20171294 Ver 1_Meeting Notes 16Oct2017-MAC-Final2_20171017

Meeting Notes
Date: October 17, 2017
Type of Site: Bank Stream Site
Prepared By: Mac Haupt
Sponsor/Provider: Resource Environmental Solutions
Meeting Type: Preliminary Site Review
County: Yadkin
Action ID: SAW -2017-01467
Basin and HUC: Yadkin - 03040101
Project Name: Twiman- RES Yadkin 01
Coordinates: 36.2131 1 °N -80.6902 °W
Attendees:
USACE-Kim Browning
NCDWR-Mac Haupt
NCWRC- Andrea Leslie, Olivia
RES -Cara, Brad, David
Notes, Sketch, etc.:
Kim's Office Review: Initial concern regarding the transition from Ell to R at TC3-A. Proposed dam removal on TC3-B
and TC2-B?
Map appears to have a wooded buffer on most Ell and EIII areas. What is planned for Ell & EIII?
Proposed E1 1.5:1, Ell 2.5:1, EIII 5:1
My Field Review:
TC1-A: R-Ok
TC1-B: EIII- this reach needs restoration, the reach is incised 8-10 feet down, a number of vertical scoured banks,
some areas of mass wasting, single tree buffer on both sides with alot of floodplain to work with. If RES decided not to
do restoration and insists on doing "enhancement", the ratio should be large, at least 8:1.
TC2-A: E1- ok
TC2-B: R, dam removal- ok for restoration, although dam there were some areas that appeared to be ok for E1/2 as
well.
TC3-A: Ell- ok, alot of cattle access
TC3-B: R, dam removal- ok
TC -4: EIII- needs to be restoration, see TC1-B
TC5-A: EIII-last reach we visited that day, has alot of buffer, also has alot of privet, we stated 7.5:1 or if justified in mit
plan would consider 5:1.
TC5-B: Ell- lower portion can be 2.5:1, however, the rest of the reach should be 3:1
TC6: Ell- DWR stated either fill like regenerative stormwater method or nothing. Not worth just planting outer 20 feet
on a narrow 15 foot gulley. DWR realizes the stream may lose flow. This reach may not be a mitigation creditable
reach.
TC7: Ell -my map said 3:1
Action Items:
Page 1

Notes, Sketch, etc.:
Page 2