20200035 Ver 1_IRT Meeting Summary_20200219

Strickland, Bev
From: Greg Turner <[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2020 5:29 PM
To: Todd Tugwell; Kim Browning; Haupt, Mac; Davis, Erin B; Dow, Jeremiah J; Crocker,
Lindsay; Munzer, Olivia
Cc: Shawn Wilkerson; John Hutton; Jeff Keaton; Jason Lorch; Tasha King
Subject: [External] Liberty Rock IRT Meeting Summary
Attachments: Liberty Rock IRT Site Walk Summary 2020-02-18.pdf, Liberty Rock Technical Proposal
- Concept Map.pdf
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to
[e-mail]
Todd, Kim, Mac, Erin, Jeremiah, Lindsay, and Olivia,
Thank you for coming out to the Liberty Rock site yesterday morning. Please find attached a summary of the meeting
and, for reference, a copy of the concept map from the technical proposal.
If you should have any questions, additions, or corrections, please let us know. As a reminder, Jeff Keaton (CCed) is the
Wildlands project manager for this site.
Thanks again,
Greg Turner, PE I Water Resources Engineer
0:919.851.9986 x109 M: 910.471.7327
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
312 West Millbrook Road, Suite 225
Raleigh, NC 27609
1

kt�
WILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
MEETING SUMMARY
MEETING: IRT Site Walk
Liberty Rock Mitigation Site — Option 3
Cape Fear 03030003; Randolph County, NC
DEQ Contract No. 7877-01
DMS Project No. 100135
Wildlands Project No. 005-02185
DATE: Tuesday, February 18, 2020
LOCATION: Liberty Park Avenue
Liberty, NC
Attendees
Todd Tugwell, USACE
Kim Browning, USACE
Mac Haupt, DWR
Materials
Erin Davis, DWR
Jeremiah Dow, DMS
Lindsay Crocker, DMS
Olivia Munzer, WRC
Shawn Wilkerson, Wildlands
Greg Turner, Wildlands
• Wildlands Engineering Liberty Rock Mitigation Site Technical Proposal dated August 13, 2019 (in
response to RFP #16-007877)
Meeting Notes
Shawn Wilkerson of Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands) led the group on a tour of the proposed mitigation
site on February 18, 2020. The purpose of the tour was to present the site to the group of IRT members and to
get their input into the management/mitigation options proposed for the site. During the tour, the group
discussed the stream and wetland approaches proposed by Wildlands and the manner which they felt would be
most appropriate to preserve, enhance, and restore the onsite streams and to rehabilitate and re-establish
onsite wetlands.
1. Mica Creek
The tour began at the upstream project extent of Mica Creek, a tributary to the Rocky River that
is proposed as a restoration reach. The group discussed a short length of proposed channel work
that will tie into a Norfolk Southern Railway culvert, which is currently perched by
approximately 2 feet. Shawn Wilkerson stated that Wildlands would fill and stabilize the
severely eroded and incised section of channel at the outfall of the existing culvert. Some of this
work may occur within the railroad right-of-way. Approximately 25% of the way downstream,
along the right streambank, a small wetland area was seen by the group. Shawn noted that a
Jurisdictional Determination is planned for the entire project area but that no credit was being
sought at this wetland. The group agreed that Mica Creek's condition warranted restoration and
that the 1:1 credit being proposed was appropriate.

2. Wetland Re-establishment and Rehabilitation Areas
The group continued into the wetland re-establishment and rehabilitation areas in the
floodplain of the Rocky River. The group looked at soils in several locations and agreed that
hydric soils were extremely prevalent. Kim Browning pointed out an area of potentially
jurisdictional wetlands in the woods along the left edge of the Rocky River floodplain,
approximately 40% of the way downstream. Wildlands agreed that this area would be
encompassed in the easement and that it would be evaluated for preservation credit or low-
level enhancement. Todd Tugwell asked about Wildlands' plans for plugging existing swales that
currently act as wetland drains. Wildlands and Todd agreed that partially filling deeper sections
of the swales to prevent significant ponding within the proposed wetland areas, while also
eliminating the drainage effect, would be appropriate. Overall, the group agreed that the
wetland approaches on the site were warranted. Todd did mention that he thought there were
likely more jurisdictional wetlands on the site and, therefore, more rehabilitation. However,
Todd also mentioned that there was likely more overall onsite wetland potential, so credit totals
should not be in jeopardy.
3. Rocky River
The group next looked at the Rocky River, which is the main project stream. This stream consists
of five project reaches, all of which are proposed as Priority 1 restoration. Significant deposits of
sand were seen throughout the floodplain and along the length of the channel. Wildlands
pointed out that, while not overly incised, the channel was actively eroding and restoring the
channel will improve pool habitat, bank stability, wetland hydrology, and buffer condition.
Multiple group members pointed out the invasive aquatic plant, Parrot -feather (Myriophyllum
aquaticum), that was present throughout the project length of the Rocky River. This invasive
plant, among others, was noted in the technical proposal and will be treated by Wildlands. Oliva
Munzer noticed several mussel shells along the Rocky River. She advised that the project length
of Rocky River may be home to one or more rare mussel species and/or the Greensboro
Burrowing Crayfish, a species listed as Special Concern in North Carolina. Shawn said the Rocky
River is proposed to be rebuilt largely offline and substrate from the existing channel will be
reused in the proposed channel. The IRT supported restoration of the Rocky River but Olivia
Munzer had some reservations due to the bedform habitat. She will get back to Wildlands about
how best to support mussel habitat during restoration activities.
4. Schist Creek
• Next, Shawn showed the group Schist Creek. This is the largest tributary to the Rocky River
within the project area, beginning just downstream of an existing culvert that flows underneath
US 421. Schist Creek is proposed for restoration along its entire length, which the IRT supported.
Todd mentioned that if the restoration is reasonably extended to a new location of the Rocky
River then that length may be included in the restoration credit.
5. Gypsum Creek
• The group moved downstream along the right floodplain of the Rocky River to look at another of
its tributaries, Gypsum Creek. This stream begins at a spring head within the project area and is
proposed for preservation but will be restored as it ties into the Rocky River. The IRT warned
that a defined channel must be maintained all the way through the riparian wetlands at the end
of the reach until the confluence with the Rocky River.
W Wildlands Engineering, Inc. page 2
LIBERTY ROCK Mitigation Site —Option 3
February 18, 2020 IRT Site Walk Meeting Summary

6. Dolomite Creek
The final stream Shawn showed the group was a small tributary to the Rocky River called
Dolomite Creek that is proposed for preservation from its origin until it reaches the floodplain of
the Rocky River. Enhancement II credit is proposed for the remaining length, which will be
improved in its connection to the Rocky River post -realignment. Shawn mentioned the existing
culvert crossing immediately upstream of ephemeral -intermittent transition will be removed. As
with Gypsum Creek, the group agreed that a defined channel must be maintained through the
wetlands at the end of the reach.
Summary and Conclusion
• The IRT agreed with the approaches proposed by Wildlands for the project streams and wetlands.
• Todd and Mac iterated that an official Jurisdictional Determination will be extremely important for the
wetland component of the project. They mentioned there may be more existing wetlands within the
project area than Wildlands' estimate from the technical proposal.
• Olivia mentioned she wrote an environmental review of the project site for species of special concern
in North Carolina and will get back to Wildlands with recommendations regarding mussel habitat.
These meeting notes were prepared by Greg Turner on February 19, 2020 and reviewed by Shawn Wilkerson on February 19,
2020 and represent the authors' interpretation of events.
W Wildlands Engineering, Inc. page 3
LIBERTY ROCK Mitigation Site —Option 3
February 18, 2020 IRT Site Walk Meeting Summary

Figure 6c. Concept Map (Option 3)
%kW I L D L A N D S 0 250 500 Feet Liberty Rock Mitigation Site
w E N G I N E E R I N G I i i i I t Cape Fear River Basin (03030003)
Randolph County, NC