19950688 Ver 1_Complete File_20050721

y -aEco stem- a
'..°?'
PROGRAM
July 21, 2005
Mr. Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1549 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
Subject: Adjustment to NCDOT Final Debit Ledger:
?? ? ?lrt ? r ?Ch?
? sr"
B-2536, Bridge 8 over Coinjock Bay on SR 1245, Currituck County;
Pasquotank River Basin (CU 03020105)
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the Ecosystem Enhancement Program
(EEP) will adjust the transferred balance to the DOT Final Debit Ledger for the Balance Farm
Mitigation Site. The Division of Coastal Management (DCM) Coastal Area Management Act
(CAMA) permit dated August 7, 1995, required mitigation to offset the impacts associated with
the project. The construction of the project is complete and impacted 0.17 acre of coastal marsh.
The adjustment to the Balance Farm Mitigation site transferred balance is to account for
mitigation that was required by DCM and requested by you in a letter dated June 23, 2005. Based
on final debit ledger received from DOT on January 28, 2004, the Balance Farm Mitigation site
was the only asset to contain a coastal marsh component and contained 40.25 acres of coastal
marsh creation and 50 acres coastal marsh preservation. EEP will deduct 0.68 acres (0.17 acre
impact x 2:1 mitigation ratio = 0.34 credits; 0.34 credits x 2:1 credit ratio (creation) = 0.68
mitigation credit required) of coastal marsh creation from the transferred asset balance from the
Balance Farm Mitigation site resulting in a transferred balance of 39.57 acres coastal marsh
creation.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Ms. Beth
Harmon at 919-715-1929.
Sincerely,
lliam D. Gilmore, P.E.
EEP Director
cc: Mr. Bill Biddlecome, USACE-Washington
Mr. John Hennessy, Division of Water Quality, Wetlands/40.1 Unit
Ms. Cathy Brittingham
File
e f 7 7? v ?' a ? ? _ .°? ?--,?s` s J? ? s .f-- >? f n ©'??'ir
N ENR
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service (enter, Raleigh, N( 27699-1652 / 919-715-0476 / www.nceep.net
x?t t ? z
i?
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF 1PANSPORTATION
JAMEs B. HUNT JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH. N.G 2761I-5201
December 13, 1996
Mr. Michael Smith
U .S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27609
Dear Mr. Smith
GARLAN D B. GARRETT J R.
SECRETARY
SUBJECT: Currituck County, Widening of NC 168 from-US 158 at Barco to SR 1215, COE Action
ID No. 199504770, State Project Nos. 6.049005T and 6.049006T, T.I.P. Nos. R-2228A
and R-2228BA.
This project was discussed at the December 12 Interagency Permit Review Meeting to resolve several
outstanding issues pertaining to the Ballance Farm Mitigation Site. There are four issues which require
resolution in order to meet the December 31, 1996 deadline: location of ditch plugs,.tidal :swale/creek
construction, contractual agreements for reference sites, and the type of wetlands to be restored at
Ballance Farm, This letter is provided to further discuss these issues; and to request minor modifications
to the existing permit.
Ditch Plugs
In response to conversations between Mike Bell and Kelly Beissel on December 4; 1996 and December
10, 1996, we have attempted to address the request to install ditch plugs on the Ballance Farm Mitigation
Site. Attached is a figure showing where ditch plugs should be installed. We intend to plug each ditch
with clay plugs meeting standard Corps specifications. Please note that, as on the Tucker Mitigation Site,
the soils comprising the field crowns on the Ballance Farm site are of sufficiently low permeability to fill
the ditches and block water flow. The proposed ditch plugs are added assurance that the ditches will not
continue to drain portions of the site. The locations on-the attached figure are approximate and final
locations will be included in the implementation plans.
Tidal Creek/Swale Construction
Special condition (h) of the permit required that the NCDOT restore "the tidal creek which originally
existed on the site". The term creek was later verbally corrected to "swale", which better reflected
conditions on the site. The NCDOT tasked its consultant with evaluating the effects of excavating a

shallow swale through the site to provided a hydrologic connection to the existing tidal creek. It was
hoped that this activity would result in swamp forest creation/restoration credits. The consultant
performed rough calculations on December 13 to estimate the effects of this excavation.
The proposed restoration of the prior converted wetlands-at-the Ballance Farm is dependant -on restoring
the groundwater to the levels that were present prior to constructing ditches at the site. Ditches have a
direct correlation to the groundwater level at a site based-upon-the principles ofDarcy's Law. Darcy,s
Law can be used to calculate the effect of a dewatering device on an area based upon the permeability of
the soil, length from the dewatering device, and elevation-difference between the area-of interest and the
dewatering device.
The calculations assume that: (1) the shallow swale is excavated to -a level approximately two feet below
grade; (2)the hydraulic gradients of the site's soil are as utilized in the groundwater model; (3) and that
groundwater levels are elevated to within 12 inches of the surface after plugging the lateral ditches.
Using this analysis, it is estimated that the proposed swale would have the effect of lowering the
groundwater in surrounding areas by as much as 1.5 feet.
This calculation is only a rough estimate, but the NCDOT believes that the excavation of the swale could
compromise the success of wetland restoration on part-of the mitigation site. Several months would be
required to fully model the potential adverse effects of this excavation. Since the implementation of the
Ballance Farm has already been significantly delayed; the NCDOT does not wish to delay the project
further to study this scenario. Consequently, the NCDOT proposes to implement the mitigation plan
without the excavated swale. This requires a modification to permit Special Condition (h).
Reference Sites
Special condition (f) of the permit required that the NCDOT complete contractual arrangements with
land owners to begin monitoring reference areas within 5 months of June 7, 1996. NCDOT legal staff
have determined that it may take until March 31, 1997 to -complete contractual arrangements with the
owners of the reference ecosystem properties. Items that must be clarified in the agreements include: (1)
how often we will need access to the property; (2) what activities will be taking place; (3) compensation
to the owners if needed; and (4) assurance that the current owners will not alter the land or hydrologic
conditions in any way that will undermine the purpose of NCDOT activities on the properties. Since one
of the properties is owned by Union Camp, we anticipate that its legal staff will carefully review the entry
agreements. At present, we have no reason to expect any problems -with gaining access to the properties
since both owners spoke with NCDOT representatives on-site. Contractual arrangements with our
consultant to obtain the necessary comparative hydrologic data have already been completed.
Wetland Types
Another question has been raised regarding the type of mitigation-to -be provided at Ballance Farm. At
the meeting, the NCDOT was reminded that the permit modification issued August 22, 1996 required
"18.50 acres of riverine bottomland hardwood wetland restoration", and this raised questions among the
group. As currently proposed, the Ballance Farm Mitigation Plan includes no specific goals for "riveriue"
wetland restoration. After examining its files, the NCDOT is not sure how this language came to be
applied to the Ballance Farm Site. The August. 22, 1996-modification -was issued based-on the
NCDOT's July 8, 1996 letter. Although this letter offers mitigation at the Ballance site, it makes no
mention of "riverine bottomland hardwood" wetlands: Furthers the Public Notice issued for this
modification does not mention this term in referring to the proposed mitigation at Ballance Farm. ,
However, the modification itself mentions this term -in-three of -its special conditions.. Oddly, Special
Condition (b) indicates that mitigation should occur `pursuant to the plan entitled 'Mitigation Plan
Ballance Farm Site' dated April 1, 1996, and-must provide-18:50 acres of riverine bottom-land-hardwood'
wetland restoration" when this plan did not mention any riverine wetland restoration. Unfortunately this -
discrepancy was not noticed previously. .
This creates considerable confusion over the mitigation for the August 22 permit modification.
NCDOT's intent, as indicated in the July 8 letter, was to mitigate for the additional impacts at Ballance
Farm using the same ratios as were used in the existing permit for the project. The modification as issued
both requires mitigation of the impact at the site, and disallows it as -riverine credits are not available
there. The NCDOT needs to have this problem clarified, and requests that the word "riverine" be deleted
from the August 22 modification.
The NCDOT appreciates the cooperation of your staff in this matter. The NCDOT hereby requests that
the Section 404 permit be modified to reflect this additional information. If you have any questions
concerning this request, please contact Mr. Gordon Cashin at [phone] extension ?78.
SincerelQy,
I CA ("^
H. Franklin.V k? P Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
cc: Mr. Mike Bell, COE, NCDOT Coordinator
Mr. Ted Devens, P.E., Wetland Mitigation Coordinator
Ms. Kelly Beissel, Mitigation Specialist

J
1
U
d
N
I LL
o
a
w
N
m
i
N
N
O
m
N
O

Ir ??
It \ ? 1' 1
,429.7-+/- ACRES
15
r
,Ut•,
I,
v _
LEGEND
PROPERTY LINE
CENTER OF BODY OF WATER
EXISTING EDGE OF WATER
-...-.*.-EXISTING DITCH
EXISTING TREELINE
??? ?? `?•\ EXISTING TOPOGRAPHIC CONTOUR, IN FEET
COASTAL MARSH BOUNDARY CONFIRMED
?: y ???,.•--? • - ' - DELINEATED WETLAND BOUNDARY
Ilk*
t ' 11" '1
t ,

l•
e
• n w
N
1 I I, I ? 9
I 39 +/' ACRES t 9
APPROXIMATE
I
LOCATION OF i
CEMETERY
60' RIGHT-OF-WAY
FCR INGRESS/EGRESS
APPROXIMATE ACREAGES
AGRICULTURAL FIELD - +/- 296:9 AC.
FORESTED WETLANDS - +/- 50.9 AC.
Figure 3. Ballance Farm, proposed
?.` COASTAL MARSH - +/- 50,9 AC.
OTHER - +/- 31.7 AC.
(UPLANDS, ROADS, AND DITCHES) ditch plug locations.
TOTAL - +/- 429.7 AC.
•',? NOTES:
1. AERIAL TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION BY:
JAMES H. BELL JR., P.C., DECEMBER 1995.
z DASHED CONTOUR MAY NOT MEET NATIONAL
MAP ACCURACY STANDARDS.

bP,AFT-
BALLANCE FARM MITIGATION SITE
CURRITUCK COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
IZ-11-96
DATE: 9-21-96 APPROXIMATE SCALE: i'=600'
RESOURCE
S0 UTHEAST. LTD.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
4916 11ATIM =GZ DR= o == 140 • RA[IICB, NC 27606
[phone] 0 lAX [phone]

u'SU1Eo
d ?sM
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS GARLAND B. GARRETT JR.
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 SECRETARY
December 17, 1996
Memorandum to: Mr. Mike Bell, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
From: Mr. Gordon Cashin, Permit Supervisor
Subject: Ditch plugs at Ballance Farm
Attached is a drawing of the standard clay ditch plug design used by NCDOT. This design has
been approved by the COE on other mitigation sites. Please disregard the reference to standard
Corps specifications for ditch plugs in the December 13, 1996 letter. We intend to use the ditch
plug design depicted in the attached figure and place the ditch plugs in the approximate locations
on the figure faxed to you earlier. Ted Devens of our staff has confirmed that there will be
enough clay in the vicinity of the Ballance Farm site to meet our needs. Thank you.
Attachment (1)
cc: Mr. Michael Smith, P.E., U.S.A.C.O.E.
Dr. David C. Robinson, P.E., Assistant Manager of Environmental Services
Mr. Ted Devens, P.E., Wetland Mitigation Coordinator
Ms. Kelly Beissel, Mitigation Specialist
r
v
0
m
A ? B A
O
EXISTING DITCH
B
5'
EXISTING GROUND I
q-\ CLAY ?;,
EXISTING DITCH 807_OM _ _OlTft
PLUG
SECTION A-A
EXISTING DITCH
WIDTH IEXISTING GROUND
EXISTING DITCH
I, BOTTOM
SECTION B-B

DET AIL ,OF DITCI1-1 PLUG

-i
{

f- .
*` SU1Fo
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS GARLAND B. GARRETr JR.
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 SECRETARY
September 24, 1996
Mr. Michael Bell
Washington Regulatory Field Office
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
P. O. Box 1000
Washington, NC 27889-1000
Dear Mr. Bell:
Re: Ballance Farm Draft Mitigation Plan
R-2228BA and R-2228A
Action ID. 199504770
Pursuant to the site visit of August 22, 1996, we're now waiting for comments from the
Corps of Engineers and other agencies on the draft plan for Ballance Farm and the two reference
ecosystems. Until we hear from you with your comments and those of the other agencies, we will be
unable to make the necessary changes to the plan. In July of this year, we stated in a letter to you
that delays to any activity (such as finalizing the mitigation plan) on the proposed schedule could
result in a delay of one year in implementing the plan. It appears that such a delay is now inevitable,
and will result in the planting not being complete until March 1999.
We hope to hear from you soon. Copies of this letter have been forwarded to those attending
the site visit. Thank you for your help with this project.
Sincerely,

David C. Robinson, Ph.D., P.E.
Permits and Wetland Mitigation Unit Head
Planning and Environmental Branch
ccAric Galamb, DEHNR-DWQ
Dennis Hawthorn, DEHNR-DCM
David Cox, NCWRC
William Wescott, NCWRC
Kevin Moody, USFWS
Kelly Beissel
Ted Devens, P.E.
Gordon Cashin
°yy? o
cr ??
v ?2
AVW*l

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
Colonel Terry R. Youngbluth
District Engineer, Wilmington District
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
Attention: Mike Bell
Dear Colonel Youngbluth:
May 8, 1997 J
eye
RECEIVE)
A* 12 199,
ENVIRONMEIVI l !C/ENCE
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed the March 12, 1997 letter from Dr.
David C. Robinson of the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) to Mr.
Michael D. Smith of your Raleigh Regulatory Field Office. The NCDOT requests an extension
of the deadline to arrange for reference sites in conjunction with the Ballance and Tucker Farm
mitigation sites.
We recommend that no mitigation credits be issued for these sites. These mitigation sites are a
mix of restoration and creation (in that the applicant is creating wetland types that fill the in-kind
replacement requirement, and not necessarily restoring the mitigation site to it's pre-agricultural
mix of hydrology and plant community). The regulatory function of these sites is to mitigate for
multiple project wetland losses resulting from NCDOT activities in the service area. In the
absence of a baseline (reference ecosystem monitoring sites), calibration and comparison of the
restored/created mitigation sites requires far more information than we currently have available.
Reference sites are the most important monitoring tool available to us (in fact, we believe that
reference sites are fairly useless to this process unless protected in perpetuity as is the mitigation
site).
Our recommendation is consistent with recent conversations with NCDOT staff. We agreed that
administrative difficulties within the Service should be internalized and not used to justify
delaying or "penalizing" the applicant. The request for relief involves the same principle: an L
administrative delay should not adversely affect our trust fish and wildlife resources.
Specifically, we oppose debiting Company Swamp for wetland fills because we have notyet
dev to edl if nalmanagement plan for the mitigation bank; our opposition has not resulted in
delays or "penalties" to the NCDOT when they seek wet and mitigation credits from that bank
because the Service is responsible for developing that plan. Our administrative difficulties do
not delay or halt the NCDOT's road building campaign. Similarly, the environment should not
be temporally penalized because of administrative delays inside the NCDOT. The applicant
determined that wetland impacts are necessary and unavoidable, and it has taken the lead in
developing the mitigation plans, it should bear the "costs" of failure or delay.
Mitigation is an important component of the President's policy and agency guidelines for
implementing § 404 of the Clean Water Act. Ecologically, the subject mitigation represents the
replacement of wetland forms, functions, and structures that would otherwise be lost through
permitted activities.. In North Carolina, the regulatory and review agencies have been flexible
and provided mechanisms for the NCDOT to prepare multi-project mitigation sites. These
generally provide large, contiguous habitats which are valuable components of the ecological
landscape. Such sites are also relatively inexpensive to restore and monitor, and we believe they
will be relatively easy to account for in the long term.
The use of multi-project mitigation sites for NCDOT projects is partially the result of qualitative
assessments of the short and long term effectiveness of disjunct NCDOT onsite mitigation.
Smaller, site specific mitigation efforts often fail. Further, the Service is institutionally incapable
of monitoring or accounting for onsite mitigation projects given the magnitude and scale of
wetland impacts attributable to NCDOT activities.
Reference sites are critical to assessing the success of multi-project mitigation sites. Such
mitigation is generally monitored for a short number of years, and then declared a success. We
reiterate our belief that declaring success and terminating monitoring and all responsibilities for a
mitigation site is ecologically inadequate given the duration of the wetland-degrading activity
and the long-term commitment to repair and maintain the subject activities by the state of North
Carolina. Parity in commitment and responsibility to affected habitat is reasonable and prudent.
We are concerned that the NCDOT merely seeks a five year lease of the reference system )
locations. Given the state of knowledge of the science of restoration, and the history of the /
NCDOT's mitigation success rate, it is vital that reference sites remain available for long-term
studies, particularly for baseline comparisons with large multi-project restoration sites.
Reference data should be available in sufficient quantity to provide statistically valid ranges for
determining success, and for periods of time which allow reasonable time series interpretations
of mitigation practices. Even if initial monitoring ceases prematurely at five years, the reference
sites should remain available and relatively undisturbed for study by future researchers. Failure
to protect reference systems in perpetuity makes it virtually impossible to conduct follow-up
studies or to examine baseline conditions in a changing environment. The failure to ensure that
reference systems are available for long-term and periodic monitoring/comparison is
scientifically unsound.
We recommend that no additional mitigation credits be issued for the subject mitigation sites
pending full implementation of the agreed upon conditions. Further, the request has raised a
serious issue about our ability to ensure the long-term integrity of off-site mitigation. We believe
that reference ecosystems are vital and integral components of restoration sites, and that they
should be similarly protected in perpetuity.
We appreciate this opportunity to comment on this matter. Please call Kevin Moody of my staff
at [phone] extension 19 if you have any comments or questions.
Sincerely,
John M. He ter
Field Supervisor
cc: NCDOT, Raleigh, NC (David Robinson)
NCDWQ, Raleigh, NC (Cindy Bell)
NCWRC, Raleigh, NC (Frank McBride)
EPA, Wetlands Regulatory Branch, Atlanta, GA (Thomas Welborn)
FWS/R4:KMoody:KM:05/04/97:919/856-4520 ext. 19:\ballance.wpd
NCWRC,HCP,FRLLS LAKE
TEL:[phone] Rug 09'96 15:13 No.004 P.02
n North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission P. _
512 N. Salisbury Strcet, Raleigh, North Carolina 276D4-1188, 919-733.3391
Charles R. Eullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mike Bell, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Washington Field Office
FROM: David Cox, Highway Project alor ,
Habitat Conservation Progr
DATE: August 8, 1996
SUBJEC'T': Comments on the wetland mitigation plan for the Ballance Farm Site in Currituck
County, North Carolina.
Staff biologists with the N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission have reviewed the subject
mitigation plan and have the following comments. Our comments are provided in accordance
wish certain provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16
U.S.C:. 661-6674).
Our comments are as follows:
1. We feel that the site would be better suited to the restoration/creation of a tidal erco;k
rather than increasing the fringe of marsh that currently borders the property. The
concept of a tidal creek would increase habitat diversity and would also present all
opportunity to create more fringe bottomland hardwood and swwnp forest
communities.
2. We.fc el that the area of marsh creation may be subject to invasion by more aggressive
species that. exist in the surrounding marsh. Disturbed areas such as the excavations
proposed on this silo: are moat susceptible to colonization by Phragrnilee austruli,, and
Tvl)ha lalifiilia. NCDOT should include a contingency plan to deal with these
inv,isive species.
NC,WRC,HCP,FALLS LAKE TEL:[phone] Aug 09'96 15:13 No.004 P.03
Mend 2 August 8, 1996
I As noted in the 't'ucker farm mitigation plan, the designated reference ecosystem (RE)
is unacceptable. We have received information on a sccvnd proposed RE but have
not had an opportunity to visit the site. We anticipate a. site visit on August 20 or 21.
4. We feel that hydrologic success criteria should be based on the RE and not the COE
delineation definition.
5. We feel that the monituring plan should be extended to five years rather than three.
Tree seedlings have usually attained sufficient height at five years to be visible above
surrounding herbaceous vegetation. This makes asscssing overall success easier
while allowing field staff to locate areas that may be experiencing problems.
6. We recommend NCDt" T evaluate the need for additional earthen berm:; through
interior portions of the property to better distribute surface waters across the site and
to minimi7c ponding along the perimeter berms. The location of additional berms
will have to he closely coordinated with the design of the tidal creek channel.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this mitigation plan. if we can be of any
further assistance please contact me at [phone].
cc: David Robinson, Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
Eric Cialatnb, DWQ, Raleigh
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Raleigh
e` ?O
RECEIVED
.?, AUGG 87 1996
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA N" E?R aA«r.H E?VCES
DEPARTMENT OF TEA sPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS GARLAND B. GARRETT JR.
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201 SECRETARY
August 5, 1996
Mr. Michael Bell
Washington Regulatory Field Office
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
P. O. Box 1000
Washington, NC 27889-1000
Dear Mr: Bell:
Re: Ballance Farm Draft Mitigation Plan
R-2228BA and R-2228A
Action ID. 199504770
Pursuant to my letter of July 5, 1996, we're still waiting for comments from the Corps of
Engineers and other agencies on the draft plan for Ballance Farm. To repeat, until we hear from you
with the comments, we will be unable to make any necessary changes to the plan, and the mitigation
site's implementation may be delayed beyond the tentative dates we have already given you.
We hope to hear from you soon. Thank you for your help with this project.
Sincerely,
L
David C. Robinson, Ph.D., P.E.
Permits and Wetland Mitigation Unit Head
Planing and Environmental Branch
Enclosure
cc: Eric Galamb, DEHNR-DWQ
Dennis Hawthorn, DEHNR-DCM
David Cox, NCWRC
Monica Swihart, USFWS
Ted Devens, P.E.
Gordon Cashin
G)
OM WASHINGTON
JAMES B, 1AINT JK.
G( m,NoR
12.02.1996 13:04
rya STATpd
?yd Nv ?
STATE of i outi CAROLINA,
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
P.O. BOX 2$701, W.F..IGH, N.C. 27611-5201
November 25, 1996
Mr. Mike Bell, P.E.
U.S. Army Cotps of Engineers
P.Q. Boat 1000
Washi.ngion, N.C. 27889-1000
Dear Mr. Bell:
Re: Ballance Farm Mitigation Site
Response to Comments on Final Plan
yy.?? $ P ??. 0q« 2
NOV 2
RTOPIlllr010N f31?AN0,I1
GARi.AND & GARRUT JR.
SECRETARY
Attached is our response to the comments received from you on the 19allance Farm
Mitigation Plan. In it we have attempted to address the comments made by the Corps of
Engineers and the NC Division of Coastal Management as well as other resource
agencies. Although we have requested written comments from the Division of Water
Quality, none have been received. We have modified the Mitigation Plan based on the
written comments we have received and on comments In.ade in, the field by the COE,
WRC, DWQ, and USIa WS on August 22, 1996. Comments made by your office included
concerns about (1) reference ecosystems, (2) ditches, (3) tidal creek restoration, and (4)
planting and contingency playas.
We trust that these responses vAll be sufficient to allow the Ballanee :Farm mitigation site
to enter the implementation phase, thus meeting the pennit condition for the NC 168
project requiring approvtll of a final plan by Deoember. 31, 1996, It is our intent to
include you in various meetings during the design phase of the site and during the
monitoring of the reference sites. The NCDOT is committed to making the 13al lance
Farm Mitigation Site a successful and functioning mitigation, site.
Sincerely, r
David C. Robinson, Ph,D., F.G.
Permits and Wetland Mitigation Unit Head

FROM WASHINGTON
12.02.1996 13:64 P.03
NCDOT's Response to Comments on the Ballance Farm Mitigation Plan
(Action ID No.: 199,504770)
1. Forested Wetland Reference .Areas: In accordance with your recommendations and
those of the regulatory agencies, the.NCDOT has chosen, two sites to serve as reference
ecosystems (RE's) for the Tucker Farm and Rallance rarity mitigation s;tes. Tlj RE sites
are the Richard's property and the Union Camp property, both of which were met with
favorable responses on the August 22, 1996 site visit. Three monitoring wells will be
installed on each RE; the NCDOT will monitor both sites for up to five years. The data
from the monitoring wells will be used to establish a range of depths to groundwater as a
success criterion. Depth to groundwater on the two mitigation sites must fall within the
range recorded at the RE's. Each RE will have 2 or 3 sampling plots in which plant
community data will be collected. Attached is a map showing the location of both
mitigation sites and both RE's (Figure 1). NCDOT is in the process of negotiating with
landowners to secure access to the properties. We will be contacting you in the future
about our progress on these sites.
2. Ditches: NCDOT has attempted to resolve tis es concerning existing ditches on the
Ballance Farm site. In order to restore wetlalid hydrology and to restrict infiltration
losses and surface runoff of precipitatio opose to remove field crowns and use
these low permeability Roanoke soils t *W(Pes xisting ditches on-site. The soils have
field tested infiltration rates sufficientlhan 2.0 x 1 0'3 cm/sec) to effectively
block the existing ditches on-site. Based upon the results of the modeling performed to
date, blocking the ditches should cause the groundwater levels to return to the
approximate levels that existed when the site was a wetland. "T"his is similar to the
terminology used in the Tucker Mitigation Plan under the section Hydrologic
Modifications. The design and location of the ditch plugs will be included in the
implementation plan. Your will have an opportunity to review these plans prior to their
implementation.
3. Tidal Creek Restoration:
The USACOE and regulatory agencies suggested the NCDOT investigate the possibility
of constructing a hydrologic connection across the mitigation site. Refer to the attached
figures for a conceptual design of this channel. Additional study by our consultant, RSE,
has resulted in several concerns related to this channel construction. We are concerned
that the proposed modifications will, have an adverse impact to the forested wetland
restoration areas currently included in the Mitigation Plan by preventing; the restoration of
wetland hydrology to the existing Swale and introducing an outlet for surface and
groundwater at the site.
Extensive groundwater modeling was performed at the Ballaace Farm site in order to
demonstrate the proposed mitigation plan for the site will have the effect of elevating the
groundwater levels to restore wetland hydrology. The existing site conditions were
entered into the groundwater model and calibrated with the groundwater elevation data
j FROM WASHINGTON
12.02.1996 13:05 P.05
phase of the project. The reference creeks for the ehazuiel creation are Roland Croeethkeand
Tull Creek both of which are adjacent to the site. This seemed to be acceptablagencies and the COE when we last visited the site,
4. Planting Scheme: Please refer to figure 30 in the Mitigation plan for the proposed
planting scheme. This is described in the text as well for the marsh creation and forested
wetland restoration in sections 8.3.3 and 8.4.4 respectively, The plant list we have
provided is what NCDOT _mdlLplant provided those species are available. The NCDOT
Roadside .Environmental Unit has been notified of the species needed for this site. Plant
species, planting schemes, and planting schedules will bo implemented within standard
parameters and will be subject to review by the regulatory agencies and the COE during
the implementation process. This course of action has been approved by the NC Division
of Coastal Management. Our contingency plan is consistent with that described in the
Mitigation Plan. If there is a below- acceptable survival rate of planted species at any
monitoring event our recourse will be to replant the site, re-evaluate the hydrologic
conditions ofthe site, and/or perform additional grading if necessary-. Similar actions will
be taken if there are inadequate hydrological conditions in that NCDOT will perform
minor additional grading, re-evaluate the site feasibility, and/or review data collected at
the reference sites.
Our contingency plan for the potential establishment of nuisance species like Phrag mites
crurtrali is to take action during the construction of the site to prevent the establishment
of the species, This strategy has been recommended by the rIC Wildlife Resources
Commission, By delaying the surface water connection from the created man. 11 to the
existing tidal creeks until planted marsh vegetation becomes established, we will prevent
any water-bonne seed froin entering the area before planted species dominate. We also
intend to plant marsh vegetation at a density high enough to prevent Phragmites from
becoming established. If, despite our preventive measures, nuisance species become
established, we will take measures to eliminate the plants including the application of
herbicides (RODEO).
The transplanting of doctor material from adjacent areas for planting in the created marsh
area will be accomplished using approved methods as stated in the Mitigation Plan.
Damage to the donor areas will be minimized by transplanting no more than 5 to 10% of
the vegetation from a given area to the created marsh area, Donor plant materials will be
removed from the donor area in small blocks, disturbing the marsh area as little as
possible. We will, if possible, attempt to use plant material from marsh areas impacted
by the highway project.
12.02.1996 13:05 P.04
obtained from the numerous observation wells and piezoincters installed at the site. '1:-he
model indicated that the existing swa.le in, the area of the proposed coastal marsh creation
extension was acting as an outlet for groundwater and surface water on the site. This has
the effect of lowering the. groundwater levels below those necessary to support wetland
i hydrology. Refer to Figure 14 in the 13allance Farm Mitigation Plan report for further
explanation.
F
!rf
Groundwater mo"_.:ag of the post-mitigation conditions at the site indicate an increase in
groundwater elevations to the areas in the imlriediate vicinity of the existing swale and to
the areas of proposed forested wetland restoration to the north and south of the swale of
as much as 1,5 feet. Refer to figure lb in the Mitigation Plan for the projected elevation
changes. This elevation in groundwater will restore wetland hydrology to these areas. In
the mitigation plan we propose to fill the ditches that drain the swale and the channels on
the north and south property boundaries. The construction of a connective channel across
the site would not prevent the losses of surface water and groundwater as proposed in the
current plan and could have the effect of preventing the elevation of the groundwater in
the forested wetlands adjacent to the proposed channel extension.
The proposed extension of the channel would impact an area of existing forested wetland.
It could also significantly affect the tide levels in the proposed created coastal marsh.
Since the NC Division of Coastal Management (DCM) has approved the coastal marsh
creation portion of the mitigation plan as is, DCM's approval is necessary for a change of
this magnitude. This would also potentially require mitigation for any existing wetland
areas impacted by the channel further reducing; the acreage of forested wetlands that
would be available for mitigation credit.
The suggested hydrologic connection will potentially change the hydrology and flooding
regime of the adjacent property. We are concerned that the construction of the channel
across the Ballance Farm Mitigation Site could alter the on-site and off-site hydrology
enough that the project's success would be compromised. Extensive field sampling and
hydrologic modeling would be required to address the concerns as stated above.
In reference to Special Condition (g.) of the subject permit concerning restoration of the
tidal creek that originally existed on the site, RSE's field studies have shown that the
tributary to Tull Creek which enters the site to the West is subject to wind tides. You may
recall from our field visit in August that this tributary extending into the forested wetland
area still remains functional. In the plan we propose to maintain this tidal creek as well
as create additional tidal creels connections within the marsh creation area. The projected
tidal influence (wind tides) are to be determined once a tide gage is installed. This will
take place in Dcceinber or January following consultation with DCM. RSF, does not
anticipate any drainage flow into the creek from the site based on their field
investigations- Preliminary cross sections of the proposed channel design are in the
Mitigation Plan, Figure 31 and are described in the text on page 42, Following the design
phase, these channel specifications will be finalized and subject to review by the Corps
and other agencies. NCDQT cannot provide final specifications until after the design
w C? M - 'J OrYI e"
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
January 8, 1997
Lieutenant Colonel Terry R. Youngbluth
District Engineer, Wilmington District
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 24802-1890
Attention: Michael F. Bell
Dear Colonel Youngbluth:

1 191
sad
IRONtvi?t? IN^ 01EIACO
2 ?
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed the
Public Notice for a Permit Modification (Action I.D. No.199504770).
The permittee, the North Carolina Department of Transportation,
requests modifications to the mitigation requirements (the Ballance
Farm Mitigation Site) for the filling of 9.29 acres of wetlands
during widening of NC 168 in Currituck County, North Carolina (TIP
Nos. R-2228BA and R-2228A). Specifically, the permittee seeks to
delete conditions which included the restoration of a tidal creek
or bore channel and associated riverine bottomland hardwoods. The
permittee would install some drainage ditch plugs to retard
drainage from the site, and would instead manage the wetland
mitigation project to produce 10.65 acres of emergent marsh and
10.6 acres of non-riverine bottomland hardwood habitat.
Additionally, 0.88 acres of riverine bottomland hardwood habitat
would be restored at the Dismal Swamp Mitigation Site. The
rationale for the requested modification is twofold: (1) the
permittee is unsure that the Ballance Farm tidal bore channel can
be restored appropriately given the engineering resources
currently devoted to mitigation (if the tidal creek is excavated
either too deeply or widely it may affect local subsurface flow
networks and the success criteria for the marsh portion of the site
may not be met), and (2) the permittee apparently has plans to
debit the habitat acreage created/restored as mitigation for future
highway development impacts.
This is the report of the Service submitted pursuant to, and in
accordance with, provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661 et seq.) and the
Endangered Species Act of 1973 (87 Stat. 884, as amended; 16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.).
The Service recommends that the request for modification be denied.
Based on the available evidence, a tidal creek (or tidal bore
channel) and associated riverine bottomland hardwood forest were
functional ecological components of the Ballance Farm Mitigation
Site before it was graded and drained during agricultural
conversion. The permittee's request results in the permanent loss
of an important landscape feature. The proposal would displace and
replace native habitat types as mitigation for highway development
impacts. That is contrary to the intent of our mitigation
agreements in this instance.
We recommend the permittee devote the engineering resources
necessary to restore the Ballance Farm Mitigation Site to the
wetland habitat types which would occur there in the absence of
anthropogenic manipulation. Should the permittee decide that
wetland restoration is impracticable, it would be reasonable to
review the utility of the Ballance Farm Mitigation Site.
We appreciate the opportunity to review this request. If you have
any comments or questions, please call Kevin Moody of my staff at
[phone] extension 19.
Sincerely,
[/John M. fefner
Field Supervisor
CC: NCDCM, Raleigh, NC (Preston Pate)
NCWRC, Raleigh, NC (David Cox)
NCWQM, Raleigh, NC (John Dorney)
EPA, Wetlands Regulatory Program, Atlanta, GA (Thomas Welborn)
NMFS, Beaufort, NC (Larry Hardy)
FWS/R4:KMoody:KM/01/06/97:919/856-4520 ext.19:B:\KM-325
FROM WASHINGTON
v
04.01.1997 ,15:07
+.? FILE

P.02
RECEIVED
W i 910,97
STATE OF i` OKYN CAROLINA Regulatory Branch
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
jAws B. HuN-r jP.
Gov6 Nop,
DVISION OF HIGHWAYS
RCL 90X25201, RALE161-t, KC- 2761-1-5201
Mamh 11, 1997
G.41 AND B. GAT.ltE rr DL
5ic?nctr
Mr, Michael D. Smith, P.W.S. #'?3 `a -tq
Chief, North Section
Regulatory Branch
U.S. 'A,rmy Corps of Engineers
6512 Falls of the Neuse Road, suite los
Raleigh, NC 27615
Dear Mr. Smith:
Re: Ballxnuz Farm Refcrcgee Ecosystems
Action ID No. 19950477D
We have been negotiating with two property owners for the reference emsyste ns for the
Ballance and TWker Farm Mitigation Sites in Currituck County,. We have forwarded Rntry
Agreements to both parties for their review and signatures. Progress is being made on one site
owned by Union Camp. TFhe other owner is a private landowner who verbally agreed to tho
aurrangem+eat du&g a field visit, February It, 1997. Since reaoWW the agreement document, he
has mscrvations about how restricted his land use will be in tho proposed reference arcs and
wishes to eanBnc the restricted area to the actual tom x 20m study plots NCDOT will use.
While he has no immediate plans to im,paat the area he feels the agreement will biterfere with his
use of the land.
We are continuing to negotiate with this landowner, but feel we may not be able to meet
tho Tvl rch 31, 1997 deadline required by the permit fbr R-2229. Alternative sites have been
discussed with Mr. Mike bell, but invostigating a new site at this late date poses several
problems including a lack of topog Vhkk information which has already been obtained on fiat
currant sites. We would like to request 1m extension of the cteatdline to complete contractual
arrangements with landowners until May 30, 1997.
Sincerely,
DAVicf C. Robinson, Ph.D., P.E.
Assistant Manager of Environmental Sexy lees
Planning and Environmental Branch
.a
See Sheet 1-A For Index of Sheets
See Suet 1-8 For Conventiont Symbots
3
N
N
N
H
0\
qt)
\46
VIRGINIA 61
-,q- r»i ----- - - - ?? 1
tE) 1221
m
u, ,p Ip rn
m
k, 'm 6 cp
M2 12,
1\?
PROJECT 34
15B 3
VICINITY MAP SHOWING LOCATION OF
STATE PROJECT 6.049008T
Q1'4?lli 2, 41 Ift
N
C'1
0
ti
U
O
GRAPHIC SCALES
LOCATION. BALLANC.F FA APPROX ? M ELY 1.5 MILES
NORTH OF SIC 168 CtT ,C;;,! (SP 1232)
NORT11 OF, SLID
TYPE OF WORK: CL.E4I CT 6, ??tj "h11 MOWING &
DISI SIC, A N-D ZT,RCS1-(V,,' If "I
`
AG
PROJECT AREA
FORESTED WETLAND
MITIGATION = 225.45 AC. (+1--)
COASTAL MARSH
MITIGATION = 58.95 AC. (+? )
PRELIMINARY PLANS.
0o -T VM roR cvHSra,*rtwn

HYDRAULICS ENGINEER DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
P8
SroNenma:
PZ
OADWAY DESIGN STATE DESIGN ENGL%7M
R
ENGINEER DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
P5 APPROVED
S7GNATUME. D1175ION ADS1IMTSlRATOR DATE
STATE Or NORTH CARG)LINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
ALN
CUR "'ITUCK' C`'61'
Prepared In IN, Olrlce or:
r?T+ sra1?lA,:c- rr-?:c:r;c?noxs
RIGHT OF WAY DATE: FLOWEf S
_
I otccr , v, v,
LETTING DATE __ Gt E_MCCROgY
MARCH UJ200 PRe"l-c'. 'OrsiGN rvcl:EER

n
S '[' 0J.,
PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SNFET N0.
1i-222WJM Tlli-.
'AL !
S
eDw%h1'
C0NVEbN'0T1 BUILDINGS & OTHER CULTURE
ROADS & RELATED ITE MS %
N .
Buildings ---------.---------------------- -------
Edge of Pavement ._. .._
MINOR Foundations ------------------------------- ------- L t-?
Curb ---
Prop. Slope Stakes Cut ------------------------- _ Head & End Wall --------------------------- CON/ NC Hw\ Utility Power Line Connects 'to Traffic Signal Area Outline ____.._._______.________ ___-- C /
Prop. Slope Stakes Fill ---._-----.
------------- --_ r _
-- Pipe Culvert --------------------------- = = = Lines Cut Into the Pavement --- _. -TS-TS-- Gate .. _ _..---------------- ----- f
Prop.Woven Wire Fence ----------------------- e E)- Footbridge ---------------------------------------- > -------- < Water Line -------.--_---._._-__- -------------- -w-?- Gas Pump Vent orU?G Tank Cap ---.- °
Prop. Chain Link Fence 6 Drainage Boxes ................... ??cn Sanitary Sower .--Ss--Ss Church
Prop. Barbed Wire Fence ----------------------- -9 8 - Paved Ditch Gutter ----------------------- _.. Sanitary Sewer Forc. ?r?airl __ ASS-FSS- School _ . g
Prop. Wheelchair Ramp ------------------------ © Gar Line ..------ -_ ------- ---- - - -c-c- Park -
Exist.Guardrail -------------------------------. UTILITIES Storm Sewer------------------------- -------. -S-S- Cemetery -_ -- ------------------------ ------ t
il
d
G Power Line - - _..------ Dam_ _ ---------------- - -- _-
uar
ra
Prop.
---------------------------------- Exist. Pole
Equality Symbol -------------------------------- Q Exist. Power Pole --- -----------------------
14 Telephone Cable - -T-T- Sign.
Pavement Removal ._--------------------------. ® Prop. Power Pole ._ .. -------------------------- b USG Tel epnona Conduit _ __-.- -TC-TC- Well ----- .._.__ .__..

Exist. Telephone Pole ..-------.---------___---
?-
_-___.__..---------------- -
Unknown Utility uTt-4UTL-
-? Small Mine -- ---_.__________.------ --- --- x
RIGHT OF WAY Prop. Telephone Pole --------------------------- Television Cable ._ ----------------- __--------- -TV-TV- Swimming Pool
Baseline Control Point.____ _ .----- ._.-. ® Exist. Joint Use Pole Fiber Optics Coble -FU-FO.-- TOPOGRAPHY
Existing Right of Way Marker .................... Q
Prop. Joint Use Pole ------------------
.b-
Exist. Water Motor
0
Loose Surface
Exist. Right of Way Line w/Morker -.._.___...- --
..__-.. --. - -------------
Telephone Pedestal _
Drown According to ?;+Au. Rnrgrri.,
onTUa Hard Surface _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ .
Prop. Right of Way Line with Proposed
Cable N Pedestal ---------------------------
?
Abandoned According to Ll/G Records.
narua
Change in Road Surface ---------------
------- ------____--
" Marker (Iron Pin & Cap) ----------------- -Ar
Hydrant ... __. _ ---------------------
-0
End Of Information
Curb
.-
Prop. Right of Way Line with Proposed
tellite Dish
S
Right of Way Symbol
R/w
(Concrete orGranite)R(W Marker - _......._ __
a y?
------------ ? Exist. Water Valve ----------------------------- ? Guard Post -- --------------------- ------ a,,.
Exist. Control of Access Line - ,-

Sower Clean Out
T

0

Paved Walk
Prop. Control of Access Line ____ ____ ________
Power Manhole f4?FJ 1 a
7,O?tI
T,
TIES
Bridge
Exist. Easement Line
Telephone Booth _ _
m
Stafe Lino
Box Culvert or r
Tunnel

- - J
Prop. Temp. Construction Easement Line E
Water Manhole ------------------ _--
O
County Line
Ferry -.-_
--
Prop. Temp. Drainage Easement Line ---------- -TOE- _._...- -_ ______.
Light Pole a Township Line Culvert ---------------
Prop. Perm. Drainage Easement Line ... -....-- -POE- _
H-Frame Pole ------------------- . __.- -.-? City Lino Footbridge
HYDROLOGY Power Line Tower ------------------------------ Rcservation Line, Trail Footpath
Stream or Body of Water . ___..-_..__.._. Pole with Base .__-- ._ n Property Line . . __..-------- -- -- Light House
Flow Arrow -------------------------------- -- _._...? Gas Valve --------- ------------------------------ . Properly Line Symbol ... _ _....___.
VEGETATION
Disappearing Stream---------------------------- >- _ Gas Meter-.----.-------------------------------- Exist. Iron Pin -
- _ - - - - - _ ------
ER
Single Tree
{
Spring - ------------------------------ ---------- Q? •.? Telephone Manhole--------------------------- Properly Corner --------------- ------- + Single Shrub
Swamp Marsh ...-------------------- _ ---_.._ Power Transformer . -------------------------- _ (2J Property (vionurnenf Hedge ^^m?
Shoreline -------------- -------------------------- ------- Sanitary Sewer Manhole ------------------------ ;., Property Number ------------- ... ----- 123 Woods Line_

X FaIIs,Rapids _..___---------- ----______._-- --+- - Storm Sewer Manhole _..--------- - ---___ ) ParceEPlumber
0
Orchard --- -----------
-_ _. {r QQC?
Head Ditches
Tail
Lateral
Pro Oil
G
W
Fence Line
--- ----
-w-:< -;
'
V
d
r ,
,
p -------------------- _
ater,
as,
Tank; ____
---_- - - rvw P. I
ineya r
_ L
-
VMEYGP.D

UCTURES
T ? rmr
Water Tank With Les

9 - -

_ __
Existing Wetland Boundaries _

_ _WrR- _

RAILROAD -
R
S
a MAJOR Traffic Signal Junction Box ....._.__ l Coastal Marsh Boundaries __._-_-___--__ _ -CMB- _- Standard Gauge_
?m Bridge, Tunnel, or Box Culvert C NC Fiber Optic Splice Box _..____...-___. .. _ f7 Existing Endangered Anirna{ Boundcries____.. - _ eao- - RR Signal Milepost ___..__.__ o ..r?r 35
N Bridge Wing Wall, Head Wall
--------------- -----
Television or Radio Tower Existing Endangered Plant Boundaries -------- - _EPB_ _ Switch --- __.

-
a and End Wall CONC ww
=LLS
SURVEY LINE
2' 5' 5' 2'
GRADE
E.02 OINT -PROPOSED 6" ABC
NATURAL GROUND 02 NATURAL GROUND
NATURAL GROUND 1' MIN.
COMPACT FILL AS DIRECTED
BY ENGINEER
TYPICAL ROAD/BERM SECTION
USE TYPICAL ROAD/BERM SECTION ON:
-ROAD 1- STA. 19+00 TO 60+74.03
-ROAD 2•• STA. 10+00 TO 58+99.78
SURVEY LINE
10:1
NATURAL GROUND
ELEV. 2.0--Z
VAR. VAR. UP TO 160' 38' 2' 2' 38' VAR. UP TO 160' AR
(SEE X-SECTIONS) (SEE X-SECTIONS)
_ I0:1
NATURAL GROUND 100:1
? ELEV. 0.4
20 20 ELEV. 0.4 100:1 10•'1 NATURAL GROUND
- ___
_
ELEV. 2.0 ELEV. 2.0
ELEV. -1 .5
TYPICAL CHANNEL SECTION
USE TYPICAL CHANNEL SECTION ON:
-CHNL 1- STA. 10+00 TO 41+82.84
-CHNL 2- STA. 10+00 TO 22+36.90
-CHNL 3- STA. 10+00 TO 18+85,88
-CHNL 4- STA. 10+00 TO 14+49.30
-CHNL 7- STA. 10+00 TO 18+72.88
-CHNL 8- STA. 10+00 TO 15+52.66
VAR. UP TO 160'
(SEE X-SECTIONS)
ELEV. 0.4-
100:1
SURVEY LINE
.6' 1' 1 1' 7.6'
VAR. UP TO 160'
(SEE X-SECTIONS)
-ELEV. 0.4
100:1
ELEV. -1.5--' TYPICAL CHANNEL SECTION
USE TYPICAL CHANNEL SECTION ON:
-CHNL 5- STA. 10+00 TO 12+52.43
-CHNL 6- STA. 10+00 TO 13+36.69
-CHNL 9- STA. 10+00 TO 11+45.65
?VAR?
1p ,1 j-- -------
NATURAL GROUND
P
-ELEV. 2.0

LINES -L1- THRU -L19-
I
AVATE FIELD CROWN SUFFICIE
0 FILL EXISTING DITCHES (A
DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER)
IN
0
PRELIMINARY `PLANS'
tq No'f l9P POH rn.+311t1c'rroN
!I i.{
DETAIL OF DITCH PLUG
5'
i
EXISTING DITCH A
PLAN VIEW OF EXISTING
DITCH WITH DITCH PLUG
DITCH PLUG
EXISTING GROUND
--------------------
NOTE: DITCH PLUGS TO BE LOCATED AS SHOWN ON THE PLANS
& AT OTHER LOCATIONS AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
3
a
rn
m
n
0
PRELIMINARY PLANS
EXISTING GROUND-
EXISTING EXISTING DITCH BOTTOM
--------------?
-------- --------------
y 1'
SECTION A-A
DITCH PLUG J /
CLAY OR BENTONITE
MIX PLUG

DITCH PLUG y
VAR.
SECTION B-B

REVISIONS
PROJECT AEFEIENCE N0. SHEET NO.
R-2226WU 2-D
1tw SHEET NO.

OADWAY DESIGN _
HYDRAULICS
ENGINEER ENCANCER
SITE MAP WITH EXISTING CONTOURS & ELEVATIONS
? . U , all ?T f.p I2 ,.'n ` r? ldJ 4
? ,1 . f 4'4 r a? .? b ? (? » 1, .° _
32 31
,JJ IS y 4 J 1a 6.?
?. ue a .°S w1J?'"'" J3 ?,a? 7I?C 1r ( ..,A X11 fl ,n J F ,r i? "e, /J
31 RAG y,.?? Il s \/ `? "!J ? ' I ?I.S 7 , a a45 ? F^ i I ,/? ,
1 ,flJbY '? , J 111 ,1J fl , i 3 ?/?q :3 ,A, ,Z6 \ 3 i / i/ J 1,
. '?, t >. .,? f J , J .,A z 21 S rh ar? ?•1
1? ? ?
a ?^ 11
a A °°'t z ?? JI Jo >; ze u / ee n
ros w 1 ° •JZ •?
z
\ ? I'/tb?? A f1 ? Al `1 30 ? IS 'fl ll M ?1 !6 a1
, I 1 a 9
1 :1 J3
J /
,01 JA ?
t ...r..
I/ )d !6 ` 4 • g I J ? » 1 Spa ?= ,.
Y,
h? \\I Jd a1 a 1 u
]b 1 JS ?a * t.l N 3
1 1 tea' 1 C ?3 1fl ? .
3
N T„/` 1 1 ,J/ U? I
n
a
1 i .•1q ?? s f3 1 : I
,un ,rJ .v
rA
.0M IlJ I -1. I? . `1JA
r I'I?I ?'? .. I,I3
1 l5 1`1 3 ? J ,U 11
,.. 1 u 1, tEE ' 3 rJ ; 0 ,29 1 III
f
n9 •3/ 19 Jl JO 6"? N
, fa ST a
10 5.5
?'°y ) ? J tJ , 1 13 '3 I" ? III fis
OS yW f ,D \ / 2e 1 ' 1 11 15 '
Y ) a - I /fl 2?? ?
v, y ^r5 ,3.9 1 J., fi51.
1 OJ ,( it"^ ` ?1 1\./11.a •?r?? 6
;a 1!. \ •11 13• ?6 J3 1 n: ?' v
W .Y " •' 1f , ?/ JI 1 ..J.A: ??+ma^" Jo:w. z 1 :?J
``°wv ;? 1 1 S 0 1? / .,l '^ ,? ! ?/ i J "A • Ji, 2I. r 3- ---?ti` a ?SJ ?. ___-_...? ,
??V `?? ,'???'? ? v ,wr.w?,` r3
:1 :fl !0 9 P } ( 22 "Je °I .» eb ab ,.5,
ul ab IJ J/ 31 .? rt U - -
:,
.45
\V/ ? tr aJ/ J, ° ? JS
?f ?? I , ?9 u??2? a \ IJ ` Z I: k 11 :9 :3 ?J ,J :1 •/? „l.i 1 J.. IJ J9,u._H.r+; __ !_TZ1?,`,II
E CI ?
.21
t e l: •w, i I ,JCI tw r, k ?I ...v v-..,"...?` (? t1 l JS 1 ra ,ft ,Jn JJ ,?•+ r ! ?-- • A
J1 ...-..
?E ^?',"?'?\ ?? ;z ?? fd s v'. ,z3 1111 v ra, 1 Ja 1 J? y :3 >' l za f >?? .. -----------
.26
? ?t ?,,../" `•^ ?..^^"? ? , 11 •,J 0 1 J 1? i L ? L ' 6' ' t o ? u `9 ? z ? ? ?1."/? ?? ? ° , . ? ? ? 1-- ' rJ`
.f..'_-`?4 \l ar3? ,fl UA _ - Pl 9 / I '19 Ia .lA 1 ]3 ZI JI 't / '-?- IIr _ 1 Y4_
I
f+ Ir
`? _ yJ ""1 ; J ZJ
.29
y 6 , 1 ?f .? rb .22
1 1.1 ; 3 + J f 1.
1 \ L
{ N /
a3 f IF ?S a ? ? : / M?a' JD
JC ?,F ff \ l 1 ?! 2l ? I
v09 J, \ S l +r? : 1 P1 J'?F ? E \. '? I J.1 ?
Oa 11 ( f ?1 ,1 ? .?
I) a [ ? ? I,1` 11t 1 ??;1
:' ? i" ?` :J l ^ 1 ?` fir,.,,-., ? 21 •P tt U r? ? 1 ? ° ?\'y, ,? ? y » 1 \
A f
. 2-3
a9 r^ ? I ,
_?-?--- i ,y°' ti ? zJ ?? 1 z.9 •» ?`.? -? 11' ::f ? ??? ?4 ? ? r?
I {{ ??I ! 1 JAf -? y. ? 1 5 1 ? ?.r.,?nl •? 'E•??'"?\, " ? ? ?? f
fhb ?? ?/?
14
REVISIONS
SITE MAP SHOWING PROPOSED CHANNELS9
ROADS/BERMS9 AND DITCH PLUGS
1 ?f
?i 1
I? \At ,
E
°`???? •5?I ^r. ?.? a 111
1
Y.td ?MI"'rAlRq ?? ?? ? 1
? 11
nnTn?ri. l
?` ` PLP?RY ??PtA.A9Yda ?y y..w?v ... y".,"K? \ R?.PPFYSm
1 1
?arraYR, '; '?
1
? i
ti

? I
i

PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
ROADWAY DESIGN HYDRAULICS
ENGINEER ENGINEER
l II??

?I

I IN
1
t ?7

PRELIMINARY PLANS
On NoT e.e Pon roNRTnUtttav
'?s I

111' .1 IIIrI
Ir
t r
FIELD .UCb41NG & DISAING r
m PROP, DITCH PLUG
r'
?i

s
s 1 3 f
A
axp0 PO ro,12+52,43 g /
1
?y N +
0
y \ 12
0
z
POTSto.14+4930 \ I '^ Pr ¢N+4477
PTSto.13+12.74 PCSto.11+0732
PCSfo.12+ 69
w

N
°
ro
3'23'
g
rSto.l0+00 O
s f
I ? f

£
PTSto,18 367 POT o.18+85 8
POTS .10+00 -
g
o $ ?
i
/ TSto.10+1
i
fo. 15+0121
/ POTSto,
/ s
r $
PCSto.12-16557 / /px
b
PT +8927 2 /2xCb
CROSS-SECTION LAYOUT
OF CHANNELS
PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
R-2228WU 2-F
RNP SHEET NO.
?
ROADWAY DESIGN WDPAULICS
.
ENGINEER ENGINEER
POTSto_15+52,66
3 (..+00
POTSIaJ3+36,69 14 00 I 1
3S0 ? _ _.- - ro ro
3 13+001 I i PTSlo.13+39J2
1 3; \ \ POTSIa.41+8264
/ x47 / K U /310(X
PTSfo.12+18.31 `g
112+0d I \ a PTSfo, 41+ 51
/ PO Sta.11+45,65 r
12100
1 U
\ f PCSta. +57.06 3
41 ko
r d SS,q PO Sta,10+00 i PT to.30+54 b
n0J ? PRC fo, 26+ l.? U
g S PT ro,19+4438
v ? 12+ ti \
ti $
a \ ti? m
w
13+00 \? g POTSfo.IO+
m PCSr0.13+ 66 \ PCSIO-23+ .44
I4+oo \
PCSto.10+00.00 16x \
PTSto.15+34
l ti
? s9 ?+p0 1
I \ Pcsto.l 6n
I ? rv PTSto.7+5122
PCSta.18+97.09) 1
I ?9K
20+00 II??
\ 1
I ? RO
titi \
PTSta.21+0935 \
1 ?
\ \
I POTSra.22+36
i
1
1 \ I I
PRCSto.3 45.06
_CHNL I-
N 103 11.7'W a POTSto.l0+00
PCS o.35+592 PRCSf 37+3067 + g
Po StoJO+ 00 w " - -- _ ° -
a}
8 RCSto.29+0 3 g g ?/
41 12+00 S M. M
N ? iy
n
13+00
_ -CHNLl-
PI Slo 10+9494 Pt Sta 13+8964 PrSto 17+40.00 PI Sto 5+28.43 P1 Sto 27+8391
p = !f 21'21.8- (LT) p = 45' 00' 103' (RT) p = 52' 53'59.r (RT) p = 4r'39'079 (LT) p = 4T 41' 26.4' (RT)
D = 6 00' 00.0' D = 19'05'54.9' D = Ir 56' 116' D = 7' 54'17H D = 1705'55.U
14+00 L = 189.27' L = 235.63' L = 44317' L = 26065' L = 25023'
T = 949f T = 12427' T = 23860' T = 13799' T = 1329!'
I R = 95473' R = 30OD0' R = 480.00' R = 320.W R = 300.00'
15+00 P! Sto 29+7958 P( Sto 36+5436 P/ Sto 38+15.05 P1 Sto 40+41D7
p = 2716'256'(LT) p = 6127'452'(LT) p = 109'OZ 125(RT) p = 88'50'48b'(LT)
+ D = 17 05'56.r 0 = 35' 48' 355' D = 95'27 347' D = 28' 38' 524'
I L = 15327' L = 171.64' L = 114J8' L = 31013'
T = 7835' T = 9512' T = 8417' T = 196.01'
16+00 R = 29997 R = 160.00' R = 60.00' R = 20OD0'
-CHNL2- -CHNL3- -CHNL4-
7+00 P7 Sto 27+8391 PI Sto 36+5436 P1 Sto 38+15.05 P! Sto 15+9828 PI Sto 12+60.03
p = 47 47'26.4'(RT) p = 61'27'450(LT) p = 109'02'12.5-W) p = 72'00'01.7'(RT) p = /2'38'03.4'(LT)
D = 17 05'55.0- D = 35' 4635.5' D = 95' 29,34.7' D = 13' 28' 529 D = 1156' 1/6
L = 25023' L = 171,64' L = 11418' L = 534.07' L = 10564'
Ea, I T = 13291' T = 95J2' T = 84.7' T = 30878' T = 5314'
R = 300.00' R = 160.00' R = 60DW R = 425.00' R = 480.00'
o_00
? M -CHNL 5- -CHNL 6- -CHNL 7- -CHNL 8-
P1 Sto Il+2610 PI Sto 11+87.70 PI Sto 15+18.99 P! Sto 12+5058
z I p = 10' 43' 486' (RT) p = 4' 35' 372' (LT) p = 13' 7' 597' (LT) p = 6' 52' 191' (RT)
D = 28' 38' 52.4' D = 7' 30'00D D = 3' 3O' DOD' D = 5'00' OOD'
z I L = 37.46' L = 6125' L = 380.00 L = 77,44'
POTSta.18+1268 T = 18.78' T = 3064' T = 19786' T = 8890'
R = 200.00' R = 76394' R = 1437.0r R = IJ4592'
PREMMINARY PLANS
RO NM URR PWR CONRTRIMON
I
REVISIONS
Goff
ppi
0
0
0
i
c
.21
POTSta.10+00 - - - -mac
''N 3 52 05S
\ \ II` 1 o-
III ?
II 'a
DO
1 I I r?
NO' DESIGNATED WASTE AREA
-ROAD 2-
I'II
POTSto.10+00A0 -LI-
N 3'58'02.0'W
C? ( FILL EXISTING DITCHES
?'I r pin .._ _. ....._ _....._.._ _.. _ ,_.... __-_ __...._ ._.. -.-..... _.. _..
---
HATCH LINE
11. POTSto.10+00.00
?) \ N 4'OI' 249W
? I I? I7 ?
I
I I?
15
Q TSto.10+00M
POTSta.14+00DI
L`
I I ?? L r nIO [JI POTSio.10+00.00
I I I --? r'L .F nta ?
1.
r ti -: I .l' - I-I
?' 1 J I I
iJ
/,v rO6.*O5.4'W_
5
r
}
POTSto.t9+69J5
25
f XI_N(INGFIjITCI!
POTSto.19+85.98

1
cen N
I I :

C
I i?

?..?1.•?-?.,? A l A_Yl 1
IIO'
PTSto.20+3852
?0 /
PCSto.19+57.37
DO NOT FILL
EXISTING DITCH
DO NOT DISTURB
EXISTING FIELDS
PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
R-MM( 4
RM' SHEET NO. •-
ROADWAY DEAGN HYDRAULICS
ENGINEER ENGINEER
ATED WASTE AREA
w.
m PROP. DITCH PLUG
PR?LIMINA ky PLANS
ro rror aw eoA 1' VITKIP l
I ?
,
-ROAD 2-
P1 Sto 20+10.05
Z? = 9259'11.4'fLTJ
? = 81535' 29.6'
T - 52.68'
R - 5O.D7

VATCH UNE SEE SHEETS 6 AND f

SHEET 91
to E
E SE
EN
pTCH
? - DO c6T DISTURB
EXISTfNG'WETLANDS
'
6
Lo t4 16
2
PoSra. a5+46b2
PTSro.44+9350
1
"08 W
v
j I_ a POTSIo.30+73.79
PCSro, 44+58.49
'

FILL EXISTING DITCHES DO NOT DISTURB
h?
EXISTING WETLANDS
Iv e
?
POTSr
ro+00
00\
o.
.
i N /
,
DO NOT FILL
EXISTING DITCH / -LT `
57 J'W ??=mAV 4vesaw
a 1
PTSfo
41+6171
. ATSra
39+!999
PoTSto.l0+00.00 .
PoTSfa.26+1244
-ROAD I- 2y
10,
PI Sic 44+76,04 \
= ID 01' 452' (RTl \
?"
PCSta.38+0921
S = 28'38' 52.4' - Y?
= 3545
POTsto.10+00.00
,
R °200.00'
PCSro.37+3077 T, ,L6-
,
".
??
-""
N i612??W ? NOT FILL
EXISTING DITCH
?
OA
48Br DO NOT FILL
P! Sic RO
T) EXISTING O1TCH
3e490(
55
N -ROAD 2-
p
L
D = 5? Pr Sic
*
' 0 Ar Sic 38+64b9
'
'
'
a L = 43094'
f T = 218-95' POTSlo.10+0000

.. 15
6
D = 543
I17T1 D = T 56
02.3
(RT)
D 1Z 3' = 12' 566" = 709' 437
{
R = 174592 P7Sra
67 u?
34+73 i L = 287,83 .83' L L = 55.4
POTSta,22+46.63 r = !4137' r = 55.x8
'
.
. R = 450.00
R = 800.00'
-ROAD I- -L5-
'
1w ?? JS P/ Sic 48+5532
'
'
gg
Pl =102"33 750
T 29-
N 10, 26 10
D = 42
3.r (LT)
0 7*
37
/
(L
) POTSro.10+0000
? ', D = II 0700.0'
= 588B8'
- PTSIo.33+0856 L
T = 30

L = 193.6r
R = 97.94
PCSfo.32+80.06
'
O.W
=
R 80000

4'
52O 3,

r -- DO NOT FILL
/ EXISTING DITCH
POTSro.r0+00.00
_
-ROAD I_
-L4-
?fh
POTSto.20+30b3

P
! Sf 8+55,g8
P _ l 16+j 5"(LT) DO NOT FILL --

--?a, Q N 3' 46'57-3'W
llD = 29O700JI EXISTING DITCH
L = 8596'

'
PCSro.30+23.77
T = 4330

286.48'
=

0
m-- ?--
?
n

-

0
=
5E ? --- --- _------- Q
' PTSto.28+98.63 ' -FILL 1. a75TING DITCHES I I PROP. DITCH PLUG
( - -----.
' __. -L3- POTSro.19+62J5
Porsto.l0+00.00 q
N 3'52 Ol.tt'W
?
' PCSfo.28+12.67 25
`i `
J T
N
l I PRELIb1?N?A RA PLANS
m
v i oro- --
I j f}K
cn3 ?
,f - - rx. NOT FILL
EXISTING DITCH
' I
h
MATCH LINE SEE SHEET 4
nol
REVISIONS

RROIECE REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
R-222SWU 6
KW SHEET NO.
'.OADWAY DESIGN NYDRAUUCS
ENGMEM ENGMEER
m
FILL EXISTING-DITCHES
PDT If'.1o"00DO
DO N T DISTURB
.? J ^ rW EXISTING WETLANDS
I
' w,?.
J / *++ti?® N I6! 'DO -aPEXISTING WETLANDS

BATCH LINE SEE SHEET 6
0
/ ',, 16 71495
POTSIo.10+00D0 / N ,- i \9? ro za ,,. ,
r n -
DO NOT DISTURB
EXISTING WETLANDS ?r7 /

I

E`
/
V /'-CM8
/ W
/
I
T ta.60+74.03
Po S s -LI3; -'
?
13' Z05 w I N
??
rn ?
y 16
-ROAD,I- POTSta.10+0000 CL

N
N I
- i
Pi Sro 58+,X45
= 3'/9 373"(RT) ? /
Do NOT F/cc
EXISTING DITCH PTSro.59+1933 \? ,
- v
2846-5 PCSIo.58+6156 PC,
/ UY
?R = IA0000 k PTSto.57+91.46
Porsro.ro+oooo
,
'15,503,
-ROAD I- N /
E? NG DITCHES ..-
pi sto O - 6'0835635(RT) \ \ / 7? ¢?--FILL Td
>D ' t L = 321.52
2??
?6pg
R = 3,000 PC51a.54+7594
Lil-
e
?q
b
16 ft' 465'
POTSta10+00A0
? DO NOT DISTURB
Y 14:N
DO NOT FILL -Y EXISTING WETLANDS
EXISTING DITCH \\
PTSto.51+SSb4
N
w
1615'
. -
POTSto.IO+OODO ,.
-ROAD I- PCSt a.49+5875 V? 19 d(ATCH LINE SEE SHEET 5

" + =
PI Sto 50+57.20
(LTl
= f0
'O 0

??? %
- V
SNEEt 5

l 0
D
OA
69'
L
1 SEE
, I-INE
-
j 8 29-58
R = t \ ?? s""-• ' ATC
Yr
IO+CO(b ss
POTSta '
INCbrf1>LTiT$ PLANS
.
?
\ H- fH1NtlT OR POAR/x ACOlR1RI0P
PROP. DITCH PLUG
00 NOT FILL-?
CXISTING DITCH V^
?- '~4W
3u?
"oI
REVISIONS

-CHNLl-
PlBlom2B(LTl
8= 189000
= 949
R = 954 ' pP/Sfo45+pp8pp9?? '(RT)
S? 2j0?53549
TTT = r24427'
R = 300DO' P!!t 5Z565? 1(
?? 44JA116
TTT = 238.80'
R = 480.00'
P/ S = fk1+54 ?
4 (LT)
26055
T = 13799
R = 320.W nr pro 74+8391
4? gJ' 26,4 (RT)
LL = 25023550
T = 329r
R = 3MW P! Sto 29+79
p = ?29'16'25B
g
LD (532P 56t
] = 7835'
R = 29999'
-CHNL2-
P1 Sto 7 8326 4 (RT!
cSc ?95p0473'?50
T=1321'
R = 300A0' pP! St 66r 27'45 36 QT!
0 c 111,ae 352'5'
T 952
R = 160.00' pPf Sto 380 A55. (
D - 11405 3247
=8417
R = 60A'

P7SIG. 2.1+09 5
-?
490 \
tq
DO NOT DISTURB
EXISTING WETLANDS ?? i F
r W4fl
POI Sto.22+36.90 ;
\ ?" ' DO NOT DISTURB
EXISTING WETLANDS

e INCOMPLETE' PLANS
1K. VIn (IMF, MR OW A(III)WITIom
SEE SHEET 6

11P
ti
i
W
-' VI
W
n ?
2 N
? N J
Tsra:ntpg 4
? w
iN!6'S06 W11
(IArcH ukE SEE SHEET 10
-CHNL3- ?
® CLEARING & P( Sto P+9828
GRUBBING AREA a-iEX NOT DWT x a
D c 13' 8 5 RTJ EXISTING wETLA NDS
=53407' 1vEA( d
POTS 1./0+?
R
425
y1.
PCao.12+8450
b
I / POT Sta, IO+C0.00
J ? DO NOT DI RB
EXISTING WE LANDS I
w1.9?`?%
PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
R-2228WU 8
kw SHEET NO.
'.OAOWAY DFSICN
ENGINEER HYDRA 1"C3
ENGM 11
/1 JUN' AN N J J'04e-e J1.1 .JI :r
z 1 ?---3 'iVY/YAA!! /J Ij 1
W 11w
e 1 ,18+2357 M POTSlo.I8+85'r r
N
EXISTING WEl LANDS
CRI6? /
/ \ ( f ? B _ P01'
I Sto.13+36X,9
r Ppp N0IT DISTURB
l I ExlSr1NG WETLANDS 1
n
m > PCSto.11+57,06
ti e PCCSfa.15+0121 1 % t 4' 11> 3j CirN( ?
Sfn.lOIOOIXI? y SS,q F N POTSto.10+00,00
P7_toJ9+4438--' PRCSfo.26+51U0
1 I?PCSto.12+65

0
?' s v; I 56 Ft?
PT oJI+8927 PCSto.13+
U IB ?g 16D ' -
DO NOT DISTURB
EXISTING WETL;qS 15?"
11-?, POTSfo.0+4129
r' POTS1o.f0+00A0
r PCS1o./0 00.00 ?- , PTSro_15+34 ,08'
/ / /lam .. I I ' \ 16 405 W \ DO
POTSto, IO+OO.OO I -f `s
?<<, •"" ?? PCSfo.16+76J
BOTSf.I6:?OC
PCSto.23+90.44
1'\ POTSto.22+0930
1 PCSfo.l,
,`y
I l1 R'
TSto.17+51221 LJ7- W
rLL EXISTING DIrC E \\
r
?-?cua POTSlo,10+?.fX1 ?
cMa DO NO1' DISTURB
fi / o EXIST ING WETLANDS .1111 --20? \ ?'
KEYISIONS I MATCH uAE SEE SHEET
m
W
h
J
U
3
i
?i.
t1 ?I ?
/ ?EEe
POTSto.15+52.66

l? \ Ill
MATCH UA£ SEE SHEET to f
o'?e
`CUe_
I {
e?
/ DO ,PT DISTURB
EXISTING WETLANDS
I?( y..MCB, ??.T
3
6
U
I
I
PTSta,30+54 3
./
r5
1
JP NOT DISTURB /cMB? \
15 EXISTN?O.}9ETLANDS
as[? Nor DlS`7 URB
1 EXlSY WETLANDS
PTSta.13+39J2 e
POTSfo.41+82.8
y? POTSto.11*45b5
1111+61b8
-CHNL h /
N 10' 30'117* W _---? 1
-?
PCSta.35+5924 PRCS1o.37+30,87
POTSlo.10+07,00
40 -
PTSto.41+5 J9
N ?
PRCSta.38+45.06
PnTSta 10+00.00
I 'I
-CM6-1 '.
?
I
l ? T?J l
\ DO NOT Dl Ur O?
EXISTING
TL DS
cy
-
m

4 ll r\r

9+0123 0 j
-- r
W
Nom/ '?" !r

N 161a ? ,,...., ?\
FILL EXISTING DITCHES` --
-016'
N 16 fl' 49b W - i
N 1615,06 5 w

v
PROJECT MERENCE N0. SHEET NO.
it
-CHNL1-
W SHEET NO.
ROADWAY OESIGH KeDRAUNCS
ENGINEER ENGINEER

?i

1 ? \

1
\ l\
?
\
Vt.,.?

1,? \
lLlr11„i i
(?
\
t.

I(
?i ll
PI Sto 29+7958 P1 Sfo 36{54.36 PI Sto 36+15D5 PI Sto 40,,41.07
= 2516'7_
5,8'(LT) 1S = 6T27'452"(LT) L = 109'02'125'(RT) Z? - 88'50'4&6 (LT)
.
D = 19' 05' 561' D = 35' 48 355' D = 95'2934.7' D = 28' 38 52.4°
L = 15327' t = f7l.64' L = 11418' L = 310J3'
T = 78.35' I = 95./2 T = 84J7' T = 196.Or
R = 29959' R 160,00' R = 60.00' R = 200.00'
-CHNL 6-- -CHNL 7- -CHNL 8-
P1 Sto I1,87.70 PI Slo f5+1899 P1 Sto 12+5058
p = f,35'372(LT) 4 - 13' n' 59.7' (LT) 6 - 8 52 191' (RT)
D = 7'.3(Y COD' D - 3' 30'00.9 D = 5'00' 00.0'
L - 61.25' L = 380.9' L = 177.44'
jt T-30..64' T-190.86' T=88.90'
R -- 761-9+' R - IbN.Oe R - IJ459Z
P07 Sta. 35'+0393 0o PROP. DITCH PLUG
?Uxa
-7tANDS
POTSto, 50+19.68
a?
'r
POTSto.56+32.09
`c
INCOMPLITfs 4'LANS
ain Aroi7sinni
,I ao .-oT ina MR
NO, DISTURB
(?fS71NG WETLANDS
.A
Y
MATCH LINE SEE SHEET 7
REVISIONS

I'

11-

??-' ? -CHNL4-
r
\.. PI Sto I +60A3
*
-j Z?
03.4
(LT)
1x
3
5
6'
D
L = 105.84'
T
'
= 53J4
•
R = 480.00

ti -
rrr \e

I,
I%
r!
-CHNL 5-
P1 Sto I1+26J0
D = 28'38'52.4*
34L = 37.46'
T = 18.78'
R = 200.00'
N.
1lli
tt.
.i 1
i
I?
?? \fr
?
i
:
IKI NOT DISTURB
I LISTING WETLANDS
--CUB ?-
A
l
I
POTSto.14+49 0
Mo.13+1274
- DO NOT DISTURB m pCS
n ` EXISjING WETLANDS A -
?o
f i I '!
3
3
DO NOT DISTURB-
EXISTING WE7LAh;))?
PT I+ till-?
I PCSla.ll+0132.
c
-, u
. ?W1A
PATCH UNE SEE SHEET 6
n
P
O
Ei
0. HO.
rRaR2228W M
?EJI
owww DESIGN NYOAAlRIC3
i t .., .. :. ..,... .:. I _.. ._ ..... .. ... R ENGINEER N
ENGINE
m
m
.. } .. PROJECT REFERENCE N SHEET NO.
.
E R 2228w 2
. ...
. "' . _: . ,.._
. ' i ..
...
.... ROADWAY DESIGN HYDRAWCS
ENGINEER ENGINEER

;
{. ! ;.
.,.. .;.:. ,. _
. ,. . >... :. .. 1.
III
.. ., .. i ..

I ..
I ?..;

c
..
{
.... b:..:.:. ...... :, _ _ , .. ._ .. .... .. .. .. ... .. ._..__.,...,
e
I
-vc a? I l I ,.
...................... ..:.:. ,..... ... __ ..
_:W._..
:_
..
....:..
E
1

J

1
!
111
V V
U V
V
V-

? ,t I

0

.... I)IJ156/
1
{
* p2OO87
_

_
-X O3rB?
_

034%'

f

XJ
.
{{
-10
2765/
.......
(+Aj
.O
AS
4- -.`
I
t { _

elm.

11
N d U... _

..
!
_ ?._
..
i

f
_ ....
.: ;

AD

f

j
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38
e
0
e
S
February 19, 1998
Summary of Proposed changes to the Ballance Farm Mitigation Site Plan Sheets
The implementation plan sheets distributed on January 9, 1998 for the field inspection
meeting held on February 12, 1998 have been modified. These modifications are
proposed based on discussions among those who attended the field inspection meeting.
The Department has been collecting wind tide data at the site for over a year and has
determined that the elevations proposed in the plan sheets for the coastal marsh creation
area will not maximize the planting area to the extent desired. Therefore, we have revised
the cross sections shown on Plan Sheet Number 2. We have decreased the channel width
from 80 feet to approximately 20 feet. The planting zones as described in the Mitigation
Plan (figure 30) will be similar, with zone 2 encompassing the largest area. These areas
will be planted as stated in the mitigation plan depending on sepcies availability.
N
O
(D
n
2
C
c
i
C

0
3
fII
Z
0
O
U)
v
(D
N
O
CD
C)
N
N
n
w
(D
?C
iU
(D
N
W
N
0
CD
N
N
0
CD
n
m
r -
m
is
m
r -
m
0
bo
Z
c
I ?
0
cn
( VIO
m
r 1l
m
0
r -
m
0
m
r -
m
0
G) z
D
D
c
co
C D
O r
o ?
? Z
D
r
0
rn
? 2
Z
Z
m D
r
m

N
N
Z
o
A
D
D
Z
Z

O

r
m z
<
D Cn
r /1
C
?
0 -
y

0 rn
rn
0
D
0 c
0 ?
a
.r-
CL

00:6L 86/9/L
00:6L L6/6Z/ZL
00:6L L64Z/ZL
00:6L L61£WZL
00:6L L6191Z L
-? 00:6L L61LZ/lL
:
00
6 L L6/6 L/ L L
0061 L61 L M L
00:6L L6/£/ LL
00:6L L6/9Z/OL
00:6L L6/Bl/Ol
00:6L L6/OL/Ol
-- 00:61 MOM
0061 L6/4Z/6
00:6L L6/9l/6
00:6L L6/8/6
00:6L L61 W/O
00:6L L61SZ/B
00:6L L619L/8

OO:6L L61L18
00:6L L610£IL
00:6L L61ZZIL E
0061 L614UL
m
00:6L L6/91L
00:6L L6/8Z/9
00:6L L6/OZ/9
00:6L L6/ZL19
00:6L L61419
00:6L L61LZ19
?- 0061 L616L/9
- 00:6L L61LL/9
00:6L L6/£/9

00:6? MGM,
- 006L L61LL/4
00:6L L6/6/4
00:6L L6/L/4

- 00:6L L6/4Z/£
.?-
00:61 L619l/£
00:6L L6181£
0061 L6/8Z/Z
?- 00:61 L6/OZ/Z
N
A -? 00:£t L6/£UL
(1) 00:U L619M
m
`.L
--? 00:£L L61LIL
00
Q
00:U L 96/0£/Z L
00
N 00:£L 961ZZ/ZL
0
- 0
o 0 0 0
w o o n o
p
T N N r r O O
m
.o
laej Ul 44618H
CL

N
rn
IO
a
NCDOT/P&E BRANCH Fax:[phone] Feb 16 '98 9:42 P.02
• .,a 9AT?v,
. ?9wr?t
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT
JAMES B. HUNT )R !'O. BoX2.5201. RALEIQH,1*T.C 27611-5201 E. NoRus TozsoN
COVER NOR SECRETARY
Februar?. 16:1998
111'r. Mi'c3iae'1,B'ell • ? ,
U.S. Army Corps Qf Engineers
P.O. Box 1000
Washington, IBC 279-89=1000
Dear Mi. Bell; :. ,
Re: Ballwice Farm Fae Inoection Meeting
This letter is to summarizo• the discussions that-took place at•the:Ballance Farm Field
Inspection Meeting on -Pebrbary.12;1098:..1?e s.H$wtkhorae (1'?TCDC and William Wescott
(NCWIZC) attended the.meting•axid.participated.in-the discussion.
We are proposing to, itlter'thc cross, sections 'of the channels in the coastal marsah'creation
areea, These changes are proposed bas.ed• on hew: ti&.i garage information we have gathered over
the past year as.v ieil as the desire•to plant a Parger.area than the channels proposed in the:
mitigation plan will allow. Thexlh iinpl widths 'ui themitigation plan are 80 feet wide (open
water) while our cutrent.proposal- Ine'ludes a channel:,ivi:dtlr of approximately 20 feet. Th?
purpose of the channel is to:provide hydrologic connectivity between the created marsh and the
natural marsh on the site,
Both Dennis I4awthorne and William Wescott supported this proposal since. it would
increase the plIpted;arek in the created coastal:lna'i lb and decivase the open water area, This
allows us• to rely less Oa .nittii'al revegetatiop of dir.created in trsh. These changes will not alter
the coastal marsh creation credits iri'the approved:Mitigation plan, therefore, we are requesting
your support of these 'changes.
Please,note that• ile implementation sohe4pleyon this project is extremely: tight. We are
reyuestirig a restxause in-.. itieigtuo.later thaii-iFebxuaFv 25 1999.4c) that we can begin advertising
tlae' contr$et in iVla'rch1995. Airy deM!ys' yr contrai t ntlvertisement will cause the construction to
occur during unfavoiable' Hydrologic conditions.
Sincerely
Vii' `??s'"?..r?'
David C..Kobson Ph.D., P.E.
Assistant:•Manager,Environmental Services
Plaanin& qnd:Environmental Branoh
cc: T. Devens, PX,
G. Cashin
r•
.w