The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20061584 Ver 1_More Info Received_20061113November 7, 2006 Cyndi Karoly 401 Permitting Unit 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 ~r ' N~''~ 1 a~ 7.~°li Kevin Barnett Surface Water Protection Section 2090 US HWY 70 Swannonoa, NC 28778 ;tt 7 "f d tJ~('u'°~ ~ ;,'~6e `T4 AMr` ~ „+;n s x ;;,w ~~ r6r~ attG>+a'u Subject Property: Scott Property Shoreline Stabilization - DWQ Project #06-1584 Tahala Shores, Lake Glenville, Jackson County Dear Mrs. Karoly and Mr. Barnett: Thank you for your detailed response to our shore stabilization application dated 11/2/2006. We would like to clarify and complete any deficiencies in our application. 1. Our goal in applying for shore stabilization is preservation of the shoreline of our Lake Glenville lot. Our lot sits on the smallest and most protected cove on the lake. In the last three years, Pine Creek Cove (which was the favorite spot for fishermen) has become the favorite spot on the lake for serious wakeboarders. As such, four or five high powered wakeboats loaded with teenagers cycle endlessly through the cove all day long on warm weekends. Our lot is concave and takes the brunt of the 2-3 foot waves 100 times a day. Our shoreline, which was smoothly sloping when we bought it 4 years ago, is now severely undercut at the vegetation line. The root systems of the shoreline bushes are hanging out in the air. Several pine trees are leaning over the water and will soon fall into the lake. Large chunks of sod covered with grasses have fallen off the ledge and rest on the muddy shoreline. At the center of the lot, we lost 2.5 feet of shoreline this summer. C'•_. Saturdays, the water around my dock is chocolate brown and the water visibility is zero. We felt helpless this summer, watching the shoreline erode. Our application was prepared by Beth Mosteller, of the Mountain Lake Permit Service. We believe that she indicated that the Duke lake rules require that stabilization walls need to be 2 feet above the typical water line, to protect the shore when the water is above full pool. The undercut ledge on much of the shore is about 2 feet high, thus yielding the 4 foot wall request (Application Item Number 13). We would love to limit the height on the wall, both to decrease its visual impact and to save money, as building such a wall is hugely expensive and the price is directly related to the amount of rock used. When we first decided to apply for a permit, we intended to request only the center 80- 100 feet for stabilization. However, the peripheral areas are now rapidly eroding to match the center and, therefore, we now think that the entire area should be stabilized. a While most of the lake walls on Lake Glenville are stacked fieldstone, some are rip-rap. The rip-rap stabilization is gray and looks completely out of place on the shore, as is doesn't match any of the indigenous rock. We will do whatever is allowed to stabilize the shore, but we prefer that whatever we do looks as natural as possible. Our shoreline mostly is muddy. There are many small loose rocks littering the mud, but no big or deep bedrocks except on the far eastern side of the shoreline. We will take a variety of photographs this weekend of the shore to better illustrate for you the features noted above. 2. As to construction techniques (Application Item Number 14), we had hoped to hire a local contractor with shore stabilization experience, someone who knows the rules of and respects the lake. We have seen walls built from the shore and from the water via a barge. Some of the dense bushes along the shore would have to be trimmed to reach the lake and to build the wall, but those bushes will soon fall into the lake anyway if nothing is done. We will insist on construction techniques that meet your standards of surface water protection. 3. The shoreline vegetation (Application Item Number 16) consists of dense grasses in the center of the lot with shrubs, thickets, and small/large trees on the edges. No building except for the wall is intended within 50 feet of the water. The house on the lot is far up the hill. We intend to leave the lot as undisturbed and natural as possible except near the house and along the path to the lake where we would like to replace some of the overgrown weeds with indigenous ground cover and woody shrubs (low maintenance! ! ! ). We will also send pictures of the shoreline vegetation next week. Please let us know what additional information is needed. We look forward to your response and we share your goals of protecting the surface waters, shoreline, and local watershed of this beautiful area of North Carolina. Sincer ly, ~"'~> David and Cindi Scott 9330 Bluffwind Chase Roswell, GA 30076 770-518-6918 (home) / 678-596-2775 (cell) Michael F. Easley, Governor ~~ ~~~ ,R \Q QG William G. Koss Jr., Secretary ~ ~ ~ North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources - _v~~~. -1 Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director ~ ~'~ ~~~~;;~ ~ Division of Water Quality ;. -~~/ November 2, 2006 DWQ Project # 06-1584 Jackson County CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED - 7005 0390 0001 3553 1886 David G. and Cynthia L. Scott 9330 Bluffwind Chase Roswell, GA 30076 Subject Property: Scott Property Shoreline Stabilization Tahala Shores, Lake Glenville, Jackson County REQUEST FOR MORE INFORMATION Dear Mr. & Mrs. Scott: On October 3, 2006, the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) received your application in regards to shoreline stabilization on Duke Energy Property adjacent to your lot within Tahala Shores. The DWQ has determined that your application was incomplete and/or provided inaccurate information as discussed below. The DWQ will require additional information in order to process your application to impact protected wetlands and/or streams on the subject property. Therefore, unless we receive the additional information requested below, we will have to move toward denial of your application as required by 15A NCAC 2H .0506 and will place this project on hold as incomplete until we receive this additional information. Please provide the following information so that we may continue to review your project. Additional Information Requested: 1. Application Item Number 13. states that you desire to install adry-stack boulder ~rrall, 4 feet in height, for a length of 280 feet. The submitted attachments do not justify your desired impacts. The attached photographs do not indicate that such extensive stabilization is necessary along this shoreline. Additionally, there is no "scale" included in the photographs, making a determination of the necessity of a wall difficult. By scaling off the dock in the submitted photographs, it appears that stabilization only needs to occur to approximately 2 vertical feet of shoreline. Lastly, the presence of bedrock and natural shore rock, as shown in the submitted photographs, do not indicate the need for such extensive stabilization. It is the determination of this office that there is only a localized area which needs stabilization and that area may be stabilized with the use of some well placed rip- rap backed with toed in filter cloth. 401 Wetlands Certification Unit 1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650 2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 Phone: 919-733-17861 FAX 919-733-6893 /Internet: http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwet!ands Nei thCarolina ~atcrru!!y An Equal OpportunitylAffirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper Scott Property Shoreline Stabilization c. Page 2 of 3 November 2, 2006 2. Application Item Number 14. states that you will utilize a rubber (?) track hoe and skid-steer for the proposed installation. As this work will be performed adjacent to waters, you must provide a description as to how the equipment will be transported, maintained, and operated while protecting surface waters. As this work will be performed within a Water Supply watershed which is also classified as trout waters, additional precautions must be taken to protect these resources. 3. Application Item Number 16 b, requests you describe vegetation within 50 feet of the shore and what will be disturoed. As no scale is included on your lot layout, this office is unable to determine if a suitable building site can be situated on the lot without impacting the vegetation within 50 feet of the shoreline. Additionally, this office cannot determine whether a suitable building site can be situated while maintaining the 30 foot woody buffer required by the Water Supply Watershed regulations. You must submit information which clearly provides he necessary information indicated as being needed above, or modify your request to reflect a reduced and justifiable amount of impact. Please respond before November 13, 2006 by sending this information to both the 401 Permitting Unit at: Mrs. Cyndi Karoly 401 Permitting Unit 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 and to the Asheville Regional Office at: Kevin Barnett Surface Water Protection Section 20^0 US HWY 70 Swannanoa, NC 28778 If we do not hear from you before November 13, 2006, we will assume that you no longer want to pursue this project and we will consider the project as withdrawn.