Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20130918 Ver 4_U2525B Final mitigation plan_revised_March2014_20140301Baker, Virginia From: Wanucha, Dave Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2014 4:51 PM To: Baker, Virginia Subject: FW: U- 2525BC mitigation (UNCLASSIFIED) Attachments: U2525B Final mitigation plan_revised_March2014docx.pdf Hey Ginny, See attached mitigation plan as discussed earlier today. This email provides some additional background. Page 5 provides a description of their Monitoring Plan. The drawings are too big to send via email. You can find them on DOTS website at http : / /207.4.62.65 /PDEA /PermApps/ Their plan calls out certain portions of Level 1 monitoring vs the entire protocol. However, our permit states that they should follow all Monitoring Level 1 protocols. They did not call us out on that when we wrote the permit. So, we could argue that they had an opportunity to request a revision of that condition at the time when they initially received it, but they did not. Don't they review the permits when they receive them? There may be some middle ground here. I have not found the Corps' 404 yet to see what they wrote. Dave W Please be advised: Beginning October 23, 2014, the Winston Salem Regional Office (WSRO) of the NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR) will begin moving to a new location. Starting October 22, 2014 at 5:00 pm, our new main telephone number will change to 336- 776 -9800. If you contact staff at their prvious telephone number, you will be directed to their new direct telephone number. All regional office services, including file review, will continue and all appointments need to be prescheduled with WSRO staff during this transition. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact the main number provided above during our normal hours of operation, 8:00 am to 5:00 pm. Effective October 22, 2014 at 5:00 pm, my office telephone number will change to 335 - 776 -9703. Dave Wanucha NC DENR Winston Salem Region Office NC Division of Water Resources Transportation Permitting Unit Winston - Salem, NC Cell (336) 403 -5655 Office (336) 776 -9703 Dave.Wanucha @ncdenr.gov 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. - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Price, Gregory W Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2014 12:31 PM To: Williams, Andrew E SAW Cc: Beauregard, Rachelle; Cox, Marissa R; Feulner, Brett M; Wanucha, Dave Subject: RE: U- 2525BC mitigation (UNCLASSIFIED) Andy, Attached is the revised mitigation plan. Please replace this revision with the original mitigation plan narrative you received in permit application package. NCDOT believes that the revision (particularly Section 2.0 Objectives) supports our reasoning to use onsite mitigation versus EEP and justifies our mitigation calculation stated in the permit application. We believe this satisfies your concerns addressed below; however, if you need more information, please let me know. Thanks, Andy. G reg - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Williams, Andrew E SAW [mailto: Andrew .E.Williams2 @usace.army.mil] Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2014 3:25 PM To: Price, Gregory W Cc: Williams, Andrew E SAW Subject: U- 2525BC mitigation (UNCLASSIFIED) Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE G reg, As we discussed earlier today on the phone, I will need some additional information regarding the mitigation proposal for U- 252513C. You may want to discuss with Jamie Lancaster as this is a very similar situation as R -2413. The Federal 2008 Compensatory Mitigation Rule states, In -lieu fee projects typically involve larger, more ecologically valuable parcels, and more rigorous scientific and technical analysis, planning and implementation than permittee - responsible mitigation. They also devote significant resources to identifying and addressing high - priority resource needs on a watershed scale, as reflected in their compensation planning framework. For these reasons, the district engineer should give preference to in -lieu fee program credits over permittee - responsible mitigation, where these considerations are applicable. However, as with the preference for mitigation bank credits, these same considerations may be used to override this preference where appropriate. Additionally, in cases where permittee - responsible mitigation is likely to successfully meet performance standards before advance credits secured from an in -lieu fee program are fulfilled, the district engineer should also give consideration to this factor in deciding between in lieu fee mitigation and permittee responsible mitigation. Currently, when the Corps issues permits for NCDOT and mitigation is purchased from EEP, we justify the preference by stating, "Mitigation for this project is proposed to be provided by the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP), which deviates from the options presented in the Final Mitigation Rule, 33 CFR chapter 11, §332.3(b)(1) -(6). The NCEEP has an approved In -Lieu Fee Instrument, dated July 28, 2010, which establishes procedures for the delivery and timing of mitigation. The NCEEP has been in operation since 2003, and has established a record for providing successful, consolidated mitigation sites, utilizing watershed plan procedures. As required by Section IV(f)(3)(c) of the NCEEP Instrument, Mitigation provided by NCEEP is also constructed and functioning in advance of NCDOT impacts, resulting in reduced temporal lag and reduced uncertainty over project success. Because of these factors, it has been determined that the use of NCEEP is environmentally preferable to other alternatives, which is consistent with the criteria presented in §332.3(a)(1) of the Rule." As such, NCDOT will need to indicate why it is environmentally preferable to provide on -site mitigation instead of through EEP. Also, for each stream that is being "relocated" or restored, the USACE stream scores are in the mid -50's, which typically results in a 2:1 ratio. Your current proposal for on -site mitigation results in a 1:1 ratio for these streams. Please provide us with any additional information that you feel is pertinent regarding the proposed mitigation that will assist us in determining if the relocation may provide all the appropriate mitigation or if additional credits will need to be purchased through EEP. Please contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Thanks. Andrew Williams Regulatory Project Manager U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Raleigh Regulatory Field Office 3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105 Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587 919 - 554 -4884 extension 26 The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we continue to do so, please complete the Customer Satisfaction Survey located at http : / /regulatory.usacesurvey.com /. Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.   1    Mitigation Plan Greensboro Eastern Loop Guilford County, North Carolina T.I.P. Number U-2525B WBS No. 34821.1.1 August 12, 2013- (Revised March 17, 2014) 1.0 BASELINE INFORMATION Transportation Improvement Project (TIP) U-2525B involves the construction of a new section of highway known as the Greensboro Eastern Loop in Guilford County (Appendix A-Figure 1). The proposed construction of U-2525B involves unavoidable impacts to jurisdictional resources within USGS Hydrologic Unit 03030002 of the Cape Fear River Basin. NCDOT proposes to offset a portion of these impacts with on-site mitigation. TIP U-2525B is located in the Central Piedmont Ecoregion. The topography in the project study area is generally characterized as rolling hills with moderately steep slopes along the drainage ways. Elevations in the study area range from 700 to 750 feet above mean sea level (USGS 1968). The project study area and surrounding area consists of low density rural, residential, commercial, agricultural, and forested areas. The mitigation site selection and mitigation work plan sections of this plan will refer to the identification labels given the affected jurisdictional resources in the onsite mitigation review. 2.0 OBJECTIVES NCDOT proposes to fulfill a portion of its mitigation requirements associated with the unavoidable impacts of this project with on-site and in-kind mitigation, as allowable per the Federal Mitigation Rule, 33 CFR 332.3. The remainder of the mitigation required for this project will be acquired through the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program. The goal of the proposed onsite mitigation is to offset and mitigate for a portion of the impacts due to U-2525B by relocating and/or restoring adjacent stream systems to their natural conditions through the removal of in-stream structures, restoration of channel dimensions and profiles through natural channel design, and establishment of riparian buffer areas. This will be achieved on three individual sites described below on a total of 2,055 linear feet of stream. These mitigation sites are located within the same USGS hydrologic unit, as well as within the same watershed as the associated permitted impacts, where it is the most likely that the mitigation will replace the loss of aquatic functions and services incurred by both the associated impact and the project as a whole. This will be achieved by: improving the floodplain functions; establishing protected riparian buffers; improving water quality within the watershed by reducing sediment, nutrient, and pollution inputs; and increasing channel stability while reducing bank erosion. NCDOT has been providing mitigation for road projects for more than 20 years and has an established record of acquiring, designing, and constructing successful mitigation sites with over 225 closed out sites protected in perpetuity through fee simple ownership or conservation   2    easements throughout the state. NCDOT has invested a significant amount of research and analysis on the proposed stream mitigation sites including measuring and classifying the existing streams, identifying and measuring reference reaches, and evaluating the watershed based on the current land use and the projected future land use. A rigorous analysis of the proposed mitigation streams and local watershed has been performed and has been used in the design of the proposed mitigation and will result in a high probability of success. Currently, EEP has a deficient of approximately 37,000 feet of stream mitigation credits within HUC 03030002 for projects scheduled to let through June 2015. Onsite stream relocation and restoration will result in reduced temporal lag in the replacement for lost aquatic resources. North Buffalo Creek and South Buffalo Creek are currently on the Final 2012 North Carolina 303(d) lists of impaired waterways. Reducing impacts to tributaries of these impaired waterways will prevent further degradation to the local watershed. 3.0 SITE SELECTION All sites are located within the proposed, new right-of-way for U-2525B. Each site was evaluated both internally as well as discussed and reviewed with regulatory personnel during concurrence meetings and field visits. Existing conditions for each site is provided in this section. Additional information on existing conditions, geomorphology parameters, and proposed stream measurements are provided in Appendix D. SITE 2-UT to South Buffalo Creek-ONEID 041-029 Site 2 (Site 5 in the Permit Drawings) is located approximately from Station 61+50 to 73+70 and scored 59 on the USACE Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet (Appendix G). Site 2 includes the relocation and restoration of 1307 linear feet of UT to South Buffalo Creek. UT to South Buffalo Creek has a NCDWQ Best Usage Classification of WS-V; NSW. Within Site 2, UT to South Buffalo Creek flows from its headwaters toward a confluence with a larger reach through two distinct valley sections (Appendix A-Figure 2A). Within the upper section, the west side (river right) valley wall is relatively steep. The east side valley wall and surrounding valley of the lower section are relatively flat. The riparian buffer of the upper section has been cleared within the last 5-10 years. The subsequent revegetation has led to a landscape with a high density of scrub-shrub successional species. Within the lower section, the riparian buffer consists of more widely spaced, larger mature woody vegetation. Throughout both valley sections, the channel is incised and entrenched and exhibits signs of instability. These moderately sinuous channels classify as Rosgen B5 streams. Sand materials dominate the channel, but there are also inclusions of gravel and bed rock. The watershed for this UT to South Buffalo Creek is 0.10 square miles at the downstream end of the site. The watershed is approximately 55% forested, 40% agricultural fields, and 5% impervious. Future zoning of the watershed is split between low (3 to 5 dwelling units/acre), interim, and moderate (5 to 12 dwelling units/acre) residential. SITE 4-UT to North Buffalo Creek- ONEID 041-031 Site 4 (Site 18 in the Permit Drawings) is located approximately from Station 217+00 to 220+10 and scored 52 on the USACE Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet (Appendix G). Site 4 includes restoration of approximately 386 linear feet of UT to North Buffalo Creek. UT to North Buffalo Creek has a best usage classification WS-V; NSW. UT to North Buffalo Creek flows through Site 4 within a broad and gently sloping valley (Appendix A-Figure 2B). The riparian   3    area has been greatly disturbed with some portions remaining cleared of woody vegetation and other areas consisting of scattered large woody vegetation. For most of the stream length, the riparian buffer is densely vegetated with a mix of shrubs and trees. The channel is incised and the upper section is moderately entrenched. The channel appears to have been modified. An earthen dam is located within the bottom third of the reach. This moderately sinuous reach classifies as a Rosgen B5 stream type. An existing 15 foot wide sanitary sewer line is located along the left bank (east side) of the existing channel approximately 25 to 30 feet from the left bank. The watershed is 0.57 square miles at the downstream end of the site. The watershed is 50% forested, 40% agricultural fields, 5% light residential, and 5% impervious. Future zoning of the watershed is primarily low residential (3 to 5 dwelling units/acre) with some moderate residential (5 to 12 dwelling units/acre). SITE 5-UT to North Buffalo Creek- ONEID 041-032 Site 5 (Site 20 in the Permit Drawings) is located approximately from Station 242+08 to 245+03 and scored 57 on the USACE Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet (Appendix G). Site 5 includes relocation and restoration of approximately 362 linear feet of North Buffalo Creek. UT to North Buffalo Creek has a best usage classification WS-V; NSW. UT to North Buffalo Creek flows within Site 5 from its headwaters to confluence with a larger reach (Appendix A-Figure 2C). The stream valley is relatively broad with a flat down valley slope. The immediate riparian buffer consists of mature woody vegetation and kudzu on portions of the hillside that are located outside of the proposed right of way. The channel is slightly to moderately incised and appears relatively stable with the exception of about 100 feet of channel that is cutting through a meander bend. This moderately sinuous reach classifies as a Rosgen E5 stream type. The channel bed includes a significant amount of artificially introduced large stone. The watershed is 0.51 square miles at the downstream end of the site. The watershed is 50% forested, 5% agricultural fields, 30% light residential, and 15% impervious. 4.0 MITIGATION WORK PLAN Each mitigation site will be constructed in conjunction with the construction of the roadway project. Following the successful completion of site grading and stabilization, each site will be reforested with a mix of bare-root tree species and live stakes as described in the Streambank Reforestation Specifications in Appendix F. The stream channels will be stabilized by planting live stakes on three foot centers and matting with coir fiber on the banks as necessary. Morphological characteristics of the proposed streams are provided in Appendix D. In accordance with the guidance and standard procedures of NCDOT’s Roadside Environmental Unit (REU), seeding and mulching will be performed on all disturbed areas within the mitigation sites for stabilization purposes. All floodplains and floodplain slopes will be over-excavated 6 inches starting 3 feet from top of stream bank and backfilled with topsoil to final grade (see detail on OSM-2 in design plan sheets). Additionally, per NCDOT’s Native Seeding and Mulching Provision, 4000 lbs/acre of lime will be applied and 500 lbs/acre of 10-20-20 fertilizer will be applied. An as-built report will be submitted within 60 days of completion of the project. On sites that have kudzu present within the ROW limits, NCDOT proposes to minimize the potential spread of this species from construction-related activities. NCDOT will attempt to suppress the Kudzu within the ROW of the mitigation sites by herbicide applications prior to reforestation and   4    during the required post construction monitoring period. The Natural Environment Section shall be contacted to provide construction assistance to ensure that each mitigation area is constructed appropriately. SITE 2-UT to South Buffalo This site includes the relocation and restoration of 1307 feet of UT to South Buffalo Creek that is currently located within the footprint of the proposed roadway through a priority II restoration approach. The channel is currently an incised B5 Rosgen stream type channel that will be restored to a stable B5 channel by establishing a lower valley at the bankfull elevation. Proper sinuosity and radius of curvature will be restored to the channel to provide stability. The channel will be elevated to its historic floodplain in some locations where possible, improving its dimension and allowing bankfull and higher flows to access the floodplain. Proper riffle-pool sequencing will also be restored to the channel with corrected pattern and the installation of rock and log structures. The installation of these structures will increase stability of the profile and banks while allowing time for vegetation to establish and natural bed materials to be transported throughout the system. Special attention was given to the possible change in flow regime in this system as it may be influenced by storm water runoff from the proposed roadway. To account for this change the stream design uses dimensionless ratios that lean toward natural channel systems with a more urban watershed than a rural watershed. For instance, the radius of curvature tends to be on the larger side to ensure that the bends in the stream channel will be gradual enough to accommodate the flashy flows that come with increased impervious area. Additionally, the belt width of the proposed channels were designed slightly more narrow than a system with no development in its watershed and the curvature of floodplains were reduced to account for increased flood flows over time as the watersheds develop. Designing the floodplain to be less sinuous allows for the new system to convey flood flows without excessively increasing shear stress along the edges of the newly constructed floodplain. The buffer for this channel will extend 50 feet from the top of bank on both sides and totals approximately 3.14 acres, all of which lies within the proposed U-2525B right-of-way. SITE 4-UT to North Buffalo Creek This site includes the restoration of 386 linear feet of UT to North Buffalo Creek through a Priority II restoration approach. The appropriate dimension, pattern, and profile will be restored to the channel. The dimension will be corrected by connecting the bankfull stream channel to a floodplain bench. A C5 Rosgen stream type channel is proposed. The pattern will be re-adjusted to return the proper pool to pool spacing and radius of curvature to the channel. This channel is confined along the left bank by the adjacent sanitary sewer line. The right bank is densely wooded. Therefore, it is necessary for the proposed stream channel to cross over the existing channel location several times to create the desired pattern. The profile will be corrected and stabilized by using rock structures. These structures will hold the profile in place and prevent head cuts until the proper bed material has had a chance to be distributed through the stream channel and vegetation has had a chance to stabilize the banks. Proposed design parameters for the proposed stream can be found in the morphological table in Appendix C. The buffer for this channel will extend 50 feet from the top of bank on both sides and totals approximately 1.01 acres, all of which lies within the proposed U-2525B right-of-way. Currently, an existing 15 foot wide sewer easement encroaches   5    on the left side of the 50 foot wide buffer. SITE 5-UT to North Buffalo Creek This site includes the relocation and restoration of 362 linear feet of UT to North Buffalo Creek with a Priority II restoration approach. The stream will be relocated outside of the fill slope of the proposed roadway. The appropriate dimension, pattern, and profile will be constructed on the relocated channel. A Rosgen type C5 channel is proposed for this stream. A lower belt width ratio is proposed due to the urbanized watershed with potential for flashy flows. The proposed channel profile will be stabilized by rock structures. The structures will provide stability and allow time for native bed materials to be transported through the newly constructed stream and for vegetation to stabilize the banks. Proposed design parameters for the proposed stream can be found in the morphological table in Appendix D. The buffer for this channel will extend 50 feet from the top of bank on both sides and totals approximately 0.91 acres, all of which lies within the proposed U-2525B right-of-way. An existing 15 foot wide sewer easement will make a perpendicular crossing of the stream near the culvert inlet. During the “4C” Meeting held on March 21, 2013 there was a discussion about the “potential road” shown on the plans at Site 5 and if NCDOT could acquire right of way between the road and mitigation site. There is a no future road planned at this location. That information was from old plans and has been removed from the plans. 5.0 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS An As-built will be submitted within 60 days of completion of the project. The As-built will document changes in the dimension, pattern, profile, vegetation plantings, and structures of the constructed channels. Success for vegetation monitoring within the riparian buffer areas are based on the survival of at least 260 stems of five year old trees at year five. Assessment of channel stability will be based on the survival of riparian vegetation and visual observation of channel dimensions, pattern or profile as well as inspection of in stream structure. 6.0 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS All of the mitigation sites will be monitored according to the April 2003 Stream Mitigation Guidelines. The following components of Level 1 monitoring will be performed each year of the 5-year monitoring period: reference photos, plant survival (identification of specific problem areas, estimated causes and proposed/required remedial action); visual inspection of channel stability. Physical measurements of channel stability/morphology will not be performed. A monitoring report will be submitted within 60 days after completing the monitoring. 7.0 OTHER INFORMATION: STREAM REFERENCE RESTORATION STUDIES A reference reach is a stream segment that represents a stable channel within a particular valley morphology. A stable stream is defined as a stream, which over time and in the present climate transports the flows and sediment produced by its watershed in such a manner that the dimension, pattern, and profile are maintained without either aggrading or degrading (Rosgen, 1996, 1998). The methodology used for the reference reach analysis consisted of the following tasks: (1)   6    identify reference quality sections of the project reaches that could be used for dimension and/or pattern analysis, (2) identify nearby reference reaches that have been previously located and surveyed and can be used to provide pattern data, (3) survey and classify the stream morphology for the on-site reference reaches, and (4) develop dimensionless ratios based on reference reach data and past project data under similar morphological conditions. Several locations were identified and surveyed (Appendix C) within the project reaches where stable bankfull features had developed and provided information regarding bankfull dimension. These locations were identified by the presence of a consistent bankfull indicator, typically a well formed bankfull bench, and stable, vegetated stream banks. Cross-section surveys were conducted in these locations to evaluate stream dimension. The bankfull cross-section areas were then plotted versus drainage area and compared to published Rural Piedmont regional curve data, provided by the North Carolina Stream Restoration Institute (SRI) (See Appendix C-Figure 3). As illustrated in Figure 3, the cross sectional areas surveyed at stable on-site reference reach locations correlates with the Rural Piedmont Regional Curve Data. Also, three of the four off-site reference reach locations correspond with the Rural Piedmont Regional Curve Data. More consideration is given to the cross sectional data gathered at stable reaches on-site because they more accurately reflect the conditions that will provide stability for that particular stream’s flow regime. The three off-site reference reaches that correlate with the Rural Piedmont Regional Curve Data have been used previously in other natural channel designs. The stream designs were based on the collected data since this data was verified by the Rural Piedmont Regional Curve Data. Shear stress calculations were completed for all reaches and are included in Appendix D. The data shows that the shear stresses for the proposed designs will be able to move the bed material of the streams. Shear stress is reduced on Sites 2 and 5, and slightly increased on site 4. Although most reaches have decreases in shear stress, incorporation of in-stream structures for grade control is implemented on all reaches. This is especially important since all restoration/relocation sites will be excavated on new location and will not immediately have the properly sorted materials transported in from upstream immediately after construction. Constructed riffles and harvesting of existing bed material will be used to the extent feasible to provide this immediate supply of properly sorted bed material. 8.0 DETERMINATION OF CREDITS NCDOT proposes to supplement mitigation provided by EEP with 2055 feet of onsite stream mitigation. All of the proposed mitigation sites exhibit some form of degradation. Site 2 and Site 5 include relocation of the channels that would be under fill slopes of the original roadway design. Based on field and meeting discussions with agency representatives and per the NCDOT plans and 401/404 permit application for U-2525B; NCDOT proposes a 1:1 mitigation ratio for a total of 2055 feet of stream credits. An as-built report will be submitted within 60 days of completion of the each mitigation site to verify actual mitigation areas constructed and planted. The success of the mitigation areas and determination of final credits will be based upon successful completion and closeout of the monitoring period.   7    8.1 CREDIT RELEASE SCHEDULE NCDOT proposes immediate, full release of the proposed mitigation to offset the unavoidable impacts associated with U-2525B. 9.0 GEOGRAPHIC SERVICE AREA The proposed Geographic Service Area (GSA) for the mitigation sites is composed of the 8-digit Hydrologic Cataloging Unit (HUC) 03030002. 10.0 SITE PROTECTION INSTRUMENT The mitigation areas are within the NCDOT Right-of-Way for the project. They will be managed to prohibit all use inconsistent with their use as mitigation properties, including any activity that would materially alter the biological integrity or functional and educational value of the sites, consistent with the mitigation plan. The sites will be placed on the Natural Environment Section’s (NES) Mitigation GeoDatabase. This database is provided to all NCDOT personnel as a record of mitigation sites and their attributes, including prohibited activities. NCDOT is held by virtue of the permit associated with these mitigation sites and the associated roadway impacts to protect the sites in perpetuity. 11.0 MAINTENANCE PLAN The mitigation sites will be held by NCDOT and placed on the NES Mitigation GeoDatabase. Once monitoring is completed and the sites are closed out, they will be placed in the NCDOT Stewardship Program for long term maintenance and protection. If an appropriate third party recipient is identified in the future, then the transfer of the property will include a conservation easement or other measure to protect the natural features and mitigation value of the site in perpetuity. 12.0 LONG TERM ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN The sites will be managed by NCDOT according to the mitigation plan. Encroachments into the areas will be investigated and appropriate measures taken to minimize any negative effects. In the event that unforeseen issues arise that affect the management of the site, any remediation will be addressed by NCDOT in coordination with the Interagency Review Team. 13.0 FINANCIAL ASSURANCES NCDOT is held by permit conditions associated with U-2525B to construct, monitor, and steward the mitigation sites. NCDOT has established funds for each project and within each Division to monitor mitigation sites and protect them in perpetuity.