The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20140194 Ver 1_Meeting Minutes_20140325Strickland, Bev From: Kulz, Eric Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 8:59 AM To: Strickland, Bev Subject: FW: Roses Creek Agency Meeting Minutes Attachments: Roses Agency_Minutes_2014_03_17.pdf Eric W. Kulz Environmental Senior Specialist 401 and Buffer Permitting Unit NCDENR - division of Water Resources — Water Quality Permitting Section 1650 MSC • ' ' .I MI E -mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties From: Smith, Chris [mai Ito: csmithCd)icaena.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 8:25 AM To: Tsomides, Harry; Mcdonald, Mike; Haupt, Mac; Pearce, Guy; Wiesner, Paul; todd.tuawellCa)usace.army.mil, McCormick, Tasha L SAW; Kulz, Eric; bowers.toddCa)epa.Qov; scott.jonesCa)usace.army.mil; david.w.brownCa)usace.army.mil; marella buncickCa)fws.Qov Cc: Smith, Ryan; McKeithan, Katie; Williams, Kevin Subject: Roses Creek Agency Meeting Minutes All, Please find attached the meeting minutes from the March 17th field meeting at the Roses Creek Mitigation Site. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments. Thanks, Chris L. Smith, PE Project Engineer, Ecological Restoration ICA Engineering, Inc. 5121 Kingdom Way, Suite 100 Raleigh, NC 27607 T 919.851.6066 1 D 919.900.1627 1 F 919.851.6846 csmith(aDicaeng.com I www.icaeng.com � a „s a� es S-eG'. „s w. „�+� ,us4`iu sY cowa/ ur.,,sr u� ,ar �ruNr,�r .Y. �..i,G,;e fe 7 ur Uo, ', . W y, OU al -6 , G+ Me , - ,ec eeeee ire , G+ U ,C,,ze c read, pl/w, ,re copy, use e v ge oraoy pa o. Y YOU ? �Ve , ece./vew vssaae „ erroc piease ce e ah, cop/es o ssage aod , cff'a ,e se, Oer , „ n J, r y r.',.0 ep_a'rr e-;,, ,.. ICA� Engineering MEETING MINUTES DATE OF ISSUANCE: March 21, 2014 PROJECT: Roses Creek Mitigation Site NCDENR Contract No. 5786 OWNER: NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources 217 West Jones St., Suite 3000A Raleigh, NC 27603 ENGINEER: ICA Engineering 5121 Kingdom Way, Suite 100 Raleigh, NC 27607 Engineer's Project No.:1402400 AGENCY MEETING: The Agency Meeting for the Roses Creek Mitigation Site was held at 9:30 am on Monday, March 17, 2014 at the project site in Burke County. The following were in attendance: Ryan Smith ICA Engineering Katie McKeithan ICA Engineering Chris Smith ICA Engineering Todd Tugwell Corps of Engineers Scott Jones Corps of Engineers Tasha McCormick Corps of Engineers David Brown Corps of Engineers Paul Wiesner Ecosystem Enhancement Program Harry Tsomides Ecosystem Enhancement Program Michael McDonald Ecosystem Enhancement Program Mac Haupt Ecosystem Enhancement Program Guy Pearce Ecosystem Enhancement Program Todd Bowers US Environment Protection Agency Marella Buncick US Fish and Wildlife Service Eric Kulz NC Division of Water Quality The following represents highlights of discussions that occurred during the site visit: Chris Smith gave a synopsis of the project site: • Site consists of four (4) streams: i. Roses Creek and three (3) unnamed tributaries. ii. The drainage areas are as follows: Roses Creek — 5.2 mil, UT 1 - 35 AC, UT 2 - 47 AC, UT 3— 10 AC. iii. All channels classified as perennial on the DWQ form. iv. Roses Creek is a designated trout stream that flows into Simpson Creek which feeds Irish Creek which feeds lake Rhodhiss. Approximately 3,500 linear feet of Roses Creek is proposed for restoration with approximately 200 linear feet at the downstream tie -in being proposed as Enhancement II. Restoration is proposed for the entire reach of UT 3. 5121 Kingdom Way, Suite 100 • Raleigh, NC 27607 • Phone: 919 - 851 -6066 • Fax: 919 - 851 -6846 MEMORANDUM — AGENCY MEETING Roses Creek Mitigation Site NCDENR Contract No. 005786 Page 2 of 3 • A combination of El, Ell and restoration is proposed for UT's 1 and 2. • It is anticipated that all restoration reaches will be Priority 1 with minimal bench cuts. • All necessary crossings will be culverted and fenced to completely exclude cattle from all reaches within the conservation easement. i. One crossing will be located on UT 1 at either the existing location or at the upstream end of the reach. ii. Two crossings are proposed on UT 2, one at the current residential crossing and one upstream of the confluence with Roses Creek. iii. The existing crossing of Roses Creek will remain or be upgraded in the existing location. • Impoundments upstream of UT 1 and UT 2 were non - negotiable for inclusion within the proposed conservation easement. kikII &VIAN:1 2. Multiple options were discussed regarding mitigation (and subsequent credits) for UT 1, including Restoration and Enhancement I and II. • The only proposed area for restoration along UT 1 was at the upstream beginning of the reach where there is the possibility to return the channel to its historic location within the valley in a remnant "meander scroll ". i. The meander scroll is an approximately 150 linear feet of abandoned channel that is offline from the existing, straight line alignment of UT 1. The abandoned channel is now a linear wetland and is heavily influenced by cattle. The remaining UT 1 reach has the potential to be Enhancement I or II or some combination of both. • It is anticipated that invert control may be needed upstream of the confluence with Roses Creek to deter the potential of a headcut upstream of an existing tree that currently is maintaining grade. 3. Adjustments to Roses Creek's plan form are anticipated throughout much of the site. However, an attempt will be made to utilize as much of the existing plan form as possible in the design of the restored channel. • There were discussions concerning the modification of the pattern of Roses Creek downstream of UT 3 through the existing tortuous meanders. The IRT expressed a desire to utilize portions of the existing channel as much as possible. However, it is anticipated that many of the meanders will need to be modified to create a stable pattern. 4. The apparent consensus is that restoration of UT 2 through the existing pasture is most appropriate downstream of the existing culverted stream crossing. This entails returning the channel to its natural valley away from the existing road. Enhancement II appears to be most appropriate upstream of the existing culverted crossing on UT 2. 5. The apparent consensus is that restoration of UT 3 along the entire reach is the most appropriate option. This will entail removal of the existing berm that was created when the channel was modified historically. It is anticipated that UT 3's design channel will be relocated to its natural valley through the existing marginal wetland in the pasture. 6. Marella Buncick discussed the fact that the site likely contains habitat for the Northern Long - eared Bat, which may be added to the list of threatened and endangered species by November of this year. S:\ Roses _Creek \Dots \Meetings \Roses_Agency_M in utes_2014_03_17.docx MEMORANDUM — AGENCY MEETING Roses Creek Mitigation Site NCDENR Contract No. 005786 Page 3 of 3 Marella explained that it will be important to discuss in the mitigation plan how the proposed activities will directly affect potential bat habitat to determine if any additional measures will be necessary to protect the bats. • Marella indicated that the USFWS would be willing to perform a Northern Long -eared Bat survey if necessary. • There is no grandfather clause for sites permitted before a species is added to the Threatened and Endangered list, therefore it is best to address any potential issues at the beginning of the project to deter potential delays in the future. m4kil3Z970dil;1;kIlHelibi S:\ Roses _Creek \Docs \Meetings \Roses_Agency_M in utes_2014_03_17.docx