The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20161076 Ver 1_Fletcher_Site_visit_Notes_11_29_16_v2.docx_20161202 _______________________________________________________ Meeting Notes MEETING: Post Contract IRT Site Visit Fletcher Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site French Broad 06010105; Henderson County, NC DEQ Contract No. 6997 DMS Project No. 100004 DATE: Tuesday, November 29, 2016, 12:00 to 2:30 LOCATION: 266 Jackson Road, Fletcher, NC __________________________________________________________________ Attendees Todd Tugwell – USACE Andrea Hughes – USACE Kim Browning – USACE Steven Kichefski - USACE Mac Haupt – NCDEQ – DWR Jenny Baker – NCDEQ – DWR Paul Wiesner – NCDEQ – DMS Harry Tsomides – NCDEQ – DMS Steve Melton – EW Solutions – Project Manager Grant Ginn – Wolf Creek Engineering – Designer Materials  EW Solutions, LLC Technical Proposal dated 6/16/16 in response to RFP #16-006808 Meeting Notes 1.Introduction to the site was given at a meeting place off of Jackson Rd. New Corps guidance (Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update, North Carolina Interagency Review Team – October 24, 2016) was discussed. One item specifically mentioned was the possibility to increase credits based on expanded buffer widths. Please note that while the October 24, 2016 guidance can be used for implementation of the project, it is not a requirement of the applicable RFP or DMS contract. This DMS project was instituted on 10/4/2016. 2.A concern was expressed about the low slope on the Weston Creek area and that some past sites with low slopes have had issues with transporting sediment properly. Mr. Ginn noted that Weston Creek appears to be a low sediment supply stream and Mr. Melton noted that the majority of the watershed is forested. _______________________________________________________ 3.No mitigation credit will be generated for stream or wetland assets located beneath powerline or transmission line ROWs. 4.The section of stream where Coates Branch and Fletcher Creek 2 are kept parallel before the confluence was discussed. Mr. Ginn explained the rationale based on site conditions and available site history. The IRT concurred and further noted that forcing a confluence to occur upstream would result in a significant reduction in existing stream footage. We discussed Wolf Creek’s plan of creating a 3D model of the buried A horizon and excavating to that feature. Wetlands will possibly be created with this practice and if EW Solutions intends to obtain mitigation credits, they will need to include this area and the applicable wetland creation rational in the project mitigation plan. Wetland monitoring would be required through the monitoring term if wetland mitigation credit is proposed in this area. The IRT indicated that removal of overburden (> 12 inches) is typically considered wetland creation at a 3:1 ratio. 5.The IRT concurred with the proposed restoration of Raccoon Branch 3 and with the proposed Enhancement II in Raccoon Branch 2 where the design includes structures to stabilize the bed. However, in areas where no structures are appropriate it was agreed that the enhancement credit ratio would be reduced to 5:1. Additionally, the wetland area in the middle of this reach would be included in the easement but no stream credit would be generated in this area. Wetland preservation credit may be requested in the mitigation plan at a 5:1 ratio. 6.Regarding Raccoon Branch I (preservation), it was discussed that there is a potential to include larger buffers to get additional credits under the new guidance. If standard Mountain County stream buffers are acquired, this preservation reach will be proposed at a 10:1 mitigation ratio in the project mitigation plan. 7.All stream calls and wetland determinations will be approved by the appropriate regulatory agencies and documentation will be included in the project mitigation plan. _______________________________________________________