20050861 Ver 2_Staff Comments_20070109 (40)

Re: Snow Creek Stream Restoration
Subject: Re: Snow Creek Stream Restoration
From: Daryl Lamb <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2007 18:20:55 -0500
To: Eric Kulz <[e-mail]>
Eric,
I did a site visit on this project today (01/09/07), pursuant to issuing a 401 authorization. The project
designer is Tommy Burchette. Unfortunately, I have not had much training in Rosgen methodology, so
I am really not well qualified to pass judgment on many of the design details. We walked the proposed
restoration reaches, and Tommy explained the work that is to be done. Something else you may want
to know (if you don't already) -the major restoration reach feeds into an ~8 acre lake. The project
applicant, C. L. White, is planning a major dam rehabilitation project on this lake that will be done
simultaneously with the restoration. The lake will be drained, and the dam (a fairly large one) will be
completely rebuilt. Additional stream restoration work will be done on the stream reaches below the
dam. I believe the restoration of the reaches below the dam is also detailed in the plans that were
included with the application. As for the design parameters, I think you better talk to Tommy
Burchette. I did ask him the source of funds for this project, and he indicated that Pilot View is
providing the money through various grants, including the Clean Water Management Trust Fund.
Best regards,
Daryl
Daryl Lamb, P.G.
NC DENR Winston-Salem Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
Winston-Salem, NC 27107
Voice: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
On 1/9/2007 9:56 AM, Eric Kulz wrote:
Ian:
Larry looked over this project, and I have looked at it too. According to BIMS, this has not been
issued yet. There are some very strange things in the design documents, including, but not limited
to: The existing stream and proposed restored reach are both B4c, but the refereece reach is a C4.
This appears to be a Priority I restoration; however the proposed entrenchment ratio (1.8) does not
differ significantly from the existing ration (1.4). the reference is 12.4. The proposed bankfull
cross-sectional area is larger than the existing; this is odd, as impacted streams are usually
overwidened. Which brings up another point; there is very little discussion of the existing site
conditions.
The strangest thing is that the existing sinuosity is 1.15, and so is the sinuosity of the proposed
reach ! !
There are other things as well.
I of 2 2/ 14/2~N)7 9:32 AM

Re: Snow Creek Stream Restoration
The box on public funds was checked "yes". Why no NEPA/SEPA?
Does anyone know if they are doing this for mitigation credit?? the PCN does not say. Also, the
total length of the restoration reach is not clear.
Darryl, are you familiar with this project?
Eric
2 of 2 2/ 14/2007 9:32 AM