19970616 Ver 1_Mitigation Plan Review_20010629

,

~ o~.-yjf:l~1i'
-s:. /,.. '"'" 0
~l[){JJ3"."\~
>i . '-
_ l. . .' ... -i
() 't:.;~.;.':~'~;;~;~;:;c,: ""(
,.....n.__ ._ .........
",-."' ....
-~~~.:->_...,..,.../-:-:.:....-.
......"........:......

!-I'7
. 1,-

Michael F. Easley
Governor

William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources

Kerr T. Stevens
Division of Water Quality

6 . i'"

June 29,2001

From:

Cynthia F. Van Der Wiele, NCDOT Coordinator
Jennifer Frye
Dave Penrose
Todd St. John

tQ)~lf

Re.c. /r~6/~V

t.ye~{ ~
1,4 It...J Q _ AJD 1- S U"-e
w '7 4 ~6-k e6-.eJ ~ .

MEMORANDUM

To:

Mr. Joe Mickey, Jr., NCWRC Stream Mitigation Coordinator

Through:

John Dorney, NC Division of Water Quality

Subject:

Comments on Stream Restoration Plan for Moretz Site, South Fork New River, Watauga County,
in association with the US 421 NCDOT ProjectR-529, Watauga County. DWQ No. 97-0616.

The above referenced project plans were reviewed by NCDWQ personnel. The Moretz Site appears to be a very
good stream enhancement proposal. The approach seems to be valid for an enhancement project. The proposal
noted that stream pattern will not be changed, but that a floodplain bench would be constructed to allow the
stream to access a floodplain. Also, in-stream structures are proposed. Such structures should be placed to aid in
re-establishing a proper profile. Thus, the dimension and profile should be adjusted. NCDWQ anticipates
proceeding with the Water Quality Certification. The following comments are offered:

. The width and location of the conservation easements should be shown on the site plan. DWQ requests a
copy or draft copy for our files.
. The typical diagrams are not specific to the size of the rock to be used in the structures. Rock sizes and footer
depths should be appropriate for the amount of scour predicted to occur behind the structures. DWQ
recommends that the rock sizes be indicated.
. The site plan indicates the potential use ofrootwads, rock vanes, rock weirs and step pools. However, no
mention is made of which structures are to be used at which location and why. DWQ would like to see more
detail and description of what structures are anticipated and why. Additionally, a typical drawing was not
provided for the step pool.
. Biological Monitoring: Since this is not a Priority I restoration project, biological monitoring will not be
required. However, Dave Penrose would like to collect samples for his own research and use the data to
compare to Level I restoration projects.
. Mitigation Ratios: The riparian area and streams are proposed to be preserved with a conservation easement.
As such, the project should qualify to obtain 3:1 credit.

North Carolina Division of Water Quality, 401 Wetlands Certification Unit,
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 (Mailing Address)
~....... "'__1-&-__ n'~.'" r""I_'_=_L.. ...,.. ....."7~. "'~ " -_-.&.:__'\

"

2

,

A Conservation Easement must be signed prior to issuance of the ~401 Water Quality Certification. You are
reminded that seven (7) copies ofa complete Pre-construction Notification Application and a fee of $475 made
payable to NC Division of Water Quality wjll be required. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on your
project.

Sincerely,

John R. Dorney

Pc: Jennifer Frye
Dave Penrose
Todd St. John
Cynthia Van Der Wiele
File Copy