19970616 Ver 1_Other Agency Comments_20020206

\

,(. /~\~;
~VJJ..,
cy

t .

FEB - 6

~ North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission ~

Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director

~;J'''''e... ~ Y' vJArlj\;Cb,^-o.......

MEMORANDUM

To:

John Dorney, NC Division of Water Quality

From:

Joe Mickey, NCWRC Stream Mitigatio

rf~

Date: January 31, 2002

Subject:

Response to 6/29/01 DWQ comments on the Stream R r Moretz
site, South Fork New River, Watauga County, in associatt S 421
NCDOT Project R-529, Watauga County, DWQ No. 97-0616, Certification No.
3185

.~

The following comments are in response to DWQ's review (June & 2001) of the Stream
Restoration Plan for the Moretz site in Ashe County. This stream.fft~ln was submitted as partial
fulfillment of stream mitigation for the US 421 project in Watauga County (R-529, DWQ No.
97-0616, Certification No. 3185). We are requesting that DWQ give approval to this project
once you have reviewed this additional information requested by DWQ. Three copies of the
Stream Restoration Plan for the Moretz site were received by Cynthia Van Der Wiele, DWQ
DOT Coordinator, on June 19,2001.

. DWQ-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. WRe response - A plan view map of
the conservation easement and a draft copy of the conservation easement are enclosed The
conservation easement encompasses 7.817 acres. Not included in this acreage are the
temporary construction and permanent access easement corridors. Please note that the
conservation easement is being reviewed by the landowner at this time. Plans are to have
the conservation easement signed within the next' two months. We will submit a signed copy
of the conservation easement to DWQ with the as-built plans once the project is completed
We will not request mitigation credit or construct the project without a signed conservation
easement

. DWQ- The typical diagrams are not specific to the size of rock to be used in the structures.
Rock sizes and footer depths should be appropriate for the amount of scour predicted to

Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries · 1721 Mail Service Center · Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] ext. 281 · Fax: [phone]

,.

\

occur behind the structures. DWQ recommends that the rock sizes be indicated. WRC
response - Footer rocks will be placed approximately 2-3 feet below the normal stream
bottom. Rock sizes will average 2'x3'x5' (30 cu'/2.5 tons).

. DWQ- The site plan indicates the potential use of rootwads, rock vanes, rock weirs and step
pools. However, no mention is made of which structures are to be use at which locations and
why. DWQ would like to see more detail and description of what structures is anticipated
and why. Additionally, a typical drawing was not provided for the step pool. WRC response
_ We have updated the project plan view, Appendix 3, to pinpoint more precisely the exact
location of each structure. This was not done earlier because once work on a project is
initiated, structure type might be changed in the field since stream conditions could have
changed from the time of the conceptual plan to actual construction. Appendix 3 gives a
plan view of each proposed structure type while the photos of each strncture type describe
why they are used Listing steplpool structures was a mistake on our part since steplpools
will not be used on this project. We have included a revised Appendix 3 for your files.

. DWQ-Biological Monitoring: Since this is not a Priority 1 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 1 restoration projects. WRC response -
Mr. Penrose will be notified 30 days prior to construction by email in the event that he
wishes to collect biological data before construction begins.

. DWQ-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. WRC
response - A conservation easement will be signed before any work is done at the project
site.

On Monday, August 6, 2001, Shannon Deaton and I met with you to discuss concerns we had
with issues related to the US 421 stream mitigation program. We appreciated you taking the
time to meet with us to resolve issues of concern to the WRC. Results of the meeting were as
follows:

. The DOT/WRC stream mitigation program is permitted under the DWQ Certification No.
3185, issued April 20, 1998 for the DOT R-529 project. Since a permit has already been
issued for the project, WRC will not have to submit a Pre-Construction Notification
Application and fee of$475 for each site.

. Three (3) copies of each site plan must be submitted to Cynthia Van Der Wiele, DWQ DOT
Coordinator for approval prior to the signing of a conservation easement. However, WRC
will not begin construction until an easement is signed.

. Copies of the conservation easement map and signed conservation easement must be
submitted to DWQ once the project is completed with the as-built plans. If the conservation
easement map is completed or the easement signed prior to the submittal of site plans to
DWQ, they will be included with the construction plans instead of the as-built plans.

,..

l

. DWQ will try to lessen the amount oftime to respond to project plans. This will help reduce
construction delays. In the past, there has been up to a 3 month delay between when plans
are received by DWQ and reply to WRC (i.e., Bare, Wild, Miller, Moretz sites). Reducing
DWQ response time will allow us to address concerns with the project in a timely manner
before we put the project out for bid and begin construction.

. WRC will continue to keep DWQ personnel informed of all phases of mitigation site
development.

. WRC can appeal in writing concerning DWQ mitigation ratios established for each site.

Thank you for your time and consideration of these issues.

Cc: Lindsey Riddick, North Carolina Department of Transportation
Jean Manuele, US Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory Branch
Shannon Deaton, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission