The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20201798 Ver 1_IRT meeting notes_20210105Strickland, Bev From: Katie Webber <kwebber@res.us> Sent: Tuesday, January 5, 2021 12:10 PM To: Crocker, Lindsay; Davis, Erin B; Tugwell, Todd J CIV USARMY CESAW (US); Haywood, Casey M CIV (USA); Wilson, Travis W. Cc: Bradley Breslow; Frasier Mullen; George Subject: [External] RE: Six Runs IRT meeting notes. Attachments: 12-15-20 site meeting notes Six Runs_revised.pdf Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to Report Spam. Good afternoon, I would like to distribute a revised memo based on some additional notes I received from the Corps. Thank you! Katie From: Katie Webber Sent: Monday, January 4, 2021 2:33 PM To: 'Crocker, Lindsay' <Lindsay.Crocker@ncdenr.gov>; Davis, Erin B <erin.davis@ncdenr.gov>; Tugwell, Todd J CIV USARMY CESAW (US) <Todd.J.Tugwell@usace.army.mil>; Haywood, Casey M CIV (USA) <Casey.M.Haywood@usace.army.mil>; Wilson, Travis W. <travis.wilson@ncwildlife.org> Cc: Bradley Breslow <bbreslow@res.us>; Frasier Mullen <fmullen@res.us>; George <gklankford9l@gmail.com> Subject: Six Runs IRT meeting notes. Good afternoon, Thank you again for your time at the Six Runs site on December 15, 2020. 1 overlooked sending out our meeting notes at the end of the year, but please find them attached now. If you have any questions or if I should amend to include additional notes please let me know. Thank you, Katie Webber, LSS Project Manager RES I res.us Office: 984.275.3483 Cell:410.279.5741 **We moved on March 2nd! Our new office is located at 3600 Glenwood Avenue, Suite 100, Raleigh, North Carolina 27612. 1 fires To: IRT and NCDMS From: Katie Webber - RES Subject: REVISED - Six Runs Mitigation Project site visit Date: Initial Memo January 4, 2021; Revised Memo January 5, 2021 Attendees: 3600 Glenwood Avenue, Suite 100 Raleigh NC 27612 Erin Davis, DWR Brad Breslow, RES, Todd Tugwell, USACE Katie Webber, RES Casey Haywood, USACE Frasier Mullen, RES Travis Wilson, NC Wildlife Matt DeAngelo, RES Lindsay Crocker, NCDMS George Lankford, George K. Lankford, LLC Summary: REVISED - additional comments received from the IRT in response to the initial memo are included at the bottom of this memo. Site visit was held to introduce site to North Carolina Interagency Review Team (IRT) and gain initial support for Six Runs Mitigation Project, which will deliver 6,500 stream mitigation credits (SMUs) and 4.0 wetland mitigation credits (WMUs). The project belongs to the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS) and is a full - delivery contract with RES. Initial feedback to the proposal from the IRT based on our visit is summarized below: Overall: • IRT prefers that crossings are included in the easement where possible. • Crossings and any dam work will need their own regulatory permitting if necessary; not covered under NWP 27. Crossings may be agricultural or improved and we'll address when we get to that point in project development. • Discuss beaver management in plan and ensure that management plan is realistic for the site. • IRT suggests developing distinct planting zones based on reference communities throughout the site. • IRT suggests reviewing understory plantings during mitigation plan development. • Anticipate an adaptive management plan that would discuss mosaic systems, moisture regimes, beavers, and etc., especially for the bottom of Brad's Branch. Above E. Darden Road: • Determine if power line above E. Darden Road to house can be moved out of easement. • Ensure 30 days flow is realistic for MT2. • If DMS/RES pursue wetland credit above the road, address crediting ratio in mit plan (RES-DMS discuss) • Ag field above BB -A is a concern for sediment contributions. IRT recommends considering in mitigation if whole reach could turn into E1. • Coordinate with NCDOT regarding ROW and pipe under road (can be difficult but still try) res.us Below E. Darden Road: • IRT recommends developing P2-specific vegetative success plan for the portion of Brad's Branch that will be cut down. Ensure the mitigation plan discusses and addresses typical P2 issues. • IRT recommends ensuring that dam rehab will not result in placement of fill in wetlands below the dam. • For the wetlands adjacent to DE4, IRT recommends making sure hydro isn't already meeting standards by providing pre -recto hydro (if we say 12%, can't already be 12%) • Ensure DE4 and Brad's Branch are not running parallel and are appropriately laid out for the site • IRT suggested running NCWAM to document rehabilitation or enhancement approach for wetlands associated with DE4. Enhancement may be more appropriate than rehabilitation because the area is already wooded and may have sufficient hydro period already. • Install wells and collect data on DE4 wetlands. IRT recommend a year's worth of data. Several wells will document transitions of wetland hydroperiods. • Leave wells in during construction. Bottom of Brad's Branch: • IRT suggested running NCWAM to document rehabilitation or enhancement approach for wetlands associated with the bottom of Brad's Branch. Rehabilitation may be more appropriate than enhancement because it is going to have significant functional uplift overall. o A ratio of 1.5:1 on bottom wetland (rehabilitation area) is realistic, but cutout the wooded areas at the bottom as enhancement. • IRT suggested exploring giving the trees a year to grow before "turning the water on" for the bottom of the site. This would not accelerate crediting but could potentially enhance vegetative growth outcomes if the bottom will be very wet. • IRT suggested exploring placement of woody debris, artificial wind throws, and earthen mounds in the bottom to allow for tree success early on. • Ensure all novel approaches are well documented in mitigation plan. • At bottom, IRT suggested monitoring with wells before construction would not help support future success criteria because the site is already quite wet and the functional uplift will be based on stream connectivity instead. Therefore, RES may prefer to have stream connectivity standard instead Thank you for your time and initial support for the project. We look forward to working together with you to develop this site into a successful mitigation bank. Thank you, Katie Webber, LSS Project Manager ADDITIONAL COMMENTS RECEIVED FROM IRT ON JANUARY 5, 2020: • Transitional areas from stream to wetland that are identified should be monitored with drone or fixed photo points. • NW3 for maintenance of dam • IRT encourages tracking understory vegetation • JD must be done for all wetlands areas • IRT recommends an Adaptive management plan if site is too wet 0 • Evidence of beaver in wetland area- this should be mentioned in MP. If keeping beaver, describe in plan how that would look. If swamp wetland, call it that. Travis notes beaver in sandy system like this not desired- could hit a nick point and cause a mess • Distinguish open water areas in MP • IRT encourages variability in site habitats- should all be well documented in MP • Could have issues with plant growth in the wetland areas cypress. Early plant is fine but final approval before authorization is at the risk of the sponsor, please note in MP.