20081477 Ver 2_401 Application_20130213

O8- I *-I iv2-
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL F&WK
WDICKSON
community infrastructure consultants
720 Corporate Center Drive Raleigh, North Carolina 27607 919.782.0495 tel. [phone] fax
TO: NCDWQ DATE: 2/8/2013
WBSCP Unit
512 North Salisbury St _ RE: Kaplan Drive Culvert
Raleigh, NC 27604 60319.00.RA
ATTENTION:
We are sending via:
®2nd Day
❑ Regular Mail
❑ Pick -up
❑
Hand Delivered
The following items:
❑ Correspondence
❑ Plans
❑ Specifications
®
Other as listed below:
COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION
5 2/8/13 1 PCN Package
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below:
® For Approval ❑ As Requested ❑ Approved as Submitted ❑ Returned for Corrections
❑ For Your Use ® For Review ❑ Approved as Noted ❑ Forward to Subcontractor
REMARKS:

`0F WA
o�rF9pG
o -c
o%- 11k1102,
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre - Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
T Section 404 Permit ❑ Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 14 or General Permit (GP) number.
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
® Yes ❑ No
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
© 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ
401 Certification:
❑ Yes ® No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes ® No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for
mitigation of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank
or in -lieu fee program.
❑ Yes Q No
1g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
❑ Yes © No
1h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes © No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project:
Kaplan Drive Culvert Improvements
2b. County:
Wake
2c. Nearest municipality / town:
Raleigh
2d. Subdivision name:
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
City of Raleigh Public Works Department, Carl Dawson, PE
3d. Street address:
222 West Hargett Street
3e. City, state, zip:
Raleigh, NC 27602 -0590 p
3f. Telephone no.:
(919) 996 -3030
3g. Fax no.:
(919) 996 -7638 I Lz aw
3h. Email address:
cad.dawson @raleighnc.gov
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is:
❑ Agent ❑ Other, specify:
4b. Name:
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
4d. Street address:
4e. City, state, zip:
4f. Telephone no.:
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
Tom Murray
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
WK Dickson
5c. Street address:
720 Corporate Center Drive
5d. City, state, zip:
Raleigh, NC 27607
5e. Telephone no.:
919 - 782 -0495
5f. Fax no.:
919 - 782 -9672
5g. Email address:
tmurray @wkdickson.com
Page 2 of 10

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
1783574025
1b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.775 Longitude: -78.711
1c. Property size:
0.25 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
Simmons Branch
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
C;NSW
2c. River basin:
103020201 (Neuse River Basin)
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
See attached project narrative.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 0
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 150
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The project will improve channel capacity and reduce flooding as well as minimizing loss of land to the landowner.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
See attached project detail.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
x❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
Comments:
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
Preliminary Q Final
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): Daniel Ingram
Agency /Consultant Company: WK Dickson
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
2005
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
®Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
The projects existing permit (Action ID 20082785) expired on 3/18/2012, before construction began. See attached narrative for additional information.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes Q No
6b. If yes, explain.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑ Wetlands ® Streams — tributaries ❑ Buffers ❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
Wetland impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary
2b.
Type of impact
2c.
Type of wetland
2d.
Forested
2e.
Type of jurisdiction
Corps (404,10) or
DWQ (401, other)
2f.
Area of
impact
(acres)
W1 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W2 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W3 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W4 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W5 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W6 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
2h. Comments:
No wetland impacts are anticipated.
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
Stream impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
3b.
Type of impact
3c.
Stream name
3d.
Perennial (PER) or
intermittent (INT)?
3e.
Type of
jurisdiction
3f.
Average
stream
width
(feet)
3g.
Impact
length
(linear
feet)
S1 P
Culvert
Simmons Branch
PER
Corps
10
72
S2 P
Culvert
Simmons Branch
PER
Corps
10
54
S3 -
Choose one
-
-
S4 -
Choose one
-
S5 -
Choose one
-
-
S6 -
Choose one
-
-
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
126
3i. Comments:
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
Open water
impact number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable)
4c.
Type of impact
4d.
Waterbody
type
4e.
Area of impact (acres)
01 -
Choose one
Choose
02 -
Choose one
Choose
03 -
Choose one
Choose
04 -
Choose one
Choose
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, the complete the chart below.
5a.
Pond ID number
5b.
Proposed use or
purpose of pond
5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
5d.
Stream Impacts (feet)
5e.
Upland
(acres)
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
P1
Choose one
P2
Choose one
5f. Total:
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a. Project is in which protected basin?
❑X Neuse ❑ Tar - Pamlico ❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman ❑ Other:
6b.
Buffer Impact
number —
Permanent (P) or
Temporary
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Stream name
6e.
Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f.
Zone 1
impact
(square
feet )
6g.
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet
B1 P
Culvert Improvements
Simmons Branch
No
1,920
1,280
B2 T
Culvert Improvements
Simmons Branch
No
8,590
4,339
B3 -
Yes/No
B4 -
Yes/No
B5 -
Yes/No
B6 -
Yes/No
6h. Total Buffer Impacts:
10,510
5,619
6i. Comments:
Page 5 of 10

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
All impacts to waters of the US have been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent practicable. The attached narrative describes avoidance and
minimization in detail.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
See attached narrative.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
❑ Yes Q No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ ❑ Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
❑ Mitigation bank
❑ Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Quantity:
Quantity:
Quantity:
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In4leu Fee Pro ram
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
❑ Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
Choose one
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4f. Non - riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
Yes X No
buffer mitigation?
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
6c.
6d.
6e.
Zone
Reason for impact
Total impact
Multiplier
Required mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund).
Pursuant to 15A NCAC 02B .0233 (6) "Table of Uses," because the road crossing will impact less than 150 linear feet of riparian
6h. Comments: buffer, it is allowable
Page 7 of 10

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
Yes ❑ No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
Not required. Temporary erosion and sedimentation control permit has been secured.
❑ Yes No
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
0%
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ Yes © No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
No new (additional) impervious surface. Temporary erosion and sedimentation control permit has been secured.
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
❑ Phase II
3b. Which of the following locally- implemented stormwater management programs
❑X NSW
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply):
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑ No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑Coastal counties
❑HQW
4a. Which of the following state - implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ORW
(check all that apply):
❑Session Law 2006 -246
[]Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑ No
attached?
S. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑X Yes ❑ No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
® Yes ❑ No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal /state/local) funds or the
x❑ Yes ❑ No
use of public (federal /state) land?
1b. If you answered 'yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
[]Yes X❑ No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1c. If you answered `yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
❑ Yes ❑ No
letter.)
Comments:
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑Yes ©No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B.0200)?
2b. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?
❑Yes ®No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
El Yes ® No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. 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.
NA
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
Yes es Q No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
0 Yes © No
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
-
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
Natural Heritage Program and USFWS wehsites.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes © No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
Yes ©No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
SHPO
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA - designated 100 -year floodplain? T-0
Yes pX No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
NC Flood Maps (floodmaps.nc.gov)
Carl R. Dawson, PE
Public Works Director
City of Raleigh Public Works Dept.
a
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Applicant/Agent's Sign re
Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an orization
letter from the applicant Is provided.)
Page 10 of 10

PRE - CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION
NATIONWIDE PERMIT 14
PROPOSED KAPLAN DRIVE CULVERT IMPROVEMENTS
SIMMONS BRANCH DRAINAGE BASIN
WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
PROJECT NARRATIVE
Introduction
The Kaplan Drive culvert upgrade is part of a watershed wide plan for Simmons Branch to
reduce roadway and structure flooding in a predominantly residential neighborhood in
West Raleigh. The Kaplan Drive roadway currently overtops during the 2 -year 24 -hour
storm event based on built out land use conditions. Residential flooding occurs at two
houses within the vicinity of the Kaplan Drive culvert crossing based on survey elevations
provide by the City of Raleigh. The proposed project is designed to convey the 10 -year
24 -hour storm based on future land use conditions. The proposed culvert upgrade will
substantially reduce roadway flooding in the project area and reduce residential flooding.
Prior Project History
The impacts associated with the Kaplan Drive culvert upgrade were previously permitted
on 11/17/2008 under a Nationwide 14 Permit (Action ID 200802785). The DWQ
Project# is 08 -1477. Initial approval for the 401 Water Quality Certification was issued on
November 5, 2008. The Nationwide 14 permit was extended on 12/13/2010 to have an
expiration date of 3/18/2012. Further email and phone correspondence with James Shern
and David Shaeffer with the Army Corps of Engineers allowed extension of the permits to
3/18/2013 if all impacts had been constructed by that date. While the City of Raleigh had
every intention of completing the impacts by 3/18/2013, unavoidable delays related to
private easement acquisition, and private utility conflicts resulted in the delay of the
Contractor's notice to proceed until 11/26/12. The anticipated end date of the
construction contract is September 9, 2013. Due to the unavoidable delays, the proposed
impacts will not be completed by 3/18/2013.
Site Location and Description
Simmons Branch drains approximately 1.2 mil from Western Boulevard to south of Avent
Ferry Road (Figure 1). The stream discharges to Walnut Creek just south of Lake Johnson.
While commercial areas in the vicinity of Western Boulevard have developed in recent
years, the majority of land use along Kaplan Drive is residential. Rain events in 2001
caused significant residential flooding in the watershed precipitating the "Simmons Branch
Drainage Study ", completed in 2002. Recommended project locations from the 2002
study are intended to provide a 10 -year level of service at major roadway crossings
assuming built out conditions in the watershed.
The existing culvert crossing at Kaplan Drive consists of 65 linear feet of twin 54"
reinforced concrete pipe. The headwalls on each side are block walls with 45 degree

Kaplan Culvert Improvements Page 2
wing walls. The culvert currently overtops during the 2 -year 24 -hour storm event. One
residence located downstream of the culvert experiences flooding during the 10 -year 24-
hour storm event based on model results. Design constraints for the Kaplan Drive culvert
crossing include large trees upstream and downstream of the culvert along the channel
banks, a sanitary sewer conflict, and a pedestrian bridge located upstream of Kaplan Drive.
The latitude and longitude coordinates are 35.775N - 78.711 W.
The topography on the property consists of moderately sloping terrain. Simmons Branch
flows from west to east through the middle of the project area. The project area generally
drains to the south, away from Kaplan Drive, eventually draining into Walnut Creek. The
site is located in the Neuse river basin (HUC 03020201).
Project Description and Purpose
The purpose of the proposed project is to increase channel and culvert efficiency and
capacity to reduce roadway flooding and flood risk to existing structures. Kaplan Drive is a
neighborhood thoroughfare for West Raleigh and road closures due to flooding are a
public safety concern. Two homes are subject to flooding as well. The proposed project is
part of a watershed level initiative to reduce flooding. Bank stability improvements will
also decrease erosion and improve water quality and aquatic habitat.
Based on the analysis of the existing conditions hydraulic model for Kaplan Drive, a 10' x
6' box culvert will convey the 10 -year storm event; however this resulted in high velocities
downstream of the culvert in excess of 15 feet per second during the 10 -year event. These
high velocities would require significant downstream erosion protection most likely
including a stilling basin. A 14' x 6' box culvert is proposed to reduce velocities thereby
reducing the risk of erosion and scour. The 10 -year velocity through the 14' x 6' culvert
would be approximately 6.5 feet per second. Erosion protection upstream and
downstream of the culvert will still be required, but would be manageable with standard
protection techniques such as matting, live stakes, and seeding. A configuration of twin 7'
x 7' boxes, buried one foot, is proposed. One box will placed in -line with the relocated
channel and left open to convey base flow. The second box will be baffled approximately
one foot to only convey storm flows.
To improve hydraulic efficiency, reduce bank erosion, and avoid a significant sanitary
sewer conflict, the existing stream channel will be re- located to the south approximately
35 feet. The relocated channel will eliminate a 90- degree bend immediately upstream of
the existing culvert and allow the channel to enter the culvert perpendicularly. Relocating
the Kaplan Drive culvert south of the existing alignment will avoid a conflict with an
existing 12° clay sanitary sewer line. The sanitary sewer is underneath the existing culvert
crossing. By realigning the existing channel and culvert south of the current location, the
new culvert will avoid a conflict with the sanitary sewer line. Conflict avoidance in this
instance will reduce potential maintenance costs to both the sanitary line and the new
storm culvert in the future.
Equipment to be used will include typical earthmoving equipment and construction
equipment.

Kaplan Culvert Improvements Page 3
jurisdictional Waters/Wetlands of the U.S.
One perennial stream is located in the central portion of the project area (Simmons
Branch). This stream is a tributary to Walnut Creek. The channel is typically ten feet wide.
No wetlands are present in the project area. Simmons Branch is a disturbed urban stream
with steep /vertical banks and many areas of active bank erosion. The riparian buffer is
mostly maintained lawn, right -of -way, or disturbed forest (Figure 2). The stream bed is
gravel with riffle -pool habitat present. No fish or benthic organisms were observed in the
channel at the time of the site visit.
Proposed Impacts to Waters of the US/Waters of the State
Storm water design requirements were obtained from the City of Raleigh stormwater
design manual entitled "City of Raleigh Stormwater Management Design Manual" dated
January 2002 and City of Raleigh code Section 10 -3053. Design standards include:
• Systems must pass the 10 -year 24 -hour storm
• Culverts for more than 25 acres must have at least 2 feet of freeboard for the
10 -year 24 -hour storm and 6 inch of freeboard for the 100 -year 24 -hour
storm
• Pipe slopes shall be no less than 0.5% and no greater than 12%
• Minimum cover outside R.O.W is 0.5 feet
• Side slopes for vegetated channels should be no more than 3 to 1
Since the proposed culvert improvements will be retrofit in a predominantly developed
area, some of the design standards may not be feasible or cost effective. At a minimum the
culvert improvements were designed to convey the 10 -year 24 -hour storm based on future
land use conditions.
The project will impact a total of 126 linear feet of channel resulting from channel
relocation and culvert upgrade (54 feet downstream and 72 feet upstream from the existing
Kaplan Drive culvert). The new Kaplan Drive culvert will be 5 feet longer than the existing
culvert (70 feet proposed, 65 feet existing).
The proposed relocated channel will be 94 feet long (54 feet downstream, 40 feet
upstream); resulting in a total net loss of 32 linear feet of stream channel. The relocated
channel will be constructed using natural channel design techniques and will incorporate
rock cross weirs, riffle grade controls, and natural plantings to provide bed and bank
stability. No riprap or other hardened structures will be utilized for bed or bank
protection.
Avoidance and Minimization
Due to stream location, access considerations, and project requirements, impacts to
streams are unavoidable. The proposed culvert is being relocated south of the existing
culvert to avoid a sanitary sewer conflict, protect several large trees downstream of the
culvert, and to provide a more efficient entrance to the culvert which will result in a more
stable channel bank. Stabilizing the left bank upstream of the culvert will protect the
roadway embankment and reduce sediment loads to the stream.

Kaplan Culvert Improvements Page 4
The proposed culvert is 5 feet longer than the existing culvert (70 feet proposed, 65 feet
existing) minimizing impacts from the relocation of the existing culvert. Because of the
culvert placement, the stream will need to be relocated immediately upstream and
downstream of the culvert. The total stream impacts for the realignment are 126 feet with
a proposed length estimated at 94 linear feet after the stream has been relocated. The
cumulative channel loss is 32 LF. The existing channel will be plugged as it connects into
the proposed channel on the upstream and downstream ends. The culvert will be baffled
and will be buried a foot with a scour pool forming naturally at a riffle grade control
structure.
The roadway width and fill slopes have been minimized while still fulfilling geometry and
traffic considerations. Stream disturbance width will be minimized and all conditions of
NWP 14 will be complied with.
The final site plan is the most practicable configuration in that it allows a usable yield of
land area while carefully configuring and placing infrastructure, utility lines, and roads to
minimize stream impact. Relocating the culvert will reduce stress on the upstream
channel bank, and preserve several large -sized trees on the downstream end.
All impacts to waters of the U.S. have been avoided and minimized to the maximum
extent practicable. All conditions of NWP 3 will be satisfied to further minimize impacts.
jurisdictional Impacts
The total area of jurisdictional waters of the
upgrade project is 0.03 acres of stream fill.
U.S. to be impacted by the proposed culvert
The stream fill is generated stream relocation and culvert upgrades. The impact is required
due to geometry constraints for the culvert upgrade to satisfy the flood control project
purpose.
Best Management Practices
Prior to the beginning of any construction activities, the applicant will implement Best
Management Practices (BMP's) to minimize erosion and migration of sediments into
affected waterways (streams and wetlands) during the construction phase. A detailed
Erosion Control Plan was developed and approved on November 11, 2011. It included
appropriate erosion and siltation control devices placed between the construction area and
adjacent waterways. These devices included the use of gravel construction entrances,
temporary seeding and mulching, silt fencing, check dams, inlet sediment filters, coir fiber
matting, and dewatering silt bags. Monitoring of BMP's will take place in accordance with
the requirements of the North Carolina NPDES general permit for construction activity to
assure that the erosion and sediment control devices are installed properly and maintained
in a functioning condition.
Compensatory Mitigation
The proposed project impacts 126 linear feet of stream. No off site mitigation is proposed
for this project. On site mitigative measures include use of natural channel design
techniques on 94 linear feet of relocated portions of Simmons Branch, strict erosion

Kaplan Culvert Improvements Page 5
control measures, and adherence to construction BMPs. Natural channel design
components include rock cross weirs, riffle grade control structures, coir matting on stream
banks, black willow live stakes, and use of a native riparian seed mix for stabilization. No
riprap or other hardened structures are proposed for bed or bank stability. It is proposed
that the relocated channel is self mitigating for the proposed impacts and no off -site
mitigation is required as net impacts are 32 linear feet.
Riparian and Watershed Buffers
The culvert upgrade at Kaplan Drive does not result in an increase in impervious surfaces.
The proposed project is in an urban watershed and forested riparian buffers are not
present. The riparian buffer has an existing land use of maintained residential lawn and
maintained right -of -way. There are several large trees with maintained grass below them.
Impacts to the riparian buffer will be minimal with only the removal of some small trees
along the stream banks and in the vicinity of the culvert upgrade. The trees that are
removed will be replaced with appropriate native tree species and the buffer replanted
with appropriate native shrub species and stabilized with a riparian seed mix on stream
banks and turf grasses in residential areas. No offsite buffer mitigation is proposed.
Floodplain Encroachment
The proposed project will not encroach upon the 100 -year floodplain and is not in a flood
hazard area.
Threatened and Endangered Species
Table 1 below lists threatened and endangered species in Wake County. No protected
species or suitable habitat was observed in the project area. The proposed project is not
likely to adversely affect any protected species.
Table 1. Threatened and endangered species in oroiect area
Common Name
Scientific Name
Federal Status
Record Status
Vertebrates
Red -cockaded woodpecker
Picoides borealis
Endan ered
Historic
Invertebrates
Dwarf wed emussel
Alasmidonta heterodon
---Endangered
Current
Vascular Plants
Michaux's sumac
Rhus michauxii
Endangered
Current
Cultural and Historical Resources
A database search of National Register of Historic Properties indicated no listed historic
properties in the project vicinity. Additionally, a site visit determined that no existing
structures will be impacted by the proposed project.

a r y J 12
,fT til
ctF
F • s r " s
LLI
N ■ r"' 1 STATES r ■ r ;�'`
IL
0 49
r
L2 ■ e ~
• a +�: PE
+ �¢ ,� , * * + +■ Kaplan Drive Culvert -
■ f ,� 1` iii ■ • rye r
mw--
LU 19
bON
a� -
u
_f.
■
Ell
e , r
DICKSON
WATERSHED SCIENCES
Figure 1. Kaplan Drive
Culvert Upgrade Project
USGS Quad Map
Raleigh, North Carolina
N
W E
0 500 1,000 s 2,000
Feet
1 inch equals 1,000 feet

X
x
x
X
0 s
z
m
D D D
it
O O O
Z
OZ
m m
s J
r
I I
r I
M
> 6 >
l> > P
< <n
ti
m
m
f
- -4
I ' o
l/ ti r II t
r
x
>>
T �!
\ > >
e
e \
e
� 1
I
x0
3W
= KAPLAN CULVERT STORMWATER
St City of Raleigh Plans Prepared By:
w IMPROVEMENTS MANAGEMENT DIVISION rill Watia� PkWK
dQQ WDICKSON
commu ni ity infrastructure consultants
720 CORPORATE CENTER DRIVE
KAPLAN CULVERT SM- 2011 -0039 & (919) 782- 049507
BUFFER AREAS
SM- 2011 -0043 Dort•
Mana ement Norm Cordli. OBE No
Soum Cording NC LICENSE N0. F -0374