Laserfiche WebLink
4 <br /> <br />Lynch is still in progress, but he cannot comment on it without knowing exactly what it <br />is. Mr. Wagner said that the need for water is very important in an application, and <br />conservation and drought management plans are important components of an application. <br /> <br /> Mr. Rudlas said that RWSA's plan is akin to a site plan and DEQ's plan is akin to <br />a Comprehensive Plan. <br /> <br /> Mr. Schwin said that once a federal permit is required, the Corps has to assess <br />direct and indirect impacts and a number of other federal laws have to be complied with. <br />He said this includes loss of wetland and streams and endangered species. <br /> <br /> Mr. Rooker asked if consideration is given if there is positive impact on the <br />environment. <br /> <br /> Mr. Schwin said the Corps has more flexibility now if a project results in an <br />overall environmental gain, but mitigation is not looked at up front. He said the merits of <br />the project have to be looked at first. He said impacts cannot be bought down. <br /> <br /> Mr. Rooker said this is an important question. He said the James River pipeline <br />alternative appears to have less environmental impacts. He said other alternatives are <br />within the watershed, are cheaper, but have more environmental impacts. He asked if <br />these alternatives are still on the table. <br /> <br /> Mr. Schwin said he can respond to this until after he is in a position of addressing <br />the alternatives, and he cannot do that currently. <br /> <br /> Mr. Rooker said a four foot crest was in the 2002 plan. He said this had wetland <br />issues but had the benefit of working within the existing watershed. He said this would <br />add additional wetland. He said it is important to know if that is an option. <br /> <br /> Mr. Schwin said he does not know the details of that project. He said it will be a <br />judgment call on the part of the Corps, but if the impacts are fairly minor the Corps has a <br />fair amount of flexibility. <br /> <br /> A representative of Game and Inland Fisheries said that the details submitted <br />regarding the four foot crest showed an impact on 30 acres of wetland and potential <br />impact to the James spiny mussel. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lynch said that the four foot crest would result in more than 30 acres of new <br />wetlands and while there would be a short-term loss there would be a long-term gain. <br /> <br /> Mr. Schwin said that in general they look at the loss of wetland up front as <br />compared to other alternatives. He suggested that a pre-application meeting with a <br />smaller group be held in his office before an application is submitted. <br /> <br /> Mr. Stokely said that the James River pipeline has less impact, but he does not <br />know all the impacts of bringing the James River water to the watershed and that would <br />have to be evaluated. He said the cost of this alternative is another issue, and whether it <br />is a practical cost. He said it is less damaging but there are other issues. <br /> <br /> Mr. Joseph Hassell, DEQ, said the question was raised about not taking care of <br />the existing watershed, but he noted that Albemarle County controls sedimentation and <br />zoning. <br /> <br /> Responding to a question from Mr. Lynch, Mr. Schwin said the Corps has <br />approved impacts in excess of 30 acres, but all projects go through the same review. <br /> <br /> Mr. Hassell said Charlottesville and Albemarle County have a 250 square mile <br />watershed. He said the demand for water is expected to grow to 200 million gallons a <br />day. He said that by sticking to the existing watershed we are putting stress on the <br />watershed. He said it is preferable, but not always possible to stick with the watershed. <br />He said in certain circumstances endangered species can be moved. Regarding Buck <br /> <br /> <br />