20020672_Scoping Comments_20100426

NC®ENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins
(;nvarnnr nirar.tnr
MEMORANDUM
To: Jennifer Harris, P.E., North Carolina Turnpike Authority
Dee Freeman
Secretary
April 26, 2010
From: Polly Lespinasse, Division of Water Quality, Mooresville Regional Office
Subject: Comments on the Draft Indirect and Cumulative Effects Quantitative Analysis Related to the
Proposed Monroe Connector/Bypass Extending from US 74 near 1-485 in Mecklenburg County to
US 74 Between the Towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, Mecklenburg and Union
Counties, Federal Aid Project No. STP-NHF-74(90), WBS Element 34533.1TA1, TIP No.s R-33291R-
2559
This office has reviewed the referenced document dated February 2010. The NC Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) is
responsible for the issuance of the Section 401 Water Quality Certification for activities that impact Waters of the U.S.,
including wetlands. It is our understanding that the project as presented will result in impacts to jurisdictional wetlands, -
streams, and other surface waters. NCDWQ offers the following comments based on review of the aforementioned
document:
Project Specific Comments:
The Indirect and Cumulative Effects (ICE) analysis' makes several assumptions in predicting future land use in the
study area. One of the assumptions is that growth in Union County may be controlled by a moratorium on new
sewer connections. There may be a moratorium implemented at the local level, however, the moratorium
implemented by NCDWQ has been lifted.- It is also NCDWQ's understanding that Union County's existing ,
wastewater facilities currently have the capacity to accept additional wasteloads. Based on this. information,
NCDWQ has concerns regarding future land use and what role the "moratorium" played in growth projections ,
through the design year (2030). Therefore, DWQ would like to recommend that growth projections be re-
evaluated eliminating the "moratorium" assumption. Both methods should be included in the final ICE..,
The draft ICE analysis states that "stream buffers were excluded from the subset of developable parcels because
development within these areas is prohibited by local and/or state regulations". Further it was "...assumed that
mitigation requirements would offset impacts." This statement is supported by documentation in Appendix A. A
review of Appendix A does not appear to provide information to justify the statement that mitigation would be -
provided for buffer impacts. The question posed to municipality representatives was "Has the local regulation of
natural resources (including stream buffers) changed in this time period". Typical responses indicated that most
respondents were aware of the adoption of the Goose Creek Site Specific Water Quality Management Plan.
Union County stated that they have a "draft ordinance for buffer regulations... but it has not been presented to, let
alone adopted by, the County Board." The Goose Creek Site Specific Water Quality Management Plan is
implemented by NCDWQ in Union County and Mecklenburg County has recently been delegated implementation
authority for portions of Goose Creek which lie in their jurisdiction. The Goose Creek buffer rules do not require
mitigation for all impacts. Certain activities are exempt or allowable without mitigation. In addition, as the ICE
analysis states, buffer widths could vary from 30 feet to 200 feet.
Mooresville Regional Office
L ocatio¢ 610 East Center Ave., Suite 301 Mooresville, NC 28115
Phone: [phone] Fax [phone] A Cuslo uer Service: 1-877-623-6748
Internet, vevv/.nmaterquality.org
An Enua.Opport tin; y'. AKrrnatrve Arlion 6roloyer- a R<cycvaa!10% Post Consumer Paper
One
North Carolina
Naturally
Please provide additional information to substantiate the exclusion of these areas in the growth projections (2030
No Build Land Use and 2030 RPA Land Use) and whether these areas were included in the 2007 Baseline Land
Use.
3. The draft ICE analysis states that there will be a "change in intensity' of land use with minimal net change in acres
of development. NCDWQ is unclear how a "change in intensity" compares to impervious surface coverage and
developed acreage. The document states that percent impervious cover would not demonstrate any "measurable
difference" between the 2030 No-Build and the 2030 RPA. If a change in intensity in land use occurs (the draft
ICE analysis identified an increase in medium density residential [700 acres with a net increase of 1,300
households in the FLUSA], and an increase of 100 acres of commercial development with the 2030 RPA with only
a slight decrease in high density residential acreage) one could hypothesize that impervious cover would increase
by more than the incremental amount identified in the draft ICE analysis. Please provide an explanation of this
comparison.
4. Per the draft ICE analysis, impervious cover changes average no more than 2% in three (3) of the impacted
watersheds (Richardson Creek, Stewarts Creek and Crooked Creek), but there is a 7% increase in both Stewarts
Creek and Bearskin Creek. The North Fork Crooked Creek, South Fork Crooked Creek, Richardson Creek and
Stewarts Creek are 303(d) Waters of the State. Most of the streams are impaired use for aquatic life due to
impaired biological integrity. An increase of 7% increase in impervious surface in the Stewarts Creek watershed
could have increased indirect and cumulative impacts on water quality that do not appear to be addressed in this
document.
General Comments:
5. In accordance with the Environmental Management Commission's Rules (15A NCAC 2H.0506(h)), mitigation will
be required for impacts of greater than 150 linear feet to any single perennial stream. In the event that mitigation
is required, the mitigation plan shall be designed to replace appropriate lost functions and values. The NC
Ecosystem Enhancement Program may be available for use as stream mitigation. . .
6. Future documentation, including the 401; Water Quality Certification Application, shall continue to include.an'
item ized'listing of the proposed wetland and stream impacts.with corresponding mapping:
7. NCDWQ is very concerned with sediment and erosion impacts that could result from this project. The NCTA shall
-address these concerns by describing the potential impacts that may occur to the aquatic environments and any . .
mitigating factors that would reduce the impacts:., ,
8. A final analysis of cumulative and secondary impacts anticipated as'a result of this project is required:, The type
and detail of analysis shall conform to the NC Division of Water Quality Policy on the assessment of, secondary
and cumulative impacts dated April.10, 2004.
9. The NCTA is respectfully reminded that all impacts; including but not limited to, bridging, fill, excavation and
clearing, and rip rap to jurisdictional wetlands, streams, and riparian buffers need to be included in the final impact
calculations. These impacts, in addition to any construction impacts, temporary or otherwise, also need to be
included as part of the 401 Water Quality Certification Application.
10. Where streams must be crossed, NCDWQ prefers bridges be used in lieu of culverts. However, we realize that
economic considerations often require the use of culverts. Please be advised that culverts should be countersunk
to allow unimpeded passage by fish and other aquatic organisms. Moreover, in areas where high quality
wetlands or streams are impacted, a bridge may prove preferable. When applicable, the NCTA should not install
the bridge bents in the creek, to the maximum extent practicable.
11. Whenever possible, NCDWQ prefers spanning structures. Spanning structures usually do not require work within
the stream or grubbing of the streambanks and do not require stream channel realignment. The horizontal and
vertical clearances provided by bridges shall allow for human and wildlife passage beneath the structure. Fish
passage and navigation by canoeists and boaters shall not be blocked. Bridge supports (bents) should not be
placed in the stream when possible.
12. Bridge deck drains shall not discharge directly into the stream. Stormwater shall be directed across the bridge
and pre-treated through site-appropriate means (grassed swales, pre-formed scour holes, vegetated buffers, etc.)
before entering the stream. Please refer to the most current version of NCDWQ's Stormwater Best Management
Practices.
13. Sediment and erosion control measures should not be placed in wetlands or streams.
14. Borrow/waste areas should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent practical. Impacts to wetlands in borrow/waste
areas will need to be presented in the 401 Water Quality Certification and could precipitate compensatory
mitigation.
15. The 401 Water Quality Certification application will need to specifically address the proposed methods for
stormwater management. More specifically, stormwater shall not be permitted to discharge directly into streams
or surface waters.
16. Based on the information presented in the document, the magnitude of impacts to wetlands and streams may
require an Individual Permit (IP) application to the Corps of Engineers and corresponding 401 Water Quality
Certification. Please be advised that a 401 Water Quality Certification requires satisfactory protection of water
quality to ensure that water quality standards are met and no wetland or stream uses are lost. Final permit
authorization will require the submittal of a formal application by the NCTA and written concurrence from
NCDWQ. Please be aware that any approval will be contingent on appropriate avoidance and minimization of
wetland and stream impacts to the maximum extent practical, the development of an acceptable stormwater
management plan, and the inclusion of appropriate mitigation plans where appropriate.
17. If concrete is used during construction, a dry work area shall be maintained to prevent direct contact between
curing concrete and stream water.. Water that inadvertently contacts uncured concrete shall not be discharged to
surface waters due to the potential for elevated pH and possible aquatic life and fish kills.
18. If temporary access roads or detours are constructed, the'site'stiall be graded to its preconstruction,contours and
elevations. Disturbed areas shall be seeded or mulched to stabilize the soil and appropriate native woody.
species shall be planted. When using temporary structures the area shall be cleared but not grubbed. Clearing
the area with chain saws, mowers, bush-hogs, or other mechanized equipment and leaving the stumps and root
mat intact allows the area to re-vegetate naturally and minimizes soil disturbance.
19. Placement of culverts and'other structures in waters,'streams and wetlands shall be placed belowthe elevation.
of the streambed by one foot for all culverts with a diameter greater than 48 inches,'and 20 percent of the culvert
diameter for culverts having a diameter less than 48 inches, to allow low flow passage of water and aquatic life.
Design and placement of culverts and other structures including temporary erosion control measures shall not be, .
conducted in a manner that may result in dis-equilibrium' of wetlands"or streambeds or banks, adjacent to or
upstream and down stream of the above structures. The applicant is required to provide evidence that the
equilibrium is being maintained if requested in writing by NCDWQ. If this condition is unable to be met due to
bedrock or other limiting features encountered during construction, please contact NCDWQ for guidance on how
to proceed and to determine whether or not a permit modification will be required.
20. If multiple pipes or barrels are required, they shall be designed to mimic natural stream cross section as closely
as possible including pipes or. barrels at flood plain elevation, floodplain benches, and/or sills may be required
where appropriate. Widening the stream channel should be avoided. Stream channel widening at the inlet or
outlet end of structures typically decreases water velocity causing sediment deposition that requires increased
maintenance and disrupts aquatic life passage.
21. If foundation test borings are necessary; it shall be noted in the document. Geotechnical work is approved under
General 401 Certification Number 3687/Nationwide Permit No. 6 for Survey Activities.
22. Sediment and erosion control measures sufficient to protect water resources must be implemented and
maintained in accordance with the most recent version of North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Planning
and Design Manual and the most recent version of NCS000523.
23. All work in or adjacent to stream waters shall be conducted in a dry work area. Approved BMP measures from
the most current version of NCDOT Construction and Maintenance Activities manual such as sandbags, rock
berms, cofferdams and other diversion structures shall be used to prevent excavation in flowing water.
24. While the use of National Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps, NC Coastal Region Evaluation of Wetland Significance
(NC-CREWS) maps and soil survey maps are useful tools, their inherent inaccuracies require that qualified
personnel perform onsite wetland delineations prior to permit approval.
I 25. Heavy equipment should be operated from the bank rather than in stream channels in order to minimize
sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing other pollutants into streams. This equipment shall be
inspected daily and maintained to prevent contamination of surface waters from leaking fuels, lubricants, hydraulic
fluids, or other toxic materials.
26. Riprap shall not be placed in the active thalweg channel or placed in the streambed in a manner that precludes
aquatic life passage. Bioengineering boulders or structures should be properly designed, sized and installed.
27. Riparian vegetation (native trees and shrubs) shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible. Riparian
vegetation must be reestablished within the construction limits of the project by the end of the growing season
following completion of construction.
NCDWQ appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on your project. Should you have any questions or require any
additional information, please contact Polly Lespinasse at [phone].
I
cc: Liz Hair, US Army Corps of Engineers, Asheville Field Office (electronic copy)
Chris Militscher, Environmental Protection Agency (electronic copy)
i Marla Chambers, NC Wildlife Resources Commission (electronic copy)
Marella Buncick, US Fish and Wildlife Service (electronic copy)
Sonia Gregory, NCDWQ Central Office (electronic copy)
File Copy