19970616 Ver 1_Other Agency Comments_20010808

0 North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
To: John Dorney, NC Division of Water Quality
From: Joe Mickey, NCWRC Stream Mitigation Coordinator
Date: August 8, 2001
Subject: Response to 6/29/01 DWQ comments on the Stream Restoration Plan for Bare
site, unnamed tributary to Peak Creek, Ashe County, in association with the 421
NCDOT Project R-529, Watauga County, WQC No. 97-0616, DWQ Certification
No. 3185 and summary of August 6, 2001 meeting to address protocol issues
This is in response to five issues related to DWQ review of the Stream Restoration Plan for
the Bare site in Ashe County submitted as partial fulfillment of stream mitigation for the US
421 project in Watauga County (R-529, DWQ No. 3185). The following comments
are offered in response to your June 29, 2001 memo:
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. We have attached a plan view map of the
conservation easement and a draft copy of the conservation easement. The conservation
easements average width is approximately 70 feet and encompasses 3.02 acres plus a 20 x
159 foot construction and access easement. Please note that the conservation easement
should be signed by the landowner on August 3, 2001. 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 construct the project without a signed conservation easement.
• 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 occur
behind the structures. DWQ recommends that the rock sizes be indicated. Footer rocks will
be placed approximately 2 feet below the normal stream bottom. Rock size will vaty_ from
250 pounds (2 cu feet) up to 1000 pounds.
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries • 1721 Mail Service Center e Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] ext. 281 • Fax: [phone]
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. 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 structure type describe why they are used.
The omission of a step pool drawing was our fault; one has been added Appendix 3.
• 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 Irestoration projects. Mr. Penrose was
notified by email on 8103101 that we hope to begin site construction soon and to notify this
office if he wishes to collect biological data before construction begins.
• Mitigation Ratios: The riparian area and streams are proposed to be preserved with a
conservation easement. A conservation easement will be signed before any work is done at
the project site. As such, the project should qualify to obtain 3:1 credit. Our preference
would have been 2:1 based on past DWQ credit issued for a similar site.
We have resubmitted 3 copies of the Stream Restoration Plan for the Bare site to Cynthia Van
Der Wiele for your files. These plans are to replace the plans submitted to your office on April
10, 2001 and returned to us on July 31, 2001. Since all 3 original copies were returned, we have
also included one of the plans received by DWQ on April 10, 2001 for your files.
On Monday, August 6, 2001, Shannon Deaton and I met with you to discuss concerns we had
with issues related to the US 421 mitigation program. We appreciated your taking the time to
meet with us to resolve issues of concern to the WRC. Results of the meeting were as follows:
• The DOTlWRC 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.
• DWQ will try to lessen the amount of time to respond to project plans. This will help reduce
construction delays. In the past, there has been a delay in the time plans are submitted to
DWQ for review and when comments are received by WRC (i.e., Bare and Wild sites
received by DWQ on 4/10/091, comments mailed to WRC on 7/27/01).
• WRC will continue to keep DWQ personnel informed of all phases of mitigation site
development.
• WRC can appeal in writing DWQ mitigation ratios established for each site
• WRC can proceed with construction of the Bare site.
If I incorrectly interpreted one of the items or left something out as a result of our August 6
meeting, please let me know. Thank you for your time and consideration of these issues.
Cc: Lindsey Riddick, North Carolina Department of Transportation
Frank McBride, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Shannon Deaton, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission