20080640 Ver 2_401 Application_20120712

WITHERS & RAVENEL
ENGINEERS I PLANNERS I SURVEYORS
1410 COMMONWEALTH DRIVE SUITE 1o1
WILMINGTON NORTH CAROLINA 28403
[phone]
FAX [phone]
TO NC Division of Water Quality — 401 Wetlands Unit
WE ARE SENDING YOU
❑ Shop Drawings
❑ Copy of Letter
08 0Lc'14 o v2-
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
DATE o6 '19 12
108 NO 0210006100
ATrENnoN Mr Ian McMillan
PHONE #
9197331786
RE HI hcroft Village
Morrisville Parkway Phase
DWQ Project # 2oo806 0
Corps AID # SAW 2008 00
1
o6 1 12
0210006i oo
® Attached ❑ Under separate cover via _
❑ Prints ❑ Plans ❑ Samples
❑ Change order ❑ Diskette ❑
the following items
❑ Specifications
COPIES
DATE
NO
DESCRIPTION
06 1 12
02100061 oo
Individual Permit Modification Request for Portion of Stage 113
1
o6 1 12
0210006i oo
CD Containing Modification Request Submittal
1
06 1 12
02100061 oo
$57o oo Review Fee
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below
® For approval ❑ Approved as submitted
❑ For your use ❑ Approved as noted
❑ As requested ❑ Returned for corrections
❑ For review and comment ❑
❑ FOR BIDS DUE 20 ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US
❑ Resubmit copies for approval
❑ Submit copies for distribution
❑ Return corrected prints
REMARKS
COPY TO USACE, File SIGNED Amy McDonald
lfenclosures are not as noted kindly notify us at once

June 12, 2012
US Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
Attn: Mr. Craig Brown
3331 Heritage Trade Drive
Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587
..
34 -Aim
ENGINEERS [ PLANNERS j SURVEYORS
NC- Division of Water Quality
401 Wetlands Unit
Attn: Mr. Ian McMillan
1650 Mail Service Center.
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699
Re: Morrisville Parkway — Phase III
Individual Permit Modification Request for Portion of Stage 1 B
Corps AID# SAW- 2008 -00373
DWQ Project # 20080640
W &R Project #02100061.00
Dear Mr. Brown and Mr. McMillan,
On behalf of the Town of Cary, we are requesting a modification to the existing Individual Permit
issued for Phase III of the Morrisville Parkway Extension. We are requesting a modification to
the IP for authorization of 593 If of permanent stream impacts for construction of ±3,256 If of
Stage 1 B of the Morrisville Parkway — Phase III.
Phase III of the Morrisville Parkway Extension extends from the western terminus of the existing
section of Morrisville Parkway at NC -55 to Green Level to Durham Road at Green Level Church
Road. Stage 1 B specifically extends from NC -55 to Twyla Road at the Greystone Subdivision.
The requested modification to the IP proposes the construction of ±3,256 If of Stage IB,
specifically beginning at NC -55 (Longitude: 35.813689 °N; Latitude: - 78.873197 °W) and ending
approximately 2300 If east of Twyla Road (Longitude: 35.811014 °N; Latitude: - 78.882892 °W).
The proposed ±3,256 If of Stage 1B for construction extends through Impacts SC -5 & SC -6 as
identified in the impact plans included as Exhibits in the existing IP for the Morrisville Parkway —
Phase III project.
The project is in Cary, Wake County within the Cape Fear River basin and onsite waters drain to
Panther Creek. The Water Quality Classification for Crabtree Creek is WS- IV;NSW and the
Stream Index Number is: 16- 41- 1 -17 -3. The cataloging unit for the site is 03030002.
Proposed Project
The IP authorized the construction of Stage 1A, with Stage 1B and Stage 2 being conceptually
approved based on worst case scenarios for impacts. The IP authorized the construction of
Stage 1A; however, construction has not begun. The IP required submittal of requests for
1410 Commonwealth Drive ( Suite 1011 Wilmington, NC 28403 ( tel: [phone] fax: [phone]
www.withersravenel.com I License No. C -0832

..
34 -Aim
ENGINEERS [ PLANNERS j SURVEYORS
modification of the IP for construction of Stage 1B and Stage 2, at which point accurate stream
and wetland impacts would be assessed for construction of these stages.
The IP defined Stage 1 B as the section extending from NC -55 to Twyla Road at the Greystone
Subdivision. Due to the current available real estate and funding, this modification request does
not include the construction of the entire Stage 1B. The current request for modification of
the IP consists of the construction of ±3,256 If of Stage 11B, which extends through
Impacts SC -5 & SC -6 as identified in the impact plans included as Exhibits in the existing
IP for Phase III of the Morrisville Parkway Extension project.
Stage 1 B assumed impacts for the construction of a 2 -lane road, with Stage 2 assuming
impacts for the expansion from 2 -lanes to 4- lanes. The proposed ±3,256 If of Stage 1B to be
constructed has been designed to accommodate four lanes, as conceptually approved as Stage
2 in the IP, with only 2 lanes being paved initially. The additional 2 lanes will be paved once
traffic levels warrant expansion to 4 lanes. By initially constructing the foundation of the road to
accommodate four lanes, all impacts associated with the final design of this section of Stage 1 B
can be determined and permitted under a single IP modification. This will avoid the need for an
additional IP modification for the future expansion to four lanes. Also, this will greatly reduce
construction costs by eliminating the need for major earthwork to occur twice for the initial
construction and future expansion to 4 lanes. Therefore, the ±3,256 If of Stage 1 B will be
constructed to Stage 2 design level to eventually accommodate 4 lanes, but will be a 2 lane
road in the interim.
Project History
The Corps of Engineers issued an Individual Permit (AID# SAW- 2008 - 00373) for the entire
Phase III of the Morrisville Parkway extension project on January 30, 2009. A copy of the IP
has been provided as an Appendix.
NC -DWQ issued a 401 Water Quality Certification (DWQ Project # 20080640) for Phase III of
the Morrisville Parkway extension project on April 8, 2008. A copy of the 401 WQC has been
provided as an Appendix.
NC -DWQ issued a Surface Water Determination letter (JB /IPRRO #11 -170) on September 19,
2011 for the ±3,256 If section of Stage 1B proposed for construction under this IP Modification
Request. A copy of the Surface Water Determination Letter has been provided as an Appendix.
Please note that the Surface Water Determination Letter specifies that the streams located
within the proposed project area are subject to Jordan Lake Buffers. Since the entire Phase III
was permitted prior to the adoption of the Jordan Lake Buffer Rules, the proposed project is not
subject to Jordan Lake Buffers. This is documented in an email, dated October 28, 2011, from
Amy Chapman with NC -DWQ, which has been provided as an Appendix.
E°T°F -HERS CN,7 RAVEHEL Page 2 of 5
-IRS 1 AN.1 RI 1 IL2V 1 P.S

..
34 -Aim
ENGINEERS I PLANNERS j SURVEYORS
W &R conducted a site review of the alignment for the ±3,256 If of Stage 1 B proposed for
construction. W &R determined that there are no wetlands located within the project area, and
the only jurisdictional features are the two perennial streams identified in the Impact Plans.
Proposed Impacts
The proposed impacts consist of 593 If of permanent impacts to perennial streams associated
with two stream crossings (SC -5 & SC -6) necessary for construction of ±3,256 If of Stage 1 B of
the Morrisville Parkway - Phase III project.
Avoidance and Minimization
Prior to final design of the roadway, a detailed wetland delineation was conducted to identify
streams and wetlands within the alignment of the ±3,256 If of Stage 1B proposed for
construction.
As a result of the linear nature of the project, as well as the alignment having been previously
determined and approved by the IP issued by the Corps, impacts could not be avoided. Stream
crossings were designed to cross the streams at as nearly perpendicular as possible to
minimize stream impacts.
The proposed 593 If of stream impacts will occur at SC -5 and SC -6, as defined by the Exhibits
in the IP. The IP conceptually approved 545 If of permanent stream impacts for SC -5 (Stages
1 B & 2 combined) and 260 If of permanent stream impacts for SC -6 (Stages 1 B & 2 combined),
for a total of 805 If of permanent stream impacts. The construction level design of the proposed
stream crossings will result in 367 If of permanent stream impacts for SC -5 and 226 If of
permanent stream impacts for SC -6, resulting in a total of 593 If of permanent stream impacts.
The construction level design has resulted in a reduction of 212 If of stream impacts.
Stage 1 B of Morrisville Parkway - Phase 111
IP Modification ',Impact Table
Permanent
Actual Impact for
Impact #
Impact Type
Previously Permitted Impact
Individual Permit
Modification
Perennial
Stage 1 B (495 If)
5451f
SC -5
Stream
+
total
3671f
Stage 2 (50 10
Perennial
Stage 1 B (200 If)
SC -6
Stream
+
260 If
226 If
Stage 2 (60 If)
Impact Totals
805 If
593 If
E°T°F -HERS CN,7 RAVEHEL Page 3 of 5
-IRS 1 AN.1 RI 1 IL2V 1 P.S

..
34 -Aim
ENGINEERS [ PLANNERS j SURVEYORS
Please note that the proposed permanent stream impacts are based on the design to
accommodate 4 lanes, which accomplishes Stage 2 design criteria conceptually approved in the
IP, and no future stream impacts will be necessary at these stream crossings.
Also, by initially constructing the proposed ±3,256 If of Stage 1B to accommodate 4 -lanes
(Stage 2 design level), major earthwork will only be required once. This will minimize the
potential for secondary and inadvertent impacts to the streams, as the likelihood for these
impacts is significantly higher with multiple major earthwork events.
Mitigation
The applicant proposes to mitigate for the proposed 593 If of permanent stream impacts through
the purchase of offsite stream mitigation credits at a 2:1 mitigation ratio, resulting in the
purchase of 1,186 If of stream mitigation. A Letter of Reservation from EEP documenting that
1,186 If of stream mitigation credits have been reserved for the proposed project has been
provided as an Appendix.
There are currently no private mitigation banks within the 03030002 basin with available stream
mitigation credits, but the Bass Mountain Bank is anticipated to release stream credits by the
middle of 2012. In the event that the Bass Mountain Bank, or another mitigation bank, has
credits available prior to the anticipated construction start date, the Applicant will purchase the
stream mitigation credits from a private mitigation bank, or a combination of a private mitigation
bank and EEP. If there are not stream mitigation credits available in a private mitigation bank
prior to the anticipated construction start date, the Applicant will purchase the entire 1,186 If of
stream mitigation credits from EEP as stated in the attached Letter of Reservation.
The current request for modification of the IP consists 593 If of permanent stream
impacts associated with the construction of ±3,256 If of Stage 11B of the Morrisville
Parkway — Phase III project. (See the attached maps and PCN for details).
Please feel free to call if you have questions or require additional information.
Sincerely,
Troy Beasley
Environmental Scientist
E°T°F -HERS CN,7 RAVEHEL Page 4 of 5
-IRS 1 AN.1 RI 1 IL2V 1 P.S

WITHERS &RAVENEL
ENGINEERS [ PLANNERS j SURVEYORS
Attachments:
• Eng Form 4345
• PCN Form
• USGS Quad Map
• Wake County Soil Survey
• Individual Permit for Morrisville Parkway - Phase III
• DWQ 401 WQC for Morrisville Parkway — Phase II I
• Corps "Environment Assessment, 404(B)(1) Analysis, Finding of No Significant Impact
and Statement of Findings"
• DWQ Surface Water Classification Letter
• Email from DWQ on Jordan Lake Buffer Rules
• EEP Letter of Reservation
• Stormwater Management Plan and Approval
• Impact Plans
E°T°F -HERS CN,7 RAVEHEL Page 5 of 5
-IRS 1 � RI i IL2V 1 P.S

7. DIRECTIONS TD THE SITE
)roject begins a1 the intersection ofl4C ~ and the existing section of Morrisville Parkway 0Lut:35.8l368AqN; Long: -7D,O73lA7"VN`and
nds approximately 2300 If east of Twyla Road (Lat: 35.811014'N; Long: -78.882892'W).
19. Project Purpose (Describe the reason or purpose of the project, see instructions)
The purpose of the proposed project is to construct a ±3,256 If section of Stage 113 of the Morrisville Parkway - Phase III project. Upon
completion of all stages of Phase III of the Morrisville Parkway extension, Phase III will provide a connection from NC-55 to Green Level
�
mIReason(s) for Discharge
The proposed 593 If of stream impacts are necessary for construction of two stream crossings associated with the construction of the
proposed ±3,256 If section Stage 113 of the Morrisville Parkway - Phase III project.
?1. Type(s) of Material Being Discharged and the Amount of Each Type in Cubic Yards:
Type Type
Amount in Cubic Yards Amount N Cubic Yards
Fill/Culvert - 20,000 cubic yards
Acres
or
Linear Feet Stream Fill -5y3D(SC-5:367 If, 8C-8:226If)
�
Type
Amount m Cubic Yards
23. Description ofAvoidance, Minimization, and Compensation (see instructions)
/\sa result of the linear nature of the project, as well as the alignment having been previously determined and approved by the IP issued for
the project, stream impacts could not beavoided.
Stream crossings (SC-5 & SC-6) were designed to cross the streams at as close to perpendicular as possible to minimize stream impacts.
"e PCN for additional discussion on avoidance and minimization.
^

Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Page 1 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
Pre - Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1 a.
Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
®Section 404 Permit El Section 10 Permit
1 b.
Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: IP Modification or General Permit (GP) number:
1 c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
® Yes
❑ No
1 d.
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
❑ No
1 g.
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 In
below.
❑ Yes
® No
1 h.
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes
® No
2.
Project Information
2a.
Name of project:
Stage 1 B of Morrisville Parkway — Phase III
2b.
County:
Wake County
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Town of Cary
2d.
Subdivision name:
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no:
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
N/A — Linear Project
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
3d.
Street address:
3e.
City, state, zip:
3f.
Telephone no.:
3g.
Fax no.:
3h.
Email address:
Page 1 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4.
Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a.
Applicant is:
❑ Agent ® Other, specify: Town of Cary
4b.
Name:
Tim Bailey — Director of Engineering
4c.
Business name
(if applicable):
Town of Cary Engineering Department
4d.
Street address:
316 North Academy Street
4e.
City, state, zip:
Cary, NC 27513
4f.
Telephone no.:
919 - 469 -4034
4g.
Fax no.:
4h.
Email address:
Tim.bailey @townofcary.org
5.
Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a.
Name:
Troy Beasley
5b.
Business name
(if applicable):
Withers and Ravenel
5c.
Street address:
1410 Commonwealth Drive, Suite 101
5d.
City, state, zip:
Wilmington, NC 28403
5e.
Telephone no.:
910 - 256 -9277
5f.
Fax no.:
910 - 256 -2584
5g.
Email address:
tbeasley @withersravenel.com
Page 2 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1 a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
N/A — Linear Project
East (Beginning): Lat: 35.813689 °N Long - 78.873197 °W
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
West (End) — Lat: 35.811014 °N Long: - 78.882892 °W
1 c. Property size:
N/A — Linear Project
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to
panther Creek
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
WS- IV;NSW (Stream Index #16- 41- 1 -17 -3)
2c. River basin:
Cape Fear — HUC - 03030002
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:
The proposed project area currently consists of undeveloped woodlands. The land use in the vicinity of the project
consists of a mixture of undeveloped land, as well as residential and commercial land uses.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
There are no wetlands within the proposed project area.
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
593 If of stream within project area.
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The purpose of the proposed project is to construct ±3,256 If of Stage 1 B of the Morrisville Parkway — Phase III project.
Phase III of Morrisville Parkway extends from the western terminus of the existing section of Morrisville Parkway at NC -55
to Green Level to Durham Road at Green Level Church Road. Stage 1 B specifically extends from NC -55 to Twyla Road
at the Greystone Subdivision. The requested modification to the IP proposes the construction of ±3,256 If of Stage IB,
specifically beginning at NC -55 (Longitude: 35.813689 °N; Latitude: - 78.873197 °W) and ending approximately 2300 If east
of Twyla Road (Longitude: 35.811014 °N; Latitude: - 78.882892 °W).
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The project consists of the construction of ±3,256 If of Stage 1 B of the Morrisville Parkway — Phase III project. The IP defined
Stage 1 B as the section extending from NC -55 to Twyla Road at the Greystone Subdivision. Due to the current available real
estate and funding, this modification request for authorization does not include the construction of the entire Stage 1 B. Stage
1 B assumed impacts for the construction of a 2 -lane road, with Stage 2 assuming impacts for the expansion from 2 -lanes to
4- lanes. The proposed ±3,256 If of Stage 1B to be constructed has been designed to accommodate four lanes, as
conceptually approved as Stage 2 in the IP, with only 2 lanes being paved initially. The additional 2 lanes will be paved once
traffic levels warrant expansion to 4 lanes. By initially constructing the foundation of the road to accommodate four lanes, all
impacts associated with the final design of this section of Stage 1 B can be determined and permitted under a single IP
modification. This will avoid the need for an additional IP modification for the future expansion to four lanes. Also, this will
greatly reduce construction costs by eliminating the need for major earthwork to occur twice for the initial construction and
future expansion to 4 lanes. Therefore, the ±3,256 If of Stage 1 B will be constructed to Stage 2 design to eventually
accommodate 4 lanes, but will be a 2 lane road in the interim.
Standard commercial construction equipment will used to construct the proposed roadway.
Page 3 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
®Yes El No El Unknown
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Comments:
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
El Preliminary ®Final
of determination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Agency /Consultant Company: S &EC
Name (if known):
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
Corps issued Final Approval of jurisdictional features in Stage 1 A through issuance of IP for the Morrisville Parkway —
Phase IIII project (AID #SAW- 2008 - 00373).
DWQ issued a Surface Water Determination Letter (JB /IPRRO #11 -170) for the proposed project area on September 19,
2011.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
® Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
Corps issued an Individual Permit for the Morrisville Parkway — Phase III project (AID #SAW- 2008 - 00373), which
approved construction of Stage 1A, and conceptually approved Stage 1 B & Stage 2.
DWQ issued a 401 WQC (DWQ Project # 20080640) for the Morrisville Parkway — Phase III project on April 8, 2008.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
® Yes ❑ No
6b. If yes, explain.
The Morrisville Parkway Extension project was initially permitted under an IP (Corps AID #2008 - 00373) with approval for
construction of Stage 1A, and conceptual approval of Stage 1 B & Stage 2. The current IP Modification Request is for
construction of a ±3,256 If section Stage 1 B. The remainder of Stage IB, as well as future sections of Phase III of the
Morrisville Parkway Extension will be permitted separately under future IP Modification Requests.
Page 4 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

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.
2b.
2c.
2d.
2e.
2f.
Wetland impact
Type of jurisdiction
number —
Type of impact
Type of wetland
Forested
(Corps - 404, 10
Area of impact
Permanent (P) or
(if known)
DWQ — non -404, other)
(acres)
Temporary (T)
W1 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W2 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W3 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W4 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W5 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W6 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
2g. Total wetland impacts
2h. Comments:
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.
3b.
3c.
3d.
3e.
3f.
3g.
Stream impact
Type of impact
Stream name
Perennial
Type of jurisdiction
Average
Impact
number -
(PER) or
(Corps - 404, 10
stream
length
Permanent (P) or
intermittent
DWQ — non -404,
width
(linear
Temporary (T)
(INT)?
other)
(feet)
feet)
Impact #1 (SC -5)
Fill /Culvert
UT to Panther
® PER
® Corps
±15'
367 If
® P El
Creek
El INT
® DWQ
Impact #2 (SC -6)
Fill /Culvert
UT to Panther
® PER
® Corps
±15'
226 If
® P El
Creek
El INT
® DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
593 If
3i. Comments:
Page 5 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

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.
4b.
4c.
4d.
4e.
Open water
Name of waterbody
impact number —
(if applicable)
Type of impact
Waterbody type
Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
01 ❑P ❑T
02 ❑P ❑T
03 ❑P ❑T
04 ❑P ❑T
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a.
5b.
5c.
5d.
5e.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
Stream Impacts (feet)
Upland
Pond ID
Proposed use or purpose
(acres)
number
of pond
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
P1
P2
K 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.
❑ Neuse El Tar-Pamlico ®Other: Jordan Lake
Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman
6b.
6c.
6d.
6e.
6f.
6g.
Buffer impact
number —
Reason
Buffer
Zone 1 impact
Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P) or
for
Stream name
mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
Temporary (T)
impact
required?
B1 ❑P ❑T
F-1 Yes
❑ No
B2 ❑P ❑T
F-1 Yes
❑ No
6h. Total buffer impacts
6i. Comments: The 401 WQC (DWQ Project #20080640) issued for Phase III of the Morrisville Parkway Extension was
issued prior to adoption to the Jordan Lake Buffer Rules, and therefore is not subject to Jordan Lake Buffers.
Page 6 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1 a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Prior to final design of the roadway, a detailed wetland delineation was conducted to identify streams and wetlands within the
alignment of the ±3,256 If of Stage 1 B proposed for construction.
As a result of the linear nature of the project, as well as the alignment having been previously determined and approved by the
IP issued by the Corps, impacts could not be avoided. Stream crossings were designed to cross the streams at as nearly
perpendicular as possible to minimize stream impacts.
The proposed 593 If of stream impacts will occur at SC -5 and SC -6, as defined by the Exhibits in the IP. The IP conceptually
approved 545 If of permanent stream impacts for SC -5 (Stages 1 B & 2 combined) and 260 If of permanent stream impacts for
SC -6 (Stages 1 B & 2 combined), for a total of 805 If of permanent stream impacts. The construction level design of the
proposed stream crossings will result in 367 If of permanent stream impacts for SC -5 and 226 If of permanent stream impacts
for SC -6, resulting in a total of 593 If of permanent stream impacts. The construction level design has resulted in a reduction
of 212 If of stream impacts.
Please note that the proposed permanent stream impacts are based on the design to accommodate 4 lanes, which
accomplishes Stage 2 design criteria conceptually approved in the IP, and no future stream impacts will be necessary at these
stream crossings.
Also, by initially constructing the proposed ±3,256 If of Stage 1 B to accommodate 4 -lanes (Stage 2 design level) major
earthwork will only be required once. This will minimize the potential for secondary and inadvertent impacts to the streams, as
the likelihood for these impacts is significantly higher with multiple major earthwork events.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
The proposed stream crossings were designed to cross the streams at as close to perpendicular angles as possible in order to
minimize stream impacts.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
® Yes ❑ No
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
® DWQ ® Corps
❑ Mitigation bank
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
®Payment to in -lieu fee program
project?
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type
Quantity
Page 7 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

3c. Comments:
4.
Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a.
Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
® Yes
4b.
Stream mitigation requested:
1,186 linear feet
4c.
If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
® warm ❑ cool ❑cold
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.
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
buffer mitigation?
❑ Yes ® No
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.
Zone
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
6e.
Required mitigation
(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).
6h.
Comments:
Page 8of11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1.
Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a.
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.
Comments: The 401 WQC was issued for Phase III of the Morrisville Parkway
Extension prior to adoption of the Jordan Lake Buffer Rules. Therefore, the project
❑ Yes ® No
is not subject to the Jordan Lake Buffer Rules. However, diffuse flow will be
achieved through the use of vegetated filter strips and level spreaders (see
attached Stormwater Management Plans for details).
2.
Stormwater Management Plan
2a.
What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
[N/A — Road Project
2b.
Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
Yes ❑ No
2c.
If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d.
If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
Stormwater runoff from the road will be treated through a combination of two wet detention ponds, level spreaders and
vegetated filter strips (see attached Stormwater Management Plans for details).
® Certified Local Government
2e.
Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ DWQ Stormwater Program
❑ DWQ 401 Unit
3.
Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a.
In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
Town of Cary
® Phase II
3b.
Which of the following locally - implemented stormwater management programs
❑ 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
attached?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5.
DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a.
Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 9 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑ Yes ❑ No
F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal /state /local) funds or the
® Yes ❑ No
use of public (federal /state) land?
1 b. 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 ® No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c. 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
❑ 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.
Phase III of the Morrisville Parkway project is being constructed in stages. The issuance of the 401 WQC for the entire
Morrisville Parkway - Phase III (DWQ Project #20080640) documents that the construction of all stages will not result in a
violation of Water Quality Standards and discharge guidelines.
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.
N/A — Road Project
Page 10 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

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 ® No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
❑ Yes ® No
impacts?
E] Raleigh
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
❑ Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
The Corps of Engineers issued an "Environmental Assessment, 404(8)(1) Analysis, Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI) and Statement of Findings" on January 7, 2009 documenting that the proposed project will not have an effect on
endangered species or designated critical habitat. A copy of this document has been provided as an Appendix.
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?
There are no waters designated as EFH in Wake County.
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?
There were no historic or archeological resources observed within the proposed alignment of the ±3,256 If of Stage 1 B
proposed for construction under this modification request.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA- designated 100 -year floodplain?
❑ Yes ® No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? w.ncfloodmaps.co
Troy Beasley — Authorized Agent
Withers & Ravenel
3/6/12
Date
Applicant /Agent's Signature
Applicant /Agent's Printed Name
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant
is provided.)
Page 11 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

USGS QUADRANGLE MAP
WAKE COUNTY SOIL SURVEY

GRAPHIC SCALE
0 1000 2000 ! I —�
Ak i•r
1 1.' �i ;J• --
/ —
.
1 inch = 2000 ft.
.�'. � Morris _ _,� r✓ � �
'� •� _ � - - - �J � _3!%1 � -�_ X \, y
44rr_ R---, { I•
�� � � � � ' Aso` lf�
•i.
_ y -� ��r� r -�• sr y�- ,. riJ f'` .�
tr_ ` I ._ •. - .J» �; _
lo
' • ••\ i _ `�'' ' -!�
-
III ( •{ } -J /� _� - � I •
Bm p � 11 I rtrt
� ,� ,
1 ,
SECTION OF STAGE 1 B OF
MORRISVILLE PARKWAY -PHASE III
;{ ,
rl� PROPOSED FOR CONSTRUCTION UNDER
r r CURRENT IP MODIFICATION REQUEST
FUTURE MORRISVILLE PARKWAY - 11 ?--,• ___
.�
PHS ALIGNMENT J�
'•. ME
E III A L � n ,i �
l
i�
_—=' ,
•����.�� _.�,5- f .
1 v Jj/ k
!�
�r
- iIS'
3�'Y • J A.1 �. L h
I'� —'
f 1 ,4 o '• r•--�. �� ;Ilia /I ,Y �' A_�,
_. • .r`'1.,
_x•
-
STAGE 1 B OF MORRISVILLE
PARKWAY - PHASE III
MORRISVILLE PARKWAY - PHASE III LOCATION EXHIBIT
WITHERS RAVENEL
ENGINEERS I PLANNERS I SURVEYORS
(-.AKY WAKE S Ot '+I}' NORTH CAROLINA

i
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 250 500 • 4
_ r r
1 inch = 500 ft.
Ar
` -. �� - ^-� _ .�N��.���f • SECTION OF STAGE IB OF MORRISVILLE
A a' rr ` ! ,f� �.,, t PARKWAY - PHASE III PROPOSED FOR + ••
CONSTRUCTION UNDER CURRENT IP y�
r .,' r ~� MODIFICATION REQUEST
..� s
FUTURE MORRISVILLE PARKWAY a� A ��a. y r`- ��
PHASE III ALIGNMENT
. ' " �� o'er �d +� _ o � •
+i • s a t � f
o
* f 5
' ■ . C
STAGE 1 B OF MORRISVILLE WITHERI3 RAVENEL
PARKWAY - PHASE III USGS QUAD MAP - GREEN LEVEL QUAD PLANNERS I SURVEYORS
WAXFCCHJ�IY NOR 11.1 CA3?f)l I A

CORPS IP FOR
MORRISVILLE PARKWAY - PHASE III

0
M� WqWWW"
ATTN: Mr. Eric Simpson
Post Office Box 8005
Cary, North Carolina 27512-8005
Any deviation in the authorized work will likely require modification of this permit. If a
change in the authorized work is necessary, you should promptly submit revised plans to the
Corps showing the proposed changes. You may not undertake the proposed changes until the
Corps notifies you that your permit has been modified.
Carefully read your permit. The general and special conditions are important. Your failure
to comply with these conditions could result in a violation of Federal law. Certain significant
conditions require that:
a. You must complete construction before December 31, 2029�
b. You must allow representatives from this office to make periodic visits to your worksitc
�is deemed necessary to assure compliance with permit plans and conditions.
You must notify this office in advance as to when you intend to commence and complete
work.

N
You should address all questions regarding this authonization to Monte Matthews in th*
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office at [phone], extension 30.
Chief, Source Data Unit
NOAA/National Ocean Service
ATTN: Sharon Tear N/CS261
1315 East-West Hwy., Rni 7316
Avmwmnvfidm�� - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -w-mi
t 0 0 .
MM
61 Forsyth Street
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Mr. Pete Benjamin
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Fish and Wildlife Enhancement
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
Mr. Ron Sechler
N19
Pivers Island
Beaufort, North Carolina 28516
Mr. David Rackley
National Marine Fisheries Service
219 Fort Johnson Road
Charleston, South Carolina 29412-9110

Permittee: TO" OF CARY JAN 2 8 2009
Permit No: SAW-200800373 REUULA1
WILM.FMOM
Issuing 0frice: USAED, WILMINGTON
NOTE: The term "you" and its derivatives, as used in this permit, means the permittee or any future transferee. The
1117WITTMim
You are authorized to perform work in the accordance with the terms and conditions specified below.
ENG Form 1721, Nov 86 EDITIONS OF SEP 82 IS OBSOLETE. (33 DFR 325 (Appendix A))

Permit Conditions:
General Conditions:
Special Conditions:
19 1
L-FT-&T-1A-CNr-1§LRu-Cj4 I rky-pi'a(fly
2 *U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1986-717425

TZTFTI���

11I
1. All work authorized by this permit must be performed in strict
compliance with the attached plans, which are a part of this permit. Any
(USACE) prior to implementation.
• I MOTOR III!, Jill
consffl=n or MU11ILenE=1C;4I1-tU8­P1MOUL, in S K III I
waters or wetlands.
4. The North Carolina Division ♦ Water Quality (DWQ)
permit/certification number 3737 was issued for this project on April 9, 2008.
Special conditions were issued associated with this water quality
permit/certification and a copy of these conditions is attached as Exhibit A. The&;
rcfercTc,tdjmydAm', s are hereby incoMorated as special conditions of this p!grmiL

6, As the plans for phases I B and 2 are finalized, permit modifications
showing the finalized plans must be submitted to the Corps for review and
evaluation. Compensatory mitigation for impacts under phases I B and 2 will be
to impacts to jurisdictional features.

I
Project Maintenance
91

Special Conditions - Action ID 200800373, Town of Cary
13. The permittee, upon receipt of a notice of revocation of this permit or
upon its expiration before completion of the work will, without expense to the
United States and in such time and manner as the Secretary of the Army or his
authorized representative may direct, restore the water • wetland to its pre-
project condition.
14. Violations of these conditions or violations of Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act must be reported i
writing to the Wilmington District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers within 24 ho
of the permittee's discovery of the violation. I
LI

STAGE 1A - (G RE YSTONE SUBDIVISION A) WETLAND AND STREAM IMPACTS
Ftbure No,
Permanent lm act T e _
linear feet **
_
Soars fPerennial
Stream:
365
1,135
SC -1
E-a Section 404 Forested Wetland
N/A
91
Section 404 Forested Wetland
N/A
153
Perennial Stream
366
1,274
SC -2
2B Section 404 Forested Wetland
2 6l7
2C. Section 4 4 F r t— e d_
m
-
538 _er _ _ a_ _ ...:::........
Total
731
9,$O�m .
** Based on firnal design (see Appendix S for plan drawings).
TAG7E Y — 2- ANE OADWAY: -55 To GREYSTONE SUBDIVIS
N WETLAND AND STREAM
IMPACTS
Fi re_o.
Permanent Impact T e linear feet*
s are feet*
SC -3
Perennial Stream 241
2,4I0
SC -4
Perennial Stream 361
3,_6 10
SC -5
Perennial Stream 495
4,950
SC -6
Perennial Stream 200
2,000<
WC -I
Section 404 Forested Wetland NIA
4,356
i_
Total 1297
17,326
* Estimaw based on
p reliminary design..
STAGE 2 — -LANE ROADWAY: NC-55 To GREEN LEVEL CHURCH ROAD
WETLAND AND STREAM IMPACTS
* Estirnat lrased;on Prelirni dessin for the Stage 2 additional irrkp ts,
Sheet 4 Of 21

Estimate tamed on protiminary design,
a
A
...... . . . ....... . .......... . ... . ................ . ............................................................ . ....... . ...... .... . ..... . ....... - - - - - - ----------- - -
"Z ................
SUM. R OF OVERALL WETLAND AND STREAM IMPACTS (ALL STAGES)
Pro ct St!&e--
Sta ge- LA
Stage I B
StM 2
2-Lane Road
4-Lane Road
Greystone
(NC 55 to Greystone
(NC 55 to Green
Totalk.
Subdivision
Subdivision)*
Level Chruch Road)*
Permanent
Section 404 Forested Wetlands (acre)
0.17
0.10
0.45
0.72
Impacts
Perennial Streams Ii7►earfeet
731
1,297
1,384
j 3,412
Temporary
Section 404 Forested Wetlands (acre
0.00
To be determined (T
TBD
TBD
Impacts
Perennial Streams linear feet)
0
TBD
TBD
TBD
Estimate tamed on protiminary design,
a
A

s
a
�
i
• i
a
�
X
#
i
sf s
40
■
i i �
`
s
u
3
�
e
IIIP I�
U" p
■
f
ry:
,,

CIOD
p-
�
N
CD
CD
�.
F
d
t,
a
i

+N Ixr*etir$r++ritF +r +i
F
� f
Rj C;7k
.
i
.
I
/
zc ]ems lv/y
1
1 ®y1
In
1
2
O
i
1
,
#y
b
it
11ww �3,
a
t
#
A _r#
!
/
/
J'
P
ne
Goo
`
#
1
Lld
#
Q+
CD
'y
,.
< o ,
t M...
�
W
�
#
1
!
m
G 'a
5 i.m3 � 0
!y
/
'1®
ws
igy
t'aa
x>
0
x
F=
at 54 aE
y

a ie� si �raa aiii� ##aiaa ®c6
b �
1 _
#s *j
j tlt A j
,:. 13 X # +
#a
cz
ti # ;
111
;t
zz
*# tt #\
# ®i
144
a 11# X ,
vs
1 5
p•:.
t Its i
4# #
IN
ON
e
#
a It t #
t
$ o IIA
If
aa# a
1114 # 1
i;I /#I
Ito # p
i - #1#
F:at# X ,
ItIX X r# ,
1ti#
rn
4 X
lip s X AV
ia
1lIY #
1
t IIX
�t 11X X 9
u
} tin
F FIX F ii
^ 1 Itl a I
�
F IIA #
aFl y
dM
CD
cn
1
CD
r-r b
# 1 P N. #X + •
} if la X
�.
qw ,Qo
t o !IX 1 r
g IIX X i
° on
1 ails F j
N.^>TCH tike � 1 FfY 1
C4
C3
m
i_
,

.............. .
ZE
............ — - ---- ------------- ..........
.. ................ . . ........
. .. .. ..... ........ ... . ..... . ......
- - --------- ........ . ...... . ................................................................................................................................................................
. .... ..
—
au
rz CdF
C/I
CD
CD
CD
LATCH INE -UPE3- S7A 127000
SEE SWEY C4
a
cn

rr r
9
Y s §izA 4ddbiii ld FP$
to
MOCH IME -MPE3^ STA VZOW SEC SHEET C3
1 8
i W
t
t p
® — LM
,
..
CD
M
CID
P,
Fil
rn
UQ
cn

DWQ 401 WQC FOR
MORRISVILLE PARKWAY - PHASE III

{ Michael F. Easley. Govemor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
April 8, 2008
_?
1 ! * 1 • ! ! ! 1 • 1 • !
WNW
Dam Safety, Non-discharge and Water Supply Watershed regulations.
Attachments: NCDWQ 401 WQC Summary of Permanent Impacts and Mitigation Requirements
Certificate of • 1 1
_._..'k
One hCarolina
401 Oversight/Express Review Perrnlis Unit a�ura�l f
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699 -1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone; 919- 733 -17861 FAX[phone]ntemet: http; J /h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands
An Equal Opportunity /Affirmative Action Employer— 50% Recycled110% Post Consumer Paper

MrI, s Overton and Town of Cary
Page 2 of 4
April 8, 2008
Conditions of Approval:
IHMZ-M .,
The following impacts are hereby approved as long as all of the other specific and general
conditions of this Approval are met. No other impacts are approved including incidental impacts:
I I
r a, I -
Sediment and Erosion Control:
2. Erosion and sediment control practices must be in full compliance with all specifications
governing the proper design, installation and operation and maintenance of such Best
Management Practices in order to protect surface waters standards:
a. The erosion and sediment control measures for the project must be designed, installed,
operated, and maintained in accordance with the most recent version of the North Carolina
Sediment and Erosloh Control Planning and Design Manual.
b. The design, installation, operation, and maintenance of the sediment and erosion control
measures must be such that they equal, or exceed, the requirements specified in the most

Mr, Overton and Town of Cary
Page 3 of 4
April 8, 2008
recent version of the North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Manual. Thedevices
shall be maintained on all construction sites, borrow sites, and waste pile (spoil) projects,
including contractor-owned or lleased borrow pits associated with the project.
c. Sufficient materials required for stabilization and/or repair of erosion control measures and
stormwater routing and treatment shall be on site at all times.
3. 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 404/40IPermit Application. All construction activities,
the design, installation, operation, and maintenance of sediment and erosion control Best
Management Practices, shall be performed so that no violations of state Ar uality standards,
statutes, or rules occur;
4. Sediment and erosion control measures shall not be placed in wetlands • waters to the maximum
extent practicable, If placement of sediment and erosion control devices in wetlands and waters is
unavoidable, they shall be removed and the natural grade restored within six months of the date thai
the Division of Land Resources has released the project;
5. Protective Fencing - The outside buffer, wetland or water boundary and along the construction
corridor within these boundaries approved under this authorization shall be clearly marked with
orange warning fencing (Or similar high bility material) for the areas that have been approved to
infringe within the buffer, wetland or water prior to any land disturbing activities;
— - I 1 0 1

CHS /cbk/ijm
d

CORPS "ENVIRONMENTAL ASESSMENT,
404(B)(1) ANALYSIS, FINDING OF NO
SIGNIFICANT IMPACT (FONSI) AND
STATEMENT OF FINDINGS

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
Applicant: Town of Cary, Engineering Department January 7, 2009
Action ID: SAW- 200800373 Waterway: UT's to
Panther Creek
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, 404(B)(1) ANALYSIS, FINDING OF NO
SIGNIFICANT IMPACT (FONSI), AND STATEMENT OF FINDINGS
This document constitutes my Environmental Assessment, Finding of No Significant Impact,
Statement of Findings, and review and compliance determination according to the 404(b)(1)
guidelines for the proposed work.
This permit action is being taken under authority delegated to the Wilmington District Engineer
by the Secretary of the Army and the Chief of Engineers by Title 33, Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 325.8, pursuant to:
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899.
X Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.
Section 103 of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act.
Section 4(e) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act of 1953.
1. Location, Existing Site Conditions, Project Description, Changes to Project:
a. Location: The proposed project location is between North Carolina Highway 55 (NC
55) westward for a distance of approximately 3 miles to a terminus with SR 1625, Green Level to
Durham Road at SR 1600, Green Level Church Road near Cary, Wake County, North Carolina.
Coordinates, in decimal degrees, for the end points of the construction areas are 35.813720° N,
78.872747° W, and 35.802659 'N, 78.909490 'W. The project site contains several wetlands
and unnamed streams channels which drain to Panther Creek in the Haw watershed of the Cape
Fear River Basin (8 -Digit Cataloging Unit of 03030002).
b. Existing Site Conditions: The proposed project would extend Morrisville Parkway,
which currently terminates on the east side of NC 55, and create a roadway linking NC 55 to
Green Level to Durham Road. Overall, the project study area is bordered to the east by NC 55,
to the west by Green Level Church Road, to the north by undeveloped forest land and residential
properties, and to the south by Green Hope School Road. The existing conditions within this
project segment include upland hardwood /pine forest, several wetlands, and several unnamed
streams draining to Panther Creek in the Cape Fear River Basin.
The upland forest is dominated by loblolly pine (Pious taeda), white oak (Quercus alba), and
tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera). Flowering dogwood (Cornus florida), arrowwood

(Viburnum dentatum), and saplings of red maple (Acer rubrum) dominate the understory.
Typical wetland vegetation is dominated by sweetgum (Liquidambar styricifZua), red maple, and
slippery elm (Ulmus rubra) within the canopy. Blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum), sedge
(Carex sp.), and soft rush (Juncus effusus) are common in the understory and herbaceous layer.
A U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) jurisdictional determination has been completed for
each segment which verifies the aquatic features stated above.
c. Project Description: Portions of Morrisville Parkway have previously been constructed.
This proposal is to extend the existing portion of roadway, currently terminating at NC 55, to
Green Level to Durham Road at Green Level Church Road. The ultimate design would be
similar to the existing sections of Morrisville Parkway which includes a 105 -foot wide, 4 -lane
median divided roadway, including 5 -foot wide sidewalks and 5 -foot wide utility strips to be
situated on both sides of the roadway. Included within this proposal is an interchange with the
future Western Wake Freeway (I -540). Fill slopes are proposed at a 2:1 ratio. Total permanent
impacts from this proposal are 0.72 acre of jurisdictional forested wetlands, and 3,412 linear feet
of perennial stream channel exhibiting important aquatic functions.
This permit proposal will be evaluated on the dimensions and aquatic impacts stated
above. However, construction of the proposed roadway would take place in three distinct stages.
Stage IA is proposed for the section between Green Level Church Road and the future Western
Wake Freeway (I -540). The proposed design is an approximately 2,500- foot long, 40 -foot wide.
2 -lane paved road, with an associated 10 -foot wide concrete greenway trail. To accommodate
the roadway alignment, two culverted stream crossings are proposed. Final designs have been
utilized for this stage and reflect 731 linear feet of perennial stream impact and 0.17 acre of
forested wetland impacts.
Stage 1B is an approximately 12,500 -foot long, 40 -foot wide, 2 -lane road, with an associated
12 -foot wide concrete sidewalk, and would be constructed from NC 55 to the Stage IA terminus.
To accommodate the roadway alignment, proposed are four culverted stream crossings totaling
approximately 1,297 linear feet of impact and one wetland crossing composed of 0.10 acre
impact. Currently, only preliminary designs are available for this stage.
While traffic forecasts support a 4 -lane road, Stage 2 will be proposed when eminent traffic
studies support the widening of the 2 -lane road to a 4 -lane road from NC 55 to Green Level to
Durham Road. At this time, the interchange with I -540 would be completed. Impacts assessed
for this stage include all culvert extensions required for the typical roadway widening and
interchange construction project. Designs are only preliminary for this stage. Approximately
1,384 linear feet of perennial stream impact and 0.45 acre of forested wetland impact are
expected from this phase.
The Town of Cary is utilizing this long -range planning approach for a fair evaluation on the
corridor and expected impacts of this roadway, rather than waiting and allowing future
development to limit the overall flexibility required for impact minimization and /or avoidance.
2

If permitted, Stage IA would be constructed using the final designs depicted within this Public
Notice. The other 2 phases would be permitted on the impacts stated above, realizing that these
are worse -case scenarios. Final designs for each stage would be provided to the Corps for a
permit modification prior to construction. At the time of permit modification, additional
minimization or avoidance would be evaluated for items such as bridging, fill slopes, etc. It is
expected that impact amounts would go down during the time of permit modification.
To mitigate for permanent impacts to jurisdictional wetlands and streams for Stage IA, the
applicant has proposed payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program
( NCEEP) at a 1:1 ratio and also to complete on -site preservation of streams and wetlands in the
amount of 3,565 linear feet of streams and 1.2 acres of wetland via the Corps' approved
Declaration of Restrictions. Additional NCEEP payments would be completed prior to the time
of impact for each respective stage.
d. Changes to Project: No modifications were made to the proposal with the exception of
finalizing the compensatory mitigation plan for Stage IA.
2. Project Purpose:
a. Basic: The basic purpose of this project is to extend the existing portion of roadway,
currently terminating at NC 55, to Green Level to Durham Road at Green Level Church Road
near Cary, Wake County, North Carolina. Therefore, the project is not water dependent.
b. Overall: The project is necessary to safely facilitate the movement of vehicles from
NC55 to Green Level to Durham Road at Green Level Church Road. A review of alternative
plans, including those that reduce or avoid impacts to waters of the U.S., is included in this
document.
3. Scope of Analysis: The proposed work would primarily benefit the citizens of the Town of
Cary. Other than the requirement to obtain a Section 404 permit, no other federal involvement in
the proposed work is anticipated. The proposed impacts are limited to perpendicular crossings of
aquatic features that are subject to Section 404 permit requirements. While additional
alternatives are available, the applicant has stated that these alternatives lack economic viability.
Accordingly, my analysis within this document will be limited to the impact areas and additional
property directly adjacent.
4. Other Federal, State, and Local Authorizations Obtained or Required and Pending:
a. State water quality certification (401): The North Carolina Division of Water Quality
(DWQ) permit/certification number 3737 was received on April 9, 2008. Special conditions
were issued, and a copy of these conditions is attached as Exhibit A.
b. Coastal Zone Management (CZM) Consistency Determination: The North Carolina
Division of Coastal Management (DCM) consistency determination /permit was not required.
3

c. Other authorizations: No previous authorizations are associated with this project.
5. Complete Application and Public Notice: The Corps received the application on February
1, 2008, and considered it complete at that time. The Corps issued a public notice on February
15, 2008, and sent this notice to all interested parties including appropriate State and Federal
agencies.
6. Alternatives [33 CFR 320.4(b)(4), 40 CFR 230.101:
M

a. Avoidance (No action, uplands, and availability of other sites): No off -site
alternatives for the proposed project were presented with the permit application. The project
purpose was defined as an expansion of the existing roadway. Off -site alternatives would not
meet the project purpose and need. Furthermore, since the proposed expansion is dependent
upon the infrastructure of the existing roadway, any off -site alternative would be financially
unfeasible for the applicant and would be expected to impact jurisdictional waters in a similar
amount.
The no action option is an alternative to the currently proposed activity. Elimination of the
crossings would reduce the impacts to waters of the U.S. This alternative would limit the
applicant's ability to meet the regional traffic needs of its citizens, and does not satisfy the
purpose and need of the proposal. Overall, the extent of the impact to waters of the U.S. that
would result from the proposed plan is minimal when weighed against the overall loss of benefits
incurred by the Town with the no project alternative.
A total of three different corridor alignments were evaluated for consideration as a possible
option to the preferred alternative. One alternative, labeled as the Northern Alternative, was a
new location option approximately 2.34 miles in length which was located north of the preferred
alternative. This option was not chosen due to additional stream impacts which totaled 11 stream
crossings versus 7 stream crossings for the preferred. The second alternative was the Southern
Alternative, which showed slightly less impacts to aquatic features by a reduction of 1 stream
crossing and 0.5 acre of wetland impact when compared to the preferred alternative. This
alternative was to use part of the existing Green Hope School Road before extending to the same
terminus with Green Level to Durham Road at Green Level Church Road. This alternative was
not chosen because the Town believed that impacts to the human environment would be higher at
the proposed interchange area because of a loss of connectivity for some existing residents. In
addition, it did not provide as efficient an east -west connector as the preferred. These items,
when weighed against nearly comparable aquatic impacts, were considered vital in discounting
this alternative.
The third alternative is considered an upgrade of existing facilities by utilizing Green Hope
School Road. Aquatic impacts were similar to the Southern Alternative and totaled 6 stream
crossings and 0.2 acre of wetland impact. This alternative was 2.19 miles long and would require
the taking of 44 properties and 13 potential relocations. Therefore, this option was not selected.
b. Minimization (modified project designs, etc.): Minimization was incorporated into the
design of the project during the planning phase by crossing streams at the narrowest point.
Bridges were evaluated as a possible minimization technique on Phase IA, but due to the small
stream channels (1 to 3 feet in width) were considered impracticable. As final designs are carried
forward for Stage 1B and 2, an assessment of the remaining stream crossings will be conducted
following consultation with the Corps at the time of permit modification
c. Conclusions of Alternatives Analysis: Following a review of all project alternatives,
the proposed alternative is the only alternative presented that meets the project purpose and need
E

and is financially feasible. In addition to the no project alternative, other alternatives exist that
could have reduced impacts to aquatic systems. However, a review of these options
demonstrates that their selection would result in an excessive financial expenditure by the
permittee or could substantially reduce public benefit.
7. Evaluation of the 404(b)(1) Guidelines:
a. Factual determinations:
1. Physical substrate: The physical substrate of the streams and wetlands
proposed for impact would be substantially altered as a result of the placement of the
culverts and fill material. Although turbidity rates within the streams and /or their adjacent
wetlands may temporarily increase during construction activities, sedimentation and
erosion control measures that are required by the state and local government should
prevent the excessive displacement of sediment downstream. Accordingly,
stream /wetland substrate below the project site should not be appreciably affected.
2. Water circulation, fluctuation, and salinity: The proposed project would
have an effect on current, circulation, or drainage pattern as the extent of impervious
surface within the catchment is increased. The proper installation of stormwater control
devices should minimize these impacts and should not result in a measurable decrease in
floodwater retention.
3. Suspended particulate /turbidity: Downstream turbidities would increase
temporarily during construction of the roadway; however, this will be a short-term impact
and would likely diminish rapidly over time upon completion of construction. The
majority of sedimentation is likely to result from clearing and construction of the roadway
in upland areas. Any impacts would be minimized by the implementation of appropriate
erosion control measures as required by the state and additional permit conditions.
4. Contaminant availability: The proposed project is not expected to introduce
contaminants or increase the likelihood of contamination. The stream impacts would be
completed with clean earthen materials produced during grading activities and should be
free of toxic pollutants or contaminants. All concrete would be cured prior to contact
with open water, eliminating the concerns associated with uncured concrete coming into
contact with water until it has hardened.
5. Aquatic ecosystem effects: The placement of fill associated with the project
would result in a total loss of the aquatic ecosystem and its functions within the impact
boundaries. Temporary impacts associated with increased runoff and temporary
discharges of sediments can be limited by the proper installation of sediment and erosion
control devices, which are required by state and local ordinances and permit conditions.
However, the proposed project would still contribute to the cumulative degradation of
streams and the associated aquatic ecosystem on and downstream of the site.
0

6. Proposed disposal site: No disposal sites are required by the proposed plans.
7. Cumulative effects: The cumulative impacts that are expected as a result of
this project and all similar projects in the region include the loss of riparian habitat and
the degradation of on -site and downstream aquatic habitat as a result of increased
stormwater runoff and additional sediment deposition. The effect of these incremental
changes to the watershed would result in further destabilization of stream channels in the
drainage basin as more stormwater is transported. The project would also result in
degradation of water quality downstream as a result of increased turbidity, runoff of
pollutants, and addition of nutrients that accompanies development. Due to the size of
the roadway, the cumulative effects of the proposed activity are undeniable. The
applicant has attempted to minimize these effects with the use of water quality control
devices. Cumulative effects can also be minimized by the proper enforcement of permit
conditions, including the regular maintenance of sediment control devices. Additional
information pertaining to cumulative effects is described in the next section "Secondary
effects ".
8. Secondary effects: Secondary effects on the aquatic environment associated
with the proposed project would largely result from the environmental changes that
would occur across the property adjacent to the roadway. Loss of upland forested areas
and the addition of impervious surfaces would cause changes in the population of
terrestrial and aquatic species makeup of the area. In an effort to assess these effects, the
Town has developed a Secondary and Cumulative Impact Master Mitigation Plan (SCI)
by providing a holistic review of the environmental impacts associated with planned land
use changes and infrastructure projects. In addition, the Town has adopted the Town of
Cary Growth Management Plan (Plan) to guide future growth by guiding rezoning, site
plan ordinances, and new infrastructure; encourages private sector development to respect
local goals; and recommends new ordinances, policies, and studies.
The Plan is supplemented and supported by smaller area plans or policy
documents. These documents establish the Town's official long -range vision and
recommendations for future land uses, transportation, parks, open space, public schools,
and the environment. This proposed project includes areas within two of these plans, the
Northwest Area Plan and the Southwest Area Plan. The Northwest Area Plan objective is
to provide higher density areas with park and open space inclusions to reduce sprawl.
The Southwest Area Plan objective is to protect environmental features by keeping
densities lower and preserving rural land patterns.
To provide additional protections to streams within this area, the Town has
enacted an Urban Transitional Buffer Ordinance that requires riparian buffers within the
Town's jurisdiction and extraterritorial jurisdiction. This ordinance exceeds the
requirements of the Neuse River Basin NSW rules by requiring 100 foot riparian buffers
on all USGS streams (perennial and intermittent) and 50 foot buffers on all streams
7

mapped on the Wake County Soil Survey. All future development within the project
area's sub - basin, within the Town's jurisdiction, will be subject to the riparian buffer
requirements.
In addition, the Town has submitted a letter dated October 3, 2008, to the Corps in
which they have stated that they will work with the Corps to protect aquatic resources
under their jurisdiction. As such, the Town will not allow their ordinances to dictate an
impact to a stream or wetland that might have originally been avoidable.
b. Restrictions on discharges:
1. Alternatives (See Section 6):
a. The activity is located in a special aquatic site (wetlands, sanctuaries
and refuges, mudflats, vegetated shallows, coral reefs, riffle and pool complexes,
etc.)
yes—X— no
b. The activity needs to be located in a special aquatic site to fulfill its
basic purpose.
yes—X— no
c. All practicable alternatives have been reviewed in Section VI above. It
has been demonstrated that the alternative with the fewest impacts on the aquatic
ecosystem (least damaging alternative), has been identified.
effects.
yesX no
d. The least damaging alternative has no other significant environmental
yes—X— no
2. Other program requirements:
a. The proposed activity violates applicable State water quality standards
or Section 307 prohibitions or effluent standards.
yes noX
b. The proposed activity jeopardizes the continued existence of federally
listed threatened or endangered species or affects their critical habitat.
yes no ]

c. The proposed activity violates the requirements of a federally designated
marine sanctuary.
yes noX
3. The activity will cause or contribute to significant degradation of waters of the
United States, including adverse effects on human health; life stages of aquatic
organisms; ecosystem diversity, productivity and stability; and recreational, aesthetic, and
economic values.
yes noX
4. Minimization of adverse effects:
a. Appropriate and practicable steps have been taken to minimize
potential adverse impacts of the discharge on the aquatic ecosystem.
yes—X— no
b. Compensatory Mitigation (Wetland restoration, enhancement, creation,
preservation, etc.): The February 6, 1990, Corp s/Environmental Protection
Agency Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) established procedures to determine
the type and level of mitigation necessary to comply with the Clean Water Act
section 404(b)(1) Guidelines. This MOA provides for first, avoiding impacts to
waters and wetlands through the selection of the least damaging, practical
alternative; second, taking appropriate and practical steps to minimize impacts on
waters and wetlands; and finally, compensating for any remaining unavoidable
impacts to the extent appropriate and practical. To determine "appropriate and
practicable" measures to offset unavoidable impacts, measures should be selected
which are appropriate to the scope and degree of those impacts, and practicable in
terms of cost, logistics, and technology in light of the overall project purpose.
The permittee shall make payment to the North Carolina Ecosystem
Enhancement Program (NC EEP) in the amount determined by the NC EEP,
sufficient to perform the amount necessary to restore 0.17 acre of riparian
wetlands in the Cape Fear River Basin, Cataloging Unit 03030002 and 731 linear
feet of warm water stream in the Cape Fear River Basin, Cataloging Unit
03030004. Construction within jurisdictional areas on the property for Stage IA
shall begin only after the permittee has made full payment to the NC EEP and
provided a copy of the payment documentation to the Corps, and the NC EEP has
provided written confirmation to the Corps that it agrees to accept responsibility
for the mitigation work required, in compliance with the MOU between the North
Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources and the United States
Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District, dated November 4, 1998.
0

In addition, the Permittee shall execute and cause to be recorded in the
Wake County Register of Deeds a Conservation Declaration, the form of which
was transmitted to USACE in a December 19, 2008, email from Mr. Eric
Simpson, which shall preserve in perpetuity 3,565 linear feet of stream and 1.2
acres of wetland described on the map attached to the email as
"WETLANDS_ PRESERVE ". The December 19, 2008, email states that the
Permittee will use the Corps approved language for Declaration of Restrictions
verbatim. The permittee shall enforce the terms of the conservation declaration
and shall take no action on the property described in the declaration inconsistent
with the terms thereof. The permittee shall record the conservation declaration no
later than May 1, 2009. The permittee shall provide a copy of the recorded
declaration to the Corps of Engineers within 30 days of recording.
Findings: The project complies with the Guidelines because the following
conditions are to be included as part of the requested permit:
Work Limits
1. All work authorized by this permit must be performed in strict compliance
with the attached plans, which are a part of this permit. Any modification to these plans
must be approved by the US Army Corps of Engineers ( USACE) prior to
implementation.
2. Except as authorized by this permit or any USACE approved modification to
this permit, no excavation, fill or mechanized land - clearing activities shall take place at
any time in the construction or maintenance of this project, within waters or wetlands.
This permit does not authorize temporary placement or double handling of excavated or
fill material within waters or wetlands outside the permitted area. This prohibition
applies to all borrow and fill activities connected with this project.
3. Except as specified in the plans attached to this permit, no excavation, fill or
mechanized land - clearing activities shall take place at any time in the construction or
maintenance of this project, in such a manner as to impair normal flows and circulation
patterns within waters or wetlands or to reduce the reach of waters or wetlands.
4. The North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) permit/certification
number 3737 was issued for this project on April 9, 2008. Special conditions were issued
associated with this water quality permit/certification and a copy of these conditions is
attached as Exhibit A. These referenced conditions are hereby incorporated as special
conditions of this permit.
5. The permittee shall make payment to the North Carolina Ecosystem
Enhancement Program (NC EEP) in the amount determined by the NC EEP, sufficient to
perform the amount necessary to restore 0.17 acre of riparian wetlands in the Cape Fear
River Basin, Cataloging Unit 03030002 and 731 linear feet of warm water stream in the
10

Cape Fear River Basin, Cataloging Unit 03030004.
Construction within jurisdictional areas on the property for Stage IA shall begin only
after the permittee has made full payment to the NC EEP and provided a copy of the
payment documentation to the Corps, and the NC EEP has provided written confirmation
to the Corps that it agrees to accept responsibility for the mitigation work required, in
compliance with the MOU between the North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources and the United States Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District,
dated November 4, 1998.
In addition, the Permittee shall execute and cause to be recorded in the Wake County
Register of Deeds a Conservation Declaration, the form of which was transmitted to
USACE in a December 19, 2008, email from Mr. Eric Simpson, which shall preserve in
perpetuity 3,565 linear feet of stream and 1.2 acres of wetland described on the map
attached to the email as "WETLANDS_ PRESERVE ". The December 19, 2008, email
states that the Permittee will use the Corps approved language for Declaration of
Restrictions verbatim. The permittee shall enforce the terms of the conservation
declaration and shall take no action on the property described in the declaration
inconsistent with the terms thereof. The permittee shall record the conservation
declaration no later than May 1, 2009. The permittee shall provide a copy of the recorded
declaration to the Corps of Engineers within 30 days of recording.
6. As the plans for phases 1B and 2 are finalized, permit modifications showing
the finalized plans must be submitted to the Corps for review and evaluation.
Compensatory mitigation for impacts under phases 1B and 2 will be addressed at the time
of each respective permit modification and completed prior to impacts to jurisdictional
features.
Culverts
7. Measures will be included in the construction /installation that will promote the
safe passage of fish and other aquatic organisms. The dimension, pattern, and profile of
the stream above and below a pipe or culvert should not be modified by widening the
stream channel or by reducing the depth of the stream in connection with the construction
activity. The width, height, and gradient of a proposed opening should be such as to pass
the average historical low flow and spring flow without adversely altering flow velocity.
Spring flow should be determined from gage data, if available. In the absence of such
data, bankfull flow can be used as a comparable level.
Culverts greater than 48 inches in diameter will be buried at least one foot below the bed
of the stream. Culverts 48 inches in diameter or less shall be buried or placed on the
stream bed as practicable and appropriate to maintain aquatic passage, and every effort
shall be made to maintain the existing channel slope. The bottom of the culvert must be
placed at a depth below the natural stream bottom to provide for passage during drought
11

or low flow conditions. Destabilizing the channel and head cutting upstream should be
considered in the placement of the culvert. A waiver from the depth specifications in this
condition may be requested in writing. The waiver will be issued if it can be
demonstrated that the proposal would result in the least impacts to the aquatic
environment. Culverts placed in wetlands do not have to be buried.
Related Laws
8. All mechanized equipment will be regularly inspected and maintained to
prevent contamination of waters and wetlands from fuels, lubricants, hydraulic fluids, or
other toxic materials. In the event of a spill of petroleum products or any other hazardous
waste, the permittee shall immediately report it to the N.C. Division of Water Quality at
(919) 733 -5083, Ext. 526 or (800) 662 -7956 and provisions of the North Carolina Oil
Pollution and Hazardous Substances Control Act will be followed.
Project Maintenance
9. The permittee shall advise the Corps in writing prior to beginning the work
authorized by this permit and again upon completion of the work authorized by this
permit. In addition, a pre - construction meeting shall take place prior to beginning the
construction activities. This meeting shall be comprised of the applicant, the contractors,
any sub - contractors and their equipment operators working within jurisdictional areas.
Please contact the Corps of Engineers Project Manager at least 2 weeks prior to the
commencement of construction to schedule this meeting.
10. Unless otherwise authorized by this permit, all fill material placed in waters
or wetlands shall be generated from an upland source and will be clean and free of any
pollutants except in trace quantities. Metal products, organic materials (including debris
from land clearing activities), or unsightly debris will not be used.
11. The permittee shall require its contractors and /or agents to comply with the
terms and conditions of this permit in the construction and maintenance of this project,
and shall provide each of its contractors and /or agents associated with the construction or
maintenance of this project with a copy of this permit. A copy of this permit, including
all conditions, shall be available at the project site during construction and maintenance
of this project.
12. The permittee shall employ all sedimentation and erosion control measures
necessary to prevent an increase in sedimentation or turbidity within waters and wetlands
outside the permit area. This shall include, but is not limited to, the immediate
installation of silt fencing or similar appropriate devices around all areas subject to soil
disturbance or the movement of earthen fill, and the immediate stabilization of all
disturbed areas. Additionally, the project must remain in full compliance with all aspects
of the Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 (North Carolina General Statutes
12

Chapter 113A Article 4).
13. The permittee, upon receipt of a notice of revocation of this permit or upon its
expiration before completion of the work will, without expense to the United States and
in such time and manner as the Secretary of the Army or his authorized representative
may direct, restore the water or wetland to its pre - project condition.
Enforcement
14. Violations of these conditions or violations of Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act must be reported in writing to the
Wilmington District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers within 24 hours of the permittee's
discovery of the violation.
8. Public Interest Review:
a. All public interest factors have been reviewed. The following public interest factors
are considered relevant to this proposal. Both cumulative and secondary impacts on the public
interest were considered.
1. Conservation: The proposed project would make mitigation payment to the
NCEEP which would be used to restore and preserve wetlands and warm water streams in
the Neuse River Basin. In addition, on -site preservation of streams and wetlands will
enhance conservation aspects of this area.
2. Economics [33 CFR 320.4(q)]: The Town and citizens of Cary would be the
primary beneficiary of the project. The project would help provide an overall traffic now
to the area in and around the project site, and could result in increases in local, state, and
federal tax revenues. The new roadway may also result in temporary job opportunities
during construction of the project.
3. Aesthetics: The community would benefit from the proper flow of traffic.
4. General environmental concerns [33 CFR 320.4(p)]: Note the comments
below.
5. Wetlands [33 CFR 320.4(b)]: The proposed project would make mitigation
payment to the NCEEP which would be used to restore and preserve wetlands in the Cape
Fear River Basin.
6. Historic and cultural resources [33 CFR 320.4(e)]: There are no known or
suspected historic or cultural resources located within the permit area, and no impact to
any of these resources would result from the project. The North Carolina Department of
Cultural Resources, Historic Preservation Office provided no comment on the proposed
action.
13

7. Fish and wildlife values [33 CFR 320.4(c)]: Comments were received from
the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission ( NCWRC) in a letter dated March
17, 2008. These comments raised concerns with the location of the interchange and the
on /off ramps in relation to avoidance and minimization of aquatic impacts, use of bridges,
and secondary and cumulative impacts from the proposed project. In addition, several
measures were included to be considered as permit conditions such as, dewatering
procedures, proper installation of culverts, streambank stabilization, stormwater control,
working from the top -of -bank, sediment and erosion control, proper reclamation of
temporary access roads, and preventing stream water contact with uncured concrete.
In a response to these comments, the applicant provided additional information
justifying the project as proposed. An email response from NRWRC dated August 21,
2008, indicated that they had no further comments or objections to the proposed project.
No response was received from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. However,
species, or their critical habitat, designated as endangered or threatened pursuant to the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, are not known to exist on the site.
8. Flood hazards: The project would not be expected to have an impact on the
overall hazard of flooding downstream of the project site. The development would result
in increases to impervious surface within the watershed, but some of this increase would
be offset by the retention of stormwater runoff flowing from the site.
9. Floodplain values [33 CFR 320.4(1)]: Pursuant to Executive Order 11988,
consideration has been given to the effect that the proposed project may have in reducing
the risk of flood loss, minimizing the impact of floods on human safety, health and
welfare, and restoring and preserving the natural and beneficial values served by
floodplains. With the exception of the road crossings, the roadway development would
exclude the floodplain. However, runoff from the site would likely increase as a result of
additional impervious surface and may result in minimal increases in flood elevations
downstream. This effect should be minimized by the construction of proper stormwater
management facilities.
10. Land use: The project would be in compliance with local zoning ordinances.
11. Navigation [33 CFR 320.4(0)]: Not applicable.
12. Shore erosion and accretion: Not applicable.
13. Recreation: Not applicable.
14. Water supply [33 CFR 320.4(m)]: Increases to impervious surfaces on the
site may alter water infiltration onsite, yet these impacts are expected to be negligible.
14

15. Water quality [also 33 CFR 320.4(d)]: The North Carolina Division of
Water Quality issued permit/certification Number 3737 dated April 8, 2008. Special
conditions were issued, and a copy of these conditions is attached as Exhibit A. No major
impacts to water quality are expected. However, increases in turbidity during
construction may result in minor adverse impacts. No comments were received from the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
16. Energy needs [33 CFR 320.4(n)]: The project would result in an increase in
energy consumption during construction from equipment to prepare the site. However,
this effect is expected to be negligible.
17. Safety: The project would be designed to meet roadway building
requirements and is not expected to result in a negative impact to overall safety of the
area.
18. Food and fiber production: Not applicable.
19. Mineral needs: Not applicable.
20. Considerations of property ownership: Adjacent landowners may be
affected as a result of the proximity of their property to the project. It is possible that
adjacent landowners may experience changes in their property value, leading to a higher
or lower tax rate. However, the use of the land would be consistent with the designated
zoning and transportation plans, and issuance of the permit would be consistent in
keeping with the public's interest in health and welfare. In addition, property ownership
and the possible relocation of homes /businesses were considered during the evaluation of
the alternatives
b. Need for Proposed Project: The applicant has established a need for the proposed
impacts based upon necessity to satisfy local traffic needs.
c. Alternative Locations: See section 6 — Alternatives.
d. Permanence of Effects: The project benefits to the applicant and public are expected to
last throughout the life of the development. Project impacts would generally be permanent, with
the exception of impacts associated during construction, which would include increased noise
and downstream turbidity.
e. Threatened or endangered species: No effect. Species, or their critical habitat,
designated as endangered or threatened pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973, are not
known to exist on the site.
f. Corps Wetland Policy: Based upon a review of the proposed impacts relative to the
15

anticipated benefits of the project, it has been determined that the beneficial effects of the project
outweigh the detrimental impacts of the project. Additionally, mitigation will be provided to
offset the unavoidable loss of jurisdictional waters of the United States resulting from the
roadway development.
g. Cumulative and Secondary Impacts: Cumulative and secondary effects on the aquatic
environment associated with the proposed project would largely result from the environmental
changes that would occur across the property adjacent to the roadway. Loss of upland forested
areas and the addition of impervious surfaces would cause changes in the population of terrestrial
and aquatic species makeup of the area. In an effort to assess these effects, the Town has
developed a Secondary and Cumulative Impact Master Mitigation Plan (SCI) by providing a
holistic review of the environmental impacts associated with planned land use changes and
infrastructure projects. In addition, the Town has adopted the Town of Cary Growth
Management Plan (Plan) to guide future growth by guiding rezoning, site plan ordinances, and
new infrastructure; encourages private sector development to respect local goals; and
recommends new ordinances, policies, and studies.
The Plan is supplemented and supported by smaller area plans or policy documents. These
documents establish the Town's official long -range vision and recommendations for future land
uses, transportation, parks, open space, public schools, and the environment. This proposed
project includes areas within two of these plans, the Northwest Area Plan and the Southwest
Area Plan. The Northwest Area Plan objective is to provide higher density areas with park and
open space inclusions to reduce sprawl. The Southwest Area Plan objective is to protect
environmental features by keeping densities lower and preserving rural land patterns.
To provide additional protections to streams within this area, the Town has enacted an Urban
Transitional Buffer Ordinance that requires riparian buffers within the Town's jurisdiction and
extraterritorial jurisdiction. This ordinance exceeds the requirements of the Neuse River Basin
NSW rules by requiring 100 foot riparian buffers on all USGS streams (perennial and
intermittent) and 50 foot buffers on all streams mapped on the Wake County Soil Survey. All
future development within the project area's sub - basin, within the Town's jurisdiction, will be
subject to the riparian buffer requirements.
In addition, the Town has submitted a letter dated October 3, 2008, to the Corps in which
they have stated that they will work with the Corps to protect aquatic resources under their
jurisdiction. As such, the Town will not allow their ordinances to dictate an impact to a stream
or wetland that might have originally been avoidable.
h. Essential Fisheries Habitat (EFH): No adverse impacts to Essential Fish Habitat
would result from the proposed project.
9. Public Hearing Evaluation (If Applicable): No requests for a public hearing were received,
and no public hearing was held.
16

10. Comments, Responses, and Corps Analysis of Comments and Responses:
a. Public Notice Comments: The Corps has reviewed all of the comments submitted in
response to the circulation of the public notice. Those comments are summarized below:
1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): No comments received.
2. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS): No comments received.
3. National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS): No comments received.
4. State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO): No comments received.
5. Other State and local agencies: Comments were received from the North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission in a letter dated March 17, 2008. These
comments raised concerns with the location of the interchange and the on /off ramps in
relation to avoidance and minimization of aquatic impacts, use of bridges, and secondary
and cumulative impacts from the proposed project. In addition, several measures were
included to be considered as permit conditions such as, dewatering procedures, proper
installation of culverts, streambank stabilization, stormwater control, working from the
top -of -bank, sediment and erosion control, proper reclamation of temporary access roads,
and preventing stream water contact with uncured concrete.
6. Organizations: No comments received.
7. Individuals: No comments received.
8. Others (including, if applicable, internal coordination with TSD,
Navigation): No comments received.
b. Applicant response to the comments: On April 18, 2008, the Corps coordinated with
the applicant the comments received in response to the public notice. The applicant responded to
the comments on August 8, 2008. In a response to these comments, the applicant provided
additional information for consideration against the proposed project.
c. Additional Coordination of Project Revisions: On August 15, 2008, the Corps
provided the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission a copy of the applicants response
to their respective comments. The Corps has summarized these comments below:
1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): No comments received.
2. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS): No additional comments received.
3. National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS): No comments received.
17

4. State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO): No comments received.
5. Other State and local agencies: An email response from NRWRC dated
August 21, 2008, indicated that they had no further comments or objections to the
proposed project.
6. Organizations: No comments received.
7. Individuals: No comments received.
8. Others: No comments received.
9. Corps Analysis of Comments and Responses: Following a review of both
the applicant's response and the supplemental information, the Corps felt that the
applicant had adequately addressed all concerns. This decision was based not only on the
extent to which the concern may potentially impact aquatic resources, but also the
relationship between the concern and the regulated activity.
11. Determinations:
a. Public Hearing Request (If applicable): Not applicable.
b. Civil Rights: In accordance with Title III of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Executive
Order 12898, it has been determined that the project would not directly or through contractual or
other arrangements, use criteria, methods, or practices that discriminate on the basis of race,
color, or national origin nor would it have a disproportionate effect on minority or low- income
communities.
c. Section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act General Conformity Rule Review: The proposed
permit action has been analyzed for conformity applicability pursuant to regulations
implementing Section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act. It has been determined that the activities
proposed under this permit will not exceed de minimis levels of direct or indirect emissions of a
criteria pollutant or its precursors and are exempted by 40 CFR Part 93.153. Any later indirect
emissions are generally not within the Corps' continuing program responsibility and generally
cannot be practicably controlled by the Corps. For these reasons a conformity determination is
not required for this permit action.
d. Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI): Having reviewed the information
provided by the applicant and all interested parties and an assessment of the environmental
impacts, I find that this permit action will not have a significant impact on the quality of the
human environment. Therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement will not be required.
e. Compliance with 404(b)(1) guidelines: Having completed the evaluation in Section VII
IN

above, I have determined that the proposed discharge complies with the 404(b)(1) guidelines.
f. Public Interest Determination: I find that issuance of a Department of the Army permit
is not contrary to the public interest provided Permittee complies with the attached special
conditions. Accordingly, I am hereby issuing the requested permit.
19

i1 : �
Monte Matthews
Regulatory Project Manager
REVIEWED BY:
Jean B. Manuele
Chief, Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
APPROVED BY:
Jefferson M. Ryscavage
Colonel, U.S. Army
District Commander
20
Date
Date
Date

DWQ SURFACE WATER
CLASSIFICATION LETTER

Troy Beasley
Withers & Ravenel
1410 Commonwealth Drive, Unit 101
Wilmington, NC 28403
ST,
JB/IPRRO#11-170
Wake County
IMMMIMMM
rroject Name: Morrisville Parkway Extension
Location/Directions: Subject property is proposed extension of the existing MorTisville
Parkway through undeveloped tract extending west of Hwy 55
Subject Stream: UT to and Panther Branch
Date of Determination: September 13, 2011
Feature E/I/P*
Not
Subject
Start*
stop* Stream
Soil
USGS
Subject
For Pts,
Survey
Togo
1 E
X
16.5
X
2 P
X
Perennial
X
X
Indictors
3 P
X
Perennial
X
X
Indicators
•Plflp
Explanation: The feature(s) listed above has or have been located on the Soil Survey of Wake County, North
Carolina or the most recent copy of the USGS Topographic map at a 1:24,000 scale. Each feature that is checked
"Not Subject" has been determined not to be a stream or is not present on the property. Features that are checked
"Subject" have been located on the property and possess characteristics that qualify it to be a stream. There may be
other streams located on your property that do not show up on the maps referenced above but, still may be
considered jurisdictional according to the US Army Corps of Engineers and/or to the Division of Water Quality.
One
NoithCarolina
Aimurally
North Carolina Division of Water Quality Raleigh Regional Office Surface Water Protection Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet www.ncwaterqualiV.org 1628 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1628 FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer— 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper

Morrisville Parkway Extension
Wake County
September 19, 2011
Page 2 of 2
This on-site determination shall expire rive (5) years from the date of this letter. Landowners or affected parties that
dispute a determination made by the DWQ or Delegated Local Authority may request a determination by the
Director. An appeal request must be made within sixty (6 0) days of date of this letter or from the date the affected
party (including downstream and/or adjacent owners) is notified of this letter. A request for a determination by the
Director shall be referred to the Director in writing c/o Ian McMillan, DWQ Wetlands/401 Unit, 1650 Mail Service
Center, Raleigh NC 27699-1650.
This determination is final and binding unless, as detailed above, you ask for a hearing or appeal within sixty (60)
days.
The owner/future owners should notify the Division of Water Quality (including any other Local, State, and Federal
Agencies) of this decision concerning any future correspondences regarding the subject property (stated above). This
project may require a Section 404/401 Permit for the proposed activity. Any inquiries should be directed to the
Division of Water Quality (Central Office) at (919)-807-6301, and the US Army Corp of Engineers (Raleigh
Regulatory Field Office) at (919)-544-4884.
Respectfully,
01 Martin R
Specialist
cc: Wetlands/ Stormwater Branch, 1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-1650
RRO/SWP File Copy

10
dogma
I
dogma
z
w
z
C)
a^
>- a
Q W
W_
d >
W LU
J_
N
RE
c
02
c
w C
U o
cn o
U O M
V
Q c
U o
i
I
� 6 1
0
W �r •� � 1
LL
.7.
.4
dp
W
cc cf)
= W
�► y..� 1 Q M 400e
w LLr' Q +
ul
LL
4*
R
1
t
s
a
t'
J
Z"
w�
>Y
1x' N
V Y
Y
M t
W
M
WY
r
IV
Y
►.
Q
C(
J
w
J
W
w
U
CL
Q
0
Q
D
a
U
D
i
I
V)
Z
w
X
w
Q
Q
w
J
J
>
N
I

1. do l I J3ti°_ �'
r• , � 12 rl I F ~ L z
C;j r hR •i� r
UU
Lij
I' �,' 1j�1 w
ff^
�� •� �t- Fay. !r f]1 � , i �• •�
�• I I Q
Lu
CL
s •'I�_
O <n �•I �! .i�� f.. �� � a'r
l I� •�
�f � •� �� ' ` n`.
rl f w
fr
r
LLJ
CL
w
LCD

DWQ EMAIL ON JORDAN LAKE
BUFFERS

Page 1 of 1
Beasley, Troy
From: Chapman, Amy [amy.chapman @ncdenr.gov]
Sent: Friday, October 28, 2011 9:37 AM
To: Beasley, Troy; Mcmillan, Ian
Subject: RE: Morrisville Parkway Extension - Jordan Lake Buffer Rules Question
You are right. It's not subject if the permit is still valid.
E -mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law
and may be disclosed to third parties.
From: Beasley, Troy [mailto:TBeasley @withersravenel.com]
Sent: Friday, October 28, 20119:36 AM
To: Mcmillan, Ian; Chapman, Amy
Subject: Morrisville Parkway Extension - Jordan Lake Buffer Rules Question
We are currently working on the modification to the Individual Permit for the Morrisville Parkway
Extension project for the construction of a portion of Phase 1 B. DWQ issued a WQC (DWQ Project
#20080640) for the entire Morrisville Parkway Extension alignment on April 8, 2008. The IP was issued
prior to the Jordan Lake Buffer Rules and is still valid, so does this mean that the project is not subject to
Jordan Lake Buffers? I believe the project is not subject to JL buffers, but I wanted to get confirmation
before we finalize the Impact Maps.
Thanks for your help.
Troy Beasley
t _'• L
1410 Commonwealth Drive, Unit 101 1 Wilmington, NC 28403
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
Direct: 910.509.6512 1 Mobile: [phone]
tbeasley @withersravenel.com
www.withersravenel.co
NOTICE OF CONFIDENTIALITY AND NONDISCLOSURE: This electronic message, which includes any attachments and other
documents referred to herein, contains information from Withers & Ravenel, Inc. that may be proprietary or confidential. The
information is intended for the use of the addressee {s} only. If you are not the addressee, note that any disclosure, copying, printing,
distribution, or use of the contents of this message is prohibited. If you received this message in error, please advise the sender by
reply and delete this electronic message and any attachments.
COPYRIGHT NOTICE: Copyright 2010 V`Jthers & Ravenel, Inc. All Rights Reserved by Withers & Ravenel, Inc. This electronic
message, any attachments thereto and all documents referred to therein are provided for the recipient's information only, and no
rights are licensed, transferred or otherwise granted by the transmission of this electronic message by Withers & Ravenel, Inc. or
receipt of this message by the recipient or any other party.
2/29/2012

EEP LETTER OF RESERVATION

Tim Bailey, PE
Town of Cary
316 North Academy St.
Cary, NC 27513 Expiration of Acceptance: September 7, 2012
Project: Morrisville Parkway Ext. Phase III Stage 113 County: Wake
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is willing to accept
payment for compensatory mitigation for impacts associated with the above referenced project as indicated in the table below. Please
note that this decision does not assure that participation in the NCEEP will be approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation
for project impacts. It is the responsibility of the applicant to contact these agencies to determine if payment to the NCEEP will be
approved. You must also comply with all other state, federal or local government permits, regulations or authorizations associated
with the proposed activity including, SL 2009 -337: An Act to Promote the Use of Compensatory Mitigation Banks as amended by
S.L. 2011 -343.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter and is not transferable. If we have not received a copy of the
issued 404 Permit/401 Certification/CAMA permit within this time frame, this acceptance will expire. It is the applicant's
responsibility to send copies of the permits to NCEEP. Once NCEEP receives a copy of the permit(s) an invoice will be issued based
on the required mitigation in that permit and payment must be made prior to conducting the authorized work. The amount of the In
Lieu Fee to be paid to NCEEP by an applicant is calculated based upon the Fee Schedule and policies listed at www.nceep.net.
Based on the information supplied by you in your request to use the NCEEP, the impacts that may require compensatory mitigation are
summarized in the following table. The amount of mitigation required for this impact is determined by permitting agencies.
Upon receipt of payment, EEP will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. The mitigation will be performed in
accordance with the N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources' Ecosystem Enhancement Program In -Lieu Fee
Instrument dated July 28, 2010.
Thank you for your interest in the NCEEP. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Kelly Williams at
(919) 716 -1921.
Sincerely,
C;�� -
Mica 1 Ellison
Deputy Director
cc: Karen Higgins, NCDWQ Wetlands /401 Unit
Jamie Shern, USACE - Raleigh
Lauren Witherspoon, NCDWQ- Raleigh
Troy Beasley, agent
File
P�StDr ... ... PYDtECt� Oar It-ate, NCD N
- J
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699 -1652 / 919 - 715 -0476 / www.nceep.net
River
Basin
CU
Location
Stream (feet)
Wetlands (acres)
Buffer I
(Sq. Ft.)
Buffer II
(Sq. Ft.)
Cold
Cool Warm
Riparian Non - Riparian
Coastal Marsh
Impact
Cape Fear
03030002
0
0 593
0 0
0
0
0
Upon receipt of payment, EEP will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. The mitigation will be performed in
accordance with the N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources' Ecosystem Enhancement Program In -Lieu Fee
Instrument dated July 28, 2010.
Thank you for your interest in the NCEEP. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Kelly Williams at
(919) 716 -1921.
Sincerely,
C;�� -
Mica 1 Ellison
Deputy Director
cc: Karen Higgins, NCDWQ Wetlands /401 Unit
Jamie Shern, USACE - Raleigh
Lauren Witherspoon, NCDWQ- Raleigh
Troy Beasley, agent
File
P�StDr ... ... PYDtECt� Oar It-ate, NCD N
- J
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699 -1652 / 919 - 715 -0476 / www.nceep.net

r'
'T,0
.EI
WO °q
l
A-
1 [n.
-
-
-
-
0'W x 12'H
CONCRETE "
BOX CULVERT j
1,
1
FADE
CONCRETE
HEADWALL \'
IMPACT #1
PERENNIAL
STREAM
STREAM IMPACT
PERMANENT IMPACTS
IMPACT #1 : STREAM IMPACT = 367 LF - 3,112 SF (0.07 A
MOPRRISVILLE PARKWAY SC -5
CARY Wake North Camlina
I,
4�
i
GRAPHIC
0
WITHERS &- RAVENEL
ENGINEERS I PLANNERS I SURVEYORS

V : �,n
Lb
a
0
� I -
.� 72" .CMP
IMPACT #2
I5 `
{Y515111r1�f51
1 1' {i5y1.5i �SIr �li+�
rNi li
� 1 11 rr +E�5551'1f;lflr ,
1 11 , it l5l 5 5 5Y 5f + 5 51 5 1i'k i t,
5551 5515 +1
�� 555 5,555'5 y 11
�•f,5L5 5 `55155 ,1'' f 5
5555 55. 1j I t
+ 155' S 5,5�y 5t5 t+
_ -_ ... -_ .. __-- -!_t15 451.,•!. � .
STREAM IMPACT
PERMANENT IMPACTS
IMPACT #2 : STREAM IMPACT = 226 LF - 743 SF (0.02 AC)
MOPRRISVILLE PARKWAY SC -6
Wakes N.rth c — i-
fitAUVVALL
GRAPHIC SCALE
50 0
1 inch = 50 ft.
WITHERS &- RAVENEL
ENGINEERS 1 PLANNERS I SURVEYORS
II