Ver - Wildlife Resource Comments - 7/23/2010

L
ez?
0
® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
NET'L %l 1 GO
TO: Steve Chapin, Permit Coordinator
Asheville Office, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ?/
FROM: Ron Linville, Regional Coordinator NATEAQUALITrSEM
Habitat Conservation Program Original Signe! ®`?
by J. R. Linville
DATE: August 4, 2003
SUBJECT: Review of 404 Application, Ed Garvin Subdivision, Dutch Creek and
tributaries thereof, Class B-Trout waters, Watauga County
The applicant is requesting a letter of concurrence from the North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) to obtain a 404 permit from the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers The NCWRC has reviewed information provided by the applicant,
and field biologists on our staff are familiar with habitat values of the project area. These
comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the Clean Water Act of 1977
(33 U.S.C. 466 et. seq.) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as
amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d).
The proposed large lot subdivision will impact Dutch Creek with a spanning
bridge crossing and a tributary of Dutch Creek will be impacted by an arch culvert
(81"x59"). An intermittent channel will be crossed using an eighteen (18) inch pipe.
Wetland fill will impact 0.091 acres.
Based on the information provided by the applicant and our information on the
range of trout in the project area, we do not believe this project will cause significant
effects to waters supporting trout providing the following conditions are followed:
1. Instream work and land disturbance within the 25-foot wide buffer zone are
prohibited during the trout spawning seasons of October 15 through April 15
to protect the egg and fry stages of trout.
2. Bridges and spanning structures should be installed in a manner that preserves
biological and geomorphic functions, including flood passage. The
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] ext. 281 • Fax: [phone]
Garvin Subdivision 2 August 4, 2003
dimension, pattern and profile of the stream should be maintained above,
below and through the structures to the maximum extent practicable.
Floodplain benches should be preserved or restored in order to maintain or
restore natural stream dimensions.
3. Culverts 48" Culverts 48" or larger should be buried approximately 1' into the
streambed. Culverts less than 48 inches in diameter should be buried to a
depth equal to or greater than 20% their size to allow for aquatic life passage.
These measurements must be based on natural thalweg depths. Any riprap
used must not interfere with aquatic life passage during low flow conditions.
4. If concrete will be used, work must be accomplished so that wet concrete does
not contact stream water. This will lessen the chance of altering the stream's
water chemistry and causing a fish kill.
5. Heavy equipment should be operated from the bank rather than in the stream
channel in order to minimize sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of
introducing other pollutants into the stream.
6. Sediment and erosion control measures shall adhere to the design standards
for sensitive watersheds (15A NCAC 4B .0024).
7. Temporary or permanent herbaceous vegetation should be planted on all bare
soil in the trout buffer areas within 5 days of ground disturbing activities to
provide long-term erosion control. We encourage the use of native onsite
vegetation and materials for streambank stabilization when practicable.
8. Remaining jurisdictional waters and wetlands should be preserved as common
undisturbed buffers and green space instead of being subdivided into lots. If
this is not possible, deed restrictions providing undisturbed buffers must be
provided.
9. Although not likely based on the information provided about the site, should
bog turtles (Clemmys muhlenbergii), a federal threatened species, or the
Carolina northern flying squirrel (Glaucomys sabrinus coloratus), a federal
endangered species be found, their habitats should be preserved and protected
through management strategies and protected buffers.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this project. If you
have any questions regarding these comments, please contact me at 336/769-9453.
Cc: John Dorney, DWQ
',N ET MIN, 9,
tJY. ? ?. 4 '11??f "{
XTER QUAVY SECTIO !
® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Roxanne Dorman
Atlantic Environmental Consultants, LLC
and
John Dorney, Manager
401/Wetlands Unit, Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural sour s
FROM: David McHenry, Northeast Coastal Region Coordi for
Habitat Conservation Section
DATE: September 19, 2003
SUBJECT: Additional comments on Section 401 Water Quality Certification/404 Permit application for
Ola Oyefusi, Lot 1727 Kinnakeet Shores Subdivision, Avon, Dare County, North Carolina.
DWQ No. 03-0838
This memorandum responds to your letter dated September 8, 2003 that included additional
information about the 0.02 acre of pond fill and bulkhead project proposed by Mr. Oyef isi on his property
(Lot 1727) in Kinnakeet Shores and your request that we reconsider our recommended modification of the
project. We reviewed this information and our original recommendations with regard to impacts of the
project on fish and wildlife resources. We also visited the project site on September 15, 2003. Our response
is provided in accordance with provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as
amended; 16 U.S.C. 661 et. seq.) and the Clean Water Act of 1977 (as amended).
We continue to feel that the project as proposed will have an unnecessary level of impact on
productive aquatic habitats for fish and wildlife resources. As we anticipated in our original comments,
the shoreline of the pond at the project site has a dense fringe (approximately 5-10' wide) of submerged
aquatic vegetation; specifically slender pondweed (Potamogeton pusillus). This growth supports small
fishes that are prey for wading birds, as well as provides forage for waterfowl such as black duck (Anas
rubripes) during the winter and other off-seasons when human disturbance is low. Although the proposed
fill is individually minor, as well as consistent with the US Army Corps of Engineers guidelines, we are
concerned about this individual fill particularly with regard to the collective effects of future bulkhead
fills that would be anticipated along other lots on the pond. This pond currently has a predominantly
unstabilized and vegetated shoreline except for the constructed beach along Portside Drive. Some other
ponds in this subdivision, most notably that along NC 12, have extensive bulkheading and less coverage
of aquatic vegetation likely because of reduced shallow water area.
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] ext. 281 • Fax: [phone]
401/404 Oyefusi - Response Page 2 September 19, 2003
DWQ 03-0838
It is the policy of the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission to oppose projects that are
proposed in productive aquatic habitats when reasonable, alternative plans that accomplish the project
objective are available. Consequently, we recommended that the bulkhead be aligned with the normal water
level to the extent practical. Based on the site plan provided and the indication that this project is not
intended for shoreline stabilization, and hence not water-dependent, we feel that our original recommendation
is warranted to minimize impacts. We would reconsider our standing recommendation if the proposed 10'+
wide deck on the southwestern edge of the pool and slight modifications of the building plan were not
possible, thereby necessitating the level of impact that is proposed.
We appreciate the opportunity to comment further on the impacts of the project on fish and wildlife
resources. If you need to discuss these comments please call David McHenry at [phone] ext 345.
cc: Walker, T. - US Army Corps of Engineers, Washington

October 13, 2003
Kevin Barnett
Division of Water Quality
Asheville Regional Office
Interchange Building
59 Woodfin Place
Asheville, NC 28801
Re: The Divide, DWQ# 03-0947, Jackson County
Dear Kevin,
The following comments address the proposed development of the Divide Golf Course and
Residential Development in Jackson County. These comments replace those that I made to you on October
9, 2003. Though I am employed as a biologist for the Division of Water Quality, these opinions do not
represent the position of the Division and are based on my professional experience and judgment as a
conservation biologist. On September 19, 2003, I surveyed a large portion of the 8.83 wetland site at the
end of Hurricane Lake. I have several concerns with the proposed development in regards to the potential
impacts to this site as well as the inadequacy of the developer's assessment of this wetland system.
The wetland in question (referred to as a scrub/shrub bog) in the community profiles and
Endangered and Threatened Species Assessment is a high quality Southern Appalachian Bog (Southern
Subtype) as defined in Schafale and Weakley's Third Approximation of the Natural Communities of North
Carolina. These wetlands are quite rare in the state due in part to topographic constraints in the mountains
and the conversion of many bogs to agriculture and pasture. The Hurricane Lake Bog is of quite high
quality for the state due to the lack of disturbance, its acreage, its heterogeneous vegetation structure, the
presence of several rare plant species, and potential occurrence of federal endangered and threatened
species.
The Endangered and Threatened Species Assessment (Appendix A of the application) was quite
limited in its description of the community composition of the site and inadequately portrays the unique
nature of the wetland. The community description only lists several species as present in the site. Two of
these, principally Witch Hazel and Silver Maple, were not present in the bog. Furthermore, Silver Maple is
not even reported to occur in Jackson County and Witch Hazel is typically not a wetland species but is
listed as facultative upland species in the Southeast by the USDA NRCS.
The Endangered and Threatened Species Assessment does not appear to have thoroughly inventoried the
site for Helonias bullata, Swamp Pink. Though surveys were conducted during its flowering season, they
were limited to the shore of the wetland and did not extend into the site. Though binoculars were used for
the inventory, the heterogeneous vegetation structure of the bog and its size (8.63acres) would essentially
negate the ability to detect this plant without traversing the site. Additionally the assessment fail to consider
another threatened species, Clemmys muhlenbergii (Bog Turtle). Though this species has not been reported
for Jackson County, a review of Natural Heritage Program records indicates several sightings within seven
miles of this site in two neighboring counties. The bog itself provides ideal habitat for this species with an
abundance of Sphagnum moss, tussocks of grasses and sedges, a mucky bottom, and a source of clean fresh
water.
I conducted a cursory survey of the bog on September 19 and encountered at least 45 species of
plants, most of which are wetland species. At least 3 of these species, Juncus brevicaudatus, J.
gymnocarpus, and Eriophorum virginicum, are Watch List plants monitored by the North Carolina Natural
Heritage Program. The presence of endangered, threatened or other rare species is likely given the pristine
nature of the bog and more thorough surveys are necessary.
Primary impacts to the wetland would be in the form of "hand clearing" in order to allow
golfers to play over the bog. Additional impacts include the construction of cart bridges over the wetland,
which require posts to be driven in the wetland. These activities could have a significant impact on the
integrity of the bog, as they will likely require the use of machinery and/or a work crew to install them.
Obvious effects include trampling, compaction of the soil and floating Sphagnum mats, and alteration of
the vegetation of the site. Sedimentation and erosion potentially caused by the clearing of surrounding
uplands could potentially alter the water quality and cause incidental fill in the wetland. Eventually the
creation of a golf course surrounding the bog and the future maintenance of the grounds could add
excessive nutrients to the bog because of fertilizer-enriched run-off. Excessive nutrient inputs could alter
the nature of the bog by enhancing growth of woody plants and weedy species, thus reducing habitat for
rare forbs and graminoids.
Because of the sensitive nature of this wetland system and the species that it harbors, I recommend
denial of any clearing, construction activities, or other impacts in the bog itself. I would encourage
extraordinary measures to prevent sediment from reaching the bog such as wide buffers and limits on
clearing within 100 feet of the bog. Furthermore in the interest of documenting and protecting the site and
its biota, I suggest contacting the Natural Heritage Program, Wildlife Resources Commission, and the US
Fish and Wildlife Service so that they survey the site and provide their comments on this proposed
development.
Sincerely,
Ed Schwartzma
Cc: John Dorney - DWQ
Cyndi Karoly - DWQ
File copy
63-aM-v

® North Caroli gWAc ife resources Commission
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Guy Pearce
Division of Coastal Management
WETLANDS/ 401 GROUP
NOV 0 3 2003
John Dorney
Division of Water Quality
Jennifer Frye
Army Corps of Engineers
FROM: Bennett Wynne /l/
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: October 30, 2003
WATER QUALITY SEQTION
SUBJECT: Consistency Determination, 401, and 404 applications for Hunter
Development Corp. (Carolina Forest mixed use development) to
temporarily impact 0.4 acre of 404 wetlands and fill 1.16 acres of 404
wetlands in headwaters and unnamed tributaries of Half Moon Creek,
between Western Boulevard and Ramsey Road, Jacksonville, Onslow
County, North Carolina. Reference: ACTID 200301016.
The Wildlife Resources Commission has reviewed the project for impacts to
wildlife and fishery resources. A site visit was made on October 29, 2003. Our comments
are provided in accordance with provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48
Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661 et seq.), Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (as
amended), and North Carolina General Statutes (G.S. 113-131 et seq.).
The subject proposal includes 581 single family housing lots, 800 multi-family
housing units, a school, a city recreation area, and associated roads, utilities, and
amenities. Pine plantations presently dominate the site which is bisected by a tributary of
Half Moon Creek. Our site visit followed a heavy rain and the stream was carrying a
heavy, fairly turbid flow at that time. The tributary, its headwaters, and associated
wetlands provide good habitat for raccoon, opossum, muskrat, mink, wading birds, and
song birds.
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] ext. 281 • Fax: [phone]
, _.
Carolina Forest s/D, etc. Z 10/30/03
As described, no impacts to waters or wetlands will result from lot development.
Rather, all impacts will come from road and sewer line construction We understand the
sewer impacts will be mostly temporary, with a return to grade and some maintenance
mowing. Permanent wetland impacts
to are to be the N Wetlands Restoration Pra am for 1.09
wetlands onsite and malting payment gr
acres of impacts, as well as preservation of remaining jurisdictional waters and wetlands
(about 20 acres).
Our primary concern is the fragmentation of fish and wildlife habitats that will
result from the project, particularly where roads cross streams. To reduce the effects of
habitat fragmentation, we recommend that streams either be bridged at road crossings or a
minimum of 2 culverts be installed, I at a lower elevation to carry all stream flow during
periods of low flow and to allow fish passage, and 1 placed at a higher elevation to help
carry storm flows but which will ordinarily be dry and allow passage of wildlife without
their having to cross the road. Continued fish passage, reduced wildlife road mortality,
and minimized hazards to motorists should be the goals of these modifications.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment. If you need to discuss these
comments or need additional assiq- ance, please call me at [phone].

2'
® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
August 27, 2001
Mr. David Baker, Office Manager
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Branch
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-006
SUBJECT: Lane Stephens Nationwide 404 Permit Application
Culvert installation - Unnamed Tributarv to French Broad River
Buncombe County, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Baker
Mr. Lane Stephens is requesting a letter of concurrence from the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission (NCWRC) to obtain a 404 permit from the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. I have reviewed
information provided by the applicant. The application was incomplete and no topographic or area map was
provided; thus, our comments have been delayed. A site visit was made on August 23, 2001. These comments
are provided in accordance with provisions of the Clean Water Act of 1977 (33 U.S.C. 466 et seq.) and the
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401. as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d).
The applicant proposes to install approximately 150 feet of 48-inch diameter culvert in a small
unnamed tributary to the French Broad River for conunercial development.
This unnamed tributarv is not classified as trout waters by the Division of Water Quality or
designated as trout water by the NCWRC. It is the opinion of the NCWRC that this project is not likely to
result m significant adverse impacts to trout. The stream likely provides habitat for other aquatic life.
The site visit revealed that there has been installed previously an estimated 200-225 feet of 48-inch
diameter culvert in this stream. Most of the remaining open stream flows toward the back of the property.
There are storage buildings at this site already. We are concerned about the cumulative impacts from
culverting and the adverse impact stormwater from this site and other impervious surfaces in the area may
have on aquatic habitat downstream of the site. Stormwater can erode streambanks and scour stream
channels. Impacts can be exacerbated if downstream property owners alter streambanks to prevent erosion
and protect property. There are some small areas of wetland vegetation associated with the channel.
Culverting the stream will further take away ecological functions and essentially destroy all fish and wildlife
value.
The total estimated impact at this site ?\ould be approximately 375 feet, however, no mitigation is
proposed. It is not clear if there has been am attempt to avoid and minimize impacts by changing building
locations or parking areas. It our understanding that Mr. Stephens received a permit several years ago for the
existing culverts. If any further 404 permits for culverting are issued, we recommend that the impacts be
mitigated at a ratio of 2:1.
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] ext. 281 • Fax: [phone]
t fii
Lane Stephens Culvert
Buncombe County, UT French Broad River
August 27, 2001
We request that any further 404 permits issued for this site be conditioned as follows.
1. Stormwater should not be discharged to the creek without treatment. Stormwater management
practices to control quantity and quality of stormwater discharged from impervious surfaces
should be incorporated into site development. A created wetland, retention pond, or vegetated
buffers are practices that may be useful in managing stormwater at this site.,
2. Any remaining streams on the property should be maintained in an open state. To insure stability,
the remaining open channel sections of the stream should be vegetated with native woody shrubs
and/or trees. This associated buffer can be incorporated into the stormwater management
measures.
3. The culvert should be placed with the floor of the barrel approximately one foot below the level of
the stream bottom to allow natural stream bottom materials to become established in the culvert
and to provide the potential for aquatic life passage during periods of low flow. This may require
increasing the size of the culvert to meet flow conveyance requirements.
4. Under no circumstances should rock, sand, or other materials be dredged from the stream channel
under authorization of this permit, except in the immediate vicinity of the culvert. Instream
dredging has catastrophic effects on aquatic life, and disturbance of the natural form of the stream
channel will likely cause downstream erosion problems, possibly affecting adjacent landowners.
5. If possible, culverts should be placed in a dry work area. Sandbags, flexible pipe, or other
diversion structures should be used where possible to minimize excavation in flowing water.
6. Backfill materials should be obtained from upland sites.
7. Adequate sedimentation and erosion control measures must be implemented and maintained on the
project site to minimize impacts to downstream aquatic resources. Temporary or permanent
herbaceous vegetation should be planted on all bare soil within 15. days of ground disturbing
activities to provide long-term erosion control. Erosion control matting in conjunction with
appropriate seeding should be used adjacent to streams instead of straw mulch.
8. If concrete is used during culvert installation (headwalls), a dry work area must be maintained to
prevent direct contact between curing concrete and stream water. Water that inadvertently
contacts uncured concrete should not be discharged to surface waters due to the potential for
elevated pH.
9. All mechanized equipment operated near surface waters should be inspected and maintained
regularly to prevent contamination of stream waters from fuels, lubricants, hydraulic fluids or
other toxic materials.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this project. Pending availability of field
staff, the NCWRC may inspect the work site during or after construction. If there are any questions regarding
these comments, please contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Owen F. And 'son
Mountain Region Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
cc: Mr. Lane Stephens, Applicant
Mr. David Day, Consultant
Mr. John Dorsey, Wetland Scientist. Division of Water Quality
£t,9L-9IL (616) :XB3 • I8Z 'WO ££9£-££L (616) :auogdaiay
IZLI-669LZ DN *iaiu2I . zaluzD aoiniaS iPUW IZLI . saizagstd puuiul Jo uoisiniQ :ssaapp? 2u. 1.8W
saniaoafgo loafoid oql haul Ilps plnoo joaiD fuo3S .ioj Z auoz jo ino juauiu2qu lamas oqi 2uinouI .iaq;agm
juoloun si ji `XlluogtoodS •pamainaJ slui.zaIuui agj uiog .iuoloun sum slouduu osagl .ioj paau oqj jng `s.iajjnq
oq; uo sjoudtm ,Liuioduial anuq Ipm ouil .lamas pasodoid oqj `;oofoid loafgns aq; o; PJu2az MIM
•slossnui pa;oaloid alms jo Xlluaapaj IuMnas JQJ JuIiguq an, uaju pofozd au; Jo UUNUIsumop .iani21 cus, aql
ui suaiu `uoijippu uI •suisiuu2jo oilunbu jo saioods aiui Iu.zanas SUIP uoo 1! osnuooq pogs.zalum looiD ? uo;S
oq; ui sjajjng pagmisipun put 2uiuoi;ounj Jo aouuua;uiuui aqj glim pauiaouoo si uoissiunuoD aq,L
•olguoilddu ag Soill plnogs :sauoz .iajjng
aql 3o gonui unllim ag put, ooiml kwjngia; pauiuuun aql ssozo plnom cull lamas aqj `;uauiu2ilu snlj.2uolV
•3 uaiu g2nozill ?jvjngpj oqj fuolu piumisuo uinl uagp put, `aajjng oq; 3o Z auoz uiiljim Sliiud `laazD XuoiS
iaiiuiud of posodoid si ouii .lamas u `Spuaun3 •molj-osug jaiumpuno.i2 of rofgns ag Maui `Xgdu 2odoi
uo posug `jugj louuugo pougop Ilom u suq put, auinui daap u ui smooo Airingyj sigl •sduui Somas pos .io
SDSfl uo pajouop jou si;ugj AoojD KuojS of Xiu;ngti; Iluuis u sossuduiooua oslu (oouapuodsauoo oq; ui D
uazu palaqul) sloozud osoq; jo auo `uoi?ippu uI •uaau jugj ui solnz oqj of loofgns are put, alaaiD SuojS japaog
slaojud aalluuis oqj jo omZ •junoW /,A:)o-d ui puog gsil2ug.2uolu paluool loun aiou L9 Pouiguioo u uio.ij
slaozud aaiill apnlaui Xuux uoisinipgns snlZ uoisinipgnS o2pig uLuninV aanlnj oql ui shored o; saing
zajjng uuuudig ooiluiud-.iul jo fl!liguoilddu 3o uoiltumualap u JOJ yd `saaaui?ug ?ui1lnsuoD uuidd?
grim .iauXo f unugS •jW gig SIiluno JaJum Jo uotsiniQ aqj 01 £00Z `9 ftw opum sum ;sonbaz V
•(papuouiu su) LL61 jo IoV jalurn uuaID oql puu (•bos •10 i99 'D'S'f19i `•Papuauiu su `IOtb ';ulS St)
;ov uoTIuuipioOD aJilPliAAIpuu gst3 aqI Jo suoisinoid giim aouupzooou ui papTnoid aru sluounuoo inO '£OOZ
`L Isn2nV uo paIisin sum ails ioafoid oqs •saomosai ajilplim put, qsg uo spogo sli of piu2zj gjim;oofozd
aqj pamainW (uoissl =OD) uoissiuuuo,-) saomosag ajilplt,AA uuclojuD quoN aqj glim sisi2oloig
5680-£0 'ON bMa
•uuilo.zuD glzoN `,CjunoD gsuN
`junoW S loog `uoisiniMS o2pig uuinjnV joj aouuildwoo oing .iaj3ng uuuudig ootluzud-JU.L :13afgf1S
£OOZ `8 isnfnV :211vQ
u01130S uoiIunJasuoD IUIRUg
.z0luuip.i00D uoi20g IuIsuoD Isuaga.ioN `AiiiagoW pinuQ :w0H3
saomosag Ium;uN put, juouiuozlnug jo luounmdaQ uullo-mD quoN
A;Iluna zaluA jo uoisiniQ `Iiujl spuuiPAV10fi
Jolt, iIsiuluzpV `,fauaoQ ugof :OZ
ovg
I?If1QNWHOMM
S I / 301. oa3iQ ani;nooxg Poomiind'2I soi.iu
qD
® uotssit IMD swinosa-H opIpltAk PuiloibD gjj6M
Buffers - Autumn Ridge Page 2 August 8, 2003
DWQ 03-0895
and whether a similar avoidance could be achieved for the unnamed tributary; again assuming the buffer
rules were applicable there. Regarding the buffer impacts along Stony Creek, maintenance of the large
woody vegetation there is no longer possible since it appeared during the site visit that areas of zone 2 had
already been cleared apparently in preparation of the sewer line construction. However, the tributary's
buffers are still largely intact. We recommend that sewer lines for this project avoid the buffers if
possible and that any need to impact these buffers be demonstrated by the project sponsor.
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the impacts of the project on fish and wildlife
resources. If you need to discuss these comments please call David McHenry at [phone] ext 345.
® North CarolinaWAdlife Resources Commission
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Amanda Jones, Permit Coordinator
Asheville Office, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers WETLANDS / 401 ROU
FROM: Ron Linville, Regional Coordinato NOV 2 1 20g3
Habitat Conservation Program
WATER QUA
DATE: November 14, 2003
SUBJECT: Review of an application for BannerLowe, LLC, Robert Stultz, Elk River and
Unnamed Tributaries Elk River, DWQ # 031134, Avery County
The applicant is requesting a letter of concurrence from the North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission (NCWRC) to obtain a 404 permit from the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers. The NCWRC has reviewed information provided by the applicant, and field
biologists on our staff are familiar with habitat values of the project area. These comments are
provided in accordance with provisions of the Clean Water Act of 1977 (33 U.S.C. 466 et. seq.)
and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d).
The project as proposed will impact 1.144 acres of wetlands and waters. The project
includes creation and preservation of 1.2 acres of wetlands as well as the relocation of 1,243
linear feet of stream and "restoration" of 843 linear feet of stream (Elk River). Impacts are
indicated as being necessary for development of a Lowe's commercial site.
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission biologists are familiar with the project
area. The Elk River that flows through the property is an excellent brown and rainbow trout
resource. Public fishing and outdoor recreation activities are known to occur in the area. Streams
in the area are stocked with trout. In addition to trout species, other rare or listed species may be
present. Due to suitable wetland habitat on the property, there is potential for the presence of bog
turtles (Clemmys muhlenbergii, Threatened). Northern flying squirrels (Glaucomys sabrinus
coloratus, Endangered) are present on and around nearby Grandfather Mountain. This property is
not known to provide habitat for that species. Virginia big-eared bats (Corynorhinus townsendii
virginianus, Endangered) are present in the area of Grandfather Mountain. It is likely that some
of these bats may forage on/over the property. It is unlikely that the property provides any roost
habitat (caves) for big-eared bats. Direct or indirect impacts to rare or listed plant and animal
species cannot be precluded without professional species inventories and suitable habitat
evaluations.
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries - 1721 Mail Service Center - Raleieh, NC 27699-1721
BannerLowe 404/401 2 November 14, 2003
Based on the information provided by the applicant, several site visits and our knowledge
of the area, we are concerned about potential for direct and indirect impacts to the Elk River
ecosystem. If 404 permits and 401 certifications are issued, the following (non-prioritized)
recommendations and activities should be included in the permit:
1. Instream work and land disturbance within the 25-foot wide buffer zone are
prohibited during the trout spawning seasons of October 15 through April 15 to
protect the egg and fry stages of trout.
2. The river enhancement activities do not appear to restore natural fluvial geomorphic
conditions to the river. Generally, these activities and stream relocations should be
considered enhancements unless geomorphic or bioengineering calculations and
designs are provided. Otherwise, they should not be considered for full mitigation
credit.
3. Stream enhancements and relocations should be accomplished in the dry and fully
stabilized with vegetation prior to releasing waters to them. As appropriate and
practicable, stranded fish and other aquatic species must be safely collected and
transferred to suitable habitats.
4. Low Impact Development (LID) techniques should be used for the project to the
maximum extent practicable to reduce stormwater impacts from stormwater runoff
and hydrologic increases to surface waters and wetlands. This should include tree
islands with inverted sand filters and similar methodologies for parking lots and
medians. Pre and post development hydrographs should remain equal to the
maximum extent possible. Please note that this condition should apply to future out
parcel developments associated with the project site.
5. Any culverts 48" or larger should be buried a foot below streambed. Culverts less
than 48 inches in diameter should be buried to a depth equal to or greater than 20%
their size to allow for aquatic life passage. These measurements must be based on
natural thalweg depths. Floodplain benching should be provided as needed to ensure
natural fluvial and biological functions.
6. Sediment and erosion control measures should adhere to the design standards for
sensitive watersheds (15A NCAC 4B .0024).
7. Maximum undisturbed buffers should be provided for the Elk River and associated
tributaries. Minimum 100' buffers are preferred; however, buffer width averaging is
acceptable providing stormwater management activities are substantial.
8. All remaining waters, wetlands, and green spaces should be permanently preserved
and protected through conservation easements provided to the Blue Ridge Rural Land
Trust.
9. Thermal impacts to water should be avoided by using LID techniques or constructed
wetlands instead of typical stormwater ponds. Sunlight exposure of stormwater
facilities should be minimized by structure design features and by incorporating
native plants for shade. If typical stormwater ponds must be built, they should
incorporate native plants for shade and habitat values.
10. Stream and wetland impacts should be accomplished in a manner that maintains base
flows to remaining wetlands and stream channels.
11. Stream relocations and other activities should be designed and installed in a manner
that avoids loss of functionality. Stream modifications and stabilization activities
must not diminish geomorphic and biological functions.
12. The applicant has indicated that public fishing in the Elk River is acceptable;
however, they do not wish to advertise this opportunity. Based on the applicant's
comments, reasonable and licensed public fishing in the Elk River should not be
BannerLowe 404/401 3 November 14, 2003
prohibited. Coordination with the Blue Ridge Rural Land Trust should be beneficial
if fishing access management within the conservation easement is needed.
13. Beaver control should be provided on an ongoing basis to maintain project plantings,
stream relocations, and Elk River enhancements.
14. Utilities must be installed in a manner that preserves the integrity and functionality of
all remaining jurisdictional waters, wetlands, buffer zones and green spaces. .
15. Native plants, including shrubs and trees, should be planted along the floodplain to
restore both terrestrial and avian buffer zone habitats and benefit aquatic habitats.
Rare species like the Alder flycatcher should benefit from such plantings. We
recommend consultations with professional North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission biologists to determine native plant schedules. Planting suggestions and
plant supply sources may be obtained from NCWRC Stewardship biologist, Elizabeth
Hughes (828/274-3646).
16. Bog turtle and listed species surveys should be accomplished by professional
biologists prior to any land clearing activities for "wetland two". Bog turtle surveys
should be accomplished during the spring of 2004 by professional biologists using
state-of-the-art trapping and survey methodologies. Survey biologists must
coordinate these activities with Project Bog Turtle and the NCWRC. Required state
and federal collection permits must be obtained.
17. If possible, additional impact reductions to "wetland two" should be provided
through a local waiver of parking lot requirements. If a waiver is provided, "wetland
two" headwater seep and associated potential bog turtle habitat impacts should be
avoided or reduced The area should be preserved to the maximum extent
practicable. Impacts to "wetland two" should be coordinated with Chris McGrath,
NCWRC non-game biologist should parking lot reductions not preclude impacts to
this wetland.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this project. If you have any
questions regarding these comments, please contact me at 336/769-9153.
cc: John Dorney, DWQ
Boyce Hudson, DENR
Chris McGrath, WRC
® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
1721 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1721, 919-733-3633
Charles R. Fullwood. Executive Director
November 14, 2003
Mr. Bob Stultz WETLANDS 1401 GROUP
Collett & Associates
P O Box 36799
Charlotte, NC 28236
NOV 2 1 2003
North Carolina VV A-! it L'tk114L ' Y SECTION
RE: BannerLowe Property, Parking Lot Impervious Areas and Potential to Reduce
Jurisdictional Waters Impacts, Banner Elk, Avery County
Dear Mr. Stultz:
This correspondence is in response to our conversation of November 12, 2003 about the required
amount of parking lot and associated impacts to jurisdictional waters of the United States on the
referenced property. The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) is
authorized to comment and make recommendations xrfiich relate to the impacts of this project on
fish and wildlife through the Clean Water Act of 1977 and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 661-667d).
The BannerLowe project is presently under review by state and federal agencies pursuant to
Sections 404 and 401 of the Clean Water Act due to the amount of impacts to jurisdictional
waters and wetlands. NCWRC biologists are concerned about the impacts of urbanization to the
Elk River ecosystem. These concerns include (but are not limited to) the .loss of natural
floodplain river buffers, the destruction of a wetland that appears to provide suitable habitat for
bog turtles (Clemmys mtuhlenbergii, federally threatened/SA & NC endangered), and stormwater
impacts to trout waters. To ensure sound stewardship, professional bog turtle surveys should be
accomplished during the months of April through June; however, avoiding "wetland two" should
preclude surveys providing that direct and indirect impacts do not occur. Information about
indirect cumulative and secondary impact issues may be found at the NCWRC website at
http://yvwzv.ncwildlife.org/pg07 WildlifeSpeciesCon/pg7c3 impacts.pdf.
Project impacts to wetlands are proposed that appear avoidable. It is our understanding that the
amount of impacts to jurisdictional waters, especially impacts to `wetland two' could be reduced
if local land use planning officials provide a waiver for the number of parking spaces and tree
BannerLowe Waiver Request, 2 November 14, 2003
Elk River
islands required. It is our understanding that municipalities often provide variances from local
ordinances to reduce these parking lot requirements for "big box" developments as the amount of
needed parking is often less than that required. Parking lot size reductions can facilitate
preservation of environmental quality by preserving or providing ecosystem buffers. These areas
can provide ancillary aesthetically pleasing green spaces.
You have indicted that you will appear before the local Zoning Board of Adjustment to request a
waiver to reduce the parking lot size requirements. We support waivers that reduce impacts to
waters and wetlands. In this case, we recommend protecting as much of the seep and wetland
associated with "wetland two" as possible. Actions that combine parking requirements for Retail
A with Retail B parking areas should be considered as this could further reduce imperviousness.
After our meeting yesterday, some agency representatives considered another alternative. Would
it be possible to move Retail B to the proposed green space next to Highway 184 to avoid impacts
to "wetland two" and then preserve upslope areas associated with "wetland two" and the river?
As you are aware, we will comment directly to the Corps of Engineers, the NC Division of Water
Quality, and the Department of Environment and Natural Resources about the proposed impacts
to jurisdictional waters and wetlands. Based on our site visits and project review, it appears that
good site based environmental planning has been provided to the extent allowable without a local
waiver. We believe that additional environmental protections can be provided with a waiver that
avoids or reduces jurisdictional impacts. Should impacts to "wetland two" be reduced with a
local waiver, it is essential that you notify this office as well as the Corps of Engineers and the
NC Division of Water Quality without delay.
Thank you for your time and your consideration of the issues and concerns discussed at our site
meeting on November 12, 2003. If you have any questions regarding these comments, please
contact me at 336/769-9453.
Sincerely
Ron Linville
Regional Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
cc: Scott McLendon, USACOE
John Dorney, DWQ
Boyce Hudson, DENR
Chris McGrath, WRC

I N,
VVETI ANDs / 401 DROUR
DEC 0 4 2003
?a
® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
September 19, 2003
Ms. Maggie Girdwood
Crescent Resources, Inc.
400 South Tryon Street, Suite 1300
P.O. Box 1003
North Carolina, 28201-1003
RE: StoneWater Bay Stabilization, Mt. Island Lake, FERC Permit 42232, Gaston County.
Dear Ms. Girdwood:
This correspondence is in response to our review and comments regarding the above
referenced project. The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) is
authorized to comment and make recommendations which relate to the impacts of this project on
fish and wildlife through the Federal License of Water Resource Project Act (Federal Power Act-
16 U.S.C. 791a et seq.), and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended;
16 U.S.C. 661-667d). This activity will occur on Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Project Number 2232.
The project proposal is to stabilize 309 linear feet of shoreline in the area of the "B"
docks. Based on our previous review of the project in June, 1999, no wetlands, emergent
vegetation or woody debris were present in any of the community dock locations. Therefore, it
is our understanding that the project will not impact any environmental areas identified on Duke
Power's Shoreline Management Plan maps.
Based on the information provided by the applicant and our knowledge of the project
area, we will not object to the project. The following conditions are recommended:
1. Minimum class I (class II preferred) riprap or rock should be used as this size
rock improves aquatic habitat. Fabric matting may be used beneath the stone to
reduce erosion and turbidity. Rock or stone should be placed just above the high
water mark and towards the lake 5-6 feet when possible to provide continuous
aquatic edge habitat.
2. Stabilization efforts should be accomplished from the lake if practicable.
3. Any Large Woody Debris (LWD) should be maintained to the maximum extent
practicable to provide aquatic habitat. If relocated, the LWD must be securely
anchored so that it will remain where installed. Two trees to be placed along the
111 ce i 5/ ?
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 2 7699-1 72 1
Telephone: [phone] ext. 281 • Fax: [phone]
StoneWater Bay Stabilization, 2 September 19, 2003
waters edge for fish habitat should be securely anchored and must not impair
navigation.
4. Stringent erosion control measures should be installed where soil is disturbed and
maintained until project completion. Temporary or permanent herbaceous
vegetation should be planted on all bare soil within 10 days of ground disturbing
activities to provide long-term erosion control.
5. Disturbed banks may be revegetated with silky dogwood (Corpus amonum), silky
willow (Salix sericea), tag alder (Alnus serrulata), black willow (Salix nigra), and
sycamore (Platanus occidentalis) or other native plants to provide long term bank
stability and stream shading. Note that silky dogwood, silky willow and black
willow can be planted as live stakes collected during the dormant growing season.
Cuttings should be randomly planted and done on 4 foot centers from the waters
edge to the top of the bank. Trees should be planted on 10-12 foot centers. Banks
in these areas should also be seeded with an approved wetland seed mix or
temporary crop of wheat or rye.
6. Wide undisturbed shoreline buffers and natural vegetation should be maintained
to the extent practicable. Existing vegetation should be preserved.
7. The applicant should contact the NC Division of Water Quality and local planning
authorities to determine if a 401 Certification or local permits are needed for the
project and for any buffer infringements or impacts.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this project. If you have any questions
regarding these comments, please contact me at 336/769-9453.
Since(f gginal Signed
by J. R. Linville
Ron Linville
Regional Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
1
® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM 'NET) ODS1401 GROUP
TO: John Dorney, 404 Section Chief j0N , 7,
NC Division of Water Quality , 2uii:
FROM: Ron Linville, Regional Coordinator NATERQUAMSEMON
Habitat Conservation Program ?41
DATE: June 25, 2003
SUBJECT: Review of 401 Certification Application (No. 030621), Richard L. Carper,
Shoreline Stabilization, Lot 51, Northview Harbor Drive, Lake Norman,
Catawba County
The Division of Water Quality is requesting comments on the referenced
stabilization project from the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC)
to obtain a 404 permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The NCWRC has
reviewed information provided by the applicant, and field biologists on our staff are
familiar with habitat values of the project area. These comments are provided in
accordance with provisions of the Clean Water Act of 1977 (33 U.S.C. 466 et. seq.) and
the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d).
The applicant proposes to install 140 feet of river rock to stabilize shoreline on
Lake Norman. It is our understanding that 404 shoreline stabilization permits are only
issued where stabilization is needed to control eroding shorelines. We have not visited
the site so these comments are general instead of specific.
Based on the photographs provided, it appears that stabilization may not be
needed for some portions of the project area. However, if stabilization activities are
allowed by the US Army Corps of Engineers and the NC Division of Water Quality, the
following recommendations are provided for your consideration:
1. Stabilization activities should only be installed on existing shoreline areas
where active erosion is occurring. Minimum class I (class II preferred)
rock should be used as this size rock improves aquatic habitat. Fabric
matting may be used beneath the stone to reduce erosion and turbidity.
Rock should be placed just above the high water mark and towards the
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] ext. 281 • Fax: [phone]
Richard Carper, Lake Norman 2
Stabilization & Tree Removal
June 25, 2003
lake for as much distance as practicable to provide continuous aquatic
edge habitat.
2. Any Large Woody Debris (LWD) should be maintained to the maximum
extent practicable to provide aquatic habitat. If relocated, the LWD must
be securely anchored so that it will remain where installed.
3. Stringent erosion control measures should be installed where soil is
disturbed and maintained until project completion. Temporary or
permanent herbaceous vegetation should be planted on all bare soil within
10 days of ground disturbing activities to provide long-term erosion
control.
4. Disturbed banks should be revegetated with silky dogwood (Cornus
amonum), silky willow (Salix sericea), tag alder (Alnus serrulata), black
willow (Salix nigra), and sycamore (Platanus occidentalis) or other native
plants to provide long term bank stability and stream shading. Note that
silky dogwood, silky willow and black willow can be planted as live
stakes collected during the dormant growing season. Cuttings should be
randomly planted and done on 4 foot centers from the waters edge to the
top of the bank. Trees should be planted on 10-12 foot centers. Banks in
these areas should also be seeded with an approved wetland seed mix or
temporary crop of wheat or rye.
5. Wide undisturbed naturally vegetated shoreline buffers should be
maintained where possible to provide water quality and wildlife habitat
values. Understory plants provide essential habitats for song bird and
small animal species. Understory vegetation can improve aesthetics,
privacy and reduce noise associated with lake use activities.
6. As appropriate, the applicant should contact local planning authorities to
determine if a permit or variance is needed for the project and for any
buffer infringements or impacts.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this project. If you
have any questions regarding these comments, please contact me at 336/769-9453.