20070168 Ver 2_More Info Letter_20100215

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins Dee Freeman
Governor Director
Secretary
February 15, 2010
DWQ Project # 07-0168, Ver. 2
McDowell County:
CERTIFIED MAIL: RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Todd Black
Fall Creek Land Company
P.O. Box 638
Hickory, NC 28603
Subject Property: Grandview Peaks Recreational Lakes
Shoal Creek [030802, 9-41-12-1, WSV]
Kelly Branch [030802, 9-41-12-2, WSV]
Weaver Branch [030802, 9-41-12-1-1, WSV]
REQUEST FOR MORE INFORMATION
Dear Mr. Black:
On December 17, 2009, the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) received your application dated December'
10, 2009, with Public Notice issued by the USACE on January 12, 2010, and received by the DWQ
January 12, 2010, to fill or otherwise impact 0.73 acres of 404/wetland (0.04 acres dam fill, and 0.69
acres flooding), and 695 linear feet of stream (dam fill), and flood 5,970 linear feet of stream, to construct
two aesthetic lakes within the Grandview Lakes residential development. The DWQ has determined that
your application was incomplete and/or provided inaccurate information as discussed below. The DWQ
will require additional information in order to process your application to impact protected wetlands
and/or streams on the subject property. Therefore, unless we receive three copies of the additional
information requested below, we will place this project on hold as incomplete until we receive this
additional information. If we do not receive the requested information, your project will be formally
returned as incomplete. Please provide the following information so that we may continue to review your
project.
Additional Information Requested:
1. On page 17, the applicant states, "The proposed lakes will not be located in streams that contain
migrating or spawning fish." Please provide documentation of any studies or data collected that
indicate that no fish species spawn in the stream segments proposed for impact.
2. Also on page 17, the applicant states that if at some point during their proposed 5-year. monitoring.
program that if water quality parameters measurements are found to be unsatisfactory by the
DWQ„ the applicant will submit a contingency plan to return water quality parameters to
satisfactory levels." How do you propose to do this and what will this contingency plan consist
or
3. The applicant proposes to do a combination of on-site preservation and paying into EEP.
401 Oversight/Express Review Permitting Unit
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
Location: 2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone]
Internet: http:l/h2o.enr.state,nc.us/ncwetlands/
NonrthCarolina
Naturall?
An Equal Opportunity \ Affirmative Action Employer
Mr. Todd Black and Fall Creek Land Company
Page 2 of 2
February 15, 2010
The total mitigation need is 7,580 stream credits. They are proposing preservation of 62,000 LF
of stream at 9:1 to provide 6,885 stream credits, and paying the balance to EEP for 695 feet. The
2003 Interagency Stream Mitigation Guidelines indicate the ratio for preservation is 10:1. At
10:1, preservation would yield 6,200 stream credits. Combined with the proposed purchase of
695 credits, they still have a deficit of 685 credits. The total credits obtained from EEP should be
1,380 credits.
4. During the pre-application meeting held at the DWQ-Asheville Regional Office on November 30,
2009, the applicant stated that post construction maintenance of the proposed dams and
impoundments will be the responsibility of the Grandview Peaks Homeowners Association.
Since the applicant has acknowledged that the proposed dams will be considered "High Hazard"
dams by the Division of Land Resources - Dam Safety Unit, this office will need to review very
specific details of this arrangement, especially in light of the dam failure at Balsam Mountain.
5. For the record, it should be noted that DWQ returned the previous application because the
applicant's agent did not submit the information DWQ had requested by the extended date the
agent had requested. Additionally, it is the understanding of this Office that the applicant chose
to withdraw his previous permit application because if he had not, the USACE was moving
towards denial of the permit request. Faced with these facts, it is unclear how the applicant
believes this virtually identical permit request will be approved. Please explain how this permit
request is significantly different from the previous one.
6. Please submit a specific minimum water release plan for the proposed dam. The plan must
include a written explanation of the specific discharge rate and mechanism to provide for each
required release. The plan must also include any design specifications, details and calculations to
show that the release shall be achieved in the given conditions. Specifically, this Office would
like the applicant to propose minimum water release for this project, other that minimum 7Q10
which may not be sufficient to protect downstream water quality. The plan shall also include
monitoring that ensures compliance. The plan and any associated facilities, once approved, must
be in place and implemented upon the completion of the dam.
7. Please provide plans at a 1'=100' scale clearly showing which lots are sold and please place
building envelopes on all lots that contain wetlands or streams.
8. As noted by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service in the previous permit application, the Grandview Peaks
website does not mention any onsite amenity ponds and the only reference to lakes a mention of
aspx).
nearby area lakes (website: http://www.falicreektand.com/GrandviewPeaks/tabid/57/Default.
This in light of the current completed sales of many of the onsite lots, it appears amenity lakes are not
a selling point of this development.
9. Page 34 of the application narrative states, ".;..when the lake is the primary amenity, lot values
become heavily dependent on its presence, and the value of lots on or in close proximity of the lake
see a substantial increase in value." How did you determine this? This position runs contrary to a
recent study conducted by the University of Wisconsin-Madison - Department of Agricultural &
Applied Economics, dated July 2007, regarding the effects of dam removal on small lake
communities which found the following:
The general conclusions of this research are:
• Shoreline frontage along small impoundments (ponds) does not notably increase
residential property value compared to frontage along free-flowing rivers.
Mr. Todd Black and Fall Creek Land Company,
Page 3 of 3
February 15, 2010'
Residential property located near a free-flowing river is more valuable than identical
property located near an impoundment (pond). Our research estimated that property
along a free-flowing river would be worth, on average, $14,000 more than a similar
property at the site of a recently removed dam or current impoundment (pond).
The results also indicate that removing a dam does little harm to property values in
the short run (2 years in the study), and helps increase property values in the long
run, as the stream and the area along it return to a "natural" free-flowing state, or are
managed as a desirable open space such as a park.
While this research focused on a single housing market in a relatively small area, the basic
messages of these results apply to other locations as well. The study focused on communities
that had relatively small ponds, and the results may not apply to large impoundments where
recreational activities like fishing, boating and swimming are well established.
Based on what our research found, we would expect that properties that lose their frontage on;
impoundments would not decrease in value, and may in fact increase in value as their
frontage converts to frontage on a river. The value of properties that no longer have water
frontage after a dam removal depends on what replaces the area of the former impoundment.
Often, such a riverside public "greenbelt" replaces the impoundment. Studies indicate open
space increases the housing values of adjacent properties, particularly if the open space is
dedicated to nature preservation and passive experiences, such as hiking and birdwatching.
Link: http://www.wisconsinrivers.oriz/index.phD?Vage=conte t&mode=view&id=6
10. Please provide an inventory of imperviousness surfaces in each drainage area. The inventory should
include all proposed building footprints, roads, driveways, sidewalks, gravel-surfaced areas, amenity
areas, etc. A Stormwater Management Plan (SMP) must be provided for any drainage areas that
exceed 24 percent imperviousness. For each BMP, provide a completed BMP Supplement Form with
all the required items (see http:Hh2o.enr.state.nc.us/su/bmp forms.htm). Per NCAC 2B 15A:
02H.1000, a "drainage area" is defined as "the entire area contributing surface runoff to a single
point."
Please submit this information or otherwise address this request within 30 calendar days of the'date of this:
letter. If we do not receive this requested information within 30 calendar days of the date of this letter,
your project will be withdrawn and you will need to reapply with a new application and a new fee.
This letter only addresses the application review and does not authorize any impacts to wetlands, waters or
protected buffers. Please be aware that any impacts requested within your application are not authorized (at
this time) by the DWQ. Please call Ms. Cyndi Karoly or Mr. Ian McMillan at 919-733-1786 if you have
any questions regarding or would like to set up a meeting to discuss this matter/
Since ly,
Cyndi Karoly, Supervisor
1 Oversight/Express Review Permitting Unit
CBK/Ym
Mr. Todd Black and Fall Creek Land Company
Page 4 of 4
February 15, 2010
cc: Kevin Barnett, DWQ Asheville Regional Office
Amanda Jones, USACE Asheville Regulatory Field Office
File Copy
Clement Riddle, CEC, 718 Oakland Street, Hendersonville, NC 28791
Filename: 070168Ver2GrandviewPeaksRecreationalLakes(McDowell)On_Hold
■ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
■ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
■ Attach this card to the back of the maiipiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to:
Mr Todd Black 2/15/10
Fall Creek Land Co
PO Box 638
Hickory NC 28603
DWQ 07-0168 V2 McDowell Co
2. Article Number
(Transfer from service label)
A Signature ❑ Ag
B. Rec Wed by ( Printed Name) C. Date of
D. Is delivery address different from Rem 1? E3 Yes
000 fM-by r delivery address below: ❑ No
N
0
ent
Add
ressee
Delivery
wred
a ❑
all Express Mail
13 13
for Merchandise
❑ Insured Mail ❑ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee)
7008 1830 0001 5600 3260
❑ Yes

UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE FirstGlass Maif--;..
Ff6e&Paid
e'rrjmt
• Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZlP+'4-r[rrthj- s ' box •
NC DENR Division of Water Quality
401 Oversight/Express Unit
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250
Raleigh, NC 27604