20050268 Ver 1_Complete File_20050210

O?O? W AT
t
? r
o <
CERTIFIED MAIL: 7003 3110 0003 6489 8032
Return Receipt Requested
Mr. Hal Brownfield
1 Andrew Pearson Drive
Mount Airy, NC 27030
Michael F. Easley, Governor
iam G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of ve?tt and Natural Resources
p ?? AUIVV Klimek, P.E. Director
ion of Water Quality
Uarch 9, 2005
Li 0,
?, 2 Q# 05-0268
E3 rry County
C?
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification with Additional Conditions
Dear Mr. Brownfield:
You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions, to place permanent fill in 40 linear
perennial stream and to flood 260 linear feet of perennial stream along an unnamed tributary to Lovills
order to construct a private recreational pond in Surry County, as described in your application receive
Division of Water Quality (DWQ) on February 10, 2005. After reviewing your application, we have d,
that this fill is covered by General Water Quality Certification Number 3402, which can be viewed on i
site at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. This Certification allows you to use Nationwide Permit N
when it is issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. In addition, you should secure any other applii
federal, state or local permits before you proceed with your project, including (but not limited to) those
by Sediment and Erosion Control, Non-Discharge, and Water Supply Watershed regulations. Also, thi
will expire when the accompanying 404 permit expires unless otherwise specified in the General Certil
eet of
;reek in
by the
ur wen
ember 39
able
required
approval
cation.
This approval is valid only for the purpose and design that you have described in your application. If you
change your project, you must notify us in writing, and you may be required to send us a new application for a
new certification. If the property is sold, the new owner must be given a copy of the Certification and approval
letter and is thereby responsible for complying with all conditions. If total wetland fills for this project (now or
in the future) exceed one acre, compensatory mitigation may be required as described in 15A NCAC 2H .0506
(h). For this approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed in the attached certification, as
well as the additional conditions listed below:
1. The following impacts are hereby approved as long as all other specific and general conditions of this
Certification are met. No other impacts, including incidental impacts, are approved:
Amount Approved Plan Location or Reference
Streams 300 linear feet Unnamed perennial tributary of Lovills
Creek located at 1 Andrew Pearson Drive,
Mount Airy, Surr Count

None Carolina
Naturally
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Wetlands Certification Unit 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 Phone [phone] FAX [phone]
2321 Crabtree Blvd. Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 Internet hfto//:h2o,enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands
Customer Service Number: 1-877-623-6748
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycledl10% Post Consumer Paper
Mr. Hal Brownfield
Page 2
March 9, 2005
2. Compensatory mitigation, as specified by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, is required for the
proposed impacts. A final, written mitigation plan shall be approved in writing by this Office before the
impacts specified in this certification occur. This plan shall detail all required restoration, enhancement,
and preservation activities to be conducted on streams and waters on site. The plan should include both
cross-section and plan view diagrams of all stream reaches proposed to be restored, stabilized, or
enhanced as well as a description of the methods and materials to be used. The mitigation plan should
also include a planting plan for those areas requiring riparian zone restoration and/or the establishment
of riparian or vegetated buffers. Where trees are required, this plan should ensure that at least two native
tree species are planted at a density sufficient to provide 320 trees per acre at maturity. This density is
usually achieved by planting approximately 436 trees/acre on a 10 x 10 ft. grid or 681 trees/acre on an 8
x 8 ft. grid. The plan should also include the types of native woody vegetation selected, methodology of
planting, and a site map indicating the location of the planting efforts. Monitoring of all restoration and
enhancement is required. The mitigation plan should include a monitoring schedule that is to be
established upon completion of all restoration and enhancement work and procedures for undertaking
repairs and corrections. This mitigation plan must be submitted to the Central Office of the
Wetlands/401 Certification Unit in Raleigh within 60 days of receiving this letter, otherwise the
approval of 401 Water Quality Certification for the above referenced impacts is withdrawn.
3. Appropriate sediment and erosion control measures which equal or exceed those outlined in the most
recent version of the North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Planning and Design Manual or the
North Carolina Surface Mining Manual (available from the Division of Land Resources at NCDENR
regional offices or the central office), whichever is more appropriate, shall be designed, installed and
maintained properly to assure compliance at all times with the North Carolina water quality standards
that are applicable to Class WS-IV waters as described in 15A NCAC 02B. 0216 Fresh Surface Water
Quality Standards For Class WS-IV Waters. Such measures must equal or exceed the requirements
specified in the most recent version of the North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Manual.
These measures must be maintained on all construction sites, borrow sites, and waste pile (spoil) sites,
including contractor owned and leased borrow pits, which are associated with this project.
4. Sediment and erosion control measures shall not be placed in wetlands or waters to the maximum extent
practicable. If placement of sediment and erosion control measures in wetlands or waters is unavoidable,
they shall be removed and the natural grade restored within six months of the date that the project is
completed or, if applicable, within six months of the date that the project is released by the North
Carolina Division of Land Resources.
5. No waste, spoil, solids, or fill of any kind shall occur in wetlands, waters, or riparian areas beyond the
footprint of the impacts depicted in the Pre-Construction Notification. All construction activities,
including the design, installation, operation, and maintenance of sediment and erosion control "Best
Management Practices" shall be performed so that no violations of state water quality standards,
statutes, or rules occur.
6. Where riprap is required for energy dissipation and scour protection, it shall be limited to the minimum
dimensions specified by appropriate engineering calculations. Riprap may only be used below the
normal high water level. The original grade and elevation of the stream's cross-section must be
maintained. Riprap placed in the stream bottom must be inserted into the bottom matrix to a depth
sufficient to provide the thickness of riprap required for scour protection. The elevation of the stream

Mr. Hal Brownfield
' Page 3
March 9, 2005
bottom must not be increased by the placement of riprap. Placement of riprap must not result in
destabilization of the streambed or banks upstream or downstream.
7. If concrete is used with any fill material, it shall not be allowed to come in contact with surface waters
until it has cured.
8. All mechanized equipment operated near surface waters must be regularly inspected and maintained to
prevent contamination of stream waters from fuels, lubricants, hydraulic fluids and other toxic materials.
9. Upon completion of the project, the Applicant shall complete and return the enclosed "Certificate of
Completion" form to notify NCDWQ when all work included in the §401 Certification has been
completed. This certificate should be sent to the 401/Wetlands Unit of the NC Division of Water
Quality at the address listed on the form. Along with the Certificate of Completion form, please send
photographs of the completed pond and restoration areas in order to document proper construction.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory hearing. You
must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send a written petition
which conforms to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of Administrative
Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, N.C. 27699-6714. This certification and its conditions are final
and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. If
you have any questions, please telephone Daryl Lamb in the DWQ Winston-Salem Regional Office at 336-771-
4600 or Cyndi Karoly in the Central Office in Raleigh 919-733-9721.
Sincerely,
e.4-
r Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
AWK/cdl
Attachments
cc: Andrea Wade, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
Winston-Salem DWQ Regional Office
Central Files
Wetlands/401 File Copy
Dr. James F. Matthews, Habitat Assessment and Restoration Program, Inc., P. O. Box 655, Newell, NC
28126
HABITAT
ASSESSMENT AND
RESTORATION wit
PROGRAM Irvc.-,---Y-- -
April 25, 2005
NC-DENR
Division of Water Quality
401 Wetlands Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1650
RE: Brownfield Pond Mitigation Plan - Surry Co., Mt. Airy
JAMES F. MATTHEWS, Ph.D.
T. LAWRENCE MELLICHAMP, Ph.D.
P.O. Box 655
Newell. NC 28126
[phone]
[phone]
fax : [phone]
cell : [phone]
fi?@Z#fl
V?
APR D
?,, •- 2 ? 2005
O'CIV
." SAN ST?,QUALI1y
7 FR BAH
Enclosed are seven copies of the plan for the 2021f. of restoration required by the
USACE.
HARP has worked with Daryl Lamb in the Winston-Salem office of DWQ to develop
this plan.
With approval, we plan to move ahead with the construction.
Sincerely,
mes F. Matthews
enclosures
Habitat Analysis, Endangered Plant Studies, Restoration of Habitats, Wetland Mitigation, Monitoring
HABITAT
ASSESSMENT AND
RESTORATION
PROGRAM Ilvc.----?
JAMES F. MATTHEWS, Ph.D.
T. LAWRENCE MELLICHAMP, Ph.D.
P.O. Box 655
Newell. NC 28126
[phone]
[phone]
fax : [phone]
cell : [phone]
Stream Restoration Mitigation Plan
Un-named Tributary to Lovills Creek
Mt. Airy, North Carolina
Surry County
April 2005
Prepared for: Hal Brownfield
a ?/;za
APR ?p
27 O
2045
os'w STgQR QUAL/
MWA70
Habitat Analysis, Endangered Plant Studies, Restoration of Habitats, Wetland Mitigation, Monitoring
Summary of the Restoration Project
Mr. Hal Brownfield filed a NW 39 Permit to restore a pond that had previously been
drained by breaching the dam. Two streams feeding the pond had converged into one
channel through the old pond bottom. There were no wetlands other than the stream
itself.
Due to insufficient knowledge of the rules and because of the use of uninformed
personnel, activity on the project elicited an NOV from Land Development on May 27,
2004. By October 2004 enough consultation had been achieved to develop a plan to
bring the project into compliance and by November, 2004 Land Development provided a
letter of Approval with Modifications. However, no work, other than stabilization, was
performed until the USACE could determine the mitigation required for the project.
Since the project had received an NOV, a general Water Quality Certification, 3402
Permit was required. This was submitted to NC DWQ in February 2005.
The USACE is requiring mitigation for 3001f. of impacts to an unnamed tributary to
Lovills Creek in the Yadkin River Basin. Impacts will include 40 If of fill and 2601f. of
flooding. Mitigation ratios will be 2:1 for the 401f. of fill associated with the dam
structure and 1:1 for the 260 If. of flooding to the stream channel. To mitigate for the
impacts, the applicant proposes on-site mitigation to include the restoration of 202 If. of
stream channel and the preservation, through conservation easement/deed restriction, or
3901f. of stream channel with 50 ft. riparian buffers on both sides of the stream and a 50-
3. vegetated pond buffer. Currently the site has satisfied the requirements of Land
Development from the NOV and has received a Letter of Approval with Modifications
and a certificate of Plan Approval for the revised E & S Plan.
Previous History of the Pond
The pond was built in the 1960s and was subsequently drained by breeching the dam.
This allowed a primary and a secondary tributary to flow through the abandoned pond
bottom to form a stream. Figure 1 shows the original size and shape of the pond. The
proposed pond restoration was significantly smaller, eliminating the northwestern
extension and reducing the northeastern bank of the pond to the southwest, but keeping
the dam in its original position.
However, due to the limitations of being able to flood only 2601f. of stream, the size of
the pond has been further reduced to 0.29 acres. As such, the inlet tributaries, which
Since the live stake season has passed, the new banks will be sown with Brown top millet
and matted with a coco matting until fall when stakes will be installed. However, to take
advantage of the restoration of the north bank of the inlet stream and a portion of the
main tritinta- (7A 14'1 AA 141 ...- 1:- .L l aL. G.._a _C • ._ _.1 nnn' . • 1
were previously under the pond surface are now exposed. These channels have become
eroded, undercut and do not have a definite point of junction above the planned pond.
The 202 If. of stream restoration required by the USACE involves these two inlet
tributaries.
Figure 2 was taken from the engineering plans for the pond.
The extent of the new pond surface is shown on the left side with hatching.
Seventy-four If. (74 If.) of stream restoration will occur along the inlet stream, which will
extend up to the junction of the main and secondary tributaries. These tributaries are
shown in Figure 2 as dark lines. The main tributary will be restored for 83 If. and the
secondary tributary will be restored for 45 If., with a newly filled point between the two
tributaries at their point of junction. The topography of the northern bank of the main
inlet stream was restored as part of the requirements for settling the NOV. However,
southern bank will have to be constructed.
The junctions of the main and secondary tributaries, which were previously under the
pond surface, now have to have newly constructed banks, and the upstream banks that
were not part of the pond will be relaxed to a less erosive angle (1.5:1).
Figure 3 shows this concept, without the topographic lines. The existing open area is
outlined in dashed red lines and the new channels and stream are outlined in dashed blue
lines. Fill is noted where needed. The fill, taken from the pond, will be moved to form
the banks. The bottom of the tributaries rest on shale so there will be no down-cutting.
Also, the toe of the new slopes can be stabilized with existing river rock, and where
needed on erosive points, coir fiber logs will be installed.
Figure 4 is taken from what will be the top of the new point between the main and
secondary tributaries. The main tributary is to the right, and the secondary is barely
visible from the lower left corner of the figure. Due to the lack of existing banks, the
inlet stream has formed a bar away from the restored bank (center of the figure, right side
of the stream). The inlet stream will be moved to the toe of the existing slope with the
formation of the new bank on the left side of the figure.
Figure 5 shows the primary tributary (top center) and the beginning of the undercut
banks, and the secondary tributary (top right) emerging from the woods. Both of these
channels are unstable along the open bottom, changing as stone and pebbles are washed
with water from heavy rains.
Figure 6 is looking upstream on the primary tributary, illustrating the undercut and
unstable banks and Figure 7 is looking upstream on the secondary tributary, illustrating
the same situation.
Both tributaries will be restored to a 1.5:1 ratio. Cross sections of both tributaries are
shown in red in Figure 8, with the proposed relaxed banks shown in blue.
OF 35 0- W
r
•� �. SLA ., . ; �+ '�
fA it
Z--
.
r. ` t` `-�'j --.may +f ■ • •
•t
i.;
.7
,f
• ■ +
0 at
066 T I I ° p 0•d0° iv I I I I I I I1 1090- �6 .6V 1 0b0° 136 0. W
Name: MT AIRY NORTH Location: 036° 32'06.8" N 080° 36'58.Z' W
Date: 12/1112004 Caption: Brownfield Pond, Mount Airy
Scale: 1 inch equals 1000 feet Figure 1
Copyrlptd P 1997, Mapteoh, Inc.

g 4 Brosnmfield _
' -e
11 Prepared by: Habitat Assessment and Restoration Program
Sri
r/
r
r`
r
5
74 LF C`" --?
? FILL
To Cr ate Stream Channel
and New Bank
1 and
j Proposed Changes for Stream Restoration
Conceptual Design, NOT for Construction
83 LF
%

FILL
Lay Bank Back 1.5:1
Total Restoration
-45 LF 202 LF
Figure 2

Hal Brown-Ifledid F1 Vie.. s.
Prepared by: Habitat Assessment and Restoration Program
and
Proposed Changes for Stream Restoration
Conceptual Design, NOT for Construction
83 LF
74 LF
FILL
To Create Stream ChannelV\ ??i '•
and New Bank i
FILL \\ \ FILL
Lay Bank Back 1.5:1
\ 45 LF
Total Restoration
202 LF
Figure 3
?.3?`r1r r•? ?? r i? ??
7 t_-qy?+,???f ?.
` A -,
F
w. - b l k"r
??"? K`°? ??' ate, ?. `i•?r
Figure 4

Figure 5
Main Tributary

H Y
"
???•
J
YY

Figure 6

Figure 7

Existing Channel Conditions
Cross Section #1
Main Tributary
1 0 0
f 9
f
f 7
0 6
9 6
f
----------------
0 6 10 1f 20 2f S
Cross Section #2
Secondary Tributary
f ..................j.......... ........... .............
............._.. ..__.......... .-. --...... ......_........ i ..................
.............i............._.... ?._................. i...............----
?. -_
.................:........................................
Average bed width = 3.4 ft
Proposed Channel Dimension Modification
Cross Section #1
Main Tributary
1 0 0
9 9
f B
f T
f 6
f 6
9 4
_ ....... .. .......: .. ............. .. ..... .. .. .. ....._..-. .. --------------- ................... .............. -
1.0
.. ....i.. ._
1.5 1.0
- ------- -
Cross Section #2
Secondary Tributary

i
...
.......... .... •-:..........._........

1.0
.
................._.....
.............-- -,.....
.. ...._................ ............._..........
.. .
...................
..................
1.0
....................
...................
............. ... ........ ............i ........ ..........
1.5
............ .. ............. ..................................
1.5
.. ..... ......._........ .................
2.
Prepared by: Habitat Assessment and Restoration Program
Conceptual Design, NOT for Construction
Figure 8
HABITAT
ASSESSMENT AND
RESTORATION
PROGRAM Irvc.------ - '
JAMES F. MATTHEWS, Ph.D.
T. LAWRENCE MELLICHAMP, Ph.D.
P.O. Box 655
Newell. NC 28126
[phone]
[phone]
fax : [phone]
cell : [phone]
Stream Restoration Mitigation Plan
Un-named Tributary to Lovills Creek
Mt. Airy, North Carolina
Surry County
April 2005
Prepared for: Hal Brownfield
D
APR 2 7 2005
I'VE TW@SAND STO ? QUAL NCH

Habitat Analysis, Endangered Plant Studies, Restoration of Habitats, Wetland Mitigation, Monitoring
Summary of the Restoration Project
Mr. Hal Brownfield filed a NW 39 Permit to restore a pond that had previously been
drained by breaching the dam. Two streams feeding the pond had converged into one
channel through the old pond bottom. There were no wetlands other than the stream
itself.
Due to insufficient knowledge of the rules and because of the use of uninformed
personnel, activity on the project elicited an NOV from Land Development on May 27,
2004. By October 2004 enough consultation had been achieved to develop a plan to
bring the project into compliance and by November, 2004 Land Development provided a
letter of Approval with Modifications. However, no work, other than stabilization, was
performed until the USACE could determine the mitigation required for the project.
Since the project had received an NOV, a general Water Quality Certification, 3402
Permit was required. This was submitted to NC DWQ in February 2005.
The USACE is requiring mitigation for 300 If. of impacts to an unnamed tributary to
Lovills Creek in the Yadkin River Basin. Impacts will include 40 If of fill and 2601f. of
flooding. Mitigation ratios will be 2:1 for the 401f. of fill associated with the dam
structure and 1:1 for the 2601f. of flooding to the stream channel. To mitigate for the
impacts, the applicant proposes on-site mitigation to include the restoration of 2021f. of
stream channel and the preservation, through conservation casement/deed restriction, or
3901f. of stream channel with 50 ft. riparian buffers on both sides of the stream and a 50-
ft. vegetated pond buffer. Currently the site has satisfied the requirements of Land
Development from the NOV and has received a Letter of Approval with Modifications
and a certificate of Plan Approval for the revised E & S Plan.
Previous History of the Pond
The pond was built in the 1960s and was subsequently drained by breeching the dam.
This allowed a primary and a secondary tributary to flow through the abandoned pond
bottom to form a stream. Figure 1 shows the original size and shape of the pond. The
proposed pond restoration was significantly smaller, eliminating the northwestern
extension and reducing the northeastern bank of the pond to the southwest, but keeping
the dam in its original position.
However, due to the limitations of being able to flood only 260 If. of stream, the size of
the pond has been further reduced to 0.29 acres. As such, the inlet tributaries, which
were previously under the pond surface are now exposed. These channels have become
eroded, undercut and do not have a definite point of junction above the planned pond.
The 2021f. of stream restoration required by the USACE involves these two inlet
tributaries.
Figure 2 was taken from the engineering plans for the pond.
The extent of the new pond surface is shown on the left side with hatching.
Seventy-four If. (74 If.) of stream restoration will occur along the inlet stream, which will
extend up to the junction of the main and secondary tributaries. These tributaries are
shown in Figure 2 as dark lines. The main tributary will be restored for 83 If. and the
secondary tributary will be restored for 45 If., with a newly filled point between the two
tributaries at their point of junction. The topography of the northern bank of the main
inlet stream was restored as part of the requirements for settling the NOV. However,
southern bank will have to be constructed.
The junctions of the main and secondary tributaries, which were previously under the
pond surface, now have to have newly constructed banks, and the upstream banks that
were not part of the pond will be relaxed to a less erosive angle (1.5:1).
Figure 3 shows this concept, without the topographic lines. The existing open area is
outlined in dashed red lines and the new channels and stream are outlined in dashed blue
lines. Fill is noted where needed. The fill, taken from the pond, will be moved to form
the banks. The bottom of the tributaries rest on shale so there will be no down-cutting.
Also, the toe of the new slopes can be stabilized with existing river rock, and where
needed on erosive points, coir fiber logs will be installed.
Figure 4 is taken from what will be the top of the new point between the main and
secondary tributaries. The main tributary is to the right, and the secondary is barely
visible from the lower left corner of the figure. Due to the lack of existing banks, the
inlet stream has formed a bar away from the restored bank (center of the figure, right side
of the stream). The inlet stream will be moved to the toe of the existing slope with the
formation of the new bank on the left side of the figure.
Figure 5 shows the primary tributary (top center) and the beginning of the undercut
banks, and the secondary tributary (top right) emerging from the woods. Both of these
channels are unstable along the open bottom, changing as stone and pebbles are washed
with water from heavy rains.
Figure 6 is looking upstream on the primary tributary, illustrating the undercut and
unstable banks and Figure 7 is looking upstream on the secondary tributary, illustrating
the same situation.
Both tributaries will be restored to a 1.5:1 ratio. Cross sections of both tributaries are
shown in red in Figure 8, with the proposed relaxed banks shown in blue.
Since the live stake season has passed, the new banks will be sown with Brown top millet
and matted with a coco matting until fall when stakes will be installed. However, to take
advantage of the restoration of the north bank of the inlet stream and a portion of the
main tributary (74 If + 4010 were live staked the first week of April 2005 to provide
stability during the growing season of 2005 (matted bank shown in Figures 4 and 5).
During this time also, the developing wetland in the fill where the old pond had a finger
to the northwest, was planted with rooted, quart sized and bare root seedlings of Alder
(Alnus serrulala), Buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis), Red hibiscus (Ilibiscus
coccineus) and Marsh-rose hibiscus (IL moscheutos). This is the beginning of the
establishment of the 50 fl. buffer along the margins of the stream and the 50 R. buffer
around the pond, which will be competed in the fall of 2005 during the planting season.
The areas along the stream below the dam will also receive the riparian buffer planting
during the fall. One small section of the stream below the dam will have both banks
restored in the fall, following removal of the temporary crossing culvert.
Monitoring
According to the North Carolina guidelines for stream restoration the NC DWQ
Wetlands Unit will determine the type or level of monitoring. This can vary from semi-
quantitative photo documentation of specific zones within or along the restoration reach,
or it can be a fuller set of survey data that demonstrates that the restoration has been built
as designed. It is our recommendation that this project be monitored by photo
documentation the ls`, 3`d, and 5`h, years following restoration. The size of the project
lends itself to photo documentation. However, an as-built document will be prepared to
demonstrate the final product as described in the proposed mitigation plan.

I I I I £ h4 I I N ' ?£Q I

at-

qy fit
Ti
'tea • ?
'
?
.Y• .
p
. I
.•.-tz :
_J'?_..?
.r
r .y_ I
_
?
)
t _
?-?
y! -
•
I j
? ° q ..

A, i -4D

(9-- a to
-40
43 co

cr)
'" ?, \\ 'fir'
?'? 1 i •' • I ? - - io
? 1
• i ?

?- --?. I `%
I ro
1

\i
?\\
?-1:X 1 11 °
\ V

43

C3 cr

zow
III I I I I I!Db 1 1 1 1 1 1 INI I?pl I A,
Vc
L
0
U
X
M
00
E
M C:
O 1
m 4"
M :. \
O

'
O
to o
:: ; i\

Fq
\ U
\
Y
• O \
r4 i`9 ?i Q? C .. `

? ;-~ C\ ? O
??
t,1 z ''?
? VJ
Z3 L
O 1
?
40 Z
-
N v
_D

v..
N-
lM
y ? .w --1 c
D tlJ cif
?.... vJ
- ? c
t. C
x?
?
cn o
U
i

C O
a. 0-

111
\
\
1
1
1
I/
l
LL
J

i
c
c
c?
Uc
?m
co
LL z
? -a
c
L
o `
T- O
O

?
0

m ?

O
C/)
O
? LL

J
O
N
cu
(?
DO O
f- N
v
?4
W
LL
J
LO
\
I
0
I J ?
i
Z
e ! C? E i,..f e ...fv ."
Prepared by: Habitat Assessment and Restoration Program
and
Proposed Changes for Stream Restoration
Conceptual Design, NOT for Construction
83 LF
74 LF
FILL \??.
To Create Stream Channel
and New Bank i
FILL FILL
Lay Bank Back 1.5:1
Total Restoration
\ 45 LF 202 LF
JJ
Figure 3

Figure 4
Figure 5
w'

Main Tributary

G x ?1 '
10 +
Secondary Tributary
w
Figure 6
?d• nc„n?'
Figure 7

Existing Channel Conditions
Cross Section #1
Main Tributary
100
/a
/s
/a
/
- ....... - ... i--------------------- ----- ----------: .... . --............. --. ..........----....-- -
- ... ...... .. ....... ................................. -- ---------- --... . --- . -
e a t 0 1 6 2 0 2 6
Cross Section #2
Secondary Tributary
.. - ...... .... ................ .-................... ._' ...................
. - ...........! ................._. ......_...--.... .....
............ ................ ..............y. ..... -- ...............-.. .................
Average bed width = 3.4 ft
Proposed Channel Dimension Modification
Cross Section #1
Main Tributary
100
6 T
/s
6
/
1 0 ......................... ............... .
_ ................................. ..........
..... ...... ................ .:................
1.5 1.0
- - ...... ................... ...... ..... 1.5 --`---'------------------ -- - --------- -
0 6 1 0 1 a 2 0 2 a 2
Cross Section #2
Secondary Tributary
.
..
. .i
.. .
. ..... ....... .... .................. ....................... ..... ............
.......
..
..... ...
.

1.0 .............. ....:... ........ ....... ...... ...................................
1.0
.................. .... .. ............ .............. ...

1.5
.
...............
. 1.5
Prepared by: Habitat Assessment and Restoration Program
Conceptual Design, NOT for Construction
Figure 8

HABITAT
ASSESSMENT AND
RESTORATION
PROGRAM INC.--
JAMES F. MATTHEWS, Ph.D.
T. LAWRENCE MELLICHAMP, Ph.D.
P.O. Box 655
Newell. NC 28126
[phone]
[phone]
fax : [phone]
cell : [phone]
Stream Restoration Mitigation Plan
Un-named Tributary to Lovills Creek
Mt. Airy, North Carolina
Surry County
April 2005
Prepared for: Hal Brownfield
D
APR 2 7 2005
DENR - 6VATE
Ft E1 ;NDSANDSTOr QJAR 7-SUXH
y

Habitat Analysis, Endangered Plant Studies, Restoration of Habitats, Wetland Mitigation, Monitoring
Summary of the Restoration Project
Mr. Hal Brownfield filed a NW 39 Permit to restore a pond that had previously been
drained by breaching; the dam. Two streams feeding the pond had converged into one
channel through the old pond bottom. There were no wetlands other than the stream
itself.
Due to insufficient knowledge of the rules and because of the use of uninformed
personnel, activity on the project elicited an NOV from Land Development on May 27,
2004. By October 2004 enough consultation had been achieved to develop a plan to
bring the project into compliance and by November, 2004 Land Development provided a
letter of Approval with Modifications. However, no work, other than stabilization, was
performed until the USACE could determine the mitigation required for the project.
Since the project had received an NOV, a general Water Quality Certification, 3402
Permit was required. This was submitted to NC DWQ in February 2005.
The USACE is requiring mitigation for 300 If of impacts to an unnamed tributary to
Lovills Creek in the Yadkin River Basin. Impacts will include 401£ of fill and 2601£ of
flooding. Mitigation ratios will be 2:1 for the 40 If. of fill associated with the dam
structure and 1:1 for the 2601£ of flooding to the stream channel. To mitigate for the
impacts, the applicant proposes on-site mitigation to include the restoration of 202 If. of
stream channel and the preservation, through conservation easement/deed restriction, or
3901f. of stream channel with 50 ft. riparian buffers on both sides of the stream and a 50-
3. vegetated pond buffer. Currently the site has satisfied the requirements of Land
Development from the NOV and has received a Letter of Approval with Modifications
and a certificate of Plan Approval for the revised E & S Plan.
Previous History of the Pond
The pond was built in the 1960s and was subsequently drained by breeching the dam.
This allowed a primary and a secondary tributary to flow through the abandoned pond
bottom to form a stream. Figure 1 shows the original size and shape of the pond. The
proposed pond restoration was significantly smaller, eliminating the northwestern
extension and reducing the northeastern bank of the pond to the southwest, but keeping
the dam in its original position.
However, due to the limitations of being able to flood only 2601f. of stream, the size of
the pond has been further reduced to 0.29 acres. As such, the inlet tributaries, which
were previously under the pond surface are now exposed. These channels have become
eroded, undercut and do not have a definite point of junction above the planned pond.
The 2021f. of stream restoration required by the USACE involves these two inlet
tributaries.
Figure 2 was taken from the engineering plans for the pond.
The extent of the new pond surface is shown on the left side with hatching.
Seventy-four If. (74 If.) of stream restoration will occur along the inlet stream, which will
extend up to the junction of the main and secondary tributaries. These tributaries are
shown in Figure 2 as dark lines. The main tributary will be restored for 83 If. and the
secondary tributary will be restored for 45 If., with a newly filled point between the two
tributaries at their point of junction. The topography of the northern bank of the main
inlet stream was restored as part of the requirements for settling the NOV. However,
southern bank will have to be constructed.
The junctions of the main and secondary tributaries, which were previously under the
pond surface, now have to have newly constructed banks, and the upstream banks that
were not part of the pond will be relaxed to a less erosive angle (1.5:1).
Figure 3 shows this concept, without the topographic lines. The existing open area is
outlined in dashed red lines and the new channels and stream are outlined in dashed blue
lines. Fill is noted where needed. The fill, taken from the pond, will be moved to form
the banks. The bottom of the tributaries rest on shale so there will be no down-cutting.
Also, the toe of the new slopes can be stabilized with existing river rock, and where
needed on erosive points, coir fiber logs will be installed.
Figure 4 is taken from what will be the top of the new point between the main and
secondary tributaries. The main tributary is to the right, and the secondary is barely
visible from the lower left corner of the figure. Due to the lack of existing banks, the
inlet stream has formed a bar away from the restored bank (center of the figure, right side
of the stream). The inlet stream will be moved to the toe of the existing slope with the
formation of the new bank on the left side of the figure.
Figure 5 shows the primary tributary (top center) and the beginning of the undercut
banks, and the secondary tributary (top right) emerging from the woods. Both of these
channels are unstable along the open bottom, changing as stone and pebbles are washed
with water from heavy rains.
Figure 6 is looking upstream on the primary tributary, illustrating the undercut and
unstable banks and Figure 7 is looking upstream on the secondary tributary, illustrating
the same situation.
Both tributaries will be restored to a 1.5:1 ratio. Cross sections of both tributaries are
shown in red in Figure 8, with the proposed relaxed banks shown in blue.
Since the live stake season has passed, the new banks will be sown with Brown top millet
and matted with a coco matting until fall when stakes will be installed. However, to take
advantage of the restoration of the north bank of the inlet stream and a portion of the
main tributary (741f + 401f) were live staked the first week of April 2005 to provide
stability during the growing season of 2005 (matted bank shown in Figures 4 and 5).
During this time also, the developing wetland in the fill where the old pond had a finger
to the northwest, was planted with rooted, quart sized and bare root seedlings of Alder
(Alnus serrulata), Buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis), Red hibiscus (Hibiscus
coccineus) and Marsh-rose hibiscus (K moscheutos). This is the beginning of the
establishment of the 50 ft. buffer along the margins of the stream and the 50 ft. buffer
around the pond, which will be competed in the fall of 2005 during the planting season.
The areas along the stream below the dam will also receive the riparian buffer planting
during the fall. One small section of the stream below the dam will have both banks
restored in the fall, following removal of the temporary crossing culvert.
Monitoring
According to the North Carolina guidelines for stream restoration the NC DWQ
Wetlands Unit will determine the type or level of monitoring. This can vary from semi-
quantitative photo documentation of specific zones within or along the restoration reach,
or it can be a fuller set of survey data that demonstrates that the restoration has been built
as designed. It is our recommendation that this project be monitored by photo
documentation the ls`, 3"d, and 5t', years following restoration. The size of the project
lends itself to photo documentation. However, an as-built document will be prepared to
demonstrate the final product as described in the proposed mitigation plan.

I I I I I I I 0° T 0. Ir I I I I 0 0° 3T 0. YV 0° 5 .QO" I 0 0° 36 0.9 11 W
_
ILL
•
:i
aiem Ch i :?.,__

+ ? (mil
• . ?' ? ?,+ ,
,

? tlr a t ?- 1. ? ?. ___ ...?'•??? •J. • /(° ?I
Z
a
l
b

of •

VV.

!` , dl jfi p /_ •I?to J0116s Clie f? -.
(.
a
• ii
°
_
z
..._. ,?'m rv?, • ° d? i ?f'', a p per;
•
• -Z
_C -j
s
0. -
?
e-• r
`
?.-lp ?
r
?
± •
+
•''
t (
J?
a f,
?S
+?
,
•:
••
1
r
y`\ ?
'-? .' ?
"
i -c
.
;
-. _ 1
,
,
.
•-? it ?;O ? o t 1 . ?? s ?/? O ?; yy,? •i• - ,, I
88
° T O I I Ok'13TO.Cb VV 11 I 1 I I I I 0do. 61 0.6"W I• I I I I I I I 1 1 013136 10.# w
Name: MT AIRY NORTH Location: 036° 32'06.8" N 080° 36'58.2" W
Date: 12/11/2004 Caption: Brownfield Pond, Mount Airy Figure 1
Scale: 1 inch equals 1000 feet
i
74 LF?`? - --;
? i
fr
l r
?r
it
it
r
I
e;d
s e i z . t L4 4 ` .` vn IMP ?IM
Prepared by: Habitat Assessment and Restoration Program
and
Proposed Changes for Stream Restoration
Conceptual Design, NOT for Construction
? FILL
To Cr ate Stream Channels
and New Bank---- -?-
FILL

r 45 LF
83 LF
.W oo
Lay Bank Back 1.5:1
Total Restoration
202 LF
Figure 2

e L cz
;j;;f;'r':?'L':!ili'y': h:C'1',l wc',PQii(1-°.•.
f
Prepared by: Habitat Assessment and Restoration Program
and
Proposed Changes for Stream Restoration
Conceptual Design, NOT for Construction
83 LF
74 LF
FILL
To Create Stream Channel
and New Bank i
FILL \\ \ FILL
Lay Bank Back 1.5:1
\\\` Total Restoration
1 \ 45 LF 202 LF
?. >F
Figure 3

?: ? - - _`i.`?• '?± ? to
Figure 4
Figure 5

'Alo
Main Tributary
,ru ..
.fir rr s?; ,? ?• ;?1.. t
}kRJ. R T,}, ? J? ? L
4 TIT
C R 9 'ti ? 1
y
Secondary Tributary
J ? ?+?'•Vilyk_i
Figure 6
s

Figure 7
L ? ti.

!1Ii ,?:• '? ;? '!? - t- '.? ? ,+ is .:a. di q ^ ?,1;.'• - `;, (` ,
Existing Channel Conditions
Cross Section #1
Main Tributary
1 B B
f 8
ee
9 7
f 6
9 6
f
Cross Section #2
Secondary Tributary
................f...... ._............j..................... ..................... ............. ....... ...................
................. ................. .... .......... ...... .------- .....;............... ...
......................................... ..... ..... ........ _ . ..............................?..........._...._..
_
Average bed width = 3.4 It
Proposed Channel Dimension Modification .
Cross Section #1
Main Tributary
1 a B
f 9
B B
97
9a
! 6
9•
.....:. _
....... .................................................
1...
............................................. ------- ......
1.5 1.0
- -- -- . ---t ...... . ... .... ........ . . .. .. 1.5 --`--------......----- - - -......--- -- -
Cross Section #2
Secondary Tributary
_.._........i ............. ......
............. .....
............_.............. ..
.........................
.......... ..... ..........................

....................
................ ... 1.5
......... .. 1.5
........ ..... ..... . ..
...
I
e 1. ?•
Prepared by: Habitat Assessment and Restoration Program
Conceptual Design, NOT for Construction
Figure 8
HABITAT
ASSESSMENT AND
RESTORATION
PROGRAM INC...... -- - '
JAMES F. MATTHEWS, Ph.D.
T. LAWRENCE MELLICHAMP, Ph.D.
P.O. Box 655
Newell. NC 28126
[phone]
[phone]
fax : [phone]
cell : [phone]
Stream Restoration Mitigation Plan
Un-named Tributary to Lovills Creek
Mt. Airy, North Carolina
Surry County
E
D
April 2005 APR 2 7 2005
DENR - WATER QUALITY
WETLANDS AND STORMWATER BRANCH
Prepared for: Hal Brownfield

Habitat Analysis, Endangered Plant Studies, Restoration of Habitats, Wetland Mitigation, Monitoring
Summary of the Restoration Project
Mr. Hal Brownfield filed a NW 39 Permit to restore a pond that had previously been
drained by breaching the dam. Two streams feeding the pond had converged into one
channel through the old pond bottom. There were no wetlands other than the stream
itself.
Due to insufficient knowledge of the rules and because of the use of uninformed
personnel, activity on the project elicited an NOV from Land Development on May 27,
2004. By October 2004 enough consultation had been achieved to develop a plan to
bring the project into compliance and by November, 2004 Land Development provided a
letter of Approval with Modifications. However, no work, other than stabilization, was
performed until the USACE could determine the mitigation required for the project.
Since the project had received an NOV, a general Water Quality Certification, 3402
Permit was required. This was submitted to NC DWQ in February 2005.
The USACE is requiring mitigation for 3001f. of impacts to an unnamed tributary to
Lovills Creek in the Yadkin River Basin. Impacts will include 40 If. of fill and 260 lf. of
flooding. Mitigation ratios will be 2:1 for the 401f. of fill associated with the dam
structure and 1:1 for the 2601f. of flooding to the stream channel. To mitigate for the
impacts, the applicant proposes on-site mitigation to include the restoration of 202 If. of
stream channel and the preservation, through conservation easement/deed restriction, or
3901f. of stream channel with 50 ft. riparian buffers on both sides of the stream and a 50-
3. vegetated pond buffer. Currently the site has satisfied the requirements of Land
Development from the NOV and has received a Letter of Approval with Modifications
and a certificate of Plan Approval for the revised E & S Plan.
Previous History of the Pond
The pond was built in the 1960s and was subsequently drained by breeching the dam.
This allowed a primary and a secondary tributary to flow through the abandoned pond
bottom to form a stream. Figure 1 shows the original size and shape of the pond. The
proposed pond restoration was significantly smaller, eliminating the northwestern
extension and reducing the northeastern bank of the pond to the southwest, but keeping
the dam in its original position.
However, due to the limitations of being able to flood only 2601f. of stream, the size of
the pond has been further reduced to 0.29 acres. As such, the inlet tributaries, which
were previously under the pond surface are now exposed. These channels have become
eroded, undercut and do not have a definite point of junction above the planned pond.
The 2021f. of stream restoration required by the USACE involves these two inlet
tributaries.
Figure 2 was taken from the engineering plans for the pond.
The extent of the new pond surface is shown on the left side with hatching.
Seventy-four If. (741f.) of stream restoration will occur along the inlet stream, which will
extend up to the junction of the main and secondary tributaries. These tributaries are
shown in Figure 2 as dark lines. The main tributary will be restored for 83 If. and the
secondary tributary will be restored for 45 If., with a newly filled point between the two
tributaries at their point of junction. The topography of the northern bank of the main
inlet stream was restored as part of the requirements for settling the NOV. However,
southern bank will have to be constructed.
The junctions of the main and secondary tributaries, which were previously under the
pond surface, now have to have newly constructed banks, and the upstream banks that
were not part of the pond will be relaxed to a less erosive angle (1.5:1).
Figure 3 shows this concept, without the topographic lines. The existing open area is
outlined in dashed red lines and the new channels and stream are outlined in dashed blue
lines. Fill is noted where needed. The fill, taken from the pond, will be moved to form
the banks. The bottom of the tributaries rest on shale so there will be no down-cutting.
Also, the toe of the new slopes can be stabilized with existing river rock, and where
needed on erosive points, coir fiber logs will be installed.
Figure 4 is taken from what will be the top of the new point between the main and
secondary tributaries. The main tributary is to the right, and the secondary is barely
visible from the lower left corner of the figure. Due to the lack of existing banks, the
inlet stream has formed a bar away from the restored bank (center of the figure, right side
of the stream). The inlet stream will be moved to the toe of the existing slope with the
formation of the new bank on the left side of the figure.
Figure 5 shows the primary tributary (top center) and the beginning of the undercut
banks, and the secondary tributary (top right) emerging from the woods. Both of these
channels are unstable along the open bottom, changing as stone and pebbles are washed
with water from heavy rains.
Figure 6 is looking upstream on the primary tributary, illustrating the undercut and
unstable banks and Figure 7 is looking upstream on the secondary tributary, illustrating
the same situation.
Both tributaries will be restored to a 1.5:1 ratio. Cross sections of both tributaries are
shown in red in Figure 8, with the proposed relaxed banks shown in blue.
Since the live stake season has passed, the new banks will be sown with Brown top millet
and matted with a coco matting until fall when stakes will be installed. However, to take
advantage of the restoration of the north bank of the inlet stream and a portion of the
main tributary (741f + 4010 were live staked the first week of April 2005 to provide
stability during the growing season of 2005 (matted bank shown in Figures 4 and 5).
During this time also, the developing wetland in the fill where the old pond had a finger
to the northwest, was planted with rooted, quart sized and bare root seedlings of Alder
(Alnus serrulata), Buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis), Red hibiscus (Hibiscus
coccineus) and Marsh-rose hibiscus (H. moscheutos). This is the beginning of the
establishment of the 50 ft. buffer along the margins of the stream and the 50 ft. buffer
around the pond, which will be competed in the fall of 2005 during the planting season.
The areas along the stream below the dam will also receive the riparian buffer planting
during the fall. One small section of the stream below the dam will have both banks
restored in the fall, following removal of the temporary crossing culvert.
Monitoring
According to the North Carolina guidelines for stream restoration the NC DWQ
Wetlands Unit will determine the type or level of monitoring. This can vary from semi-
quantitative photo documentation of specific zones within or along the restoration reach,
or it can be a fuller set of survey data that demonstrates that the restoration has been built
as designed. It is our recommendation that this project be monitored by photo
documentation the lst, 3ra, and 5a', years following restoration. The size of the project
lends itself to photo documentation. However, an as-built document will be prepared to
demonstrate the final product as described in the proposed mitigation plan.

I I I I T -I I °3T 0. yv 350.4- W
all,
-i",--L
ILL
,
Y .? v`. J ? • y
. _ # 1
N4 Satiem Ch
f fir` 4
Nil
.f
t - .-?? •
-44
Via, "`... w 1-y f
4
?.-
Z ; • ? • tit l•? ~ - + ?: Z
?y
41
,
¦
•
IJ 4 `r I r j a ?f* • i ii s`F» Q118S-_Sc
1jt
- MIV-W?v
o ? ?1..? 4• y ,`t '? li1,i tit, • • ? ?ff :'11.?'• ,?5._.--? ?_? i?f`. jk.
?T i Ok' 13T 0.da' 4v I I I 0° UO" W i I I I 11 1 Ok° 13s 0. • w .6v W Name: MT AIRY NORTH Location: 036° 32'06.8" N 080° 36'582' W
Date: 12/112004 Caption: Brownfield Pond, Mount Airy Scale: 1 inch equals 1000 feet Figure 1
Copyright (G) 1997, Mepteoh, inc.
Al ZOZ
u01jejo}s9?1 jejol
oe ue Ae r
01

}
uogon gsuoo io4 ION `u6isaa len}deouoo
uoi}ejojsa?j weeilS Jol safiueyo pasoda,d
pue
wej60ad uogeio4sal:{ pue;uawssessy jej!geH :Aq pajedaJd
Nue8 MON pue
Iauueyo Weajjs aje a? o1
-1 t7L
ti

k ? 'L, Tt m+v qty' [' r
Prepared by: Habitat Assessment and Restoration Program
and
Proposed Changes for Stream Restoration
Conceptual Design, NOT for Construction
83 LF
74 LF
FILL
To Create Stream Channel \ \
and New Bank
/
FILL FILL
Lay Bank Back 1.5:1
Total Restoration
45 LF 202 LF
:c>ss ::?>>.c=r E.
Figure 3
2 NW ^ ° 'J J
yps , e
M•ip

1 }
? Xis r
s .
Figure 4
-e 5

Main Tributary
fs• y.? 4 . "?r'?r • d ' t. j', -•+a it •S
"F s r 3 N ?? L
V5 im\ Y t
a'
Secondary Tributary

Figure 6
W14
i ?

Figure 7
. ?? n s ? :J ;• (1
E xr) s^ ,tai . 1'? :t,-•_'i, ?„ f?` ?.? ,i e. f( U ?t ? [; t z •::
io I.a- .`?.' k...._ 1' !; 1 J fit..., l ?R,.. ?? r; ?• ft ._` ?...' L':
Existing Channel Conditions
Cross Section #1
Main Tributary
100
ff
fs
0 T
9 6
9 6
f 4
..........
--^.' ..............i........._......._....._........
s 0 6 10 10 Z0 25 3 1
Cross Section #2
Secondary Tributary
............. ........................ ............

------. ..... !....... ......... ..................................................
..................

.............
...........!........
_..... ................................. .................... ...... ... ........... ...... ....... .. j .............. -
Average bed width = 3.4 ft
Proposed Channel Dimension Modification
Cross Section #1
Main Tributary
1 0 0
9f
D 0
IT
ff
f 6
f
_ ..................................... -------------- ........... ;... ..............
1.0
- 1 '- * ............ ?- -------- ------ ------ ----------
1.5 1.0
--------------------- ..- .. 1.5 .............. ........
Cross Section #2
Secondary Tributary
i ....
j .................. ...... .............. I
:. ..................................
1.5 1.5
.................. ! ................. ......... .- -----.. .... ..... -........... ........ ........
Prepared by: Habitat Assessment and Restoration Program
Conceptual Design, NOT for Construction
Figure 8
HABITAT
ASSESSMENT AND
RESTORATION
PROGRAM INC.-?-?
JAMES F. MATTHEWS, Ph.D.
T. LAWRENCE MELLICHAMP, Ph.D.
P.O. Box 655
Newell. NC 28126
[phone]
[phone]
fax : [phone]
cell :[phone]
Stream Restoration Mitigation Plan
Un-named Tributary to Lovills Creek
Mt. Airy, North Carolina
Surry County
April 2005 0[R@ g u vq
APR 2 7 2005
Prepared for: Hal Brownfield DENR - WATER QUALITY
`;ETLANDS k1D STORIS4ATER BRANCH

Habitat Analysis, Endangered Plant Studies, Restoration of Habitats, Wetland Mitigation, Monitoring
Summary of the Restoration Project
Mr. Hal Brownfield filed a NW 39 Permit to restore a pond that had previously been
drained by breaching the dam. Two streams feeding the pond had converged into one
channel through the old pond bottom. There were no wetlands other than the stream
itself.
Due to insufficient knowledge of the rules and because of the use of uninformed
personnel, activity on the project elicited an NOV from Land Development on May 27,
2004. By October 2004 enough consultation had been achieved to develop a plan to
bring the project into compliance and by November, 2004 Land Development provided a
letter of Approval with Modifications. However, no work, other than stabilization, was
performed until the USACE could determine the mitigation required for the project.
Since the project had received an NOV, a general Water Quality Certification, 3402
Permit was required. This was submitted to NC DWQ in February 2005.
The USACE is requiring mitigation for 300 If. of impacts to an unnamed tributary to
Lovills Creek in the Yadkin River Basin. Impacts will include 40 If. of fill and 260 If of
flooding. Mitigation ratios will be 2:1 for the 40 If of fill associated with the dam
structure and 1:1 for the 260 If. of flooding to the stream channel. To mitigate for the
impacts, the applicant proposes on-site mitigation to include the restoration of 2021f. of
stream channel and the preservation, through conservation easement/deed restriction, or
3901f. of stream channel with 50 ft. riparian buffers on both sides of the stream and a 50-
ft. vegetated pond buffer. Currently the site has satisfied the requirements of Land
Development from the NOV and has received a Letter of Approval with Modifications
and a certificate of Plan Approval for the revised E & S Plan.
Previous History of the Pond
The pond was built in the 1960s and was subsequently drained by breeching the dam.
This allowed a primary and a secondary tributary to flow through the abandoned pond
bottom to form a stream. Figure 1 shows the original size and shape of the pond. The
proposed pond restoration was significantly smaller, eliminating the northwestern
extension and reducing the northeastern bank of the pond to the southwest, but keeping
the dam in its original position.
However, due to the limitations of being able to flood only 260 If. of stream, the size of
the pond has been further reduced to 0.29 acres. As such, the inlet tributaries, which
were previously under the pond surface are now exposed. These channels have become
eroded, undercut and do not have a definite point of junction above the planned pond.
The 202 If. of stream restoration required by the USACE involves these two inlet
tributaries.
Figure 2 was taken from the engineering plans for the pond.
The extent of the new pond surface is shown on the left side with hatching.
Seventy-four If. (741f.) of stream restoration will occur along the inlet stream, which will
extend up to the junction of the main and secondary tributaries. These tributaries are
shown in Figure 2 as dark lines. The main tributary will be restored for 83 If. and the
secondary tributary will be restored for 45 If., with a newly filled point between the two
tributaries at their point of junction. The topography of the northern bank of the main
inlet stream was restored as part of the requirements for settling the NOV. However,
southern bank will have to be constructed.
The junctions of the main and secondary tributaries, which were previously under the
pond surface, now have to have newly constructed banks, and the upstream banks that
were not part of the pond will be relaxed to a less erosive angle (1.5:1).
Figure 3 shows this concept, without the topographic lines. The existing open area is
outlined in dashed red lines and the new channels and stream are outlined in dashed blue
lines. Fill is noted where needed. The fill, taken from the pond, will be moved to form
the banks. The bottom of the tributaries rest on shale so there will be no down-cutting.
Also, the toe of the new slopes can be stabilized with existing river rock, and where
needed on erosive points, coir fiber logs will be installed.
Figure 4 is taken from what will be the top of the new point between the main and
secondary tributaries. The main tributary is to the right, and the secondary is barely
visible from the lower left corner of the figure. Due to the lack of existing banks, the
inlet stream has formed a bar away from the restored bank (center of the figure, right side
of the stream). The inlet stream will be moved to the toe of the existing slope with the
formation of the new bank on the left side of the figure.
Figure 5 shows the primary tributary (top center) and the beginning of the undercut
banks, and the secondary tributary (top right) emerging from the woods. Both of these
channels are unstable along the open bottom, changing as stone and pebbles are washed
with water from heavy rains.
Figure 6 is looking upstream on the primary tributary, illustrating the undercut and
unstable banks and Figure 7 is looking upstream on the secondary tributary, illustrating
the same situation.
Both tributaries will be restored to a 1.5:1 ratio. Cross sections of both tributaries are
shown in red in Figure 8, with the proposed relaxed banks shown in blue.
Since the live stake season has passed, the new banks will be sown with Brown top millet
and matted with a coco matting until fall when stakes will be installed. However, to take
advantage of the restoration of the north bank of the inlet stream and a portion of the
main tributary (74 if + 40 If) were live staked the first week of April 2005 to provide
stability during the growing season of 2005 (matted bank shown in Figures 4 and 5).
During this time also, the developing wetland in the fill where the old pond had a finger
to the northwest, was planted with rooted, quart sized and bare root seedlings of Alder
(Alnus serrulala), Buttonbush (Cephalanlhus occidenlalis), Red hibiscus (Hibiscus
coccineus) and Marsh-rose hibiscus (K moscheulos). This is the beginning of the
establishment of the 50 ft. buffer along the margins of the stream and the 50 ft. buffer
around the pond, which will be competed in the fall of 2005 during the planting season.
The areas along the stream below the dam will also receive the riparian buffer planting
during the fall. One small section of the stream below the dam will have both banks
restored in the fall, following removal of the temporary crossing culvert.
Monitoring
According to the North Carolina guidelines for stream restoration the NC DWQ
Wetlands Unit will determine the type or level of monitoring. This can vary from semi-
quantitative photo documentation of specific zones within or along the restoration reach,
or it can be a fuller set of survey data that demonstrates that the restoration has been built
as designed. It is our recommendation that this project be monitored by photo
documentation the ls`, 3"', and 5`h, years following restoration. The size of the project
lends itself to photo documentation. However, an as-built document will be prepared to
demonstrate the final product as described in the proposed mitigation plan.

3 I I I £ i i N 'h£QI
'
_ - _} - --- -?' ---`? • :. -- ??; _ _ to

•
,_ ?.+1.-f !f 1 ?
.
,
' . Q h? AFL
? :J ° ?
`? (? •?
?i Jl _
'
f •
r

1 - - - I O ra ;,.a
44. -

v a
`_ 5? ° ,, r
f t
r ° °°
ti°
5

,
?
. - ? l ? 4 11 r 0.. M .L` •
•?? ?% ;, °

t t. , j 111. ,f o ? -
_

o 1 \ -

? • t
r ..-,
O f?
? ? j -. 0
• +'?
??. /_. /f.?f a ?I ?•-a\
- -
'
?%• F-

Co- _ - ._
46
N

'
•/
fly
.
A• I _ 11 - ??
?N j i ? Y .. f?. •1! CO
I
• ? fir, ' ?•? 4 I ?
•
I I I I I
II I
ICI i
I I I I I INdpp
U81 11 11
°
r-A
v
O)
.rl
r1
a
7
O
D
C
O
d
(o
a
U A
M
?U
m ;5
O
O 0
°o 0
?a
ci .-•
Z0w
n C"," d 6w ^Ypr.!' i?1'4t' f ,
t C t g ?Y^ 1 ? t l
C:,'a C. is t}G ?r s F.tl'?4t B#u'; M.•g r5?,,,i
Habitat Assessment and Restoration Program
and
Changes for Stream Restoration
eptual Design, NOT for Construction
74 LF ?-"----, ?. a
FILL
To Cr ate Stream Channel
and New Bank: I
-.-10 10
83 LF

/
FILL \

\
=per^0?1 /'?'/?/ •\ /
l i
orr f.
-?? 45 LF
Lay Bank Back 1.5:1
Total Restoration
202 LF
Figure 2

».. s.:. ?.r .
r
Prepared by: Habitat Assessment and Restoration Program
and
Proposed Changes for Stream Restoration
Conceptual Design, NOT for Construction
::. 83 LF
74 LF\? i
FILL
To Create Stream Channel V
and New Bank .?
FILL FILL
Lay Bank Back 1.5:1
\\ fem.
Total Restoration
45 LF 202 LF
Figure 3

Figure 4
-e 5
Main Tributary
• ,??.(?? 'tom r /s
t ? k i ) ?t'• ? ??
i ?,?

v -
It t
.S/
r
•i T ?
a v3 k
,
??

b 11
?
?? •V ..,
+?
-
.A ?'
yy"I
..
• A 4

Secondary Tributary
?. f R 8
Figure 6

Figure 7
S f? i ?c ..r.• ? t7
].? (I ','iv'y '. t t' t1 1 -... ?, ?•. Ir], t ?.?
?? ; "?? I ry /fir:-%1? Vim. R ?.1? :I! ?: ?:a c?¢' a ` ?;:,? ? !•-.
Existing Channel Conditions
Cross Section #1
Main Tributary
1 0 0
0 9
is
0 7
0 6
9 6
8!
T-
e e f 0 1 6 Z 0 T 6 31
Cross Section #2
Secondary Tributary
................. .................... .....................!..................... ..............................
.......................... ..... ................................ .......
............................................ _......._.................................__._.. ................
--+ _
............................... .............................................
Average bed width = 3.4 ft
Proposed Channel Dimension Modification
Cross Section #1
Main Tributary
1 0 0
9 9
6 6
7
fs
f 6
94
Cross Section #2
Secondary Tributary
................... .. ..... ..... . .................. ............................. ....... ..`................ ...
6 1.0

.. ...
........... 1.5
......... . .. . 1.5
..... .........................
1.0
...... .. ..... ..
1.5 1.0
_ ...... .. ..... ......... ... ... ...._..... .. 1.5 ......--.--- --
Prepared by: Habitat Assessment and Restoration Program
Conceptual Design, NOT for Construction
Figure 8
HABITAT
ASSESSMENT AND
RESTORATION
PROGRAM INC..... ?-- -
JAMES F. MATTHEWS, Ph.D.
T. LAWRENCE MELLICHAMP, Ph.D.
P.O. Box 655
Newell. NC 28126
[phone]
[phone]
fax : [phone]
cell : [phone]
Stream Restoration Mitigation Plan
Un-named Tributary to Lovills Creek
Mt. Airy, North Carolina
Surry County
April 2005 to, @g 9 5
v L1
APR 2 7 2005
Prepared for: Hal Brownfield DENR-?"4ATERQUALITY
YdENJNDS wND STOFgj ATER BRNX-B
Habitat Analysis, Endangered Plant Studies, Restoration of Habitats, Wetland Mitigation, Monitoring
Summary of the Restoration Project
Mr. Hal Brownfield filed a NW 39 Permit to restore a pond that had previously been
drained by breaching the dam. Two streams feeding the pond had converged into one
channel through the old pond bottom. There were no wetlands other than the stream
itself.
Due to insufficient knowledge of the rules and because of the use of uninformed
personnel, activity on the project elicited an NOV from Land Development on May 27,
2004. By October 2004 enough consultation had been achieved to develop a plan to
bring the project into compliance and by November, 2004 Land Development provided a
letter of Approval with Modifications. However, no work, other than stabilization, was
performed until the USAGE could determine the mitigation required for the project.
Since the project had received an NOV, a general Water Quality Certification, 3402
Permit was required. This was submitted to NC DWQ in February 2005.
The USACE is requiring mitigation for 3001f. of impacts to an unnamed tributary to
Lovills Creek in the Yadkin River Basin. Impacts will include 40 If. of fill and 260 If of
flooding. Mitigation ratios will be 2:1 for the 401f. of fill associated with the dam
structure and 1:1 for the 2601f of flooding to the stream channel. To mitigate for the
impacts, the applicant proposes on-site mitigation to include the restoration of 202 If. of
stream channel and the preservation, through conservation casement/deed restriction, or
3901f. of stream channel with 50 ft. riparian buffers on both sides of the stream and a 50-
ft. vegetated pond buffer. Currently the site has satisfied the requirements of Land
Development from the NOV and has received a Letter of Approval with Modifications
and a certificate of Plan Approval for the revised E & S Plan.
Previous History of the Pond
The pond was built in the 1960s and was subsequently drained by breeching the dam.
This allowed a primary and a secondary tributary to flow through the abandoned pond
bottom to form a stream. Figure 1 shows the original size and shape of the pond. The
proposed pond restoration was significantly smaller, eliminating the northwestern
extension and reducing the northeastern bank of the pond to the southwest, but keeping
the dam in its original position.
However, due to the limitations of being able to flood only 2601f. of stream, the size of
the pond has been further reduced to 0.29 acres. As such, the inlet tributaries, which
were previously under the pond surface are now exposed. These channels have become
eroded, undercut and do not have a definite point of junction above the planned pond.
The 2021f. of stream restoration required by the USACE involves these two inlet
tributaries.
Figure 2 was taken from the engineering plans for the pond.
The extent of the new pond surface is shown on the left side with hatching.
Seventy-four If. (741f.) of stream restoration will occur along the inlet stream, which will
extend up to the junction of the main and secondary tributaries. These tributaries are
shown in Figure 2 as dark lines. The main tributary will be restored for 83 If. and the
secondary tributary will be restored for 45 If., with a newly filled point between the two
tributaries at their point of junction. The topography of the northern bank of the main
inlet stream was restored as part of the requirements for settling the NOV. However,
southern bank will have to be constructed.
The junctions of the main and secondary tributaries, which were previously under the
pond surface, now have to have newly constructed banks, and the upstream banks that
were not part of the pond will be relaxed to a less erosive angle (1.5:1).
Figure 3 shows this concept, without the topographic lines. The existing open area is
outlined in dashed red lines and the new channels and stream are outlined in dashed blue
lines. Fill is noted where needed. The fill, taken from the pond, will be moved to form
the banks. The bottom of the tributaries rest on shale so there will be no down-cutting.
Also, the toe of the new slopes can be stabilized with existing river rock, and where
needed on erosive points, coir fiber logs will be installed.
Figure 4 is taken from what will be the top of the new point between the main and
secondary tributaries. The main tributary is to the right, and the secondary is barely
visible from the lower left corner of the figure. Due to the lack of existing banks, the
inlet stream has formed a bar away from the restored bank (center of the figure, right side
of the stream). The inlet stream will be moved to the toe of the existing slope with the
formation of the new bank on the left side of the figure.
Figure 5 shows the primary tributary (top center) and the beginning of the undercut
banks, and the secondary tributary (top right) emerging from the woods. Both of these
channels are unstable along the open bottom, changing as stone and pebbles are washed
with water from heavy rains.
Figure 6 is looking upstream on the primary tributary, illustrating the undercut and
unstable banks and Figure 7 is looking upstream on the secondary tributary, illustrating
the same situation.
Both tributaries will be restored to a 1.5:1 ratio. Cross sections of both tributaries are
shown in red in Figure 8, with the proposed relaxed banks shown in blue.
Since the live stake season has passed, the new banks will be sown with Brown top millet
and matted with a coco matting until fall when stakes will be installed. However, to take
advantage of the restoration of the north bank of the inlet stream and a portion of the
main tributary (741f + 40 lq were live staked the first week of April 2005 to provide
stability during the growing season of 2005 (matted bank shown in Figures 4 and 5).
During this time also, the developing wetland in the fill where the old pond had a finger
to the northwest, was planted with rooted, quart sized and bare root seedlings of Alder
(Alnus serrulala), Buttonbush (Cephalanlhus occidentalis), Red hibiscus (Hibiscus
coccineus) and Marsh-rose hibiscus (K moscheulos). This is the beginning of the
establishment of the 50 ft. buffer along the margins of the stream and the 50 ft. buffer
around the pond, which will be competed in the fall of 2005 during the planting season.
The areas along the stream below the dam will also receive the riparian buffer planting
during the fall. One small section of the stream below the dam will have both banks
restored in the fall, following removal of the temporary crossing culvert.
Monitoring
According to the North Carolina guidelines for stream restoration the NC DWQ
Wetlands Unit will determine the type or level of monitoring. This can vary from semi-
quantitative photo documentation of specific zones within or along the restoration reach,
or it can be a fuller set of survey data that demonstrates that the restoration has been built
as designed. It is our recommendation that this project be monitored by photo
documentation the 15% 3`d, and 5a', years following restoration. The size of the project
lends itself to photo documentation. However, an as-built document will be prepared to
demonstrate the final product as described in the proposed mitigation plan.

_ I I I I £h9F I I N'
:n

?I?
Ziflol

'h£4 I
o a
M
o of - ---. -- `f-
I
¦
• c apa= OL • _! o •

! ¢
F+ 0'y ; ?o
,

0- 1
'
f > • 1; ro. j .1 •. O

y
«- •• may.
rl
?r •
__..
i?
1.r . ?
?
:rf? ?1 .._._ -
1 •?
` ?•f?
?J ?
111 !
4 ?'i? M
o `•,- `; "
? ?`??ii ?r f -- J
_
- ° _..
_. y
1 ?

?
t
01

- ?? f . I
O Pfi % , j - 4

o

III I I I I I !.06• . I I I I I 1 1 1 INI Obp Idol 111 ill I I
r--I
N
?J
. ri
r24

N
CD ?`
cr)a
O C
W
O p
Z ?
- 13
O a
CO a
O ?
M
io
O m
(?9
U a
-1U
O LO
C3 0
Q C U
i?
T
E:3 m
Z0(1)
74 LF
To
FILL
-ate Stream Channel
and New Bank `
FIL7L-
lv_?
i J_'"e^ .,,? i:.. ?;f.i+.(,.; ;?-.k ,•Sr'a)G ?+ j:?,f `,f"?'^r Air:'<„`
"j n-; Nz ;ih Ca:'o4in:Da
Prepared by: Habitat Assessment and Restoration Program
(l ?
and
Proposed Changes for Stream Restoration
Conceptual Design, NOT for Construction
83 LF

° -YC?r J'
Lay Bank Back 1.5:1

-- Total Restoration
45 LF
r"
202 LF
Figure 2
12.
,1 t
?j
'`<ci171 ??c:iCtlCi .
Prepared by: Habitat Assessment and Restoration Program
and
Proposed Changes for Stream Restoration
Conceptual Design, NOT for Construction
83 LF
74 LF
FILL
To Create Stream ChannelV\
and New Bank i
f?
FILL FILL
Lay Bank Back 1.5:1
Total Restoration
45 LF 202 LF
Figure 3
Figure 4
-e 5
4a
Main Tributary

'
4

Pl t vr`v? y ^t?. °t 'tr1a{t vim.": ?1 K' fd ° ti
-Ar
Secondary Tributary
Figure 6

Figure 7
5i 1 .,?,.. iS a 1? is ;? ' (• ?. ?v {}?=f ii ? ?;? 5 ? ? ,:?
?p _!9
D
Existing Channel Conditions
Cross Section #1
Main Tributary
100
!!
!s
! 7
! 6
9 6
!
-.._.-.{ ................«r<------._._.._..i................. ._.._....__.....
0 6 10 16 20 26 30
Cross Section #2
Secondary Tributary
................... ....................F.......
' ............. ............ .-------- ,......... ........... i...................
i

Average bed width = 3.4 ft
Proposed Channel Dimension Modification
Cross Section #1
Main Tributary
1 0 0
! e
B B
! 7
f !
! 6
! l
Cross Section #2
Secondary Tributary
...................i.......-- ... ......... _..... ......"...
1.0
! ... . .._... . ..... ..................
1.0
...
....................... - . .....-- .
1.5
.. . ................. ............ ...... -
1.5
.... .... .

............ --..............
..............:...........................
1.0 ........................ ............................... .....-:......__........
---- .------ ... .....:------- ... ... ... ;........... .------ : ................
1.5 1.0
6 0 ! 10 10 20 20 6i
Prepared by: Habitat Assessment and Restoration Program
Conceptual Design, NOT for Construction
Figure 8
HABITAT
ASSESSMENT AND
RESTORATION
PROGRAM INC.------ - '
JAMES F. MATTHEWS, Ph.D.
T. LAWRENCE MELLICHAMP, Ph.D.
P.O. Box 655
Newell. NC 28126
[phone]
[phone]
fax : [phone]
cell :[phone]
Stream Restoration Mitigation Plan
Un-named Tributary to Lovills Creek
Mt. Airy, North Carolina
Surry County
April 2005 113?@g% S D
AP R 2 7 2005
Prepared for: 1-Ial Brownfield

AUTY
,CN
OF-NR NO
S 0 a MR BRAS
tN "
Habitat Analysis, Endangered Plant Studies, Restoration of Habitats, Wetland Mitigation, Monitoring
Summary of the Restoration Project
Mr. Hal Brownfield filed a NW 39 Permit to restore a pond that had previously been
drained by breaching the dam. Two streams feeding the pond had converged into one
channel through the old pond bottom. There were no wetlands other than the stream
itself.
Due to insufficient knowledge of the rules and because of the use of uninformed
personnel, activity on the project elicited an NOV from Land Development on May 27,
2004. By October 2004 enough consultation had been achieved to develop a plan to
bring the project into compliance and by November, 2004 Land Development provided a
letter of Approval with Modifications. However, no work, other than stabilization, was
performed until the USACE could determine the mitigation required for the project.
Since the project had received an NOV, a general Water Quality Certification, 3402
Permit was required. This was submitted to NC DWQ in February 2005.
The USACE is requiring mitigation for 300 If. of impacts to an unnamed tributary to
Lovills Creek in the Yadkin River Basin. Impacts will include 401£ of fill and 2601£ of
flooding. Mitigation ratios will be 2:1 for the 40 If. of fill associated with the dam
structure and 1:1 for the 260 If. of flooding to the stream channel. To mitigate for the
impacts, the applicant proposes on-site mitigation to include the restoration of 2021f. of
stream channel and the preservation, through conservation easement/deed restriction, or
3901f. of stream channel with 50 ft. riparian buffers on both sides of the stream and a 50-
ft. vegetated pond buffer. Currently the site has satisfied the requirements of Land
Development from the NOV and has received a Letter of Approval with Modifications
and a certificate of Plan Approval for the revised E & S I'lan.
Previous History of the Pond
The pond was built in the 1960s and was subsequently drained by breeching the dam.
This allowed a primary and a secondary tributary to flow through the abandoned pond
bottom to form a stream. Figure 1 shows the original size and shape of the pond. The
proposed pond restoration was significantly smaller, eliminating the northwestern
extension and reducing the northeastern bank of the pond to the southwest, but keeping
the dam in its original position.
However, due to the limitations of being able to flood only 2601f. of stream, the size of
the pond has been further reduced to 0.29 acres. As such, the inlet tributaries, which
were previously under the pond surface are now exposed. These channels have become
eroded, undercut and do not have a definite point of junction above the planned pond.
The 2021f. of stream restoration required by the USACE involves these two inlet
tributaries.
Figure 2 was taken from the engineering plans for the pond.
The extent of the new pond surface is shown on the left side with hatching.
Seventy-four if (74 If.) of stream restoration will occur along the inlet stream, which will
extend up to the junction of the main and secondary tributaries. These tributaries are
shown in Figure 2 as dark lines. The main tributary will be restored for 83 If. and the
secondary tributary will be restored for 45 If, with a newly filled point between the two
tributaries at their point of junction. The topography of the northern bank of the main
inlet stream was restored as part of the requirements for settling the NOV. However,
southern bank will have to be constructed.
The junctions of the main and secondary tributaries, which were previously under the
pond surface, now have to have newly constructed banks, and the upstream banks that
were not part of the pond will be relaxed to a less erosive angle (1.5:1).
Figure 3 shows this concept, without the topographic lines. The existing open area is
outlined in dashed red lines and the new channels and stream are outlined in dashed blue
lines. Fill is noted where needed. The fill, taken from the pond, will be moved to form
the banks. The bottom of the tributaries rest on shale so there will be no down-cutting.
Also, the toe of the new slopes can be stabilized with existing river rock, and where
needed on erosive points, coir fiber logs will be installed.
Figure 4 is taken from what will be the top of the new point between the main and
secondary tributaries. The main tributary is to the right, and the secondary is barely
visible from the lower left corner of the figure. Due to the lack of existing banks, the
inlet stream has formed a bar away from the restored bank (center of the figure, right side
of the stream). The inlet stream will be moved to the toe of the existing slope with the
formation of the new bank on the left side of the figure.
Figure 5 shows the primary tributary (top center) and the beginning of the undercut
banks, and the secondary tributary (top right) emerging from the woods. Both of these
channels are unstable along the open bottom, changing as stone and pebbles are washed
with water from heavy rains.
Figure 6 is looking upstream on the primary tributary, illustrating the undercut and
unstable banks and Figure 7 is looking upstream on the secondary tributary, illustrating
the same situation.
Both tributaries will be restored to a 1.5:1 ratio. Cross sections of both tributaries are
shown in red in Figure 8, with the proposed relaxed banks shown in blue.
Since the live stake season has passed, the new banks will be sown with Brown top millet
and matted with a coco matting until fall when stakes will be installed. However, to take
advantage of the restoration of the north bank of the inlet stream and a portion of the
main tributary (741f + 4010 were live staked the first week of April 2005 to provide
stability during the growing season of 2005 (matted bank shown in Figures 4 and 5).
During this time also, the developing wetland in the fill where the old pond had a finger
to the northwest, was planted with rooted, quart sized and bare root seedlings of Alder
(Abrus serrulata), Buttonbush (Cephalanlhus occidentalis), Red hibiscus (Hibiscus
coccineus) and Marsh-rose hibiscus (H. moscheutos). This is the beginning of the
establishment of the 50 ft. buffer along the margins of the stream and the 50 ft. buffer
around the pond, which will be competed in the fall of 2005 during the planting season.
The areas along the stream below the dam will also receive the riparian buffer planting
during the fail. One small section of the stream below the dam will have both banks
restored in the fall, following removal of the temporary crossing culvert.
Monitoring
According to the North Carolina guidelines for stream restoration the NC DWQ
Wetlands Unit will determine the type or level of monitoring. This can vary from semi-
quantitative photo documentation of specific zones within or along the restoration reach,
or it can be a fuller set of survey data that demonstrates that the restoration has been built
as designed. It is our recommendation that this project be monitored by photo
documentation the ISt, 3"d, and 5ei, years following restoration. The size of the project
lends itself to photo documentation. However, an as-built document will be prepared to
demonstrate the final product as described in the proposed mitigation plan.

0° T 0. 0" I I I I 0 0° 3T 0. " I+V 5 -QO" 0° 36 0. " W
- - ¦?
w ` `. : • ?
f! i _ r i I !k a p'
'
t i

qtr , 4.?`v. eIti

y tot :ti f (•?? .` . a

t'.+
•? ? :? t ? 41.E ? t.' •
?
, •? 7
1 l

__ _ .'•

{
lie

Y

,.
1 1 C&' 13T O.dO" ? v I I I I I I I I O 0.bo" I• I I I I I I I I I o§0°1360.
1 0go. T o. " w
Name: MT AIRY NORTH Location: 036° 32'06.8" N 080° 36'58.2" W
Date: 12/112004 Caption: Brownfield Pond, Mount Airy
Figure 1
Scale: 1 inch equals 1000 feet
(:opyrIgnt (G) 1 887, MepteCII, Inc.
Z eanSTa
J-1 E8
.?
;iue8 MON pue
Iauueyo WeGUIS aje J 01
uoi}on.4suoo J01-LON 'ufteC] lenldaouoo
uoijejolsa?j weaj}S aol seBueyo pasodoad
pue
1
l?
I
1tI
!t
1 tl
/ !!
weJ60ad uopjojsa?j pue juawssessy jejigeH :Aq paiedaJd r J1
?4 1 µ,3
he

J-1 zaz
innn lrncnL Min i

„tlrr;''C-t;li? (l;lt:c'.f iIE-
r
Prepared by: Habitat Assessment and Restoration Program
and
Proposed Changes for Stream Restoration
Conceptual Design, NOT for Construction
83 LF
74 LF\? i
FILL \ \
To Create Stream Channel V
and New Bank
FILL FILL
Lay Bank Back 1.5:1
Total Restoration
45 LF 202 LF
Figure 3
4?? 5
' 4 .
,G {q,?V
Figure 4
Figure 5
Main Tributary
t a
Y a:3
A'1 e `
ro h
Secondary Tributary
Its
a • Amy.•`

Figure 6
?` 4?ti 4C"A
R tyx - y ti?
r k esr.
Y f ?
kiw : .
Figure 7
? { ,I ," ? ,
u
ll fi •?,, ? ? ? ,S ? ?'. ? ?j? `?.
'
a
`' i3 i? r ' r,
L, e t' •J s r-
''
`
;? i r 7 it s
L
:.

,
? /.'.,1
.
r , '.
k' '
4,N ` , •
p ? ?
??
': d'
? a n
? ?
. ?
?
N .;M1_' Y? ?
? '
Existing Channel Conditions
Cross Section #1
Main Tributary
t 0 0
9 9
oe
0 7
8 6
9 6
0
---------------
...............i.....--..._.................__..... ...._........ ------ r-" _.........__.i........__.......:
S 0 6 10 16 20 26 31
Cross Section #2
Secondary Tributary
...... ..........t..---......._.....j................._. ........................................................
............... --.---........... ......... .................... .......... .........-- ' .................
.. ........................... .. .. ................. ............. ................. ...
I
.................. i. ._............... ................ ......... ...... _. .i. ................ .?. .................
S S ,S ,S lS
Average bed width = 3.4 ft
Proposed Channel Dimension Modification
Cross Section #1
Main Tributary
,n0
.e
0 B
f 7
ss
0 6
0•
SS
- ._...-----•--- --------------- ..I..._....--..-- ..........._.............. ..............
1.0
1.5 1.0
Cross Section #2
Secondary Tributary
..................i........ ..... ...... ...... .... . .. ... ..... ...... .................

......................
i

.....
1.5 .......
1.5
......... ......... ....
?
Prepared by: Habitat Assessment and Restoration Program
Conceptual Design, NOT for Construction
Figure 8
O?O? W AT FRQG
J ?
o -c
CERTIFIED MAIL: 7003 3110 0003 6489 8032
Return Receipt Requested
Mr. Hal Brownfield
1 Andrew Pearson Drive
Mount Airy, NC 27030
Michael F. Easley,
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
March 9, 2005
DWQ# 05-0268
Surry County
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification with Additional Conditions
Dear Mr. Brownfield:
You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions, to place permanent fill in 40 linear feet of
perennial stream and to flood 260 linear feet of perennial stream along an unnamed tributary to Lovills Creek in
order to construct a private recreational pond in Surry County, as described in your application received by the
Division of Water Quality (DWQ) on February 10, 2005. After reviewing your application, we have determined
that this fill is covered by General Water Quality Certification Number 3402, which can be viewed on our web
site at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.tis/newetIands. This Certification allows you to use Nationwide Permit Number 39
when it is issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. In addition, you should secure any other applicable
federal, state or local permits before you proceed with your project, including (but not limited to) those required
by Sediment and Erosion Control, Non-Discharge, and Water Supply Watershed regulations. Also, this approva
will expire when the accompanying 404 permit expires unless otherwise specified in the General Certification.
This approval is valid only for the purpose and design that you have described in your application. If you
change your project, you must notify us in writing, and you may be required to send us a new application for a
new certification. If the property is sold, the new owner must be given a copy of the Certification and approval
letter and is thereby responsible for complying with all conditions. If total wetland fills for this project (now or
in the future) exceed one acre, compensatory mitigation may be required as described in 15A NCAC 2H .0506
(h). For this approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed in the attached certification, as
well as the additional conditions listed below:
1. The following impacts are hereby approved as long as all other specific and general conditions of this
Certification are met. No other impacts, including incidental impacts, are approved:
Amount Approved Plan Location or Reference
Streams 300 linear feet Unnamed perennial tributary of Lovills
Creek located at 1 Andrew Pearson Drive,
Mount Airy, Surr County

None hCarolina
)aturally
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Wetlands Certification Unit 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 Phone [phone] FAX [phone]
2321 Crabtree Blvd. Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 Internet http/l:h2o.enr.state.nc,us/ncwetlands
Customer Service Number: 1-877-623-6748
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper
Mr.
Page 2
March 9, 2005
2. Compensatory mitigation, as specified by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, is required for the
proposed impacts. A final, written mitigation plan shall be approved in writing by this Office before the
impacts specified in this certification occur. This plan shall detail all required restoration, enhancement,
and preservation activities to be conducted on streams and waters on site. The plan should include both
cross-section and plan view diagrams of all stream reaches proposed to be restored, stabilized, or
enhanced as well as a description of the methods and materials to be used. The mitigation plan should
also include a planting plan for those areas requiring riparian zone restoration and/or the establishment
of riparian or vegetated buffers. Where trees are required, this plan should ensure that at least two native
tree species are planted at a density sufficient to provide 320 trees per acre at maturity. This density is
usually achieved by planting approximately 436 trees/acre on a 10 x 10 ft. grid or 681 trees/acre on an 8
x 8 ft. grid. The plan should also include the types of native woody vegetation selected, methodology of
planting, and a site map indicating the location of the planting efforts. Monitoring of all restoration and
enhancement is required. The mitigation plan should include a monitoring schedule that is to be
established upon completion of all restoration and enhancement work and procedures for undertaking
repairs and corrections. This mitigation plan must be submitted to the Central Office of the
Wetlands/401 Certification Unit in Raleigh within 60 days of receiving this letter, otherwise the
approval of 401 Water Quality Certification for the above referenced impacts is withdrawn.
3. Appropriate sediment and erosion control measures which equal or exceed those outlined in the most
recent version of the North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Planning and Design Manual or the
North Carolina Surface Mining Manual (available from the Division of Land Resources at NCDENR
regional offices or the central office), whichever is more appropriate, shall be designed, installed and
maintained properly to assure compliance at all times with the North Carolina water quality standards
that are applicable to Class WS-IV waters as described in 15A NCAC 02B .0216 Fresh Surface Water
Quality Standards For Class WS-IV Waters. Such measures must equal or exceed the requirements
specified in the most recent version of the North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Manual.
These measures must be maintained on all construction sites, borrow sites, and waste pile (spoil) sites,
including contractor owned and leased borrow pits, which are associated with this project.
4. Sediment and erosion control measures shall not be placed in wetlands or waters to the maximum extent
practicable. If placement of sediment and erosion control measures in wetlands or waters is unavoidable,
they shall be removed and the natural grade restored within six months of the date that the project is
completed or, if applicable, within six months of the date that the project is released by the North
Carolina Division of Land Resources.
5. No waste, spoil, solids, or fill of any kind shall occur in wetlands, waters, or riparian areas beyond the
footprint of the impacts depicted in the Pre-Construction Notification. All construction activities,
including the design, installation, operation, and maintenance of sediment and erosion control "Best
Management Practices" shall be performed so that no violations of state water quality standards,
statutes, or rules occur.
6. Where riprap is required for energy dissipation and scour protection, it shall be limited to the minimum
dimensions specified by appropriate engineering calculations. Riprap may only be used below the
normal high water level. The original grade and elevation of the stream's cross-section must be
maintained. Riprap placed in the stream bottom must be inserted into the bottom matrix to a depth
sufficient to provide the thickness of riprap required for scour protection. The elevation of the stream
Mr. Hal Brownfield
Page 3
March 9, 2005
bottom must not be increased by the placement of riprap. Placement of riprap must not result in
destabilization of the streambed or banks upstream or downstream.
7. If concrete is used with any fill material, it shall not be allowed to come in contact with surface waters
until it has cured.
8. All mechanized equipment operated near surface waters must be regularly inspected and maintained to
prevent contamination of stream waters from fuels, lubricants, hydraulic fluids and other toxic materials.
9. Upon completion of the project, the Applicant shall complete and return the enclosed "Certificate of
Completion" form to notify NCDWQ when all work included in the §401 Certification has been
completed. This certificate should be sent to the 401/Wetlands Unit of the NC Division of Water
Quality at the address listed on the form. Along with the Certificate of Completion form, please send
photographs of the completed pond and restoration areas in order to document proper construction.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory hearing. You
must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send a written petition
which conforms to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of Administrative
Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, N.C. 27699-6714. This certification and its conditions are final
and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. If
you have any questions, please telephone Daryl Lamb in the DWQ Winston-Salem Regional Office at 336-771-
4600 or Cyndi Karoly in the Central Office in Raleigh 919-733-9721.
Sincerely,
Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
AWK/cdl
Attachments
cc: Andrea Wade, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
Winston-Salem DWQ Regional Office
Central Files
Wetlands/401 File Copy
Dr. James F. Matthews, Habitat Assessment and Restoration Program, Inc., P. O. Box 655, Newell, NC
28126
MEMORANDUM
TO: John Dorney Regional Contact:
Non-Discharge Branch WQ Supervisor:
Date:
SUBJECT: WETLAND STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Facility Name Hal Brownfield County Surry
Project Number 05 0268 County2
Recvd From APP Region Winston-Salem
Received Date 2/10/05 Recvd By Region
Project Type pond restoratin
Certificates Stream
Permit Wetland Wetland Wetland Stream Class Acres Feet
Type Type Impact Score Index Prim. Supp. Basin Req. Req.

39 Stream PT O N F 12-72-8-(2. ws'v CA 30,703. I 300.00
F_ F_ O _Y0 N (F_ F-F_ r- F_ r-
Mitigation Wetland
MitigationType Type Acres Feet
Stream restoration ? F___ 202.00
Stream preserve F- F_ 390.00
F_ I F_
Is Wetland Rating Sheet Attached? Q Y .O N Did you request more info? Q Y 0 N
Have Project Changes/Conditions Been Discussed With Applicant? * Y O N
Is Mitigation required? Q Y O N Recommendation: Q Issue * Issue/Cond O Deny
Provided by Region: Latitude (ddmmss) 363212 Longitude (ddmmss) 803650
Comments:
A site visit was made on 09/21/2004. The site is 14.74 acres in size and consists of a mix of rural
cc: Regional Office
Central Office Page Number 1
Facility Name
Project Number
Hal Brownfield County Surry
05 0268 Regional Contact: Daryl Lamb
Date: 3/9/2005
I
cc: Regional Office
Page
Central Office Number 2
Facility Name I la] Brownfield
County Surry
Project Number 05 0268
Comments (continued from page 1):
Regional Contact: Daryl Lamb
Date: 3/9/2005
impacts total 300 If of an unamm ed tributary to Lovills Creek. In the process of addressing the
violations- several meetings were held between the applicant's agents and the NCDLR and the
USAGE. As a consequence the applicant submitted a revised Sediment and Erosion Control Plan to
the DL R and a com en?)t mit igation plan to the USACE_ The applicant also submitted a PCN to
DWQ The proposed impacts un der the current PCN total 300 If and include 40 If fo impact from the
construction of an in-channel ear then dam and 250 If of impact from flooding of a perennial channel.
The resulting pond area will be 0. 29 acre and will receive drainage from an area of 131.7 acres. The
purpose of the pond is aesthetic enhancement of the property. The applicant also modified his
design to ensure that the total im pacts would not exceed 300 If in ord .r to use NW #39 to satisfy the
permitting requirements of Sectio n 404 of the CWA_ The USACE is requiring mitigation for the 40 If of
earthen dam fill at a ratio of 2:1 a nd mitigation for the channel flooding at a ratio of 1:1. The applicant
will perform on-site mitigation, wh ich will consist of the restoration of 202 If of stream channel and
preservation of 390 If of stream c hannel. Restoration will include both the inlet channel above the pool
area and the outlet channel belo w the dam. Preservation will be achieved through a conservation
easement and deed restrictions a nd will include a 50 ft. wide riparian buffer on both sides of the
stream and a 50 ft. wide vegetate d buffer completely around the pond. Currently the site is in
compliance with sediment and er osion control requirementsand the proposed mitigation has been
accepted by the USAGE. There are no paved surfaces on the site and none are planned. Impervious
surface consists of the footprint o f the newly constructed house and is 4200 sq. ft. in area. which is
0,615% of the total site area, WS RO DWQ will issue authorization. with additional conditions, to use
WQC #3402 for the proposed im pacts,
cc: Regional Office
Central Office Page Number 2
MEMORANDUM
TO: John Dorney Regional Contact:
Non-Discharge Branch WQ Supervisor:
Date:
SUBJECT: WETLAND STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Facility Name Hal Brownfield
Project Number 05 0268
Recvd From APP
Received Date 2/10/05
Recvd By Region
Daryl Lamb
, yp Tpddpr
County Surry
County2
Region Winston-Salem
Project Type pond restoratin
Certificates Stream
Permit Wetland Wetland Wetland Stream Class Acres Feet
Type Type Impact Score Index Prim. Supp. Basin Req. Req.
39 Stream PT -@N F_ 12-72-8-(2. Nv 1-s F V CA 30,703. ? 300.00
F-F-O Y _0N Mitigation Wetland
MitigationType Type Acres Feet
Stream restoration F- [_ 202.00
Stream preserve F__ I 390.00
F_ F F_
Is Wetland Rating Sheet Attached? Q Y 0 N Did you request more info? Q Y @ N
Have Project Changes/Conditions Been Discussed With Applicant? Q Y O N
Is Mitigation required? QQ Y O N Recommendation: Q Issue @ Issue/Cond O Deny
Provided by Region: Latitude (ddmmss) 363212 Longitude (ddmmss) 803650
Comments:
A site visit was made on 09/21/2004. The site is 14.74 acres in size and consists of a mix of rural
and residential land uses. A new home has recently been built on the site. The proposed project
consists of restoring an old pond which the previous land owner had drained by breaching the dam.
This is a violation site. The applicant was cited by NCDLR on 05/27/2004 for sediment and erosion
control violations associated with land clearing activities begun in conjunction with the pond
restoration. Non-compliance with sediment and erosion control requirements continued from June
through September. On September 15th, 2004- the applicant was cited by the USACE for exceeding-
the limits of Nationwide Permit #39. At that time the applicant was operating under a NWP #39 and
was "deemed authorized" under WOC #3402. since the planned stream impacts had been declared
as less than 150 If. Through his agent. the applicant was notified by WSRO that a formal application
for 401 certification would now be required due to both the violations and the fact that the actual
planned stream impacts would reach and exceed 150 If. Actual stream
cc: Regional Office
Central Office Page Number 1
or
A-1-F

L North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission C
Richard B. Hamilton, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM P@[90169B
TO: CYndi B. KarolY, Supervisor
401 Oversight and Express Permits Unit FEB 2 2 2??5
NCDWQ Wetlands and Stormwater Branch
n
FROM: Ron Linville, Regional Coordinator DENR -WATER QUALITY
/' ,m,bSANDSTOR?f?rATERFa'iA?;CN
Habitat Conservation Program ?J `?
DATE: February 17, 2005
SUBJECT: Review of an application by Hal Brownfield, Pond Restoration, Unnamed Tributary Lovills Creek,
DWQ No. 050268, Surry County
The applicant is requesting 401 Water Quality Certification from the North Carolina Division of Water Quality. The
NCWRC has reviewed information provided by the applicant, and field biologists on our staff are familiar with
habitat values of the project area. These comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the Clean Water
Act of 1977 (33 U.S.C. 466 et. seq.) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16
U.S.C. 661-667d).
It appears that this project will reshape an existing pond following an approved erosion control plan. Total impacts
will be less than 300 linear feet of stream. The project appears to have been out of compliance with both the NC
Division of Land Resources and the US Army Corps of Engineers. This agency commented on the project
previously when impacts were indicated to be about 200 feet of impacts.
Our evaluation of the project has not changed. A cool water release is still recommended if the pond has sufficient
depth to thermally stratify. We still recommend native vegetation for buffers and stabilization practices. Disturbed
banks can be revegetated with silky dogwood (Corpus amonum), silky willow (Salbc sericea), tag alder (Alms
serrulata), black willow (Salix nigra), and sycamore (Plalanus occidentalis) to provide long term bank stability and
shading. Silky dogwood, silky willow and black willow can be planted as live stakes collected during the dormant
growing season. Cuttings should be randomly planted on four (4) foot centers from the waters edge to the top of the
bank. Trees should be planted on ten (10) to twelve (12) foot centers. Banks can be seeded with an approved seed
mix or temporary crop of wheat or rye.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this project. If you have any questions regarding these
comments, please contact me at 336-769-9453.
Attachment: January 28, 2004 Memorandum with attachments
Ec: Daryl Lamb, DWQ-WSRO w/o attachments
Andrea Wade, USACOE w/o attachments
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries - 1721 Mail Service Center - Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] - Fax: [phone]
r

1
f
r
r
1

r?

North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission f
Richard B. Hamilton, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Andrea Wade, Permit Coordinator, Raleigh Office
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
FROM: Ron Linville, Regional Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program Original Signed
by J. R. Linville
DATE: January 28, 2004

SUBJECT: Review of an application by Hal Brownfield, Farm Irrigation Pond, Unnamed Tributary
Lovills Creek, Surry County
The applicant is requesting a letter of concurrence from the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission (NCWRC) to obtain a 404 permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The NCWRC
has reviewed information provided by the applicant, and field biologists on our staff are familiar with
habitat values of the project area. These comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the
Clean Water Act of 1977 (33 U.S.C. 466 et. seq.), the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401,
as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d) and These comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the
Clean Water Act of 1977 (33 U.S.C. 466 et. seq.), and the Dam Safety Law of 1967 (GS 143-215.23 et.
seq.).
The applicant proposes to construct a dam for a farm irrigation pond on an unnamed tributary of
Lovills Creek. It appears from the application that the pond is proposed to be an inline structure. Impacts
to stream waters will be roughly 200 linear feet.
Based on the information provided by the applicant and our information on the range of trout in
the project area, we do not believe this project will cause impacts to waters supporting trout. However,
inundation impacts to waters caused by dams should be evaluated for non inline alternatives to determine
whether they are practicable. Accordingly, the following recommendations are provided for your
consideration:
1. An off line pond or bioengineering diversion should be fully evaluated to determine if
these options are practicable and feasible prior to issuance of a 404 Permit or 401
Certification.
2. If a dam is permitted online, consultations with Kevin Hining, fishery biologist are
necessary to determine if a cool water release is appropriate. Mr. Hining can provide
technical assistance on needed materials and construction requirements. Additional
information on pond construction practices may be found at
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
. Telephone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
Jr Brownfield Pond 2 January 28, 2004
http•//N ,,,,-w ncN ildlife or!T/p!T11 ConunlnfoContacts/p!*I Id4 I.pdf(or see attached
Fisheries Management Fact Sheet).
3. The pond should be built "in the dry" in order to prevent sedimentation impacts
downstream.
4. Minimum flow release requirements should be established by the NC Division of Water
Resources for the area immediately downstream of the dam.
5. The applicant should contact Matthew Gantt with the Division of Land Resources (DLR)
at 336-771-4600 to determine if dam safety issues apply to the project.
6. The applicant should contact Daryl Lamb with the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) at
336-771-4600 to determine if a 401 Certification is needed for the project.
7. Stringent erosion control measures should be installed where soil is disturbed and
maintained until project completion. Temporary or permanent herbaceous vegetation
should be planted on all bare soil within 15 days of ground disturbing activities to
provide long-term erosion control. Impacts to the pond structure and pond water by
grazing livestock should be avoided.
8. Native plants should be incorporated into the pond edges (excluding the dam) to provide
shade for temperature maintenance, bank stabilization and habitat. These values may be
reduced or displaced by pond construction. The attached stormwater pond
recommendations are provided as general information.
9. Any stream or wetland mitigation required at this site should be should be coordinated by
the COE with DWQ.
10. To protect aquatic habitats and protect the pond, native species should be used to provide
upstream and downstream buffers, streambank stabilization, and thermal protection
(shade). For additional information, Wildlife biologist, David Sawyer can be reached at
336-957-4855. Additional planting suggestions and plant supply sources may be
obtained from Stewardship biologist, Elizabeth Hughes at 828-651-8380.
11. If concrete will be used, work must be accomplished so that wet concrete does not
contact stream water.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this project. If you have any questions
about pond design and construction, please contact Kevin Hining at 336-921-3029. If you have any
questions regarding these comments, please contact me at 336-769-9453.
Attachments: Fisheries Management Fact Sheet - Ponds
Piedmont Stormwater Pond Planting Recommendations
Cc: John Dorney, DWQ
Daryl Lamb, DWQ-WSRO
clearance above the bottom to avoid future interference from sediment accumulation. The drawoff pipe
should be constructed of a relatively light but rigid material (aluminum is best). Heavy pipes are
difficult to mount and put extra strain on the standpipe that could eventually cause its failure. If the
drawoff pipe material isn't sufficiently rigid it may collapse under the suction pressure. Typically
drawoff pipes are mounted by inserting two crossbars through the pipe 6-12 inches from the top end,
then putting the drawoff pipe over the standpipe so that these crossbars rest on the top of the standpipe.
Three bolts or pins can be inserted into the pipe several feet down from the top to serve as spacers that
will keep the drawoff pipe vertical and centered on the standpipe.
Fisheries Management
What: Environmental Impacts Caused by Ponds. Ponds provide aesthetic benefits, water for crop
irrigation and livestock, as well as fishing, opportunities and wildlife habitat. However, ponds can be
detrimental to fish, wildlife, and water quality if constructed improperly. Ponds that are created by
damming streams, and ponds of any type that continuously release water back into a stream can be
especially harmful.
Where: Poorly designed ponds can impact aquatic life and water quality statewide, but the impacts are
greatest around ponds located in and near coldwater streams in the mountains and foothills.
When: Historically, ponds were built on farms to supply water for livestock and crop irrigation. In
recent years, the rate of pond construction has increased as more and more people move to the
mountains and build ponds to improve the appearance of their property or to provide fishing
opportunities.
Why: There are two major problems that ponds can cause. First, a pond created by damming a
stream impedes the migration of many aquatic organisms along the stream, including fish, mussels,
and amphibians. The second problem is related to the release of warm water from ponds. Because
impounded water warms more quickly than moving water, water is considerably warmer in ponds than
in free flowing streams. Furthermore, the warmest water within a pond will be at the surface, while
the coolest water will be found near the pond bottom. Within most ponds, the water that flows out of
the pond and back into adjacent streams is drawn off the surface. When this warm surface water is
released, water temperatures within the stream increase, harming trout, smallmouth bass, and other
species adapted to cooler water temperatures. While there can be thermal impacts below ponds that
only release water periodically during heavy rain events, the impacts will be most severe below ponds
that constantly release water.
How to build ponds without damming the stream channel: To ensure that the migration of aquatic
organisms within streams are not blocked when building a pond, consider locating new ponds away
from streams and using surface runoff, springs, or water pumped from wells as water sources. Ponds
can also be filled by building them adjacent to a stream and diverting or pumping a small portion of the
stream water into the pond to fill it. Water
is filled, should
water should only be diverted into the pond as needed
the pond is being filled. Once the pond
to maintain water levels.
How to reduce the thermal impacts of pond outflows: Thermal impacts caused by ponds that
continuously release surface water into streams can be reduced in ponds that are equipped with a
standpipe to regulate water levels. The installation of a bottom drawoff device (see diagram on next
page) over the existing standpipe helps reduce the temperature of water released by the pond by
siphoning off the cooler water found near the pond bottom. Furthermore, a bottom drawoff also helps
prevent fish kills in ponds by removing the stagnant, low oxygen water from the pond bottom. The
drawoff pipe needs to be large enough in diameter so that the cross-sectional area of the space between
the two pipes is greater than the deessaf the ponde and should leave at least ascto be long
ouple fee of
enough to reach into the cooler per waters o
Brownfield Pond 3 January 28, 2004
Piedmont Stormwater Pond; Planting Recommendations
Instead of using the typical fescue grasses, the upper interior and exterior of the structure should be
planted with the following mix:
Spring/Summer Mixture, May 1 - Sept. 15 Fall/N'Vinter Mixture, Sept. 15 - April 30
Browntop millet 20 lbs/a Winter Wheat 120 lbs/a
Kobe lespedeza 20 Ibs/a Kobe lespedeza 20 lbs/a
Shrub lespedeza 1 Ib/a Shrub lespedeza I lb/a
Switchgrass* 5lb/a Switchgrass* 5lb/ac
Add to fall or spring plantings: `Tioga' Deertongue (Panicum clandestinum) at a rate of 7 lbs.
Pure Live Seeds (PLS) per acre.
* When possible on slopes less than 3:1 use Switchgrass instead of lespedezas and on slopes greater than
3:1 use Orchard Grass or Creeping Red Fescue. Other native species may be appropriate depending on
soil, slope, and region. Korean lespedeza may be appropriate in colder geophysical areas. We do not
recommend Sericea lespedeza. Native plants and warm season grasses are preferred over exotic plants.
Add one of the following to the above mixture:
Creeping Red Fescue 5 lbs/acre
Ladino Clover** 5 Ibs/acre
Atlantic Coastal Panic Grass 5 lbs/acre (PLS)
Alfalfa** 5 lbs/acre (requires fertilizer containing Boron)
** Lime & fertilize disturbed areas according to NRCS soil test results and follow planting guidelines as
appropriate and necessary. Depending on elevation and region, other native species may be appropriate.
Note that mowing should be limited to late winter or early spring. Mowing should only occur as needed to
prevent unwanted tree growth on a 2-3 year schedule.
The provision of shade around impounded waters can significantly reduce thermal impacts. Trees and
shrubs (1 year bare root seedlings) should be planted randomly at a minimal rate of 100 trees per acre on
the top and upper portions of the structure and at a minimal rate of 150 per acre around the normal water
elevation and littoral shelf area. The following list of tree species may assist in providing habitat benefits:
Loblolly Pine* Red Cedar Black Gum American Holly Dogwood
Hickory Sumac White Oak Willow Oak Red Maple**
Oak Viburnum Green Ash Ironwood Black Cherry
Persimmon Water Oak Spice Bush Willow (sp) Serviceberry
Swamp Chestnut Silky Dogwood
Other species may be utilized depending on site requirements and native plant availability. Pines* should
not exceed 15% of the reforestation. No more than 20% of the tree species will be of a single species. An
80% success rate is acceptable over five years. Large or fast growing trees like Sycamore and Maple**
may not be appropriate near detention facility dams.
Triage Check List
Date:
2l Project Name: Hal Brownfield
DWQ#: 05-0268
County: Surry
To: Daryl Lamb, Winston-Salem Regional Office
60-day processing time: 2/10/05 4/10/05
From: Cyndi Karoly Telephone : [phone]
The file attached is being forwarded to your for your evaluation.
Please call if you need assistance.
? Stream length impacted
? Stream determination
Wetland determination and distance to blue-line surface waters on USFW topo maps
? Minimization/avoidance issues
? Buffer Rules (Meuse, Tar-Pamlico, Catawba, Randleman)
? Pond fill
Mitigation Ratios
? Ditching
? Are the stream and or wetland mitigation sites available and viable?
? Check drawings for accuracy
Is the application consistent with pre-application meetings?
? Cumulative impact concern
Comments: As per our discussion regarding revision of the triage and delegation processes,
please review the attached file. Note that you are the first reviewer, so this file will need to be
reviewed for administrative as well as technical details. If you elect to place this project on hold,
please ask the applicant to provide your requested information to both the Central Office in
Raleigh as well as the Asheville Regional Office. As we discussed, this is an experimental, interim
procedure as we slowly transition to electronic applications. Please apprise me of any
complications you encounter, whether related to workload, processing times, or lack of a "second
reviewer" as the triage process in Central had previously provided. Also, if you think of ways to
improve this process, especially so that we can plan for the electronic applications, let me know.
Thanks!
HABITAT
ASSESSMENT AND
RESTORATION
PROGRAM Itvc.-,--n--
JAMES F. MATTHEWS, Ph.D.
T. LAWRE C;MELLICHAMP, Ph.D.
P.O. Box 655
c.,yell. NC 28126
[phone]
s? G [phone]
cJax : (7041687-3128
cell : (Z 577-6717
February 9, 2005
NC-DENR `y
Division of Water Quality
401 Wetlands Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1650
RE: Brownfield Site Pond Restoration - Surry Co., Mt. Airy
Enclosed are an original and six copies of a PCN application (after the fact, due to NOV)
for the above cited project. This letter and the letter of authorization for agent are
included only in the original packet. The check is also included.
HARP has worked with Daryl Lamb in the Winston-Salem office of DWQ to develop
this application and with Andrea Wade of the USACE. We have tried to supply a
complete past history so that all information is in one place.
Documentation of the past NOVs is supplied, along with the documentation of satisfying
the requirements to move ahead.
Daryl Lamb has visited the site and is familiar with the project. Andrea Wade is
satisfied with the mitigation proposal, as noted in the application.
We hope this will permit the project to move into the construction phase.
Sincerely,
ames F. Matthews
enclosures
Habitat Analysis, Endangered Plant Studies, Restoration of Habitats, Wetland Mitigation, Monitoring
AUTHORIZATION AND DESIGNATION OF AGENCY
North Carolina Department of Natural Resources-Water Quality Section
RE: Project: Hal Brownfield Pond
Otivner: Harold ("Hal") Brownfield and wife, Suzanne Brownfield
County:
River Basin:
Project Location
To whom it may concern:
Surry
Yadkin
Greenhill Road, Mount Airy, North Carolina
By my signature below, I hereby nominate and appoint Dr. James F. Matthews, Ph.D. as
my agent with regard to the above-referenced Project. Dr. Matthews is authorized to receive
from the North Carolina Department of Natural Resources any and all information and to act in
my place and stead in all respects. This authorization shall remain in full force and effect until
revoked in writing by me.
This the 15`h day of December, 2004
`Harold "Hal" Brownfield
Sworn to and subscribed before me this the 15`h day of December, 2004
Nol ury Public
pN Dp
NOTARY
0% HUEUC U
I(),<

Office Use Only: Forrn'?Version Ma?,2002
USACE Action ID No. 200420296 DWQ No.
(If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not
I.
II.
Processing
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
X Section 404 Permit (submitted) ?
? Section 10 Permit ?
X 401 Water Quality Certification

Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NW 39
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here: ?
4. If payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) is proposed for
mitigation of impacts (verify availability with NCWRP prior to submittal of PCN), complete
section VIII and check here: ?
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), check here: ?
Applicant Information
Owner/Applicant Information
Name: Hal Brownfield
Mailing Address: 1 Andrew Pearson Dr.
Mount Airy, NC 27030
Telephone Number [phone].
E-mail Address:
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name: James F. Matthews
Company Affiliation: Habitat Assessment and Restoration Program, Inc
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 655, Newell, NC 28126
Fax Number:
Page 1 of 10
Telephone Number: [phone] Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address: imatthws(a,email.uncc.edu
III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: Hal Brownfield Pond Restoration
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only)
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): Surry Co. 5021-07-67-6514
4. Location
County: Su11y Nearest Town: Mt. Airy
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number):
Directions to site (include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): Proceed N out of Mt. Airy on N.
Main St (SR 1701) Turn left on Greenhill Rd Site is 0.5 mi. on right at Andrew Pearson
Dr.
5. Site coordinates, if available (UTM or Lat/Long):36° 32' 12.45" N- 80° 36'49.65" W
(Note - If project is linear, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that separately lists the
coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody,)
6. Property size (acres): 14.7
7. Nearest body of water (stream/river/sound/ocean/lake): Lovills Creek
8. River Basin: Yadkin-PeeDee
(Note - this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr. state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: Site is mixed rural, residential. One new house has been built
Page 2 of 10
on the property, with a driveway off Greenhill Rd. The terrain is wooded. An old pond is
being partially restored, following the breach of the dam by the previous owner. The only
clearing has been for the driveway , house site and the area around the pond. The soil from
the dam breach remains and will be used to repair the dam. Some grading took place around
the pond and the stream through the pond was impacted, leading to an NOV by Land
Development. Also the size of the pond restoration was larger than the permit, leading to a
Notice of Noncompliance from the USACE.
10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used: A track
hoe will be used to reshape the pond to the correct dimensions. following the new erosion
and sedimentation control plan that was approved on 11-10-04 (Surr)! 2005-003). The soil
removed from the pond will be spoiled below the pond behind the existing berm. The dam
will be rebuilt at a lower level and with a smaller footprint over the stream. The total impact
to the stream will be 3001f The USACE will issue a modification of the permit for 3001f. of
impact As part of the mitigation the undercut streambanks of the inlet channel will be
repaired and live staked The NW streambank below the dam will be repaired and live
staked Wooded buffers will be established around the pond below the dam and upstream
above the pond Woody plants will be installed on the pond banks where needed and
downstream to the west to provide a woody buffer around the pond and the streams.
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: To restore a previously drained pond. The
previous pond shows on the attached USGS Quad. The previous owner drained the pond.
The present owner wants to restore the pond for aesthetic purposes. The new pond will be
significantly smaller than the pond shown on the old USGS map.
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules.
A NW Permit 39 was filed with the USACE and work was begun However, due to insufficient
knowledge of the rules and because of the use of uniformed personnel the project was cited for
an NOV by Land Development on May 27 2004 Subsequent visits by Land Development
noted continued non-compliance in June July, August and September. In addition a visit by the
USACE on September 15, 2004 led to a letter of Non-compliance for exceeding the limits of
impact and for sedimentation of the stream HARP received a call from Mr. Brownfreld's
attorney (Hugh B Campbell III) on October 6 asking that Dr Jim Matthews help Mr.
Brownfield achieve compliance. A site meeting was scheduled on October 7, 2004, with the
Page 3 of 10
regulator agencies Attending were Hal Brownfield Hugh Campbell Andrea Wade Brooks
Cole Eric Shook and Jim Matthews A Phase I activity was agreed upon to bring the protect into
E & S compliance Another meeting was held on October 12, with those involved in achieving
compliance Attending were: Hal Brownfield Hugh Campbell Eddie Bunn Bunn Engineering)
Rick Sowers (Sowers Construction), Bill Walters (LSA) and Jim Matthews. Phase I was
implemented a revised E & S plan was developed to reflect the measures needed to handle the
erosion and the final placement of the soil from the project. Information on the progress was
communicated on October 12 to Brooks Cole and Andrea Wade. Site meetings were held on
October 25 and 26 On October 25, attendees were Hugh Campbell Keith Meredith (Sowers),
Bill Walters and Jim Matthews The completed Phase I plan was evaluated. On October 26,
attendees were Hugh Campbell Keith Meredith and Eddie Bunn Work was suspended until all
regulatory agencies were satisfied with the progress with the revised plans, and with
communication A revised plan was submitted by Bunn Engineering on November 4 and on
November 10 Land Development provided a Letter of Approval With Modifications. On
November 19, a site meeting was held to discuss how to Implement Phase II Attending were
Hal Brownfield Rick Sowers Eddie Bunn, Bill Walters Keith Meredith and Hugh Campbell.
Assignments were made but no work was performed Andrea Wade called on November 22 to
request that no work begin until the scope of mitigation had been defined. To achieve this a
revised mitigation plan was developed with Andrea Wade (see below). At this time, Jim
Matthews received a call from Daryl Lamb DWQ in W-S notifying him that a general Water
Quality Certification 3402 Permit would be required since the site is under an NOV and the
pond restoration will exceed 1501f With this submittal and with an established mitigation plan
from the USACE the project will proceed when approved Daul Lamb has visited the site and
is familiar with the objectives of the project Andrea Wade has communicated the process of
establishing the deed restrictions for the mitigation plan to Hugh Campbell.
V. Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
It is not expected that any additional permits will be requested for this project
VL Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. The applicant must also
provide justification for these impacts in Section VII below. All proposed impacts, permanent
and temporary, must be listed herein, and must be clearly identifiable on an accompanying site
plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial) must be shown on a
delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems. Wetland and stream
evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate. Photographs may be
included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for wetland or stream
Page 4 of 10
mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional space is needed for
listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts: 300 if of a perennial stream will be
filled or inundated by the pond restoration The pond will not be restored to the original size.
2. Individually list wetland impacts below:
Wetland Impact
Site Number
(indicate on ma)
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
(acres) Located within
100-year Floodplain**
(es/no) Distance to
Nearest Stream
(linear feet)
Type of Wetland***
None No

* List each impact separately and identity temporary impacts. impacts mcium, out are not umiteu to: tu{x;iuauccu CIVA 11ir" 61"U ,e,1"L,
excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams, separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
** 100-Year floodplains are identified through the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(FIRM), or FEMA-approved local floodplain maps. Maps are available through the FEMA Map Service Center at 1-800-358-9616, or
online at http://www.fema.gov.
*** List a wetland type that best describes wetland to be impacted (e.g., freshwater/saltwater marsh, forested wetland, beaver pond,
Carolina Bay, bog, etc.) Indicate if wetland is isolated (determination of isolation to be made by USACE only).
List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: 0
Total area of wetland impact proposed: 0
3. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts below:
Stream Impact
Site Number
(indicate on ma)
Type of Impact* Length of
Impact
(linear feet)
Stream Name** Average Width
of Stream
Before Im ct Perennial or
Intermittent?
lease specify)
1 Dam 40 If UT to Lovills Creek 8-10 ft. Perennial
2 Flooding 260 If UT to Lovills Creek 9-10 ft. Perennial

List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. impacts mclude, but arc not limited to: culverts and. associated np-iup,
dams (separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding), relocation (include linear feet before and after, and net losstgain),
stabilization activities (cement wall, rip-rap, crib wall, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is
proposed, plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams must be included.
"" Stream names can be found on USGS topographic maps. If a stream has no name, list as UT (unnamed tributary) to the nearest
downstream named stream into which it flows. USGS maps are available through the USGS at 1-800-358-9616, or online at
Page 5 of 10
utivw.us,s.gov. Several internet sites also allow direct download and printing of USGS maps (e.g., www.towzone.com,
,mw.mapquest.com, etc.).
Cumulative impacts (linear distance in feet) to all streams on site: 3001f.
4. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.) below:
Open Water Impact
Site Number
(indicate on ma)
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
(acres)
Name p Watele)

(if applicable) Type of Waterbody
(lake, pond, estuary, sound,

bay, ocean. etc.)

• List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. impacts include, but are not uuutea to: Lill, cxcavauon, Luu,bu,b,
flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
5. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ? uplands ® stream ? wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.): Excavation restore breached dam install overflow pipe
and repair emergency spillway. Overflow pipe to discharge into existing stream
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.): Aesthetic
Size of watershed draining to pond: 131.7 ac. Expected pond surface area: .29 ac
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts.
The impact is being minimized by impacting no more than 300 If to comply with the NW
39 Permit and will restore eroded streambanks for the inflow stream above the pond and eroded
streambanks below the dam Buffers will be established around the pond and along the stream.
Page 6 of 10
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on March 9, 2000, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCWRP concurrence shall be placed on hold as
incomplete. An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration
in DWQ's Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetiands/strmizide.html.
1. Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
The engineering plan serves as the site map, although both USGS and Highway maps are
included with this implication The stream is an UT of Lovills Creek on the Mt. Airy North
USGS Quad 300 If of the stream will be impacted by the dam and by flooding. Existing
eroded stream banks will be restored/repaired and live staked Wooded buffers (50 ft.) will
be established or maintained around the pond below the dam and along the stream below the
dam These will be protected by deed restrictions Currently the site has satisfied the
requirements of Land Development from the NOV and ahs received a Letter of Approval
with Modifications and a Certificate of Plan Approval for the revised E & S plan. Achieving
this has completed Phase I Phase II has been planned and will proceed following the
approval by DWQ and the USACE. USACE has approved the mitigation plan.
Page 7 of 10
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration
Program (NCWRP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCWRP at
[phone] to determine availability and to request written approval of mitigation prior
to submittal of a PCN. For additional information regarding the application process for the
NCWRP, check the NCWRP website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/w!D/index.htm. If use of
the NCWRP is proposed, please check the appropriate box on page three and provide the
following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet):
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet):
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres):
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federaUstate) funds or the use of public
(federaUstate) land?
Yes ? No
If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ? No ?
If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please attach a
copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter.
Yes ? No ?
X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Meuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and
Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please identify )?
Page 8 of 10
Yes ? No ® If you answered "yes", provide the following information:
Identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers. If buffer
mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the buffer
multipliers.
Zone* ( uure act feet) Multiplier ReUquired
Nfigation
1 3
2 1.5
Total
• Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additiona120 fed from the edge of Zone 1.
If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e., Donation
of Property, Conservation Easement, Riparian Buffer Restoration / Enhancement, Preservation or
Payment into the Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as
identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0260.
Woody plants will be installed where needed in order to achieve a wooded buffer of 50 f. All
buffers around the pond and along the streams will be protected by deed restrictions.
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (both existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site.
Discuss stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands
downstream from the property.
The site was wooded without any structures or paving A driveway was constructed into the
house site The driveway will not be paved The footprint of the house and garage is 4,200 sf.
With a total property _of 14.74 acres the amount of impervious impact (4,200/642,074) is
0065% The site will remain wooded except for the flooded pond area (.29 ac.). Wooded
buffers will be established around the pond and below the dam.
XIL Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
No wastewater is generated by the project
XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Page 9 of 10
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H.0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ® No ?
Is this an after-the-fact permit application?
Yes ® No ?
XIV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
aJ o
(Agent's
Agent's Signature Date
is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 10 of 10
I
yy\?0?? ?jys22 22? o<' 'PO?yo?Q?
?\\? 2 mo ??9 g Z
i `d ? ?tiLy a
?J N
p
N 00z IS
m 4 F
5?11,g h p /?S SWV
p I m m
SABLE Q 1O PILOT VIEW JJ u? y?
N
^
0 2q0 0 L) CARDINAL
?? ap?9 v?f W X178, o
100 GNJ?yG
v M? vb'J SQwM O
} ?,y yOS+ G069-I"NHWNIa
NM01A/33aJ O drL yc'
7
0J Y?
J
y?11o1 w 771HN3340 0 0v2 \ 3
d O O
d v
IcNOUWpOD
SR 1702 V ti
??tv PINE KNOLL 0 ry0? • O2 cL
FOXCROFT ?Z 1"Drills crock
5
tGN
M w
1 co
o` NOlsO
a G??NNE Zt9? aS / rn
QOOAUSaM
60 c>`?
QUO Qp¢ ?6o
% d 9b92 ?, " ?Q..
j bs 1 4d
4 RL.14 5?
? s?s? as N
cc j N
h
WILBURNRD 9l9[ EL?OA 2
Od, s? N `yS F?-O <
sn/73NL1 ?b?y Od 6 ? o?? s`?'
w ? z
? o
N o obst as C`Ptx?
3: £ N 0

CPA

ti a
1 •'`` ' ?? IF O ir• +v4
.r! 1. • •
? I - ???f-- S.
tia

•
• ?
' ??
i ? ? O

r
:,?
1
j
-
C
co :3

c6 0
? - ...
1 ?
1 _.
r Ch
- '
(. 1 .Its I ?
-
_ -
_ F
•
1'1
1 1' •
?
l
. a
r ? p
n.
ti t iJ
r r \ b J U
ci y
?. f L

. -,
\ t • '?, ?•.
? - _ •(
.?.,`,, ??
'r i
? 11 r, ?•

r:.•
• i'? ? rte' '"

%
- ` ..
- •

r
. Ir,
?
r
i I
ri { _ , ?s

?
+ `. -!
~~-. ?. ?l
, J
t r.
lam` ` O ? 1?
,l

CD a)

•' •
i 1 , tr9
?
w f Y
• '?
r (O IO U
Z0co
N . 0? l
Case #
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
LAND QUALITYSECTION•S85 IV ghtown Streel, WinJJston-Salen:, NC 27107 [phone]
River Basin C
?
5
G
U
?
q
I
I I
C I
.
Y O W r15
(f
?
(
.rf Project:
County -
1 Project# Urr,/
Person Financially Res onsible- 1 r- ,,w-5 , c - goo -00"
/?
Address: l f1nCIV.."t/ peorSon I?r,rC. Aq. r?,ri/. 1/0?0
1. Project Location G('; "A'11 1zd. Pictures: No ? Yes Prints ? Slides ? Digital Video ? 'a
2. Weather and Soil Conditions IA)or ryt (Dye,, rc, 5-{ -
3. Is site currently under notice of violation? Yes ? No ID"
"'
If no, check violations below:
4. Is the site in compliance with the S.P.C.A. and the rules? Yes . ? No D
5. Violations:
? a. No approved plan, G.S. 113A-57(4) and 15A NCAC 413.0007(c) EKC Inadequate buffer zone, G.S. 113A-57(1)
ob. Failure to follow approved plan, G.S. 113A-61.1 [3 h. Graded slopes and fills too steep, G.S. I I3A-57(2)
W:f Failure to submit revised plan, G.S. 113A -54.1(b) and or 15A NCAC 413.0024 (d)
15A NCAC 413.0018(a) ? i. Unprotected exposed slopes, G.S. 113A-57(2)
? d. Failure to provide adequate groundcover, G.S. 113A-57(3) and 13J. Failure to maintain erosion control measures,
15A NCAC 413.0007(b) or 15A NCAC 413.0024(e) . 15A NCAC 413.0013
Be. Insufficient measures to retain sediment on site, G.S. 113A-57(3) ? k. Other(descnbe)
Erf. Failure to take all reasonable measures, NCAC 4B.0005
6. Potential NPDES Permit Violation? Yes Cr No ? Describe
7. Has sedimentation damage occurred since last inspection? Yes ?' If yes, where? (check.all that.apply):? ,.. No ?
..Lake/natural watercouprse on the tract a - - Lake/natural watercourse off the tract ? Other property ?
Description: 5f??l.+,rr ,rl l?cc, 1,<< r•, > fr t?.n SfY? .m r'?cnnv / { or hren '-XC'c?c lr'cl
Degree of damage: Slight ? Moderate ? Severe
8. Contact made with (Name) e
Inspection Report, given ? or sen!?X to Person Financially Responsible Date giv sen
ions needed:
9. Corrective act
/
V/ rVPre1 /i?S7'o ?? C,Cle rfl?c. {l• 1/ICGSC.?« i lire ve'r?T C n,/ t( r I or J
O/ 7`
5r/r 5 eC?;;yaff1l??o,? t e?ornQcje 57? rc,rn c,,gh >rfu :prn_l cc .

(?,J Re<D-hre )cjf.?i lone clo.ic, ftze scam
`Re'oc'I,- 41 llrrl7CicleC? s 'ooh
?/ •?? `/'Jl? l(- GC?r gCcc< lC /vJPL/lUVPS ?+'fJClrj=(r ?ik .,/ TGY+'?PSrTr GS ?/ C,? rJro? v?D?G//?
4-c( -h) :?t, ?ni't4 G I 1 Ol'ort 1l 04 ` Cl??l(jGrG7c/i G c%??f°SSes ? // ?/rcn S ??!t
V1G71 „Js- <% 061 0 Uvr uvcc/ >/C"? -
I1 !' .t G c f ? L+< < <'VOt, 'r( Co L- r !Jn c ? r, G' r
Sfrfo C/?Gnnc? o^l ?r-/?,h??\/._
10.Commcnnts: /V(7tC/ 5(W141P,1.1fbv+i/ ?rouc,h M
17rCcm r?1Ccr)+7r /1C !? 12 e fn Ct+577 P' L ?1/ fY(CrVC"JIhC c9u!!>me?7 WcJr??
//V I rlc.Cl e c,ic .
7- ?e IOCc,7r Cf
- I YrC (/?t e? ?CriCl i/4+'vl G7reCc5 (n.rr( ?'/Carte; ? f ?Gr'e
Reportby: e",-, C , Others present Z/o c k s C ?F
Date of Inspection: `7 Time arriving at site: Time leaving site:
(?
cc: IV
North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross, Secretary
James D. Simons, P.G., P.E.,FDirector
And State Geologist
May 27, 2004
1\ o: '
r
NCDENR
WINSTON-SALEM REGIONAL OFFICE
DIVISION OF LAND RESOURCES
LAND QUALITY SECTION
NOTICE OF VIOLATIONS OF THE
SEDIMENTATION POLLUTION CONTROL ACT
CERTIFIED MAIL 7002-3150-0000-15714802
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Hal Brownfield
1 Andrew Pearson Drive
Mount Airy, NC 27030
RE: Hal Brownsfield Residence
Surry County
Compliance Date: June 15, 2004
Dear Mr. Brownsfield:
On May 26, 2004, personnel of this office inspected a project located off of Greenhill Road in Surry
County, North Carolina. This inspection was performed to determine compliance with the
Sedimentation Pollution Control Act (Act) of 1973. The inspection revealed a land-disturbing
activity of approximately 4.03 acres being conducted.
It is our understanding that you and/or your firm are responsible for this land-disturbing activity. The
purpose of this letter is to inform you that this activity was found to be in violation of the Act, G.S.
113A-50 to 66, Title 15A, North Carolina Administrative Code (NCAC), Chapter 4. If you feel that
you are not responsible for the following violations, please notify this office immediately.
The violations that were found are:
1. Failure on a tract of more than one acre, when more than one acre is uncovered, to install
sedimentation and erosion control devices sufficient to retain the sediment generated by the
land-disturbing activity within the boundaries of the tract during construction upon and
development of the tract. G.S. 113A-57 (3). Adequate erosion and sedimentation control
measures have not been installed to adequately contain sediment within the project limits.
585 Waughtown Street, Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27107-2241
Phone: [phone] \ FAX: [phone] \ Internet: w,,w.enr.state.nc.us/ENR/
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY \ AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER-50','. RECYCLED/ 10° o POST CONSUMER PAPER
2
May 27, 2004
2. Failure to take all reasonable measures to protect all public and private property from damage
by such a land-disturbing activity. 15A NCAC 4B .0105. Adequate measures have not been
installed to prevent off site sedimentation from this project.
3. Failure to retain along a lake or natural watercourse a buffer zone of sufficient width to
confine visible siltation by natural or artificial means within the 25 percent of that portion of
the buffer zone nearest the land-disturbing activity. G.S. 113A-57 (1). Visible siltation was
noted in the natural watercourse below the property.
4. Failure to maintain on graded slopes and fills, an angle which can be retained by vegetative
cover or other adequate erosion control devices or structures. G.S. 113A-57 (2). Vertical
slopes were noted adjacent to the stream, which were too steep for stabilization with
vegetative ground cover.
5. Failure to maintain satisfactorily all temporary and permanent erosion and sedimentation
control measures and facilities during the development of a site. 15A NCAC 4B .0113.
Erosion control measures and facilities have not been satisfactorily maintained, and the
proposed sediment trap could not be found.
To correct these violations, you must:
1. Submit a revised plan that includes the area that has currently been disturbed outside of the
original approved limits of disturbance.
2. Install adequate sediment and erosion control devices in order to prevent any further off site
sedimentation.
3. Adequately stabilize all disturbed areas with an adequate groundcover.
4. Repair and stabilize damaged stream channels.
5. Restore an adequate buffer zone along the stream.
Please note that merely planting grass seed does not satisfy the requirements of "vegetative cover" or
of "ground cover sufficient to restrain erosion." These requirements are not satisfied until an
adequate cover of grass or other ground cover (such as properly applied and secured, mulched
seeding or appropriate rip-rap) is established which is, in fact, sufficient to restrain accelerated or
man-made erosion.
The initial, one-day civil penalty could be an assessment of up to S5,000.00. A time period for
compliance is not required for this initial, one-day civil penalty pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 113A-61.1(c)
and N.C.G.S. § 113A-64(a)(1). An initial, one-day civil penalty is being considered for this project.
If the violations described in this Notice are not corrected within 15 days following your receipt of
this Notice, (or by June 15 2004, whichever term is longer), the Division of Land Resources, may
May 27, 2004
take additional appropriate legal action against you pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 113A-64. That action
could be the assessment of additional civil penalties and may result in the initiation of other remedies
as prescribed by the Act. If additional civil penalties are assessed for the violations, the amount may
be up to $5,000.00 per day for each day of the violation pursuant to NCGS 113A-64(a)(1). If all
violations are corrected within the time period specified for compliance, additional civil penalties or
legal remedies will not be pursued.
Any new land-disturbing activity associated with this project should not begin until the area presently
disturbed is brought into compliance with the Act. When corrective actions are complete, you should
notify this office so that the work can be inspected. You should not assume that the site is in
compliance with the Act until we have so notified you. In addition, once compliance has been
achieved, all installed measures must be satisfactorily maintained until development is complete and
the site is fully stabilized to avoid further violations of the Act.
We solicit your cooperation, and would like to -avoid taking further enforcement action. At the same
time, it is your responsibility to understand and comply with the requirements of the Act. Copies of
the relevant statutes and administrative rules may be examined at this office or will'be sent to you
upon request. Should you have questions concerning this notice or the requirements of the Act,
please contact either Eric Shook or me at your earliest convenience.
Sincerely,
Matthew E. Gantt, P.E.
Regional Engineer
Land Quality Section
MEG/ES
cc: Gray Hauser, Sediment Specialist
Steve Tedder, Water Quality Supervisor
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
Action ID: 200420296 County: Surry
NOTIFICATION OF PERMIT NONCOMPLIANCE
Responsible Authorized
Party Hal Brownfield Agent Bunn Ens;ineering Co., P.C.
Mr. Eddie Bunn, P.E., P.L.S.
Address One Andrew Person Drive Address 152 N. Main Street
Mount Airy NC 27030 Mount Ail y, 27030
Telephone Number 336-786-1800 Telephone Number
Size and Location of Property (Nvaterbodv Hi2hwav name/number, town, etc.): The property is
located on the north side of Greenhill Road, approximately 3 miles east of its intersection US 52 in Mount
Airy, Surry County, North Carolina. ,
Description of Unauthorized Activity / Permit Noncompliance: Non-compliance of Nationwide
Permit 39. Stream impacts. associated with the construction of a pond, including the placement of fill and
flooding of the channel, cannot exceed 149 linear feet of stream channel.
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
Unauthorized Activity River and Harbor Act, Section 10 (33 USC 403)
X Noncompliance with Permit X Clean Water Act, Section 301 (33 USC 1311)
Unless you have a Department of the Army Permit for the above-described activity, it is a violation of federal law
as specified above. You have agreed to do no further work in waters or wetlands without the required Department
of the Army Pennit. Any further unauthorized work in waters or wetlands will be considered an intentional
violation of federal law. If you do no further work in waters and wetlands, and perform the remedial action
requested below, the Corps of Engineers will take no further action in this matter. If you continue to
work in waters and wetlands without the required authorization, and/or fail to perform the requested
remedial action, the Corps will take further administrative action, and may request the U.S. Attorney to
file suit against you. V you need further information about the Corps of Engineers regulatory program,
please contact Andrea Wade at telephone number (919) 876 - 8441 extension 31.
Remedial Action Requested: You must restore.the dimension, pattern and profile of the impacted stream
channel that exists outside the authorized limits of the NW 39 permit. You must also submit a detailed
restoration plan including a timeline for the restoration and a riparian replanting schedule to our office for
approval by October I, 200=1.
Your signature acknowledges receipt of this notification. Return a signed copy of this notification to
the Raleigh Regulatorv Field Office in the enclosed pre-addressed envelope.
Property Owner / Responsible Party Signature
Regulatory Project Manager Signature
Date September 15, 2004
11/15/2004 07:30 13367895506 GG&C
NOV-15-2004 01;15 PM BUNNUENGINNEERINGUCO.PC 336 789 5246
LETTER OF APPROVAL WITIJ M013MCA'TIONS - Hal Brownfield Pond
November 10, 2004
Page 2
11/15/2004 07:30 13367895506 GG&C
_"oV-a5-2004 01_14 PM BUNNUENGINNEERINCUCC-PC
North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross, Seaetary
Jwmcs D. simow, P--, P.E., Director
And State Geologist:
November 10, 2004
336 789 5246
PAGE 02/05
P-02
1??
NCDENR
WINSTON-SAL.-EM REGIONAL OFFICE
DIVISION OF LAND RESOURCES
LAND QUALITY SECTION
LETTER OF APPROVAL
WITH MODIFICATIONS
Mr. Hal Brownfield
1 Andrew Pearson Drive
Mount Airy, NC 27030
Dear Mr. Brownfield:
This office has reviewed the subject erosion and sedimentation control plan and hereby issues
this letter of approval with modifications. A list of the modifications is attached. This, plan
approval shall expire three (3) years following the date of approval, if no land-disturbing activity
has been undertaken, as is required by Title 15A NCAC 413 .0029. Should the plan not perfonn
adequately, a revised plan will be required (G.S. 113A-54.1 (b)).
Please be advised that Title 15 NCAC 4B.0018 (a) requires that a copy of the approved erosion
control plan be on file at the job site. Also, you should consider this letter to give the notice
required by GS 113A-61.1 (a) of our right of periodic inspection to insure compliance with the
approved plan.
North Carolinas Sedimentation Pollution Control Program is performance-oriented, requiring
protection of existing natural resources and adjoining properties- If, following the
commencement of this project- it is determined that the erosion and sedimentation control plan is
inadcqualc to meet the requirements of the Sedimentation and Pollution Control Act of 1973
(North Carolina General Statute 113A-51 through 66), this office may require revisions to the
plan and implementation of the revisions to insure compliance with the Act.
Acceptance and approval of this plan is conditioned upon your compliance with
Federal and State water quality laws, regulations, and rules. In addition, local city
or county ordinances or rules may also apply to this land-disturbing activity. This
approval does not supersede any other permit or approval.
PAGE 03/05
P- 05
- -1 ---.1
535 Waughtown Street, Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27107-224t.
Phone: [phone] \ FAX [phone] \ Internet vrww,cnr.stnte.nc.us/ENRI
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY \ AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED / 10% POST CONSUMER PAPM
11/15/2004 07:30 13367895506 GG$C
NOV-.15-2004 01:t5 PM RUNNUENGINNEERINGUCO.PC 336 7$9 5246
LETTER OF APPROVAL WITR MODIFICATIONS - RaI Brownfield Pond
November 110, 2004
Page 3
PROJECT NAME.
COUNTY:
FIVER BASIN:
WATER CLASSIFICATION:
FACILITY NUMBER.:
SUBMITTED BY:
RECEIVED BY L.Q.S.:
Hal Brownficld Pond
Surry
Yadkin
Other
Surry 2005-003
Bunn Engineering
November 5, 2005
REVISED SUBMITTAL ( X
MODIFICATIONS
This plan is approved with the following modifications:
1. Silt fence must be installed around the outlet of the barrel pipe such that it will prevent
the 611 material from wa9kung into the stream.
2. During the installation of the barrel pipe and foundation prep. for the pipe - The stream
flow must be pumped around the work area.
PAGE 04/05
P- 04
Ln
Lr) 'n
W
Q
M
N
N
T
N
M
U
d
U ,
?o
U U
l7 14
u
z
W
w
z
z
U
ZI
W
q
_
k.0
CZ)
Lr) z
U-)
a)
co
r-
r
rn E
m a
© ,.
mm
©?
m
V
CI
CD
CD I
N
I N
L0 r
CERTIFICATE OF PLAN APPROVAL

The posting of this certificate certifies that an erosion and sedimentation control plan
has been approved for this project by the North Carolina Department of Environment
and-Natural Resources in accordance with North Carolina General Statute 113A 57 (4) and
113A - 54 (d) (4) and North Carolina Administrative Code, 'title 15A, Chapter 4B.0107 (c).
This Certificate must be posted at the primary entrance of the job site before construction
b.e'ns and until establishment of permanent groundcover as required by North Carolina
Administrative Code, Title 15A, Chapter 413.0127 (b).
d?*+dp
®?a
Q
Project Name and Location
SP"y -2 *04< r- POT
Date of Plan Approval ^^-
701WR

?t Regional Engineer
S
a .
~i,~ y/
4J
r- a;
'`C. V ~v ~ ~ r7
i~~ -"~4 " -
-i, . ~ W C7
r,, ;r: r '
r 1. r r'; r' ' ~ L
r 1 ~ p 7 ~ ~j.~ 4! ' I t ~ l I ~ r~ ~ ~u . ~ ,,y ~`i
r r,~ r
r ,ar r ,,r r , r- , ~.i.~ CD i ~ ~ 11 i Z
h~'; r r ,r~. 4 ~ ~ ~ mm
r~ rr,i; , ~ , i % ~ W ~.pf
~~:l,N,~il;'~ !iN ~i l _ . 4 W i S ~ I ~~~i 1 ~ ~ - H j 4:
i I ~ i f F-t ~ k
~ r%. ~ ~ p ~ LJ ,1 p ~ f' ! ~ ~
ti ~ ~ fi ~ u. i ~i~ t ~ C-; ~f - ~ ~ t ~
~.r~ ' ~ ' i, r ~ t a ~ : _ _ ~ i - _ ~ ~ ! p ~ ~ ~ry r~yyei
~ q: ,
, , , y ~ ~ i ji 1~ i v p y.! ~ w, ~ . ~ - ~ , f r-{
ll ! ~ . ~ °
~~c , - Irv, err'' ~ y ~ ~ , 1 ~ ~ ti` ,.f ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Gs
t. - - ~ r r- f , . ~,1 '""'r' `
w t ~ ~ z ,'i~~ ~ ~ .p 1 ~ T~ ~ ~
Q ~ ? MA ~ , O ~
3 , ~ ~ t ~ ~ ~ ~ fi . _ x ~ ' \ ' DIr~H 1. w-
`~P f,. r, ~ r-
Q r ~ _ t x - i ~~L ~ - ~ ~~1 ~
--f~L-- ~
J ' ~U - ~ R,i~
r ~ 1
,f , ,~,X~ - ~ ~ / '
s, ~r ' ~ ~ ~ ' ,%i
! .t/ / \ dntek' El = 1006 ~ ~ , \ ' . i r ~ _ A ~
r Jf,,, v, v ~ ,r` k ~ , en 0,29 c ~ , - ~ r ~ `
I \ L~~ L - - : r i ~ _ -
~~f~ 1 i~~r / fix' i % J( - r L / ~ ~
- ~ p ' ~~fY .
Y C~ 1 r r' i u
~ l>7 ' ~ ~ ~ r, ~ i ~ ~
- ~ ~ ~ k ~ ~ .y~ ~f
~ / \ ~ i ~ j
. t~ ~ k ~ ~X xa ~ ~ i ~ ~ X X f"` f . ,f
~ / ~ / \ l~, ~ ~ '
r < i! ~ i~ n Y ~ ~ ,
''x' '~,Y SP~j'~_~~' ~ Y, ~i, ~ ' ~ ~ i ~ 1 ,
i
i ~ X 'y - ~ ~ 1 ~ lJJl 1~.
/ rr s~ r?l V ~T - t i r 107 T ~ x ~ ~ ~ 4 i. S i _ ri /l '
~ ~ S~ r 't ~ t f !ter' rv ~ a ~ X ~ 4 ,kh. fl' / i i' i f'~ ,
.i~ Y ~ / r _ { x' ~ ~ i r i 1 i i~ i / / ~ 1 i j ,
~ of ~ X V :h X ! ~ ~ %
~ t~ ~.Y r r•- i , ~ r _ - - ....,I
1 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ROA? SHALL tXTEN? TC AN EXISTING GRAVE 'V. r'"~ L DR~ E u_ i
i ~ [ _ ~ 5-; TU PROVIDE ACCESS TO THE SITE. THE EXISTING GRAVEL ?RIVE WILL BE US~D AS E ~ A CONSTRUCTIDN ENTRANCE SILT FENCE SHALL BE PLACED ON BOTH SIDES Or' THE
~ ~ ~ ~ > -l~l - - TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION R!7A?
t t , ~ r~
~ 2 SI_E SHEET 2 FOR DETAi!_S AND CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE .`_7„
r~. ~ r, ~ d ~ t h~ Ry ~ D
iiE DAM SHALL HE CLiNS TR[„TE ? USING IMPERVIOUS CLAY MA T ERIAi. ~ UMPACT T" y~_~ ED iI
0 ~ y ~ -,y~ ; _ ~ h, .LL'/ , r ~~r~. `i5% O~ ITS MP~XIMUM DRY DENSITY.
- I7, l U
. i ' 1 d,- z 1 4.J
.RFJj ~ M i ~ ,off ~ Y>y ,r , , F}-.,
I
/ f
r ~ ~ _ ~ ~ N M; '~AL ~:r~
" 1 ~~ry~~
t . Fri,.; f Fv ~ ~ ~1 1
~""~RARY S?REAN.:;R~SS.!v;:/ _ / - ~
_ ~
PROJECT DESCRIPTION; ;~-'E ~'~k~'rSF ::_t ' .il-i' ::;NSTR;JCT A FQND ~7N A RESIDEN':A~
LUG iN ?rE SAiHL uCAi ~ti Ati a:: ~'.~N1 WHICH HAD BEEN DRAINED
_ - 18 METAL. BARRE_ ERR ~ ~•~~R _ _1.~ ~ ~ AND BREACHED AT SDMt ?IMF IN "HE PAS'

R _ _ ~ ~ R. ~ ~ - SITE DESCRIPTION,
THIS SITE IS IN A WOODED AREA WITH A SMAL1 STREAM RUNNING THROUGH II. THE DRAINAGE AREA CONSISTS DF 131.7 ACkES wrIICH IS MOST~~Y UNDEVEL[7PF D~
' ~ i R 'k .r...........
_ q / `R~ p i 0~ .DATE RE:VdSfOtJ
, Ti ~ - f? 7._,~.___...____... 1 1 3~___~_4__._.._._ _

c, - - hti ; T
~,lyllilSBYBpyYSi
~e ~ e~~~~~a~ Fdgd 4 . ~ . F,SS~p y ~F
I F^` ~ m G
~ ~ ~ ~F
(j~ n ?
~i~ ~t~{ to <r ~4:°.."~
{1 +~r~ 4... L ~~aP4 (e
I~ ~.AiN A ' R AN~~. A~ y ~ °'Y` ,B~ L~ PE Mi~S PRC]VALS
2- INSTALL SEDIMENT I~ENC: 3. INSTALL TEMPORARY CiINSTT~UCIION ROAD AND TEMPORARY STREAM %ROSSING,
4. INSTALL TEMP. SEDIMEN' `'RAPS AND TEMP. BERM AN? ?1FCH. ,
5. INSTALL PERMANENT 18' ;Uti_VERT BARREL THROUGH DAM SITE AND OL'TLE` PROJECTION, d^ I
XS 6. ROUTE STREAM THROUGH BARREL ~ ~ { ~ 7 CONSTRUCT DAM AND EMERGENCY SPILLWA7 {~j I ~ ~ d
(S _ i 8. INSTALL ROCK DAM ANA !:SE A PUMP AND `rMPORARY PIPE TC ?ASS I?yE STREAM ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~
's ACROSS THE ?AM ~ w
9. INSTALL THE RISiR i7N;C 'F{E BARREL AN; INSTALL. RIP-RAP AN"i-i LOATIi.IN ~ ~ STONE OVER BOTTOM ~7f R`.SER PLATE
10 MAINTAIN f"LC]W IN SRT ~,M WH E PON? TS :_IN Y i G q ~':~M,' ~ ~ ~ ~ Il ~L G B ,S N }
# ~ i 11. MAINTAIN ALL ERCIS.UN ~ .;N'TR MEAS RES THR ',Hy ~;T r, . - ~ ~ ".r r,` ~ ~ ~ - ~ I C,. ~ OL U UU,.~ ~I~ tE _ r R,.~L.. !
GRAI'}~1(; (.ALIT IP. SEED ALL DISTURHEH Ak, AS ACCORDINL SE LC.NG SraEi; ~
wt'^°-~, oer~nvc e~, i r: unr,~n4 v Me~nei lore ~ I ~ ~r
1c 2C sa e y
L. i
N FEF, I
1 inch LO ;l.

I~- ° ~
STORM DRAINAGE CHART Q m ~ ~
10 YEAR R T RCP r}Value: 0.013 ~ N Stain Frequerxy pe ype
TREATED TIMBER WING-WALLS z z
TIED INTO SLOPE TO PREVENT Lacafion p~ PIPE Q4TA ~ ~ o
6" x 6' TREATED TIMBERS SHORT-CIRCUITING Mn. US o o ~
LAID PERPENDICULAR TO SLOPE Sub Total Total i C Q prrret) Q (fotan Slope Pipe S¢e Vfii6 Ler~lh US CS Top B. 2 ~ ~ o
Fran To h>ter>sill' Rux>if ~ (n.) (fps) (feet) Irnert (ft.) Invert (fl) (ft.) ~ a a (rnfir.) Caef. x x ~
pn.) RIM'BOC H ~ ~ w
~oN HW37 EW36 SEESTORMWATERDESIGNCALCUATIOPISREPORf 0.022 WA 60 WA 91 286.00 286.00 - > 00 0~ ~
~FN - ~q Q~~ ON O~ U
~b Dg 35 DCI34 0.70 0.70 7.22 0.63 3.18 3.18 0.032 9.2 15 9.4 31 296.00 294.00 300,99
RIP-RAP ENERGY Ow . DISSIPATOR . 7 13.7 1 6.9 58 291.00 290.00 .99 ~ o ~ o ~ ° Dq 34 FF:S33 0.67 1.37 7.22 0.73 3.53 6.72 001 5 300 I 0'~ ~N
0~ WQ WQ W I <LO ti0 0.M
~S I - F F~ q 32 q 8 0.69 0.69 7.22 0.49 244 244 0.030 8.5 15 9.1 40 328.70 327.50 336.16 , ~ o 2 cv M
~..a... OW r 1 i _ ~ i Dq 31 q 7 0.18 0.18 7.22 0.75 0.97 0.97 0.032 5.9 15 9.4 31 319.00 318.00 325.05
i vONNFLL ti. ' ZO'c, COYvNFLL ti::5'i~l i i
zori=:. ~-.gin q30 q25 0.56 0.56 7.22 0.48 1.94 1.94 0.011 9.4 15 5.4 28 325.40 325.10 33224 ``,~uuum~rr,~~ vA~wnrl S
JOINT DETAIL ~ ~ - ~ - q 29 q 28 0.16 0.16 7.22 0.70 0.81 0.81 0.011 6.8 15 5.4 47 336.20 335.70 343.65 ~ " ,,•d.
NOT TO LENTf;fl DEP1H ~ ~7q - ~ i w , SCALE ~ - 1 9.8 40 336.50 334.10 ~ ~ '•~ti i ( 1 ~ ' ~ q 28 q 27 0.16 0.32 7.22 0.63 0.73 1.54 0.035 6.9 5 34Q57 ; p; ~ ~~'t •
REBAR DRIVEN WHET IND , ~ ~ - , ~ ~ ~ , ~ , i ~ ~ ~ ~ ,1 r ~ ~ ~ (N) , ~ ~ ~ ~ - - ~ ~ % ~li~,/ ~:r~. ~ ~ i Iii- 1 I~ ~ ~ MINIMUM OF 2-FEET ~ ; ~ ,i , ~ ; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ - ~ % ; r r ' ' ; q 26 0.04 0.36 7.22 0.81 0.23 1.77 0.013 8.7 15 6.1 112 333.90 33240 336.85 = ~ J ~ J - ° q27 =Q• z•w= cJ
EW-1 261 6x6 ~ ~ i; ~ ' ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ , ~ o ~ INTO STABLE SOIL - ~i .-J r - i ~ q 26 q 25 0.35 1.27 7.22 0.63 1.59 5.30 0.032 11.2 15 9.4 106 33220 328.80 335.21 = U ; 2 . N i :`~i
(BEND TOP AS SHOWN), = FES -33 80 6x6 ~ ; - ~ , , ~ ; , _ ~ ' ~ 7 1.64 7.22 0.63 1.68 6.99 0.029 127 15 8.9 188 324.90 319.50 331.60 ' ~ •.d' ' ~ m q 25 DCI 6 0.3 ~d, ,,d
A TIMBERS RESISTANT TO ROT ~ ~ ~ ~ r~ /~t r ~ ~ ~ I ' ~i ' ~ ~ 1 ONLY THE TED ' , y' . ~ i ; ~ ~ i ~ t I %0 i i , ~ ~ / ~ i i' 4 5.8 25 315.00 314.70 1. N • __~1 ' j ' ~ " ; d i , ~ I q 24 q 18 0.08 0.08 7.22 0.79 0.46 0.48 0.012 5. 15 32 83 J r,~r ~
AND DECAY ARE ACCEPTABLE FOR USE IN i% ~ - ; < < I ; ~ ' 1~4 STEEL PLATE ~ / i ~ ~ / ~ ~ / / ~ ~ f ~ Q rr,,ilnl , l 1-. _ ~ f - i ' / T~h ~ q 23 q 17 0.44 0.44 7.22 0.63 200 200 0.012 9.3 15 5.8 25 310.30 310.00 317.61 ului
% TREATED TIMBER LEVEL SPREADERS. ~ ~ " / .,h'' ~ ! ~ , ~ r ~ , . = 4 WIDE LENGTH _ ~ f~?~ ~,~j ~~7, ~ ~ _ i , ~ ~ ~ 's 1 i _ _ ~ ~ a ~ w~ ~ ~ ' .
ALL JOINTS TO BE SECURED ACCORDING TO ~ ~ i ' ~ r ,t ~ ! ` " - q 22 DCI 21 0.08 0.08 7.22 Q77 0.44 0.44 0.010 5.5 15 5.3 40 301.40 301.00 304.19
JOINT DETAIL. ~ ; ~ _ i i j,i ~ _ / . i ,r~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ = ~i ' ~ ~ - i ' O ~ ~ % ~ ~ CrCI 21 q 15 0.11 0.19 7.22 0.45 0.36 0.80 0.012 6.7 15 5.6 26 299.70 299.40 306.40 N i ~ ' O
N GTHWISE CENTER ~ !'i . ! ~ ~ I t ' ~ ; J/;~' / / ~ ~.r / ' i ~ / I / f i ~~"-ti--''-~ ~'4._ DRILL REBAR HOLES IN TREATED UMBER 0 LEN UPSLOPE ENDS OF WING-WALLS TO BE , ~ ~ ~ ~ < ' / / % ~ ~ -
AND A MINIMUM OF 4-INCHES FROM END OF TREATED TIMBER SECURED VNTH ~4 REBAR DRIVEN THROUGH ~ ~ ' ` ~ i / ~ ~ ' ? ( ,,J~ ~ - - s q 20 q 19 0.15 0.15 7.22 0.73 0.79 0.79 0.010 6.8 15 5.3 39 317.60 317.2(1 324.79
DRILLED TREATED TIMBERS AND INTO GROUND. ~ ~ - - j/,/ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ? .r i ~ l ~ ~ ~ . 1 9.7 15 5.3 40 317.00 316.60 323.57 d' _ ~v -~'i' /i~/. q19 q 18 0.17 0.40 7.22 0.63 0.77 202 00 0 f~ ~
TREATED TIMBER LEVEL SPREADER DETAIL ; . ; _ ; , - - ; , , ~ _ ~ , - ' - ' ' ` ~ q 18 q 17 0.10 0.94 7.22 0.66 0.48 4.50 0.010 13.0 15 5.3 204 314.50 31240 321.83 O ao _ .61 1.55 7.22 0.61 269 7.18 0.025 13.2 15 8.2 106 309.80 307.20 316.81 ^.1
- r i ~ r { 1 ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ; - -'fit-~~M~ - L~ ~---~o~_---_--._-._ ~ - q17 q16 0 01 ~ _ l- q 16 q 15 0.37 211 7.22 0.63 1.66 9.67 0.048 13.0 15 11.5 77 307.00 303.30 310.Oi2 N
i _ _ ~ f ~ ~ _ - _ I .94 10.61 0.010 18.0 24 7.3 39 299.30 298.90 306,13 G ~ 0 O q 15 q 3 0.21 232 7.22 0.62 0 n 0 0
' ~ _ `~~,A _ _ ; ~ ~ I_ - ~ - - _ _ ~ - ~ - - ~ ~ i~ ~ ~ C 0. k
. ' , ' ! q 14 q 13 0.07 0.07 7.22 0.73 0.37 0.37 0.012 5.0 15 5.8 25 353.90 353.60 360.79 ~ ~ 0 0
_>~~1 - _ A ~ \ 0.77 0.010 6.7 15 5.3 40 353.40 353.00 360.79 y ~ \ , ~ q 13 q 12 0.08 0.15 7.22 0.69 0.40 C 0
A- _ ~ A A~yiA~~~~ J, .,1 M ~ ~ - _ - ~ ~ ~ , ~ 3 q 12 q 11 0.04 0.19 7.22 0.81 0.23 1.00 0.033 5.9 15 9.6 2G3 35280 344.00 356.50 U G O
I - ~ " ~ 1 _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 10 0.85 1.04 7.22 0.45 276 3.76 0.013 11.7 15 5.9 32 339.30 338.90 346.77 ~ O
_ 6 , ~ , ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - . _ . • ~ )1t~r~`.~,.w• ~ ' .70 3.74 7.50 0.018 14.2 15 7.0 85 338.70 337.20 346.31 ~ - , . ~ ~ q 10 q 9 0.74 1.78 7.22 0 OT 0 ~
~ ~ _ ~ GAE u - - _ 314.5 ~ s- f - l , I' '1 ~ 339'9 ',335 ' , 331\5 ` 0 27.8 322:0' ~ ,,~1~'1 -.~317,~~~ ` - • ~A ~ A ~ 3 1 - ~ i 324 5 ~ , /~p~ ~ - - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q 00 I 12 1 13.6 81 337.00 331.60 .37 N ~ , ~ ~ Z ~ q 9 q 8 0.16 263 7.22 0.52 0.60 10.54 0.067 6 5 340 y ~ Z ~
I I~'~ i ~ ~ I ~ ~I li 1~ ~ 1R1 ~ ! iV ~ ~4. i M/\ 5.1~- ~ t ~tJ~' ~ tUY/ ~ ` ~ ~ ~ ~ ` 0 a ~ q 8 q 7 0.16 299 7.22 0.53 0.69 1221 0.046 14.3 15 11.3 136 327.30 321.00 334.56 0 O ~ tq A ~ ' N o ~ 00
i t ii I ~ - - ' ~ - ~ , A i. ~ ~ ' ' ~ ~ ; ~ ~ q 7 [Iq 6 0.31 4.94 722 0.65 1.45 20.65 0.020 20.3 24 10.2 40 317.80 317.00 325.05 'G ~ ~ - ` ~ I Ot,.~
I ~ _ _ - - - f n~ - - - ~ T1ON EASEM~~T - - ~ ~ ` ` ~ Dq 6 D(CI 5 0.44 5.38 7.22 0.63 200 2265 0.032 19.3 24 129 25 316.00 315.20 323.16 ~ ` -1 ~.~4!-~--~~_ , ~
i - X20 rTEMPORARY, CONSIRUC ~ - - " ` . ~ ' " ~ C1q 5 q 4 0.45 5.83 7.22 Q70 227 24.92 0.020 21.8 24 10.2 50 315.00 314.00 323.16 0 ~ _ . 01
- - _ _ _ _ - ~ ' - _ _ - _ ~ _ _ _ ~ _ , , ~ ~ - - ~ ~ ' ' ' ~ ' ' ~ q 4 q 3 0.13 8.28 7.22 0.72 0.68 36.21 0.056 20.7 24 17.0 192 313.80 303.10 318.92 ~ ~o>~c~b~, \
_ . - - _ _ _ z,.,__w__ v~ r ;RIP ~•A~ AF~R4N ~ER _ - - , ~ r } _ ~ ? ~ j , , ~ N STREET 8.62 7.22 Q63 1.55 37.76 0.013 27.7 30 9.5 31 296.80 296.40 306.E ~ 'AF~RbN (ERI 1!) , , / . ; ~AIL.BE q 3 q 2 0.34 G I , ~ f % / ;~x1ST~'NG 60' PUBLIC RAW q 2 EW 1 0.16 8.76 7.22 0.78 0.90 38.66 0.012 28.4 30 9.1 17 296.20 298.00 306.E O
i ~ _ _ d i ~ ~ ~ - - ~ - - - - - \ \ ~ ~ , ~ , r ~ ~
, J i . ~ . ~ , ~ _ ~ ~ t i,'C-
~ _ , ~ , ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 7 ) ~'~\,A \ i , -
t i ti ~ ~ ~ , - i , _ - a' I T=330.fY _ ~ _ ' , r V l ~ _ • -'~j .3 w a CI' / b I V - " 6=330. t Q -L~ ~ ~ 1 , ~ v ; ~ ~ - - ! INLET OUTLET PROTECTION RIP RAP APRONS ,A
w S T - ~ 1 I T ~ I X50. ~ ~0 ~`~1. a m ? A~ ~ ~ ~ 3 ~ ~ ' G~346.0 ~ _ - n ~ ~ ~ sTRUCTURE a (10) PPE ~ VELO(9TY mP RAP also) 9ff
x J ~ ~ ~ I C Vi .D,E.~ r - GPE= F n n GPE= I ~ ~ ~ , ~ GPE= ' a w, i ~ A i a ' i _F_ ~ , .'D F N _ V W.P S C.D I. ' 3 w 336.9 r I. Q 22.7 X22.8 CFS IN lT'S TYPE in l (ft) z W (ft) x T (io) '~k EW 1 38.66 30 9.1 CLASS 1 13 20 z 8 z 24
F ~ Q i I Cb; V.W.P.S..E. g -I' 3 ' ,356A ~ / - A ~ ~'J, o i i i GPE~ F i ~I V` q i - ~ r I i I ~~~a;,r.f;r ~ ~ FES 33 6.72 15 6.9 CLASS 1 13 10 z 4 z 24 .d i
i~ / i i i' ~ ~ ~ 336.$ ~27 / , i~ o' 12 L 1 , 356.2. ~ \ , ~ / -3r2 - ER 1 1.89 N A 261 CLASS 1 13 10 x 27 z 24 I
lJ~ , i i ~~pp / NOTE RIP RAP SHALL BE CONSTRl1C1ED OVER FlLTER FABRIC MIRAFl 500X OR APPROVED EQUAL.
' 31 , m , ~ l ~ ~ h~ ~ EfiAININd WALL ~ ~ 5 , ~ _ `7"r F i " ~ ~ ~ i, ~ / ~ ! ~ i F~ GPE~ ~ I ~ 1 o a ~o F : J
~ ~ ~ ~ i 'ri - ~ ~ 338.3 322.7 ~ ~ I 'S f, _ , ~ ~ t~ T=3J0 0 o, F - r. F~~ ,Q' ~ . t- ~ - ~
o ~ - '1~' `6PE.~~ ~ M~ M ~GPE~ ~ . ~ ~ I ~ - ; . ~ q ~ i ~ 322.7 ~ v ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ' ~ 354,1 ~ f, •354.5 ~336.~ ~ J , ~ ~o ~ Q~ Jn W^, V ~ _ -
~ /r / ~ `i , ~ ~ f ~ Li n l .
I - ~ ~ ' ' / / ~ / ~ ~h7 F -~-f E 1\ ~ O
~ ~ i ~ l ~ I i~ d Cr~20 ~ i ~ _ ~ 3~ ~ i, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ; ~ i AAdd i _ ~ DRAAIAGE $WAIE SECTION ~ °o G W uQ J N
a0 ~ 321.1 !U' / ~f0 .335.5 ~~i % ~ F ~ ~ F - i F- ~ o _ RETAINING WALL ' 0' ~ ~ - I -27 1 ~ / (~'E ~ / ~ j j GPE=.- n ~ i f I z DRA~VAGE SWALE AND LINER CHART N
135.1 /352. i 3526 N i - A ~ i ~ / / ; ' ~ ~ ,~=i 1 i f ' m I ~ : ¢ A V I~'. \~~~Z~ ~ Y ~ o,
' x 1 ~ ~ ~ ' ! 320.1 ~ ~ ~ I I , w / ~ ~ \ i,! I + I ~ ~ `~~1 ~`~I ~ B C a~°n ~ I ~ G w w ~ i , DRAMAGE SqE DESIGN TEMPORARY PERMANENT ~ ~ w
m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ A ~ i / ~I a i / - -w ~ ~ 1 ~ I , j I 1 \ 1 I ,~i. SLOPE DEPTH UiER LINER z ~ ~ ~ ~
~ q ~ GPE=~ , - - i i ' A i , i i i , - 3190 ~ 1 ~ e - 30 334:b - ~ r I ~ i ` I s i I j ~ ,I~~ SWALE (FT) MATERIAL MATERIAL w z o ~1 ~ ~`i 1 ~ ~ ~ r, ~ ~a I ' ~ I ' { ~ t ; i , ~ s'~~~1 ~t ~ ~ ~ ~ o
i F ~ ~ ~ r GPE* F GPE= q i - ~ I T _ ~GPE, - ~ ~ -a--' / I I -25" ~ r 1. r 9901 ~ - ~ , ~ ~ 354.7 ~ ~ 333.8 ~ 3~ - / ~ ~ 1~ ~ " I 1 ~ ~ ~ ' I ' I ~ l ptE~'~ ~-,1~~,. ~ _ _ - A 3:1 1 GRASS MIXTURE GRASS MIXTURE ~ o Q ~ ° ~ i ~ w I I, ~ i ~ ~ i' f 1' ~ V~ L.__1~„'~ Irl_'~> ~ t ~ ti °j W w o r lII11 f~~! I I I owe ~~ti~ti°o
- - - - ~ . - ~ ~ ~ ~ F - ~ ~ I - , , 5 _ 36a - i7 ~ - ~ I r / ~ I ~ ~ i ! = - i AN GREEN OR APPROVED EQUAL ~ ~ Q ~ Q ° ~ ~ ~ ( I , , ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ NOTE: LINER MATERIAL TO BE NORTH AMEBIC ~ o ~ ~ ~ W
- 1 i - fl - ~r ~ o i ~ ''316.8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~o I i 41 ~ ~ ~ / ~ ~ ; I / ~ I I - ~ ' ~ 1~ 2 0 R ~ 4i Q Y l ! ~ ~ 1 ` ' I ~ I! f' 1 30 CITY OF DURHAM PUBLIC ~L o o ~ ~ o ~ ~ l, i J I ~ f i! ~ l .1' 4ti ~ S ~ ~L O N 2 O [n
~ ~ ! ~ ~ ~ - X37.5 i ~ - ' F ~ ~ ' _ - - a ~ I 3 ~ x 5 - ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ , ~ ~ ~E` -316 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ F ~ , ~ ~n . ~ f ' ~ 1 i % r i ' t % ' ~ ; r , ~ ' ' ~ ~ l SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT
n ~ i' i F 3. 331.8 0. ~ / / f ~ ~V _~V _ 3 ~ 324.0 ~ II ' / ~ o' I GPEk ~ ~ ~ ~ i r r ~ / / ~ i ~ ~ 1 ~ - - - - ~ / ~ / J ' ~ i'r 1 r I ! i U t
~ ~ 248.1 ~ ~ ~i , ~ q ~ _ r ~ / / ~ ~ r - - r _ E `r Uc~
I l % _ 3~ ~ i , ~ ° ' ' t 'T, J ? ~ ~ 1 i I ii ~ !10' I I ~ w . / / / / ~ ~ ~ , ! I f r I i f ) ~ ~ GPE=1,23.4_,._,,,- GRADED PAD_ELEVATiON r J
a~~ m - a 11 - ~~0~ ' N F I-~ - , . F - N ~ 1 , ' n ~ ~ G~= _ ' F ~ . i ~ ' - ~ ~ a i ~ F STORM. WATER. TO,DRAIN T.0 FRONT..t)F.,LOT ,1; ~ h i
128 ~ / I ~g ~ ~ o A ~ ~ i A " GPE= _ GPE~ `13, .--'~3 3H~ ii ~ ~ - GPE* i ~ ~ F M 4~ ~ I I _ -329:fl' i 312.fi ' 16 55 F - ~ ~ r- - „ , . i , _ - _ I
Q - ~ ~ ; 0" - _ ~ ~N ~ / ~ , ~ j I o 1;~,i _ _ STORM.. WATER TO DRAIN.. TO _ REAR_ OF_ LOT ( R
I ,f 344.4 ~b,0 ~ _ ~ - - - _ ~ - F ~ " - - / I ~ i' ynb r .s _ r _ i I ~i~ i i ~ ~ / / ~ j =11,i ~i I _ _ F, ~ ~ ~ yI 'i ~ I ~ I ~ ~ ~ l , ~ ~ ~ f ~ j ~ ~ ~ I S _ _ .STORM WATER TO DRAIN.. TO_ B,OTH _FRONT .AND. REAR_OF LOT ~ _ _
, _ ~ - , o _ ~ ~ ~ ~ - :D~ .S:(1:E. - ~ - '''l ~ , - _ ~ _
a o ~ Q ~ ~ - F - 2i - GP ~ ; ~ i r " - GPE= _ GPE ~ / - 343,0' E ~ ; ~ ~ ~ f3 0~- ~ ~ ~ It , ; ' r ;~1 ~ T..1,23,4 _ _ TOP OF _ WALL. ELEVATION GBE~i. ! r ~ - J" ~ ~ EW C ~ I ~ FES Q ' ~
cv ' 'f S ~ J4 ~ ~ ~309.4 ~ ~ '/03.5 ~ ~ N ~ ~ 5o-•,, CI 126.2._ ~320.D ~ ,308.7 ~ _ . . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ . , ~ 336.y ~ ~ _ ~ - _ _BOTTOM OF EXPO$ED..WALL ELEVA__ N
~ - ~ ~ ry i I - I '342.6 ~ ~ - q i - ~i ~ ~ I!,,1 ~ ~ B-123.4 . . g I I , ~ -
~ _ - - _ , , : ~ x . , ~ • ~ ~ , . , ~ ~ ~ GPE / ETAT ~ I C.D.V.W.P.S.D.E. CITY OF DURHAM VARIABLE WIDTH 1
5as QP 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ! h, ~ o . - ~ : \ 1 326 7. ~ _.-N 3 ~ F - _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ X3.0 ~ - - . ~ ~ < ` ~ - F q ter- WkCL ~ Ex. MH ? ~ ° PUBLIC STORM DRAINAGE EASEMENT - - Q ~ j RIM ELEV. 289.94'
ui ~ S ~ d pq ! r ~4PE GPI- ~3 , ?oz , O a '`r~ 6 T~318.0 ~ - =319A' 307.0 ~Q~ ~ ~ ,T~302~ ~n5~ f=~ r n RIM IN 281.79' Z s ~ ~ _ l w_\.. _ ~n5~ ~ ~ ~ RIM Ot1T 281.74' J
_ ~ Cl g ~ 324.•7 C¢314.0. _ / I ~ Sr+3Q20 i / Cr28S N G~M`~ G.D. y,! 7 r ~ ~ ~~f'~-' _ G~~89• , ~ ~ ~ _ _ ~ \
a r ~ 839.3 / M. ~ ~ ~ - s f ~ ~ / ; m . , ~ ~ d ~ i- ` ~ - \ PR TION ~ ~ ,~v ~ OUTLET OTEC Q o, ~ - ti \ RIP RAP APRON z:-.~~ V Q ~ \ ,~s. : ~ - F ~
- . ~ ~ , ' r'A' o` , ~ 3 Q ~ ro - _ _ _W. . -cr - 6 ~ 1 3 _ WS , ;32: -IF'+.-_ - ``N'-- "-P - P N Tt~~~ ~f TED TIMBER 1• CONTRACTOR SHAH VERIFY THE LOCATION OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES, AND T
~ R, ~ o o ~ CI - ~ - - ~ ~ m - ~ ~ ~ - _ - - _ I ~ - - - - ~ ~ - - - `c•. - - \ ~ SPREADER ~ ; SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGE RESULTING FROM HIS ACTIVITIES. ~ _
V ~ i a r i - r - - i ' ~ ~ . - - " ' CALL UTILITY LOCATOR SERVICE 48 HOURS PRIOR• ' ^ ~ ' . q ~ ~ TABILIZED WITHIN 15 DAYS OF ANY PHASE OF O _ \ \ m ~ 2. CUT AND FlLL SLOPES WILL BE S Z
- 1T, - - ~ ~ / ~ ° ...336.1 _ _ - - f r _ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~r~~ ~ ~ \ - GRADING - D~I~ ~o o;
_ _ 1/ _ ~ ~ c.D~v.w.PS 3oao ~ A \ ~ ~ 3. NO TIEBACKS AND APPURTENANCES ASSOCIATED WITH THE RETAINING WALLS _ ~ ~ A 30 CITY OF > N I HT OF WAY. Q Q
N j ' ~ ~ ~ fla ~ ~ i ~~Gt31a.O _ ~ - ETAINING'WAI~ ~ R r ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ / - - ~ ~ ~ 1R TED TIMBER-- - - ~ ~ 3Y ~ ~ T~311.0 ~ EW ~ -;J~, 1b ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , - - '~Ga3a2O 1 FNQTI~~6AC1~5 ~ ~ " ~ ~ i~~^ DURHAM PUBLIC - _ ARE PERMITTED VdTHI R G ~ A ti I • ~ d \ SANITARY SEWER _ . ~
READ _ G~ R ` _ ~r~ ARE ALtD~D 1N z b i 'R ~ - - ~ EASEMENT Z - ~i ~ . ~ 1 \ O j~~~3020' ~ ` ~ ~V A ~ G ~ _ _ ~
7 333.4' / ~ ~ ~00 /~~1~2.0 Q ~ 11 _ ~ ~ , ~ R ~ " ' . R TLET PREEFECTION ~ R , i~ _ ~GPE, - ~ ~ ~ % ~ / - , , ~ _ ~ ~ ~p z °Y
~ ~ = - , _ r' o i ~ 330.4 , ~ - ~ ' ` - - - ~ ~1~ _ .~o " - ~ " ~ 'l 318~~ 14' , T _ NQt ~ ~ ~ r, ` - RIM ELEV. 292.94' V e~ 1 ~ ,~>r_ _ - Q ~ ~ ~ ~y ~ V RIM IN 283.50 r
w ~ 13 ~ - _ - - i~~ - ~ ~ t ?JJ = /GP / GpE - ~ - - v1 - _ - GPE- ~ ' g ~ ! - - - ~ ~ 315.1 ~ _ ~ Q- ~ ; ~~7 A ~ ~ RIM OUT 283.42' ~ ~ ~ ~l t~ e
- '32av- - _ - 32i.t REIAININ~-+NACL _ - ~ - w ~ ~ , - - { - ~ ~ , 325.1 , , TKO _ - - - ' 41.0 r ; ~ " > i ~ - `3025 ~ \ _ Q~R
_ _ i % _ /s= ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ - U V W.P S;q ~ - T~1O.o ' ~ ,D.E ; ' l ~ - i . _ ~ , i ~ ' " _ _ ~ _ ~ AV' ; ~ II. ~ , , ~ 2~i' X. 2 'SANITARY ~ ~ ~FNF . - E 5 n. c V
, - ; : - yto RMANENT NA t - ~ DRAI G~-. _ , - ; ~ - ~ ~ , I; I ~ ~ SEWER EASEMENT z ~u ~ r~,rypefir~,. ~H1 E~ GUAIiT'r l ~ ~ ; ..Oft _ MiM,a,rFp - - r ~ ~ ~ _
~ n - _ _ ~,~i _ - _ _ _ ~ - ~ ti ~ - _ ~ j ~ ~ - - - _ ~ _ ~ , ~ ' ~ Vl i . . ~r
~ ~ F _ _ - INVi 352.79' / ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ - _ s.% - ~ - - - r ; i 1 , . _ ~ i f S 309.93 - ~ - R E ~ _ _ y , p i - = ~ , n \ j ~V ll ' ' ryl I, I L'XIST CB ` \ ^ ~I
- - ~ -c-~y - _ - , ~ _ _ - 'O ~ ~ 7'~ N INM35P.28, _ ~ _ - n ~ ~ ~ _ ~ _ _\~lI ~ ~ ~i 60 0 JO QO 120 240 I ~ ~ ~ " ~ ~ ;~"T -C 302.47 EXIST FES ? ~ N 3 ~ ~ ~ INV. 291.2 U ~ , ~J ~ EXIST CB ~ ' IN 296.47 (18"RCP)
~ _ - - . ~ ~ _ _ ~ ~ y n ~7 ? - _ - ~ i - ~ .Ex STORM MH~ 3 ~~'u N y u „2 ~ ti ~ ~ ~ ~ TIC 303 54 ' ~d ~ ~ -9UT 295.77 (18°RCP)
~ ~ ~ _ ~ , - - _ ~ "v. ^ 36" ,RCP ~ ~ w n„ n~~ F ~ TG~~ -t - _ r RIM-316.94 7 C ~ JJ w Y ~ ~ ~ INV'IN=310.54 _ ~ ~ si'r' 'i ~~P~ ~~7~ ~ '"-pUL i . _ .r n - ~ - ^~I H s - r ;a J% T C .t'I A't 4 ''O+~ IN 298.14 (15"RCP) 0,- R< m P Jr L i m ~ ` ~ ,OUT 297.79 (18'RCP) ~ U_ ~ G'F ` ~'-E I,
_ - _ ti - , INV bUT-310.39 _ _ - r Z i rn - ~ ~ ~ . ~ _ , rv - r ~ , t. r 7.. ~ ~ - ~ ' ~ f ? ` ".7 ~ ~ (1-~ -1 N d n ~ ~ -I pI Vin"
I ~ ~7 . ~ Q'~ ~ i, I ~ - ~"T , w ~ - 3 r D c ~ ~ d ~ ~ 3~ 'iii 1, lIIC),1 - 8D a 4 7_ ~:~a, - ~ ~,~7T ~ I
~ J R' ~ ~ ~ _ _ `r . n- ~ - ~ i I z DRAWING I M m ' _ CITY OF DURHA
_ , N ~ ~ - ~ ~r• ~ ~ - ~ , 4 ~ ~ ~'C';! n, EXIST I I - _ _ - ~ ~ ~ - PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ~ ` u ~ INV OUT , . m a~ so3.s~' - APPROVED
! i N ~ ' i ~ + - - ~ ~ - . -
. ~ ~ - , ~ ~ r i w I ENGINEERING . - DATE / -
_ ~ ~ ' "
0 ASCOTT WAY V V STORM WATER _-_-----.__------------DATE
TRANSPORTA110N DATE -
PROJECT NUMBER
DATE
p 4AN~
1.11 a 1521-04