Polk County, North Carolina
Dear Mssrs. Chapin, Barnett, Karoly, McHenry:
Enclosed please find the pre-construction notification (PCN) for Streambank stabilization on property
owned by Arthur and Linda Covil in Polk County. Work applied for in this permit includes streambank
stabilization and debris removal.
The project site has been identified by the Polk County Soil and Water Conservation District as one area
eligible for North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), Division of
Water Resources (DWR) Water Resources Development Project Grant funding. The State of North
Carolina has recently provided funding through the DWR for damaged areas that were not addressed by
the federal Emergency Watershed Protection (EWP) program.
The project area consists of approximately 1,160 feet of steeply eroding streambank located along Wheat
Creek near the community of Mill Spring. A site vicinity map is included as Figure 1 of the attached
PCN document. Wheat Creek is classified by the DENR as "C" waters throughout the project area.
Mr. Ryman has signed the application as an authorized agent for Polk County and the property owner. A
letter of authorization is attached at the end of the PCN document.
Altamont appreciates your review of this application. If you would like additional information, please
contact the undersigned.
Sincerely,
~ ~~
Jo . Lenk, P. ~"`~ ~e.~. 4 + `~~
enclosures: Check for permit fee (Karoly only) 4'-~`'~`' `~ ~"~~~~'t
PCN-DWR Project 02-Wheat Creek / Covil Property ,
t a . <.~~t:!~
. -, ., .
cc (letter only): Polk County Soil and Water Conservation District ~~'`=iLr`~`"~-1 ~~
P:\Polk SWCD NRCS\Polk DWR nroiects 02-08\Covil Site-DWR-02\PCN cover letter .doc

Office Use Only: Form Version May 2002
20070181
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No.
(If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".)
I. Processing ,1 ~~ „q ; - ^~
f f,~ f;~~_;uT
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project: R~CE~VE~
® Section 404 Permit ^ Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
Section 10 Permit ^ Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
® 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: Nationwide 13
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification is
not required, check here: ^
4. If payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) is proposed for
mitigation of impacts (verify availability with NCWRP prior to submittal of PCN), complete
section VIII and check here: ^
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page 4),
and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), check here: ^
II. Applicant Information
1. Owner/Applicant Information
Name: Property Owner: Arthur & Linda Covil
Mailing Address: 2270 Abrams Moore Rd
Rutherfordton, NC 28139
Telephone : [phone]
Applicant: Polk County Soil and
Water Conservation
District
PO Box 236
# 4 Annex Building
Columbus, NC 28722
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: sandra.reidna,nc.nacd.net
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter must
be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name: Stuart A. Ryman
Company Affiliation: Altamont Environmental, Inc. ~~
Mailing Address: SO College Street p ~~~,'~ I_!~ D
Asheville, NC 28801 ~ -.
Telephone Number: [phone] Fax Number:[phone] ~ `~ ,~~~ ~y .$ 'lt1j~7
E-mail Address: sryman~a,altamontenvironmental. com
_, ~.Fa`~4:i~ ru4t7 ~~o~o~A'a 3~~~ ~RA'Nf~l
P:\Polk SWCD NRCS\Polk DWR projects 02-08\Covil Site-DWR-02\Covil_PCN.doc Page 5 of 18

III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
Name of project: DWR Project 02-Wheat Creek / Covil Property Streambank Stabilization
Note: The entire project area is within the Covil property and will not affect adjacent properties.
Figure 2- Site Plan, does not include property boundaries for this reason and all correspondence to
the Covils should be addressed to Arthur Covil found below
1. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): N/A
2. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): Map # 104 Parcel # 43 Account # 24503
3. Location
County: Polk Nearest Town: Columbus, NC
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): N/A
Directions to site (include road numbers, landmarks, etc.):
From U. S. Interstate 26 towards east, exit at # 67 on to Highway 74 east. Follow N. C. Highway
74 east to the Pea Ridge Rd. Exit, #170. Follow Pea Ridge Road north % mile and turn right on
Abrams Moore Road. Follow Abrams Moore approximately 3 miles until it crosses Wheat
Creek, the first bridge on Abrams Moore Rd. The bridge is the upstream extent of the project
area. The site extends downstream to a small private concrete bridge that provides access to
lower livestock pastures owned by the Covils.
4. Site coordinates, if available (UTM or Lat/Long): 035 ° 17' 56.38 " N, 082 ° 03 ' 22.06"W
(Note - If project is linear, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that separately lists the
coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
5. Property size (acres): Approximately 1 SO acres; Disturbed acreage will be approximately 0.75
acres.
6. Nearest body of water (stream/river/sound/ocean/lake): Wheat Creek
P:\Polk SWCD NRCS\Polk DWR projects 02-08\Covil Site-DWR-02\Covil_PCN.doc Page 6 of 18

7. River Basin: Broad River
(Note -this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The River
Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)
8. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project at
the time of this application:
The proposed project site consists of woodland areas and livestock pasture. Surrounding land
consists of rural residences, woodland and farmland. Wheat Creek was significantly damaged
by Tropical Storms Frances and Ivan in September, 2004. Furthermore the project area exists
in an area used heavily by livestock. This condition, coupled with storm events more recent than
2004, have left the Wheat Creek streambanks in a poorly vegetated, eroding state. The project
area is located on the Covil property and runs alongside Wheat Creek in the stream corridor for
approximately 1,250 feet and is bounded at either end by, the Abrams Moore Bridge at the
upstream extent of the project, and a private bridge owned by the Covils at the downstream end.
Many damaged areas along streams and rivers throughout the southeastern United States were
repaired through funding provided by the Natural Resource Conservation Service (MRCS) as
part of the Emergency Watershed Protection (EWP) program. The NRCS program required
economic justification for discrete repairs and primarily addressed jlood damaged areas
adjacent to homes or commercial agricultural areas. As a result, some severely eroded
streambanks adjacent to undeveloped land were not addressed by the EWP program.
The State of North Carolina has provided funding through the DENR Division of Water
Resources (DWR) Water Resources Development Project Grant program for damaged areas that
were not addressed by the EWP program and targets streambank that are actively contributing
sediment and reducing water quality. The Covil site has been identified by the Polk County Soil
and Water Conservation District (PCSWCD) as one area eligible for DWR funding and for this
project DWR funding will be coupled with the National Resource. Conservation Service cost
share funding to fence cattle out of the stream and to establish a minimum 20 foot buffer between
livestock areas and the stream.
The project area extends 1,250 linear feet, and planned bank stabilization and riparian planting
will address at least 81 S feet of bare eroding bank and poorly vegetated areas. Through
cooperation with the Department of Transportation the PCSWCD and Altamont hope to stabilize
an additional 345 feet of impaired streambank that appears to be in the DOT right of way along
the east side of Abrams Moore Road. Wheat Creek is classified as "C" waters throughout the
project area.
Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
SUMMARY
streambank slopes along Wheat Creek will be made less steep with the use of a track mounted
excavator. Slopes will be adjusted to approximately three horizontal to one vertical in areas
accessible to heavy equipment without damaging existing quality riparian vegetation. In areas
where large living trees are too close to the existing bank to allow for such a slope, the slope will
P:\Polk SWCD NRCS\Polk DWR projects 02-08\Covil Site-DWR-02\Covil_PCN.doc Page 7 of 18

be softened to the extent possible with out damaging trees that are holding the streambank in
place. Root wads may be installed upstream of such areas to provide aquatic habitat and deflect
stream flow away from the bank.
Some toe of slope areas of streambanks may be reinforced in higher stress areas with large
angular boulders. In these areas one row of boulders will be placed in a footer trench. The
footer trench will be lined with filter fabric, and the boulders will be backed with the filter
fabric. Depending on the vulnerability of the area, another tier of large boulders may be placed
on top of the footer rock and set back approximately one to two feet in order to match the slope
of the streambank. Void spaces behind the footer and tiers of rock will be back-filled with
material excavated from the footer trench. When backfrlling is complete excess filter cloth
protruding from between the boulders and the backfrll will be trimmed to an elevation slightly
higher than the elevation of the top of the boulder toe protection. Single veins and cross veins
constructed of either large angular rock or hardwood tree trunks may be used to help turn flow
in streambends and protect streambanks in high stress areas on the outside of turns in the
stream. Illustrations of typical designs and installations of these structures are included in
Attachment A.
Live fascines may be buried in the streambank where feasible at an elevation approximately
equal to bankfull. Fascines will consist of bundles of a variety of live stakes taken from native
species of trees. The live cuttings used for fascine bundles will be no larger than one inch in
diameter and will be approximately three to four feet in length. Tips of live cuttings will be
oriented in the same direction but cut to varying lengths before placement in the fascine bundles.
Fascine bundles will be bound together with heavy biodegradable twine and placed in trenches
with the tips facing in an upstream direction. The live Fascines will take root and quickly begin
to anchor and further strengthen the toe of the streambank slope soon after installation (see
illustration in Attachment A).
After the streambank slopes are adjusted, and structures consisting of boulders, rootwads and
fascines are installed, disturbed areas of the project will be hand seeded with annual rye or
similar grain. Coir and Jute matting will be installed over the areas of bare soil, trenched in on
all sides and held down by wooden and live stakes. Coir matting will be used to stabilize
vegetation before it is established from the waters edge to an elevation higher that bankfull and
Jute matting will be used at elevations above that. Hydro-seeding of these areas with a native
seed mix will follow, and caution will be used to keep seed, mulch and tackifiers out of the river
and above the typical high water elevation in order to reduce the risk of eutrophication. Finally
the remainder of poorly or non-vegetated streambanks will be planted with a variety of native
bare-root, container and live-stake trees and shrubs to a width no less that 20 feet from the
waters edge along the reach of the project area. All plantings will be watered in after
installation and subsequently, as needed. These plantings will help re-establish riparian
vegetation within the project area reducing sediment load to the stream, providing a more stable
streambank and future shading of the river channel. Trees and shrubs will be purchased and
planted while dormant. Livestock will be fenced out of the project area as segments of the
project are completed.
The project may include removal of debris (i. e. large trees) from the stream channel that is
obstructing water flow, limiting hydraulic capacity of the river channel, or forcing flow into
unprotected banks. Debris that is stable and is situated such that it is protecting vulnerable
banks will be left in place. Root balls from trees removed as debris may be used as rootwads for
P:\Polk SWCD NRCS\Polk DWR projects 02-08\Covil Site-DWR-02\Covil_PCN.doc Page 8 of 18

bank stabilization and as aquatic and terrestrial habitat in several locations within the project
area. Rootwads are planned for use where the existence of desirable large live trees will not
allow grading of the streambank to a preferable three horizontal to one vertical slope. Trees
selected for rootwads will be cut 15 to 20 feet up the trunk from the roots and sharpened to a
point with a chainsaw. In locations were rootwads are used, a trench will be excavated large
enough to burry a footer log parallel to the streambank at the toe of the slope. The rootwad will
be inserted, sharpened trunk first, into the bank and the trunk just above the roots will rest on the
footer log. The rootwads will be oriented so that stream flow is deflected away from the
streambank to protect large living trees in these locations. Placement of the rootwads at an
angle approximately 75 degrees from the upstream bank will provide deflection of streamwater
in an effort to preserve near bank, mature live trees.
Rootwads and footer logs will be installed so that the bottoms of the structures extend to the
maximum scour depth of the channel and the top of footer log and bottom of rootwad log are
roughly the same elevation as the stream invert. Rootwad trunks will be inserted into the
streambank by a track mounted excavator so that the root ball is exposed and at least two thirds
of the trunk is buried in the bank. Rootwads and footer logs will be backfilled with material
excavated from footer log and rootwad trenches and where necessary will be stabilized on either
side with large angular rock or rip rap (see Attachment A)
Equipment used to accomplish the above tasks will include: a rubber tired back-hoe /loader,
a track mounted excavator with hydraulic thumb, one or two 1 S ton dump trucks, and hand tools.
A wood chipper may be used to reduce the amount of debris to be hauled away from the site and
minimize potential disposal fees. Wood chips may be used to mulch areas beyond the top of
bank.
DETAILS
The following activities are proposed within the project area:
An area of Wheat Creek within the Covil property located in Polk County, North Carolina
has been identified by the PCSWCD as eligible for monies provided by the State of North
Carolina through a DWR grant. The PCSWCD and Altamont Environmental, Inc.
(Altamont) plan to stabilize over-steepened streambanks and restore the riparian buffer
along this 1,250 foot reach of stream. The structures proposed for streambank stabilization
at the site are: Rootwads, Rock Toe Protection Single and Cross Veins, and Live Fascines.
Once the streambank is stabilized native species of grasses, shrubs and trees will be planted
on the streambank and disturbed areas of the site.
A Site Vicinity Map is included as Figure 1, and locations of streambank stabilization and
riparian planting areas are provided in Figure 2. Illustrations of Typical Structure Design
are included as Attachment A. Photos of planned stabilization areas with proposed
streambank slopes superimposed area are included as Attachment B. Across-section of an
area typical of existing streambanks within the project area and proposed grading plans are
included as Figure 3. Estimates of shear stresses within the project area at elevations
ranging from 1 to S feet were calculated and those elevations are indicated on Figure 3.
Shear Stress Calculations are included as Attachment C. A detailed assessment of Wheat
Creek is included as Attachment D.
P:\Polk SWCD NRCS\Polk DWR projects 02-08\Covil Site-DWR-02\Covil_PCN.doc Page 9 of 18

Before construction at the site begins, existing live trees and vegetation that are
identified as stabilizing the streambank will be flagged to be left in place. Project area
boundaries will also be identified and marked.
• Some removal of organic and non-native material from the channel maybe necessary in
areas where the hydraulic capacity of the stream channel has been reduced based upon
on site observations.
Using the track mounted excavator and the backhoe, streambank slopes within the
project area will be adjusted from their near vertical state to a slope of approximately
three horizontal to one vertical or flatter except where large living trees close to the
bank prohibit grading. In these areas rootwad structures will be installed just upstream
and slopes will be softened as much as possible. Some adjustment of the slope before
installation of structures will allow for easier access to the project area, will compact
the slope and will eliminate much of the need to access the streambank from the water.
Debris generally consisting of trees, stumps and woody material will be removed from
the stream channel using the track mounted excavator equipped with a hydraulic thumb
if the debris is observed to be having an adverse affect on the stream. Some of the
larger dead trees maybe used as rootwads structures within the project area Rootwad
structures are not recommended in areas where there is less than 1 S percent silt and
clay content in streambank soils. Rootwads will not be used in such areas.
If possible an excavator with along-arm or long-stick boom will be used for this project
to reduce or eliminate the need to enter the stream channel. The excavator to be used
for this project will be a 200 series or comparable machine. Woody debris removed
from the channel will be reused as rootwad structures, disposed of as firewood, chipped
into mulch, hauled to an appropriate landfill or some combination there of.
• For streambank areas where rock toe protection is used, a footer trench will be
excavated at the toe of the slope. The footer trench will be excavated to a depth of
approximately two feet or deep enough to bury each footer rock to a depth equal to
three-quarters of its thickness. Ideal dimensions for large angular rock to be used at the
site are four feet by three feet by two feet or larger. Footer trenches will be dug in a
downstream to upstream sequence in order to limit the amount of sediment discharged
to the stream and limit the flow of water into the trench. Footer trench lengths will be
dug in sections equal to the width of the filter cloth to be used for the project in order to
limit disturbance of the channel bed material. Completing the project in sections will
limit the number of times the trench will have to be re-excavated due to sediment
washed in by the stream. Footer trenches and stabilization structures at their upstream
and downstream ends will be keyed in the streambank so that during periods of high
flow, water will not get behind the structure and compromise its integrity.
• After a section of footer trench is dug, filter cloth will be placed in the trench and a
sufficient amount of cloth will be extended up the streambank to back the footer and next
tier of rock once it is placed. Footer rock of a size described above will then be placed
in the trench securing the bottom of the filter cloth in place.
P:\Polk SWCD NRCS\Polk DWR projects 02-08\Covil Site-DWR-02\Covil_PCN.doc Page 10 of 18

• After the footer rock is placed the filter cloth will be held up so that it backs the footer
rock while the void behind the footer is backfilled with material that was excavated from
the trench.
• Again the filter cloth will be laid on the streambank while the first tier of rock is placed
atop the footer. This first tier of rock will be placed partially on the footer and partially
on the backfill, set back in a manner to match the three to one slope of the streambank.
• Once the first tier of rock is placed on the footer, the filter cloth will again be held up so
that the remainder of the rock structure can be backfrlled.
• Structures not made of rock will be similarly backed with filter fabric to prevent wash
out. When construction of the rock toe and other structures is complete, a trench
approximately one foot by one foot will be installed just above the rock toe protection
structure at approximate bankfull elevation. Live fascines will be installed in the trench
and the trench will be backfilled. Fascine trenches will be excavated to dimensions
slightly smaller than the fascine bundle, so that the top of the fascine is exposed. Live
stakes will be driven through the fascines to secure them in place. Subsequent growth
of the fascines will stabilize the toe of the streambank as roots interlock with soil,
matting and structure in these locations.
After streambank slopes are adjusted, construction of structures is completed and
fascines are installed, all disturbed areas will be hand seeded with annual rye grass or a
similar grain. Coir mat will be installed over the completed fascines and bare soil near
the toe of the streambank and will extend up the streambank to an elevation above
bankfull. Jute mat will be used on the upper portion of the slopes to stabilize soils
during initial growth of vegetation. On-site temporary seeding and mulching will occur
on the remainder of bare soil within five days of ground disturbing activities to provide
long-term erosion control.
• When the construction portion of the entire project area is complete all disturbed areas
will be hydro-seeded with a native seed mix above typical high water elevation. Care
will be taken to keep seed, mulch, fertilizer and tackifiers out of the stream to prevent
the risk of euotrophication downstream.
Post hydro-seeding, disturbed areas will be planted with a diverse variety of bare-root
and live-stake native plants, shrubs, and trees. Species selection for planting will be
based on observations made of plants that are naturally occurring within the stream
corridor or that could exist with in the region. Planting will conform to the guidelines
prescribed in the DENR Ecosystem Enhancement Program, Guidelines for Riparian
Buffer Restoration. Re-seeding will be conducted, as necessary, with a native annual
and perennial seed mix with a temporary nursery crop of wheat, millet, or other grain.
Woody vegetation will be planted during the appropriate planting season or will be kept
dormant in coolers until planted. Planting will be expected to take place during cool
weather months.
P:\Polk SWCD NRCS\Polk DWR projects 02-08\Covil Site-DWR-02\Covil_PCN.doc Page 11 of 18

Stabilization of streambanks will require placement of material in wet conditions. In such
cases, sand bags, or the equivalent, will be used to deflect water flow away from the work area,
as well as to prevent water from accumulating in the work area. Standard erosion and
sedimentation control measures will be utilized throughout the project.
Care will be taken to avoid adverse affects to adjacent or downstream property owners.
At the work site, work shall proceed from downstream to upstream to reduce sediment loading.
Staging areas for equipment and material will be placed in upland areas away from surface
water and out side of the floodplain. Work will proceed as follows at the work area (as
applicable).
1. Flag the work limits.
2. Mark live trees and shrubs to be protected.
3. Construct temporary construction entrance /exits, where necessary.
4. Place erosion control fencing and other protective measures as necessary.
S. Inspect and maintain repairs.
Explain the purpose of the proposed work:
Work being conducted by the Polk County Soil and Water Conservation District Office and
Altamont, and is being funded through the North Carolina Division of Water Resources grant.
The grant is intended to fund projects in storm damaged areas that were not addressed by the
federal Emergency Watershed Protection program. The purpose of the project is to stabilize
streambanks in the project area, fence livestock from the creek, restore and widen the riparian
corridor within the project area, and to reduce the amount of sediment entering the stream by
reducing erosion of the streambanks along Wheat Creek.
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules.
NA
V. Future Project Plans
P:\Polk SWCD NRCS\Polk DWR projects 02-08\Covil Site-DWR-02\Covil_PCN.doc Page 12 of 18

Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
No
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. The applicant must also
provide justification for these impacts in Section VII below. All proposed impacts, permanent
and temporary, must be listed herein, and must be clearly identifiable on an accompanying site
plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial) must be shown on a
delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems. Wetland and stream
evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate. Photographs may be
included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for wetland or stream
mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional space is needed for
listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
1.Provide a written description of the proposed impacts:
Proposed impacts include streambank stabilization, riparian buffer widening and enhancement.
Precautions will be taken to keep heavy equipment out of the streamchannel except where
absolutely necessary to install bank stabilization measures and retrieve debris. Work will be
conducted in the dry to the extent practicable. Sediment and erosion control measures, including
sand bags, silt fences and reseeding, will be utilized to minimize sedimentation and erosion.
2.Individually list wetland impacts below:
Wetlands will not be impacted at this site.
Wetland Impact
Site Number
(indicate on ma)
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
(acres) Located within
100-year Floodplain**
es/no) Distance to
Nearest Stream
(linear feet)
Type of Wetland***

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: mechanized cleazing, grading, fill,
excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams, separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
** 100-Yeaz floodplains are identified through the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(FIRM), or FEMA-approved local floodplain maps. Maps are available through the FEMA Map Service Center at 1-800-358-9616, or
online at htt~://www.fema.gov.
*** List a wetland type that best describes wetland to be impacted (e.g., freshwater/saltwater marsh, forested wetland, beaver pond,
Carolina Bay, bog, etc.) Indicate if wetland is isolated (determination of isolation to be made by USACE only).
P:\Polk SWCD NRCS\Polk DWR projects 02-08\Covil Site-DWR-02\Covil_PCN.doc Page 13 of 18

List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: None
Total area of wetland impact proposed: N/A
3.Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts below:
Stream Impact Length of
Stream Average Width
of Stream
Perennial or
Site Number (see Type of Impact* Impact Name** Before Impact Intermittent?
Figure 1) (linear feet) (ft)
Covil Property Streambank stabilization
project area and riparian buffer <1,160 Wheat Creek 19 ft @ Bkf Perennial
restoration
* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: culverts and associated rip-rap,
dams (sepazately list impacts due to both structure and flooding), relocation (include lineaz feet before and after, and net loss/gain),
stabilization activities (cement wall, rip-rap, crib wall, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is
proposed, plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams must be included.
** Stream names can be found on USGS topographic maps. If a stream has no name, list as UT (unnamed tributary) to the nearest
downstream named stream into which it flows. USGS maps are available through the USGS at 1-800-358-9616, or online at
www.usgs.gov. Several Internet sites also allow direct download and printing of USGS maps (e.g., www.topozone.com,
www.mapguest.com, etc.).
Cumulative impacts (linear distance in feet) to all streams on site: <1,160 linear feet
4.Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.) below:
There will be no impacts to open waters, only to Wheat Creek.
Open Water Impact

Site Number
(indicate on ma)
*
Type of Impact Area of

Impact
(acres)
Name of Waterbody

(if applicable) Type of Waterbody

(lake, pond, estuary, sound,
ba ,ocean, etc.)

• List each impact sepazately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: fill, excavation,
dredging, flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
S.Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ^ uplands ^ stream ^ wetlands
P:\Polk SWCD NRCS\Polk DWR projects 02-08\Covil Site-DWR-02\Covil_PCN.doc Page 14 of 18

Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.): N/A
VII.
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.): N/A
Size of watershed draining to pond: N/A
Expected pond surface area: N/A
Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts.
On behalf of the Polk County Soil and Water Conservation District, Altamont will provide
contractors engaged in the implementation of this work both written and verbal instructions of all
impact avoidance statements provided below. All heavy equipment will be kept out of the stream
channel during streambank stabilization work and debris removal except where absolutely
necessary to complete work. Disturbance of the channel bottom, streambanks and equipment
access areas shall be held to the minimum necessary to allow for implementation of bank
stabilization work. Temporary grass cover shall be planted on all bare soil within 5 days of
ground disturbing activities. Straw mulch and tall fescue grass will not be used in riparian areas.
Herbaceous, woody shrub and tree vegetation will be installed on the streambank upon completion
of bank stabilization work Altamont will provide a site manager to routinely inspect and
supervise contractor work to help ensure impact avoidance instructions are being followed.
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on March 9, 2000, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
P:\Polk SWCD NRCS\Polk DWR projects 02-08\Covil Site-DWR-02\Covil_PCN.doc Page 15 of 18

and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCWRP concurrence shall be placed on hold as
incomplete. An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration
in DWQ's Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/strmgide.html.
1.Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide as
much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
N/A
2.Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration
Program (NCWRP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCWRP at
[phone] to determine availability and to request written approval of mitigation prior
to submittal of a PCN. For additional information regarding the application process for the
NCWRP, check the NCWRP website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htm. If use of
the NCWRP is proposed, please check the appropriate box on page three and provide the
following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet): N/A
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet): N/A
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Amount ofNon-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state) funds or the use of public
(federal/state) land?
Yes ® No ^
If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ^ No
P:\Polk SWCD NRCS\Polk DWR projects 02-08\Covil Site-DWR-02\Covil_PCN.doc Page 16 of 18

If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please attach a
copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter.
Yes ^ No ^
X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Meuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and
Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please identify)?
Yes ^ No ® If you answered "yes", provide the following information:
Identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers. If buffer
mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the buffer
multipliers.
*
Zone Impact
(s uare feet)
Multiplier Required
Miti ation
1 3
2 1.5
Total
* Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additiona120 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e., Donation
of Property, Conservation Easement, Riparian Buffer Restoration /Enhancement, Preservation or
Payment into the Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as
identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0260.
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
P:\Polk SWCD NRCS\Polk DWR projects 02-08\Covil Site-DWR-02\Covil_PCN.doc Page 17 of 18

Describe impervious acreage (both existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site.
Discuss stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands
downstream from the property.
Impervious acreage will not change at the project site, and other than Abrams Moore Road,
which is adjacent to the project site and is asphalt; impervious surfaces do not exist at the site.
Erosion and sedimentation prevention and control will be maintained throughout this project
primarily through proper water management, construction sequencing, proper staging and
stockpiling of materials. Appropriate channel capacity for expected flow events will be
maintained at all times. Equipment, fuels, lubricants, and other potential sources of water
pollution will not be stored in areas that could be flooded during this project.
XII. Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
Wastewater will not be generated as part of this project.
XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ^ No
Is this anafter-the-fact permit application?
Yes ^ No
XIV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Sperms, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
.~ ~ ~~~ a ~
Applicant/Agent's Signa ure Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 18 of 18

2 p p ?p X 8 1
ACCESS AGREEMENT
This Access Agreement is made between Polk County Soil and Water Conservation
District Supervisor Board (SWCD) and:
following elements:
-Streambank Stabilization -Native plant Re-vegatation
-Debris Removal -Exotic/Invasive plant removal
SWCD and the Property Owner agree:
1. Property owner grants permission to SWCD and its contractors and agents to
enter upon their land for the purpose of assessing and repairing the flood damage
caused by Hurricanes Frances and Ivan. Additionally, this agreement includes the
right of ingress and egress on the land for the purpose of maintaining the
emergency works for the period of one year from the date of completion.
2. Property owner grants permission to SWCD and its contractors and agent to
conduct stream stabilization measures, which may include debris removal, stream
bank stabilization using rocks, wood, and/or, mulching and seeding, and/or
channel relocation.
3. SWCD agrees to comply with local, state, and federal laws applicable to the work,
and further agrees to exercise due care and caution in the performance of all work
on the Property.
4. This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding between the parties. All
prior agreements or understandings, whether oral or written, are superseded. This
Agreement may be amended only by a written document duly executed by the
parties.
5. The proposed measures are intended to repair flood damage to the stream and to
return affected areas to pre-flood conditions. Repair and/or improvements to
structures are not part of this project. Damaged bridges, driveways, and eroded
fields are not addressed by measures. SWCD and its contractors will strive to
minimize impacts to adjacent properties. However, some impact may be
unavoidable. The Property owner releases SWCD and its contractors from
liability for any damage incurred as result of this work.
6. This agreement does not provide confirmation that the subject site is eligible for
Emergency Funds, nor does it encumber funds for any repair work at this site.
7. Property owner agrees not to remove or modify construction repairs, including
vegetation, for one year from the date of completion.
The SWCD is requesting access to the property for the purpose of assessing and repairing
damage to the streambank, stream channel, and floodplain that was caused by hurricanes
Frances and Ivan and more recent storms. The repair work will include some or all of the

8. SWCD will discuss the draft design with the Property Owner prior to submittal
for permitting.
9. Property Owner agrees to reimburse SWCD for all costs associated with the
design if the property owner decides to terminate this agreement after work has
begun.
10. The Polk County Soil and Water conservation District and Polk County property
owners hereby authorize Altamont Environmental Inc. (Agent/Consultant) to sign
and execute all necessary permits and coordinate communications with the
appropriate regulatory agencies.
Polk County Soil and Water Conservation District
By: '~11t77~'~ `~t~ ~ ~V `7Y r
SWCD o~ resent e
~~
By:
Date: l ~ "~ a `~Glr;
Property Owner
Date: ~ ~ - ZC7 - C~ Date: i'./ -- z- / -- G., ,~

a
APPROXIMATE,
SITE LOCATION
t�
F
E N G I N E E R I N G & H Y D R 0 G E 0 L 0 G Y
50 COLLEGE STREET, ASHEVILLE, NC 28801
TEL.[phone] FAC 828.281.3351
www.altarnontenvironmental.com
DRAWN BY: JOEL LENK SCALE (FEET)
PROJECT MANAGER: STU RYMAN
CLIENT: PCSWCD 500 0 500
DATE: 01/25/06
i
t
«l
SITE VICINITY MAP FIGURE
DWR PROJECT 02 - WHEAT CREEK/
COVIL PROPERTY
2270 ABRAMS MOORE RD
RUTHERFORDTON, NC 28139
1000
P:\POLn SWCD NRCS\POCK DWR PRoJecrs 02-08\COVIL Size-DWR-02\RcuRes\CAD\FIG.I

-+~-, 493 -
d 0 10
~ Top of Proposed IMPAIRED RIFFLE
Low Bank Elevation CROSS-SECTION
LEGEND
EXISTING STREAMBANK SLOPE
- - - - -- - PROPOSED STREAMBANK SLOPE
-+-4 ELEVATIONS ABOVE THALWEG FOR WHICH
__ _ __ r_ SHEAR STRESS WAS CALCULATED
~ 20. 30
Bankfull Elevation
Within Existing Channel
ENGINEERING dt H YDROCE OLOGY
50 COLLEGE STREET, ASI-~VILLE, NC 28801
1'EL.828.281.3350 FAC.828.281.3351
www. altamontenvironmental. com
DRAWN BY: PAUL Dow
PROJECT MANAGER: STU RYMAN SCALE (FEET)
CLIENT: POLK COUNTY 5 0 5 10
DATE: OI-25-07
Slope
C3~1)
PROPOSED SLOPES FIGURE
CROSS-SECTIONAL AREAS
DWR-02- WHEAT CREEK /
COVIL PROPERTY
POLK COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
P:\POLrc SWCD NRCS\PoLrc

ATTACHMENT A
Illustrations of Typical Structure Design

2 0 0 70 1 8 1
~ 1
B~t,~t,n stay° ~, )
4 - 15% -Innereenn
Flow -~ ~)
y~~ ~~
PROFILE FLOW
Note: Use of geotextile
material on upstream
side of logs is strongly
recommended
Slope and
Vegetate Banks
Bankfull
Legend
~ ^ Bader Rock ~ Header ~
Footer
Vegetatbn Log
NOT TO SCALE
ENGINEERING dt H YOROGEOLOGY~
50 COLLEGE STREET, ASHEVILLE, NC 28801
TEL.[phone] FAC.828.281.3351
www. altamontenvironmental.com
DRAWN BY: JOEL LENK
SOURCE: NORTH CAROLINA
PROJECT MANAGER: STU RYMAN
CLIENT: PCSWCD STREAM RESTORATION
DATE: INSTITUTE
LOG VANE
ILLUSTRATION
DWR-03-OSTIN CREEK / ARLEDGE PROPERTY
POLK COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
P: \POtn SWCD NRCS\POUC DWR eRJJecrS 02-OB\G2ufoGE Sire-DWR-03\FIGUPE$\Sraucrutes luisrR<naS.Owc
CROSS-SECTION

Structure spans 1/2 to 2/3 of stream width.
~~
J~
PLAN
Flow
\ai ~~ r
/// `T-
~hannel ~\\
Sub-Pavement~~~
\~\\°-
Slope and
Vegetate Banks
Banldun
IL Bona,
+:L-~l
Legend ~.- '
Header Rods ~~ Tree Ele/~- ~_
Footer Rock ~ Vegetation
NOT TO SCALE
NGI VEERING HYpROGEOLOG,Y::..
$O COLLEGE STREET, ASHEVILLE, NC 2880(
TEL.[phone] FAC.828.281.3351
www. altamon [env ironmentat.com
DRAWN BY: JOEL LENK
PROJECT MANAGER: STU RYMAN souRCE: NoRTr+ cAROUNA
CLIENT: PCSWCD STREAM RESTORATION
DATE: OI-25-07 INSTITUTE
Notes:
-Rocks in vane are not
spaced.
-Rocks in "J" section are
spaced 1/2 rock width.
Berth
PROFILE
CROSS-SECTION
ROCK J-HOOK
ILLUSTRATION
DWR-03-OSTIN CREEK / ARLEDGE PROPERTY
POLK COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
P: \Part SWCD NRCS\POU\ DWR vRwecis 02-OB\FRtFOGe Si iE-DWR-03\FicuRts\SimKiuRE51ui51v«iWS.OwG I

Notes:
-Rocks in "J" section are
spaced y2 rock width. ~ 1
-Use of geotextile
upstream of logs Bankfull Stage
is recommended 7-15% ~1
nner Berm
Flow -
'~ > "~ 1 ~
iii ~/ -_ -
/// `J - ~=iii ~~i ---.t!t~rr= i~r~
Flow
~ PROFILE
. Y~-Yz of Bottom Width
,• I
`~1 "
For logs Q4" diameter, cable 3 logs
(10"-12") on ends using y" able.
Log Bottom two logs should be below the
D~ ~ster stream bed.
PLAN slope and
vegetate Banks
BankfuR
~~ ~ Bench - -
-/ _ ///
/ ~ //~
Legend =eed= - -//,EY//- - -/?_///
Elevatkx~ _~~_ ~ t- ~ ~_~~\ \\\ \\\_\\\=
Header Rods ~ Tree _ -T j ///%//-%/%
Footer Rods ®`°~ CROSS-SECTION
NOT TO SCALE
N I N R 1 N H Y R O L O Y
50 COLLEGE STREET, ASHEVILLE, NC 28801
TEL.[phone] FAC.828.281.3351
www.altamontenvironmcntal.com
DRAWN BY: JOEL LENK souRCE: NORTH cARauNA
PROJECT MANAGER: STU RYMAN
CLIENT: PCSWCD STREAM RESTORATION
DAT E: O I -25-07 INSTITUTE
LOG J-HOOK
ILLUSTRATION
DWR-03-OSTIN CREEK / ARLEDGE PROPERTY
POLK COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
P~ \Pq-n SWCD NRCS\POUt DWR vRO~ecTS 02-OB\M\fOCE Si rE-DWR-03\FlcuRes\SrRUCrutes Iwsrasrip5.Dw4

Structure spans 1/2 to 2/3 of stream width.
Flow
Note:
-Rocks in vane are not
spaced.
~~; ~,
Bankfull Stage
F
I
Slope and
Vegetate Banks
Bankfull
~ ~ Bench
\\\-
i1_ ~i -
Legend Bed
.. Eleva
Header Rods
~ ~ Vegetation
~Foot~ Rack
NOT TO SCALE
~:~ 11111_~-t11 c~~-il l^ ~1.~-y ~ :z~~-~ ~ DI-~II w~ ~!^ hY~
~NCINE ERINt', H YDROGEQLOGY
50 COLLEGE STREET, ASF~VILLE, NC 28801
TEL.[phone] FAC.828.281.3351
www.altamontenvironmental.com
DRAWN BY: JOEL LENK souRCE: NORTH caROUNa
PROJECT MANAGER: STU RYMAN srREan RESroRaTioN
CLIENT: PCSWCD INSTITUTE
DATE: OI-25-07
PROFILE
CROSS-SECTION
SINGLE ROCK VANE
ILLUSTRATION
DWR-03-OSTIN CREEK / ARLEDGE PROPERTY
POLK COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
P: \POEK SWCD NRCS\POU DWR rawECrs 02-08\GR~ocE SiiE-0WR-03\Fi GUPES\S•nucrwES luiimariorvs.owc l

12" - 18"
Step 1 -Prepare Fascine Bundles: Cigar-shaped Bundles Of Live,
Rootable Brush And Branches With Butts Alternating, 6 To 8-inch
Diameters, Tied 12 To 18 Inches On Center
Backfill
2/3 Fascine
Diameter \
\\ \ \
\~\
Step 2 - Dig Trench (2/3 Fascine Step 3 -Place Bundles In Trench.
Diameter In Depth) Backfill And Tamp, Leave
Top Exposed
3" Above Bundle \
\ ~\
Step 4 -Cover Slope With Matting, Step 5 -Add Stakes Below Bundles
If Needed, Stake On
2 - 4' Cuttings.
Construction Note: Installation Begins At The Bottom
Of The Slope And Proceeds Upslope
Following Step 1 Through Step 5
~tNotex Adapted From
Fascines may be totally Maryland's Waterway
buried onstruction Guidelines
~ .~
"``" '" Y Y

50 COLLEGE STREET, AStIEVILLE, NC 28801
TEL.[phone] FAC.828.281.3351
www.altamontenvironmental.com FASCINE SCHEMATIC

DWR-02-WHEAT CREEK / COVIL PROPERTY
NORTH CAROLINA
POLK COUNTY
DRAWN BY: JOEL LENK
PROJECT MANAGER: STU RYMAN
CLIENT: POLK CO. SWCD SOURCE: THE VIRGINIA STREAM RESTORATION
a STABILIZATION BEST MANAGEMENT
PRACTICES GUIDE, 2004 ,
DATE: OI-25-07 P:\POLK SWCD NRCS\PGLI( DWR PROJECTS 02-08\t.OVIL SITE-02\FIGURES\CAD\FA$CINE.UWG

Grade Streambank
to a Stable Slope
i -
~ ~,~%.
~~~~~.~
bl
C
t
~' St
~
~
a
e
u
e
Qcf Elevation I
,~~~
Slope
Bracing Boulder
~ ~ ~ a
0
Extend
Bench
` 1-2 Feet
~~ ~ 4
Past
Stream Bed Invert Footer
Log
Top Of Footer Log At
Or Below Stream Invert
SECTION Root Wad and Footer Log
Extends To
Max. Scour Depth
.' Footer Log
Flow
~ Root Fan
Trunk
Root Wads Oriented \
Perpendicular To
Flow Direction °
~D
Construction Note: Bracing
A Brace Log Can Be Used Boulders
For Additional Stability /
And Should Be Pinned To (~~ ~
Adjacent Rootwads
't
PLAN
Section & Plan Views Adapted
From Rosgen (1999)
~ .~

ENGINEERING d[ HYDROGEOLOGY ROOTWAD SCHEMATIC

50 COLLEGE STREET, A$IiEV1LLE, NC 28801
TEL.[phone] Fnc.828.281.3351
www.altamontenvironmental.com DWR-02-WHEAT CREEK / COVIL PROPERTY
NORTH CAROLINA
POLK COUNTY
,
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT MANAGER: STU RYMAN
CLIENT: POLK CO. SWCD SOURCE: THE VIRGINIA STREAM RESTORATION
& STABILIZATION BEST MANAGEMENT

DATE: OI-25-07 PRACTICES GUIDE, 200E
P:\POLK SWCD NRCS\POLK DWR PROJECTS OZ-OB\COVIL SITE-02\PIGURES\CAD\ROOTWAO.OWG

ATTACHMENT B
Conceptual Design Photos

" ~ ~ ,
...,. ~ V;
yy
"s^ ~^ ',, r' ~ r f ` ~° ` ~•; pry.
ds'~ ~ e ,; ~, ,k,
~,+ ~ ,'- ~ a. .~"° ~ ~ y~ ~ ~' f ~,.
x
~ ~ ~ s S
ash' ~ + "+ ~ $ ~.i ~ ~~ ~ ; ~~ ~ S ~ ~.~.~ °9 ~ ~ .~ ~~~f K, .#~~) y ~ <
p e
~ i ~„,y
r~
,
j p y
~a d' ~ ~b } " { `~R t ~ ~ ~ ~ ck ~ ~~I ~ .°.
Id
' ti ~ ~
".
1. ' ~ ".~6~44aw.EgS R ~^" Y P <,~ ~i ~~ ,: } .~ggK"A``;'~T .~ ;~o-~'y R &~V a'. ~ ~ 16.
~ •.~ ~Yr" ~V, ,. § g ~ '~, ~ ~~ -.~ .' "~"$ s a.* Ada '"Vx~ ~'' ~ 4 ~~,p {~.
A
t~~ ~a' t%*m~,4s ,4 t~~ t~\,. a `..""^ ~!.; `; °"~" '~"~~~°~ .'~. ,'y+»#' .~;3'~°` ~~`': ~t.F+'~,,r ,~ ~ r~.g, «tXX t'~'",I.
„
~~k i. < < v pr . ~a . ~„a~~»`~' " .,e' vN'a w ~ ~ ~ ~ "`~~ r, r'.~*,* ',r .. ~ d ~ ~ b ~ ~ r.~c~~ ~
w
..
~e ~ e v ~ ~, ,.~ x~ ~ r r ~.? ~ I ~ ~,
~.L.
~" " t! `mow " r~.3~`7'K. ,mg.. ~ ~ , p`.. 'f * ~° '~ ~ L ~~
~~~ ~ۥ~;-, , x ,R t -~.~ .. ~i ksw aV-im~'E i ., ~ ag~+'GS f s ~ r F ` .~..
~., ,-~x
'^ F
"• ~ ,~r
~~ CONCEPTUAL DESIGN PHOTO I
,..r ,-~ t~-' -
' ENGINEERING & H YDROGEOLOGY

~, ~ 7 ~°""~
,, 50 COLLEGE STREET, ASFIEVILLE, NC 28801
TEL.sz8zs133so FACSZS.z8133s1
DWR-02-WHEAT CREEK /
KK

~,,.~°
~~~ ~ -

-~~ ~ ~,°" www.altamontenvironmental.com

COVIL PROPERTY
°°`~ *~ ~'~ - ~r~AwN BY: ~oEL LENK NORTH CAROLINA
POLK COUNTY
`~,;;. ;' *~.~
,~ _ ` ~ `~"~'
~:, PROJECT MANAGER: STU RYMAN
NOT TO SCALE ,
- CC
LIE
NT: PCSWCD
' ~ ~,r. n
C
VATE. _L5_O~ P'.\POLK SWCD NRCS\PaK DWR PROJECTS 02-08\COVIL SITE-DWR-02\FIGLREG\CONGEPTUPL DESIGN PHOTOS.DWG
N
O
O
O

-P ~<a ~ ~ • ~ .rx ,,i
S k L 4 $ ~ /' yR~'
4`
11 $z :'F" F°
w ~ r~1
r -~; ~ .,.
a
4 ^a.
la ~~
I a:~.. 1
Q«y„~
([ ~ W 1 \ ~9
1111 A~ k
.° R pf, `~ ~ t ~ Air" •a (.. \ ~ ~~<t W''; '! rv ~~ t~ ~~1.k ? ~ t
y ~ a ~ s i< ~ t / ~. rc \ . 1 !eR ~ ex"p, t F'a j'` s e \,~ i Syr--.. ~ y~la.\
,,,fi.,~S"G' `*..~,,~ ~. wt5, '.~, w *'~ `, ~ ~ "~ ' S n ~\ e r six, ~iWI ~ a ~ ;' ~ n
..
4 TF
• w ! ~'`
f~ 'f • ~. w
n.
`' -. ~
,~a~, f // C _`
" `5.^~a .:... 5'~lA.~ •, n.r.:. .."i..~~a ~n+s• ~. I.. ~ _ ^*'--,.. - L!^^.! .. ,.. • .> '~ iftiiE.~"r .s_:."a- ~r'71:.-'~':~t~a';'Y
~'., t- LATTEN STREAMBANK SLOPES TO ~
,, ~ PRESERVE LARGE STABLE TREES ANC
..
-- - C
n~ - -
,~ ~
.. ~r~..far ~WF.v~'aiti:. "'4~.~-°~w-,'sal ~f~'.:.~.' ~"1:. ~' J' ~~'~ra
;,
y~~'
~' ice. ~e'"d"~~~

~*~•~~r, ~~~_3'`.~r,,.i'„~„ ENGINEERING HYOROGEOLOGY
'c ~-~„~' a , rs~, ~~""~„ 50 COLLEGE STRt:fT, AStiEVILLE, NC 28801
f~~w?- ,'~'. ~ ,~ '/• "- 'reL.8282813350 FAC828.2813351
!j • ~ ~/~ ?"~~~~ ~ www.altamontenvironmental.com
~ r ~~~ ' DRAWN BY: JOEL LENK
~' `-~q+~'~^!''~' T,t: ,PROJECT MANAGER: STU RYMAN
~' "` ~'~~` ~,. ,,,r,~' CLIENT: PCSWCD NOT TO SCALE
. ,fix ".~-' ~- DATE: I-25-07
CONCEPTUAL DESIGN PHOTO 2
DWR-02-WHEAT CREEK /
COVIL PROPERTY
POLK COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
P.\POLtt SWCD NRCS\POLrc DWR PROJECT; 02-OB\COVIL SITE-DWR-02\FIGWES\CONSEPTUAL DEGI Grv PHOTOS.GWG

345 LINEAR FEET OF STREAMBANK IN DOT RIGHT OF WAY
ADJACENT TO ABRAMS MOORE ROAD.
FLATTEN STREAMBANK SLOPES TO 3:1,
PRESERVE LARGE STBLE TREES AND
r. REVEGETATE AS DECRIBED IN PCN DOCUMENT
N G I N E E R I N G & H Y O R O G E O L O G Y
50 COLLEGE STREET, ASHEVILLE, NC 28801
TEL.[phone] FAC.828.281.3351
www. altwn ontenvironmental. com
DRAWN BY: JOEL LENK
PROJECT MANAGER: STU RYMAN NOT TO SCALE
CLIENT: PCSWCD
DATE: 1-25-07
CONCEPTUAL DESIGN PHOTO 4
DWR-02-WHEAT CREEK /
COVIL PROPERTY
POLK COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
PAP— SWCD NRCS\Parc DWR PROJECTS 02-08\COVIL SITE-DWR-02\FIGWES\CO SEPTUAL DESIGN PHOTOS.DWG

%a~- .~ 345 LINEAR FEET OF STREAMBANK IN DOT RIGHT OF W~
..•~''"
..~ ,,,,.~,,- ADJACENT TO ABRAMS MOORE ROAD.
w

~ ~~.
~~ ~;_ `~ ,
f;~
~~~ x. ..
,r .
~° ..
-L_ATTEN STREAMBANK SLOPES TG "~~ ~ ~'" ~

~ ~
~
~~ESERVE LARGE STBLE TREES Af~ `
~` ;~ ~'`
:,>µ ~'"
~ ,-,
- - -- ..
_
f
~ P
,
,
,_ , ~
~. ~,
E ~

~.; ~ s
~
~- .
»~

y ~.
a
a' ~ ~ ~
~ ~~,
e~-~~ ~ ENGINEERING & H YDROGEOLOGY
50 COLLEGE STREET, ASHEVILLE, NC 28801
s "„ ,.M TEL. [phone] FnC828281.3351
www. alta~nontenvironmen[al.com
DRAWN BY: JOEL LENK
,„' PROJECT MANAGER: STU RYMAN NOT TO SCALE
~ ~`~'"^`„ CLIENT: PCSWCD
~`. HATE: I-25-07
CONCEPTUAL DESIGN PHOTO 5
DWR-02-WHEAT CREEK /
COVIL PROPERTY
POLK COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
P:\POLK $WCD MRCS\POLtt DWR PRPlECTS 02-08\COVIL SITE-DWR-O2\FIGLWE$\CGNSEPTU/L DESIGN PHOTOS.DWG

ATTACHMENT C
Shear Stress Calculations

Wheat Creek
Covil Property
Polk County, NC
Streambank Stability Calculations
Find shear stress with r = yRHS
where: y = 62.4 lb/ft3 (density of water)
RH =hydraulic radius (ft)
S =average stream slope (ft/ft)
2pp?p ~ 8'
Calculate shear stress for depths up to the top of bank. Using channel dimensions from a
cross-section measured by Altamont personnel in the field with the proposed 3:1 slope on
the streambank(see attached cross-section(s)), calculate hydraulic radius for the following
depth conditions (*Note: depth measured from deepest part of channel):
• 1 ft;
• 2 ft;
• 3 ft;
• 4 ft,
• 5 ft, (elevation at top of low bank)
Set S = 0.0049 ft/ft (based on height of fall along thalweg divided by measured distance
along thalweg in field by Altamont)
P:\Polk SWCD NRCS\Polk DWR projects 02-08\Covil Site-DWR-02\Covil Shear stress calculations.doc Page 1 of 3

Calculate shear stress for the straight channel.
Area
RH Wetted Perimeter (WP)
Cross-
Elevation Sectional Area Wetted Hydraulic Top Width Shear Stress
(ft) (sfj Perimeter (ft) Radius (ft) of Channel (lb/ftz)
1 8.57 15.67 0.55 15.49 0.2
2 27.64 23.12 1.20 22.66 0.4
3 53.74 30.01 1.79 29.25 0.5
4 85.99 36.34 2.37 35.25 0.7
5 124.24 42.66 2.91 41.25 0.9
Dm~ 1.80=Maximum Depth Bankfull as measured in field by Altamont
4.90 =elevation at top of existing low bank
Permissible shear stress for large angular rock at toe of slope =10.1 lb/ftz (see attached
Table)
Permissible shear stress for coir matting on streambank = 3 - 51b/ftz (see attached Table)
Permissible shear stress for live fascine on streambank =1.25-3.10 lb/ftz (see attached
Table)
Adjust calculated shear stress values to account for channel sinuosity.
-o.s
z~~ = 2.652
Rc =Radius of Curvature
W =Top Width of Channel
(Equation 10 of "Stability Thresholds for Stream Restoration Materials - ERDC TN-
EMRRP-SR-29" prepared by Craig Fischenich of the USAE Research and Development
Center, Environmental Laboratory, 3909 Halls Ferry Rd, Vicksburg, MS 39180, May
2001)
C
(Chapter 2 of "Stream Restoration, A Natural Channel Design Handbook" prepared by
the NC Stream Restoration Institute)
P:\Polk SWCD NRCS\Polk DWR projects 02-08\Covil Site-DWR-02\Covil Shear stress calculations.doc Page 2 of 3

Rc = (1772/8*62) + 62/2 = 94 feet
W = W =top widths of channel at depths of 1,2,3,4, and 5 feet indicated on the table
above.
Max Shear Stress for
Sinuous Channel
Elevation (ft) Shear Stress (lb/ftz) (lb/ft2)
1 0.2 0.2
2 0.4 0.5
3 0.5 0.8
4 0.7 1.2
5 0.9 1.6
Permissible shear stress for large angular rock at toe of slope =10.1 Ib/ft2 (see attached
Table)
Permissible shear stress for coir matting on streambank = 3 - 51b/ft~ (see attached Table)
Permissible shear stress for live fascine on streambank =1.25-3.10 lb/ft~ (see attached
Table)
P:\Polk SWCD NRCS\Polk DWR projects 02-08\Covil Site-DWR-02\Covil Sheaz stress calculations.doc Page 3 of 3

~_
,~,
a
~:
~d
d
Table 2. Permissible Shear and Vel
Soils
Gravel/Cobble
VecLetation
Fine colloidal sand
Sandy loam (noncolloidal)
Alluvial silt (noncolloidal)
Silty loam (noncolloidal)
Firm loam
Fine gravels
Stiff clay
Alluvial silt (colloidal)
Graded loam to cobbles
Graded silts to cobbles
Shales and hardpan
1-in.
2-in.
6-in.
12-in.
Class A turf
Class B turf
Class. C turf
0.02 - 0.03
0.03 - 0.04
0.045 - 0.05
0.045 - 0.05
0.075
0.075
0.26
0.26
0.38
0.43
0.67
0.33
0.67
2.0
4.0
3.7
2.1
1.0
1.5
1.75
2
1.75 - 2.25
2.5
2.5
3 - 4.5
3.75
3.75
4
6
2.5 - 5
3-6
4 - 7.5
5.5 - 12
6-8
4-7
3.5
A
A
A
A
A
A
A, F
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
E, N
E, N
E, N
Long native grasses 1.2 - 1.7 4 - 6 G, H, L, N
Short native and bunch grass 0.7 - 0.95 3 - 4 G, H, L, N
Reed plantings 0.1-0.6 N/A E, N
Hardwood tree plantings 0.41-2.5 N/A E, N
Temoorary Degradable RECPs Jute net 0.45 1 - 2.5 E, H, M
Straw with net 1.5 - 1.65 1 - 3 E, H, M
Coconut fiber with net 2.25 3 - 4 E, M
Fiberglass roving 2.00 2.5 - 7 E, H, M
Non-Degradable RECPs Unvegetated 3.00 5 - 7 E, G, M
Partially established 4.0-6.0 7.5 - 15 E, G, M
Fully vegetated 8.00 8 - 21 F, L, M
Ri ra 6 - in. dso 2.5 5 - 10 H
9 - in. d5o 3.8 7 - 11 H
12-in. dso 5.1 10-13 H
18-in. ds~ 7.6 12-16 H
24 - in. dso 10.1 14 - 18 E
Soil Bioengineering Wattles 0.2 = 1.0 3 C, I, J, N
Reed fascine 0.6-1.25 5 E
~j Coir roll 3 - 5 8 E, M, N
Vegetated coir mat 4 - 8 9.5 E, M, N
Live brush mattress (initial) 0.4 - 4.1 4 B, E, I
Live brush mattress (grown) 3.90-8.2 12 B, C, E, I, N
Brush layering (initial/grown) 0.4 - 6.25 12 E, I, N
Live fascine 1.25-3.10 6 - 8 C, E, I, J
Live willow stakes 2.10-3.10 3 - 10 E, N, O
Hard Surfacing Gabions 10 14 - 19 D
Concrete 12.5 >18 H
Ranges of values generally reflect multiple sources of data or different testing cond itions.
A Chang, H.H. (1988). F. Julien, P.Y. (1995). K Sprague, C. J. (1999).
B. Florineth. (1982) G. Kouwen, N.; Li, R. M.; and Simons, D.6., (1980). L. Temple, D.M. (1980).
C. Gerstgraser, C. (1998). H. Norman, J. N. (1975). M. TXDOT (1999)
D: Goff, K. (1999): I. Schiechtl, H. M. and R. Stern. (1996). N. Data from Author (2001)
E Gray, D.H., and Sotir, R.B. (1996). J. Schoklitch, A. (1937). O. USACE (1 997).
ERDC TN-EMRRP SR 29
5
er_Ity fer Selected Lining Materials'

ATTACHMENT D
Level III Assessment

ENGINEERING & H Y D R O G E O L O G Y
50 COLLEGE STREET, ASHEVILLE, NC 28801
TEL. [phone] Fac.828.281.3351
www.altamontenvironmental.com
2 0 0 70 1 8 1
December 20, 2006
Ms. Sandra Reid
District Administrator p ~~: z~~ ~~;;/7
Polk County Soil & Water Conservation District ~ '"° ~'~ .
P.O Box 236 -•
#4 Annex Building ~~~~ ~ ~'~~~
Columbus, North Carolina 28722 ilfcM~ ~V i, :.~ ~.r~~,.; ~ ~
Re: DWR Project 02
Assessment of Stream Condition -Wheat Creek on the Arthur and Linda Covil Property
Polk County, NC
Dear Mrs. Reid:
Altamont Environmental Inc. (Altamont) has completed a Level III Assessment of existing conditions on
the stream reach described above and has analyzed departure from it's full natural potential The
procedures used were consistent with those outlined in the Apri12003 North Carolina Agricultural Cost
Share Program (NCACSP) Manual . This letter documents the results of the Level III Assessment and
analysis as well as other information regarding the project area.
BACKGROUND
The Polk County Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD) received a grant from the North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), Division of Water Resources (DWR) to
stabilize eroding streambanks on seven properties in Polk County. To secure the grant, SWCD staff
inventoried the damage at the subject sites and obtained preliminary approval from the landowners for
the proposed repairs. However, detailed assessments were not completed. Upon receiving the grant, the
SWCD retained Altamont to complete a detailed assessment of each site, design repairs for the damaged
areas and submit the designs to the United States Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) and the North
Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) for permitting in the form of a Pre-
Construction Notification (PCN) for this project.
The SWCD desires to incorporate natural channel design elements into the repairs, where possible.
However, detailed natural channel design procedures are beyond the scope of this project. As an initial
step, the SWCD required Altamont to complete a Level III assessment on each reach identified by the
SWCD to quantify the impacts and establish a basis for the design of the stabilization measures.
This letter documents the assessment techniques and the findings associated with the site identified as
DWR Project 02 located on a portion of Wheat Creek approximately 1,700 feet upstream from the
confluence with the Green River. The project site extends from the Abrams Moore Road bridge
downstream approximately 1,280 feet to a privately owned bridge that provides access to livestock fields
owned by Mr. and Mrs. Covil. A site location map is attached as Figure 1.
P:\Polk SWCD NRCS\Polk DWR projects 02-08\Covil Site\Level III Letter Final.doc

Ms. Ried
December 20, 2006
Page 2 of 4
LEVEL III ASSESSMENT
Between November 21 and 28, 2006 Altamont representatives analyzed the condition of the stream.
During the assessment, Altamont utilized various forms to guide and document field data collection
activities, including: a Level III Assessment form (from pagesV-82 and V-84 of the NCACSP Manual) a
Stream Survey Data Sheet, a Qualitative Riparian Vegetation Assessment Guide, a Channel Stability
Rating form, and a Bank Erosion Hazard Index form. Copies of these documents are attached. Also
attached are profiles, cross-sections and photographs of the assessed reach of Wheat Creek.
Wheat Creek in the project area is classified as an F4 stream using the Rosgen Classification of Natural
Rivers. The following paragraphs provide supplemental information and support the data included on the
attached forms. The bold and underlined text corresponds to specific fields on the Level III Assessment
sheet
Riparian Vegetation within the project area is generally in poor condition due mainly to livestock
impacts. Livestock are allowed to graze to the waters edge and cross the creek in numerous locations
within the project area. These factors have had an adverse affect on the stream channel, water quality
and riparian vegetation. As a~result of grazing, the existing vegetation consists primarily of pasture
grasses and large caliper trees. The current conditions however, do present some opportunity for
transplanting and variety of native herbaceous, shrub and tree species were observed at the site. Please
refer to the Qualitative Riparian Vegetation Assessment Guide sheet in the attachment to this letter.
Stream Size can be defined by several parameters. For this project, Altamont developed an estimated
stream size (cross-sectional area at bankfull stage in square feet (ft2)) using the regional curve for rural
Piedmont North Carolina Streams (Harman, W.H, et al, 1999). Specifically, the cross sectional area was
estimated by comparing the approximate drainage area to the bankfull cross sectional area shown on the
regional curve. Based upon this evaluation, the cross-sectional area for a stream with a drainage area the
size of the Wheat Creek drainage area should fall between 25 and 90 ft2. The actual cross-sectional area
measured by Altamont in the impaired project reach is approximately 22.15 ftz.
Cross-sectional area at bankfull stage, bankfull width, and average bankfull depth, as measured in the
field, are represented in the cross sections of the Wheat Creek channel and Stream Survey Data Sheet
attached.
The Stream Order of Wheat Creek is second order. A second order stream is defined as a stream in
which two or more first order streams have converged.
The Meander Pattern of Wheat Creek can be qualitatively described as meandering. The reach of
stream assessed for this project is of insufficient length to support an accurate quantitative evaluation of
meander pattern such as Meander Length, Radius of Curve, Belt Width, and Sinuosi ,however these
values were calculated and appear on the Stream Survey Data Sheet Normally these measurements
would be made on a much larger scale. In addition, detailed assessment of meander pattern are typically
completed to aid in natural channel design which is beyond the scope of this project.
P:\Polk SWCD NRCS\Polk DWR projects 02-08\Covil Site\I,evel III Letter Final.doc

Ms. Ried
December 20, 2006
Page 3 of 4
A Channel Stability Rating was calculated using the Pfankuch rating procedure (see the Phankuch
Channel Stability Rating Sheet which is included as an attachment). The Channel Stability Rating score
for the assessed reach was calculated be 117, which falls in the Fair/Moderately Unstable category for a
stream reach classified as F4.
Sediment Supply determinations were made by using a Bank Erosion Hazard Index (BEHI) method and
near bank stress estimations based on channel pattern and cross-sectional shape observed in the field.
Based on this assessment, Altamont classified the sediment supply of Wheat Creek in the project area as
high. Near Bank Stress was observed to be high, particularly in areas where mid channel bars force
water to poorly vegetated streambanks (see photographs and descriptions in the attachment). The
Streambank Erosion Potential was found to be high based on assessment by the Bank Erosion Hazard
Index (BEHI) method and a BEHI score of 34.
Streambed (Vertical) Stability was found to be degrading based on Entrenchment Ratio. The
Width/Depth Ratio Condition was found to be normal to high. Based on field measurements the
bankfull Width is calculated to be 19.05 feet, the mean bankfull Death is 1.17 feet and the Width/Denth
Ratio is 16.28 feet.
As discussed, the Stream Tyne for Wheat Creek in the project reach was determined to be F4 based
Entrenchment Ratio, Width/Depth Ratio, Sinuosity, Stream Type, Slope and Channel Material.
The Flow Regime within the project area is altered and unstable. The Depositional Pattern in the
channel within the project area appears to be moving away from a single thread pattern toward a more
enastamosed ,pattern due to increased sediment load entering the channel. The most obvious cause for
these changes is the reduction of riparian vegetation within the corridor and livestock disturbance on the
streambanks. Evidence of Debris Blockages were observed during field assessments as stumps of trees
that had fallen into the stream channel due to under cut banks. These blockages appear to have been cut
and removed by the property owner. A longitudinal Profile survey of the stream channel was completed
by Altamont, and using profile survey Water Surface Slope and Valley Slope were calculated. Bed
Features and their relationships were identified in the field on the longitudinal profile. Features such as
Steps, Pools, and Riffles, and Convergance/Divergance of the stream flow were noted and entered on
the Level III assessment sheet. The channel does not exhibit a Plane Bed channel. Pool/riffle S acin
can be view on the profile survey included as Figure 3 in the attachment.. Also included in the
attachment are several cross-sections produced from data collected during the assessment of the project
reach.
ADDITIONAL OBSERVATIONS AND CONSIDERATIONS
Before completing the PCN there are several items that should be considered. First, during the
assessment, Altamont observed an overhead power line running through the project area parallel to
Abrams Moore Road. The lines cross Wheat Creek twice within the project area. The SWCD should
determine who owns the line and obtain details regarding any associated right of way restrictions (e.g.,
whether or not the right of way agreement restricts the type vegetation that can be planted beneath the
lines).
P:\Polk SWCD NRCS\Polk DWR projects 02-08\Covil Site\Level III Letter Final.doc

Ms. Ried
December 20, 2006
Page 4 of 4
A second observation made during the stream survey and assessment was that approximately 345 feet of
the streambank on river right is directly adjacent to Abrams Moore Road and repairs in this area may
encroach upon the Department of Transportation (DOT) right of way. A discussion should take place
with the a local DOT representative to determine whether or not the DOT will allow the proposed bank
stabilization project to encroach upon the right of way. This discussion could result in the DOT assisting
with stabilizing the streambank within their right of way.
Finally, Altamont suggests that the SWCD consider coordinating the Covil DWR Project 02 with the
North Carolina Agricultural Cost Share Program project to assist Mr. and Mrs. Covil with fencing and
livestock crossings. Other options for live stock may also be available. One option may be to create
another access to the southern Covil pasture via the woods on the ridge to the east of the project area. If
this option is acceptable to the Covils, it may eliminate the need for two costly cattle crossings of Wheat
Creek and be more beneficial to the stream as well.
Altamont understands that the SWCD estimated that approximately 500 feet of streambank is in need of
stabilization at the referenced site. During Altamont's assessment of the Wheat Creek project area we
observed and measured some 440 feet of steep, bare, eroding bank on river left and approximately 375
feet on river right. Our estimates indicate that approximately 815 total linear feet of streambank is in
need of repair. The Altamont estimate does not include the 345 feet of streambank that is in the DOT
right of way. Before preparing the PCN, Altamont requests confnnation that a PCN should address the
entire $15 feet of eroding banks that were observed.
Altamont appreciates the opportunity to provide these assessments and options to the SWCD for this
project. We would be pleased to assist you in evaluating the utility easemeirt and DOT right of way if
you wish. Please feel free to contact either of us with questions or comments.
Sincerely,
_. ,~.~
oel D. L nk, P.G.
Cc: Mr. Gerald Harbinson -Natural Resource Conservation Service
Attachments: Figure 1-Site Vicinity Map
Level III Assessment Form
Stream Survey Form
Qualitative Riparian Assessment Guide
Phankuch Channel Stability Rating Sheet
BEHI Evaluation Sheet
Figure 2-Stream Layout
Figure 3-Longitudinal Profile
Figure 4- Cross-Sections
Photographs and Descriptions
jr'
16
r~,,
Stuart A. Ryman, P.G.
1
P:\Polk SWCD NRCS\Polk DWR projects 02-08\Covi] Site\Level III Letter Final.doc

~~ t.ti~ ~' .,.. ~ }
~•~ as
``~~ ,~..,_. .~ _r.
.,~.
~ ,~ ~ ~~ is j ' 1 l,,r
.~. j
,~ ~ _ ~.w. __~. .,~..,....-,
~~,.
t1 ~ . ~o ~"?c3Z7
~ /
• ~' t,..,, a ~ ~''~'•.:
a
/~ ,~°l /'r'° ~ r
•• 1 ....,._....._.,,._.._._
,4 ~..,,,~ .,,,ti ~.~ - .. ,

~ ...
,~ ~
.. ,
~, .~
.. ~.. ,.
•: ~'~ F
_.
.. .~w.rwu.^„
~t 1 ." .,...,.. , l r
~ ~ ~ d
APPP^XIMA I E ~~-~
~I
~'~~ SITE ~^CATI^N '.kl ~`
} .~
~~~ -~ ~
r" •'~ ~ •~` ~ A
-. ,
"~ l .: i ~
~.
~.~,
,
~'
{ t~~,
k '. `•
~~
rr ate" „S r ~ `. .. ._... ~ .. ry.~ ....
~~ `~~.. ~ ~ ~~ 4 a
~.~,.. ~, ,.~" f "'~ ~ • .'~.. ,
r v:.
u, x
m+' .. ...~..~- w ~d _
z /..
.~
.j~ .~ ~~
`~
~,...,ro--~--.
tile.
.w.,,y~ w +~.
. ~ ~..~
``~.
{ rt
°,,' ./
°~ ~% r''~ `" h
~ 1 ~~ ~,
a r
F• ~
y~
r~
f ,Y
3~ ~ ~f
~, ~ ~ ,~
p~-~`~J ~~ ~ ~ '~
~~ ~~
~ ~~s
~~ ~ /
~ r' yy.,
'~ 1 T
~F.
~~
4
a
r ', e.
,,
.,<.r ,,, ~ ..n 1 • ~ i
,.: ,
}_ .
._ +~
µ_,
~ ~ ~ ~ ,-
r ~ 1 w '~
r 1~
..966 `a',,..°'~ °~,," ". ~ ~' ,,,~ 1
1 i. ~ '`~ ~.,f0 t.
r-
L°i~ ~,.r~ .~.~-
0
. /''
~., ~ ,, f
! {y }
f '~. //
_ i ~ t"
ALTAMONT ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.
-.
50 COLLEGE STREET, ASI-IEVII,LE, NC 28801
TEL.[phone] FAC.828.281335 ]
www. altamontenvuontnental. com
DRAWN BY: JOEL LENK
PROJECT MANAGER: STUART RYMAN
CLIENT: PCSWCD
DATE: 12/19/06
SCALE (FEET)
500 0 500 1000
SITE VICINITY MAP FIGURE
DWR PROJECT 02 -WHEAT CREEK
ARTHUR & LINDA COVIL PROPERTY
2270 ABRAMS MOORE RD
RUTHERFORDTON, NC 28139
., ~~
"`-„~. ~
,...
~ ~ f +._1

St:reambank Stabilization
Definition/Purpose
A streambank Stabilization system means the use of bioengineering practices,
native material revetments, channel stability structures, andlor the restoration or
management of riparian corridors in order to protect upland BMPs, restore the
natural function of the stream corridor and improve water quality by reducing
sedimentation to streams from streambank erosion and decreasing the delivery of
nitrogen, phosphorus and other pollutants to the stream from adjacent pasture or
cropland. (DIP)
Policies
1. The use of this BMP for NCACSP funding would be limited to agricultural
operations where the natural streambank has been severely damaged by
livestock access, or other activities associated with agricultural operations.
Each site should be reviewed by the flistrict Board to determine the eligibility far cost
share funding and prioritize ±he sites as to the direct effec±s, long term benefits
and the landowners willingness to be involved, maintain, and support the
practice.
2. Planned practices require a contact with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and
the N. G. Wildlife Resources Commission for all proposed sites. A Water
Quality certification may also be needed from the N. C. Division of Water
Quality.
3. On livestock operations, fencing off the stream and the wooded portion of the
riparian area is mandatory.
4. A minimum set-back of 20 feet of undisturbed native vegetation or restored
riparian area adjacent to the installed practice is mandatory in all situations.
5. An analysis of the existing stream condition and the degree of departure for the
existing stream condition from its full operating potential must be made as a part
of the planning and design process for this BMP. The analysis of stream
condition and departure may be made following the procedures established by
Dave Rosgen in Applied River Morphology, Chapter 6 (Rosgen, 1996).
Rosgen's field survey from, Summary of "Condition" Categories for Level ill
Inventory may be used to document.the analysis.
6. If the analysis when completed as outlined in Item Na. 5, shows that the profile,
pattern, and/or dimensions of the stream need to be restored in order to restore
the natural stability and function of the stream, assistance will be required from
a person who has successfully completed Rosgen's Restoration Course or
equivalent natural channel design training.
NCACSP MANUAL, APRIL 2003 PAGE V-82

SUMMARY OF "CONDITION" CATEGORIES FOR LEVEL 111 INVENTORY
j Stream Name Wheat Creek Observers Joel Lenk
i LOCatlon Pea Ridge, Polk County ,North Carolina Stream Type Fa Date 11/21/06
Riparian Vegetation Generally poor and sparse Fiow regime Altered and Urstable
j Stream Size, Stream order Measured Bkf. Area = 22.15 ft~ Depositional pattern Moving toward enastamosed
~ Meander pattern K = 1.7s Debris/channel blockages Observd, removed by owner
i Channel stability rating (Pfankuch) Fair/ Mod. Unstable Altered Channel State: poor vege., steep banks, entrenched
~ Sediment supply (check appropriate category): Dimension/shape;
~ Extreme Width @bankfull = 19.05
! Very High Depth @bankfull = 1.17
High x Width/depth ratio 16.28
Moderate Patterns: (*show as fund. of Wbkf):
Low Meander length" Wavelenth = - 1,060 ft
S#reambed (vertical) stability Radius of curve' Ro ft
Aggrading Belt wdth* 15o ft
Degrading x Sinuosity 1.78
Stable Profile:
Width/depth ratio condition: _
_ Water surface slope o•ooa9
~
No~nat~~abte; X _ Valley sto~~- o.ooaz
High X Bed features:
Very high Riffle/pool X
Streambank erosion Potential: Step/pool
Bank erodibility: Near-bank stress: Conver./divrg. X
Extreme Extreme Plane bed
High X High x Other
Moderate Moderate Spacing" See Longitudinal Profile
Low Low Describe alterations: slightly wide, sediment choked channel
General Remarks
Refer to cover letter figures and remainder of attachment.
Attach photographs taken mid-stream looking up and downstream. Make site map.
Attach vicinity map of reach and/or aerial photo for specific location.
Note any permanent cross-section for level 1V verification of cross-section stability, actual erosion rates,
change in pebble counts, deposition studies, sediment sampling, etc.
Attach c~
profiles,
Signatun
NCACSP MANUAL, APRIL 2003
Inel Stability rating form, bank erosion rating form,
PAGE V-84

Stream Survey Data Sheet
Site _ DWR-02, Wheat Creek, Arthur & Linda Covil Property Date 11/21/06
Survey Crew Joel Lenk, Jon Hazinski, Evan Yurkovich
Riffle Cross Section:
Area at Bankfull, Abp (ft2) 22.15
Width at Bankfull, Wb,~ (ft) 19.05 .
Width Flood Prone Area, W~,e (ft) 24.30
Maximum Depth Bankfull, D,~x (ft) 1.80
Max Depth Top Low Bank, DTOB (ft) 4.90
r.
Mean Depth at Bankfull, Dew = Abp / Wb~ (ft) 1.17
Entrenchment Ratio, ER = W~,a / Wb~ (ft/ft) 1.28
Width to Depth Ratio, W/D = Wb~ / ~~r (ft/ft) 16.28
Bank Height Ratio, BHR = D Tos / D,~,~ (ft/ft) 2.72
Max Depth Ratio = Dix / Db~ (ft/fr) _1.54
Longitudinal Profile (minimum of 20 X bankfull width):
Length of Channel Thalweg, Lam, (ft) 1280 Slope of Channel, Sa„~ = AELEV / Lam, (ft!ft) 0.0042
Length of Valley, L„alley (ft) 717 Sinuosity, K = L,,~. / I-valley (mfr) 1.78
Elevation Change (head first riffle to head last riffle), DELEV (ft) 5.50
Pool Cross-Section:
Pool Arca at Bankfull, A,p~~ (ft2)- 15.85
Pool Width at Bankfull, Weal (ft) 13.31
Pool Max Depth Banldull, D~~ (ft) 1.80
Pool Area Ratio = A.pooi / ~kf (ft2/ft2) 0.72
Pool Width Ratio = W pool / Wb,~ (ft/ft) 0.70
Pool Max Depth Ratio = Dpi / Db~ (ft!ft) 1.53
Pattern Survey (minimum of 2 wavelengths, list ranges of measurements):
Meander Wavelength, Lm (ft) -1,060 Meander Wavelength Ratio = Lm / Wb~ (ft/ft) 64.63
Meander Belt Width, Wy~i (ft) 150 Meander Width Ratio = Wb~~ / Ws~ (ft/ft) 9.15
Radius of Curvature, ~ (ft) 8o Radius of Curvature Ratio = ~ / Wb~ (ft/ft) 4.88
Pebble Count Results (reachwide):
Median Particle Size; d50 (mm) Estimated 5 mm .
;.,..::
.....
Rosgen Stream Classification: F4

r
Qualitative Riparian Vegetation Assessment Guide
Preliminary Assessment
i
Project name DwR- 02, wheat creek Date t v2vos Proposed Project len th t 2ao ft
Existing vegetation
Dominant tree species Tulip Poplar, Red Oak, Beach, River Birch
Size distribution of trees a variety of mature, saplings and seedlings exist on inside of meander on river righ~
Dominant shrubs ecies assumed Minebark
Dominant herbaceous species varie of pastureland grasses
Successional stage, disturbances,
or potential for natural chap a varies from annual herbaceous in pasture to hardwood fon'est
Patchiness succession is not occuring in pasture
Visible stresses heavy grazing and erosion
Bank Conditions
Bare banks approximatly 30 % of banks
Presence and density of lar a trees tree trunks on channel edge, roots lining banks, broken riparian torrid
An le and resence of undercuts abundant at range of angles 90 to -60
Material fine sandy clayey silt.
invasive presence minimal with the exception of pasture grasses.
PatChlness banks are bare where livestock graze and cross and banks are vertical or undercut
Land use
Wildlife impacts or protection minimal im acts from wildlife
Recreational none
Officio! Power line and assumed easement, DOT right of way along Abrams Moore
A ricultural and razin heavy grazing and numerous livestock crossings
Mowin none
Herbicides none apparent
Other disturbances none apparent
Soli
Composition seriesrf known reddish brown, micaceous, fine sandy, clayey silt
Compactedness soil compacted by livestock, construction should loosen soil, additional organic material rec
Fertile thin to no topsoil
O anic material soil appears to lack organic material
Testln no soil test taken
~r
commended
Construction planning
Potential for transplants variety of saplings and shrubs for transplant, transplants will be stored in shade and watered
Potential for tree fencing disturbance around large trees and wooded areas will be avoided and protected

W
C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ m
O O O ~ ~ ~ ~ N Y
O ~
~ ~
r
r I____ I
~ I• ~ I
LL C a

m • N
C m
~ ~ O~ L
N
C
C
~ s
• G
nn m y~ O
U ~ C y "1 ~~
~
1-

Q II I L • I
g U~ Q
A I a
~+ Z
~ I` ~~
u!
c $
~ o a m n QQ p~nn g
~F
N~
n
E 3 b ?,s, a
'a c o R q L^ ~•„
'~ ~ E N Y
g. ~
~ ~ -
g
a
~
~ _
H
I '- a I
'~ I~ U I
O°. ~ 4
+ ~ c c n ~ $
~
o ~ a a~
~ 9i c ~ ~ _
c~
N
~7' X
~ `a ~ a $ ~ j
~~~~J
a
a
.~
;..,`
.Q
C
t
U
V
Y
C
4:.
of
t
0
..y.•
E
U
Y
C
J
x
d
~ 8Q
O C7
0
r~
N
r
m
0
.O
U ~
d
U
x
d W
Y
Q~
U
m
t
N
o a
~ w
V
a
•
Y
E °
m
J
X a ~ ~ d a
C~ ~ m °N' y g~ ~ ui Y o.vo',.E` ~pp ° ~ ~ ,Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~Ci pct Do
171 ~ C a c w 3 N O G Q U O > H Y /1 COI W
'p~ ~ a E ~~ d d C n ~ C U ~L.. Dp m 0 U~~~ N ¢C
A ~ N O~ Y~'1 'D O N~ N N ~ tC0 LL• E N X R d~`$ O Q>Q W N C~ u C
m LL >. ~~ V C Q C N V d LL a U a LL W O. ~ N d N Z E~ C ~ O d
1D O N m f0 ~ .N,- M O O ~ aD fh
J~~ T// ~ N N
W d O C p C_ N C d _ O Y
C • d o N m U~ IO a y X_ • d •~ d h
N
d a ~ ~~ m y c o~ 3 ~ E m E c~ c ~ v
E N c a O ui 'v 'S m o c i d a o o d N n u Q
'v ~ • c vi _ a an d m e d 'n c a a m
V a d a N
Z N .N. O y N II ~ ~ C L > Ol E ~ 10 L., !/J • ~ C y
_ N ~ d O O ; N
N p y Q ~ 7 0 N L C d ~ QC1 .y O „ L
C ~ NIl _ - N O1 ~ N ; 'C .S g s
~, d ~3 ~° c N
~ ~ -~ L .. N d O O O~ d 'C
d
S_ d ~' • N ''p Np ~ O" L r~ p C a a H Ol C ~po d
T~ L N C O L ' Ol C V C °. O d ~ W ~ ~ H y N 10
L G O yC O .d. ~ 5 ~ ;C •_ fP 9 a a yccj d L d C NC p pp OI
} C 01 d 'O O C ,d„ $~ C O1 .d- y W O E $ m • O O. a
rs ~ o `~ X yy >, m X ~ 3$ ~~ an d ~''h d T o. L° o ;t u o c
V d ° N O G W 1p y O R~ O C °I > O w O~~ p 0~ 0 0 GS ~ C d m
o LL>. fN1°NE mo No~E1o ino ~c~ Ua~~°~ofNmo~ aw
f f0 V fD N ~' O 1p CD N N Y W ~ N
O N N d
C ~ C
J r7 ~ n a O r ~ n ~ ~ C^ •
C Lp • C
w E N N ~ V ~ a~ L d N
~ ~• $ E L m o a 1co ~ o ,~ ~ d w .4 i~
y q1 ani o m N ~ p ~ ~ >. » ,t o E .w
`m c ~ c ~~ tQQi' u v d d c E
m uE5 d `~ E ~ °~ g n~ ~ a r ~ ~ c N e
~' ,$ ~ ~' ~ E w ._cd. ~ ~ ~ E Y ~ m ~ d a
~ c h m,ri o r,a m€ a n n ~ h ~ N ~'~
0 0 ~ da v n • n ._ E o 3 $ 4 0
~, ~ ° a'g mr ~ m ma d.4 ~ ~c ~ y o et~
al 7 a C ^ N • W e d .N.. ry C O C "Q ~ a n A • OI ~ m
m
N
e
c°n
m
•
d
0
a,
Y
m
O f7 N N ~

c
N d (O
.~. L
d 'C ~
c N'
N y + ~ 1~p
N- LL !n V
i[
•
;; > v
c ~ °-
5 '~ ~ 8i ~
d ~ a m
a
~
E ~ ~

,Eg y~
~d
_~
~d

~ ~s m
a a ~ ~~ ~ ~
tel. N QC
`~
~ ~ °

m 3~
oo
r
' ~3 C

c
°
~~~ m H 3
~ S
v E Y d m
w~$,1'~t £
¢a a'"o8~n
~ $
m
~~_~
~

N~ m~ d~
C~ _
Y~ 2
~
.. O1
11
00
°
a 1 0 S G ~ SI 3
° p
0
a
> vU mU Ou
. ci
an ~ 1° m ~ ao
E
J
s~ue8 ~add~ ~ s~ueg ~anno~
~~, ~y~~~ b°111~~ci$
~ ~ N ~ tD ~
0
c
a
ro
l0

C
O 'C N O W
c
~ n
~ ~
U E °
`o m n Y
~

O
LL
~j
C
.~
Y ~ c~
U U1 ~ p
d O
.~C

d
ood
Nn Y
'O ~ -
YNRi 4%
d
can
d U
.O Y
`m t
°' .~ _
~ ~ C 3
'E

C d
~ j
N N ~
,rr',
N ~~ ~ ~
'
C 1~
.l
~a N ~ t%J~ Q~ 2~ v ~ Q G
, ~ `o
N

~
Q d g
C
~
a
C n
N W
Cp
~ N~ .Q
Ol

8
O

L
C t
C
~ ~ 7 •~ .p
~ ~ OG.
.SZ rY0
7 W
o ~ m Ua alb wo <°>°
~ m
wo;;o8
M
1D
O
V
li

C7
N

F
d
v
W

Bank Erosion. Hazard Index
Site DWR - 02,. Wheat Creek, Covil Property
Survey Crew Joel Lenk, Jon Hazinski
Date 11!21106
Category. Bank Ht
Ratio
(ft7ft) Root Depth
Ratio
(%) Root
Density
(%) Bank
Angle
(degrees) Surface
Protection
(%) Total
Index
Very Low Value 1.0 -1.1 100 - 80 100 - 80 0 - 20 100 - 90
Index l-2 1-2 1-2 1-2 1-2 <10
Low Value 1.'1- 1.2 80 - 55 80 - 55 20 - 60 90 - 50
Index 2-4 2-4 2-4 2-4 2-4 10-20
Moderate Value 1.2 - 1.5 55 - 30 55 - 30 60 - 80 50 - 30
Index '4-6. 4-6 4-6 4-6 4-6 .20-30
High Value 1.5 - 2.0 30 -15 3.0 -15 80 - 90 30 -15
index 6-8 6-8 6-8 6-8 6=8 30-40
Very Value 2.0-2.8 15-5 15-5 90-120 15-5
High Index 8-9 8-9 8-9 8-9 8-9 40-45
Extreme .Value ~ > 2.8 < 5 < 5 > 120 < 5
Index 10 10 10. 10 10 > 45.
Field Value . ~ 7.7Y ~ ~ 15 % . 40 % 70'% - 75
Measure Index g g... 5 5 3 ` 29
Total Field Index 29~
1v11mer1Ca1 A(IJllStIllentS .. + 5 (due to % sand in st~eambank soils)
Bedrock: BEHI Very Low
Boulders: BEHI Low
Cobble: Decrease by one category if graveUsand less than 50%
Gravel: Adjust Index up 5 - 10 points depending on sand %
Sand: ~ Adjust Index up 10 points
Silt/Clay: No Adjustment
Stratification: Adjust Index up 5 -10 points depending on position of unstable layers in
relation to bankfull stage
Adjusted BEHI 34

\~
\ \ 2+00 3+00 d.
~ 0+00 1+00 ~
~ ~ ~
\ \ ~. ~
\~ 0,5 ~
\ Q\ 4+00
\~
n ~ ~~ Impaired Rifle B
o ~ \o~ Cross Section 4
~ ~ \~\
~ ~ \ o\ 5+0
n ~o Q1
1
o ~-°- I I
~ ~, 6+00
I I
~o
II
~~ I
I
~ 1 ~+oo
~l
~l
l~
8+00
I~
~ ~ 9+00
Thalweg Location
Possible NC DDT 10+00
Encroachment I ~ b
Erom +10+00 to ~-
Pro~ect End ~
~- ~
o" o
~ ~
1 ~+oP
~/
/~
/~
1200 ~
~ ~ Cho ~ ~hP
S CY
~ ~ S S A~
C ~`i
Low Pasture Acce ~~ C
~ ss Bridge ~
• ~ ~ ~ STEAM LAYOUT FIGURE
NGINEERING cot H Y R GY
50 COLLEGE STREET, ASIiEVILLE, NC 28801
TEL.[phone] FAC.828.281.3351 DWR- 02 -WHEAT CREEK /
www.altamontenvironmental.com C O V I L P R O P E R T Y
DRAWN BY: PAUL DOW SCALE (FEET) POLK COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
PROJECT MANAGER: STU RYMAN
CLIENT: POLK COUNTY 30 o so so
DATE: 12-19-07 P:\POLK SWCD NRCS\POLK DWR PROJECTS 02-08\COYIL SITE-02-08\COVIL SITE-02\FIGURES\CAD\STEAM LAYOUT FOR LIII

soo 4 _ _ 4__ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ ___ _ _'1" ,
HORIZONTAL SCALE 1 INCH = 100 FEET
VERTICAL SCALE 1 INCH = 5 FEET
:N IN RIN- HY R Y
50 COLLEGE STREET, ASF~Vn.LE, NC 28801
TEL.828.28L3350 EAC828.281.3351
www.altamontenvuonmental.com
DRAWN BY: PAUL DOW
PROJECT MANAGER: STU RYMAN
CLIENT: POLK COUNTY
DATE DESCRIPTION BY CHK APV DATE: 12/19106
LGNGITUDINAL PROFILE FIGURE
COLVIL I 'J
POLK COUNTY J
NORTH CAROLINA
FILE PATH: P:IPOLK SWCD NRCS1POLtt DWR PROJECTS 02-OBICOVIL SITEIFIGURESICAD\ COLVILLDWG I

Top of Low Bank
Area at Bankfull
Top of Low Bank
500 ~ _ - _ _ __
--------------------------------- ----- ----------------------- Flood Prone Area
i .. __ ~ ,~ i _~. _Bankfull Elevation
494: _ __ ___ _ _ _ _ _
0 10 20 30
REFERENCE RIFFLE
4
493 '_ __ __ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _
0 10 20 27.37
IMPAIRED RIFFLE
4
Top of Low Bank
497 `.....___.......Area at..Bankfull.-~...__ .......... ........... _.........:
-----=------------------------ =----------------- f Flood Prone Area
~ Bankfull Elevation
488 _ _ _ __ _ __ _
0 10 20 32
IMPAIRED POOL
4
NOTES:
ELEVATIONS ARE RELATIVE IN FEET.
CROSS-SECTIONS I FIGURE
R R Y
50 COLLEGE STREET, ASHEVE,LE, NC 28801
TEL.[phone] FAC.828.281.3351
www.altamontenvironmental.com
DRAWN BY: PAUL DOW
SCALE (FEET) PROJECT MANAGER: STU RYMAN
3 0 3 6 CLIENT: POLK COUNTY
REV. DATE DESCRIPTION BY CHK APV DATE: 12-19-07
DWR-02-WHEAT CREEK/
COVIL PROPERTY
POLK COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
P:1POtN SWCD NRLS1POtrt DWR Peodecrs02-081COVi~ Site-DWR-021RCUaes1CAD1Flc.3

PHOTOGRAPHS & DESCRIPTIONS
DWR PROJECT 02-CONIC PROPERTY,
WHEAT CREEK, POCK CONTY, NC
View west from beneath Abram's Moore Bridge, upstream into a more intact riparian corridor and stream channel.
P:\Polk SWCD NRCS\Polk DWR projects 02-08\Covil Site-DWR-02\photos for Level IIl.doc

cqy°~ ~ ~ r~ _~t ~?' a r t
6 ~~y,~, ~ R ~ {; g rte.
~ .~t~i
o Z _ _ ,. °,.~ ;,, f~ r r
pg"> a
,..~ ~ ,~
y .~. .... ~ ....' !
.--.
... ,
~ ..
C.~"~ t ~r~* ,.. ,.. _ _.. ~ y~ ~ ~, ,~"~
" ~.. .-. r`-`
. ~~
View east downstream into the project reach ~~~here there are visible overstep, bare,~eroding banks, decreased to
nonexistent ream channel.
View southwest within the project reach, note livestock crossing area, enastamosed over-widened channel forcing water to
unprotected, bare, vertical to under-cut, streambanks, causing excessive sedimentation and trees fall into the channel.
Note removed tree blockage on river right.
P:\Polk SWCD NRCS\Polk DWR projects 02-08\Covil Site-DWR-02\photos for Level IlLdoc

View northwest of entrenched Wheat Creek channel, vertical, bare, eroding bank in foreground, power line running
through the project area. Wooded area on right contains tree and shrub saplings suitable for transplant.
south of Abram's Moore Road and stream bank condition in theDOT right of way.
P:\Polk SWCD NRCS\Polk DWR projects 02-08\Covil Site-DWR-02\photos for Level IILdoc

t ¢Y
~ ~ ~ ~ e
1~ 7~',' ~
~.:,,~ '~~ } _ t1 t ~.
~'
ra.
.;.-~
~~
~,
.l ~ 4 .t.,
View northeast, upstream of representative poor bank condition~and livestock crossing. Rushes and other wetland plants
at toe of bank suitable for transplant.
Photo of native herbaceous Dog Hobble form within the project reach, example of transplant opportunity.
P:\Polk SWCD NRCS\Polk DWR projects 02-08\Covil Site-DWR-02\photos for Level IILdoc