Evans Road

I ?
Evans Road (SR 1653) Extension
from
Weston Parkway to Aviation Parkway (SR 1002)
Wake County
a
T.I.P. No. U-2403
State Project 9.8050364
i?
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
STATE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT/
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
North Carolina Department of Transportation
J Division of Highways
-? In Compliance With the
North Carolina Environmental Policy Act
For Further Information Contact:
Mr. L. J. Ward, P.E.
Manager, Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
` Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
i
7
Approved:
go
Date L. J. d, P.E.
Manager of Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation

?f
r
s?
E?
l

7

VI. POTENTIAL W`ETIJVMS/FLOOD STORAGE MITIGATION
A. Mitigation Sites
This project has utilized a planning process and mitigation
sequencing that takes into account the February 1990 Memorandum
of Agreement between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) and the U.S. Department of the Army (Army) concerning the
determination of mitigation under the Clean Water Act Section
404(b)(1) guidelines. Efforts were made to locate and identify
the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative that
met the stated project purposes. Preliminary study lines (Refer
to Figure 3) were identified and wetland involvement determined
for each. The alignment which had the least wetland involvement
was chosen in order to avoid, to the:•maximum extent practicable,
potential impacts.
After determining that wetlands takings could not totally be
avoided with this project, steps were taken to minimize the
adverse impacts as much as feasible. Project modifications
included (1) reduction of right of way from 164 feet to 120 feet
through the affected wetlands, (2) reduction of pavement lane
widths from 12 feet to 11 feet to accommodate a reduced cross-
section (3) elimination of the roadway median, (4) use of the
steepest embankment slopes practical in this area (2:1), and (5)
lowering of the proposed roadway grade to reduc3ion-of
h of
embankment. Compensation for the unavoidable loss o 2.7 cres
of wetlands is proposed through the restoration and wetlands contiguous to this site.
Based on field examination and subsequent analysis, it
appears that sufficient opportunity exists proximal to the
proposed project for on-site rather than off-site wetlands and
flood storage mitigation to occur.
A judicious selection of mitigation sites for this project
allows for the balancing of the flood storage impact and
compensation for wetlands losses within the same site. These
sites, as shown on Figures 4a and 4b, were chosen for their
potential to both recover flood storage taken by the roadway
embankment and remain in close proximity to the areas of wetland
losses. Table 8 lists the specific sites in priority with the
estimated acres (wetlands) and acre-.feet (flood storage) noted.
These sites are listed as potential mitigation areas. Actual
acreages of wetlands impacted and cubic yards of roadway fill
required within the flood storage basin will be determined in the
final design phase. Coordination with the appropriate agencies
for a Section 404 permit will be completed prior to agreement on
specific sites and mitigation measures for this project.
Approval to use lands within the 100-year floodplain (Wake County

47
f J
I
r

4
1? I-I N,? --?-H v 4

property) to mitigate flood storage and wetlands impacts has been
advanced by the Wake County Board of Commissioners on July 2,
1990 (refer to letter of August 22, 1990 from Wake County in
Appendix C).
As has been noted, wetland acreage in the Crabtree Creek
riparian zone is extensive, a result of the rise in water table
associated with Lake Crabtree. However, some areas within the
floodplain do not currently exhibit wetland characteristics due
to their elevation above surround-ing terrain. A total loss of
approximately 2.7 acres of wetland will need to be mitigated. A
combination of restoration and creation sites is suggested as the
most effective approach to mitigate negative impacts on the
wetland resource. Specific sites identified for mitigation
potential are shown on Figures 4a and 4b.
Sites lA and 1B include approximately 2.0 acres immediately
adjacent both sides of Crabtree Creek. Site 1A includes the
western levee and disturbed areas in the riparian zone. The
levee appears to be Congoree soil, while farther back from the
creek on this side and slightly upslope, the original soil
appears to be Altavista, well drained in the surface horizons but
distinctly mottled at 3.5 to 4.0 feet. This mottling indicates
excellent potential for conversion to wetland after upper layers
are removed. Area 1B includes the levees of Congoree soil on the
east bank between the creek channel and slackwater sloughs or
tributary stream channels entering Crabtree Creek. Original
forest cover has been removed in this location on both sides of
the creek, from a point upstream of the proposed crossing,
downstream to the lake itself.
Mitigating here (Sites lA and 1B) would provide an
opportunity to restore bottomland forest similar to that proposed
for clearing to accommodate the project. Grading 3.5 feet or
more of the existing surface material would reduce existing banks
to match the surrounding bottomland contour, where saturated
conditions generally prevail. After grading is complete, wetland
tree species such as River birch (Betula nigra), Green ash
(Fraxinus pennsylvanica), Overcup oak (Quercus 1 rata), and Swamp
chestnut oak (Quercus michauxii), should be planted to compensate
for forested wetland removed along the new causeway.
Sites 2 and 7, located approximately 1,400+ feet northeast
of the proposed ROW, includes 3.3 acres along the southeastern
shore of Lake Crabtree. The soil currently here, Wehadkee, is
prone to seasonal flooding, with a seasonally high water table
approximately at the surface., Observation in May and June, hence
during the current growing season, reveals dry conditions and no
wetlands species on the terrace just above the lake level.
However, shoreline Juncus and cattail colonies with observed
depth to saturation of about 2.5 feet on the terrace suggest that
48
T..

grading to a contour even with the adjacent marginal wetland area
(approx. 2.0 feet) will create a more extensive marsh area.
between the lake and the grass covered sewerline ROW farther
upslope. Prevailing onshore winds from across the lake will also
tend to drive water against this shore, thus periodically
flooding the area. No tree planting is proposed here because of
the expected hydrologic regime.
_ Due to the distance from the project and its small size,
Site 3, (not shown) consisting of 0.2 acres has been rejected as
a feasible mitigation site.
Site 4, contiguous with Site 1A, also contains the Altavista
soil discussed previously in connection with Site IA. Therefore,
removing surface material to an average depth of 4.0 feet, even
with or perhaps below lake level would expose soil capable of
supporting wetland tree species, as in Site IA. The same species
of oaks and river birch are proposed for planting here as
required.
TABLE 8
Potential Wetlands/Flood Storage Mitigation Sites
(Refer to Figures 4a and 4b)
Site Acres Acre-feet
1A 1.38 4.83
18 0.59 2.07
2 2.38 3.57
3 (Rejected) N/A N/A
5 1.20 3.00
6 0.30 0.75
7 0.90 1.35
4 (as needed) 0 - 6.0 0 - 24.00
Total 12.75 Acres 39.57 acre-feet
Sites 5 and 6 are wooded upland areas, between the sewerline
easement and the lake, adjacent to sites 2 and 7 respectively.
These sites could be graded down an average of 2.5 feet to
further offset flood storage capacity loss and mitigate wetlands
with a similar scheme as noted for sites 2 and 7.
49
E
t

As noted in Table 8 the total flood storage capacity
recovered with sites 1A, 1B, 2, 5, 6 and 7 is estimated at 15.6
acre-feet. Additional recovery may or may not be needed to
achieve the 18.2 acre-feet depending upon final design
calculations. Should additional storage be required, Site 4 is
proposed' to be used only as needed to mitigate the remaining
flood storage capacity deficit.
B. Permit Coordination
i
In preparing this environmental report, information was
solicited from a meeting with Mr. Ken Jolly (U. S. Army COE) and
subsequent telephone discussion with Mr. Wilson Laney (USFWS).
The step-down procedure for permit application requires that,
first, this project qualify on the basis of demonstrated need
and, second, that all reasonable attempts be made to minimize
impacts on waters of the United States, including wetland
acreages. Assuming these conditions are met, the project is
proposed to be permitted under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
with an appropriate mitigation plan developed to satisfy the
current federal goal of no overall net loss of wetland values and
functions.
C. Monitorinv Plan
As part of the mitigation effort for this specific project a
monitoring plan to insure that permit conditions are complied
with will be developed by the N. C. Department of Transportation
in coordination with the Corps of Engineers.
r
t-
I
r
r
r
so r
7
--- STUDY LINES ---
mmw?? A
,ff,iV,drAF. s
B B11151111 C
Ip
EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
U-2403
(Weston Pkwy, to Aviation Pkwy.)
PRELIMINARY STUDY LINES
June 1990 No Scale Figure 3
J
a Route Slip Distribution:
U.S. Department of
Transportation
To: Name Date Org/Rtg Symbol
Mr. Ron Ferrel 07/27/94
Remarks:
---Per Your Request Attached is the permit for the Evans Road project. If you
-For Your Information have any questions, please call me at 856-4350.
der Our Conversation
Vote and Return
discuss With Me
for Your Approval
for Your Signature
Comment
Take Appropriate Action
-Please Answer
prepare Reply For Signature Of
From: Name Telephone Org/Rtg Symbol
Greg Punske 856-4350 HO-NC
Form DOT F 1320.9 (Rev. 5-81) Supersedes All Previous Editions
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
IN REPLY REFER TO July 18 , 1994
Regulatory Branch
Action ID Nos. 197800390 and 199100143
Mr. Greg Punske
U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
North Carolina Division office
310 New Bern Avenue, Fourth Floor
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601
Dear Mr. Punske:
In accordance with your request of July 6, 1994, enclosed are copies of
Department of the Army (DA) permits issued to the North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) to establish a marine maintenance facility on Spooners
Creek off Croatan Sound, Manns Harbor, Dare County, North Carolina
(197800390), and to discharge fill material in wetlands adjacent to Crabtree
Creek associated with construction of Evans Road, Cary, Wake County, North
Carolina (199100143).
Questions may be addressed to Mr. Cliff Winefordner, Regulatory Branch,
telephone [phone].
Sincerely,
Enclosures
G. e Wrig t
Chief Regulat y Branch
FNWR N. C. ffifS ON
mm JUL 191914
NV. Ank.ik
M, 0!'.. A
r; dT
1 ?r t
V

August 24, 1992
Regulatory Branch
Action ID. 199100143
North Hills Properties, Inc.
NCDOT
Silverton, Inc.
c/o Mr. Roger D. Lewis, P.E.
Burton, Adams, Kemp and King
Post Office Box 311
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602-0311
Dear Mr. Lewis:
In accordance with your written request of November 20, 1990, and the
ensuing administrative record, enclosed is a permit to discharge fill
material into wetlands adjacent to Crabtree Creek to effect construction of
an extension of Evans Road in Cary, Wake County, North Carolina. The
application was revised by letter of July 12, 1991, to include the North
Carolina Department of Transportation and Silverton, Incorporated, as
co-applicants.
If any change in the authorized work is required because of unforeseen or
altered conditions or for any other reason, the plans revised to show the
change must be sent promptly to this office. Such action is necessary, as
revised plans must be reviewed and the permit 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 general conditions require that:
a. You must complete construction before December 31, 1995.
b. You must notify this office in advance as to when you intend to
commence and complete work. ~- --'
L
c. You must allow representatives from this office to make periodic
visits to your worksite as deemed necessary to assure compliance with permit
plans and conditions.
i
The enclosed Notice of Authorization, ENG Form 4336, must be conspicuously
displayed at your worksite.
Sincerely,
James H. Bradley
Chief, Construction-Operations
Division
Enclosures
-2-
Copy Furnished with enclosures:
Director, Atlantic Marine Center
National Ocean Service
ATTN: MOA 232X1
439 West York Street
Norfolk, Virginia 23510
Copies Furnished with special conditions and plans:
Ms. L. R. (Mike) Gantt
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Fish and Wildlife Enhancement
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
Mr. Larry Hardy
National Marine Fisheries Service
Habitat Conservation Service
Pivers Island
Beaufort, North Carolina 28516
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency - Region IV
Wetlands Regulatory Unit
345 Courtland Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30365
Mr. John Parker
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Blind Copy Furnished:
CESAW-CO-E/Ramel
a
• d \
RECE) vEt,
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT
riorta i?ills Properties, Inc.
north Carolina Deparccent or Transportation
Permittee Silyet;ton, Inc.
Jction
Permit No Iv. 199100143
No.
Issuing Office
"SA4- CO-E

REGULATORY BRANH
NOTE: The term "you" and its derivatives, as used in this permit, means the permittee or any future transferee. The term
"this office" refers to the appropriate district or division office of the Corps of Engineers having jurisdiction over the permitted
activity or the appropriate official of that office acting under the authority of the commanding officer.
You are authorized to perform work in accordance with the terms and conditions specified below.
Project Description:
To dise"cge i111 juterial into woclaods adjacent to Craotrae Creek to
atfe-ct cc.natrcictlon of Aft iXtatision of -vans ;toaj accOrdlnb to C, attaciiCc
;Mane.
Project Location:
"ry, .rake County, iortn C4rol1na
Permit Conditions:
General Conditions:
1. The time limit for completing the work authorized ends on December 31, 1995 . If you find that you need
more time to complete the authorized activity, submit your request for a time extension to this office for eonkderation at least
one month before the above date is reached.
2. You must maintain the activity authorized by this permit in good condition and in conformance with the terms and condi-
d&,n of this permit. You are not relieved of this requirement if you abandon the permitted activity, although you may make
a good faith transfer to a third party in compliance with General Condition 4 below. Should you wish to cease to maintain
the authorized activity or should you desire to abandon it without a good faith transfer, you must obtain a modification of
this permit from this office, which may require restoration of the area.
3. If you discover any previously unknown historic or archeological remains while accomplishing the activity authorized by
this permit, you must immediately notify this office of what you have found. We will initiate the Federal and state coordina-
tion required to determine if the remains warrant a recovery effort or if the site is eligible for listing in the National Register
of Historic Places.
ENO FORM 1721, Nov 66 EDITION OF SEP 82 13 OBSOLETE.
(33 CPR 325 (Appendix A))
1
e. Damage claims associated with any future modification, suspension, or revocation of this permit.
4. Reliance on Applicant's Data: The determination of this office that issuance of this permit is not contrary to the public
interest was made in reliance on the information you provided.
5. Reevaluation of Permit Decision. This office may reevaluate its decision on this permit at any time the circumstances
warrant. Circumstances that could require a reevaluation include, but are not limited to, the following:
a. You fail to comply with the terms and conditions of this permit.
b. The information provided by you in support of your permit application proves to have been false, incomplete, or
inaccurate (See 4 above).
c. Significant new information surfaces which this office did not consider in reaching the original public interest decision.
Such a reevaluation may result in a determination that it is appropriate to use the suspension, modification, and revocation
procedures contained in 33 CFR 325.7 or enforcement procedures such as those contained in 33 CFR 326.4 and 326.5. The
referenced enforcement procedures provide for the issuance of an administrative order requiring you to comply with the terms
and conditions of your permit and for the initiation of legal action where appropriate. You will be required to pay for any
corrective measures ordered by this office, and if you fail to comply with such directive, this office may in certain situations
(such as those specified in 33 CFR 209.170) accomplish the corrective measures by contract or otherwise and bill you for the
cost.
6. Extensions. General condition 1 establishes a time limit for the completion of the activity authorized by this permit. Unless
there are circumstances requiring either a prompt completion of the authorized activity or a reevaluation of the public interest
decision, the Corps will normally give favorable consideration to a request for an extension of this time limit.
Your signature below, as permittee, indicates that you accept and agree to comply with the terms and conditions of this permit.
jUi' 'k3 "Oubi., 'ind tilt. F.'"iK tt su(;:;:, ,in.
(PERMITTEE (DA E)
1100 41
17, l°f ?Z-
This permit becomes effectiv hen the Federal official, designated to act for the Secretary of the Army, has signed below.
(DISTRICT ENGINEER) (DATE)
?.l i.i'Lai 5 TULLOC--, COL3NEL
1.
When the structures or work authorized by this permit are still in existence at the time the property is transferred, the terms and
conditions of this permit will continue to be binding on the new owner(s) of the property. To validate the transfer of this permit
and the associated liabilities associated with compliance with its terms and conditions, have the transferee sign and date below.
(TRANSFEREE)
(DATE)
*U.& GOVEMA*NT PRINTING OFFICE: 19M - 717-40
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
a. The "Wetlands/Flood Storage Mitigation Plan (Revision #3)' dated
June 2, 1992 (copy enclosed), including the 'Project Special Provisions
Wetland Reforestation' addendum, will be implemented in its entirety. The
following conditions and/or clarifications shall also be implemented as part
of the mitigation plan:
1. In the event that the hydrological success criteria (saturated within
12 inches of the surface, ponded or flooded for at least 26 consecutive days
of the growing season) is not met during the first year, well monitoring will
continue in successive years until the success criteria has been met and
documented.
2. All disturbed areas adjacent to the mitigation sites will be
stabilized to prevent sedimentation into the mitigation sites.
3. Construction of the mitigation sites will be initiated at such time
to provide for planting of seedlings the first suitable planting period
(November 15 through March 15) following commencement of project construction.
b. The fill material will be clean and free of any pollutants except in
trace quantities. Metal products, organic materials, or unsightly debris will
not be used.
c. The permittee will maintain the authorized work in good condition and
in conformance with the terms and conditions of this permit. The permittee is
not relieved of this requirement if he abandons the permitted activity without
having it transferred to a third party.
d. No excavated or fill material will be placed at any time in waters or
wetlands outside the permitted roadway fill alignment.
e. The activity will be conducted in such a manner as to prevent a
significant increase in turbidity outside the area of construction or
construction-related discharge. Increases such that the turbidity in the
waterbody is 50 NTU's or less are not considered significant.
f. If the permittee discovers any previously unknown historic or
archeological remains while accomplishing the authorized work, he will
immediately notify the Wilmington District Engineer who will initiate the
required State/Federal coordination.
g. Appropriate sedimentation and erosion control measures shall be
implemented to minimize siltation and turbidity impacts from the project.

0o
PrAwwi
)R
=--SITE
A

]SITE
LAITY MAP
:E: WAKE COUNTY HIGHWAY
SCALE
M wll
SITE MAP
SOURCE:. N.C. HIGHWAY NAP
SCALE
/O ? to N?t.?s

?1 h I.

EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
e proposed project is a joint venture NCDOT PROJECT II-2403
etween the Korth Carolina Department of
ransportation and two private developers, 7 NOV, 1990
orth stills Properties, Inc. and silverton, Inc Sheet 1 of
AV;rTIa ?pp2? '
END PROJECT
Za Apo ilk
Y -?e ?,ENOTES WETLANDS
1A MITIGATION SITES
COUNT, Y GAE-ENWAYS TRAIL
f J
?C?
1
MATC y L 1 NE
? s 1T1

t_
C'77j ITS
I
W
° 4?;
IS COLO?IIIL ELI
Ii) -1 h.
i
i 11 It
a /I
Ago
s? t
Z ? , 2
63 M
of
a
M C•
mbi
M Lk
E-4 0:
alga
xo
a
a

Y
3 '
w
E Ole 2,
dps s
its
t
DENOTES FILL IN WETLANDS
SCALE IN FEET
o Av 20
PLAN VIEW SHEET 1 OF 2
I rl N1-11\ EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
WARE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
Sheet _.j_ of Z NOV, 1990-

lk r
• ? w
dt' { '
9 P* cod IL
T > 9 "
94
H a
r7 O • I 4 a
E
I .?
J \ l ?
CL s s ? _'/} ? 1' 1
t ca N
?'/0 T ~ ;
'` 3 H DENOTES FILL IN WETLANDS
g t 3 'DENOTES FILL BELOW O.H.W.
4
22' SCALE IN FEET
a o J 2JO
a• PLAN VIEW SHEET 2 OF 2
° EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
a
SZ
MATCH L??yE 94 Sheet ,? of ..Z NOV, 1990
IVA TC L /NE B .

r ?

o

W A

'
a llp
tv
? ?
O

J A
i
is
0
a

H+ c N
IL V
0z
N
Q ?

1 Z
o' U
H
a

M
O

1.,

NO FILL BELOW O.H.W.

SCALE AS SHOWN

PROFILE SHEET 1 OF 2

EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
Sheet of .7 NOV, 1990
I a
O
r
0
°
4

r
a
' S
I w?
b
L

? 0
o u n
O

V VI N
O K
O
N v ?
N
e ?

2 a
k

O I N
> i
Wr Y O
? G7
M
E
M
.?
i
a .a

„ o
h h a N w
+
0 ?
Q
?0
5 g
?
a ? o
a

M Q?

w o
M n ?n
r w w
O
• Q
`l

Y
<

H
N
N
.. W V
W •
>
d O ?
?z ?
14
ni of 21 11 ill A
A
8
DENOTES FILL BELOW O.H.W.
SCALE AS SHOWN
PROFILE SHEET 2 OF 2
EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
Sheet , 4 of .2. NOV, 1990
+ 4 a 4 L 4.
TYPICAL SECTION A-A
PROPOSED WETLAITD MITIGATION SITES
NO SCALE
Potential MetlandsM ood Storage Mitigation Sites
Site Acres Acre-feet
IA 1.38 4.83
18 OS9 2.07
2 2.38 3.57
3 (Rejected) IVA N/A
S 1.20 3.00
6 0.30 0.75
7 0.90 1.35
4 (as needed) 0 - 6.0 0 - 24.00
Total 12.75 Acres 39.57 acre-feet
SUMMARY OF OUANTITIES FOR PROPOSED ROAD
TOTAL AREA OF FILL IN WETLANDS- 2.64 Ac.
FILL BELOW O.H.W. - 95 C.Y.
TOTAL FILL IN WETLANDS - 41,900 C.Y.
11
s
PROPERTY OWNERS
NA
7.
LANCE CRABTREE
NORMAL POOL ELEV. 276.0
EXCAVATE TO ELEV. 276.0 \\
(SEE TABLE BELOW)
Y
+ ?-- + -- ± VAR.
v
EXISTING MARSH
north Hills Properties, Inc.
P. O. Box 17004
Raleigh, North Carolina 27619
Wake County Government
c/o Mr. Richard T. Stevens
Wake County Manager
P. 0. Box 550
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602
i
4
4
EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
Sheet Z of.2 NOV, 19901 -
October 27, 1991
Revised March 16, 1992
Revised June 2, 1992
EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
WAKE COUNTY
NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
WEIIANDS/FLOOD STORAGE MITIGATION PLAN
(REVISION #3)
COE ACTION ID #199100143
Mitigation Sites
This project has utilized a planning process and mitigation sequencing that takes into
account the February 1990 Memorandum of Agreement between the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of the Army (Army) concerning the
determination of mitigation under the Clean Water Act Section 40=4 (b)(1) guidelines.
Efforts were made to locate and identify the least environmentally damaging practicable
alternative that met the state project purposes. Preliminary study lines were identified and
wetland involvement determined for each. The alignment which had the least wetland
involvement was chosen in order to avoid, to the maximum extent practicable, potential
impacts.
After determining that wetlands takings could not totally be avoided with this project,
steps were taken to minimize the adverse impacts as much as feasible. Project modifications
included (1) reduction of right of way from 164 feet to 120 feet through the affected
wetlands, (2) reduction of pavement lane widths from 12 feet to 11 feet to accommodate a
reduced cross-section (3) elimination of the roadway median, (4) use of the steepest
embankment slopes practical in this area (2:1), and (5) lowering of the proposed roadway
grade to reduce width of embankment. Compensation for the unavoidable loss o '? 7 acres
of wetlands is proposed through the restoration and creation of wetlands contiguous to and
near this site.
Based on field examination and subsequent analysis, it appears that sufficient
opportunity exists proximal to the proposed project for on-site rather than off-site wetlands
end flood storage mitigation to occur.
A judicious selection of mitigation sites for this project allows for the balancing of the
flood storage impact and compensation for hardwood wetlands losses within the same site.
These sites, as shown on Figures 1 and 2 (attached) were chosen for their potential to both
recover flood storage taken by the roadway embankment (approximately 18.2 acre-feet) and
remain in close proximity to the areas of wetland losses. Table 1 lists the specific sites
designated for hardwood wetlands creation in priority with the estimated acres (wetlands)
and acre-feet (flood storage) noted. Table 2 shows the additional sites of marsh type
1
wetlands creation. These sites are listed as proposed mitigation areas. Actual acreages of
wetlands i cted and cubic yards of roadway fill required within the flood- storage basin
will be determined in the final esign p ase. Coordination with the appropriate agencies for
a Section 404 permit has been in progress for over one year and mutual agreement on sites
and mitigation measures should be achieved with this plan. Wake County Board of
Commissioners on July 2, 1990 approved the use of lands within the 100-year floodplain
(Wake County property) to mitigate flood storage and wetlands impacts associated with the
Evans Road Extension project (refer to letter of August 22, 1990 from Wake County in
Appendix C of State EA/FONSI).
As has been noted, wetland acreage in the Crabtree Creek riparian zone is extensive,
partially as a result of the rise in water table associated with Lake Crabtree. However, some
areas within the floodplain do not currently exhibit wetland characteristics due to their
elevation above surrounding terrain. A total loss of approximately acres of bottomland
hardwood wetland will need to be mitigated. A combination of restoration and creation sites
is suggested as the most effective approach to mitigate negative impacts on the wetland
resource. Specific sites identified for mitigation potential are shown on Figures 1 and 2.
-Site L-k includes approximately 0.91 acres immediately adjacent to the north side of
Crabtree Creek. Site 1A includes the levee and disturbed areas in the riparian zone. The
levee appears to be Congoree soil, while farther back from the creek on this side and slightly
upslope, the original soil appears to be Altavista, well drained in the surface horizons but
distinctly mottled at 3.5 to 4.0 feet. This mottling indicates excellent potential for conversion
to wetland after upper layers are removed. Original forest cover has been removed in this
location on both sides of the creek, from a point upstream of the proposed crossing,
downstream to the lake itself.
Mitigating on Site 1A would provide an opportunity to restore bottomland forest
similar to that proposed for clearing to accommodate the project. Grading 3.5 feet or more
of the existing surface material would reduce the existing bank to match the surrounding
bottomland contour, where saturated conditions generally prevail. After grading is
complete, wetland tree species such as River birch (Betula niM), Green ash (Fraxinus
pennsvlvanica), Overcup oak ( uercus lvrata), and Swamp chestnut oak ( uercus
michauxii), will be planted to compensate for forested wetland removed along the new
causeway. The wetland reforestation shall be implemented as noted in the attached Project
Special Provisions for Wetland Reforestation and Grading.
Site 4A and 4B consists of 2.39 and 0.51 acres respectively just north of Site IA and
also contains the Altavista soil discussed previously in connection with Site IA. Therefore,
removing surface material to an average depth of 4.0 feet, even with or perhaps below lake
level would expose soil capable of supporting wetland tree species. The same tree species
as in site 1A are proposed for planting on Site 4A and 4B.
2
TABLE 1
Proposed Wooded Wetlands/Flood Storage Mitigation Sites
(Refer to Figures 1 and 2)
Mitigation Wetlands Flood Storage
Site Acres Acre-feet
lA 0.91 3.19
4A 2.39 9.56
413 0.51 2.04
8 2.66 6.65
TOTAL 6.47 21.44
TABLE 2
Additional Flood Storage Mitigation Sites with
Supplemental Marsh Wetlands
Marsh
Mitigation Wetlands Flood Storage
Site Acres Acre-feet
2 2.38 3.57
5 1.20 3.00
6 0.30 0.75
7 0.90 1.35
TOTAL 4.78 8.67
Site 8 is found approximately 2400 feet south (upstream) of the project comdor
(refer to Figure 2). Site 8 totals 2.66 acres and is contained within the 100 year floodplain,
owned by Wake County. This site was examined on January 24, 1992 by our biologist, Gary
Plank, to determine whether the hydrology and soils present were conducive for wetland
creation and if conducive, the extent of excavation required to insure successful mitigation.
This site is mostly at or below the 100-year flood level (284.9 ft) but exhibits characteristics
markedly different from the surrounding area.
On a portion of the floodplain slightly higher and noticeably drier than immediately
surrounding areas, this site is currently occupied by a mature loblolly pine stand. Adjacent
floodplain areas to the south, north and west are dominated by bottomland hardwoods, with
cane occurring in scattered lower lying places. Tree species occurring in these adjacent
areas include Yellow-Poplar, River Birch, Green Ash, Willow Oak, and Sweetgum. To the
east, the site is bordered by a west facing slope and the mouth of a ravine formed by an
intermittent drainage. In the pine stand itself, dead river birches (8-10 in. DBH) occur in
several places, but most of the areas dominated by pine are now either pure pine or include
scattered poplars and sweetgums.
Eight test holes were dug at locations (Fig. 2) where vegetation indicators suggested
that differing hydrological and soil characteristics might be observed (Table 3). Data
gathered on the site and shown in Table 3 suggest that this site can be converted to a
functioning wetland dominated by bottomland hardwood species, if proper measures are
taken to assure success.
The soils on the site are clearly alluvial in origin--either Chewacla or Congoree--a
result of historical stream migration and associated sediment deposition. While the Wake
County Soil Survey indicates Chewacla soils across much of the Crabtree floodplain,
Congoree also occurs here and, based on field observations (Table 3), appears to be the
more likely soil on this site. Adjacent to the proposed site on the north, however, an
intermittent drain exhibits markedly different soil conditions more indicative of Wehadkee
soil (Holes #1 and #8), with its darker gray color and increased saturation.
Table 3. Data Gathered at Supplemental \ditigation Site 708.
Hole 7"r Location
Canopy Composition` Hydrology Soil Color
1 90' SW 1-135 P/SG w/cane Standing water to 3 in 10 YR 4r'
2 66'S Hole 1 P/YP/SG No water 2.0 ft 10 YR 5i')
3 1-137 P/YP No water at 2.0 ft 10 YR Si6
4 100' W 1-137 YP/GA Saturated at 1.0 ft Oxidation at
1.5 ft
5 75' W Hole 4 RB/YP/WO Saturated at 9" Some gleving
cane 10 ft west Standing water at 15"
6 100'N Hole 5 P w/cane No Saturation 10 YR 6/2
dead RB
%? 7 150' N Hole 6 P/WO cane to N No water Gleying at
3 dead RB 18"
8 75' N Hole 7 SG/WO w/cane Saturated surface 10 YR 4/2
Standing at 10"

'Species: P-loblolly pine, SG-sweetgum, YP-yellow poplar, GA-greenash, RB-river birch, WO-willow oak
Holes #1 and #8 indicate the northern limit of the proposed mitigation site (Fig. 2).
Similarly, Hole #4 indicates the western extent of the mitigation area, where the pine stand
4
has given way to bottomland hardwoods, with soils beginning to exhibit hydric conditions.
The southern extent of the mitigation site corresponds to the limit of the pine stand, at
about line stake 1-138 (Fig. 2).
The site is fed by intermittent drains from relatively steep slopes to the east. As
indicated by the hydrology observed in Holes #1, 4, 5, and 8, saturated conditions prevail
in areas adjacent to the proposed mitigation site. The westernmost holes appear to reflect
subsurface influence of Crabtree Creek and drainage from the ravine southeast of the site.
The objective of this mitigation is to create hardwood wetlan habitat n site
currently dominated by mature pines, thereby mitigating loss of equivalent a itat in the
proposed Evans Road corridor. Several points bear consideration in proposing site 8 and
the following procedures. First, areas adjacent the pine stand are obviously exhibiting
wetland characteristics, including development of hydric conditions in soils essentially the
same as the soil beneath the pine stand. Second, the mature pines currently on the
proposed site have effectively dried the soil through years of active transpiration. Removing
these mature pine trees will have an immediate impact on the site's hydrology, reducing
transpiration potential and thereby lengthening the hydroperiod following rainfall episodes.
Third, the presence of dead River Birches of significant diameter suggests that at one time
the proposed site was wetter than it is now and that stand composition may have been
correspondingly different. Finally, it should be noted that the observations recorded in Table
3 were made during a time when winter rainfall had been markedly below levels typical of
this region.
In any case, current soil conditions must be altered by grading to reduce depth of
subsoil material, thus the overall contour of the proposed site. Removing 3.0 feet of the
existing material would reduce the site contour to a level below the surrounding botton land
contour, where saturated conditions generally prevail. In the removal process, surface
humus and topsoil material would be retained for redistribution on. the excavated site
following removal of the lower soil layers. Replacement of 0.5 to 1.0 ft of topsoil and humus
material would provide a hospitable medium for tree planting.
After surface replenishment is complete, tree species such as River Birch (Betula
niQra Green Ash (Fraxinum pennsvlvanica), Overcup Oak ( uercus Ivrata), Swamp
Chestnut Oak ( uercus michauxii), Blackgum (Ntvssa svlvatica), and Willow Oak ( ilercus
hp ellos L.) would be planted. Appropriate planting density. and species composition will be
as proposed previously with Site 1A, 4A and 4B.
It is further proposed that to the extent possible, drainage from Weston's future
upland development sites just east of this mitigation area be channeled into this area to
augment naturally occurring drainage. Channeling stormflows in this manner will not only
help irrigate the site but will also allow filtration of runoff from paved surfaces before
stormflows enter the nearby Crabtree Creek and lake system.
Appropriate monitoring of stand growth will be maintained by NCDOT, as indicated
with the attached monitoring plan. Growth rates of bottomland hardwood plantations along
S
Richland Creek on NCSU's Schenck Forest (part of the Crabtree Creek watershed) indicate
that under controlled conditions on a wet site, 1.0 ft. seedlings of the proposed species will
reach average heights of 6.0 ft. three to five years after planting. On slightly drier adjacent
areas of the same site, growth rates have been even better.
Sites 2 and 7, located approximately 1,400 + feet northeast of the proposed ROW,
includes 3.3 acres along the southeastern shore of Lake Crabtree. The soil currently here,
Wehadkee, is prone to seasonal flooding, with a seasonally high water table approximately
at the surface. Observation in May and June, hence during the growing season, reveals dry
conditions and no wetlands species on the terrace just above the lake level. However,
shoreline Juncus and cattail colonies with observed depth to saturation of about 2.5 feet on
the terrace suggest that grading to a contour even with the adjacent marginal wetland area
(approx. 2.0 feet) will create a more extensive marsh area between the lake and the grass
covered sewerline ROW farther upslope. Prevailing onshore winds from across the lake will
also tend to drive water against this shore, thus periodically flooding the area. No tree
planting is proposed here because of the expected hydrologic regime. Natural succession
of juncus and carex species is expected on these sites.
Sites 6 and 6 are wooded upland areas, between the sewerline easement and the lake,
adjacent to sites 2 and 7 respectively. These sites would be graded down an average of 2.5
feet to further offset flood storage capacity loss and to offer supplemental wetlands
mitigation with a similar scheme as noted for sites 2 and 7.
As noted in Table 1 the total flood storage capacity recovered with sites 1,\, 4A, 4B,
and 8 is estimated at 21.44 acre-feet. Additional recovery will probably be needed depending
upon final design calculations. Additional storage is proposed with sites 2, 5, 6 and 7
providing 8.67 acre-feet of flood storage as noted in Table 2 for the Crabtree svstem. The
offering of marsh type wetlands on these sites totals 4.78 acres and is proposed only as
supplemental wetlands mitigation.
Permit Coordination
In preparing this environmental report, information was solicited from a meeting with
Mr. Ken Jolley (U.S. Army COE) and subsequent telephone discussion with Mr. Wilson
Laney (USFWS). The step-down procedure for permit application requires that, first, this
project qualify on the basis of demonstrated need and, second, that all reasonable attempts
be made to minimize impacts on waters of the United States, including wetland acreages.
Assuming these conditions are met, the project is proposed to be permitted under Section
4a4 of the Clean Water Act with an appropriate mitigation plan developed to satisfy the
current federal goal of no overall net loss of wetland values and functions.
Monitoring Plan
As part of the mitigation effort for this specific project a revised monitoring plan to
insure that permit conditions are complied with has been developed by the N.C. Department
6
of Transportation in coordination with the Corps of Engineers and is attached. In addition,
Project Special Provisions for Wetland Reforestation and Grading to be used on this project
are also attached.
\90004.011Rev;viitig.Pln

i
^C) ra?-
1Y t `Sn 1.°°21 ? ?„?
`ND '2ROJECT
z/
--? T

0

r

1; ! ?t
t
It i i
I
'7 O'n v 'YL TEL..{:JS
1A MITIGATION SITES
E
co
G
r' . ,?
r _
48
?•/ ?? .

(r.i? 1
J - y-=
?.

J
N-j
f ? 1I+Ij r\\ ??
/ .I
?l ti(f: BEC-f,N FROJcL
=! 5 . 0
1!?
? i
ti
2 1.? J
MITIGATION SITES 6
iris TOrt '`"c
r
i
r
1GiJ
W1ri^ COUNT-l-,
`DOT PRO j CT U-2403
•-
FIGURE 1 Nc.v, '• a 90
MARCH 1992
o??
N i (A
-Z" '7Z) _ O O7
O

i
i
f
i

m f

? o

m
f D

f
I?
f O
' O
0

D

N
\ I ? v4J
I

/ I'll n

a
\
V
W
m

3 !
!
GtW
f .
so-
t
lv?
,
/
/
/
1
l
1
r
i
PROJECT 9.8050364 U-2403 WAKE CO.
EVAINS ROAD (SR 1653) EXTENSION
GUIDELINES FOR WETLAND MONITORING PROGRANI
. OCTOBER 15, 1991
REVISED MARCH 16, 1992
REVISED JUNE 2, 1992
I. Monitoring Timeframe - vlitigation sites, specifically permanent sample plots, shall
be inspected at the following times. .
A. Prior to planting
B. At completion of planting (including an "as-built" report)
C. August-September of every growing season until vegetative success criteria is
met as previously noted.
II. Data to be Obtained at Specific Inspection Times
A. Prior to planting
1. Check for proper elevation and grade, get the permitting agency's
approval on the elevation.
2. Check for proper plant species and for acceptable plant quality.
Betula nigra - River Birch, 15-18", Seedling Br.
Fraxinus pennsylvania - Green Ash, 15-18", Seedling Br.
Quercus lyrata - Overcup Oak, 12-15", Seedling Br.
Quercus michanxii - Swamp Chestnut Oak, 12-15", Seedling Br.
Nyssa sylvatica - Blackgum
Quercus phellos L. - Willow Oak, 12-15", Seedling Br.
Note: Plant species are contingent on availability at the time for
planting, should fewer than six species be available at time of planting
consultation with the COE will be held to determine an acceptable
course of action.
! 3. Check for proper planting methods
4. Check for proper plant spacing (8' O.C.)
B. At completion of planting check for conformity with plans as well as quality
of planting.
to
C. August-September of every growing season until success criteria is met.
1. Determine survival rate based upon data collected from permanent
sample plots.
2. Measure height of plants
3. Take photograph(s)
4. Estimate percent population of
a. Plant species
b. Overall (natural succession)
III. Supplemental Monitoring for Hydrology
The hydrology parameter for this specific project has been established as
saturation within 12 inches of the surface, ponded or flooded for at least 26
consecutive days of the growing season for the first year under reasonably
average climatic conditions. NCDOT will document compliance through the
use of monitoring wells within the mitigation sites. The location and number
of monitoring wells will be determined prior to planting and after consultation
with the Corps.
IV. Evaluation and Recourse Action
A. Acceptable survival rate of a minimum of 320 stems per acre living for three
years without size/height specification. If after three years the number of trees
per acre is only slightly below 320 (i.e. 312, 317 etc.) NCDOT will consult with
the COE to determine an appropriate recourse option.
B. Annual data evaluation.
1. Below acceptable survival rate (recourse options)
a. Replant (supplemental or complete)
b. Minor regrading
C. Reevaluate feasibility "01
2. Acceptable survival rate - no action
Note: Because the area to be mitigated is not on DOT right-of-way,
agreement with the owner (Wake County) wfll be secured for the initial grading and
planting, the evaluation period, and possible replanting.
11
9.3050346 PROJECT SPECIAL PROVISIONS WAIF COUNTY
WETLAND REFORESTATION
WETLAND REFORESTATION
WETLAND REFORESTATION SHALL BE PLANTED AS SHOWN ON THE PLANS
OR AS DETERMINED BY THE ENGINEER.
WETLAND REFORESTATION SHALL MEET ALL REQUIREMENTS FOR
REFORESTATION IN THE STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS.
SEASONAL LL IITATIONS: SEEDLINGS SHALL BE PLANTED FROM NOVEMBER
15 THRU MARCH 15.
SEEDLINGS SHALL BE PLANTED AS SOON AS PRACTICAL FOLLOWING
PERMANENT SEEDING AND MULCHING.
ROOT DIP: THE ROOTS OF REFORESTATION SEEDLINGS SHALL BE COATED
WITH A SLURRY OF WATER, AND EITHER A FINE CLAY ("KAOLIN") OR A
SUPERABSORBENT THAT IS MADE TO BE USED AS A BARE ROOT DIP. THE
TYPE, MIXTURE RATIO, METHOD OF APPLICATION, AND THE TIME OF
APPLICATION SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE ENGINEER FOR APPROVAL.
WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE ENGINEER SEEDLINGS MAY BE COATED
BEFORE DELIVERY TO THE JOB OR AT THE TIME OF PLANTING, BUT AT NO
TDvlE SHALL THE ROOTS OF THE SEEDLING BE ALLOWED TO DRY OUT. THE
ROOTS SHALL BE MOISTENED I%fYIEDIATELY PRIOR TO PLANTING.
METHOD OF MEASUREMENT WILL BE THE SAME AS TREE REFORESTATION
IN THE STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS.
BASIS OF PAYMEN'T' WILL BE THE SAME AS TREE REFORESTATION IN THE
STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS EXCEPT THAT PAYMENT WILL BE MADE UNDER:
WETLAND REFORESTATION ..........................ACR
WETLAND GRADING:
'S
WETLAND GRADING SHALL CONSISTS OF GRADING AREAS TO RECEIVE
WETLAND REFORESTATION, AS SHOWN ON THE PLANS OR AS DIRECTED BY
THE ENGINEER, TO AN ELEVATION DETERMPTED BY THE ENGINEER. THIS
ELEVATION IS INTENDED TO BE THE SAT AS SURROUNDING WETLAND
AREAS. THIS WILL REQUIRE EXCAVATION OF APPROXIMATELY 3.5-4 FEET
OF SOIL. THE EXCAVATION WILL BE PAID FOR AS 'UNCLASSIFIED
EXCAVATION'. THE AREA SHALL THEN BE GRADED LEVEL. THE SOIL
lCC r? -t5N Aft` z (hiv BPS Jt
12
SHOULD NOT BE COMPACTED.
SEEDING AND MULCHING, AND EROSION CONTROL ITEMS WILL BE
PAID FOR AT THEIR RESPECTIVE CONTRACT UNIT PRICES.
METHOD OF MEASUREMENT: THE QUANTITY OF 'WETLAND GRADL tG' TO
BE PAID FOR WILL BE THE ACTUAL NUMBER OF ACRES OF LAND, r
MEASURED ALONG THE SURFACE OF THE GROUND, WHICH HAS BEEN
GRADED AND ACCEPTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THESE PROVISIONS.
BASIS OF PAYMENT: THE QUANTITY OF 'WETLAND GRADNNG' MEASURED
AS PROVIDED ABOVE WILL BE PAID FOR AT THE CONTRACT UNIT PRICE PER
ACRE.
PAYMENT WILL BE IMADE UNDER:
WETLAND GRADING ...............................EA.
i
\90004.01\wetland3.rgh
13
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
Action ID. 199100143 August 10, 1992
EVALUATION OF SECTION 404(b)(1) GUIDELINES
ARDlicants: North Carolina Department of Transportation, Division of
Highways, ATTN: L. Jack Ward, P.E., Manager, Planning and Environmental
Branch, P.O. Box 25201, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
North Hills Properties, Inc., ATTN: Julian Ford, P.O. Box 17004, Raleigh,
North Carolina 27619
Silverton, Inc., ATTN: Mr. Frank Robuck, Jr., Post Office Box 17102,
Raleigh, North Carolina 27619
I. Proposed Project: The permittee proposes to place approximately 41,900
cubic yards of clean fill material into wetlands adjacent to Crabtree Creek,
at the upper end of Lake Crabtree, for construction of approximately 1,500
feet of a four-lane public highway. The new highway extends the existing
Evans Road approximately 3,500 feet to the northwest from where it currently
ends at Weston Parkway (S.R. 1653), across Crabtree Creek to Aviation Parkway
(S.R. 1002). The proposed highway embankment will be an average of
approximately 95 feet wide (maximum 118 feet), bottom width, where it crosses
the wetlands, requiring the loss of approximately 2.64 acres of bottomland
hardwood wetlands. The embankment includes a 3 feet wide extension for a
proposed Wake County greenways trail which will connect to other proposed
trails on the upland. The embankment will also include four culverts: one 24-
inch, two 30-inch, and one 66-inch. Approximately 95 cubic yards of clean
earth fill will be placed below ordinary high water to relocate a tributary to
Crabtree Creek, and stone riprap would be placed within Crabtree Creek to
facilitate a bridge crossing.
To compensate for the proposed wetlands loss, the applicant proposes to
restore and create a total of approximately 6.47 acres of bottomland hardwood
wetlands. The applicant proposes to grade, and plant with wetlands tree
A species, 4 upland pine and mixed pine/hardwood areas contiguous with Crabtree
Creek's adjacent-wetlands and floodplain. Mitigation grading would involve
excavation of the sites from three to four feet in depth, and replacement of 6
to 12 inches of topsoil/humus to elevations approximately equal to the
existing natural bottomlands. The compensation sites would be monitored for
viability for a minimum period of three years following planting, and in cases
of unacceptable findings, the permittees would consult with the Corps of
Engineers to determine appropriate recourse options. 4.78 acres of additional
-2-
upland areas along the southeastern shore of Lake Crabtree would also be
excavated, to the elevation of the emergent wetlands on the lake, for
additional flood storage mitigation. These areas are expected to propagate
additional emergent marsh vegetation. The purpose of the work is to provide
for the construction of a new north-south corridor to satisfy heavy traffic
demand in the area, and provide access to a rapidly growing area.
II. Alternatives [40 CFR 230.10]:
(1) Improving Existing Roadways: This alternative would involve widening
NC 54 and North Harrison Avenue to multi-lane roadways to handle projected
traffic growth. The projected increased usage of North Harrison Avenue would
cause breakdown condition at its interchange with I-40. This alternative
would not provide additional access to the large new developments already
underway along Weston Parkway, Evans Road, and the future Cary Parkway.
Capacity analysis of this alternative reveals unacceptable Level of Service
ratings by the design year (2010). The Greater Raleigh Urban Thoroughfare
Plan, a transportation plan showing the comprehensively planned development of
the area, shows Evans Road replacing NC 54 as a primary thoroughfare, which
this alternative would circumvent. Future widening of NC 54 is probably not
feasible (cost effective). Cost analysis shows an approximately doubled cost
($4,000,000 more) for widening NC 54 as compared to the proposed project.
Based on the above information, it has been determined that this alternative
is not a reasonably available alternative which would accomplish the project
purpose and satisfy the project needs.
(2) Other Alignments: This alternative would involve putting the
proposed roadway on a different alignment to cross Crabtree Creek. Based on
the available information, the proposed alignment crosses the Crabtree Creek
floodplain at a point where the impacted wetlands are the minimum possible.
Also, the proposed alignment allows a connection with the existing Evans Road,
which provides for improved traffic flow and safety. Based on the above, this
alternative would not have less adverse effect on the aquatic ecosystem.
(3) No action: This alternative would likely result in severely
congested or breakdown conditions on North Harrison Avenue and NC 54, based on
projected traffic growth . These roadways are primary thoroughfares for the
area. It is expected that extreme congestion during peak hours would be
commonplace and the duration of peak periods would lengthen with time. This
alternative is not consistent with local, regional, or state transportation
goals. Impacts to the aquatic ecosystem would be eliminated by this
alternative; however, the project purpose and need would not be met.
(4) Narrower roadway: The proposed roadway calls for construction of a
median on the portions that are not within wetlands; it has been deleted form
wetland portions to minimize the impacts to the aquatic ecosystem. The
-3-
proposed pavement lane width through wetlands has been reduced from 12 to 11
feet, and the fill embankments have been modified to the steepest practical
slope (2:1) through wetlands. The proposal is expected to be a major
thoroughfare; therefore, eliminating lanes to reduce the roadway width would
not accomplish the project purpose.
(5) Elevated (non-fill) greenway trail: This alternative would require
that the structures be designed to avoid uplifting or floating during extended
periods of inundation, per Wake County requirements. It would also require at
least a temporary disturbance of the wetlands that are in the vicinity of the
trail construction area. Due to the additional cost and special construction
requirements associated with this alternative, it has been determined that it
is not a practicable alternative.
III. Technical Evaluation Factors Considered:
A. Physical/chemical characteristics and anticipated changes:
Substrate: 2.64 acres of waters of the U.S., including wetlands,
would be filled for the proposed project. The impact includes relocation of a
tributary to Crabtree Creek, and placement of stone riprap within Crabtree
Creek to stabilize the bank for bridge construction. The substrate in the
wetlands and tributary would be permanently adversely modified; however, it is
expected that the relocated tributary would eventually "naturalize" to some
extent to replace the lost creek bottom.
Currents, circulation or drainage patterns: Drainage patterns within
the floodplain, and the Crabtree Creek tributary will be permanently altered
by the project. The roadway would have four culverts which are expected to
maintain flows and drainage through the fill. It is not expected that the
work on Crabtree Creek will substantially change its drainage characteristics.
Suspended particulates; turbidity: Construction of the proposal will
result in increased turbidities adjacent to and downstream of the work areas.
This degradation of water quality should only be minor and of short duration
provided appropriate sedimentation control measures are implemented. Although
the additional hard surface development may increase turbidity in the area, no
substantial long-term turbidity impacts are expected.
Water quality (temperature, salinity patterns and other
parameters): Although run-off from the proposed roadway would enter the
waterways directly and indirectly, the proposal is not expected to
substantially modify water temperature or chemical make-up of waters effected
by the construction. A Water Quality Certification has been issued for this
project.
-4-
Flood control functions: The proposed project encroaches 1,500 feet
perpendicularly across the Crabtree Creek 100-year floodplain. Hydraulic
analysis shows that the proposed bridge and roadway will increase the upstream
100-year flood a maximum of 0.8 to 1.0 foot. The roadway cross-section width
and elevation has been reduced to the maximum extent possible, and the
unavoidable 18.2 acre-feet of fill within the floodplain will be mitigated by
the excavation of approximately 30.11 acre-feet within the floodplain for
flood storage.
Storm, wave and erosion buffers: No appreciable effect on these
factors is anticipated.
Erosion and accretion patterns: The proposal calls for riprap
erosion protection at the bridge embankments on Crabtree Creek. Some short-
term adverse impacts would be anticipated during the construction phase of the
project. Sedimentation and erosion control measures are proposed and should
be maintained throughout the life of the project, in accordance with state and
local regulations.
Aquifer recharge: No anticipated effect.
Baseflow: No anticipated effect.
Additionally, for projects involving the discharge of dredged
material into open water:
Mixing zone, in light of the depth of water at the disposal site;
current velocity, direction and variability at the disposal site; degree of
turbulence; water column stratification; discharge vessel speed and direction;
rate of discharge; dredged material characteristics; number of discharges per
unit of time; and any other relevant factors affecting rates and patterns of
mixing: Not applicable. Discharges involve stable material such as riprap or
will be done after dewatering of disposal site.
B. Biological characteristics and anticipated changes.
Special aquatic sites (wetlands, mudflats, coral reefs, pool and
riffle areas, vegetated shallows, sanctuaries and refuges, as defined in 40
CFR 230.40-45): The wetlands to be impacted by the pit expansion consist of
three different plant communities: branch bottomlands that have been cleared,
cultivated and allowed to revert to forest several times in the last century,
and maintained sewer and gas right-of-ways. The branch bottomlands
overstories are vegetated primarily by river birch ( etu nigra), sycamore
(Platanus occidentalis), yellow poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), sweetgum
(Liq-uidambar sttyraciflua), and red maple (Acer rubrum). The utility right-of-

-5-
e. Elevated (non-fill) greenway trail: This alternative would require
that the structures be designed to avoid uplifting or floating during extended
periods of inundation, per Wake County requirements. It would also require at
least a temporary disturbance of the wetlands that are in the vicinity of the
trail construction area. Due to the additional cost and special construction
requirements associated with this alternative, it has been determined that it
is not a practicable alternative.
Summary: I have reviewed the application and plans furnished by the applicant
and the environmental assessment. I am aware that the project would involve
the loss by filling of approximately 2.64 acres of bottomland hardwood
wetlands for construction of a for construction of approximately 1,500 feet of
a four-lane public highway. To compensate for the proposed wetlands loss, the
applicant proposes to restore and create a total of approximately 6.47 acres
of bottomland hardwood wetlands. I do not consider these impacts significant
due to their nature, and the replacement of lost functions by the compensatory
mitigation.
The proposed project has had extensive review through our normal public
notice process. Agency comments received on the proposal include the
following:
a. A Coordinated State Viewpoint was received for the project on
May 1, 1991. The State Natural Heritage Program recommended denial, based on
a lack of justification for the project need, and the project impacts to the
natural environment. The Wildlife Resources Commission recommended denial,
based on non-wetlands dependency, lack of alternatives investigation, non-
selection of the least environmentally damaging alternative, and lack of
suitable mitigation. The State Department of Community Assistance also
commented on the lack of justification for the project need. On September 12,
1991, the State confirmed that its recommendations had not changed. By letter
dated July 13, 1992, the Wildlife Commission submitted the final Coordinated
State Viewpoint, recommending denial based on non-selection of the least
damaging alternative, non-wetlands dependency, and failure to avoid and
minimize environmental impacts to the extent possible. The Wildlife
Commission also made several recommendations concerning the proposed
` compensatory mitigation plan and its monitoring.
i
b. A State Water Quality Certification, No. 2743, was issued for the
proposed work by the N.C. Division of Environmental Management on June 17,
1992.
C. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, by letter dated July 2, 1992,
concurred that the proposed mitigation will adequately compensate for fish and
wildlife values that will be lost due to project construction, and
recommended a condition that the proposed mitigation commence prior to, or at
least concurrent with, project construction.
-6-
d. The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency by telephone conversation of
July 1, 1992, stated that they have no objection to issuance of a permit for
the proposed work.
e. The National Marine Fisheries Service has reviewed this application
and submitted no comments.
I have reviewed the application and plans and the public interest record,
and I find that the proposed work is not controversial and will not have a
significant effect on the quality of the human environment.
An evaluation of the EPA's 404(b)(1) guidelines, 40 CFR Part 230, has been
performed. I have determined that the proposed discharge of fill material
complies with the guidelines with the inclusion of appropriate special
conditions.
I find that this application is not a major Federal action significantly
affecting the human environment; and hence, the preparation of a detailed
statement under Section 102(2)(c) of the National Environment Policy Act of
1969 is not required.
I have given full consideration to this application. After weighing
favorable and unfavorable aspects, I find that the issuance of a permit to the
North Carolina Department of Transportation, Division of Highways; North Hills
Properties, Inc.; and Silverton, Inc.; will not be contrary to the general
public interest provided that it adheres to the conditions incorporated in the
permit.
lter S. Tulloch
Colonel, Corps of Engineers
District Engineer

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
Action ID. 199100143 August 10, 1992
EVALUATION OF SECTION 404(b)(1) GUIDELINES
Applicants: North Carolina Department of Transportation, Division of
Highways, ATTN: L. Jack Ward, P.E., Manager, Planning and Environmental
Branch, P.O. Box 25201, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
North Hills Properties, Inc., ATTN: Julian Ford, P.O. Box 17004, Raleigh,
North Carolina 27619
Silverton, Inc., ATTN: Mr. Frank Robuck, Jr., Post Office Box 17102,
Raleigh, North Carolina 27619
I. Progosed Project: The permittee proposes to place approximately 41,900
cubic yards of clean fill material into wetlands adjacent to Crabtree Creek,
at the upper end of Lake Crabtree, for construction of approximately 1,500
feet of a four-lane public highway. The new highway extends the existing
Evans Road approximately 3,500 feet to the northwest from where it currently
ends at Weston Parkway (S.R. 1653), across Crabtree Creek to Aviation Parkway
(S.R. 1002). The proposed highway embankment will be an average of
approximately 95 feet wide (maximum 118 feet), bottom width, where it crosses
the wetlands, requiring the loss of approximately 2.64 acres of bottomland
hardwood wetlands. The embankment includes a 3 feet wide extension for a
proposed Wake County greenways trail which will connect to other proposed
trails on the upland. The embankment will also include four culverts: one 24-
inch, two 30-inch, and one 66-inch. Approximately 95 cubic yards of clean
earth fill will be placed below ordinary high water to relocate a tributary to
Crabtree Creek, and stone riprap would be placed within Crabtree Creek to
facilitate a bridge crossing.
To compensate for the proposed wetlands loss, the applicant proposes to
restore and create a total of approximately 6.47 acres of bottomland hardwood
wetlands. The applicant proposes to grade, and plant with wetlands tree
A species, 4 upland pine and mixed pine/hardwood areas contiguous with Crabtree
Creek's adjacent wetlands and floodplain. Mitigation grading would involve
excavation of the sites from three to four feet in depth, and replacement of 6
to 12 inches of topsoil/humus to elevations approximately equal to the
existing natural bottomlands. The compensation sites would be monitored for
viability for a minimum period of three years following planting, and in cases
of unacceptable findings, the permittees would consult with the Corps of
Engineers to determine appropriate recourse options. 4.78 acres of additional
-2-
upland areas along the southeastern shore of Lake Crabtree would also be
excavated, to the elevation of the emergent wetlands on the lake, for
additional flood storage mitigation. These areas are expected to propagate
additional emergent marsh vegetation. The purpose of the work is to provide
for the construction of a new north-south corridor to satisfy heavy traffic
demand in the area, and provide access to a rapidly growing area.
II. Alternatives [40 CFR 230.10]:
(1) Imvroving Existing Roadways: This alternative would involve widening
NC 54 and North Harrison Avenue to multi-lane roadways to handle projected
traffic growth. The projected increased usage of North Harrison Avenue would
cause breakdown condition at its interchange with I-40. This alternative
would not provide additional access to the large new developments already
underway along Weston Parkway, Evans Road, and the future Cary Parkway.
Capacity analysis of this alternative reveals unacceptable Level of Service
ratings by the design year (2010). The Greater Raleigh Urban Thoroughfare
Plan, a transportation plan showing the comprehensively planned development of
the area, shows Evans Road replacing NC 54 as a primary thoroughfare, which
this alternative would circumvent. Future widening of NC 54 is probably not
feasible (cost effective). Cost analysis shows an approximately doubled cost
($4,000,000 more) for widening NC 54 as compared to the proposed project.
Based on the above information, it has been determined that this alternative
is not a reasonably available alternative which would accomplish the project
purpose and satisfy the project needs.
(2) Other Alignments: This alternative would involve putting the
proposed roadway on a different alignment to cross Crabtree Creek. Based on
the available information, the proposed alignment crosses the Crabtree Creek
floodplain at a point where the impacted wetlands are the minimum possible.
Also, the proposed alignment allows a connection with the existing Evans Road,
which provides for improved traffic flow and safety. Based on the above, this
alternative would not have less adverse effect on the aquatic ecosystem.
(3) No action: This alternative would likely result in severely
congested or breakdown conditions on North Harrison Avenue and NC 54, based on
projected traffic growth . These roadways are primary thoroughfares for the
area. It is expected that extreme congestion during peak hours would be
commonplace and the duration of peak periods would lengthen with time. This
alternative is not consistent with local, regional, or state transportation
goals. Impacts to the aquatic ecosystem would be eliminated by this
alternative; however, the project purpose and need would not be met.
(4) Narrower roadway: The proposed roadway calls for construction of a
median on the portions that are not within wetlands; it has been deleted form
wetland portions to minimize the impacts to the aquatic ecosystem. The
-3-
proposed pavement lane width through wetlands has been reduced from 12 to 11
feet, and the fill embankments have been modified to the steepest practical
slope (2:1) through wetlands. The proposal is expected to be a major
thoroughfare; therefore, eliminating lanes to reduce the roadway width would
not accomplish the project purpose.
(5) Elevated (non-fill) greenway trail: This alternative would require
that the structures be designed to avoid uplifting or floating during extended
periods of inundation, per Wake County requirements. It would also require at
least a temporary disturbance of the wetlands that are in the vicinity of the
trail construction area. Due to the additional cost and special construction
requirements associated with this alternative, it has been determined that it
is not a practicable alternative.
III. Technical Evaluation Factors Considered:
A. Physical/chemical characteristics and anticipated changes:

Substrate: 2.64 acres of waters of the U.S., including wetlands,
would be filled for the proposed project. The impact includes relocation of a
tributary to Crabtree Creek, and placement of stone riprap within Crabtree
Creek to stabilize the bank for bridge construction. The substrate in the
wetlands and tributary would be permanently adversely modified; however, it is
expected that the relocated tributary would eventually "naturalize" to some
extent to replace the lost creek bottom.
Currents, circulation or drainage patterns: Drainage patterns within
the floodplain, and the Crabtree Creek tributary will be permanently altered
by the project. The roadway would have four culverts which are expected to
maintain flows and drainage through the fill. It is not expected that the
work on Crabtree Creek will substantially change its drainage characteristics.
Suspended particulates; turbidity: Construction of the proposal will
result in increased turbidities adjacent to and downstream of the work areas.
This degradation of water quality should only be minor and of short dtitation
provided appropriate sedimentation control measures are implemented. Although
the additional hard surface development may increase turbidity in the area, no
substantial long-term turbidity impacts are expected.
Water quality (temperature, salinity patterns and other
parameters): Although run-off from the proposed roadway would enter the
waterways directly and indirectly, the proposal is not expected to
substantially modify water temperature or chemical make-up of waters effected
by the construction. A Water Quality Certification has been issued for this
project.
-4-
Flood control functions: The proposed project encroaches 1,500 feet
perpendicularly across the Crabtree Creek 100-year floodplain. Hydraulic
analysis shows that the proposed bridge and roadway will increase the upstream
100-year flood a maximum of 0.8 to 1.0 foot. The roadway cross-section width
and elevation has been reduced to the maximum extent possible, and the
unavoidable 18.2 acre-feet of fill within the floodplain will be mitigated by
the excavation of approximately 30.11 acre-feet within the floodplain for
flood storage.
Storm, wave and erosion buffers: No appreciable effect on these
factors is anticipated.
Erosion and accretion patterns: The proposal calls for riprap
erosion protection at the bridge embankments on Crabtree Creek. Some short-
term adverse impacts would be anticipated during the construction phase of the
project. Sedimentation and erosion control measures are proposed and should
be maintained throughout the life of the. project, in accordance with state and
local regulations.
Aquifer recharge: No anticipated effect.
Baseflow: No anticipated effect.
Additionally, for projects involving the discharge of dredged
material into open water:
Mixing zone, in light of the depth of water at the disposal site;
degree of
current velocity, direction and variability at the disposal site;
turbulence; water column stratification; discharge vessel speed and direction;
rate of discharge; dredged material characteristics; number of discharges per
unit of time; and any other relevant factors affecting rates and patterns of
mixing: Not applicable. Discharges involve stable material such as riprap or
will be done after dewatering of disposal site.
B. Biological characteristics and anticipated changes.
Special aquatic sites (wetlands, mudflats, coral reefs, pool and
riffle areas, vegetated shallows, sanctuaries and refuges, as defined in 40
R CFR 230.40-45): The wetlands to be impacted by the pit expansion consist of
three different plant communities: branch bottomlands that have been cleared,
cultivated and allowed to revert to forest several times in the last century,
and maintained sewer and gas right-of-ways. The branch bottomlands
overstories are vegetated primarily by river birch ( to nigla_), sycamore
( ata u occidenta is), yellow poplar (T.iriodendron rulivifera), sweetgum
(LigUidambar styraci&"ua), and red maple (Acer rubrum)• The utility right-of-
-8-
iii. Other restrictions. Will the discharge contribute
to significant degradation of "waters of the United
States" through adverse impacts to:
1) human health or welfare,
through pollution of XX
municipal water supplies, Yes No
fish, shellfish, wildlife
and special aquatic sites?
2) life stages of aquatic
life and other wildlife?
*
_ XX
Yes No
3) diversity, productivity and
stability of the aquatic XX
life and other wildlife Yes No
or wildlife habitat or loss
of the capacity of wetland to
assimilate nutrients, purify
water or reduce wave energy?
4) recreational, aesthetic and
economic values?
*
Yes No
iv. Actions to minimize potential
adverse impacts (mitigation). XY_ _
Will all appropriate and Yes No
practicable steps (40 CFR
230.70-77) be taken to minimize
the potential adverse impacts of
the discharge on the aquatic
ecosystem?
(b) 404(b)(1) Compliance/Non-compliance Review (40 CFR 230.12):,-
( ) The discharge complies with the guidelines.
(X) The discharge complies with the guidelines, with
*. the inclusion of the appropriate and practicable
conditions listed above (in III.B.2.b.iv) to
minimize pollution or adverse effects to the
affected ecosystem.
( ) The discharge fails to comply with the requirements
of these guidelines because:
4
-9-
( ) There is a practicable alternative to the
proposed discharge that would have less
adverse effect on the aquatic ecosystem and
that alternative does not have other
significant adverse environmental
consequences.
( ) The proposed discharge will result in
significant degradation of the aquatic
ecosystem under 40 CFR 230.10(b) or (c).
( ) The discharge does not include all appropriate
and practicable measures to minimize potential
harm to the aquatic ecosystem, namely...
( ) There is not sufficient information to make a
reasonable judgement as to whether the
proposed discharge will comply with the
guidelines.
alter S. Tulloch
Colonel, Corps of Engineers
District Engineer
i
•A I
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF
March 7, 1997
Regulatory Branch
Action ID No. 199100143
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Vick:
n
l*
o
y
2n
?n
This correspondence is in reference to the monitoring
requirements contained in the subject Department of the Army
Permit, issued to the North Carolina Department of Transportation
(NCDOT) on August 17, 1992, for work at the Evans Road Extension
mitigation sites, associated with the Evans Road (SR 1653)
highway project located adjacent to Crabtree Creek in Wake
County, North Carolina (TIP Nos. U-2403, State Project No.
9.8050364).
A review of NCDOT's revised and approved mitigation plan for
this highway project reveals that your staff was to have:
a. established permanent vegetative sample plots and conduct
inspections of those plots prior to planting, at the completion
of planting (including an "as-built" report), and August-
September of every growing season until vegetative success
criteria has been met.
b. installed monitoring wells to document compliance and to
document the hydrology parameter for this project, previously
established as saturated within 12 inches of the surface, ponded
or flooded for at least 26 consecutive days of the growing
season, for the first year under reasonably average climatic
conditions.
C. monitored the vegetative survival rate at a minimum of
320 stems per acre of living trees for three years without
size/height specifications.
Special Condition (a.) of the subject permit states that
NCDOT's Revised (##3) Mitigation Plan, dated June 2, 1992, will be
implemented in its entirety and that the following conditions
shall also be implemented as part of the mitigation plan:

Printed on IS Recycled Paper
-f,
-2-
(1.) In the event that the hydrologica
(saturated within 12 inches of the surface,
at least 26 consecutive days of the growing
during the first year, well monitoring will
successive years until the success criteria
documented,
1 success criteria
ponded or flooded for
season) is not met
continue in
has been met and
(3.) Construction of the mitigation sites will be initiated
at such time to provide for planting of seedlings the first
suitable planting period (November 15 through March 15) following
commencement of project construction.
Conversations with Mr. Eric Alsmeyer of my regulatory staff
reveals that, although your staff did submit the required
monitoring data for calendar year 1995, as of this date, we have
not received the calendar year 1996 monitoring report for the
work at the Evans Road Extension site. Your staff's failure to
provide the required monitoring report has put NCDOT in
noncompliance with the terms and conditions of the subject
permit.
By copy of this letter, you are hereby directed to provide us
with the 1996 annual monitoring report for the Evans Road
Extension Mitigation Site by March 21, 1997, or I will have no
recourse but to pursue enforcement action against the North
Carolina Department of Transportation for permit noncompliance.
(Please refer to Pages 10 and 11 of the mitigation plan for
specifics regarding the required data.)
Failure to comply with this request may result in referral to
the United States Attorney with a recommendation for appropriate
action, including the potential for an administrative fine.
Thank you for your time and cooperation. If you have any
questions, please call Mr. Alsmeyer at the Raleigh Regulatory
Field Office, telephone [phone], extension 23.
Sincerely,
Mic ael D. Smith, P.W.S.
Chief, North Section
Regulatory Branch
.f
-3-
Copies Furnished:
Dr. Larry Goode, State Highway Administrator
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Mr. John Hefner
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Fish and Wildlife Enhancement
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
Mr. Larry Hardy
National Marine Fisheries Service
Pivers Island
Beaufort, North Carolina 28516
Mr. Thomas Welborn, Chief
Wetlands Regulatory Section-Region IV
Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds Branch
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
345 Courtland Street
Atlanta, Georgia 30365
Regional Director
National Marine Fisheries Services, NOAA
9721 Executive Center Drive, North
Saint Petersburg, Florida 33702-2449
State Property Section
North Carolina Department of
Administration
116 West Jones Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
/Mr. John Dorney
Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health, and
Natural Resources
Wetlands and Aquatic Plants
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
°`STATE o,
. I'd
s t;.? S
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
RECEIVED
MAR 1 q 1997.
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR.
GOVERNOR
Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road
Suite 120
Raleigh, NC
Dear Sir:
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201
March 14, 1997

GARLAND B. GARRETT J R.
SECRETARY
The 1996 Annual Monitoring Report for the Evans Road Sites (TIP Project U-2403) is attached
hereto. The mitigation sites are located in Wake County, adjacent to Evans Road Extension.
Mitigation occurred on-site at eight locations. Sites IA, 4A, 413, and 8 were restored as
bottomland forest. On sites 2, 5, 6, and 7, marsh type wetlands were created.
In order to demonstrate successful mitigation, vegetative monitoring must be conducted for a
minimum of three years, and hydrologic monitoring must be conducted until the site has
achieved wetland hydrology. Hydrologic monitoring of all sites will begin in the spring of 1997.
The results of the 1996 vegetative monitoring are described in the attached report.
If you have any questions, please contact me at [phone] ext. 209.
Sincerely,
? 7 Z? z ---)L La
Thomas E. Devens, P.E.
Wetland Mitigation Coordinator
attachment
cc: Ms. Cyndi Bell
N.C. Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Div. of Water Quality
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, NC 27607
0
Evans Road Mitigation Site
Annual Report for 1996
1. Project Description
This project consists of several sites located along Crabtree Creek and Lake Crabtree.
Approximately 9.1 acres of wetlands were created. The following communities were
established:
Wooded Wetlands/Flood Storage (approximately 5.4 acres)
Fresh Marsh/Flood Storage (approximately 3.7 acres)
II. Project Association
This mitigation project offsets wetland impacts associated with construction of Evans
Road Extension (TIP U-2403, Project No. 9.8050364).
III. Project History
Summer 1993
March 1994
September 1994
March 1995
September 1995
March 1996
September 1996
IV. Success Criteria
Construction - Sites graded to proper elevations.
Tree Planting
Vegetation Monitoring
Trees Re-planted, random tree protectors (test)
Vegetation Monitoring
Trees Re-planted with protectors (1 a,4a,4b)
Vegetation Monitoring
There must be a minimum mean density of 320 trees/acre of approved target species
surviving for at least three years.
Evans Road Mitigation Site
Annual Report for 1996
1. Project Description
This project consists of several sites located along Crabtree Creek and Lake Crabtree.
Approximately 9.1 acres of wetlands were created. The following communities were
established:
Wooded Wetlands/Flood Storage (approximately 5.4 acres)
Fresh Marsh/Flood Storage (approximately 3.7 acres)
II. Project Association
This mitigation project offsets wetland impacts associated with construction of Evans
Road Extension (TIP U-2403, Project No. 9.8050364).
III. Project History
Summer 1993
March 1994
September 1994
March 1995
September 1995
March 1996
September 1996
IV. Success Criteria
Construction - Sites graded to proper elevations.
Tree Planting
Vegetation Monitoring
Trees Re-planted, random tree protectors (test)
Vegetation Monitoring
Trees Re-planted with protectors (1 a,4a,4b)
Vegetation Monitoring
There must be a minimum mean density of 320 trees/acre of approved target species
surviving for at least three years.
V. Results
totals/(avg)
Plot # Trees(p) Trees % Survival Density/acre
la - 1 25 61 244.0% 1659
4a - 1 25 24 96.0% 653
4a - 2 25 23 92.0% 626
4b - 1 25 55 220.0% 1496
8 - 1 25 10 40.0% 272
8 -2 25 13 52.0% 354
(6 plots) 25.0 31.0 124.0% 843
Plot # % Coverage
2/5 - 1 90.0%
2/5 - 2 90.0%
2/5 - 3 95.0%
6/7 - 1 85.0%
totals/(avg) (4 plots) 90.0%
Notes from Report:
• Sites la, 4a, and 4b were replanted and tree protectors were installed on all trees in
March 1996. The report from September 1995 indicated beaver depredation on trees
without tree protectors.
• Plot 1 a - 1 has many river birch naturally colonizing (approximately 50 were
identified within the plot). Green ash is doing well, overcup oak and cherrybark oak
are doing fare. This plot is located in the wettest portion of the site.
• Plot 4a - 1 contains river birch, green ash, overcup oak, cherrybark oak, and willow
oak. Approximately 5 black willow are naturally colonizing in this plot.
• Plot 4a - 2 contains green ash, overcup oak, cherrybark oak, and willow oak. Only
one black willow was identified within this plot.
• Plot 4b - 1 is showing good signs of success. River birch, green ash, overcup oak,
cherrybark oak, willow oak, and water oak exist within the plot. Approximately 15
black willow were naturally colonizing within the plot.
• Plots 2, 5, 6, and 7 are fresh water marsh/flood storage areas which are allowed to
naturally regenerate with fresh-water march species. These sites contain a variety of
species including juncus, cattail, and Sericea lespedeza.
VI. Summary
Of the 9.1 acres on this site, approximately 5.4 acres were planted with trees. There were
10 plots established throughout these sites, encompassing all plant communities. An
average of 94% survival was obtained in areas replanted in spring of 1996. However,
only a 46% survival rate was obtained in areas planted in spring of 1995 (site 8). Sites 2,
5, 6 & 7 have, on average, 90% coverage of freshwater marsh species.
VII. Proposed Remedial Action
A supplemental planting of site 8 took place prior to March 15, 1997. Approximately
200 tree per acre were planted with random spacing,

1 7=

ATIOka SI-I =C
717 C-C
.-- : gyp' „tea
f :.. L J 1 L
=
i ;Sti 1553)
? i
rn V t J
1A MITIGATION SITES

'J
Evans Road Extension
Mitigation Sites
Wake County, TIP U-240
Figure I
I
i
3
I
j
1 V ? ? !
I
m
o o , '?
.
i
r
1 +
- ' T\ 1
I V 1
CO 1 '
cn ' \ I ? ? --J 1 j i
f t
\ W
G
I J ? s
C-i
I rn :LL----- -- i i ,- I
{
olj l1 I i
. (-1
-?1'i ?! \
\ i
f- rl I ` 1
' iI) -i 1 , I
t
1 ;
1 / ?`FIX
t
I ..
? ii ii
r
Vii,
I f
JAMES B. HUNT JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Ms. Cyndi Bell
N.C. Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Div. of Water Quality
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, NC 27607
Dear Ms. Bell:
e wSrATEo
3 ° "+
January 26, 1998
GARLAND B. GARRETi' JP_
S EC REZ'A RY
,-)
The 1997 Annual Monitoring Report for the Evans Road Sites (TIP Project U-2403) is attached
hereto. The mitigation sites are located in Wake County, adjacent to Evans Road Extension.
Mitigation occurred on-site at eight locations. Sites IA (0.91 a), 4A (2.39a), 4B (0.51a), and 8
(2.66 a) were restored as bottomland forest. On sites 2 (2.38a), 5 (1.20a), 6 (0.30a), and 7 (0.90a)
marsh type wetlands were created.
In order to demonstrate successful mitigation, vegetative monitoring must be conducted for a
minimum of three years, and hydrologic monitoring must be conducted until the site has achieved
wetland hydrology.
If you have any questions, please contact me at [phone] ext. 209.
Sincerely,
9a4w4
Thomas E. Devens, P.E.
Wetland Mitigation Coordinator
attachment
cc: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road
Suite 120
Raleigh, NC
6)
Evans Road Mitigation Site
Wake County
TIP # U2403
Project # 9.8050364
Prepared by:
Permits and Mitigation Unit
Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
January 1998
T 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................1
1.1 Project Description ...................................................................................... 1
1.2 Purpose ........................................................................................................1
2.0 HYDROLOGY .......................................................................................................1
2.1 Success Criteria ........................................................................................... l
2.2 Hydrologic Description ...............................................................................1
2.3 Results of Hydrologic Monitoring .............................................................. 2
3.0 VEGETATION ....................................................................................................... 2
3.1 Success Criteria ........................................................................................... 2
3.2 Vegetative Description ................................................................................ 2
3.3 Results of Vegetative Monitoring ............................................................... 3
4.0 CONCLUSIONS .....................................................................................................4
4.1 Hydrology ................................................................................................... 4
4.2 Vegetation ...................................................................................................4
5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................ 4
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project Description
The Evans Road Mitigation Site is located in Wake County, adjacent to Evans Road Extension.
Mitigation occurred on-site at eight locations. Sites IA, 4A, 413, and 8 were restored as
bottomland forest. On sites 2, 5, 6, and 7, marsh type wetlands were created (Figures 1 and 2).
1.2 Purpose
Monitoring of the Evans Road site is required to demonstrate successful mitigation. Monitoring
of wetlands for success criteria falls under two categories: hydrology and vegetation. The
following report describes the results of the hydrologic and vegetative monitoring during 1997 at
the Evans Road Mitigation Site.
2.0 HYDROLOGY
2.1 Success Criteria
In accordance with federal guidelines for wetland mitigation, the success criteria for hydrology
states that the area must be inundated or saturated (within 12" of the surface) by surface or
ground water for at least 12.5% of the growing season. The growing season in Wake County
begins March 26 and ends November 6. The dates marking the start and end of the growing
season were based on information gathered from The National Weather and Climate Center
(http: //www. wcclnres. usda.gov/water/wetlands. htmo. These dates correspond to a 50%
probability that air temperatures will drop to 28° or lower after March 26 and before November
10 thus the growing season is 229 days.
2.2 Hydrologic Description
Eleven monitoring wells, two rain gauges, and one surface water gauge were installed on site
(Figure 3). Data was collected on a daily basis. Rain data and depth to groundwater readings
were recorded by automatic monitoring wells and gauges. All monitoring wells, rain gauges, and
surface water gauges were installed prior to March 26 thus data collection spanned the entire
growing season.
Appendix 1 contains a plot of the water depth for each monitoring well and surface gauge.
Precipitation events are included on each graph as bars.
1
2.3 Results of Hydrologic Monitoring
The total number of days that the groundwater was within twelve inches of the surface was
determined for each well. This number was converted into a percentage of the 224-day growing
season. The results are presented in Table 1.
TABLE 1
Number of Days Achieving Wetland Hydrology (3/26 to 11/10)
.............................................
tt
$.. , .:.:... .................................................................
rMR af:tlie
........ ...................................................................
r?lena:: e#:>::>::>:::
..............

E-1 68.6 Yes
E-2 84.7 Yes
E-3 87.8 Yes
E-4 86.9 Yes
E-5 54.1 Yes
E-6 94.8 Yes
E-7 49.3 Yes
E-8 61.1 Yes
E-9 63.8 Yes
E-10 62.0 Yes
E-11 57.2 Yes
3.0 VEGETATION
3.1 Success Criteria
Success criteria states that there must be a minimum mean density of 320 trees/acre of approved
target species surviving for at least three years.
3.2 Vegetative Description
This site consists of approximately 9.1 acres of wetland creation. The site contains creation of
the following plant communities:
Wooded Wetland/Flood Storage ( approximately 5.4 acres)
Fresh Marsh/Flood Storage (approximately 3.7 acres)
2
The site was planted in March 1994, March 1995, and March 1996. Of the 9.1 acres on the site,
approximately 5.4 involved tree planting. There were ten plots established throughout the site,
encompassing all plant communities.
3.3 Results of Hydrologic Monitoring
The initial number of trees within in each vegetative plot was counted in March 1996. The
number of trees surviving within each plot after the first growing season was counted in
September 1996. The number of trees within each plot after the second growing season was
counted in October 1997. The results of the second growing season are shown in Tables 2 and 3
TABLE 2 - Vegetative Monitoring Results (Trees)
totals/(avg)
Plot # Trees(p) Trees % Survival Density/acre
la - 1 25 51 204.0% 1387
4a - 1 25 21 84.0% 571
4a - 2 25 21 84.0% 571
4b - 1 25 33 132.0% 898
8 - 1 25 14 56.0% 381
8 - 2 25 11 44.0% 299
(6 plots) 25.0 25.2 100.7% 685
TABLE 3- Vegetative Monitoring Results (Grasses)
Plot # % Coverage
2/5 - 1 90.0%
2/5 - 2 90.0%
2/5 - 3 95.0%
6/7 - 1 85.0%
totals/(avg) (4 plots) 90.0%
Notes from Report
• Sites la, 4a, and 4b were replanted and tree protectors installed on all trees in March 1996.
Previous report from September, 1995 indicated beaver depredation on trees not having tree
protectors. Several dead tree seedlings located in tree protectors that were randomly installed
throughout planted areas.
• Plot 1 a - 1 has many river birch naturally invading (approximately 40 were identified within
the plot). Green ash was doing well, overcup oak doing fair. This plot was located in the
wettest portion of the site.
• Plot 4a - 1 has river birch, green ash, overcup oak, and willow oak present within the plot.
Several black willow were identified (approximately 5) naturally invading in this plot.
• Plot 4a - 2 has green ash, overcup oak, and willow oak present. Only one black willow was
identified within this plot.
3
• Plot 4b - 1 is showing good success. River birch, green ash, overcup oak, cherrybark oak,
willow oak, and water oak exist within the plot. Several black willow were naturally
invading (approximately 15 identified within the plot).
• Plots 2, 5 ,6, and 7 are fresh water marsh/flood storage areas which were allowed to naturally
regenerate with fresh-water march species. These sites have a variety of species located on
them including juncus, cattail, and sericea lespedeza.
4.0 CONCLUSIONS
4.1 Hydrology
The groundwater was within twelve inches of the surface for at least 12.5% of the growing
season in all wells.
4.2 Vegetation
The overall average density of trees was 100.7%. This is equivalent to 685 trees/acre in areas
replanted in spring of 1996, greater than the 320 tree/acre minimum success criteria. Sites 2, 5,
6, and 7 have an average coverage of 90% in freshwater marsh species.
5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
• Continue annual monitoring of site hydrology through the growing season (March 26 to
November 10).
• Continue annual vegetative monitoring.
4

fl t 1
y

' (1

oo

. t
......... .
„

=

r
.
,1

ti
t, -- ' 'O:, 11
1 111':'I'1,11111? ?
-?
1 > •
//
>: ? ?
?? .
1 I I ' I' ] c ; l! ' I' I (? I I .t '1' I? S /'. ` ?
UJ

1•.. I li
•! ?, •1
11 111 1
?
\ (,
1
? 1. 11
1•I 1 ?

u>
r.?
1 ) ").
!J
A.
,, 111

ll
,,) III • •_,
1
> ? '1
. l) 1•
I
L'
.
l:•
ll) 1
)'1
I 1
l l ...1
'li I
?. III

r,

P,
cn
o

,
rn
:u
G
G

1
r I
y I C-)

CID

I I i-r?

c7i
co `Ln _ ?I

aA .:"
w --; 0
C-) 0
?
W

I
r

-------------
h01 OSr D
LVAtgc ,?O,I%D c_>,..rE_M S)
i
1
l
r
1
v
S
F
i •
G
?D

rr
0 ?\? i

J
? o
a
z
o
Pet
o.
a' a
o ?.
peeW
0
a
-i
r
PI
peed
omd
r
0
o?
a
b

1 ,
?I

1 I

O ,

I ,

O
i

I iil

O

co

G 1 -- k

C;3 - 1 .) s

LA 7'

'? CEO
?
•
; ? -
?
\
i
? ? , s

1
.---4 I-- -

i '

?Tl
ma'
a
IrD
w
Evans Road

i
u s

4
? L YY

(ui) uoim.diaaJd
N o N o N o v? o
fM cn CV CV r O O
'O
e0
0
w
C
W
L-LL
ZZ-0 L
6
Z VW
Z-0 L
ZZ-6
Z L-6
Z-6
sZ-9
c L-8
C-9 ..
tiZ-L
d
CL
4 6-L y
d
?-L D
bZ-9
4V9
t-9
SZ-S
S 6-S
9-9
SZ-4
9 VV
S-6
9Z-c
3
z
a
0
A=
I
I
I
m
0
c
Cr
N O lA O to N N O 8
(u!) ielempunoiiD o; y;dea 1
(w) uog0Tdi3eJd
u> o ?n o ?n o u? o
fM M (11 CM ? O O
I -
I -
cc
O
? N
N
C
w
1
1 L"?L
1
I
ZZ-O L
J
s

I

ZVW
J

I
Z-0 L

1 ZZ-6
J
i

I

Z L"6
J Z"6 N
I
1
I
£Z"8
t
I
I
£ L-8

?
t aai
I ?

I
I
' bZ-L
?

c Q
w
I b L-?
CO)
I °: I
I I
I ?
j trz-9 0
I
'
I ?o
I
I b L"9
J
I

} SZ-9
i
i S L"S
t
t
1 9-9
i'
SZ-b
J
# S L"b

S-b

71
9Z"S
In O U? O IA N N
(w) ia;empunojE) of tilde(]
(w) uotmdiDsJd
u> O Un O in o v) o
f7 m (V CV O O
I
I
t
t L-LL
t
I
t
ZZ-0 L

ZVM
t

I
Z-0 L
I
ZZ-6
I
t

t

Z L-6

t
t Z-6
t

I
£Z-9
?-
1
t
t
1
I can,
?
i

I
tiZ-L
a
ttu y
? a
M 1 b L-L (I

W 1 ti-L o

I
t
t
4Z-9
I
i
I
b L-9
t
I
b-9
€ 1 SZ-S
F 1
F 1

t I
I
<;;. y-5
I

? 1 SZ-b
1

t 9 L-6
I
i 1 S-b
1

9Z-£
In O In O In N N
(w) jo4empunoi f) o; y;dap
r
a
m
0
d
m
'S
I
I
I
R
m
0
c
(ui) uoi;epdiaaJd
q q q q LP O v? O
M cM N fV O
---- - ----- - -- - - O
1
1
k
1
i ?rrr
k
ZZ-0l

ZVM

Z-O l
t
i
t ZZ-6

t
i i
E Z L-6
t Z-6

E £Z-8
1
1 £ V9
k
t
k W
r
I

1
4Z-L
9
d

L i b-L o
I i
k
t
i
bZ-9
f
1
4 V9
tI
E b"9
E

i SZ-S
t
1
i S 6-S
f
k
S-S
E
I
[
t !;Z-b

E t
t S VV
E
E
S?
t
t
-
9Z
£
In O N O N N
(ui) ja;empunoig o; y;dea
L
a
d
N
!0
I
I
I
m
m
c
(ul) uoim.dlaaJd
?n o u> o u> o in o
M N N .-- C C
i'
I
1
t ? l- l l
t
1
ZZ-0 L
1

ZVM
1
1
t

Z-01
1
ZZ-6
1
1
t
i Z l-6
j Z-6
1

I
£Z-9
1
1
1
£l$
1
1
£$
A
t W
r

I bZ-L ?
2
O a
u? b 6-L y
C ? 1 d
j b-L O
w 1
1
1
I
bZ-9
1
V l-9
I'
b-9
1 SZ-S
1 S l-S
1
i
1 9-9
1
1 -
I'
SZ-b
1

I'
S l-b

1 S-b
7 -
9Z
£
LO O in O U) N N C07
i M
(ul) ia;eMpunoig o; y;dad

L
n
?
N
f0
c
I
I
I
?o
m
'o
q o U?
Cl) M CV
(ul) uoi;epolaaJd
o u?
04 r
I
1
I
I
I
I
7 I
I
I
1
a
I
I
o ?n o
?- O O
ZZ-6
Z L-6
Z-6
£Z-9
£l$
£-8
r
tiZ-L
n.
tiVL H
w
tiZ-9
t
n
w
O
d
m
N
I
I
I
m
m
0
(ui) ia;empunojE) o; y;dea

(ui) uogeydmJd
?n o u? o ?n o ?n o
(h fM (V (V ? ? O O
€ I
1
I

L-LL
I

I
ZZ-0 L

I ?rrr?i Z L"0 L
I
I

I

Z-0 L
I

I
ZZ-6
I
Z L"6
I
I ?
?
I
Z-6
I
I
£Z$
I s
I o.
a?
I £L$ ?
I y
I
I ?

O `?
I ff
c ? E I

W j b L-L H
I
I ;;
I b-L o

I c
I
I
I
bZ"9
I

'f
b L"9
1
I

t
I 9 V9
I
1
1
9-9
1
I' SZ"b

l'. S L"b
l
1!
S"h

9Z-£
In p
O I O O N a to N m 0 LO
M O
(ui) jalempunoj!D of yldaa

.a
Rs
O
cc ao
N
c
w
(ui) uoi;epdmJd
in o in o in o u> o
fM CM N N - O C
- -----------

.z-?

Z1
Z"o1
ZZ-6
Z 1-6
Z-6 OD
>
CZ-9
ell,
L
n
ar
O
£$ W `y
of
r
4Z"L

a cr
41"L N

ar [

tiZ{J m
m
0
c

41-9 'm

SZ-S
S1-9

SZ-6
s"
? i
S 1-h
i
' s 9-b

IA O In O O N N M CC?
(ui) japmpunaD of g4daa

V
cc
O
QL ?
N??
C
W
LQ o
C7 Cl)

ZZ-0

ZL-0L

Z-O L
ZZ-6
Z L-6
Z-6 rn

£Z-8
£ L-8 r
d
d
O
t• d
r
tiZ-L d
Cr

4 L-L
N i

d ?
I
?o
VZ-9 0
c

4 V9

9Z S
" S L-S
S-S
SZ-b
S VV
S-b
- -
-
9Z
c
tD O ?A O N N N 0 0
i
(ui) jalempunojE) of yldea
(w) uoi lidIDOM
v? o u? o N o
CV N 7 O O
lk I. M
V
R
0 o
W
(ui) uogepdiaaJd
N o N o N o
cM C7 CV CV
N o
0 0

ZZ-0 L
-MOW

Z L-0l
z-M
zz-6
U-6
0

Z-6
SZ-8
t
a
d
c V9 o
d
S
£-s

4Z-L 0

L
y l-L y i

m
0
-lot
4Z-9
b V9
b-9
SZ-S
S l-S
S-S
SZ-b
S L-b

5
-
9Z
c
N O N O In O N N
(ui) jejBmpunojE) o; y;daa

O
C
W
(ui) uoi;e:pdiaaJd
? o ? o v? o
cM ri CV 04
? o
0 0

ZZ-O L

U-M
Z-0 L
ZZ-6
ZV6
Z-6
sz-9
C VS
A
W
r
4Z-L 9
m
CL

ti L-L y

bZ-9
t? V9
ti-9
SZ-S
9V9
S-9
SZ-h
Sl b
S-h
-
9Z
c
In o lf? O N N M M
(ui) ia3eMpunoag of y;dad

L
C.
d
0
d
l0
d
c
tY
I
I
I
m
m
0
C
m
Ir
Mr. G. Wayne Wright
October 28, 1991
Page 2
In the interest of time, we are providing the review agencies with a copy of all attached
documentation. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
BURTON, ADAMS, KENT & KING, INC.
Roger D. Lewis, P.E.
Senior Vice President, Special Services
RDL:RGH.ja
Attachments
cc: Mr. Julian Ford; North Hills Properties, Inc.
Mr. Frank Robuck, Jr.; Silverton, Inc.
Dr. Larry R. Goode; Programs, Policy & Budget - NCDOT
Mr. B. J. O'Quinn; NCDOT
Ms. Sandi Nance; NCDOT
Mr. Ken Jolley; US Army Corps of Engineers
Mr. Eric Alsmeyer; US Army Corps of Engineers
Mr. Doug Spell; Town of Cary
Mr. John Parker; NC Department of EHNR
Mr. John Dorney; NC Department of EHNR
Ms. L. K. (Mike) Gantt; US Fish and Wildlife Service
Mr. Lee Pelej; US EPA
Mr. Dennis Stewart; NC Wildlife Resources Commission
\90004.01\Wright.Lt
October 27, 1991
EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
WAKE COUN'T'Y
NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
WETLANDS/FLOOD STORAGE MITIGATION PLAN
COE ACTION ID #199100143
Mitigation Sites
This project has utilized a planning process and mitigation sequencing that takes into
account the February 1990 Memorandum of Agreement between the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of the Army (Army) concerning the
determination of mitigation under the Clean Water Act Section 404 (b)(1) guidelines.
Efforts were made to locate and identify the least environmentally damaging practicable
alternative that met the state project purposes. Preliminary study lines were identified and
wetland involvement determined for each. The alignment which had the least wetland
involvement was chosen in order to avoid, to the maximum extent practicable, potential
impacts.
After determining that wetlands takings could not totally be avoided with this project,
steps were taken to minimise the adverse impacts as much as feasible. Project modifications
included (1) reduction of right of way from 164 feet to 120 feet through the affected
wetlands, (2) reduction of pavement lane widths from 12 feet to 11 feet to accommodate a
reduced cross-section (3) elimination of the roadway median, (4) use of the steepest
embankment slopes practical in this area (2:1), and (5) lowering of the proposed roadway
grade to reduce width of embankment. Compensation for the unavoidable loss of 2.7 acres
of wetlands is proposed through the restoration and creation of wetlands contiguous to this
site.
Based on field examination and subsequent analysis, it appears that sufficient
opportunity exists proximal to the proposed project for on-site rather than off-site wetlands
and flood storage mitigation to occur.
A judicious selection of mitigation sites for this project allows for the balancing of the
flood storage impact and compensation for wetlands losses within the same site. These sites,
as shown on Figures 4a and 4b, (of the State EA/FONSI) were chosen for their potential
to both recover flood storage taken by the roadway embankment (approximately 18.2 acre-
feet) and remain in close proximity to the areas of wetland losses. Table 1 lists the specific
sites in priority with the estimated acres (wetlands) and acre-feet (flood storage) noted.
These sites are listed as proposed mitigation areas. Actual acreages of wetlands impacted
and cubic yards of roadway fill required within the flood storage basin will be determined
in the final design phase. Coordination with the appropriate agencies for a Section 404
permit will be completed prior to agreement on specific sites and mitigation measures for
this project. Approval to use lands within the 100-year floodplain (Wake County property)
to mitigate flood storage and wetlands impacts has been advanced by the Wake County
Board of Commissioners on July 2, 1990 (refer to letter of August 22, 1990 from Wake
County in Appendix C of State EA/FONSI).
As has been noted, wetland acreage in the Crabtree Creek riparian zone is extensive,
a result of the rise in water table associated with Lake Crabtree. However, some areas
within the floodplain do not currently exhibit wetland characteristics due to their elevation
above surrounding terrain. A total loss of approximately 2.7 acres of bottomland hardwood
wetland will need to be mitigated. A combination of restoration and creation sites is
suggested as the most effective approach to mitigate negative impacts on the wetland
resource. Specific sites identified for mitigation potential are shown on Figures 4a and 4b.
Sites 1A and 1B include approximately 2.0 acres immediately adjacent both sides of
Crabtree Creek. Site 1A includes the western levee and disturbed areas in the riparian zone.
The levee appears to be Congoree soil, while farther back from the creek on this side and
slightly upslope, the original soil appears to be Altavista, well drained in the surface horizons
but distinctly mottled at 3.5 to 4.0 feet. This mottling indicates excellent potential for
conversion to wetland after upper layers are removed. Area 1B includes the levees of
Congoree soil on the east bank between the creek channel and slackwater sloughs or
tributary stream channels entering Crabtree Creek. Original forest cover has been removed
in this location on both sides of the creek, from a point upstream of the proposed crossing,
downstream to the lake itself.
Mitigating here (Sites 1A and 1B ) would provide an opportunity to restore
bottomland forest similar to that proposed for clearing to accommodate the project. Grading
3.5 feet or more of the existing surface material would reduce existing banks to match the
surrounding bottomland contour, where saturated conditions generally prevail. After
grading is complete, wetland tree species such as River birch (Betula nigra), Green ash
(Era! nus pennsylvanica), Overcup oak ( uercus data), and Swamp chestnut oak ( uercus
michauxii), will be planted to compensate for forested wetland removed along the new
causeway. The wetland reforestation shall be implemented as noted in the attached Project
Special Provisions for Wetland Reforestation and Grading.
Sites 2 and 7, located approximately 1,400 + feet northeast of the proposed ROW,
includes 3.3 acres along the southeastern shore of Lake Crabtree. The soil currently here,
Wehadkee, is prone to seasonal flooding, with a seasonally high water table approximately
at the surface. Observation in May and June,. hence during the current growing season,
reveals dry conditions and no wetlands species on the terrace just above the lake level.
However, shoreline Juncus and cattail colonies with observed depth to saturation of about
2.5 feet on the terrace suggest that grading to a contour even with the adjacent marginal
wetland area (approx. 2.0 feet) will create a more extensive marsh area between the lake
and the grass covered sewerline ROW farther upslope. Prevailing onshore winds from across
the lake will also tend to drive water against this shore, thus periodically flooding the area.
No tree planting is proposed here because of the expected hydrologic regime. Natural
succession of juncus and carex species is expected on these sites.
Site 4 consists of a minimum of 2.0 acres which is contiguous with Site IA and also
contains the Altavista soil discussed previously in connection with Site 1A. Therefore,
removing surface material to an average depth of 4.0 feet, even with or perhaps below lake
level would expose soil capable of supporting wetland tree species, as in Site 1A. The same
species of oaks and river birch are proposed for planting on Site 4.
TABLE 1
Proposed Wetlands/Flood Storage Mitigation Sites
(Refer to Figures 4a and 4b)
Mitigation Wetlands Flood Storage
Site Acres Acre-feet
1A 1.38 4.83
1B 0.59 2.07
2 2.38 3.57
4 2.00 8.00
5 1.20 3.00
6 0.30 0.75
7 0.90 1.35
TOTAL 8.75 23.57
Sites 5 and 6 are wooded upland areas, between the sewerline easement and the lake,
adjacent to sites 2 and 7 respectively. These sites could be graded down an average of 2.5
feet to further offset flood storage capacity loss and mitigate wetlands with a similar scheme
as noted for sites 2 and 7.
As noted in Table 1 the total flood storage capacity recovered with sites 1A, 1B, 2,
4, 5, 6, and 7 is estimated at 23.6 acre-feet. Additional recovery may or may not be needed
depending upon final design calculations. Should additional storage be required, Site 4 is
proposed to be enlarged beyond the 2.0 acres as needed to mitigate the remaining flood
storage capacity deficit.
Permit Coordination
In preparing this environmental report, information was solicited from a meeting with
Mr. Ken Jolley (U.S. Army COE) and subsequent telephone discussion with Mr. Wilson
Laney (USFWS). The step-down procedure for permit application requires that, first, this
project qualify on the basis of demonstrated need and, second, that all reasonable attempts
be made to minimize impacts on waters of the United States, including wetland acreages.
Assuming these conditions are met, the project is proposed to be permitted under Section
404 of the Clean Water Act with an appropriate mitigation plan developed to satisfy the
current federal goal of no overall net loss of wetland values and functions.
Monitoring Plan
As part of the mitigation effort for this specific project a monitoring plan to insure
that permit conditions are complied with has been developed by the N.C. Department of
Transportation in coordination with the Corps of Engineers and is attached. In addition,
Project Special Provisions for Wetland Reforestation and Grading to be used on this project
also attached.
\90004.01\Mitig.Pln
REC' D
OCT 2 4 1991
BAKK, INC.
PROJECT 9.8050364 U-2403 Wake Co.
Evans Road (SR 1653) Extension
GUIDELINES FOR WETLAND MONITORING PROGRAM
October 15, 1991
I. Monitoring Timeframe - Mitigation site shall be inspected at the following time.
A. Prior to planting
B. At completion of planting
C. Two (2) years following completion (or after 2nd full
growing season)
II. Data to be Obtained at Specific Inspection Times
A. Prior to planting
1. Check for proper elevation and grade, get the permitting agency's
approval on the elevation.
2. Check for proper plant species and for acceptable plant quality.
Betula nigra - River Birch, 15-18", Seedling, Br.
Fraxinus pennsylvania - Green Ash, 15-18", Seedling Br.
Quercus lyrata - Overcup Oak, 12-15", Seedling, Br.
Quercus michanxii - Swamp Chestnut Oak, 12-15", Seedling Br.
Note: Plant species are contingent on availability at the
time of planting.
3. Check for proper planting methods
4. Check for proper plant spacing (VO O.C.)
B. At completion of planting check for conformity with plans as well as
quality of planting
C. Two (2) years following completion (or after 2nd full growing season)
1. Estimate survival rate (optional - collect data if it can be
determined)
2. Measure height of plants
3. Take Photograph(s)
4. Estimate percent population
a. Plant species
b. Overall (natural succession)
RECD
UU i 1 4 1991
BAKK, INC. .
Page 2 of 2 U-2403
III. Evaluation and Recourse Action
A. Acceptable survival rate of a minimum of 320 stems per acre
B. Two (2) year data evaluation
1. Below acceptable survival rate (recourse options)
a. Replant (supplemental or complete)
b. Minor regrading
c. Reevaluate feasibility
2. Acceptable survival rate - no action
Note: Because the area to be mitigated is not on
DOT right-of-way, agreement with the owner (Wake County) will
be needed for the initial grading and planting, the evaluation
period, and possible replanting.
NA64 'i
i OF 2
9. 80 03 4 PROJECT SPECIAL PROVISIONS
WE::TL« AND REFORESTATION
WAKE COUN7y
RECT
OCT 1 4 1991
WETLAND REFORESTATION:
BAKK, INC.
WETLAND REFORESTATION SHALL B&PLANTEa AS SHOWN ON THE PLANS
OR AS DESIGNATED BY THE ENGINEER.
WETLAND REFORESTATION SHALL MEET A .: L" .1"! ..
REFORESTATION IN THE STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS.
SEASONAL LIMITATIONS: SEEDLINGS SHALL BE PLANTED FROM NOVEMBER 1.5'
THRU MARCH 15.
SEEDLINGS SHALL BE PLANTED AS ;:i!_1!_!'• AS PRACTICAL FOLLOWING PERMANENT
MULCHING-
ROOT ?I; THE ROOTS OF REFORESTATION SEEDL INGS SHALL BE COATED
WITH i"i SLURRY t'. i WATER, AN.•'• EITHER H FINE CLAY ('KAOLIN -) OR A
:mil PE? '?` "''r? O1I=' 1-F_'P•, i'
«, .. i•t is=,_!?
,.
IS
THAT MADE _t i•?. B
.
` ED
USE D
" tS A Br•'?i't Ew ROOT D IP.
THE TYPE, MIXT URE RATIO , METHOD Or AP PLICA TION, AND THE '_1"1L"
OF APPLICATION SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE E NGINE ER FOR A PPROVAL.
WITH , '_E THE APPROVAL OF ,:-!E. ENGINEER _ _
SEEDLINGS MFl'-?i BE COATED BE?=!:ii•?E
THE
DELIVERLY TO THE .
SHALL BE MOISTENEE
OB OR AT THE TIME OF PLANTING, BUT AT NO TIME
'T'Hi_ `:•=EE1:}!_ING BE ALLOWED TO DRY OUT. THE ROOTSHALL THE ROOTS OF
1MMEDIALELY PRIOR TO PLANTING,
METHOD ._ MEASUREMENT WILL BE THE SAME AS TREE REFORESTATION
iN THE STANDARD SPECIFITATIONS.
BASIS OF PAYMENT WILL B THE SAME AS TREE REFORESTATION IN •! THE
STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS EXCEPT THAT PAYMENT B MADE
UNDER:
WETLAND REFORESTATION . . .. . .. . .. . . . :-tt.: i'i
WETLAND GRADING:
WETLAND GRADING SHALL CONSISTS GRADING AREAS TO RECEIVE
WETLAND REFORESTATION, AS SHOWN ON r THE PLANS OR AS DIRECTED B)
THE ENGINEER, TO AN ELEVATION DETERMINED BY THE ENGINEER. THIS
ELEVATION IS INTENDED TO BE THE SAME AS SURROUNDING WETLAND
AREAS. THIS WILL REQUIRE EXCAVATION APPROXIMATE L.? "t" 3.5-4 FEET 1. OF
.i .. SOIL. THE EXCAVATION WILL BE PAID FOR ; AS 'UNCLASSIFIED
_.
EXCAVATION'. AREA SHALL THEN BE GRADED LEVEL. THE SOIL
SHOULD NOT BE COMPACTED
i m m L_ ...
9.8050354 2 OF 2
SEEDING AND MULCHING, AND EROSION CONTROL_ ITEMS WILL. B
PAID FOR AT THEIR RESPECTIVE CONTRACT UNIT PRICES.
METHOD OF MEASUREMENT ? THE QUANTITY OF 'WETLAND GRADING' TO BE
PAID FOR WILL ICE THE ACTUAL NUMBER O ACRES O LAND, MEASURED
ALONG THE SURFACE O THE GROUND, WHICH HAS BEEN GRADED AND
ACCEPTED IN ACCORDANCE-WITH THESE PROVISIONS.
BASIS OF PAYMENT: THE QUANTITY O 'WETLAND GRADING' MEASURED AS
PROVIDED ABOVE WILL BE PAID 1=i7i"K AT THE CONTRACT UNIT :'RICE PER
ACRr
PAYMENT WILL BE MADE UNDER:
WETLAND GRADING . . . . . . . . . . . _ EY,.
RECD
OCT 2 4 1991
Br KKK NQ
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PAGE i
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE DIVISION OF-HIGHWAYS 9.8050364
COMPLETE ENTIRE PROJECT
L.X.CU2403 -rip Nn FED AID NO, PROJECT COUNTY
U-2403 2403 9.80'_ 0364 Ltd RE'C'D
WETLAND REFORESTATION OCT V 4 1991
EVr•"NS ROAD (SR 1653) EXTENSION FROM WESTON PARKWAY TO
AVIATION PARKWAY ;Sig i002 BAKK, INC.
LINE/DES/SEC 1 E M DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT BID AMOUNT
i 6 200 SUPPLEMENTARY CLEARING 2
GRUBr; I'Nit AC'.i''.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 L SP WETLAND GRADING 4
AC 4
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 Q 225 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION 24,200
C Y
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 i_. P WETLAND c i:::FO ESTATION 4
ACI
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
L.ENG I H ALONG PROs =• .000 MILES TOTAL CONTRACT .... _ . . . . ..

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
IN REPLY REFER TO August 14, 1991
S: August 30, 1991
Regulatory Branch
Action ID. 199100143 @ D
Mr. Roger Lewis, P.E.
Burton, Adams, Kemp & King FRAMS 2 0
P.O. Box 311
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602-0311
Dear Mr. Lewis:
On November 20, 1990 you applied on behalf of North Hills Properties, Inc.
for Department of the Army authorization to discharge fill material into
wetlands adjacent to Crabtree Creek, for construction of an extension of Evans
Road in Cary, Wake County, North Carolina. The application was revised by
letter of July 12, 1991 to include the North Carolina Department of
Transportation, and Silverton, Inc.
In process of reviewing this proposal, we have determined that the
proposed mitigation for loss of bottomland hardwood wetlands does not provide
appropriate and practicable mitigation for all remaining unavoidable adverse
impacts, as my staff has discussed in a previous meeting with you. In order
to assist you in formulating an acceptable proposal for appropriate and
practical mitigation, we are providing the enclosed "Mitigation Guidelines",
which identifies the desirable components of an acceptable bottomland
hardwoods mitigation proposal. We have developed these guidelines with input
from Federal and State resource agencies, as well as the North Carolina
Department of Transportation and other appropriate sources.
We recommend that you revise your mitigation plan in accordance with the
proposed guidelines, to mitigate for the projected unavoidable losses of
waters and/or wetlands, and submit the revised plan for our concurrence.
Should you determine that part(s) cf the guidelines are inappropriate or
impracticable for your proposal, you should provide specific information to
justify that position. As discussed with Ron Hairr of your office, a meeting
to allow all the involved parties to discuss your mitigation proposal is
tentatively scheduled for 2:00 pm, Friday, August 30, in Room 470 of the
Highway Building in Raleigh. Please provide your mitigation submittal to this
office by August 22, 1991, with copies to all objecting Federal and State
review agencies, to allow minimal time for review before the meeting.
Mr. Eric Alsmeyer of my Raleigh Field Office staff, is responsible for
processing your application telephone [phone].
Sincerely,
e Wri ht
Chief, Regulatory Branch
Enclosure
.S
-2-
Copies Furnished (with enclosure):
Mr. John Parker
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Ms. L. K. (Mike) Gantt
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Fish and Wildlife Enhancement
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency - Region IV
Wetlands Section - Water Quality Branch
345 Courtland Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30365
Mr. John Dorney
Water Quality Section
Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Department of Health,
Environment and Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Mr. Dennis Stewart
North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27687
6: 0
0

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY c? w}'43
Wilmington District, Corps of Engine G'
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-189
Action ID 199100143 December 13, 1990
PUBLIC NOTICE
NORTH HILLS PROPERTIES, INC., Post Office Box 17004, Raleigh, North
Carolina 27619, has applied for a Department of the Army (DA) permit TO
AUTHORIZE THE PROPOSED PLACEMENT OF FILL MATERIAL INTO WETLANDS ADJACENT TO
CRABTREE CREEK, FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A FOUR-LANE PUBLIC HIGHWAY AT CARY,- WAKE
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA.
The following description of the work is taken from data provided by the
applicant and from observations made during an onsite visit by representatives
of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Plans submitted with the application
show the placement of approximately 41,900 cubic yards of clean fill material
into wetlands adjacent to Crabtree Creek, at the upper end of Lake Crabtree,
for construction of approximately 1,500 feet of a four-lane public highway.
The new highway would extend the existing Evans Road approximately 3,500 feet
to the northwest from where it currently ends at Weston Parkway (S.R. 1653),
across Crabtree Creek to Aviation Parkway (S.R. 1002). The proposed highway
embankment would be an average of approximately 95 feet wide, bottom width
(maximum 118 feet) where it crosses the wetlands, requiring the loss of
approximately 2.64 acres of bottomland hardwood wetlands..- The embankment
would include a 3 feet wide extension for a proposed Wake County greenways
trail which would connect to other proposed trails on the upland. The
embankment would also include four culverts: one 24-inch, two 30-inch and one
66-inch. Approximately 95 cubic yards of clean earth fill would be placed
below ordinary high water to relocate a tributary to Crabtree Creek, and stone
riprap would be placed within Crabtree Creek to facilitate a bridge crossing.
To compensate for the proposed wetlands loss, the applicant proposes to
restore and create a total of approximately 6.7 to 12.7 acres of wetlands.
The final acreage of compensation area would depend on final design
calculations of flood storage capacity and and the further excavation needed
to mitigate the storage capacity deficit. The applicant proposes to grade,
and plant with wetland plant species, as appropriate, seven areas contiguous
with Crabtree Creek's adjacent wetlands. The compensation sites would be
monitored for viability for a minimum period of 2 years following planting.
Plans for the proposed construction are included with this public notice._
The State of North Carolina will review this public notice to determine
the need for the applicant to obtain any required State authorization. No
DA permit will be issued until the coordinated State viewpoint on the proposal
has been received and reviewed by this agency, nor will a DA permit be issued
until the North Carolina Division of Environmental Management (DEM) has
determined the applicability of a Water Quality Certificate as required by
PL 92-500.
? r
-2-
This application is being considered pursuant to Section 404(b) of the
Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). Any person may request, in writing within
the comment period specified in the notice, that a public hearing be held to
consider this application. Requests for public hearing shall state, with
particularity, the reasons for holding a public hearing.
The District Engineer has consulted the latest published version of the
National Register of Historic Places for the presence or absence of registered
properties, or properties listed as being eligible for inclusion therein, and
this worksite is not registered property or property listed as being-eligible
for inclusion in the Register. Consultation of the National Register
constitutes the extent of cultural resource investigations by the District
Engineer, and he is otherwise unaware of the presence of such resources.
Presently, unknown archeological, scientific, prehistorical, or historical
data may be lost or destroyed by work under the requested permit.
The District Engineer has determined, based on a review of data furnished
by the applicant and onsite observations, that the activity will not affect
species, or their critical habitat, designated as endangered or threatened
pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973.
The decision whether to issue a permit will be based on an evaluation of
the probable impacts, in cumulative impacts, of the proposed activity
and its intended use on the public interest: Evaluation-of the probable
impacts which the proposed activity may have on the public interest requires a
careful weighing of all those factors which become relevant in each particular
case. The benefits which reasonably may be expected to accrue from the
proposal must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable detriments. The
decision whether to authorize a proposal, and if so the conditions under which
it will be allowed to occur, are therefore determined by the outcome of the
general balancing process. That decision should reflect the national concern
for both protection and utilization of important resources. All factors which
may be relevant to the proposal must be considered including the cumulative
effects thereof. Among those are conservation, economics, aesthetics, general
environmental concerns, wetlands, cultural values, fish and wildlife values,
flood hazards, flood plain values, land use, navigation, shore erosion and
accretion, recreation, water supply and conservation, water quality, energy
needs, safety, food and fiber production, mineral needs, considerations-of
property ownership, and, in general, the needs and welfare of the people. For
activities involving the placement of dredged or fill materials in waters of
the United States, a permit will be denied if the discharge that would be
authorized by such permit would not comply with the Environmental Protection
Agencies' 404(b)(1) guidelines. Subject to the preceding senten'lp and any
other applicable guidelines or criteria, a permit will be grantees unless the
District Engineer determines that it would be contrary to the public interest.

-3-
The Corps of Engineers is soliciting comments from the public; Federal,
State, and local agencies and officials; Indian Tribes, and other interested
parties in order to consider and evaluate the impacts of this proposed
activity. Any comments received will be considered by the Corps of Engineers
to determine whether to issue, modify, condition, or deny a permit for this
proposal. To make this decision, comments are used to assess impacts on
endangered species, historic properties, water quality, general environmental
effects, and the other public interest factors listed above. Comments are
used in preparation of an Environmental Assessment and/or Environmental Impact
Statement pursuant to the National Environmental Policy_Act. Comments are
also used to determine the need for a public hearing and to determine the
overall public interest of the proposed activity.
Generally, the decision whether to issue this DA permit will not be made
until the DEM issues, denies, or waives State certification required by
Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. The DEM considers whether or not the
proposed activity will comply with Sections 301, 302, 306, and 307 of the
Clean Water Act. The application and this public notice for the DA permit
serves as application to the DEM for certification.
Additional information regarding the Clean Water Act certification may be
reviewed at the offices of the Environmental Operations Section, North
Carolina Division of Environmental Management, Salisbury Street, Archdale
Building, Raleigh, North Carolina. Copies of such materials will be furnished
to any person requesting copies upon payment of reproduction costs.
The North Carolina Division of Environmental Management plans to take
final action in the issuance of the Clean Water Act certification on or after
January 7, 1991.
All persons desiring to make comments regarding the application for Clean
Water Act certification should do so in writing delivered to the North
Carolina Division of Environmental Management, Post Office Box 27687, Raleigh,
North Carolina 27611-7687, on or before December 31, 1990, Attention:
Mr. William Mills.
Written comments pertinent to the proposed work, as outlined above, will
be received in this office, Attention: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer, until 4:15 p.m.,
January 14, 1991, or telephone [phone].

=,r { A
tai ?i ? `??'?. 4 fn • ^ ?. ?? $
,A ISITE
. x
I. BE
.
` "m r a A -It
LAITY MAP
SOURCE: WAKE COUNTY HIGHWAY :.IA
SCALE
0-5 0
MIN
ITE
Ra aioh u.w' ua?

A
• . n l 10 Mfr O s T O :. .
SITE MAP
SOURCE:. N.C. HIGHWAY, MAP
SCALE y.•
Ap 40 go I'I
EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
WAKE Comm, NORTH CAROLINA
AA. proposed project is a joint venture
een the North Carolina Department of NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
sportation and two private developers,
h Mills Properties, Inc. and Silverton, Inc Sheet 1 of 7 NOV, 1990

Y DENOTES WETLANDS
.. pA?AY
AvlwT1OK 1002)
END PROJECT tsa nryi0v? ?y
v ?vz?
TO ?
A m
r C EW-1
*0 a
x. w y
d 3 z
WAKE COUNTY GREENWAYS TRAIL
?A E-4
O E
w " .-
_ k
4
11A ?CRABTREE
t ? CREEK
? 1 }
LAKE CRABTREE_
\ 3- i?J1 COLONIAL PIPELINE
\ '? --- - NORMAL POOL ELEV. 276.0
k Try sF
?. 3 FFti?q ? ?SSJ ? A
,!sT,Q4jC , 5
I _? Q'
BEGIN PROJECT_ 6 3
LOCATION MAP
W?ESTON PARKWAY :euu
(SR 1795) J'I zao' ,_o z EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
J ' WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
1 1 NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
1 1
J / EVANS ROAD Sheet ? of 7 NOV, 1990
(SR 1653)
J 1

/?'!A T
C?777
I

,x

NE
I,
I? ? K ?? ? (GA5)
? § /$Y ??- ??~ PIPELINE ESM
COLONIAL
if
I XO

p

w

z ?

?H •
a

M

004
Z O
P4

lit
3 '
q
s
t
,i DENOTES FILL IN WETLANDS
SCALE IN FEET
I ? ? \, ? 0 /QD Zm
'c
PLAN VIEW SHEET 1 OF 2
?
\?w EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
Sheet .3 of Z NOV, 1990
? v T
? r

1

EA fob;
a -7
Abill
sy
1?
1z .
1717 a
a
U M
.j
i?
A
S T
A
f ? ?K 1

5Z
N L/
ti
W
1
7
r-. WL- '4
a
--- w
OVA
_ c• a z
U
Oro
K tl `
°? M CRA$ TREE?? ? -`
c'R
Zzic
s s ?. ` WI:T
1 1 X ? LAND LIMIT
O ?
._ .. ? I .I ? Y Le

1
of I a

11 a?
DENOTES FILL IN WETLANDS
E
I, DENOTES FILL BELOW O.H.W.
w a' SCALE IN FEET
zoo
I PLAN VIEW SHEET 2 OF 2
EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
J4 WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
I A ??
I? , Sheet 4 of . _Z_ NOV, 1990
? r 1
IVA T<f I-/NE B tL
o
h
w?
0
a °' 04
O m
zz
H
O? E-4
64
? ?1
Z V
H
H
J
0
M
C4 5
NO FILL BELOW O.H.W.
SCALE AS SHOWN
PROFILE SHEET 1 OF 2
a. ut
WARE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
Sheet S* of 7 NOV, 1990
O 40 Q°ip I O
O
N
N
?
O

4
(Q 0
4

I r
N
I?

?
o O O I g
r•f ,
t 10 1. ? N
N V Y
? b
I N
N
a r m I
k
O
p r!
a I
o I ? 4

' W>Y O

M

I N 'i
a
x
o ? ?

0
Q
01
r
d
h
? W

h
M
N
° .
3
+ 0

a
Q °o °m
o
?
°

0
? 0

r
? N

~ `a9?
o ?

0
N o

. ??
a
?
ti m m - O ? Q
a
a r r a y
e
0
< N
N
Y O
I
2
C1
h
EVANS ROAD EXTENSION

I'

? ?N
O
° o0
O
n
r r r
ul
N
W
d
A
M
a
a?
I t

M zH
I

«I •? ? C-4 1--4

o -.
t _? Q
o spa oa

N 5
t
s9a
r9Q 09,
%a
0
a ?-
t
V
W
oO
Z
W
v
. N O
o ? o
e e
e
r
-
O
N N N h
r r r r v
0
a
ul

N
W
r
V M
rC d W > C
2 ? o

?ATCN 4 ? N N
3
Q
0 0
ro
? I
0.
I ??a
a
1
a ? S
n? N m 3,
to
14
E
M
M
a
A
z
a
E
W
3
DENOTES FILL BELOW O.H.W.
SCALE AS SHOWN
PROFILE SHEET 2 OF 2
EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
NOV, 1990
• Sheet 6 of -7-
S a • s' !
6"VD4- + 1 4 f
LAKE CRABTREE
NORMAL POOL ELEV. 276.0
EXCAVATE TO ELEV. 276.0 NO 77
(SEE TABLE BELOW)
\ x f g
?-- + --± VAR. -? - -VAR.*I 4
. EXISTING MARSH

TYPICAL SECTION A-A
PROPOSED WETLAIID MITIGATION SITES
NO SCALE
Potential Wetlands/Flood Storage Mitigation Sites
Now

Site Acres Acre-feet
1A 1.38 4.83
1B 0.59 2.07
2 2.38 3.57
3 (Rejected) N/A M/A
5 .1.20 3.00
6 0.30 0.75
7 0.90 1.35
4 (as needed) 0 - 6.0 0 - 24.00
Total 12.75 Acres 39.57 acre-feet
SUMMARY OF QUANTITIES FOR PROPOSED ROAD
TOTAL AREA OF FILL IN WETLANDS= 2.64 Ac.
FILL BELOW O.H.W_ = 95 C_Y.
TOTAL FILL IN. WETLANDS = 41,900 C.Y.
PROPERTY OWNERS
North Hills Properties, Inc.
P. 0. Box 17004
Raleigh, North Carolina 27619
Wake County Government
c/o Mr. Richard Y. Stevens
Wake County Manager
P. O. Box 550
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602
.
EN1 Of ? United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
o Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726 ? =02M
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
January 25, 199 ---
8 1991 `] 3
Lieutenant Colonel Thomas C. Suermann
District Engineer 16Y AT E F 'D'? <LI "
Wilmington District 5 ?- f
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
Dear Lt. Colonel Suermann:
This is the report of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) and the
Department of the Interior on the Public Notice for Action ID 199100143,
dated December 13, 1991. The applicant, North Hills Properties, Inc.,
proposes to place fill material in 2.64 acres of forested wetlands to
construct a proposed extension of existing Evans Road near Morrisville, Wake
County, North Carolina. A previous Service report was provided to the N.C.
Department of Transportation, Division of Highways, on April 13, 1990, in
response to a scoping letter for the proposed project. This report is
submitted in accordance with provisions of the Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. 661-667e) and Section 7 of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543). It is to be used in
your determination of 404(b)(1) compliance (40 CFR 230) and your public
interest review (33 CFR 320.4) as they relate to protection of fish and
wildlife resources.
A Service biologist visited the site on January 21, 1991. Palustrine
forested wetlands present are dominated by various species of oaks ( uercus
sp.), river birch (Betula ni ra) and other bottomland hardwood tree species.
Palustrine emergent wetlands are present also in existing gas pipeline and
sewer line rights-of-way which cross the proposed alignment. Vegetation in
these areas is dominated by rushes (Juncus spp.), bulrush (Scirpus sp.),
cattail (Typha sp.) and various species of grasses and sedges. Draft
National Wetland Inventory (NWI) mapping is available for the site and
depicts the wetland area in the vicinity of the proposed crossing as
palustrine, forested, broad-leaved deciduous, seasonally-flooded. Present
in the entire area at the time of the site visit were many pools which
likely serve as breeding habitat for numerous amphibians, including chorus
frogs (Pseudacris sp.) and salamanders (Ambystoma sp.). The site is part of.
what once was a much larger, contiguous bottomland ecosystem adjacent to
Crabtree Creek; however, subsequent to NWI mapping of the site, the area
downstream of the proposed project site was cleared and converted to open
water, now called Lake Crabtree, as part of the U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service flood control project on Crabtree
Creek. Soils underlying the site are predominantly Chewacla hydric soils
with some Wehadkee hydric soils also present.
According to the Public Notice, implementation of the project, as proposed,
will require the fragmentation and filling of 2.64 acres of forested
wetlands. Fill is proposed for construction of a proposed four-lane public
highway which would extend existing Evans Road approximately 3,500 feet to
the northwest from where it current''-•y ends at Weston Parkway (SR 1653)
across the floodplain of Crabtree Creek and through the headwaters of Lake
Crabtree to Aviation Parkway (SR 1002). The proposed highway embankment
would average 95 feet in width with a bottom width of 118 feet across the
wetland portions of the alignment. The embankment includes a 3-foot wide
extension for a proposed make County greenways trail. Drainage structures
proposed in the solid-fill causeway are: one 24-inch, two 30-inch, and one
66-inch culvert. Crabtree Creek ;could be crossed by a bridge and would be
channel _`Zed and _?pra.pped for an approximate 200-foot reach at the -ro sling
point. Construction as proposed would significantly further fragment one of
the last contiguous portions of the extensive palustrine forested wetland
ecosystem which existed in the area prior to .onstruction of Lake Crabtree.
Construction would also increase noise and disturbance to wildlife using the
system and impose a considerable safety hazard to wildlife movement along
the Crabtree Creek riparian corridor.
The applicant proposes to mitigate for lost Netiand resources 'Oy restoration
and creation of approximately 6.7 to 12.7 acres of wetlands adjacent to
existing wetlands and in the riparian zone of Lake Crabtree and Crabtree
Creek. Final acreage proposed for mitigation would depend on final design
calculations of flood storage capacity and the amount of excavation needed
to mitigate the flood storage capacity eliminated by emplacement of fill
within the flood pool of Lake Crabtree. The applicant proposes to grade
seven areas contiguous with existing wetlands and plant wetland species.
Monitoring would be performed for two years follo,,71 g punting. Performance
criteria are not specified in the Public Notice. Mitigation measures for
offsetting the adverse effects of increased noise, disturbance, travel
impedance and increased likelihood of wildlife mortality are not addressed
in the Public Notice.
The Service places considerable value on palustrine forested wetlands.
Resident and migratory wildlife may include white-tailed deer, raccoon, red
and gray fox, passerine birds, raptors, reptiles and amphibians. This site
and its associated habitats are of significant value to wildlife in and
adjacent to Lake Crabtree and wetlands adjacent to Crabstree Creek as sites
for feeding, cover, migration, nesting and juvenile rearing. Forested
wetlands also perform essential water quality functions. They serve in
pollution and sediment removal, act as flood water retention sites, and
contribute useable nutrients to the aquatic food web. This is especially
true in the present case since the site is within the flood pool of a
reservoir expressly designed for flood control purposes. A detailed
description of this habitat type and its value to fish and wildlife is found
in the Service's publication entitled Riparian Ecosystems: Their Ecology
and Status (Brinson, M.M., B.L. Smith, R.C. Plantico and J.S. Barclay.
1981. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FIWS/OBS-81/17. 155 pp.).
Palustrine forested wetland losses are occurring at a high rate on a
national basis. In the two decade period between the early 1950's and
1970's palustrine forested wetlands were reduced nationally by 10.8 percent
(Frayer, W.E., T.J. Monahan, D.C. Bowden and F.A. Graybill. 1983. Status
and Trends of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats in the Conterminous United
States: 1950's to 1970's. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C.
32 pp.). Fully 92 percent of the national losses in palustrine forested
wetlands occurred in the southeastern United States (Hefner, J. and J.
Brown. 1984. Wetland Trends in the Southeastern United States. Wetlands
4:1-11.).
Based on the above-described habitat values and the fact that such areas are
relatively scarce or becoming scarce on a national basis or in the
ecoregion, the Service's Mitigation Policy (Federal Register 46(15):7656-
7663, January 23, 1981) goal for resources of this type calls for no net
loss of in-kind habitat value. After minimizing losses of such habitats,
the unavoidable losses should be replaced with similar habitat values so
that populations of the species associated with the habitats will remain
relatively stable in the area over time. Specific ways to achieve this
include: 1) physical modification of replacement habitat to convert it to
the same type lost; 2) restoration or rehabilitation of previously altered
habitat; 3) increased management of similar replacement habitat so that the
in-kind value of the lost habitat is replaced; or 4) a combination of
measures.
The attached page identifies the Federally-listed endangered (E) species
which may occur in the area of influence of this action. The Federally-
listed endangered red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) may occur
within the impact area of the proposed project. If the proposed project
will be removing pines greater than or equal to 30 years of age in pine or
pine/hardwood habitats, surveys should be conducted for active cavity trees
within a 1/2-mile radius of project boundaries. If red-cockaded woodpeckers
are observed within the project area or active cavity trees found, the
project has the potential to adversely affect the red-cockaded woodpecker,
and you should contact this office for further information.
In consideration of the high value of the project area to fish and wildlife,
we believe the public interest would best be served through impact
avoidance. The Service also believes that the proposed work, if authorized,
would be contrary to the guidance provided in the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency guidelines for Specifications of Disposal Sites for
Dredged or Fill Material (Federal Register 45(249):85344-85357, December 24,
1980), which state that fill shall not be placed in wetlands when
alternatives exist. Several upland alternatives to the proposed project
appear available. Alternative routing via Weston Parkway, NC 54 and
Aviation Parkway, much of it presently four-laned, is already in place.
Further, upland habitats adjacent to the wetlands may be developed through
access from existing Weston Parkway and Aviation Parkway without the need
for the proposed wetland crossing and fill activities. In the unlikely
event that the applicant should be able to document that no practicable
alternative to the proposed project exists, the Service would be willing to
discuss mitigation possibilities; however, based on our site visit, much of
the area proposed for use as mitigation is already comprised of functional
wetlands. In order to effect fish and wildlife resource conservation and to
A.
fulfill the public trust in this matter, the Service recommends that a
Department of the Army permit not be issued.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on this project.
We would be pleased to meet with you, your staff, or the applicants to
discuss our concerns.
Sincerely,
L.K. Mike Gantt
Supervisor
.11, - l

Burton, Adams, Kemp & King, Inc.
April 3, 1992
Mr. G. Wayne Wright D
Chief, Regulatory Branch
Department of the Army
Wilmington District
Corps of Engineers
APR - be
224 Fayetteville Street Mall
Post Office Box 311
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602-0311
P 919856-1777
FAX [phone]
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
RE: Modification of Section 404 Permit Application, COE Action ID # 1991001431
NCDOT Project # U-2403, Evans Road Extension over Crabtree Creek in Cary,
North Carolina.
Dear Mr. Wright:
Thank you for your, letter of November 21, 1991 detailing the Corps concerns with
the revised mitigation plan submitted for the Evans Road Extension project on October 28,
1991.
Please find enclosed a revised (2nd revision) Wetlands/Flood Storage Mitigation Plan
which we feel adequately addresses the concerns you noted. The revisions to the previously
submitted Section 404 Permit Application are based upon our subsequent discussions with
the Corps and a field review of the mitigation sites held on December 11, 1991 with the
appropriate review agencies.
In response to the specific concerns listed in your letter the following information has
been included in the revised mitigation plan (attached) and is briefly explained here:
a. Site 4 as depicted in the environmental assessment (refer to EA, Figure 4b)
was proposed to be used only as necessary for bottomland hardwood wetlands
mitigation should the acreage available in Sites 1A and 1B not be adequate
to fully compensate for the wetland losses associated with the project. Site 4
as originally shown contained approximately 6-?- acres which were believed to
be non-wetland. The revised (1st revision) mitigation plan indicated that 2.0
acres of Site 4 would be required for mitigation. This 2.0 acre site was shown
as being contiguous to Site 1A. Site 4 as shown on Figure 4b of the
Environmental Assessment/FONSI is a wooded area that extends northward
of Site lA and is bounded by a cleared sewer line easement to the west and
Lake Crabtree and its associated marsh type wetlands to the east. Agreement
Page 2
April 3, 1992
Mr. Wright
was reached at the December 11, 1991 field review as to the extent of the
actual wetland areas in Site 4. It has been determined that 2.9-acres of
suitable upland area is available within Site 4 for mitigation purposes. The 2.9
acres are contained in two areas and are identified on the attached Figure 1
as Site 4A and Site 4B.
Sites 5 and 6 are required for flood storage mitigation and are proposed to be
cleared and graded down an average of 2.5 feet. These two sites were offered
as additional wetlands mitigation (marsh) beyond that proposed to offset the
loss of bottomland hardwoods.
b. The field review of Sites 1A and 1B (refer to Figure 4b, EA) determined that
the acreage estimated on the aerial map to be available for mitigation
purposes was larger than the actual, useable mitigation acreage. Site lA was
reduced from 1.38 acres to `0.91 acres. Site 1B was found not to be suitable
due to access limitations and has been removed as a proposed mitigation site.
C. The revised mitigation plan will provide for the placement of 6" of hydric soil
or other suitable topsoil taken from the area (to be disturbed by the project)
within the wetlands creation sites. In addition, fertilizer or lime as determined
necessary will be provided in these sites to enhance the survival of the planted
seedlings.
d. A 3 year monitoring plan for wetland hardwood creation has been accepted
by NCDOT to include a success criteria of a minimum of 320 trees per acre
living for 3 years without a height specification. The monitoring will continue
until the success criteria is met, allowing provisions for replanting, regrading
or other measures determined necessary to correct identified site problems.
e. Species composition will not exceed 20 percent for any one tree species. Six
species will be incorporated into tree plantings based upon seasonal or market
availability. We currently propose to use tree species such as River birch
(Betula nigra), Green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), American Sycamore
(Plantanus occidentalis L.), Overcup oak (Quercus lyrata), Swamp chestnut
oak (Quercus michauxii), and Willow oak (Quercus phellos L.) to provide an
acceptable diversity of plantings.
After reviewing the mitigation sites in the field with COE representatives it was
determined that additional mitigation acreage for the bottomland hardwood losses (which
totaled 2.7 acres) were required beyond the 3.81 acres available at Sites 1A., 4A, and 4B.
Page 3
April 3, 1992
Mr. Wright
The applicants agreed to research and investigate other acceptable mitigation sites within
the immediate project area to offer as additional mitigation. Field investigation of several
nearby potential sites resulted in a new site just southwest of the project along Crabtree
Creek which satisfies the COE requirements. Corps personnel reviewed the site in the field
and found it acceptable provided adequate hydrology was available. Soil borings verified
that an adequate hydrologic regime can be supported on this site with appropriate grading.
Reforestation with selected hardwood species is proposed on the new site as previously
proposed with Sites 1A, 4A and 4B. Additional detail concerning this new site labeled on
Figure 2 as Site 8 is contained within the revised mitigation plan. The new Site 8 totals 2.66
acres and is contained within the 100 year floodplain of Crabtree Creek (owned by Wake
County).
A total of 6.47 acres of created hardwood wetlands is proposed with Sites 1A, 4A, 4B
and 8 as identified. In addition, the mitigation for flood storage which occurs on Sites 2, 5,
6, and 7 will also provide for 4.78 acres of marsh wetlands through natural succession of
nearby juncus and carex species.
As previously noted a revised wetlands hardwood creation monitoring program has
been accepted by NCDOT and is attached.
If we can provide further assistance in expediting the Section 404 Permit please feel
free to contact us.
In the interest of time, we are providing the review agencies with a copy of all
attached documentation. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
B ON, ADAMS, P & KING, INC.
Roger D. ewis, P.E.
Senior Vice President, Special Services
RDL:RGH/jd
Attachments
2
lv?
ld$
Page 4
April 3, 1992
Mr. Wright
cc: Mr. Julian Ford, North Hills Properties, Inc.
Mr. Frank Robuck, Jr., Silverton, Inc.
Dr. Larry R. Goode, Programs, Policy & Budget - NCDOT
Mr. B.J. O'Quinn, NCDOT
Ms. Sandi Nance, NCDOT
Mr. Ken Jolly, US Army Corps of Engineers
Mr. Eric Alsmeyer, US Army Corps of Engineers
Mr. Doug Spell, Town of Cary
Mr, John Parker, NC Department of EHNR
Mr. Jahn x]yorney, NC Department of HNR
Ms. L.K. (Mike) Gantt, US Fish and Wildlife Service
Mr. Lee Pelej, US EPA
Mr. Dennis Stewart, NC Wildlife Resources Commission
Mr. David Proper, Wake County Community Development
\90004.01\ Wright.Lt
Iori rn ?.
vx?? 02?
END PROJECT A (sue lo?'xo?? ,
Q Rp3 xky`S
2
"vx
Y -)? DENOTES WETLANDS
1A MITIGATION SITES
Q? t-t
??s-carp-?re?. r-?-??,?,.?

0 1
rC E-+
ro a H
Y
0 rJ

3 z
O
r 0 Q H YJAKE COUNTY GREENYrAYS TRAIL
a 0 W Ei

u
L (
04 fc
O E- /
4A ..
P-4 Z
x
z 403 / ,.
} i -k
CRaBTREE /
# CREEE
3 1A
LAKE CRA,BTREE
? i COLOnIAL PIPELINE
NORMAL POOL ELEV. 276.0
A
T
? Ty r 3 - k 1y^ L f
7
BEGIN PROJECT
_ fJ MITIGATION SITES .6 \
?j? ?j SCALE
WESTON PARKWAY zco 0
c 00 YCYI
(SR 1795) ---EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLIN;
NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
,l f EVANS ROAD FIGURE 1 NOV , 19
(SR 1653) MARCH 195
i I
Soo
r
o n D '`''ERN
-` 00 Z 4I
N Y
N,
70
0.0 > C- D -4 `\ 4
m z ° 0 ?,•
K nom z
n -'max l
n _m
_ Cl) 10 -------------_ I '
ND? r f /
L0 -t. m p '
L0 000 ??
WF-
N Z m t i \?
A V) J --?
t ,
z 1° l
D
f
I o ?f
t ?
t
i t
I z ?
cri
e ,
? ? v
a ?
I
W
r v
W A 08
e
m 09 _ o
f
w ? -i o `
cn ? t-e ?
v (1)
t
m
-I D f
?,-
lip
,
PROPOSED
EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
t
t <
I '
October 27, 1991
Revised March 16, 1992
EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
WAKE COUNTY
NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
LANDS/FLOOD STORAGE MITIGATION PLAN
(REVISION #2)
COE ACTION ID #199100143
Mitigation Sites
This project has utilized a planning process and mitigation sequencing that takes into
account the February 1990 Memorandum of Agreement between the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of the Army (Army) concerning the
determination of mitigation under the Clean Water Act Section 404 (b)(1) guidelines.
Efforts were made to locate and identify the least environmentally damaging practicable
alternative that met the state project purposes. Preliminary study lines were identified and
wetland involvement determined for each. The alignment which had the least wetland
involvement was chosen in order to avoid, to the maximum extent practicable, potential
impacts.
After determining that wetlands takings could not, totally be avoided with this project,
steps were taken to minimize the adverse impacts as much as feasible. Project modifications
included (1) reduction of right of way from 164 feet to 120 feet through the affected
wetlands, (2) reduction of pavement lane widths from 12 feet to 11 feet to accommodate a
reduced cross-section (3) elimination of the roadway median, (4) use of the steepest
embankment slopes practical in this area (2:1), and (5) lowering of the proposed roadway
grade to reduce width of embankment. Compensation for the unavoidable loss of 21k acres
of wetlands is proposed through the restoration and creation of wetlands contiguous to and
near this site.
Based on field examination and subsequent analysis, it appears that sufficient
opportunity exists proximal to the proposed project for on-site rather than off-site wetlands
and flood storage mitigation to occur.
A judicious selection of mitigation sites for this project allows for the balancing of the
flood storage impact and compensation for hardwood wetlands losses within the same site.
These sites, as shown on Figures 1 and 2 (attached) were chosen for their potential to both
recover flood storage taken by the roadway embankment (approximately 1$.2 acre-feet) and
remain in close proximity to the areas of wetland losses. Table 1 lists the specific sites
designated for hardwood wetlands creation in priority with the estimated acres (wetlands)
and acre-feet (flood storage) noted. Table 2 shows the additional sites of marsh type
wetlands creation. These sites are listed as proposed mitigation areas. Actual acreages of
wetlands impacted and cubic yards of roadway fill required within the flood storage basin
will be determined in the final design phase. Coordination with the appropriate agencies for
a Section 404 permit has been in progress for over one year and mutual agreement on sites
and mitigation measures should be achieved with this plan. Wake County Board of
Commissioners. on July 2, 1990 approved the use of lands within the 100-year floodplain
(Wake County property) to mitigate flood storage and wetlands impacts associated with the
Evans Road Extension project (refer to letter of August 22, 1990 from Wake County in
Appendix C of State EA/FONSI).
As has been noted, wetland acreage in the Crabtree Creek riparian zone is extensive,
partially as a result of the rise in water table associated with Lake Crabtree. However, some
areas within the floodplain do not currently exhibit wetland characteristics due to their
elevation above surrounding terrain. A total loss of approximately 2.7 acres of bottomland
hardwood wetland will need to be mitigated. A combination of restoration and creation sites
is suggested as the most effective approach to mitigate negative impacts on the wetland
resource. Specific sites identified for mitigation potential are shown on Figures 1 and 2.
Site lA includes approximately 0.91 acres immediately adjacent to the north side of
Crabtree Creek. Site 1A includes the levee and disturbed areas in the riparian zone. The
levee appears to be Congoree soil, while farther back from the creek on this side and slightly
upslope, the original soil appears to be Altavista, well drained in the surface horizons but
distinctly mottled at 3.5 to 4.0 feet. This mottling indicates excellent potential for conversion
to wetland after upper layers are removed. Original forest cover has been removed in this
location on both sides of the creek, from a point upstream of the proposed crossing,
downstream to the lake itself.
Mitigating on Site 1A would provide an opportunity to restore bottomland forest
similar to that proposed for clearing to accommodate the project. Grading 3.5 feet or more
of the existing surface material would reduce the existing bank to match the surrounding
bottomland contour, where saturated conditions generally prevail. After grading is
complete, wetland tree species such as River birch (Betula pig a), Green ash (Fraxinus
pennsylvanica), Overcup oak ( ueircus lyrata), and Swamp chestnut oak ( uercus
michauxii), will be planted to compensate for forested wetland removed along the new
causeway. The wetland reforestation shall be implemented as noted in the attached Project
Special Provisions for Wetland Reforestation and Grading.
Site 4A and 4B consists of 2.39 and 0.51 acres respectively just north of Site lA and
also contains the Altavista soil discussed previously in connection with Site 1A. Therefore,
removing surface material to an average depth of 4.0 feet, even with or perhaps below lake
level would expose soil capable of supporting wetland tree species, as in Site 1A. The same
tree species are proposed for planting on Site 4A and 4B.
2
TABLE 1
Proposed Wooded Wetlands/Flood Storage Mitigation Sites
(Refer to Figures 1 and 2)
Mitigation Wetlands Flood Storage
Site Acres Acre-feet
1A 0.91 3.19
4A 2.39 9.56
4B 0.51 2.04
8 2.66 6.65
TOTAL 6.47 21.44
TABLE 2
Additional Flood Storage Mitigation Sites with
Supplemental Marsh Wetlands
Marsh
Mitigation Wetlands Flood Storage
Site - Acres Acre-feet
2 2.38 3.57
5 1.20 3.00
6 0.30 0.75
7 0.90 1.35
TOTAL 4.78 8.67
Site 8 is found approximately 2400 feet south (upstream) of the project corridor
(refer to Figure 2). Site 8 totals 2.66 acres and is contained within the 100 year floodplain,
owned by Wake County. This site was examined on January 24, 1992 by our biologist, Gary
Blank, to determine whether the hydrology and soils present were conducive for wetland
creation and if conducive, the extent of excavation required to insure successful mitigation.
This site is mostly at or below the 100-year flood level (284.9 ft) but exhibits characteristics
markedly different from the surrounding area.
On a portion of the floodplain slightly higher and noticeably drier than immediately
surrounding areas, this site is currently occupied by a mature loblolly pine stand. Adjacent
floodplain areas to the south, north and west are dominated by bottomland hardwoods, with
cane occurring in scattered lower lying places. Tree species occurring in these adjacent
areas include Yellow-Poplar, River Birch, Green Ash, Willow Oak, and Sweetgum. To the
3?
east, the site is bordered by a west facing slope and the mouth of a ravine formed by an
intermittent drainage. In the pine stand itself, dead river birches (8-10 in. DBH) occur in
several places, but most of the areas dominated by pine are now either pure pine or include
scattered poplars and sweetgums.
Eight test holes were dug at locations (Fig. 2) where vegetation indicators suggested
that differing hydrological and soil characteristics might be observed (Table 3). Data
gathered on the site and shown in Table 3 suggest that this site can be converted to a
functioning wetland dominated by bottomland hardwood species, if proper measures are
taken to assure success.
The soils on the site are clearly alluvial in origin--either Chewacla or Congoree--a
result of historical stream migration and associated sediment deposition. While the Wake
County Soil Survey indicates Chewacla soils across much of the Crabtree floodplain,
Congoree also occurs here and, based on field observations (Table 3), appears to be the
more likely soil on this site. Adjacent to the proposed site on the north, however, an
intermittent drain exhibits markedly different soil conditions more indicative of Wehadkee
soil (Holes #1 and #8), with its darker gray color and increased saturation.
Table 3. Data Gathered at Supplemental Mitigation Site #8.
Hole # Location Canopy Composition* Hydrology Soil Color
1 90' SW 1-135 P/SG w/cane Standing water to 3 in 10 YR 4/2
2 66' S Hole 1 P/YP/SG No water 2.0 ft 10 YR 5/3
3 1-137 P/YP No water at 2.0 ft 10 YR 5/6
4 100' W 1-137 YP/GA Saturated at 1.0 ft Oxidation at
1.5 ft
5 75'W Hole 4 RB/YP/WO Saturated at 9" Some gleying
cane 10 ft west Standing water at 15"
6 100'N Hole 5 P w/cane No Saturation 10 YR 6/2
dead RB
7 150' N Hole 6 P/WO cane to N No water Gleying at
dead RB 18"
8 75' N Hole 7 SG/WO w/cane Saturated surface 10 YR 4/2
Standing at 10"
*Species: P-loblolly pine, SG-sweetgum, YP-yellow poplar, GA-greenash, RB-river birch, WO-willow oak.
Holes #1 and #8 indicate the northern limit of the proposed mitigation site (Fig. 2).
Similarly, Hole #4 indicates the western extent of the mitigation area, where the pine stand
has given way to bottomland hardwoods, with soils beginning to exhibit hydric conditions.
4
The southern extent of the mitigation site corresponds to the limit of the pine stand, at
about line stake 1-138 (Fig. 2).
The site is fed by intermittent drains from relatively steep slopes to the east. As
indicated by the hydrology observed in Holes #1, 4, 5, and 8, saturated conditions prevail
in areas adjacent to the proposed mitigation site. The westernmost holes appear to reflect
subsurface influence of Crabtree Creek and drainage from the ravine southeast of the site.
The objective of this mitigation is to create hardwood wetland habitat on site
currently dominated by mature pines, thereby mitigating loss of equivalent habitat in the
proposed Evans Road corridor. Several points bear consideration in proposing site 8 and
the following procedures. First, areas adjacent the pine stand are obviously exhibiting
wetland characteristics, including development of hydric conditions in soils essentially the
same as the soil beneath the pine stand. Second, the mature pines currently on the
proposed site have effectively dried the soil through years of active transpiration. Removing
these mature pine trees will have an immediate impact on the site's hydrology, reducing
transpiration potential and thereby lengthening the hydroperiod following rainfall episodes.
Third, the presence of dead River Birches of significant diameter suggests that at one time
the proposed site was wetter than it is now and that stand composition may have been
correspondingly different. Finally, it should be noted that the observations recorded in Table
3 were made during a time when winter rainfall had been markedly below levels typical of
this region.
In any case, current soil conditions must be altered by grading to reduce depth of
subsoil material, thus the overall contour of the proposed site. Removing 3.0 feet of the
existing material would reduce the site contour to a level below the surrounding bottomland
contour, where saturated conditions generally prevail. In the removal process, surface
humus and topsoil material would be retained for redistribution on the excavated site
following removal of the lower soil layers. Replacement of 0.5 to 1.0 ft of topsoil and humus
material would provide a hospitable medium for tree planting.
After surface replenishment is complete, tree species such as River Birch (Betula
ni a , Green Ash (Fraxinum pennUlvanica), American Sycamore (Elantanus occidentalis
L.), Overcup Oak ( uercus lvrata), Swamp Chestnut Oak ( uercus michauxii), and Willow
Oak ( uercus hellos L.) would be planted. Appropriate planting density and species
composition will be as proposed previously with Site 1A, 4A and 4B.
It is further proposed that to the extent possible, drainage from Weston's future
upland development sites just east of this mitigation area be channeled into this area to
augment naturally occurring drainage. Channeling stormflows in this manner will not only
help irrigate the site but will also allow filtration of runoff from paved surfaces before
stormflows enter the nearby Crabtree Creek and lake system.
Appropriate monitoring of stand growth will be maintained by NCDOT, as indicated
with the attached monitoring plan. Growth rates of bottomland hardwood plantations along
Richland Creek on NCSU's Schenck Forest (part of the Crabtree Creek watershed) indicate
5
that under controlled conditions on a wet site, 1.0 ft. seedlings of the proposed species will
reach average heights of 6.0 ft. three to five years after planting. On slightly drier adjacent
areas of the same site, growth rates have been even better.
Sites 2 and 7, located approximately 1,400 + feet northeast of the proposed ROW,
includes 3.3 acres along the southeastern shore of Lake Crabtree. The soil currently here,
Wehadkee, is prone to seasonal flooding, with a seasonally high water table approximately
at the surface. Observation in May and June, hence during the growing season, reveals dry
conditions and no wetlands species on the terrace just above the lake level. However,
shoreline Juncus and cattail colonies with observed depth to saturation of about 2.5 feet on
the terrace suggest that grading to a contour even with the adjacent marginal wetland area
(approx. 2.0 feet) will create a more extensive marsh area between the lake and the grass
covered sewerline ROW farther upslope. Prevailing onshore winds from across the lake will
also tend to drive water against this shore, thus periodically flooding the area. No tree
planting is proposed here because of the expected hydrologic regime. Natural succession
of juncus and carex species is expected on these sites.
Sites 5 and 6 are wooded upland areas, between the sewerline easement and the lake,
adjacent to sites 2 and 7 respectively. These sites would be graded down an average of 2.5
feet to further offset flood storage capacity loss and to offer supplemental wetlands
mitigation with a similar scheme as noted for sites 2 and 7.
As noted in Table 1 the total flood storage capacity recovered with sites 1A, 4A, 4B,
and 8 is estimated at 21.44 acre-feet. Additional recovery will probably be needed depending
upon final design calculations. Additional storage is proposed with sites 2, 5, 6 and 7
providing 8.67 acre-feet of flood storage as noted in Table 2 for the Crabtree system. The
offering of marsh type wetlands on these sites totals 4.78 acres and is proposed only as
supplemental wetlands mitigation.
Permit Coordination
In preparing this environmental report, information was solicited from a meeting with
Mr. Ken Jolley (U.S. Army COE) and subsequent telephone discussion with Mr. Wilson
Laney (USFWS). The step-down procedure for permit application requires that, first, this
project qualify on the basis of demonstrated need and, second, that all reasonable attempts
be made to minimize impacts on waters of the United States, including wetland acreages.
Assuming these conditions are met, the project is proposed to be permitted under Section
404 of the Clean Water Act with an appropriate mitigation plan developed to satisfy the
current federal goal of no overall net loss of wetland values and functions.
Monitoring Plan
As part of the mitigation effort for this specific project a revised monitoring plan to
insure that permit conditions are complied with has been developed by the N.C. Department
of Transportation in coordination with the Corps of Engineers and is attached. In addition,
Project Special Provisions for Wetland Reforestation and Grading to be used on this project
are also attached.
\90004.01\RevMitig.Pln
Y DENOTES WETLANDS
IA MITIGATION SITES
OK -21' ? YtA?
?vXATX ?pp2?
END PROJECT ?S'l.ipnL ??
?a
1
a cn
? r-a H
O H W
r C=? W
d 3z
0
r O t? r-r YIAKE COUNTY GREENWAYS-TRAIL
W E-4
cf]
t O
C7
O H / -_
w 4A
7 413
x
-? CRABTREE
1A CREEK
LAKE CRABTREE
3 i COLONIAL PIPELINE
- HORRAL POOL ELEV. 27 6 . 0
°po
? d P?
GyT y G` V r1? 3 X j0el, -L4
Fcy??? y ass, 2 r?> sb
s
7
BEGIN PROJECT
MITIGATION SITES 6
`SCALC
WESTON PARKWAY
(SR 1795 ) rll
EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
r ' WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLI2
! ! NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
i ! !
1 r
?r f EVANS ROAD FIGURE 1 NOV, 1!
! (SR 1653) MARCH 15
r !
i

a
o '
z I
Cl)
i

Z
1

-? ; o
0 /o
z
,
r
-<

r ?

. 0
o
to

i -7()
I r

C r-7

m ? (T)
j
A \ w
O
I
w
!
co
.
w

I
w .rf
0A

1 m

m
? #
o?
V)
-.I
= 0
Rrl 0 1-+
' -I o
w
Ul -O 0
> O
A
-i m
F--1
7
m
r
-i D
mz
., o
Z
o"oa
-
--? PROPOSED
EVANS
ROAD EXTENSION
r
I
sou ry
ER
N Rq I
N ? Wq y
C S
l
}
I
1
D
1
.
r
D
r?
1
r
1
t
r
r
i
r
.
`i ?

PROJECT 9.8050364 U-2403 WAIF CO.
EVANS ROAD (SR 1653) EXTENSION
GUIDELINES FOR WETLAND MONITORING PROGRAM
OCTOBER 15, 1991
REVISED MARCH 16, 1992
1. Monitoring Timeframe - Mitigation site shall be inspected at the following time.
A. Prior to planting
B. At completion of planting
C. Three (3) years following completion (or after 3rd full growing season)
II. Data to be Obtained at Specific Inspection Times
A. Prior to planting
1. Check for proper elevation and grade, get the permitting agency's
approval on the elevation.
2. Check for proper plant species and for acceptable plant quality.
Betula nigra - River Birch, 15-18", Seedling Br.
Fraxinus pennsylvania - Green Ash, 15-18", Seedling Br.
Quercus lyrata - Overcup Oak, 12-15", Seedling Br.
Quercus michanxii - Swamp Chestnut Oak, 12-15", Seedling Br.
Plantanus occidentalis L. - American Sycamore, 15-18" Seedling
Br.
Quercus phellos L. - Willow Oak, 12-15", Seedling Br.
Note: Plant species are contingent on availability at the time for
planting.
3. Check for proper planting methods
4. Check for proper plant spacing (8' O.C.)
B. At completion of planting check for conformity with plans as well as quality
of planting.
C. Three (3) years following completion (or after 3rd full growing season).
1. Estimate survival rate (optional - collect data if it can be determined)
2. Measure height of plants
3. Take photograph(s)
4. Estimate percent population
10
a. Plant species
b. Overall (natural succession)
III. Evaluation and Recourse Action
A. Acceptable survival rate of a minimum of 320 stems per acre living for three
years without size/height specification.
B. Three (3) year data evaluation.
1. Below acceptable survival rate (recourse options)
a. Replant (supplemental or complete)
b. Minor regrading
c. Reevaluate feasibility
2. Acceptable survival rate - no action
Note: Because the area to be mitigated is not on DOT right-of-way,
agreement with the owner (Wake County) will be needed for the initial
grading and planting, the evaluation period, and possible replanting.
11
9.8050346 PROJECT SPECIAL PROVISIONS WAKE COUNTY
WETLAND REFORESTATION
WETLAND REFORESTATION
WETLAND REFORESTATION SHALL BE PLANTED AS SHOWN ON THE PLANS
OR AS DETERMINED BY THE ENGINEER.
WETLAND REFORESTATION SHALL MEET ALL REQUIREMENTS FOR
REFORESTATION IN THE STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS.
SEASONAL LIMITATIONS: SEEDLINGS SHALL BE PLANTED FROM NOVEMBER
15 THRU MARCH 15.
SEEDLINGS SHALL BE PLANTED AS SOON AS PRACTICAL FOLLOWING
PERMANENT SEEDING AND MULCHING.
ROOT DIP: THE ROOTS OF REFORESTATION SEEDLINGS SHALL BE COATED
WITH A SLURRY OF WATER, AND EITHER A FINE CLAY ("KAOLIN') OR A
SUPERABSORBENT THAT IS MADE TO BE USED AS A BARE ROOT DIP. THE
TYPE, MIXTURE RATIO, METHOD OF APPLICATION, AND THE TIME OF
APPLICATION SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE ENGINEER FOR APPROVAL.
WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE ENGINEER SEEDLINGS MAY BE COATED
BEFORE DELIVERY TO THE JOB OR AT THE TIME OF PLANTING, BUT AT NO
TIME SHALL THE ROOTS OF THE SEEDLING BE ALLOWED TO DRY OUT. THE
ROOTS SHALL BE MOISTENED IMMEDIATELY PRIOR TO PLANTING.
METHOD OF MEASUREMENT WILL BE THE SAME AS TREE REFORESTATION
IN THE STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS.
BASIS OF PAYMENT WILL BE THE SAME AS TREE REFORESTATION IN THE
STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS EXCEPT THAT PAYMENT WILL BE MADE UNDER:
WETLAND REFORESTATION ..........................ACR
WETLAND GRADING:
WETLAND GRADING SHALL CONSISTS OF GRADING AREAS TO RECEIVE
WETLAND REFORESTATION, AS SHOWN ON THE PLANS OR AS DIRECTED BY
THE ENGINEER, TO AN ELEVATION DETERMINED BY THE ENGINEER. THIS
ELEVATION IS INTENDED TO BE THE SAME AS SURROUNDING WETLAND
AREAS. THIS WILL REQUIRE EXCAVATION OF APPROXIMATELY 3.5-4 FEET
OF SOIL. THE EXCAVATION WILL BE PAID FOR AS 'UNCLASSIFIED
EXCAVATION'. THE AREA SHALL THEN BE GRADED LEVEL. THE SOIL
12
SHOULD NOT BE COMPACTED.
SEEDING AND MULCHING, AND EROSION CONTROL ITEMS WILL BE
PAID FOR AT THEIR RESPECTIVE CONTRACT UNIT PRICES.
METHOD OF MEASUREMENT: THE QUANTITY OF 'WETLAND GRADING' TO
BE PAID FOR WILL BE THE ACTUAL NUMBER OF ACRES OF LAND,
MEASURED ALONG THE SURFACE OF THE GROUND, WHICH HAS BEEN
GRADED AND ACCEPTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THESE PROVISIONS.
BASIS OF PAYMENT: THE QUANTITY OF 'WETLAND GRADING' MEASURED
AS PROVIDED ABOVE WILL BE PAID FOR AT THE CONTRACT UNIT PRICE PER
ACRE.
PAYMENT WILL BE MADE UNDER:
WETLAND GRADING ...............................EA.
13
Y NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT O TRANSPORTATION PIGS i
F'RELTiI.L;l,R'r,. ESTIMATE DIVISION OF -HIGHWAYS 9 .S650364
COMPLETE ENT IRE PROJECT
LX. CU240_,?-? TIP NO. FED AID NO, 0 -.11 E. C C 'U N' T Y

WETLAND REFORESTATION OCF

O
M
K 4 1991
EVANS RO N FRO
AD (SR 1653) EXTENSI WI... SI OI PAR
WAY TO
Alv, rri..I I(_ifi i-' l;,KWFyY .`: R 1 Ci (). BA1CK, 1NC•
LINE/DES/SEC
- ITEM DESCRIPTION
---------------- QUANTITY UNIT BID
---------------------- AMOUNT
---------------
------------ -----------
GRUBBING ACR
------------ --------------------------- ----------------------
-'!cI. ----------------
11 225 UNCLAS.31FIED EXCAVATION 24,20--,-:',
------------ --------------------------- ---------------------- ---------------

------------
--------------------------- A C Imo.
----------------------
--------------
LErjr ' '-I ALONG .-:'; : _- .000 ,.ILEA. T OTAL CONTRACT ....... _ . _

14
ENVIRONMENT &
RLNfINFRASTRUCTURE
RUST Environment & Infrastructure Inc.
5510 Six Forks Road
Raleigh, NC 27609
Tel. [phone] • FAX [phone]
July 23, 1993
Mr. G. Wayne Wright
Chief, Regulatory Branch
Department of the Army
Wilmington District
Corps of Engineers
P. O. Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
Re: Modification of Section 404 Permit
COE Action ID #199100143, NCDOT Project #U-2403,
Evans Road Extension over Crabtree Creek in Cary, NC
Dear Mr. Wright:
Construction of this project began on November 18, 1992 under authority of the
above referenced individual permit. The preparation of the wetlands mitigation sites
associated with the project began in mid-spring 1993 with field surveys of each site.
Calculation of the exact acreage of each site based on the survey data has revealed a
shortfall of acreage available to mitigate wetlands losses as proposed in the "Wetlands/Flood
Storage Mitigation Plan, Revision #3".
The mitigation plan proposed four (4) sites totaling 6.47 acres of bottomland
hardwood wetland mitigation to offset the taking of 2.7 acres of hardwood wetlands filled
for the project. Table 1 indicates the acreage of each wetland mitigation site as proposed
and the actual acreage surveyed. Figures 1 and 2 (attached) illustrate the general location
of these sites.
Mr. G. Wayne Wright
\90004.01\WnghtM
n
Quality through teamwork 0
Mr. G. Wayne Wright
Page 2
TABLE 1
Proposed Wooded Wetlands/Flood Storage Mitigation Sites
(Refer to Figures 1 and 2)
Mitigation Proposed Actual Surveyed Shortfall
Site Wetlands Area (Acres) (Acres)
(Acres)
1A 0.91 0.84 0.07
4A 2.39 1.43 0.96
4B 0.51 0.20 0.31
g 2.66 1.87 0.79
Total 6.47 4.34 2.13
The permittees (North Hills Properties, Inc., Silverton, Inc. and the North Carolina
Department of Transportation) recognizing this 2.13 acres shortfall propose to compensate
for this deficiency by converting the flood storage mitigation sites labeled 2, 5, 6 and 7
(shown on Figure 1) to hardwood mitigation sites. Sites 2, 5, 6 and 7 have previously been
described in the "Wetlands/Flood Storage Mitigation Plan, Revision #3". The conversion
from flood storage to hardwood wetlands mitigation sites will not adversely affect the flood
storage capacity required within the Lake Crabtree impoundment.
Sites 2, 5, b and 7 total 4.08 (Table acres sites, a total of 8.42 acres of hardwood
wetlands mitigation. Together with the original four
mitigation will be prepared and 6.47 acres will be guaranteed survival as originally proposed
in the approved permit and mitigation plan.
Mr. G. Wayne Wright
\90004.01\WriW-W 2
Mr. G. Wayne Wright
Page 3
TABLE 2
Additional Proposed Wooded Wetlands/Flood Storage
Mitigation Sites
(Refer to Figures 1 and 2)
Mitigation Site Proposed Wetlands
(Acres) Actual Surveyed
(Acres)
2 and 5 3.48 3.48
6 and 7 0.60 0.60
Total 4.08 4.08
Sites 2, 5, 6 and 7 are proposed to be graded down to elevation 276.5 feet and the
areas prepared using the same regime as proposed for the original four wetlands mitigation
sites. A minimum of 6" of topsoil, deeper (up to 18") in some areas will be provided on the
sites.
Corps of Engineers representatives as well as North Carolina Department of
Transportation biologists and soil scientists have reviewed the proposed additional sites 2,
5, 6 and 7 in the field and have found the sites to be adequate for hardwood wetlands
mitigation from a soils and hydrology perspective.
Access to the sites 2, 5, 6 and 7 will be via the existing sewerline easement (shown
on Figure 1). This sewerline easement is currently considered wetland (grassed) and access
can be authorized for tem.^•oranl construction access under Nationwide Permit #33. The
temporary construction access requires filling the sewerline easement to support access by
heavy equipment and vehicles. The fill material for this temporary construction road will
be removed in its entirety after construction is completed. The remedial restoration plan
proposes the temporary construction access road be returned to its preconstruction elevation
and all fill material removed to high ground. Natural succession will revegetate the
easement area.
Therefore, in accordance with the general and special conditions of the individual
Section 404 permit for this project, the permittees hereby request a modification of the
permit to reflect the described necessary changes in the mitigation plan and sites to
compensate for the shortfall in acreage discovered during construction of the originally
proposed bottomland hardwood mitigation sites.
Mr. G. Wayne Wright
\90004.01\Wright-M 3
Mr. G. Wayne Wright
Page 4
By copy of this letter, we also request a NC DEHNR, Division of Environmental
Management 401 Water Quality Certification for the permit modification.
If there are any questions concerning this request, please call Mr. Ron Hairr at (919)
676-5130.
Thank you for your consideration of this matter.
Sincerely,
RUST Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
RogerC?s, P.E.
Transportation Department Manager
RDL/RHG/nr
cc: - Mr. Julian Ford, North Hills Properties, Inc.
Mr. Brantley Powell, Jr., Silverton, Inc.
Dr. Larry R. Goode, Programs, Policy & Budget - NCDOT
Mr. B. J. O'Quinn, NCDOT
Ms. Sandy Nance, NCDOT
Mr. Ken Jolly, US Army Corps of Engineers
Mr. Doug Spell, Town of Cary
Mr. John Parker, NC DEHNR
, Doxney, NC` DENHR
Ms. L. K. (Mike) Gantt, US Fish and Wildlife Service
Mr. Dennis Stewart, NC Wildlife Resources Commission
Mr. David Proper, Wake County Community Development
\90004.01\Wright.H3
Mr. G. Wayne Wright
\9OW4.01\WriO1M 4

ENVIRONMENT &
RUTUNFRASTRUCTURE
MEMORANDUM
TO: File/Distribution List
FROM: Ron Hairr, Project Manager
RUST Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
DATE: August 10, 1993

SUBJECT: Modification of Section 404 Permit for NCDOT Project U-2403, Evans Road
Extension, Cary, North Carolina. RUST File 87042.000.
Please find attached a copy of the Corps of Engineers approval of the July 23, 1993 request
for modification of the Section 404 Permit for this project (COE Action ID #199100143).
The permit has been modified to authorize the mitigation plan changes and temporary
access road as described within the request. This change is subject to the condition of
removing the temporary road fill entirely to upland areas and restoring the affected area to
pre-project condition.
Please attach this modification to the permit information in your files.
-RGH:jfa
Distribution List:
Mr. Julian Ford, North Hills Properties, Inc.
Mr. Brantley Powell, Jr., Silverton, Inc.
Dr. Larry R. Goode, Programs, Policy & Budget - NCDOT
Mr. B. J. O'Quinn, NCDOT
Ms. Sandy Nance, NCDOT
Mr. Ken Jolly, US Army Corps of Engineers
Mr. Doug Spell, Town of Cary
Mr. John Parker, NC DEHNR
Mr. John Dorney, NC DEHNR
Ms. L. K. (Mike) Grantt, US Fish and Wildlife Service
Mr. Dennis Stewart, NC Wildlife Resources Commission
Mr. David Proper, Wake County Community Development
Mr. David Wagner, North Hills Properties, Inc.
Mr. Doug Huggett, NCDOT
Mr. Roger Lewis, RUST E & I
Quality through teamwork
0
A
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEE
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
IN REPLY REFER TO August 5, 1993
Regulatory Branch
Action ID. 199100143
North Carolina Department of Transportation
North Hills Properties, Inc.
Silverton, Inc.
c/o Mr. Roger D. Lewis. P.E.
RUST Environment & Infrastructure
5510 Six Forks Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609
Dear Mr. Lewis:
-'? ME=0
- 9
Reference the Department of the Army permit issued on September 2, 1992,
and subsequent modification, for discharges of fill material to facilitate
construction of the Evans Road extension, NCDOT Project No. U-2403, in Cary,
Wake County, North Carolina. Reference also.your letter of July 23, 1993, on
behalf of the permittees, requesting modification of the permit to allow a
change in the size and location of the mitigation sites, and to authorize,
after-the-fact, a temporary construction access road.
Specifically, you propose to change the nature of four previously proposed
flood storage mitigation sites 2,5,6 and 7 on-the southeast side of Lake
Crabtree to provide 4.08 acres of bottomland hardwood mitigation. This change
would be to compensate for a 2.13 acre shortfall in the actual size of the
_originally proposed hardwood mitigation sites, and to ensure survival
requirements on a minimum of 6.47 acres, as originally required by the permit.
The additional hardwood sites would be graded to elevation 276.5 and prepared
and planted as required for the original sites.
The existing temporary construction road on the sewerline easement is
necessary for access to mitigation sites 2,5,6, and 7. All of the fill
material for the road will be removed to high ground after construction is
completed, and preconstruction elevations will be restored.
The permit is hereby modified to authorize the mitigation plan changes and
temporary access road described above, subject to the following additional
condition:

-2-
The temporary road fill will be entirely removed to upland areas
following completion of the construction activity, and the affected areas
restored to pre-project conditions. It is understood that all other
conditions of the original permit remain applicable and that the expiration
date is unchanged.
FOR THE COMMANDER:
James H. Bradley
Chief, Construction-Operations
Division
Copy Furnished
Mr. John Dorney
Water Quality Section
Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 29535
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
I

/.S
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental ftviagement
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Govemor April 23, 1991 George T. Everett, Ph.D.
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary Director
Mr. Roger D. Lewis, P.E., r »s
Senior Vice President, Special Services 4,z
BAKK Engineers
Post Office Box 311
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602-0311 APR 29 1991
Dear Mr. Lewis : %FA-T QUALITY
S. - -f-C),14
Subject: 401 Water Quality Certification.
Proposed Evans Road Extension
NCDOT Project U-2403
-Wake County
Thank you for responding to my letter of January 31, 1991
requesting additional information concerning the subject request.
I have reviewed the material and offer the following comments:
1. Although I will defer to the NCDOT opinion that the road
is necessary to insure adequate traffic flow .I question
the wisdom of constructing.this road in light of the
following statement included in your response.
"Even by adding the multi-lane section of
Evans Road Extension and widening NC54 and
North Harrison Avenue we find only a marginal
improvement in level-o€-service for NC 54
and North Harrison Avenue."
It would appear prudent to investigate alternate methods
of transportation if the roads being constructed will
only marginally improve the level of service.
2. The modified mitigation plan is not acceptable. The
density of trees to be planted and the monitoring plan
are not adequate. It is recommended that a meeting be
scheduled with all of the agencies involved with this
project to discuss what constitutes an acceptable
mitigation proposal.
PoDutkm rrevendkm rays
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]
An Equal opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

Mr. Roger D. Lewis
April 23, 1991
Page Two
The Division is prepared to issue the 401 Water Quality
Certification for this project upon receipt of an acceptable
mitigation proposal. If you have questions please do not hesitate
to contact me at 919/733-5083.
Sincerely,

Ron Ferrell
RF/kls
Lewis2.ltr/D-1
cc: George Everett
Wayne Wright, COE - Wilmington
Eric Alsmeyer, COE - Raleigh
Qp?
peg a^y ::9:::.
J `§ Itdp>??y GI?r?l j°

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources .
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Govemor January 31, 1991 George T. Everett, Ph.D.
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary Director
Mr. Roger Lewis, P.E.
Burton, Adams, Kemp & King, Inc.
P.O. Box 311
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602-0311
Dear Mr. Lewis:
Subject: NCDOT Project U-2403
Evans Road Extension
Wake County
The Division has reviewed the request for a 401 Water Quality
Certification for the subject project. The wetlands to be
impacted by this project are a significant natural resource and
should be protected unless there is no practicable alternative to
the proposed project.
Please submit a detailed alternatives analysis outlining why
the existing roads and interchange cannot be further upgraded to
accommodate the projected traffic demand. Specifically, can the
Harrington Avenue interchange be upgraded to accommodate the
projected increase of 3900 vehicles per day by 2010? Do the
traffic projections take into account the recent and future
improvements to I-40? Also, please include the basis for the
projected traffic demand.
An evaluation of the mitigation plan is not possible at this
time due to insufficient information. It is recommended that
you consult MIST - Mitigation Site Type Classification (EPA -
Region IV Wetland Planning Unit, Atlanta, GA.) when preparing
mitigation proposals. A meeting can be scheduled with all
interested agencies to discuss the mitigation plan if the
alternatives analysis supports the conclusion that no practicable
alternative exists to the proposed project.
PoliuBon Pm-mndon Pays
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]

Mr. Roger Lewis
July 31, 1991
Page Two
It
If you have questions, or if I can be of assistance please
contact me at 919/733-5083.
Sincerely,
Ron Ferrell
RF/kls
Lewis.ltr/D-1
cc: Eric Alsmeyer - COE
Regulatory.Field office
11413 Falls of Neuse Road
Wake Forest,,NC 27587-9408
John Parker - DCM
? y? ¦ 1
ENT OF T
TAn
PRIDE IN _??
A United States Department ?fthe Interior nMUlca?.?
o
-? FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
yqR Raleigh Field Office
cH 3. Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
r..
Lt. Colonel Thomas C. Suermann
District Engineer
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
Dear Lt. Colonel Suermann:
May 15, 1991
Ste.
_j 7,1
MAY 21 1991 ;
u QUALITY
SECTION
This responds to a May 2, 1991 letter from Dr. Wayne Wright requesting the
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (Service) review and comment on
supplemental information pertaining to the Public Notice for Action ID
199100143, dated December 13, 1990. The applicant, North Hills Properties,
Inc., proposes to place fill material in 2.64 acres of forested wetlands
adjacent to Crabtree Creek to construct a four-lane public highway as part
of the extension to Evans Road in Cary, Wake County, North Carolina.
Supplemental information about the project was provided in letters dated
January 23, 1991 and April 10, 1991 from Ronald G. Hairr of BAKK Engineers,
and project concerns were discussed at a coordination meeting in Raleigh on
May 8, 1991. This is the report of the Service and the Department of the
Interior and supplements our previous report dated January 25, 1991. It is
submitted in accordance with provisions of the Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 661-667e), and Section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1533-1545) (Act). It
is to be used in your determination of 404(b)(1) compliance (40 CFR 230) and
your public interest review (33 CFR 320.4) as they relate to the protection
of fish and wildlife resources.
The supplemental information provided cited projected traffic volumes in the
year 2010 for Evans Road, NC 54 and SR 1652 as justification that
alternative routing and improvements to existing roadways would not provide
an adequate level of service. The Service continues to believe the public
interest would best be served by impact avoidance. only minimal gains in
improved traffic flow would be temporarily achieved through construction of
this section of roadway.
We concur with the finding that the proposed project is unlikely to
adversely impact the Federally-listed endangered red-cockaded woodpecker
(Picoides borealis) based on the lack of suitable habitat in the area.
Therefore, the requirements of Section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act
are fulfilled. However, obligations under Section 7 of the Act must be
reconsidered if: (1) new information reveals impacts of this identified
action that may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner not
previously considered; (2) this action is subsequently modified in a manner
which was not considered in this review; or (3) a new species is listed or
critical habitat determined that may be affected by the identified action.
If the Corps determines that no reasonable and practical alternatives exist
and the remaining impacts are thus unavoidable, the Service's remaining
concerns are in regard to the mitigation plan. This plan is described in
the State Environmental Assessment / Finding of No Significant Impact for
the project, dated September 18, 1991, and in the revised mitigation site
%.
monitoring guidelines included as an attachment to the above referenced
letter of April 10, 1991.
The mitigation plan, as currently proposed, involves restoration of 1.97
acres of bottomland hardwood forest and creation of 4.78 acres of freshwater
marsh. Total mitigation acres are based on the need to offset flood storage
capacity losses occurring from project construction. An additional area of
up to 6.0 acres of upland hardwood is proposed to be used only as needed to
mitigate flood storage capacity losses. The Service believes this plan is
not adequate to replace in-kind the lost forested wetland habitat values.
Minimum mitigation acreage should not be limited to that which is necessary
to compensate for flood storage capacity. It should be adequate to assure
replacement of habitat value lost. Recent. research by Dr. Gerald McRain has
shown that, for bottomland hardwood forested wetlands in North Carolina, a
3:1 ratio of replacement habitat to habitat lost is generally adequate for
assuring no net habitat value loss.
More specifically, the proposed 20-foot planting spacing and 30 percent
acceptable survival rate are unacceptable because they will not replace the
habitat value lost. The Service recommends that the spacing be reduced,
thereby increasing planting density, and/or the acceptable level of survival
be increased, so that the expected result will be a mature forest with 520-
foot spacing of the desired species. Reasonably accurate estimates of
survival rate should be a required part of the mitigation plan. Further, we
recommend annual monitoring of the mitigation site for effectiveness be done
annually for the first two years following completion of planting with a
follow-up inspection after the fifth growing season. If replanting is
required, additional monitoring will be necessary. The Service approves of
the four species proposed for planting but would like a list of alternative
species which will be used if the preferred species are not available at the
time of planting. Because the proposed mitigation sites are not on property
owned by the applicant, a written agreement signed by the property owner
(Wake County)-that allows for the initial grading and planting, monitoring,
and possible replanting should be included in the final mitigation plan.
In order to effect fish and wildlife resource conservation and to fulfill
the public trust in this matter, the Service continues to recommend that a
Department of the Army permit not be issued for the proposed project until
the above issues are resolved.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to provide these comments. We would
be pleased to meet with you, your staff, or the applicant to discuss our
concerns.
Sincerely yours,
Go?x
L.K. Mike Gantt
supervisor
KIP),
MEMO V
DATE: 9 ZJ q '
TO: CSC E?erce="m SUBJECT: VANS 'p-MAD
-VL- QWbO SE 3EN l 7n. M ?

] 1S M`( c?L ? t/v to A l n1G Tk_*T-

S t N 0 c "W C L-3 "-L- l.S 5u c' Tttti q d
LA-'far--.1 2e-c."ner &C= ?.N -'- r-c°?"C-67 ?kt F17dP0i,¢e- .

m. North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
--2-W

Burton, Adams, Kemp & King, Inc.
April 10, 1991
Mr. G. Wayne Wright
Chief, Regulatory Branch
Department of the Army
Wilmington District
Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
Post Office Box 311
224 Fayetteville Street Mall
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602-0311
919/856-1777
FAX [phone]
RE: Proposed Evans Road Extension over Crabtree Creek in Cary -
NCDOT Project U-2403; Action ID # 199100143
Dear Mr. Wright:
Thank you for the opportunity to review the responses received on our application
for Department of the Army authorization to discharge fill material into wetlands adjacent
to Crabtree Creek, for construction of an extension of Evans Road in Cary, Wake County,
North Carolina. Your suggestion that we provide additional information to address these
comments was welcomed.
We are pleased to provide the following information for each of the primary
objections and/or comments from the responding agencies. Each comment is stated below
with response.
US Fish and Wildlife Service - Letter of January 25, 1991.
Comment: (page 2, paragraph 3) "Performance criteria are not specified in the Public
Notice."
Response: Performance criteria as noted here relates to the acceptable survival rate
of wetland species planted within the mitigation areas. The original mitigation
proposal did not specify the percentage considered acceptable. North Carolina
Department of Transportation (NCDOT) has reviewed this matter and now proposes
a 30% population planted and natural succession as the acceptable survival rate. The
revised Wetland Monitoring Program for this project is attached to this letter for
submittal to the US Army Corps of Engineers.
Comment: (page 3, paragraph 3) "The Federally - listed endangered red-cockaded
woodpecker (Picoides borealis) may occur within the impact area of the proposed
project. If the proposed project will be removing pines greater than or equal to 30
years of age in pine or pine/hardwood habitats, surveys should be conducted for
active cavity trees within a '/2-mile radius of project boundaries. If red-cockaded
woodpeckers are observed within the project area or active cavity trees found, the
project has the potential to adversely affect the red-cockaded woodpecker,..."
Response: Based upon several field surveys by a qualified biologist no evidence was
found to suggest inhabitation by any wildlife species listed as threatened or
endangered in North Carolina. Specifically, no nesting habitat for the red-cockaded
woodpecker exists in the project area, nor were any red-cockaded woodpeckers
observed during the field surveys.
Comment: (page 3, paragraph 4) "Several upland alternatives to the proposed project
appear available. Alternative routing via Weston Parkway, NC 54 and Aviation
Parkway, much of it presently four-laned, is already in place."
Response: No upland alternatives to the proposed Evans Road corridor have been.
identified and none appear feasible. The thoroughfare planning studies conducted by
NCDOT identified the need for a new highway corridor (Evans Road) as the best
means to serve north-south travel in the area. To omit this short section of Evans
Road between Weston Parkway and Aviation Parkway would defeat the purpose of
the Evans Road corridor, which is to serve nort h-south travel and relieve the
overloaded NC 54 through Morrisville. The Evans Road corridor as planned is a
major element in the approved Greater Raleigh Urban Area Thoroughfare Plan_
eventually providing a multilane facility from downtown Cary out to I-40 and the .
planned Northern Wake Expressway where it would have access via an interchange.
Alternative routing via sections of Weston Parkway, NC 54 and Aviation
Parkway is not an acceptable method of handling the future traffic demands in this
area. Capacity analyses of NC 54, North Harrison Avenue and Evans Road indicates
multi-lane facilities ,will be required for NC 54 and North Harrison Avenue by the
design year (2010) even with the Evans Road corridor in place. Rerouting the traffic
demand to the existing roadways will only worsen these congested highways and
further deteriorate traffic operations.
Comment: (page 3, paragraph 4) "Further, upland habitats adjacent to the wetlands
may be developed through access from existing Weston Parkway and Aviation
Parkway without the need for the proposed wetland crossing and fill activities. "
Response: The purpose of this highway project, which was approved and
programmed by the North Carolina Board of Transportation in their latest
Transportation Improvement Program, is to provide for an integral link in an
approved transportation corridor that was determined to be necessary and in the
public interest to correct an inadequacy of north-south connectors in the rapidly
growing Cary area. This project has never been identified nor intended to provide
access to allow for property development. It will, as noted in the approved
Environmental Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact, allow for improved
traffic access to nearby highways and freeways for a large, developing area, and thus
provide improved traffic operations for the entire area.
Comment: (page 3, paragraph 4) "...based on our site visit, much of the area
proposed for use as mitigation is already comprised of functional wetlands."
Response: The determination of suitable wetland mitigation sites was made by our
biologist during the spring of 1990. Observation in May and June 1990 during the
growing season confirmed dry conditions and no wetland species on these sites.
On September 6, 1990 a pre-application field review with representatives of
the Corps of Engineers confirmed the wetlands delineation for the project and
potential mitigation sites. We maintain that the mitigation sites proposed are not
currently functional wetlands and will provide excellent opportunity to restore and/or
create- habitat to replace that impacted.
US Environmental Protection Agency - Letter of January 14, 1991.
Comment: (page 1, paragraph 3) "It is our understanding that the applicant has
upland alternative for road alignment that could- be easily utilized instead of locating
the work in wetlands."
Response: The concern here is identical to a previous one expressed by the US Fish
and Wildlife Service in their letter of January 25, 1991 and already addressed.
NC Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources, Division of Environmental
Management - Letter of January 31, 1991.
Comment: (page 1, paragraph 2) "Please submit a detailed alternatives analysis
outlining why the existing roads and interchange cannot be further upgraded to
accommodate the projected traffic demand. Specifically, can the Harrington
(Harrison) Avenue interchange be upgraded to accommodate the projected increase
of 3,900 vehicles per day by 2010? Do the traffic projections take into account the
recent and future improvements to I-40? Also, please include the basis for the
projected traffic demand."
Response: The basis for the projected traffic demand is data collected and prepared
by the North Carolina Department of Transportation through their Statewide
Planning and Research Units. Traffic counts are taken on various highways and
entered into computer models along with data on population growth rates, economic
activity, planned highway improvements and historic traffic patterns. Traffic
projections for roadways within this project study area were prepared by taking this
data and forecasting future demands along I-40, Harrison Avenue, NC 54 and other
roads in the vicinity. These traffic numbers are further refined by traffic analysts in
the Research Unit to reflect existing and/or planned improvements or other factors
which may not have been previously taken into account. The traffic projections
approved for use by NCDOT are shown on Figures 2a -and 2b of the approved
EA/FONSI for the project. The traffic projections made for the Evans Road project
do take into account the recent six-lane widening of I-40 and the planned
improvement of I-40 to eight lanes.
The projected increase in traffic for the Harrison Avenue interchange is not
3900 vehicles per day by 2010 as stated in the comment. The correct increase is
projected to be 14,800 vehicles per day. The 3,900 vpd figure was apparently derived
from the difference between the 2010 projections for the road network comparing the
traffic with and without the Evans Road Extension.
Upgrading the existing roads (NC 54 and North Harrison Avenue) and the
interchange to accommodate the projected traffic demand will not by itself adequately
address the future traffic needs in the study area. Capacity analyses were performed
to evaluate the existing road network to see if it could handle the future traffic. The
analyses showed that the existing lanes without. improvements would suffer
breakdown conditions (level-of-service F). Widening NC 54, North- Harrison Avenue
to four and five lane sections respectively, also results. in levels-of-service E and F.
These levels of service for arterial facilities are considered unacceptable for adequate
traffic operations. The capacity analyses work sheets supporting these findings were
previously supplied to the Corps on January 23, 1991 in response to an earlier
request.
Even by adding the multi-lane section of Evans Road Extension and widening
NC 54 and North Harrison Avenue we find only a marginal improvement in level-of-
service for NC 54 and North Harrison Avenue. It is our opinion that six lanes will
ultimately be required on NC 54 and North Harrison. Avenue as well as major
improvements to the North Harrison Avenue interchange with I-40 in order to
achieve the desirable levels-of-service (LOS C or D) for this network.
The basic premise found in this analysis is that the rapid growth of the Cary
area, specifically the north Cary area, over the next 10 to 20 years is demanding
additional infrastructure be supplied to handle this increase in population and
business activity. Simply widening the existing two roads which provide north-south
travel in the north Cary area will not be sufficient to satisfy the traffic demands at
acceptable levels.
Comment: (page 1, paragraph 3) "An evaluation of the mitigation plan is not possible
at this time due to insufficient information."
Response: A summary of the mitigation measures offered is contained within the
approved EA/FONSI document for this project. Additional information concerning
the mitigation measures were provided to the Corps of Engineers in the Section 404
permit application, including a monitoring plan developed by NCDOT. The
mitigation and monitoring plans were reviewed in light of this comment and
additional detail has been prepared and is hereby submitted to the Corps. NCDOT
continues to feel that a two (2) year monitoring program is adequate. Other recent
permits in more sensitive wetland areas have been acquired utilizing the two (2) year
monitoring plan. Additional detail on size, height and plant spacing is provided in the
attached Wetland Monitoring Program. An acceptable survival rate of 30%
population planted and natural succession is proposed. In addition, a planting
schedule and landscape design plans are being prepared by the Roadside
Environmental Unit of NCDOT and will be included within the final design plans.
Please find attached a copy of the revised Wetland Monitoring Program prepared by
NCDOT. If additional information is needed for your review please feel free to contact us
at your convenience.
Sincerely,
Roger D. Lewis, P.E.
Senior Vice President, Special Services
RDL/RGH/tm
Attachment
cc: Mr. Eric- Alsmeyer, Corps of Engineers, Raleigh Field Office
Mr. Julian Ford, North Hills Properties, Inc.
Mr. David Wagner, North Hills Properties, Inc.
Mr. Jack Ward, Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
Dr. Larry Goode, Director of Program, Policy & Budget, NCDOT
Mr. Tom Darden, Member, Board of Transportation
Ms. L.K. Mike Gantt, Supervisor, US Fish & Wildlife Service
Mr. Thomas C. Welborn, Chief, Wetlands Regulatory Unit, USEPA
Mr. Ron Ferrell, Division of Environmental Management, NCDEHNR
STAIZ
•? Qiw ?Y.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P.O. BOX 25201
RALEIGH 27611-5201
JAMES G. MARTIN DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR Feb 19, 1991
THOMAS J. HARRELSON
SECRETARY
MEMORANDUM TO: Ron Hair
WILLIAM G. MARLEY, JR., P.E.
STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR
BAKK Consultants
Raleigh, NC
FROM: V. Charles Bruton
Environmental Unit Head
Planning & Environmental Branch
SUBJECT: Wake County, Project 9.8050364, U-2403,
Proposed Evans Rd Extension, Crabtree Creek,
Guidelines for Wetland Monitoring Program.
In accordance with discussions at the recent meeting held. at
my office on the above project, I am enclosing revised
monitoring guidelines as prepared by the Roadside
Environmental unit.
f:corr\u-2403.1
cc: BJ O'Quinn, P&E
R.Covington, Rdside Env.
R. Elmore, Cnslnt Cord Unit
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
PROJECT 9.8050364 U-2403
GUIDELINES FOR WETLAND MONITORING PROGRAM
I. Monitoring Timeframe - Mitigation site shall be inspected at
the following time.
A. Prior to planting
B. At completion of planting
C. Two (2) years following completion (or after 2nd full
growing season)
II. Data to be obtained at Specific Inspection Times
A. Prior to planting
1. Check for proper elevation and grade, get the
permitting agency's approval on the elevation.
2. Check for proper plant species and for acceptable
plant quality.
Betula Nigra - River Birch, 15-1811, Seedling, Br.
Fraxinus Pennsylvania -.Green Ash, 15-18", Seedling Br.
Quercus Lyrata - Overcup Oak, 12-1511, Seedling, Br.`
Quercus Michanxii - Swamp Chestnut Oak, 12-15",
Seedling Br.
Note: Plant species are contingent on
availability at the time of planting.
3. Check for proper planting methods
4. Check for proper plant spacing (20' O.C.}
B. At completion of planting check for conformity with
plans as well as quality of.planting
C. Two (2) years following completion (or after 2nd full
growing season
1. Estimate survival rate (optional - collect data if
it can be determined)
2. Measure height of plants
3. Take Photograph(s)
4. Estimate percent polulation
a. Plant species
b. Overall (natural succession)

III. Evaluation and Recourse Action
A. Acceptable survival rate (30% population planted and
natural succession)
B. Two (2) year data evaluation
1. Below acceptable survival rate (recourse options)
a. Revegetation (supplemental or complete)
b. Minor regrading
c. Reevaluate feasibility
2. Acceptable survival rate - no action
Note: Because the area to be mitigated is not on
DOT right-of-way, agreement with the owner (Wake
County) will be needed for the initial grading and
planting, the evaluation period, and possible
replanting.
• STA7 o
JAMES G. MARTIN
GOVERNOR
THOMAS J. HARRELSON
SECRETARY
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P.O. BOX 25201
RALEIGH 27611-5201
March 18, 1991
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
Mr. Cliff Winefordner
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
PO Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402
WILLIAM G. MARLEY, JR., P.E.
STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR
RE: Proposed Evans Road Extension over Crabtree Creek in
Cary - NCDOT Project U-2403; Action ID # 199100143
Dear Cliff:
On November 20, 1990, BAKK Engineers applied for a.permit from
your office for the above captioned project in Wake County. On
February 28, you advised _BAKK of objections that your office-had-
received for issuing this permit.
This project is a joint venture between the Department of
Transportation and North Hills, Inc. and Silverton, Inc. with the
cost of the project being shared equally. BAKK.is handling the
planning, design, and construction of this project on behalf of
North Hills and Silverton.
The Department fully supports this project and feels it will
provide a vital transporation link for this rapidly growing area
upon completion. Before the Department enters into a public/
private agreement of this nature, we first determine that the
anticipated benefits of the project actually exceed the benefits
from a regular Tranportation Improvement Project. The Department
also reviewed other viable alternatives to the project such as
different alignments 'and/or improving existing roads. This
project, with its currently designed location, met all the criteria
for Department funding and anticipated transportation needs in the
project area. This project is also included in the Town of Cary's
Thoroughfare Plan.
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
-2-
I hope your office will review the permit application
submitted by BAKK and the appropriate permits be issued as quickly
as possible so this project can be constructed as scheduled.
If this office can be of any assistance please feel free to
contact me at 919-733-2031.
Sincerely,
-?? ? &'•L
Larry R. Goode, Ph.D., P.E.
Director, Program, Policy & Budget
cc: Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Tom Darden
Julian Ford
Frank Robuck
Roger Lewis
Ron Hairr
Barney O'Quinn
Calvin Leggett

e M SINE
Y
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Govemor April 23, 1991 George T. Everett, Ph.D.
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary Director
Mr. Roger D. Lewis, P.E.
Senior Vice President, Special Services
BAKK Engineers
Post Office Box 311
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602-0311
Dear Mr. Lewis:
Subject: 401 Water Quality Certification
Proposed Evans Road Extension
NCDOT Project U-2403
Wake County
-Thank you for responding to my letter of January 31, 1991
requesting additional information concerning the subject request.
I have reviewed the material and offer the following comments:
1. Although I will defer to the NCDOT opinion that the road
is necessary to insure adequate traffic flow I question
the wisdom of constructing this road in light of the
following statement included in your response.
"Even by adding the multi-lane section of
Evans Road Extension and widening NC54 and
North Harrison Avenue we find only a marginal
improvement in level-of-service for NC 54
and North Harrison Avenue."
It would appear prudent to investigate alternate methods
of transportation if the roads being constructed will
only marginally improve the level of service.
2. The modified mitigation plan is not acceptable. The
density of trees to be planted and the monitoring plan
are not adequate. It is recommended that a meeting be
scheduled with all of the agencies involved with this
project to discuss what constitutes an acceptable
mitigation proposal.
roUuUon hewm8on rays
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]
An Eaual Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
W. I 2
Mr. Roger D. Lewis
April 23, 1991
Page Two
The Division is prepared to issue the 401 Water Quality
Certification for this project upon receipt of an acceptable
mitigation proposal. If you have questions please do not hesitate
to contact me at 919/733-5083.
Sincerely,

Ron Ferrell
RF/kls
Lewis2.ltr/D-1
cc: George Everett
Wayne Wright, COE - Wilmington
Eric Alsmeyer, COE - Raleigh
I

c „a STATE u
VP
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources .
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Govemor January 31, 1991 George T. Everett, Ph.D.
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary Director
Mr. Roger Lewis, P.E.
Burton, Adams, Kemp & King, Inc.
P.O. Box 311
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602-0311
Dear Mr. Lewis:
Subject: NCDOT Project U-2403
Evans Road Extension
Wake County
The Division has reviewed the request for a 401 Water Quality
Certification for the subject project. The wetlands to be
impacted by this project are a significant natural resource and
should be protected unless there is no practicable alternative to
the proposed project.
Please submit a detailed alternatives analysis outlining why
the existing roads and interchange cannot be further upgraded to
accommodate the projected traffic demand. Specifically, can the
Harrington Avenue interchange be upgraded to accommodate the
projected increase of 3900 vehicles per day by 2010? Do the
traffic projections take into account the recent and future
improvements to I-40? Also, please include the basis for the
projected traffic demand.
An evaluation of the mitigation plan is not possible at this
time due to insufficient information. It is recommended that
you consult MIST - Mitigation Site Type Classification (EPA -
Region IV Wetland Planning Unit, Atlanta, GA.) when preparing
mitigation proposals. A meeting can be scheduled with all
interested agencies to discuss the mitigation plan if the
alternatives analysis supports the conclusion that no practicable
alternative exists to the proposed project.
Pollution Prevention Pays
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]
r
Mr. Roger Lewis
July 31, 1991
Page Two
At
If you have questions, or if I can be of assistance please
contact me at 919/733-5083.
Sincerely,
Ron Ferrell
RF/kls
Lewis.ltr/D-1
cc: Eric Alsmeyer - COE
Regulatory Field Office
11413 Falls of Neuse Road
Wake Forest, NC 27587-9408
John Parker - DCM
I , 1
fi S?TF o
State of North Carolina
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Governor
December 19, 1990
Dr. George T.. Everett
Division of Environmental Management
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Dear Dr. Everett:
4h11ian W. CdDey, Jr., Secretary
The attached U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Public Notice No. 00143 dated
12/13/90 describing a project proposed by North Hil s roperties, Inc.
is being circulated to interested state agencies for comments on applicable
Section 404 and/or Section 10 permits.
Please indicate below your agency's position or vie-wToint on the proposed
project and'return this form by 1/14/91
Very sincerely,
John R. Parker, Jr.
404 Coordinator
REPLY This office objects to the project as proposed.
Comments on this project are attached.
This office supports the project proposal.
No comment.
JRP:jr/aw
Signed
Date
Agency
P.O. Box 27687. Raleigh. North Carolina 27611.7687 Telephone [phone]
x-
Y
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
Action ID 199100143
December 13, 1990
PUBLIC NOTICE
NORTH HILLS PROPERTIES, INC., Post Office Box 17004, Raleigh, North
Carolina 27619, has applied for a Department of the Army (DA) permit TO
AUTHORIZE THE PROPOSED PLACEMENT OF FILL MATERIAL INTO WETLANDS ADJACENT TO
CRABTREE CREEK, FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A FOUR-LANE PUBLIC HIGHWAY AT CARY,. WAKE
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA.
The following description of the work is taken from data provided by the
applicant and from observations made during an onsite visit by representatives
of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Plans submitted with the application
show the placement of approximately 41,900 cubic yards of clean fill material
into wetlands adjacent to Crabtree Creek, at the upper end of Lake Crabtree,
for construction of approximately 1,500 feet of a four-lane public highway.
The new highway would extend the existing Evans Road approximately 3,500 feet
to the northwest from where it currently ends at Weston Parkway (S.R. 1653),
across Crabtree Creek to Aviation Parkway (S.R. 1002). The proposed highway
embankment would be an average of approximately 95 feet wide, bottom width
(maximum 118 feet) where it crosses the wetlands, requiring the loss of
approximately 2.64 acres of bottomland hardwood wetlands. The embankment
would include a 3 feet wide extension for a proposed Wake County greenways
trail which would connect to other proposed trails on the upland. The
embankment would also include four culverts: one 24-inch, two 30-inch and one
66-inch. Approximately 95 cubic yards of clean earth fill would be placed
below ordinary high water to relocate a tributary to Crabtree Creek, and stone
riprap would be placed within Crabtree Creek to facilitate a bridge crossing.
To compensate for the proposed wetlands loss, the applicant proposes to
restore and create a total of approximately 6.7 to 12.7 acres of wetlands.
The final acreage of compensation area would depend on final design
calculations of flood storage capacity and and the further excavation needed
to mitigate the storage capacity deficit. The applicant proposes to grade,
and plant with wetland plant species, as appropriate, seven areas contiguous
with Crabtree Creek's adjacent wetlands. The compensation sites would be
monitored for viability for a minimum period of 2 years following planting.
Plans for the proposed construction are included with this public.notice.
The State of North Carolina will review this public notice to determine
the need for the applicant to obtain any required State authorization. No
DA permit will be issued until the coordinated State viewpoint on the proposal
has been received and reviewed by this agency, nor will a DA permit be issued
until the North Carolina Division of Environmental Management (DEM) has
determined the applicability of a Water Quality Certificate as required by
PL 92-500.
-A

-2-
This application is being considered pursuant to Section 404(b) of the
Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). Any person may request, in writing within
the comment period specified in the notice, that a public hearing be held to
consider this application. 'Requests for public hearing shall state, with
particularity, the reasons for holding a public hearing.
The District Engineer has consulted the latest published version of the
National Register of Historic Places for the presence or absence of registered
properties, or properties listed as being eligible for inclusion therein, and
this worksite is not registered property or property listed as being eligible
for inclusion in the Register. Consultation of the National Register
constitutes the extent of cultural resource investigations by the District
Engineer, and he is otherwise unaware of the presence of such resources.
Presently, unknown archeological, scientific, prehistorical, or historical
data may be lost or destroyed by work under the requested permit.
The District Engineer has determined, based on a review of data furnished
by the applicant and onsite observations, that the activity will not affect
species, or their critical habitat, designated as endangered or threatened
pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973.
The decision whether to issue a permit will be based on an evaluation of
the probable impacts, including cumulative impacts, of the proposed activity
and its intended use on the public interest: Evaluation of the probable
impacts which the proposed activity may have on the public interest requires a
careful weighing of all those factors which become relevant in each particular
case. The benefits which reasonably may be expected to accrue from the
proposal must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable.detriments. The
decision whether to authorize a proposal, and if so the conditions under which
it will be allowed to occur, are therefore determined by the outcome of the
general balancing process. That decision should reflect the national concern
for both protection and utilization of important resources. All factors which
may be relevant to the proposal must be considered including the cumulative
effects thereof. Among those are conservation, economics, aesthetics, general
environmental concerns, wetlands, cultural values, fish and wildlife values,
flood hazards, flood plain values, land use, navigation, shore erosion and
accretion, recreation, water supply and conservation, water quality, energy
needs, safety, food and fiber production, mineral needs, considerations of
property ownership, and, in general; the needs and welfare of the people. For
activities involving the placement of dredged or fill materials in waters of
the United States, a permit will be denied if the discharge that would be
authorized by such permit would not comply with the Environmental Protection
Agencies' 404(b)(1) guidelines. Subject to the preceding sentence and any
othet applicable guidelines or criteria, a permit will be granted unless the
District Engineer determines that it would be contrary to the public interest.

-3-
The Corps of Engineers is soliciting comments from the public; Federal,
State, and local agencies and officials; Indian Tribes, and other interested
parties in order to consider and evaluate the impacts of this proposed
activity. Any comments received will be considered by the Corps of Engineers
to determine whether to issue, modify, condition, or deny a permit for this
proposal. To make this decision, comments are used to assess impacts on
endangered species, historic properties, water quality, general environmental
effects, and the other public interest factors listed above. Comments are
used in preparation of an Environmental Assessment and/or Environmental Impact
Statement pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act. Comments are
also used to determine the need for a public hearing and to determine the
overall public interest of the proposed activity.
Generally, the decision whether to issue this DA permit will not be made
until the DEM issues, denies, or waives State certification required by
Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. The DEM considers whether or not the
proposed activity will comply with Sections 301, 302, 306, and 307 of the
Clean Water Act. The application and this. public notice for the DA permit
serves as application to the DEM. for certification.
Additional information regarding the Clean Water Act certification may be
reviewed at the offices of the Environmental Operations Section, North
Carolina Division of Environmental Management, Salisbury Street, Archdale
Building, Raleigh, North Carolina. Copies of such materials will be furnished
to any person requesting copies upon payment of reproduction costs.
The North Carolina Division of Environmental Management plans to take
final action in the issuance of the Clean Water Act certification on or after
January 7, 1991.
All persons desiring to make comments regarding the application for Clean
Water Act certification should do so in writing delivered to the North
Carolina Division of Environmental Management, Post Office Box 27687, Raleigh,
North Carolina 27611-7687, on or before December 31, 1990, Attention:
Mr. William Mills.
Written comments pertinent to the proposed work, as outlined above, will
be received in this office, Attention: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer, until 4:15 p.m.,
January 14, 1991, or telephone [phone].
go-

iSITE

man

R Ef
p Bill
"SITE

A
7
.AM .
A

y wnw saxes O H `\ N I T O
SITE MAP
SOURCE:. N.C. HIGHWAY MAP
SCAT E ?.
/O 40
Nit.E3
EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
°-
proposed project is a joint venture WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
een the North Carolina Department of, NCDOTPROJECT U-2.403
sportation and two private developers,
h dills Properties, inc. and Silverton, Inc Sheet 1 of 7 NOV, 1990
a A?
INITY MAP
SOURCE: WAKE COUNTY HIGHWAY
SCALE
O.S O / I
Ay-
A

Y DENOTES WETLANDS
.. 0? 4AY
', AvXA?I .1p021
END PROJECT (5R•A,?ION?' ?'~
TO R9V Z?yS
A?
r a 4 H
° a
Vol 3 z
3L ? W H / ; WAKE COUNTY GREENWAYS.TRAIL
d
O
H
? I: .
a
k 3
3 /
4 } .'r 3C (
?-! 11A
CRABTREE /
ze CREEK , J(
LAKE CRABTREE
`\ ? i I COLONIAL PIPELINE i _ -..-
- 1 -- NORMAL POOL ELEV. 276.0
OAO
cOGtiT!\4? s 'r 3 L--,- 0* ? 1%
cq?? lp ? ? sly, 1{r?
? 3 N?gys ssj ,? •z -? -? ?S
3- ? 1 T R4'? ` t 5 1
BEGIN PROJECT 6
LOCATION MAP
W(ESTOL?I PARI(WAY !1' SCALC
(SR 1795)
EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
WARE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
f EVANS ROAD Sheet ? of NOV, 1990
j (SR 1653)
/7A 7 4
s
o s i
(t Ig- -???SMT • (GAS)
Z $ ?Y rj. plpst.
CoLoS
r
i
400,
k$% 01
?Y
? I
W
3 a
3 I Ap S?
XO sOO ?
t
'l M
I i DENOTES FILL IN WETLANDS
w
?3 a' I w SCALE IN FEET
a° /Gb .200
PLAN VIEW SHEET 1 OF 2
,`C c \
z ?\ EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
a ~ WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
-0 N 43
NCDOT PROJECT U72403
? 0:
H
=0 Sheet 3 of Z NOV, 1990
a
a
i
i
1 I
a?' ay
_ L 1
? M
/0 ~
a
U
s?
i R
"y 1
S
k
t-4
T
f 'L , ?N 1

l
El

sz
MATChf L?
wN
I
W
N I? '
1
a
-_ w
i
O4 ?
fro
M CRAB TREE
s = CREEK s?
j ?.
a s ? X \ WETLAND LIMIT
'w
all
W
0
I A? ?
tl' I H
I S a? DENOTES FILL IN WETLANDS
H ?
I, DENOTES FILL BELOW O.H.W.'
1-101
xK
01-1
?a sv SCALE IN FEET
a '1 o io0 2,0
6
a a PLAN VIEW SHEET 2 OF 2
"Ool
a
EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
W WARE COUNTY, NORTH.CAROLINA
NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
• Sheet _.4_ of . Z NOV, 1990,
A9A Tell LINE B
rq
to

O
M '
h
.

T h

w O
a
o
J A
tm 40
O
a
4 Gal a v
H+ ?3 W
y
p O
p
-
z z
O
a
Y?
0
?k H
E

a
a
4
H
J
O

AVV

NO FILL BELOW O.H.W.

SCALE AS SHOWN
PROFILE SHEET 1 OF 2

WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
Sheet S* of 7 NOV, 1990
o a°p I OO N
0

Q
O
Q

I N
?

v

0o O O
I L
Op
t t0 b? N
V {O
I a
Q
N ?O `
A i / r pv I `
k .
O W
H N ?

y
H

I
M
a
a

O } ?
h N ? b N W
h el

+ l

00 ?

a o
5 °o
°m
°u b o V
a

a

n

o _ mmom???
a
N O? O
+ O. Cf1
.3
?
. m m
P 00 u (
1
0
/ r / r v
e
0
N
I ?

•+
W V
d
?>
?'1
a r
?
??
o

? l EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
c
.r
1

j
l
I : E
l
N

?
? o spa oa

N 5

ssa
rd 99Q (S•

?
p ?
a N
o

Vf -
O ,O
O r

? F

O w
? O
Pf ?O
s ell
a ?

i
a
vi
O

a
?
1

0 0
0

? N N

3 ?

d o
4
m
uJ ? N

W a

,
a
O
O `
N O
O r O
I
+ ? ur
10 ap !?
N N N
O
If1 Q
I y1
1 1 1 1 1 l ??? ?

i w° O N
N
W V
6 W > H
C
r( I ^o9A

2
4
O 40
0.
03
O

I ?
-
I
111 N 3
1V 47C f/ L /1?E B
E
H
M
a
a
z
a
a
E
W
DENOTES FILL BELOW O.H.W.
SCALE AS SHOWN
PROFILE SHEET 2 OF 2
EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
Sheet 6 of.Z NOV, 1990

IV4 T.
4 4
LAKE CRABTREE
\\NORMAL POOL ELEV. 276.0
EXCAVATE TO ELEV. 276.0
(SEE TABLE BELOW) 77
-f ?S- -- ± VAR. --•..?-VAR -} 4 '?J
. EXISTING MARSH
+ 4 4 -E -!- 4- 4
TYPICAL SECTION A-A
PROPOSED WETLAIID MITIGATION SITES
NO SCALE
Potential Wetlands/Flood Storage Mitigation sites
Now

Site Acres Acre-feet
1A 1.38 4.83
1B 0.59 2.07
2 2.38 3.57
3 (Rejected) "/A M/A
5 ..1.20 3.00
6 0.30 0.75
7 0.90 1.35
4 (as needed) 0 - 6.0 0 - 24.00
Total 12.75 Acres - 39.57 acre-feet
SUMMARY OF QUANTITIES FOR PROPOSED ROAD
TOTAL AREA OF FILL IN WETLANDS= 2.64 Ac.
FILL BELOW O.H.W. = 95 C.Y.
TOTAL FILL IN WETLANDS = 41,900 C.Y.
PROPERTY OWNERS
North Hills Properties, Inc.
P. O. Box 17004
Raleigh, North Carolina 27619
Wake County Government
c/o Mr. Richard F. Stevens
Wake County Manager
P. O. Box 550
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602
k)1/GAS/yl IZ'Vo lO001
- Af
United States Department of the Interior
FTSTI AND WMDL= SERVTCE
?1/LtA/?1 1L' kjo
s
N
0
Ac.,a Ni
United States Department of the InteriRL E
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Sax 33720
Raleigh, North Carolina !-'636-3726

-:1d r-he
143,
ZIE! to
--

'.'?-. _ ..-- __ '-'--- .- T- lam' N. C.
%p;'•.1":?l+-`. 'l` r-'_?ti??.'?i _.?b '.. -i -. _.y-- a - ?,: r:? _ _? __m.m -. .va i..`_ _;x in
?; - r. - r . r? is
°1'7.L75:?J .'r ?• 7..?J_ 1•?.l.l.?
"'??.-- r. i' T'•.:: .. ' A i ? L . _ .. _ .. . _ p`' Lr endangered
:Mie,-_ _w ._ .-._ . 49; •;. T f., ??sed in

.rv 5h and
strine

r - species.
w`=aa. an
;:...._-'[J? L'::=._f tie _'.. _.- _ _.
?.N Y.H. .. _ •.
f! V ?. ?. `si _, _ ._ __.'Iat:'i Un in
__.
_
y
- ?-? Draft
Y?,; y Yrt
e and
'ilT"I.?}Ei Y
a

which
-._?;.. ?. ? -fling Chorus
iS *art Of
-,•,
area
to open
I.ak epartment Of
nrl: ,t' v _A t-0 ;mow on Crabtree
wi En9L
vl/zo/?Jl 1L: Wj
L
Creek. So-'Is ?lnderlyl_nq the site ar- gredomirantly Chewacla hfdric ,oils
with some Wehadkee hydr_ic inils also rprp5ein t.
Accordi_^.C} `c the, P1 bl]'_c Notice, irnpllsr n7 ration if the. pr) t., as C_?roposed,
tT l l r?Cw ' -e tl ee '7f 254 a,ra_S of forested
.¢ejaZ1 J ">i1 J; z pul.0 ° _ 3 t??.°_pr?Sf? tour
-,ant
'v:_ {? :liaT? 5 b7G? _., t!J
5 - il. -.r
hea tai of lake
v? ?L[J ,.•? _h _ .,.??..1 i_' P. _ ......,:?O.ti` °??,r ?•_i E•µ. T1; '_i Il`.73`•( em. can 4lPnt
118 fte- CwoSS the
s??.?. Y., • 5 -t,: :..:s - - :t:?r _??--`t--r one of
•Jttiand
?r:a ----._ _i _i ?Li_ rl•?v'_ j :_t< _1i1=._ ?,? 4!••r1Y tc
li e?r?t-.. J^-; r!. riC4 f' L•- f P.,_'^i. '? .'.. ?.?it tr`?U _ ''[ :+SY. _. .. =_na' design
'??C"'I?", .- ..?'^i,,i{ i# ,r;3?•?- .. .=n.. %.. -ii .IittT ? C?. .'i-_i.'Fl IIW°_?Gd
t0 ,rIitia fl - s al 10 ?i:?•??t_"f?i?F:'? :?'' fill
".?i!•k +?'_ - ;]'a T?`'i ?_ old:`.. _ l±__=. "i ij=-a e
?V?%a -on ? _ * i ;II',i1? :!_tZ t '. ;a_,`i _rT
yC ?r tZ1 i]=5 i0r
I
?1
ili??f:!'?• ?.id i:l _ .it 3c?,1ressed
ar`.v.s'..Lden- and +. "_' r-y ?J- ._._? "?r• 5;;._t _°z.d.? _ e,r c , rFd
a A gra j pa_ser- ; - k:,d T,Ph? a_ This site
;-1i1 ,. ..- ... ,..-.1 i<., r;.; ri'• t.-, y.l yaw tea 4 + 4n and
as Sit
fog feel. _ vr, mi ?GtLL rorested
v serve in
and
._ ?5p?v Lally
71 7-: I-P S It:
Tt_ir E"colcgy
1i the
?. a:ri ?. S . B•arClay .
15 ?). .
C. UVO
V 1 /GO/V 1 1 Z: fou LLIj E)k)4
Palustrine forested wetland losses are occurring at a high rate on a
national basis. Tn the two der.-ache period het.ween the early 1950's and
1970's palitst.rine forested wetland: were redl:ced nationally by 10.8 percent
(Frayer, W.E., T.J. J-Innahan, E.^, Bowden and F.A. Graybill. 1983. Status
cnd TrQrids ^f Wetlcirds and in the Conterminous United
Stetes: 1g c `s uo 97t `?. U .S. %._F. an rt 'f i, _ Service, Washington, D.C.
i ; ?.. -f U
ym pp. rL'll'r' :? e??e:.s >. ses in paJ.ustrine forested
Yr'eiQT aim s __, the g'.<ta- iT3ry1 [Hefner. J. and tT.
`Mates. Wet' ands
areas are
rr ut? <r1'1 t{ r i- ? 1.1. or in the
Lo no net
iv , ._.3_. 23'
t ?tiN uP ir,¢1?j,r y :i?'j.,_t?_ . _.-.?? . ??yi-?? '"_ .- - `i'a - _ - • - - i'?., ?`i1?3?.ti3'CS,
±k3 11.=t'_ Values So
1' remain
} at
this
S itl ?.-?I4=mot` in,
It to
ant; .. .aIT altered
_ - y - ' - - - - - - - -
that the
:3 T, o
c
<iC Y°.r 'f E) species
:?t_1 r?r :, G _ ... _`,1:.i. ^ jiP G+pprally.
?StS _L;_?i, 1 ',° may OCCUr
project
aj., r,y '.Y. Y iCl a7" _ ct ftgy ?n pine or
i ac ;;o;_,dpeckers
r±' ~; ?•aG t 7 ;F::. uf. Y r 1_ _'.$_`i.':E i'.1 _t`J i?:a found, the
r ? .. .. p,• T'?", uh.*'. ;.7n ndpecker,
anal v ti.._,?,
_. c t ¢l-_. and wildlife.
" -
zfe =''.ir•v spr--. ;'i t,_=_iyh impact
mot. .7
'7. 4
tt"!C .w:,. e i?-'rk l.? aiithor?ied,
-'v ri 41. [tea F ±. J Environmental
j-; -- _ Bites for
<i4''
n ! ?. i;' `ta ,:.61 k'e rr- ..1: cr,351 De4e7t[uer 24,
I _' t? ,mot i. -F 1 1R :.? ry ?t. ._ ': r: wetlands TI'th?n
p a
,lt. -r:a t ex sT . r=uLL k :. _ G? _r y;-Pp ll?d project
app4.a a?ic'_7 5..?..?` le . ?".l =i-.r a` _ve f _-. i-7Q'i t y1C .5.14 and
F','? l;i.?.'1 ?`?•- F.4`'ti`iv.'.?, TfIiJ'-- rt :. _ __ _.- _1 }:. 31read y in through
a-Ve_7_.'k.aC? l-hrough
Y -tho%it the need
r ±hA the unlikely
-_1 t, ty
no pcticable
.".. .. to i,..._`.? V-.: 44 WOUld be willing to
ell SM ,4 7
. Out mite visit, much of
the area pru 4S•_4 for t?sP S ^ a1reat, COi1pZ"'s of functional
wet1an ds: 1P, ord?r- s-.n ?ffPrr. f'£ M-i .nil wl l d' ife rpsourc'_e conservation and to
111/6o/;11 1G: lU

fulfill the public tnist in this matter, the Service recommends that a
Department of the Army permit not be i°sued.
he on this project.
The applicants to
LgJ VUb

Box 1075 Southern Pines, North Carolina 28387
t..
1-94 At
? n
NLI
J

a sa-L
P/I
?S-
/; ,'a+?s /?lv ? a-- GazcSrrva.7?'a? ?5 ?c?
ih s r-?
70
MEMO
DATE:/
TO: SUBJECT:

ifo ??X'-K 16N ?E -q uct s ? ,N -rt'k?- tl?r

From:
srA?,
North Carolina Department of Environment,
_?? ?g Health, and Natural Resources gp printed on Recycled Paper

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin. Govemor April 23, 1991 George T. Everett, PhD.
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary Director
Mr. Roger D. Lewis, P.E.
Senior Vice President, Special Services
BAKK Engineers
Post Office Box 311
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602-0311
Dear Mr. Lewis:
Subject: 401 Water Quality Certification.
Proposed Evans Road Extension
NCDOT Project U-2403
Wake County
Thank you for responding to my letter of January 31, 1991
requesting additional information concerning the subject request.
I have reviewed the material and offer the following comments:
1. Although I will defer to the NCDOT opinion that the road
is necessary to-insure adequate traffic flow I question
the wisdom of constructing this road in light of the
following statement included in your response.
"Even by adding the multi-lane section of
Evans Road Extension and widening NC54 and
North Harrison Avenue we find only a marginal
improvement in level-of-service for NC 54
and North Harrison Avenue."
It would appear prudent to investigate alternate methods
of transportation if the roads being constructed will
only marginally improve the level of service.
2. The modified mitigation plan is not acceptable. The
density of trees to be planted and the monitoring plan
are not adequate. It is recommended that a meeting be
scheduled with all of the agencies involved with this
project to discuss what constitutes an acceptable
mitigation proposal.
Poeudon Pm%"W on rays
P.O. Box 27687. Raleigh. North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirrnative Action Employer
Mr. Roger D. Lewis
April 23, 1991
Page Two
The Division is prepared to issue the 401 Water Quality
certification for this project upon receipt of an acceptable
mitigation proposal. If you have questions please do not hesitate
to contact me at 919/733-5083.
Sincerely,
11?e-,-I-e-'???
Ron Ferrell
RF/kls
Lewis2.ltr/D-1
CC: George Everett
Wayne Wright, COE - Wilmington
Eric Alsmeyer, COE - Raleigh
x J
Burton, Adams, Kemp & King, Inc.
April 10, 1991
Mr. G. Wayne Wright
Chief, Regulatory Branch
Department of the Army
Wilmington District
Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
Post Office Box 311
224 Fayetteville Street Mall
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602-0311
919/856-1777
FAX [phone]
RE: Proposed Evans Road Extension over Crabtree Creek in Cary -
NCDOT Project U-2403; Action ID # 199100143
Dear Mr. Wright:
Thank you for the opportunity to review the responses received on our application
for Department of the Army authorization to discharge fill material into wetlands adjacent
to Crabtree Creek, for construction of an extension of Evans Road in Cary, Wake County,
North Carolina. Your suggestion that we provide additional information to address these
comments was welcomed.
We are pleased to provide the following information for each of the primary
objections and/or comments from the responding agencies. Each comment is stated below
with response.
US Fish and Wildlife Service - Letter of January 25, 1991.
Comment: (page 2, paragraph 3) "Performance criteria are not specified in the Public
Notice."
Response: Performance criteria as noted here relates to the acceptable survival rate
of wetland species planted within the mitigation areas. The original mitigation
proposal did not specify the percentage considered acceptable. North Carolina
Department of Transportation (NCDOT) has reviewed this matter and now proposes
a 30% population planted and natural succession as the acceptable survival rate. The
revised Wetland Monitoring Program for this project is attached to this letter for
submittal to the US Army Corps of Engineers.
Comment: (page 3, paragraph 3) "The Federally - listed endangered red-cockaded
woodpecker (Picoides borealis) may occur within the impact area of the proposed
project. If the proposed project will be removing pines greater than or equal to 30
years of age in pine or pine/hardwood habitats, surveys should be conducted for
active cavity trees within a 1/2-mile radius of project boundaries. If red-cockaded
woodpeckers are observed within the project area or active cavity trees found, the
project has the potential to adversely affect the red-cockaded woodpecker,..."
Response: Based upon several field surveys by a qualified biologist no evidence was
found to suggest inhabitation by any wildlife species listed as threatened or
endangered in North Carolina. Specifically, no nesting habitat for the red-cockaded
woodpecker exists in the project area, nor were any red-cockaded woodpeckers
observed during the field surveys.
Comment: (page 3, paragraph 4) "Several upland alternatives to the proposed project
appear available. Alternative routing via Weston Parkway, NC 54 and Aviation
Parkway, much of it presently four-laned, is already in place."
Response: No upland alternatives to the proposed Evans Road corridor have been
identified and none appear feasible. The thoroughfare planning studies conducted by
NCDOT identified the need for a new highway corridor (Evans Road) as the best
means to serve north-south travel in the area. To omit this short section of Evans
Road between Weston Parkway and Aviation Parkway would defeat the purpose of
the Evans Road corridor, which is to serve north-south travel and relieve the
overloaded NC 54 through Morrisville. The Evans Road corridor as planned is a
major element in the approved Greater Raleigh Urban Area Thoroughfare Plan
eventually providing a multilane facility from downtown Cary out to I-40 and the
planned Northern Wake Expressway where it would have access via an interchange.
Alternative routing via sections of Weston Parkway, NC 54 and Aviation
Parkway is not an acceptable method of handling the future traffic demands in this
area. Capacity analyses of NC 54, North Harrison Avenue and Evans Road indicates
multi-lane facilities will be required for NC 54 and North Harrison Avenue by the
design year (2010) even with the Evans Road corridor in place. Rerouting the traffic
demand to the existing roadways will only worsen these congested highways and
further deteriorate traffic operations.
Comment: (page 3, paragraph 4) "Further, upland habitats adjacent to the wetlands
may be developed through access from existing Weston Parkway and Aviation
Parkway without the need for the proposed wetland crossing and fill activities. "
Response: The purpose of this highway project, which was approved and
programmed by the North Carolina Board of Transportation in their latest
Transportation Improvement Program, is to provide for an integral link in an
approved transportation corridor that was determined to be necessary and in the
public interest to correct an inadequacy of north-south connectors in the rapidly
growing Cary area. This project has never been identified nor intended to provide
access to allow for property development. It will, as noted in the approved
Environmental Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact, allow for improved
traffic access to nearby highways and freeways for a large, developing area, and thus
provide improved traffic operations for the entire area.
Comment: (page 3, paragraph 4) "...based on our site visit, much of the area
proposed for use as mitigation is already comprised of functional wetlands."
Response: The determination of suitable wetland mitigation sites was made by our
biologist during the spring of 1990. Observation in May and June 1990 during the
growing season confirmed dry conditions and no wetland species on these sites.
On September 6, 1990 a pre-application field review with representatives of
the Corps of Engineers confirmed the wetlands delineation for the project and
potential mitigation sites. We maintain that the mitigation sites proposed are not
currently functional wetlands and will provide excellent opportunity to restore and/or
create habitat to replace that impacted.
US Environmental Protection Agency - Letter of January 14, 1991.
Comment: (page 1, paragraph 3) "It is our understanding that the applicant has
upland alternative for road alignment that could be easily utilized instead of locating
the work in wetlands."
Response: The concern here is identical to a previous one expressed by the US Fish
and Wildlife Service in their letter of January 25, 1991 and already addressed.
NC Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources, Division of Environmental
Management - Letter of January 31, 1991.
Comment: (page 1, paragraph 2) "Please submit a detailed alternatives analysis
outlining why the existing roads and interchange cannot be further upgraded to
accommodate the projected traffic demand. Specifically, can the Harrington
(Harrison) Avenue interchange be upgraded to accommodate the projected increase
of 3,900 vehicles per day by 2010? Do the traffic projections take into account the
recent and future improvements to I-40? Also, please include the basis for the
projected traffic demand."
Response: The basis for the projected traffic demand is data collected and prepared
by the North Carolina Department of Transportation through their Statewide
Planning and Research Units. Traffic counts are taken on various highways and
entered into computer models along with data on population growth rates, economic
activity, planned highway improvements and historic traffic patterns. Traffic
projections for roadways within this project study area were prepared by taking this
data and forecasting future demands along I-40, Harrison Avenue, NC 54 and other
roads in the vicinity. These traffic numbers are further refined by traffic analysts in
the Research Unit to reflect existing and/or planned improvements or other factors
which may not have been previously taken into account. The traffic projections
approved for use by NCDOT are shown on Figures 2a and 2b of the approved
EA/FONSI for the project. The traffic projections made for the Evans Road project
do take into account the recent six-lane widening of I-40 and the planned
improvement of I-40 to eight lanes.
The projected increase in traffic for the Harrison Avenue interchange is not
3900 vehicles per day by 2010 as stated in the comment. The correct increase is
projected to be 14,800 vehicles per day. The 3,900 vpd figure was apparently derived
from the difference between the 2010 projections for the road network comparing the
traffic with and without the Evans Road Extension.
Upgrading the existing roads (NC 54 and North Harrison Avenue) and the
interchange to accommodate the projected traffic demand will not by itself adequately
address the future traffic needs in the study area. Capacity analyses were performed
to evaluate the existing road network to see if it could handle the future traffic. The
analyses showed that the existing lanes without improvements would suffer
breakdown conditions (level-of-service F). Widening NC 54, North Harrison Avenue
to four and five lane sections respectively, also results in levels-of-service E and F.
These levels of service for arterial facilities are considered unacceptable for adequate
traffic operations. The capacity analyses work sheets supporting these findings were
previously supplied to the Corps on January 23, 1991 in response to an earlier
request.
Even by adding the multi-lane section of Evans Road Extension and widening
NC 54 and North Harrison Avenue we find only a marginal improvement in level-of-
service for NC 54 and North Harrison Avenue. It is our opinion that six lanes will
ultimately be required on NC 54 and North Harrison Avenue as well as major
improvements to the North Harrison Avenue interchange with I-40 in order to
achieve the desirable levels-of-service (LOS C or D) for this network.
The basic premise found in this analysis is that the rapid growth of the Cary
area, specifically the north Cary area, over the next 10 to 20 years is demanding
additional infrastructure be supplied to handle this increase in population and
business activity. Simply widening the existing two roads which provide north-south
travel in the north Cary area will not be sufficient to satisfy the traffic demands at
acceptable levels.
Comment: (page 1, paragraph 3) "An evaluation of the mitigation plan is not possible
at this time due to insufficient information."
Response: A summary of the mitigation measures offered is contained within the
approved EA/FONSI document for this project. Additional information concerning
the mitigation measures were provided to the Corps of Engineers in the Section 404
permit application, including a monitoring plan developed by NCDOT. The
mitigation and monitoring plans were reviewed in light of this comment and
additional detail has been prepared and is hereby submitted to the Corps. NCDOT
continues to feel that a two (2) year monitoring program is adequate. Other recent
permits in more sensitive wetland areas have been acquired utilizing the two (2) year
monitoring plan. Additional detail on size, height and plant spacing is provided in the
attached Wetland Monitoring Program. An acceptable survival rate of 30%
population planted and natural succession is proposed. In addition, a planting
schedule and landscape design plans are being prepared by the Roadside
Environmental Unit of NCDOT and will be included within the final design plans.
Please find attached a copy of the revised Wetland Monitoring Program prepared by
NCDOT. If additional information is needed for your review please feel free to contact us
at your convenience.
Sincerely,
U
Roger D. Lewis, P.E.
Senior Vice President, Special Services
RDL/RGH/tm
Attachment
cc: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer, Corps of Engineers, Raleigh Field Office
Mr. Julian Ford, North Hills Properties, Inc.
Mr. David Wagner, North Hills Properties, Inc.
Mr. Jack Ward, Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
Dr. Larry Goode, Director of Program, Policy & Budget, NCDOT
Mr. Tom Darden, Member, Board of Transportation
Ms. L.K. Mike Gantt, Supervisor, US Fish & Wildlife Service
Mr. Thomas C. Welborn, Chief, Wetlands Regulatory Unit, USEPA
Mr. Ron Ferrell, Division of Environmental Management, NCDEHNR
r
JAMES G. MARTIN
GOVERNOR
THOMAS J. HARRELSON
SECRETARY
MEMORANDUM TO: Ron Hair
Feb 19, 1991

DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
WILLIAM G. MARLEY, JR., P.E.
STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR
BAKK Consultants
Raleigh, NC
FROM: V. Charles Bruton
Environmental Unit Head
Planning & Environmental Branch
SUBJECT: Wake County, Project 9.8050364, U-2403,
Proposed Evans Rd Extension, Crabtree Creek,
Guidelines for Wetland Monitoring Program.
In accordance with discussions at the recent meeting held at
my office on the above project, I am enclosing revised
monitoring guidelines as prepared by the Roadside
Environmental unit.
f:corr\u-2403.1
cc: BJ O'Quinn, P&E
R.Covington, Rdside Env.
R. Elmore, Cnslnt Cord Unit
pww
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P.O. BOX 25201
RALEIGH 27611-5201
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer

III. Evaluation and Recourse Action

A. Acceptable survival rate (30% population planted and
natural succession)
B. Two (2) year data evaluation
•1. Below acceptable survival rate (recourse options)
a. Revegetation (supplemental or complete)
b. Minor regrading
c. Reevaluate feasibility -
2. Acceptable survival rate - no action
Note: Because the area to be mitigated is not on
DOT right-of-way, agreement with the owner (Wake
County) will be needed for the initial grading and
planting, the evaluation period, and possible
replanting.
????'V YC 4
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P.O. BOX 25201
RALEIGH 27611-5201
JAMES G. MARTIN March 18, 1991
GOVERNOR
THOMAS J. HARRELSON
SECRETARY
Mr. Cliff Winefordner
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
PO Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
WILLIAM G. MARLEY, JR., P.E.
STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR
RE: Proposed Evans Road Extension over Crabtree Creek in
Cary - NCDOT Project U-2403; Action ID # 199100143
Dear Cliff:
On November 20, 1990, BAKK Engineers applied for a permit from
your office for the above captioned project in Wake County. On
February 28, you advised BAKK of objections that your office had
received for issuing this permit.
This project is a joint venture between the Department of
Transportation and North Hills, Inc. and Silverton, Inc. with the
cost of the project being shared equally. BAKK is handling the
planning, design, and construction of this project on behalf of
North Hills and Silverton.
The Department fully supports this project and feels it will
provide a vital transporation link for this rapidly growing area
upon completion. Before the Department enters into a public/
private agreement of this nature, we first determine that the
anticipated benefits of the project actually exceed the benefits
from a regular Tranportation Improvement Project. The Department
also reviewed other viable alternatives to the project such as
different alignments and/or improving existing roads. This
project, with its currently designed location, met all the criteria
for Department funding and anticipated transportation needs in the
project area. This project is also included in the Town of Cary's
Thoroughfare Plan.
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
-2-
I hope your office will review the permit application
submitted by BAKK and the appropriate permits be issued as quickly
as possible so this project can be constructed as scheduled.
If this office can be of any assistance please feel free to
contact me at 919-733-2031.
Sincerely,
g? A-r?'L
'Z?? /1
Larry R. Goode, Ph.D., P.E.
Director, Program, Policy & Budget
cc: Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Tom Darden
Julian Ford
Frank Robuck
Roger Lewis
Ron Hairr
Barney O'Quinn
Calvin Leggett

MEMO
TO: C r- Q'2C-s- E?Ic` YZETT?
DATE: -??' l 1
SUBJECT: E V A\is ' _o\,ab

S. -kAA-'r--b i 64 P t-t?N? C ? U S P'' V'X ?(? "ro `> Ajv
`, s7 D ? R a ? A`- \ N PCI lZI`-? l?-CI V N R? U E-?-i? t N
'k L--ETTZ--?& ' F,7f--m . \ 13 I f `i 1 L S `j<-Z:?N (. t2 ?P,?rZcs?
"'D 'i - P' 1 l v?5 AcI?ECZ xVtts
W?1L?
y cxv iLVsow W (-??( W L
}Z- cwE N -k r
From:
?I
North Carolina Department of Environment,
_=„n ?g Health, and Natural Resources ?? printed on Recycled Paper
quw
MEMO
TO:
DATE: S/? 1/ l I
SUBJECT:

1 l s rti?= t N? ?Ze?S w s ?u c? k N
0 2 S? S,& HAzg -3 &? O -P--6-2-671 vZE D.
Ce:,? A-C?-Y-,? c- ( c=? ( C-
W C w 5> L-U,z- L. E? ?(?-ASS Lcn o cPo s t ?Zo?
7N P'I" cam. .

l 0 o l C k-TC S j -4-? S ar ?-G 04? -11
P2r?e? 1? 4'?Nc7LONt VUG w LSTt-^"P S .
?v ( CvgNN???-:?SSc?
From: 0-- /_1`"`---
?o-
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources T`^?.
5 V3 Printed on Recycled Paper
Cunn?
y
. SLATE
T` E{
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Mardn, Governor "January 31, 1991 George T. Everett, PhD.
William W. Cobey, Jr., secretary Director
Mr. Roger Lewis, P.R.
Burton, Adams, Kemp & King, Inc.
PO Box 311
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602-0311
Dear Mr. Lewis:
Subject: NCDOT Project U-2403
Evans Road.Extension
Wake County
The Division 'has, reviewed the request for a 401 Water Quality
Certification for the subject project. The wetlands to be
impacted by,this project are a significant natural` resource and
should be protected unless there is no practicable alternative to
the proposed project.
Please submit a detailed alternatives analysis outlining why
the existing roads and interchange cannot be further upgraded to
accommodate the projected traffic demand. Specifically, can the
Harrington Avenue interchange be upgraded to accommodate the
projected increase of 3900 vehicles per day by 2010? Do the
traffic projections take into account the recent and future
improvements to I-40? Also, please include the basis for the
projected traffic demand.
An evaluation of the mitigation plan is not possible at this
time due to insufficient information. It is recommended that
you consult MIST - Mitigation Site Type Classification (EPA -
Region IV Wetland Planning Unit, Atlanta, GA.) when preparing
mitigation proposals. A meeting can be scheduled with all
interested agencies to discuss the mitigation plan if the
alternatives analysis supports the conclusion that no practicable
alternative exists to the proposed project.
PolluBon Pm%wftion Pays
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]
Mr. Roger Lewis
July 31, 1991
Page Two

If you have questions, or if I can be of assistance please
contact me at 919/733-5083.
Sincerely,
Ron Ferrell
RF/kls
Lewis.ltr/D-1
cc: Eric Alsmeyer - COE
Regulatory Field Office
11413 Falls of Neuse _Road
Wake Forest,.NC 27587-9408
John Parker - DCM
?A
,F d---
MEMO
FROM: Harlan Britt, Deputy Director
Divi=vironmental nage ment
TO: -
Date: O
Subject:
awe
J
P'011?w
2

4?4-
?North Carolina Department
_ of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
IN REPLY REFER M
Regulatory Branch
SUBJECT: Action ID. 199100143
December 4, 1990
Mr. William Mills
Water Quality Section
Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Dear Mr. Mills:
Enclosed is the application of North Hills Properties, Inc., for
Department of the Army authorization and a State Water Quality Certification
to construct an extension of Evans Road over Crabtree Creek in Cary, Wake
County, North Carolina. Your receipt of this letter verifies your acceptance
of a valid request for certification in accordance with Section 325.2(b)(ii)
of our administrative regulations.
We are considering authorizing the proposed activity pursuant to Section
404 of the Clean Water Act, and we have determined that a water quality
certification may be required under the provisions of Section 401 of the same
law. A Department of the Army permit will not be granted until the
certification has been obtained or waived.
In accordance with our administrative regulations, 60 days after receipt
of a request for certification is a reasonable time for State action.
Therefore, if you have not acted on the request by January 3, 1991, the
District Engineer will deem that waiver has occurred.
Questions or comments may be addressed to Eric Alsmeyer, telephone (919)
846-0749.
Sincerely,
Wri t
Vhieef, Regule atory Branch
Enclosure
-2-
Copy Furnished (without enclosure):
Mr. John Parker
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
.I
yob
l 9'9/ ool
r-

Burton, Adams, Kemp & King, Inc.
224 Fayetteville Street Mall
Post Office Box 311
November 20, 1990
%- i
a f
District Engineer
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602-0311
919/856-1777
FAX [phone]-,!

RE: N.C.D.O.T. Project U-2403; Proposed Evans Road Extension over Crabtree
Creek in Cary, North Carolina
Dear Sir:
Enclosed please find one copy of application for permit to place fill in wetlands as
required under Section 404 of The Clean Water Act. Also enclosed are drawings indicating
the extent of proposed work within wetlands, a proposed wetland mitigation plan, and a
proposed wetland monitoring plan.
The proposed project is a joint venture between the North Carolina Department of
Transportation and two private developers, North Hills Properties, Inc., and Silverton, Inc.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation is participating in the cost of this project
and will take over future maintenance responsibilities of the bridge and roadway after
construction, as well as the wetland mitigation sites.
As consulting engineer for this project, please direct future correspondence to Burton,
Adams, Kemp, and King, Inc.
Sincerely,
Roger P.E.
Senior Vice President, Special Services
RDL/tm
cc: A.M. Rohmani, NCDOT
Enclosure
FOR
.e
PERMIT TO EXCAVATE AND/OR FILL
WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
EASEMENT IN LANDS COVERED BY WATER CAMA PERMIT FOR MAJOR DEVELOPMENT
Department of Administration State of North Carolina Department of the Army
(GS 146-12) Department of Natural Resources and Community Development Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
(GS 113-229,1,13.215.3(a)(1), 143-215.3(c), 113A-118 (33 CFR 209.320.329)
Please type or print and fill in all blanks. If information is not applicable, so indicate by Placing N/A in blank.
1. Applicant Information
A. Name Ford E. Julian
Last First Middle
B. Address North Hills Properties, Inc. , P.O. Box 17004
Street, P. 0. Box or Route
Raleigh N.C. 27619 (919)-677-1003_
City or Town State Zip Code Phone
If. Location of Proposed Project:
A. County Wake
B. 1. City, town, community or landmark -_ Cary ,
2. Is proposed work within city limits? Yes X No
C. Creek, river, sound or bay upon which project is located or nearest named body of water to project
Crabtree Creek
111. Description of Project
A. 1. Maintenance of existing project 2. New work Proposed 4-Lane Highway
B. Purpose.of excavation or 3
1. Access channel length ` width depth
2. Boat basin length width depth
3. Fill areaHiahway Embankm=tcngth±l , 500 Width*95' depth ±S'
'1. Other
length width depth
C. 1. Bulkhead length N/A Average distance waterward of MHW (shoreline)
2. Type of bulkhead construction (material)
D. Excavated material (total for project)
1. Cubic yards N/A 2. Type of material
E. Fill material to be placed below MHW (see also V1. A)
1. Cubic yards 95± 2. Typeofmaterial Earth Material Suitable for Hwy.
IV. Land Type, Disposal Area, and Construction Equipment:
A. Does the area tube excavated include any marshland, swamps or other wetland? Yes No X
B. Does the dispntial area include any marshland, swamps or other wetland? Yes * No
C. Disposal Area
1. Location within Project R/ W & other areas at Contractors' option
2. Do you claim title to disposal areal R/ W to be dedicated to NCDOT
D. Fill material source if fill is to be trucked in wetland mitigation sites +/or borrow pit
E. flow will excavated material be entrapped and erosion controlled? string ent erosion control measure;
F. Type of equipment to be used Highway Construction Equipment
G. Will marshland be crossed in transporting equipment to project site? If yes,,i xplain Yee - under proj?osed_
fi11
Suitable material found in wetland mitigation areas will be used for
roadway embankment.
D& F•B 1
Rev. 10/78
?• I/Ii ViiVVY Vw Vi I IV?4{.\ /?,Cr 1 (JCI?, ('V?.? .
•A. 1. Private
2. Commercial
3, Housing Development or Industrial
4. Other Public Hicrhway
0. 1. Lot sixe(s)
2. Elevation of lot(s) above mean high water
3. Soil type and texture
4. Type of building facilities or structures
S. Sewage disposal and/or waste water treatment A. Existing Planned
0. Describe
6. Land classification (circle one) DEVELOPED TRANSITIONAL COMMUNffY RURAL
CONSERVATION OTHER (See CAMA Local Land Use Plan Synopsis)
VI. Pertaining to Fill anti Water Quality:
A. Does the proposed project involve the placement of fill materials below mean high water? Yes _X No
B. 1. Will any runoff or discharge enter adjacent waters as a result of project activity or planned use of the
area following project completion? Yes X No
2. Type of discharge Rainwater runoff
3. Location of discharge -through storm sewers & roadside ditches
VII. Present rate of shoreline erosion (if known): _ N/A
Vill. List permit numbers anti issue dates of previous Department of Army Corps of Engineers or State permits for
work in project area, if applicable: N/A
IX. Length of time required to complete project: 2 years
X. In addition to the completed application form, the following items must be provided:
A. Attach . a copy of the deed (with State application only) or other instrument under which applicant
claims title to the affected property. OR if applicant is not claiming to be the owner of said property,
then forward a copy of the deed or other instrument under which the owner claims title plus written
permission from the owner to carry out the project on his land.
B. Attach an accurate work plat drawn to scale on 8%: X 11" white paper (see instruction booklet for
details). Note: Original drawings preferred - only high quality copies accepted.
C. A copy of the application and plat must be served upon adjacent riparian landowners by registered or
certified mail or by publication (G.S. 113-229 (d))Enter date served
D. List names and complete addresses of the riparian landowners with property adjoining applicant's.
Such owners have 30 days in which to submit comments to agencies listed below.
- North Hills Properties. Tnr _ . P _ n R„V l 7nnn
- Wake County Government c/o Mr Ri c-bard Y Steypnc Wake rnuni-, Mri-r-
-P.O. Box 550, Rat iah N C 27602
XI. Certification requirement: I certify that to the best of my knowledge, the proposed activity complies
with the State of North Carolina's approved coastal management program and will be conducted in a
manner consistent with such program.
X11. Any permit issued pursuant to this application will allow only the development described in this appli•
cation and plat. Applicants should therefore describe in the application and plat all anticipated devel-
opment activities, including construction, excavation, filling, and land clearing.
DATE AM o /C/,o
is
Applicant's Signature
D&F-02 SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR MAILING INSTRUCTIONS
Rev. 10/78 t:

{R .d`i11?.y9 •.+
BFGNI
I cARY r
VICINITY MAP
SOURCE: WAKE COUNTY HIGHWAY •i
SCALE
0-3 19
he proposed project is a joint venture
etween the North Carolina Department of
ransportation and two private developers,
north Iiills Properties, Inc. and Silverton, Inc

EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
Sheet 1 of ? NOV, 1990
Y DENOTES WETLANDS
Oli4Aw?Y
1103. 1p02?
END PROJECT ?5R ?y 10N' ?,i
40 VLD IBS
1 •
A c11
r z
igg F
i° a "
WM
c 3 Z
O
X Q E // . WAKE COUNTY GREENWAYS TRAIL
? O C7
O H
P4 Z // -t k
k
3
i
+ 4
1A CRABTREE
;e t CREEK
1 j ;1B z
LAKE CRABTREE
3- i ? COLONIAL PIPELINE=
r _ 14ORMAL POOL ELEV. 276.0
x ? A
4! s? ?I pAo
\ ? ;k / ?Ic isFd
10GNr,\?y
FFN?Q? ?' ass J .2•
I !7
BEGIN PROJECT 6
?Ii ?r ' ?• LOCATION MAP \
SCALE
WESTON PARKWA; !I? zoo rT1?
(SR 1795) f EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
I ' WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
! ! NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
EVANS ROAD Sheet 2 Of ? NOV, 1990
(SR 1653)
1 ?

)Alr
??? ?? ? (GAS)
CN, IPELIIiE
/? EX OL
r
k
K 1

3 1 ?
w

sa
a f
'
a
f
o
z i

V] M
a
a
w
?s
H C4
9 41
zo

PG
a
3
F
a
\ \
DENOTES FILL IN WETLANDS
\ SCALE IN FEET
o ioo z o
PLAN VIEW SHEET 1 OF 2
\
EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
Sheet 3 of __Z. NOV, 1990
3 z d I' ". ?'?j L
P* cu
I
E ? a
H r, _..r W
,4 a ? ? a ' ? ?• ? 4? x _?w..
A n rr u
?? d ?+
i
n; c ;"':TL
AND LIMIT
N
a Lt
U / O• j
s'
-J
F a DENOTES FILL IN WETLANDS
E
DENOTES FILL BELOW O . H . W .
a
ti !µ , cza q' SCALE IN FEET
s ; -? p io0 Z?
M
r' I o. PLAN VIEW SHEET 2 OF 2
a
ly 1001,
EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
s' hz NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
5Z
MATC hi L?/VE. a" . Sheet .4_ of .7 NOV, 1990
A
MA T Cf/ L /NE B .
/M
Tin
?C
x N

0
W
?
WW
in
o
0
wa a
to bo (m
W

? ?E. U]
C)
°

4:0 $
?3 a a
O M

O
Q E-4
w

?? tv Z U
04
z =i
H

0
ch

A1/t/

NO FILL BELOW O.H.W.

SCALE AS SHOWN
PROFILE SHEET 1 OF 2

EVANS ROAD EXTENSION

WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
Sheet S' of 7 NOV, 1990
? ? I OO N
? N
0
Q I?
0

I w
N
I s
0.yy
y ?

o
o
-
o u

r+ I se O

4
N au r O V) I

N
N v
Q
?D •
`
g i M 1 v h
k
W

s o
n
? I

'a w x o
c?
a
O
O E
H
a
a

h
N
c
N
N w

+ 0
O 3
?

N

0
?
0 m
b ? p

w
0
f

i
+
I
?p
p A
\
p
pppd??b?
d

0 -
N
IA T -
O
O
m
M Q
m6

C14+
r.
r m vi
m o

T O v 0

4

1 1 1 1 9
m \
m
a
N

y
a?
U
>
?
o I

r 2

??

o

? ?I ?
O
0
o^
M b ?
1 1 n
a
t-
1 U
i Q a

I N N
1 0

I
?l
I ?
I
- 0
rasa h
z H
I a
?
? ? wa
N
1 •

6 rLa oo-

N 5
3

99La
W
spa
arw

A ?
M N
? W
a m
NN
?
` 1.?1.
'I
•
a
m
W ,
at , r

0 N O
; r O
e CZ n o
N N N Ifl
1 1 1 In A
h Ca
•. W V M
Q M W > O
Z ?
/1?ATGN L//
N 4
3 I
o
N
a I

?A
t
I ?
II ??? Q
n

O
I N
?
I
o°
l . g
y N I 3
m$2 0

E
M
a
A
z
a
F
w
3
DENOTES FILu BELOW O.H.W.
SCALE AS SHOWN
PROFILE SHEET 2 OF 2
EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
Sheet 6 of _j_ NOV, 1990
-_..... iV 4 T.
4 4
LAKE CRABTREE
NORMAL POOL ELEV. 276.0
EXCAVATE TO ELEV. 276.0
(SEE TABLE BELOW)
?- + ± VAR. - + \ F
EXISTING MARSH
+ 4 4 4- 4
TYPICAL SECTION A-A
PROPOSED WETLAIID MITIGATION SITES
NO SCALE
Potential Wetlands/Flood Storage Mitigation Sites
Site Acres Acre-feet
1A 1.38 4.83
1B 0.59 2.07
2 2.38 3.57
3 (Rejected) NM N/A
5 1.20 3.00
6 0.30 0.75
7 0.90 1.35
4 (as needed) 0 - 6.0 0 - 24.00
Total 12.75 Acres 39.57 acre-feet
SUMMARY OF QUANTITIES FOR PROPOSED ROAD
TOTAL AREA OF FILL IN WETLANDS= 2.64 Ac.
FILL BELOW O.H.W. = 95 C.Y.
TOTAL FILL IN WETLANDS = 41,900 C.Y.
PROPERTY OWNERS
North Hills Properties, Inc.
P. 0. Box 17004
Raleigh, North Carolina 27619
Wake County Government
c/o Mr. Richard Y. Stevens
Wake County Manager
P. 0. Box 550
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602
EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
.Sheet 7 of 7 NOV, 1990
POTENTIAL WETLANDS/FLOOD STORAGE NMTIGATION
Mitigation Sites
This project has utilized a planning process and mitigation sequencing that takes
into account the February 1990 Memorandum of Agreement between the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of the Army (Army)
concerning the determination of mitigation under the Clean Water Act Section
404 (b) (1) guidelines. Efforts were made to locate and identify the least environmentally
damaging practicable alternative that met the state project purposes. Preliminary study
lines were identified and wetland involvement determined for each. The alignment which
had the least wetland involvement was chosen in order to avoid, to the maximum extent
practicable, potential impacts.
After determining that wetlands takings could not totally be avoided with this project,
steps were taken to minimize the adverse impacts as much as feasible. Project
modifications included (1) reduction of right of way from 164 feet to 120 feet through the
affected wetlands, (2) reduction of pavement lane widths from 12 feet to 11 feet to
accommodate a reduced cross-section (3) elimination of the roadway median, (4) use of the
steepest embankment slopes practical in this area (2:1), and (5) lowering of the proposed
roadway grade to reduce width of embankment. Compensation for the unavoidable loss of
2.7 acres of wetlands is proposed through the restoration and creation of wetlands
contiguous to this site.
Based on field examination and subsequent analysis, it appears that sufficient
opportunity exists proximal to the proposed project for on-site rather than off-site wetlands
and flood storage mitigation to occur.
A judicious selection of mitigation sites for this project allows for the balancing of
the flood storage impact and compensation for wetlands losses within the same site. These
sites, as shown on Figures 4a and 4b, (of the State EA/FONSI) were chosen for their
potential to both recover flood storage taken by the roadway embankment and remain in
close proximity to the areas of wetland losses. Table 1 lists the specific sites in priority with
the estimated acres (wetlands) and acre-feet (flood storage) noted. These sites are listed as
potential mitigation areas. Actual acreages of wetlands impacted and cubic yards of roadway
fill required within the flood storage basin will be determined in the final design phase.
Coordination with the appropriate agencies for a Section 404 permit will be completed prior
to agreement on specific sites and mitigation measures for this project. Approval to use
lands within the 100-year floodplain (Wake County property) to mitigate flood storage and
wetlands impacts has been advanced by the Wake County Board of Commissioners on July
2, 1990 .(refer to letter of August 22, 1990 from Wake County in Appendix C of State
EAXONSI).
As has been noted, wetland acreage in the Crabtree Creek riparian zone is extensive,
a result of the rise in water table associated with Lake Crabtree. However, some areas
within the floodplain do not currently exhibit wetland characteristics due to their elevation
above surrounding terrain. A total loss of approximately 2.7 acres of wetland will need to
be mitigated. A combination of restoration and creation sites is suggested as the most
effective approach to mitigate negative impacts on the wetland resource. Specific sites
identified for mitigation potential are shown on Figures 4a and 4b.
Sites IA and 1B include approximately 2.0 acres immediately adjacent both sides of
Crabtree Creek. Site ILA includes the western levee and disturbed areas in the riparian zone.
The levee appears to be Congoree soil, while farther back from the creek on this side and
slightly upslope, the original soil appears to be Altavista, well drained in the surface
horizons but distinctly mottled at 3.5 to 4.0 feet. This mottling indicates excellent potential
for conversion to wetland after upper layers are removed. Area 1B includes the levees of
Congoree soil on the east bank between the creek channel and slackwater sloughs or
tributary stream channels entering Crabtree Creek. Original forest cover has been removed
in this location on both sides of the creek, from a point upstream of the proposed crossing,
downstream to the lake itself.
Mitigating here (Sites 1A and 1B ) would provide an opportunity to restore
bottomland forest similar to that proposed for clearing to accommodate the project.
Grading 3.5 feet or more of the existing surface material would reduce existing banks to
match the surrounding bottomland contour, where saturated conditions generally prevail.
After grading is complete, wetland tree species such as River birch (Betula ni ra , Green
ash Fraxinus pennsylvanica), Overcup oak uercus I to , and Swamp chestnut oak
uercus michauxii), should be planted to compensate for forested wetland removed along
the new causeway.
Sites 2 and 7, located approximately 1,400 + feet northeast of the proposed ROW,
includes 33 acres along the southeastern shore of Lake Crabtree. The soil currently here,
Wehadkee, is prone to seasonal flooding, with a seasonally high water table approximately
at the surface. Observation in May and June, hence during the current growing season,
reveals dry conditions and no wetlands species on the terrace just above the lake level.
However, shoreline uncus and cattail colonies with observed depth to saturation of about
2.5 feet on the terrace suggest that grading to a contour even with the adjacent marginal
wetland area (approx. 2.0 feet) will create a more extensive marsh area between the lake and
the grass covered sewerline ROW farther upslope. Prevailing onshore winds from across the
lake will also tend to drive water against this shore, thus periodically flooding the area. No
tree planting is proposed here because of the expected hydrologic regime.
Due to the distance from the project and its small size, Site 3, (not shown) consisting
of 0.2 acres has been rejected as a feasible mitigation site.
Site 4, contiguous with Site IA, also contains the Altavista soil discussed previously
in connection with Site IA. Therefore, removing surface material to an average depth of 4.0
feet, even with or perhaps below lake level would expose soil capable of supporting wetland
tree species, as in Site 1A. The same species of oaks and river birch are proposed for
planting here as required.
TABLE 1
Potential WetlandsMood Storage Mitigation Sites
(Refer to F%ures 4a and 4b)
Site Acres Acre-feet
1A 1.38 4.38
1B 0.59 2.07
2 2.38- 3.57
3 (Rejected) N/A N/A
5 1.20 3.00
6 0.30 0.75
7 0.90, 135
4 (as needed) 0-6.0 0-24.00
TOTAL 12.75 3957
Sites 5 and 6 are wooded upland areas, between the sewerline easement and the lake,
adjacent to sites 2 and 7 respectively. These sites could be graded down an average of 2.5
feet to further offset flood storage capacity loss and mitigate wetlands with a similar scheme
as noted for sites 2 and 7.
As noted in Table 1 the total flood storage capacity recovered with sites IA, 1B, 29
5, 6, and 7 is estimated at 15.6 acre-feet. Additional recovery may or may not be needed to
achieve the 18.2 acre-feet depending upon final design calculations.` Should additional
storage be required, Site 4 is proposed to be used only as needed to mitigate the remaining
flood storage capacity deficit.
Permit Coordination
In preparing this environmental report, information was solicited from a meeting
with Mr. Ken Jolly (U.S. Army COE) and subsequent telephone discussion with Mr. Wilson
Laney (USFWS). The step-down procedure for permit application requires that, first, this
project qualify on the basis of demonstrated need and, second, that all reasonable attempts
be made to minimize impacts on waters of the United States, including wetland acreages.
Assuming these conditions are met, the project is proposed to be permitted under Section
404 of the Clean Water Act with an appropriate mitigation plan developed to satisfy the
cdrrent federal goal of no overall net loss of wetland values and functions.
Monitoring Plan
As part of the mitigation effort for this specific project a monitoring plan to insure
that permit conditions are complied with has been developed by the N.C. Department of
Transportation in coordination with the Corps of Engineers and is attached.
PROJECT 9.8050364 U-2403
GUIDELINES FOR WETLAND MONITORING PROGRAM
I. Monitoring Timeframe - Mitigation site shall be inspected at
the following time.
A. Prior to planting
B. At completion of planting
C. Two (2) years following completion (or after 2nd full
growing season)
II. Data to be Obtained at Specific Inspection Times
A. Prior to planting
1. Check for proper elevation and grade, get the
permitting agency's approval on the elevation.
2. Check for proper plant species and for acceptable
plant quality.
Betula Nigra - River Birch,
Fraxinus Pennsylvania - Green Ash,
Quercus Lyrata - Overcup Oak,
Quercus Michanxii - Swamp Chestnut Oak
Note: Plant species are contingent on
availability at the time of planting.
3. Check for proper planting methods
4. Check for proper plant spacing
B. At completion of planing check for conformity with
plans as well as quality of planting
C. Two (2) years following completion (or after 2nd full
growing season
1. Estimate survival rate (optional - collect data if
it can be determined)
2. Measure height of plants
3. Take Photograph(s)
4. Estimate percent polulation
a. Plant species
b. Overall (natural succession)
4

III. Evaluation and Recourse Action
A. Acceptable survival rate (30% population planted and
natural succession)
B. Two (2) year data evaluation
1. Below acceptable survival rate (recourse options)
a. Revegetation (supplemental or complete)
b. Minor regrading
c. Reevaluate feasibility
2. Acceptable survival rate - no action
Note: Because the area to be mitigated is not on
DOT right-of-way, agreement with the owner (Wake
County) will be needed for the initial grading and
planting, the evaluation period, and possible
replanting.
p DATE: _
TO: AOA SUBJECT:
tiCi 7
gr?67 ?2? , ?jZ - ?t5 6V O G i3
rv°r -
Oro
Z5 d"?
North Carolina Department of Environment-
??? Health,, and Natural Resources
a

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Wilmington District, Corps of Engine G -,
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-189
Action ID 199100143 December 13, 1990
PUBLIC NOTICE
NORTH HILLS PROPERTIES, INC., Post Office Box 17004, Raleigh, North
Carolina 27619, has applied for a Department of the Army (DA) permit TO..
AUTHORIZE THE PROPOSED PLACEMENT OF FILL MATERIAL INTO WETLANDS ADJACENT TO.
CRABTREE CREEK,- FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A'FOUR-LANE.:PUBLIC HIGHWAY AT CARY,_ WAKE
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA.
The following description'of the work is taken from data provided by.the
applicant and from observations made during an-onsitw visit by representatives
of the U.S. -Army-' Corps Hof Engineers:.- Plans -submitted with the -application
show the placement of approximately 41,900 cubicyards of clean fill material
into wetlands `adjacent to--Crabtree Creek,-°at.the upper..end of ?:Lake?`(Crabtree,
for 'construction ,of approximately' 1,`500='-feet :of. a four-lane 'publ?icrshghway.;
The-new? highway would .extend: the-:hissting. Evans:Roads.approxiinately,,3,,:500. feet
to the northwest from where' it.`currently.ends'.at`Weston T rkw :(r, -,,1653);
across Crabtree Creek to Aviation Parkway (S.R.-1002). The proposed highway
embantrnteiit ould :be .an ta?rerage .,of pgxo?cimaL , 9? ,e ttdth
{maximum 31$ feet), where .i `` e ti
approximatety-- 64, acr
would ,4-ncllude :,.a-.3 -°fe
trail; vhibb=-vould 'connI6e ?Mr
embankment/-3 ould also iricl'lidej;four: cu lver'ts,;tazne, 24-1mch, and one
66-inch. •" pproximately 95 oubic yards of cle'ah?*arthVEill 4o?i ed
below ordinary high water • •to relocate -`a tributary "to Crabtree .Creek, `and stone
riprap would be placed'within,Crabtree - Creekto facilitate-; a bridge crossing.
To compensate for the proposed-4wetlands '1oss', the applicant, proposes to
restore and .create a- total; of .approximately` b . 7 : to.` 12<:-7 acres.: of- wetlands .
The final°acreage.: of?compensation~-area, would dependfvn final design
calculations of flood: storage ,capacity and and Thw°'further excavation needed
to mitigate,Ithe'storage capacity deficit.' The.:applicant proposes to grade,
and plant with wetland plant species, as appropriate, seven areas contiguous
with Crabtree Creek's adjacent wetlands. The compensation sites would be
monitored for viability for a minimum period of 2 years following planting.
-Plans for the proposed construction are included with this public notice._
The State of North Carolina will review this public notice to determine
the need for the applicant to obtain any required State authorization. No
DA permit will be issued until the coordinated State viewpoint on the proposal
has been received and reviewed by this agency, nor will a DA permit be issued
until the North Carolina Division of Environmental Management (DEM) has
determined the applicability of a Water Quality Certificate as required by
PL 92-500.
-2-
This application is being considered pursuant to Section 404(b) of the
.Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). Any person may request, in writing within
the comment period specified in the notice, that a public hearing be held to
consider this application. Requests for public hearing shall state, with
particularity, the reasons for holding a public hearing.
The District Engineer has consulted the latest published version of the
National Register of Historic Places for the presence or absence of registered
properties, or properties listed as being eligible for inclusion therein, and
this worksite is not registered property or-property listed as. being- eligible
for inclusion in the Register. Consultation of the National Register
constitutes the extent of cultural resource investigations by the District
Engineer,:::and he is otherwise unaware of the presence,of..such resources.
Presently-,,-_ unknown archeological, scientific,. prehistorical,::or,historical
data may be lost or,destroyed by work under. the requested -permit.
-The. Mistrict Engineer has .determined, based on .a :review of data, furnished
by the -applicant and onsite: observations,.; that,the;tactivity jw ll,iaot affect
apecies.,Z or,. ?their-:rcritical-,_habitat,, designated as;:endangered , vOvo a eatened
pursuant to) the, EndangeredSpecies - Acts o£ -1973. ` 1 Qsx ? :;; r r .. .-
±31?-C
The (decision :whether to_ issue't a permit will( be Lbas `
p
the probable dmpapts? ncI.uding,.aumulati 0 ,
MAnp
and :itsU &ende& us ub tame
impacts- -vhichr the
case, The-:benefits-'which. reasonab1y.. n' y. beaexp ct?edr-tas , rat:
proposal amust !be. balanced=.against.. ixs xeasonably-? foresbe _ -'* he
decision whether to authorize .a:proposai,fi and.-if so.: ,the.cot?d t i rider, which
it will be allowed to: occurare,; therefore ;,determined by tie gout mei of.-the
general balancing.process. That ;decision should reflect; .the;;.national, concern
for both protection and. utilization; of important. resources..,:,.All Sactors which
may be relevant tothe. proposal must be considered includin& then:cumulative
effects thereof. Among-: those are conservationeconomics, Aesthetics, general
environmental concerns, wetlands, cultural values, fish and wildlife values,
flood hazards, flood plain values, land use, navigation,. shore: erosion and
accretion, recreation, water supply and conservation,, water<quality, energy
needs, safety, food and fiber production, mineral needs, considerations, of
property ownership, and, in general, the needs and welfare of the people. For
activities involving the placement of dredged or fill materials in waters of
the United States, a permit will be denied if the discharge that would be
authorized by such permit would not comply with the Environmental Protection
Agencies' 404(b)(1) guidelines. Subject to the preceding sentence and any
other applicable guidelines or criteria, a permit will be granted unless the
District Engineer determines that it would be contrary to the public interest.

-3-
The Corps of Engineers is soliciting comments from the public; Federal,
State, and local agencies and officials; Indian Tribes, and other interested
parties in order to consider and evaluate the impacts of this proposed
activity. Any comments received will be considered by the Corps of Engineers
to determine whether to issue, modify, condition, or deny a permit for this
proposal. To make this decision, comments are used to assess impacts on
endangered species, historic properties, water quality, general environmental
effects, and the other public interest factors listed above. Comments are
used in preparation of an Environmental Assessment and/or Environmental Impact
Statement pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act. Comments. are
also used to determine the need for a public hearing and to determine the
overall public interest of the proposed activity.
Generally, the decision whether to issue this DA permit will not be made
until the DEM issues, denies,`or waives State certification required by
Section 401 of the Clean Water Act.. The DEM considers -.whether or not the
proposed activity will comply with Sections 301,'-302, 306, and 307 of the
Clean Water Act.; The application and-:this-public notice ;for the DA permit.
serves as Application to the DEM_forwcer.tification.
Additional information regardtQO hd"C'ean7Wate Act certification may be,
reviewed at the.offices of the E ental Qpe ations_Section, North ;
Carolina Division-of E' a meet traet,uA' r"?
Building, Raleigh'?No'rth 1 '
to any person reque`tg
The North.Carolina-.Division of_ rtviron?nentah t plans to take''. t,
final action` in the issuance of"itho" C1ean.Watericaton on or jafter
M
January 7, 1991
4
x.`
All persons desiring to make-comments regarding the'application for Clean
Water Act certification should, do so'-'in writing,:"delivered to, the North
Carolina Division of Environmental ;Management,'.Post'.Office Box 27687, Raleigh,
North Carolina 27611-7687, on or before December 31,....:1990, Attention:
Mr. William Mills
Written comments pertinent to the proposed work, as outlined above, will
be received in this office, Attention: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer, until 4:15 p.m.,
January.14, 1991, or telephone [phone].
Win; d? ,ct
•.^? .4
`A IA ISITE m'
? x"
PROA=
MAP
IT Y
_ SOURCE:: w: J-4R G ? 44
Arr j-
R « 1? N n M
.. 1 1J ? ? J ? { f ?
.• a f
• ) f
+ a { ..
SITE MAP
SOURCE:-N.C. HIGHWAY MAP
SCALE ?..
i0 0 to N?c?s
EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
No WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
The proposed project is a joint venture NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
between the north Carolina Department of
Transportation and two private developers,
North Uills Properties, Inc. and Silverton, Inc Sheet 1 of 7 NOV, 1990
c
Y I DENOTES WETLANDS
AX
''OK
AVIAt1pp0A2)
,END PROJECT SSA. T?'?ryIO???.?,.
Rid I?
TO
Y a 4 E
d 3z
I 0 A O • , ; YIAKE COUNTY GREENWAYS TRAIL
W E-4
?? 1 O
L 04 N /
w " k _
. 1•_
k 1.
3
IA 4
?CItABTItEE
,! Y # CREEK
7L ' ?LAKE"CRABTREE
COLONIAL PIPELINE
. HORHAL POOL ELEV. 276:0
k #
\? s z f OAO
I k
jc??d1 1 FFti4 rs`rJ •z S?a?'S
BEGIN PROJECT 6
r LOCATION MAP
S TON PARKWAY i 1( SCALE
(SR 1795) VIII Zan'
EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
< < NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
EVANS ROAD Sheet ? of. 7 NOV, 1990
(SR 1653)
? f

/y'!A TIC 6 L / N6
w 3 j1(GAS)
.jr
pipgLlKE ?.
f?.
J
''? _? ?-- flCIS r.. COLON
t_
r.
e
3
s
777
?.
aQ
' DENOTES FILL IN WETLANDS
SCALE IN FEET
ry.
206
PLAN VIEW SHEET 1 OF 2
V_t\j' I ?\
z ` ?\ EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
a" WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
a
w N
M NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
E-4 9
w o Sheet of Z NOV, 1990
zo
• a
a

Wig I
?i ? O
?, M TREE • .
00
g "a - . SEEK s?
? ? ? X \? ETLAND;LIMIT
f
fj,
'Y
N -
G a DENOTES FILL IN WETLANDS
E
DENOTES FILL BELOW O.H.W.
SCALE IN FEET
s
266
r I PLAN VIEW SHEET 2 OF 2
o' EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
b WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
3 NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
O A
5Z , Sheet 4 of .-7- NOV, 1990
M.A4 N L/NE ,o s?
c
VA TC L /NX B
o ? I OO N
N
?
N
O
t0
4

' r
N
z
I w
?
w
?V
o
C !
'o u
n I ? O
?
0 tn 2 a
N v f 0a I
?
r r r r v I
k
O
a I
n
O I N T
I W r ]L O a

w?O

q o 5 °o ? °a' ? o a
h ?aQ ? N ?Q a
' <

,. ;, °

m

o.
N
o
m
gT
„„ o
M; w
o

r m
as
o P

r . r r $

t 0
n
N
sn _O
I
?
W
dw V
> p
o
r
??
o

' h
0
Nil 0
w? a
, q

o .

a
°
a

a 0

s
?
y 4? . Er

n A
it
?
r_.
Mr
AM

NO FILL BELOW O.H.W.
SCALE AS SHOWN
PROFILE SHEET 1 OF 2
EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
WAKE COUNTY, NORTH. CAROLINA
NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
Sheet ,_Z of 7 NOV, 1990

- z ?%v A r +
4 .
{ ?- 1
LAKE CRABTREE
NORMAL POOL ELEV. 276.0
EXCAVATE TO ELEV. 276. \

(SEE TABLE BELOW) 0 \
-Y VP
±
+ - -! -- ? VAR .aI t 4
--
VA R.
J
. EXISTING MARSH
a 4 -I- 4- 4. 4
TYPICAL SECTION A-A
PROPOSED WETLAUD MITIGATION SITES
NO SCALE
Potential NetlandsMood Storage-Mitigation Sites
Site Acres Acre-feet f
to i i
. 1038- 4.83
a z
18 ¢` e 2 O7
uv 3 ' +
6 0,30 r? 0.75 3
7 0.90 1.35
4 (as needed) 0 '- 6.0 _0" - -24.00
Total 12.75 Acres • 39.57 acre-feet
SUMMARY OF QUANTITIES FOR PROPOSED ROAD
TOTAL AREA OF FILL IN.WETLANDS= 2.64 Ac.
FILL BELOW O.H.W. = 95 C.Y.
TOTAL FILL IN'WETLANDS = 41,900 C.Y.
PROPERTY OWNERS
North Hills Properties, Inc.
P. O. Box 17004
Raleigh, North Carolina 27619
wake county Government
c/o Mr. Richard Y. Stevens
Wake County Manager
P. O. Box 550
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602
EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
.Sheet 7 of Z NOV, 1990
.41- .- ` "
/9'91
s??
Burton, Adams, Kemp & King, Inc.
INIGINEERS
224 Fayetteville Street Mall
Post Office Box 311
November 20, 1990 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602-0311
919/856-1777
- 1:
FAX [phone]; r'-'

District Engineer
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
RE: N.C.D.O.T. Project U-2403; Proposed Evans Road Extension over Crabtree
Creek in Cary, North Carolina
Dear Sir.
Enclosed please find one copy of application for ;permit to place IM -in wetlands as
required under Section 404 of The Clean Water Act. Also enclosed are drawings indicating
the extent of proposed work within wetlands, a proposed wetland mitigation plan, and a'
proposed wetland monitoring 'p
The. propo
The North Carolina Department of.Thinsportation is partld Ling in the cost of this project
and will take over future maintenance responsibilities o e bridge and roadway ` after
construction, as well as the wetland mitigation sites.
As consulting engineer for this project, please direct future correspondence to Burton,
Adams, Kemp, and King, Inc.
Sincerely,
Roger P.E.
Senior Vice President, Special Services
RDUtm
cc: A.M. Rohmani, NCDOT
Enclosure
FOR
PFRA•11T TO EXCAVATE AND/OR FILL WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
EASEMENT IN LANDS COVERED BY WATER CAMA PERMIT FOR MAJOR DEVELOPMENT
Department of Administration State of North Carolina Department of the Army
(GS 146.12) Department or Natural Resources and Community Development Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
(GS 113-229, 1.13.215.3(a)(1), 143-215.3(c), 113A-118 (33 CFR 209.320.329)
Please type or print and fill in all blanks. If information is not applicable, so indicate by placing N/A in blank.
1. Applicant information
A. Name Ford E. Julian
Last First Middle •
D. Address North Hills ProFerties, Inc., P.O. Box 17004
Street, P. O. Box. or Route
Raleigh N.C. 27619 (919)-6.77-1003
City or Town State Zip Code Phone
11- Location of Proposed Project:
A. County Wake
B. 1. City, town, community or landmark--- Cary
2. Is proposed work within city limits? Yes X No
C. Creek, river, sound or bay upon which project is located or nearest named body of water to project
Crabtree Creek
111. Description of Project
A. 1. Maintenance of existing project 2. New work prams _d 4-Lan H i ghwa v
e
1 M
B. Purpose of excavation or @ V.
1. Access channel length` " a
2. Boat basin dt'gth's
3. FillareaHiahwav Embankmnirength±l 500 Evdth- ` depth
4. Other length width depth 1 j
C. 1. Bulkhead length N/A Average distance waterward of MHW (shoreline) nL
2. Type of bulkhead construction (material)
D. Excavated material (total for project)
1. Cubic yards N/A 2. Type of material
E. Fill material to be placed below MHW (see also VI. A)
1: Cubic yards 95 2. Type ofmatcrial Earth Material Suitable for Hwy.
IV. Land Type, Disposal Area, and Construction Equipment:
A. Does the area lu be excavated include any marshland, swamps or other wetland? Yes No X
B. Does the disposal area include any marshland, swamps or other wetland? Yes * No
C. Disposal Area
1. Location within Project R/W & other areas at Contractors' option
2- Do you claim title to disposal areal R/W to be dedicated to NCDOT
D. Fill material source if fill is to be trucked in wetland mitigation sites f/or borrow pit
E. How will excavated material be entrapped and erosion controlled? stringent erosion control measure:
F. Type of equipment to be used Highway Construction Equipment
G. Will marshland be crossed in transporting equipment to project site? If yes,,i xplain Yes - under proposed _
fill
* Suitable material found in wetland mitigation areas will be used for
roadway embankment.
D& F•91
Rev, 10/78
V. Interud-d U._- of Prcjact Are: (Describe)
" A. 1. Private
2. Commercial
3. Housin; Development or Industrial
4. Other- Public Highway
B. 1. Lot size(s)
2. Elevation of lot(s) above mean high water
3. Soil type and texture
4. Type of building facilities or structures
S. Sewage disposal and/or waste water treatment A. Existing Planned
0. Describe
6. Land Classification (circle one) DEVELOPED TRANSITIONAL COMMUNfi'Y RURAL
CONSERVATION OTHER (Sec CAMA Local Land Use Plan Synopsis)
VI. Pertaining to Fill and Water Quality:
A. Does the proposed project involve the placement of fill materials below mean high water? Yes _X No
B. 1. Will any runoff or discharge enter adjacent waters as a result of project activity or planned use of the
area following project completion? Yes X No
2. Type of discharge Rainwater runoff
3. Location ofdischarge through storm sewers &roadside d; he
Vil. Present rate of shoreline erosion (if known): N/A
Vill. List permit numbers and issue dates of previous Department of Army Corps of Engineers or State permits for ,
work in project area, if applicable: N/A '
IX. Length of time required to complete project: - 2 Years
X. In addition to the coml
A. Attach a copy of
claims title to then
B.
then forward a copy
permission from the owner to carry out the project on.his land.
Attach an accurate work plat drawn to scale on 8% X 11" white paper (sec instruction booklet for
details). Note: Original drawings preferred - only high quality copies accepted.
C. A copy of the application and plat must be served upon adjacent riparian landowners by registered or
certified mail or by publication (G.S. 113-229 (d))Enter date served
D. List names and complete addresses of the riparian landowners with property adjoining applicant's.
Such owners have 30 days in which to submit comments to agencies listed below.
__ North Hills Properties , Tnr•. P-0 Rnx 1 7(104 Ra 1 ai ah N C 9761 ?
- Wake County Government /o Mr. Richard Y Stevens Wa1kp Cntlnt-w M&r-
P.O. Box 550. Raleirrh. N-C_ X7602
XI. Certification requirement: 1 certify that to the best of my knowledge, the proposed activity complies
with the State of North Carolina's approved coastal management program and will be conducted in a
manner consistent with such program.
XI1. Any permit issued pursuant to this application will allow only the development described in this appli-
cation and plat. Applicants should. therefore describe in the application and plat all anticipated devel-
opment activities, including construction, excavation, filling, and land clearing.
DATE
Applicant's Signature
Y.
D&F-02 SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR MAILING INSTRUCTIONS
Rev. 10/78 '..
r IA.•
=--k7,a2i S I TE
BEGIN
rt B ?
S I TE
A

?I

r iwi•. swan: ' O H N. r T
14
•r•vwM M I
SITE MA
SOURCE.: N.C. HIGHWAY MAP
SCALE
?p D tD Ni?Es
EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
he proposed "WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
he project is a joint venture NCDOT PROJECT- U-2403
etween the North Carolina Department of
ransportation and two private developers,
orth Iiills Properties, Inc. and Silverton, Inc Sheet 1 of 7 NOV, 1990
Y DENOTES WETLANDS
Av1AT1 1002)
END PROJECT ?5R TE?}.SON?L ??
Rp RDO Sti
1
x ? Z W
+OO 4 Ey
a?
Y N H ?
d 3 Z
A MO // . WAKE COUNTY GREENWAYS TRAIL
W E-4
d ca
W'
k ( W N
a " 1:
k
3 `
11A CRABTREE
:e # CREEK
J
cOG?rI S4)
. ? 3 FF?? ? ass J A .2.

• `oho
Plato 74?
'
d
I0N FTL
.? ys T94j? ``/ 5
;t
BEGIN PROJECT
LOCATION MAP \
WESTON PARKWAY rll Z,??o_?T ?,
(SR 1795)
EVAN S ROAD EXTENSION
' WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
EVANS ROAD Sheet 2 Of 7 NOV, 1990
(SR 1653)
?A
/?'IATC y [ //yS A
-?? ?_ ? ? ? /? I T ICOLOgI2?L PIPELIK ?+ ?`
EX _?
J
I
W 3
XO
1 ^
I
}
3 Kro DENOTES FILL IN WETLANDS
SCALE IN FEET
PLAN VIEW SHEET 1 OF l2
EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
a" WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
a ,
`M VJ
N
NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
? C4
H
z o Sheet 3 of Z NOV, 1990
a
a '
3 ? mod. I? " c ? I I
H r G.1
z , _ v
a x f
a it
i
je? d >+
?° I tz-l v
M CRAB TREEEE C
REEK r?
i a 1
W L
/ .? I ?? '?TLAL4TD UtIT
t a '? 1 a ,
v _ p'
Z
4
n
110010.
G a?? DENOTES FILL IN WETLANDS
E
l y, DENOTES FILL BELOW O . H . W .
a
1-01
ti t , u s' SCALE IN FEET
d u ` J Q /00 166
I ?N ? r I o. PLAN VIEW SKEET 2 OF 2
o' EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
14 .9
n 1 ) N? . NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
5Z
?4 Sheet 4 Of -Z- NOV, 1990
MATCH -/NE A a~

N N
? N I
0

1 ;
?

hl

I ?
1 O
- - -
s
t ?1 x E

w a

o
? `'" J 0
? t/a oa
"1 N 5

ssa

W ?a ?

Q
N
N
0 o m a
W
if O .
• Q
m .
O
M
O t0 „ ? jk .

a

a

VI Q
> V
7

1
? ?4l
H
h
i

1-4
Z a
d $ a
z
m
N
W a

_ F
W
I
I
o DENOTES FILL BELOW O.H.W.

ti
o SCALE AS SHOWN
o - 9 • + p1?
0 I PROFILE SHEET 2 OF 2
N N N
A 1 1 q? ?` ??? Q
° EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
'^ Q N WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
o I
W c I
? NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
?
a a I 3 Sheet 6 of NOV, 1990
o
Z a
N N m?' c
- .
/n A TC f? 41161s
`?
IV4T.
LAKE CRABTREE
NORMAL POOL ELEV. 276.0
EXCAVATE TO ELEV. 276.0
(SEE TABLE BELOW) r y v
h ?- + -- ± VA R. -1???+ VAR-+ ? -} \ 4
EXISTING MARSH
+ 4 4 4- 4
TYPICAL SECTION A-A
PROPOSED WETLAITD MITIGATION SITES
NO SCALE
Potential Metlands/Flood Storage Mitigation Sites
Site Acres Acre-feet
1A 1.38 4.83
1B 0.59 2.07
2 2.38 3.57
3 (Rejected) lI/A M/A
5?;y 3.001:
,
6 t 0.75:`
7 t
4 (as needed) 0 - b. U 0 -"24
Total 12.75 Acres 39.57 acre-feet
SUMMARY OF QUANTITIES FOR PROPOSED ROAD
TOTAL AREA OF FILL IN WETLANDS= 2.64 Ac.
FILL BELOW O.H.W. = 9S C.Y.
TOTAL FILL IN WETLANDS = 41,900 C.Y.
PROPERTY OWNERS
North Hills Properties, Inc.
P. 0. Box 17004
Raleigh, North Carolina 27619
EVANS ROAD EXTENSION
FAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Wake County Government
c/o Mr. Richard Y. Stevens
Wake County Manager
P. O. Box 550
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602
NCDOT PROJECT U-2403
Sheet _Z of Z NOV, 1990
POTENTIAL WETLANDS/FLOOD STORAGE MITIGATION
Mitigation Sites
This project has utilized a planning process and mitigation sequencing that takes
into account the February 1990 Memorandum of Agreement between the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of the Army (Army)
concerning the determination of mitigation under the Clean Water Act Section
404 (b) (1) guidelines. Efforts were made to locate and identify the least environmentally
damaging practicable alternative that met the state project purposes. Preliminary study
lines were identified and wetland involvement determined for each. The alignment which
had the least wetland involvement was chosen in order to avoid, to the maximum extent
practicable, potential impacts.
After determining that wetlands takings could not totally be avoided with this project,
steps were taken to minimize the adverse impacts as ,much as feasible. Project
modifications included (1) reduction of right of way -from 164 feet to 120, feet through the
affected wetlands, (2) reduction of pavement lane, widths from `].2 '"feet to 11 feet to
accommodate a reduced cross-section (3) elimina of the ; adwa
{a q
steepest embankment A
roadway grade to reduce
2.7 acres -of wetlands
contiguous to this site.
Based on field examination and subsequent analysis, it appears that sufficient
opportunity exists proximal to the proposed project for on-site rather than off -site wetlands
and flood storage mitigation to occur.
A judicious selection of mitigation sites for this project allows for the balancing of
the flood storage impact and compensation for wetlands losses within the same site. These
sites, as shown on Figures 4a and 4b, (of the State EA/FONSI) were chosen for their
potential to both recover flood storage taken by the roadway embankment and remain in
close proximity to the areas of wetland losses. Table 1 lists the specific sites in priority with
the estimated acres (wetlands) and acre-feet (flood storage) noted. These sites are listed as
potential mitigation areas. Actual acreages of wetlands impacted and cubic yards of roadway
All required within the flood storage basin will be determined in the final design phase.
Coordination with the appropriate agencies for a Section 404 permit will be completed prior
to agreement on specific sites and mitigation measures for this project. Approval to use
lands within the 100-year floodplain (Wake County property) to mitigate flood storage and
wetlands impacts has been advanced by the Wake County Board of Commissioners on July
2, 1990 (refer to letter of August 22, 1990 from -Wake County in Appendix C of State
EA/FONSI).
As has been noted, wetland acreage in the Crabtree Creek riparian zone is extensive,
a result of the rise in water table associated with Lake Crabtree. However, some areas
within the floodplain do not currently exhibit wetland characteristics due to their elevation
above surrounding terrain. A total loss of approximately 2.7 acres of wetland will need to
be mitigated. A combination of restoration and creation sites is suggested as the most
effective approach to mitigate negative impacts on the wetland resource. Specific sites
identified for mitigation potential are shown on Figures 4a and 4b.
Sites ILA and 1B include approximately 2.0 acres immediately adjacent both sides of
Crabtree Creek. Site ILA includes the western levee and disturbed areas in the riparian zone.
The levee appears to be Congoree soil, while farther back from the creek on this side and
slightly upslope, the original soil appears to be Altavista, well drained in the surface
horizons but distinctly mottled at 3.5 to 4.0 feet. This mottling indicates excellent potential
for conversion to wetland after upper layers are removed. Area 1B includes the levees of
Congoree soil on the east bank between the creek channel and slackwater sloughs or
tributary stream channels entering Crabtree Creek. Original forest cover has been removed
in this location on both sides of the creek, from a point upstream of the proposed crossing,
downstream to the lake itself.
Mitigating here (Sites IA and 1B ) would provide an opportunity to restore
bottomland forest similar to that proposed for clearing to???c+?omtn ate the ro'ec?t..
Grading 3.5 feet or moresof the exishng??
match the surroundini bottdmland
After grading is complete, wetland tree species such as River liirc etnla mgrs), Green
ash Fraxinus pennsylvanica), Overcup oak uercus lyrata), and Swamp chestnut oak
uercus michauxii), should be planted to compensate for forested wetland removed along
the new causeway.
Sites 2 and 7, located approximately 1,400 + feet northeast of the proposed ROW,
includes 3.3 acres along the southeastern shore of Lake Crabtree. The soil currently here,
Wehadkee, is prone to seasonal flooding, with a seasonally high water table approximately
at the surface. Observation in May and June, hence during the current growing season,
reveals dry conditions and no wetlands species on the terrace just above the lake level.
However, shoreline uncus and cattail colonies with observed depth to saturation of about
2.5 feet on the terrace suggest that grading to a contour even with the adjacent marginal
wetland area (approx. 2.0 feet) will create a more extensive marsh area between the lake and
the grass covered sewerline ROW farther upslope. Prevailing onshore winds from across the
lake will also tend to drive water against this shore, thus periodically flooding the area. No
tree planting is proposed here because of the expected hydrologic regime.
Due to the distance from the project and its small size, Site 3, (not shown) consisting
of 0.2 acres has been rejected as a feasible mitigation site.
Site 4, contiguous with Site IA, also contains the Altavista soil discussed previously
in connection with Site IA. Therefore, removing surface material to an average depth of 4.0
feet, even with or perhaps below lake level would expose soil capable of supporting wetland
tree species, as in Site 1A. The same species of oaks and river birch are proposed for
planting here as required.
TABLE 1
Potential Wedands/F1ood Storage Mitigation Sites
(Refer to ftuues 4a and 4b)
Site
1A Acres
1.38 Acre-feet
4.38
f? 1
1B 0.59 2.07 u 5?
2 2.38 3.57
3 (Rejected) N/A N/A 6_6
5 1.20 3.00
6 0.30 0.75
7 0.90 135
4 (as needed) 0-6.0 0-24.00
TOTAL 12.75 3957
//,J5In
.S e o
laot?1''? ?--licL5 j?tc lf? J_+? v-SttJG ?ruU?rr`?f ? ?:F;a ..-r,i??,,, r,,r;.?`?P?afl `St'C 1t.?• ,Y,,i?i i?.a?"?§?' ??'I i I III, ,i?? "??' ?? ? „ ? i
ev,
7vi
Sites _5 and 6 are __ ;
adjacent to sites 2 and 7 respectively. These sites could be graded down an average of 2.5
feet to further offset flood storage capacity loss and mitigate wetlands with a similar scheme
as noted for sites 2 and 7.
As noted in Table 1 the total flood storage capacity recovered with sites 1A, 1B, 2,
5, 6, and 7 is estimated at 15.6 acre-feet. Additional recovery may or may not be needed to
achieve the 182 acre-feet depending upon final design calculations: Should additional
storage be required, Site 4 is proposed to be used only as needed to mitigate the remaining
flood storage capacity deficit.
Permit Coordination
In preparing this environmental report, information was solicited from a meeting
with Mr. Ken Jolly (U.S. Army COE) and subsequent telephone discussion with Mr. Wilson
Laney (USFWS). The step-down procedure for permit application requires that, first, this
project qualify on the basis of demonstrated need and, second, that all reasonable attempts
be made to minimize impacts on waters of the United States, including wetland acreages.
Assuming these conditions are met, the project is proposed to be permitted under Section
404 of the Clean Water Act with an appropriate mitigation plan developed to satisfy the
current federal goal of no overall net loss of wetland values and functions.
Monitoring Plan
As part of the mitigation effort for this specific project a monitoring plan to insure
that permit conditions are complied with has been developed by the N.C. Department of
Transportation in coordination with the Corps of Engineers and is attached.
PROJECT 9.8050364 U-2403
GUIDELINES FOR WETLAND MONITORING PROGRAM
I. Monitoring Timeframe - Mitigation site shall be inspected at
the following time.
A. " Prior to planting
B. At completion of planting
C. Two (2) years following completion (or after 2nd full
growing season)
TI. Data to be obtained at Specific Inspection Times
A. Prior to planting
1. Check for proper elevation and'grade, get the
permitting agency's approval on the..,elevation.
2. Check for proper plant species and for acceptable
plant quality.
Betula Nigra River Birch,
;Fraxnus.;.Penns --,--?=-
T
Note: Plant species are coil
tng?n
availability at the time of planting.
3. Check for proper planting methods
4. Check for proper plant spacing
B. At completion of planing check for conformity with
plans as well as quality of planting
C. Two (2) years following completion (or after 2nd full
growing season
1. Estimate survival rate (optional - collect data if
it can be determined)
2. Measure height of plants
3. Take Photograph(s)
4. Estimate percent polulation
a. Plant species
b. Overall (natural succession)
III. Evaluation and Recourse Action
A. Acceptable survival rate (30% population planted and
natural succession)
B. Two (2).year data evaluation
1. Below acceptable survival rate (recourse options)
a. Revegetation (supplemental or complete)
b. Minor regrading
c. Reevaluate feasibility
2. Acceptable survival rate - no action
Note: Because the area to be mitigated is not on
DOT right-of-way, agreement with the owner (Wake
County) will be needed for the initial grading and
planting, the evaluation period, and possible
replanting.

Burton, Adams, Kemp & King, Inc.
April 16, 1991
Mr. Ron Ferrell
Post Office Box 311
224 Fayetteville Street Mall
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602-0311
919/856-1777
FAX [phone]
Division of Environmental Management
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
RE: Proposed Evans Road Extension over Crabtree Creek in Cary,
NCDOT Project U-2403
Dear Mr. Ferrell:
We are pleased to provide the following information in response to the items listed
in your letter of January 31, 1991. Due to the nature of the comments additional time was
necessary to review the application and prepare the appropriate responses.
The basis for the projected traffic demand is data collected and prepared by the
North Carolina Department of Transportation through their Statewide Planning and
Research Units. Traffic counts are taken on various highways and entered into computer
models along with data on population growth rates, economic activity, planned highway
improvements and historic traffic patterns. Traffic projections for roadways within this
project study area were prepared by taking this data and forecasting future demands along
I-40, Harrison Avenue, NC 54 and other roads in the vicinity. These traffic numbers are
further refined by traffic analysts in the Research Unit to reflect existing and/or planned
improvements or other factors which may not have been previously taken into account. The
traffic projections approved for use by NCDOT are shown on Figures 2a and 2b of the
approved EA/FONSI for the project. The traffic projections made for the Evans Road
project do take into account the recent six-lane widening of I-40 and the planned
improvement of I-40 to eight lanes.
The projected increase in traffic for the Harrison Avenue interchange is not 3,900
vehicles per day by 2010 as stated in your comments. The correct increase is projected to
be 14,800 vehicles per day. The 3,900 vpd figure was apparently derived from the difference
between the 2010 projections for the road network comparing the traffic with and without
the Evans Road Extension.
Page 2
Mr. Ron Ferrell
April 16, 1991
Upgrading the existing roads (NC 54 and North Harrison Avenue) and the
interchange to accommodate the projected traffic demand will not by itself adequately
address the future traffic needs in the study area. Capacity analyses were performed to
evaluate the existing road network to see if it could handle the future traffic. The analyses
showed that the existing lanes without improvements would suffer breakdown conditions
(level-of-service F). Widening NC 54, North Harrison Avenue to four and five lane sections
respectively, also results in levels-of-service E and F. These levels of service for arterial
facilities are considered unacceptable for adequate traffic operations. The capacity analyses
work sheets supporting these findings were previously supplied and approved by NCDOT
and submitted to the Corps on January 23, 1991 in response to their request for additional
detail.
Even by adding the multi-lane section of Evans Road Extension and widening NC 54
and North Harrison Avenue we find only a marginal improvement in level-of-service for NC
54 and North Harrison Avenue. It is our opinion that six lanes will ultimately be required
on NC 54 and North Harrison Avenue as well as major improvements to the North Harrison
Avenue interchange with I-40 in order to achieve the desirable levels-of-service (LOS C or
D) for this network.
The basis premise found in this analysis is that the rapid growth of the Cary area,
specifically the north Cary area, over the next 10 to 20 years is demanding additional
infrastructure be supplied to handle this increase in population and business activity. Simply
widening the existing two roads which provide north-south travel in the north Cary area will
not be sufficient to satisfy the traffic demands at acceptable levels.
In reference to the mitigation plan, a summary of the mitigation measures offered is
contained within the approved EA/FONSI document for this project. Additional information
concerning the mitigation measures were provided to the Corps of Engineers in the Section
404 permit application, including a monitoring plan developed by NCDOT. The mitigation
and monitoring plans were reviewed in light of this comment and additional detail has been
prepared and was submitted to the Corps. A copy of this is attached for your information.
NCDOT continues to feel that a two (2) year monitoring program is adequate. Other recent
permits in more sensitive wetland areas have been acquired utilizing the two (2) year
monitoring plan. Additional detail on size, height and plant spacing is provided in the
attached Wetland Monitoring Program. An acceptable survival rate of 30% population
planted and natural succession is proposed. In addition, a planting schedule and landscape
design plans are being prepared by the Roadside Environmental Unit of NCDOT and will
be included within the final design plans.
Page 3
Mr. Ron Ferrell
April 16, 1991
If I can be of further assistance please contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Roger D. Lewis, P.E.
Senior Vice President, Special Services
RDL/RGH/tm
Attachment
cc: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer, Corps of Engineers, Raleigh Field Office
y.
JAMES G. MARTIN
GOVERNOR
THOMAS J. HARRELSON
SECRETARY
MEMORANDUM TO: Ron Hair
Feb 19, 1991

DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
WILLIAM G. MARLEY, JR., P.E.
STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR
BAKK Consultants
Raleigh, NC ?f
FROM: V. Charles Bruton
Environmental Unit Head
Planning & Environmental Branch
SUBJECT: Wake County, Project 9.8050364, U-2403,
Proposed Evans Rd Extension, Crabtree Creek,
Guidelines for Wetland Monitoring Program.
In accordance with discussions at the recent meeting held at
my office on the above project, I am enclosing revised
monitoring guidelines as prepared by the Roadside
Environmental Unit.
f:corr\u-2403.1
cc: BJ O'Quinn, P&E
R.Covington, Rdside Env.
R. Elmore, Cnslnt Cord Unit
d ?,a Sfi1TF o
•? Gavw ?'?
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P.O. BOX 25201
RALEIGH 27611-5201
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer

PROJECT 9.8050364 U-2403
GUIDELINES FOR WETLAND MONITORING PROGRAM
I. Monitoring Timeframe - Mitigation site shall be inspected at
the following time.
A. Prior to planting
B. At completion of planting
C. Two (2) years following completion (or after 2nd full
growing season)
II. Data to be Obtained at Specific Inspection Times
A. Prior to planting
.1. Check for proper elevation and grade, get the
permitting agency's approval on the elevation.
2. Check for proper plant species and for acceptable
plant quality.
Betula Nigra - River Birch, 15-18", Seedling, Br.
Fraxinus Pennsylvania - Green Ash, 15-18", Seedling Br.
Quercus Lyrata - Overcup Oak, 12-15", Seedling, Br.
Quercus Michanxii - Swamp Chestnut Oak, 12-1511,
Seedling Br.
Note: Plant species are contingent on
availability at the time of planting.
3. check for proper planting methods
4. Check for proper plant spacing (20' O.C.)
B. At completion of planting check for conformity with
plans as well as quality of planting
t
C. Two (2) years following completion (or after 2nd full
growing season
1. Estimate survival rate (optional - collect data if
it can be determined)
2. Measure height of plants
3. Take Photograph(s)
4. Estimate percent polulation
a. Plant species
b. Overall (natural succession)

III. Evaluation and Recourse Action
A. Acceptable survival rate (30% population planted and
natural succession)
B. Two (2) year data evaluation
1. Below acceptable survival rate (recourse options)
a. Revegetation (supplemental or complete)
b. Minor regrading
c. Reevaluate feasibility -
2. Acceptable survival rate - no action
Note: Because the area to be mitigated is not on
DOT right-of-way, agreement with the owner (Wake
County) will be needed for the initial grading and
planting, the evaluation period, and possible
replanting.

Burton, Adams, Kemp & King, Inc.
May 3, 1991
Mr. Ron Ferrell
Division of Environmental Management
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611-7687
Post Office Box 311
224 Fayetteville Street Mall
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602-0311
919/856-1777
FAX [phone]
Subject: Coordination Meeting for Section 404
Permit for TIP Project U-2403, Evans Road Extension;
:pct-ion ID, 199100141
Dear Mr. Ferrell:
This is to confirm a meeting that has been scheduled on
Wednesday, May 8, 1991 at 9:00 AM to discuss the Section 404 Permit
application for the Evans Road Extension Project. The location
will be in the Third Floor Conference Room of North Hills
Properties, Inc., 4224 Six Forks Road, Raleigh, North Carolina.
The US Army Corps of Engineers has requested this meeting of
interested parties to discuss project concerns and expedite the
permit process.
If there are any questions concerning themeeting please call
Mr. Eric Alsmeyer, COE at [phone].
Sin e ly,
au
Ronald Hairr
Project Manager
Burton, Adams, Kemp & King, Inc.
RGH/jad
cc: Mr. Julian Ford, North Hills Properties, Inc.
Mr. David Wagner, North Hills Properties, Inc.
Mr. Roger Lewis, BAKK
Dr. Larry Goode, Director, NCDOT Programs, Policy & Budget
Mr. Barney O'Quinn, NCDOT Planning
Mr. Frank Roebuck, Silverton, Inc.
Mr. Ron Ferrell, NC Div. of Environmental, Health, Natural
Resources - Div. of Environmental Management
Mr. Ken Jolly, US Corps of Engineers
Mr. Eric Alsmeyer, US Corps of Engineers
Ms. L.K. Mike Gantt, US Fish and Wildlife Service
Page 2
May 3, 1991
Mr. Lee Pelej, US Environmental Protection Agency
Mr. Mike Crocker, US Fish and Wildlife Service
Mr. Doug Spell, Cary Town Engineer
a

` N1 G c,.
T L
Altt,oug:. the - ewpoint racord is roe complete due to the vorti.n???? ?$
the processing for the 401 Certification, the responses to date-a
significant and should be considered at this time- Three key agencies e:ave
entered sound objections and/or expressions of Concern, Having reviawad cFher
impacts to the Crabtree 'reek in recent years, the writer shares the concern
with additional proposed fragmentation of this important urban greenway,
wildlife corridor and urban runolt?r ands perhaps, proposed.
impossible enimpact to
ganerally considered the most difficu
mitigate.
Those agencies submitting substantive comments and a summary of each
follows, Agency submittals are enclosed for your further review,
Division of Parks and Recreation Natural Heritage Program - ,?.,.
- "?onc8zns are so strung that the grogram feels the road should
not be 1+ui t. -there will be considerable damage to the natural
e^,,:1 _, went , particularly regarding fragmentation of a bottom-
ar..5.nd swamp" , ""tie EA/FOIvSI does not appear to have made a
str._,& enough case to justify need for this new road, which
;; s _,-as a w-_da f lnodDiain of significant natural features".sie, tance ..,.questions the benefit tt
S destract-,on _f these wetlands Public
- y L
.. t.,Y '?•+'.,?tl"il: t ?6e a substantial Public C Or
not built vi if the project was
r
f

J'
t
I In
may i,
or -S- C
hi ?
project irrlthet ` ._
1rP.yr_mt i .t?nYL1 ?BI??6ill] f;"s' ? ?. a ?_ !5,.,
y ? :? a s F m ia.iflr) t
"? e9 ti. l bl`li ,
r-
...-._._ _ty??,.*?`?.'?•-'may y l,? v
Jorih Parker, Jr?
pile'SJ"Y1
ccs Division of Envitormenta M?
Wildlife Resources COMMiSSL`ail
Division of Community kssistance
Division of ',arks & Reer"it-ion
Enclosure

I?
i
r

r
iI
-.._>- -,
i-
?at?ua?Y
404 ????, ranker . "?
w ti ? a
i d extens-&- rl aG_ :ass
?
aYl:d
Wet
CI Cek
El R P. N 7: concel 71F
.?r y?•r?P}?a??.1 t3- G. 4rr??L 77..:? ,yy?? d-t¢s V?J?r ?jl6l?ellO,. ,7 I?ni1
EA,, ? i uN ? .'. l.ile ?tVY ,..i.r?c i+°?J S?,A ?f? g?. ,q. t.?1: g
p??w ® `r?,?,: 'j WA e, S tYla the road 5klo - i tvt,t be
.
tc the rlatuxa
w`.i Qe .rit?7a? ?agmltation Cif a _
?it ?, xeg,,ding r
rte ?ti ,iand al3Ci awamp
a??iror?-nent . r 1
dlTiOnt as a
! and swamp ; to
t tomjar
wildlife has berme s-ay e 2 L Ln the htreellis!G r ejo4tan Lake, and
as
creation of r_ese'rvoir e?wh tc, have made a s4-rang L;Q .^?• 1-is aew r0ar+e which t) ects
Falls Lake, 'The EAI°F???q d aF? case to jlilSti?(",? ... -
o?c r ?. ,?- .tea fea,?ares .
c
or
Wi43e i?.CJp jx :?zllr.-'e%? a ...
G l a -'s'
Enclosure
JAN
,l
ll
1
COASTAL
In 11:
T) VTSI ON P AF--'- Atr?. RE,
iover.ber 14, 199
Me c a 11I,
??'>-U 1:
UBJLCT
Melba McGee
Gar, Ti.ng.L I `.{
LeGxandr Natural Heritage program
I4arrY
16 E'x Yens ic?r3 , Fake r; .
EAiFI;I ?,r E?rans R?rad
nEpEFdENCE : 9- 0 2 9 4,
a C?NSithe
e:°y.°?ed `?.e EAI we canna'
u ritage Pr.ogxm, has Crabtree Creek:
The Natural e.e r n acr, ss ill riot has e'
R -653' etea i.
Evan Road ( +- on page 51 that ,the project w
ent" . The Nat era::
enu rl ion about the
Support. the statemen- - i
nformat?n
ir!g
a significant adverse impact on t
the E"/,,t FONS1 also
Heritage Prvgrafi is not dawar , Pages 51 Of p Health &
Envircnn. - nr. ?n
protect was ever rece r)epartment o- in the P1a
indicates t teat -ibe N • lted about
??ICL* the 41e pxaI?fec` _om any of the
," was car?sia¢ ~ ???er ?iecu?,??ar y
Natural Rescthe EA/F contains :c
?. ?`ON?.? ,??- . ? stems -• a {
: a9°sr Ye'- the e epa tM(arI7 r4fient i ncludi119
that dep material
?agencies in ?athat agencies :ten ing
:d it mad suggest - never did see scop
the Natural Hezitage Frogr ab r
Evans AV ex-=
aucut ? the report by E1 ark and
FrcgraM ,cor.,nend», the the
The Natural Heritage 'T'heir
90) that describes the 2?acfra?cREAIT't?NS11?n
Fyraham (19 s- x the wetlands,
proposed project area (page Partioularl? as is ttie=r
well presented, material or,
des?;riPtion of the resourc iss ° very This
ro cased action,
, and wildlife,
vegetation acts of th that t?^ere will
e p p 2"1
slammar'y of the imp cle?.r be a
resources makes it very and ans. ral populations iPages
natural sig.?if icant impact on w The Y,?w road would create This is even
and s Of t.1e EA/FONSI + .. t f cr a . iraal species,
important bottomlan A .the, }- . " y:: ent less Of hunr a treecres of
cif , e.e
more critical becauwetYit the ?.?nstructioz? of Lake ?,
ropDeed road site s <, the
bottomla sor t
nd habitat from tie p
loss of extensive battamlar`lds swam and the
ir-,InediatelY downstre&7dcuss f
has been a tremenCarolina in the last decade ,Tordansiakes t-~
Piedmont of Korth such as Falls and that further
are
h;ga:y (such as 1-40) swamps
constructs oll of reservoir s
cdnst.ruct cnio?droads and hi9 hese Tr'i.asandsic 9as plant resources*
Few rf t:?n bisect the f J- P -f tale Wildlife
now left for the bene:,?-t ?
.y
y i ` +'C L1 v? 'r ? ,' s hY.° potential for a titigrl.t.i-Z:'r, 07 tyae
Ord `? .. " be corst x a clt t,4, n A toted of
wetlr?dss:s, if the roan were tc
acres of we ;.:pan b . ld e impacted 'page 22) however, , the
2.7 Natural ; i .ag Program is concerned about the grad ng of
r uplands tc create wetlands that would mitigate the wetland loss
pages 41-19:. This Is particularly the case where the uplands
are forested. Presently-forested uplands should not be
cleared and then graded downward several feet just to produce
/ wetlands for mitigation. However, if the uplands are presently
in an unforested stage, then removal, of several feet of soil to
create wetlanas would be less a concern to the Natural Heritage
Program.
In summary, the Natural Heritage Pro-gram has ma or concerns abou.
the extensioin of Evans Road across the Crabtree Creek f "loodpl.ain <.
impacts to the naturalnvira!-ment are ,or.siser3ale, and we
?relieve that the raatUl:al e?kv??crAr;a;.t wo??d be 'tet<ter ser e y by
not having any new road cressi igs cf the Czattree Creek
-f loodplai.n above Lake : ' :

71? ?•: -T C:?a?LCa •.
arker = Jr.
TO% E ccbdii?a???
4,34 fiartti1ton j ?
Fcichard+ Li''ector S
1rpC?M= Aeeaetan fy, ?y y+c ?j y
DA'I'?+ i a allaiX 1 r
COUnty
li otl c 3
SUS i Inc
uoxth Mills Fxcetrtieep 'p msed a
lti'a l Las -.r 51-x# i
on 01-1
fe Mas",rues ar-d 'Dlologistx ec„ ar` aL,
The W ?. a ropoaad ?'D t V&JUes of tuezn?er 1 and 1
r s1j1 '? +f th F the ra4} t? ?- -t,AOTJ
n Ma
r wit• cond%jcte, on ocnsz
tF' Lon waa r aeeeasin?3 ?, arts are
are fam a
r 5 to .in des of furthe oes . p;?r Qn r..SC4 the ??oxth
o., ? for the purpose and wildlife xeso?x visi o • ? as
X99 fish an wit's certain Pxv113x,-1 at seq.?
iaets on Aot a Coordina"
nxovided in nao?;ordanoe poil 8,nd Wildlif whole a
'iron't`gntan?i Mhs fish et seq'?
CarolinaGAG5} 16 U.
mended ? as amended
a A nvolved •
n,t 4, Stat • 4 "'
t,;ion is a Envixonnentas
Federal ac Ts oni tYi we are
oo??en? ?? i 1g90 s ant for a.
As we Stated in oract -NOvax:.ber it, s pres.
ect
in th
op e following
for thiV prc?7 s ,xo?1
went lv 'Sed to tra denied for
Aaseas ar
r,it be
verb' stxon d that this
We ommen the work being
reasons: ig not dependent on
im
this Protect
etlands " d'o;
ate w
d
b not thQ o'??'lY inve$ti?3'te
atives were altexn'tiV was
altern damag in?3
the least en:?rrt?nmentall'
-? t ealeote6 r Suitab=O
? ?? ;-arb Y1

?I
'4I
I,II
I OFF
Y
0
f
l

Page 2
ijantuarj, 11, 1991
7?7e d y: a .and the need for adequate roads to serve ?
rapidly gr w :gig area such as Raleigh-Cary-RTP, but we
believe that a we'll designed road system can handle traffic,
volumes without undue sacrifice of the natural environment,
It appears that this project is more one of %nvsnience than
of necessity. Therefore, we must recommend Fiat high quality
wetland and upland habitats not, be sacrificed for this
project. our recommendation is for tk:e no-build alternative.
For detailed info--_t-:nation regarding our review of the
specific environmental impacts of this project, please see
our comments of November 27, 1990 concerning the
Environmental Assessment.
Thank you for the opportunity ro review and conmenr on
this document.
RBH/ 1p
cc; The Honorable Eugene Price
,tike Scruggs, District 3 Wildlife Biologist
r
Y
? f kl
e .. _ _ v l?.
+ AP
f I{ Ix"
I3 •tir ?? :Y}???
i
f l 1. ?1 M?.. L G! _?
worth Carolina
Department of Economic and Community Development
?ernes t : Malt. n, (3on-emor j
M E M O R A N D U M
To ..'Chn Parker, U ^ri Cuor:..:: - -
'... :c1 m`o+?
C' ViSion of Mo sr.$? tea :ale a s?

SUBJEC Com:aents Public Noi- i me Nzw ? 1 ry?
-'..G Raleigh i-eq-_Ontal Cffice Uf the D1+Jision Oi Community Assistance :as
re?,lswed 'u"yic `Notice NO. U0143 for application by North Hills Properties.
iiyc. to place appr,?ximata";fir 41,90r f'??i ands of clew till ?Y!atBriainto
YC?Ia .cis ad."scent to Crabtree Creek for the con?txuction of a four-lane public
road, ther=eby destroying approximately 2.64 acres of bottongland hardwood wet-
lands, and questions the benefit to the public ir7 light of the destr';ction of
these wetlands.
APpduximately 46% of the entire length of the proposes project, Evans street
Extension from, Weston Parkway to Aviation: Parkway, is through: wetlands. The
r..oil=wetl$nd properties adjoining this proposed rcadwsy are directly accessible
from eith:ar Weston Parkway or Aviation Parkway. !Weston Parkway, where Evans
Street carrently ends, provides direct access to NC 54 a..,l tc North Harrison
Avenue, kablic Notice No, 00143 does not IemcT.strate a s J.: -:tantial Pabl.ic or
P i;.®ts need which would not be met if the project Was not Lailt as proposed.
As proposed, the roadway across the wetland area a,id flood plain of Crabtree
Greek will cut off the large Wetland area southwest of the project from Lake
Crabtree and the wetland areas near it, thus destroying an open ar!d safe
wildlife corridor.
The applicant- proposes wetland mitigation: siteo whic1n, are wall located adla
cent to axis'-i.?g wetr,a ??s, The public nati ? states that "the applicant
proposes to restore ae; create a total of approximately 6.7 to 12,7 +acreb of
wetlands", If t hs p- ect is approved with the rnA to gati .= teas, the m:.tz a-
-,
t ion areas sha`?«Ld :besigned to create a viable bottornlat,.d hardwood wetlar;3
++yth species a,t?res,ost siiri'ar to those wetlands destroyed and whiGh
ca p-Lament the ? 5 t2g we ;.l?trrd areas

•t
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
512 North Salisbury Street + Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Governor William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary
Dr. G. Wayne Wright
Corps of Engineers
P. 0. Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402
Dear Dr. Wright:
In keeping with your request, this office has circulated to interested
state review ;agencies- U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Public Notice Action ID
199100143 dated December 13, 1990 which describes a project proposed by North
Hills Properties, Inc. of Raleigh. The project, involving wetland fill
amounting to 2.64 acres to facilitate construction of a new four lane
connector highway, is located in the Crabtree Creek flood plain at Cary, in
Wake County.
Although the viewpoint record is not complete due to the continuing of
the processing for the 401 Certification, the responses to date are
significant and should be considered at this time. Three key agencies have
entered sound objections and/or expressions of concern. Having reviewed other
impacts to the Crabtree Creek in recent years, the writer shares the concern
with additional proposed fragmentation of this important urban greenway,
wildlife corridor and urban runoff filter being proposed. Fragmentation is
generally considered the most difficult, and perhaps, impossible impact to
mitigate.
Those agencies submitting substantive comments and a summary of each
follows. Agency submittals are enclosed for your further review.
Division of Parks and Recreation, Natural Heritaee Proaran - "....
"Concerns are so strong that the program feels the road should
not be built. There will be considerable damage to the natural
environment, particularly regarding fragmentation of a bottom-
land and swamp". "The EA/FONSI does not appear to have made a
strong enough case to justify need for this new road, which
bisects a wide floodplain of significant natural features".
Division of of Community Assistance - "....questions the benefit to
the public in light of the destruction of these wetlands". "Public
Notice No. 00143 does not demonstrate a substantial public or
private need which would not be met if the project was not built
as proposed".
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Dr. G. Wayne Wright
..Page 2
May 1, 1991
S"
Wildlife Resources Commission - ".... very strongly oppopsed
to this project in its present form. We recommend that this
permit be denied...."
Inasmuch as your office will be notified directly by the Division of
Environmental Management on final action on the required 401, this office will
not submit additional comments unless-project modification requires further
review.
Very sincerely,
John R. Parker, Jr.
Inland '404 Coordinator
JRP : j r/
cc: Divisibni-of Environmental Management
Wildlife Resources Commission
Division of Community Assistance
Division of Parks & Recreation
Enclosure
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
Regulatory Branch
IN REPLY REFER TO
May 2, 1991
Fv
t °Z
? i'
Action ID. 199100143
Ms. L. K. (Mike) Gantt
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Fish and Wildlife Enhancement
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
Dear Ms. Gantt:

On December 13, 1990, we announced by public notice the application of
North Hills Properties, Incorporated, for Department of the Army authorization
to place fill material into wetlands adjacent to Crabtree Creek associated
with construction of a four-lane public highway at Cary, Wake County, North
Carolina. By letter dated January 25, 1991, you recommended that the permit
be denied because of anticipated adverse environmental impacts, the
availability of practicable alternatives, and concerns regarding the proposed
wetland restoration and creation.
By letters of January 23 and April 10, 1991 (copies enclosed), the
applicant provided information which addresses your concerns. We are
anticipating final action on this application, and would appreciate your
comments regarding this additional information on or before May 17, 1990.
Based on past experience with similar applications, we believe that a
meeting between the applicant and our respective offices might expedite the
application process. Your participation in such a meeting is requested.
Coordination to arrange a meeting time and place will occur shortly.
Questions or comments may be addressed to Mr. Eric Alsmeyer, Raleigh
Regulatory Field Office, telephone [phone].
Sincerely,
Enclosures
G. Wayne Wright
Chief, Regulatory Branch
Copies Furnished (without enclosures):
Mr. John Dorney
Water Quality Section
Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Department of Health,
?V/ Environment and Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Mr. John Parker
North Carolina Department
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina
of
27611-7687
United States Department of the Interior
o "^?F FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
a?- Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
August 15, 1991
Colonel Walter S. Tulloch
District Engineer
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
Attention: Regulatory Branch
Dear Colonel Tulloch:
Reference is made to your August 5, 1991, letter concerning an application
by North Hills Properties, Inc. to fill wetlands for construction of a four-
lane highway in Cary, Wake County, North Carolina (Action ID. 199100143).
This report is submitted in accordance with provisions of the Fish and
Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661 et seq.).
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), in our May 15, 1991, report,
objected to permit issuance based on the probability of practicable
alternatives that would avoid wetland impacts. If such alternatives were
lacking, the Service required compensatory mitigation of fish and wildlife
habitat values lost to project construction.
In your recent letter you stated that the Corps had evaluated additional
information provided by the applicant and accepted their argument that no
practicable alternatives exist. In light of your decision, the Service will
not object to permit issuance, provided that any permit issued is
conditioned such that the fish and wildlife habitat values to be lost are
fully mitigated. We expect to work with your staff and the applicant to
develop a mitigation plan at a meeting scheduled later this month.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to comment on this project. Please
advise us of any action taken by the Wilmington District, Corps of
Engineers. You may contact David Dell, Permit Coordinator, of this office
if you have any question regarding our recommendations.
Sincerely,
&Vff
L.K. Mike Gantt
Supervisor
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
IN REPLY REFER TO
Regulatory Branch
Action ID. 199100143
August 5, 1991
Mr. John Parker
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Dear Mr. Parker:

I `
On December 13, 1990, we announced by public notice an application by
North Hills Properties, Inc. to place fill material into wetlands adjacent
to Crabtree Creek, for construction of a four-lane public highway at Cary,
Wake County, North Carolina. By letter dated May 1, 1991, you transmitted
State agency recommendations that the permit request be denied based on
anticipated adverse environmental impacts, the availability of practicable
alternatives to the proposed work, and concerns regarding the proposed
wetland restoration and creation.
By the enclosed letter dated July 22, 1991, the North Carolina
Department of Transportation has provided additional information which we
believe adequately addresses the availability of a practicable alternative.
We are anticipating final action on this permit request, pending development
of an acceptable mitigation proposal, and would appreciate agency comments
concerning this information within 10 days of your receipt of this letter.
We expect to be requesting State agency participation with the
applicants and other commenting agencies in a meeting in the near future to
discuss the final details of a mitigation plan for this proposal.
Questions or comments may be addressed to Mr. Eric Alsmeyer, Raleigh
Regulatory Field Office, telephone [phone].
Sincerely,
G. Wayne Wright
Chief, Regulatory Branch
Enclosure
S ? L ? ?c?Ct (? ???5 11????c=5 - ?tl f?NS l?O ?X I?iSLcSN
-----------
?L^??C? s r\. 15 67
l1NC?v ! sVJ lei--Z C? (3ccL CLCit?L - -
-..--
- -----J2-v?5 CTc
- I Its 5 -SAo c-? - --
3E.. v?o e_-fi.PACA t
L--VAtNy, 2I ?6u 101 Pcz?a??iy ?csi ??D?
A'
???wU Z

t'

S?TL-5 -CC4,E?SGbJ -b(?5e7- n sl -b(l?lCsZS ,-

- ----
Gars ??. r. ?Z;? c,J S Ct
?? CottiL 3C

/CC
T1 N G C ,,j u ,4EGc ?T3GLS y? ??G?I I? e/?

-e L! (°-?, L-t 5
?VvSi T`,
c_T-e f,] R 11 t/c
r,
L>
?J PC- e 5
CY"F'' r-?-A?-_ ?fir rti J? t? ?f{` -
?--
--_---? l?? CSC r u? lGC` Tv

2
cz
I y
- I i ( i
I I ,
,
I I i t ! i I

I
I?
I?
I V

F_ _ - ?vs_?taN
4 ±: rr LS
-7 CD 1 i??S aCC 5 w/ fr e tto fit. c rt??a".??-<?c?
.: ? ? ? ?U 1 ?'?A?4-?1 c c? t c"6 2 E? ,? c ?. ? u??.:rr/'?? 4 (=". .. ?? j. l?,R LSc} N Ch ??/???tl.S
?sR?s s tug s? {3E P??«QJ ??.a
7 CC) ?Cc?S<0?1 ?0u, 1j SC? l?(( l [t? AN`(
q`t o a PCB f . Te l SS ,t C Q R POE - D S
L G
v-- ? c,A a; orc TI?
k55 cS r?;? ?.tc r"?f-t?
°--? P V F oc aSS A,(,-5 T 1-A K pu a ?1 "0 ? N i t?•'{yv??
U ?c? riv6J C `5 ?, % 0ccc To ?K Dc` ?,t7Z?c e /? aSSr? G
}
i
I)I
i1
it
f?
!j
;I
>t
i!
i?
r?
it
?C
?I
i
l?
I(
i}
?I
I 1
r 41-
is sr? ?--
N C: e_ t t N?t?'2 c" -rte A7 U t A 77 fiY`J
LS P,-'-,ICAns; 2???SC ?s 3???

LaW ?o a Q •?
DO, W oir
?i9utd 7 ?za??R.
C I+EKez S.v.z-r ?}
aka S omliAsov.
JvSct,l
/Yl;ke CRn?,rk?e?

, •7
XI

?4? Cou cis
NC ,D
N ?-Q aT - Koads??e ?,v;rort.

?(,s Fws ,dale; h
Clfl
5'?g ?s i? 5?9s :.z
733-170
707
9/V- 9-<W-CI/716
9[`l -'733-C?4
733 -a92o
X33 23)z-
8s
Fsfo -- ".s? J
42"E:-?Q -- 17 77
4?SCo - t" L'I'7
.-.
l13
-____ _. / CT__iG__f4 co?____l?? _?_ _._S,PE .(r=<?-_._?,.JO x_14 .-----
__
---- --------- -
-- ----------- - -

? ? 3

--------------- --------- -- -- ---

IMPORTANT

To i
Date b / Time
WHILE YOU WERE OUT
1c 5 /
M
1
of
-
Phone
7?

=( OC t?l
AREA CODE NUMBER EXTENSION
X
I

Message t' '

1

5.
JkA? &V-

Signed
TELEPHONED
PLEASE CALL
CALLED TO SEE YOU WILL CALL AGAIN
WANTS TO SEE YOU URGENT
RETURNED YOUR CALL
N.C. Dept. of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources

MEMO
TO: - P-zj?'
mlv-
VVwIkJ

67
?? ?d? na"-r
?1/1 6t)
From:
- I<rn? w ?l
?CF N,v m. i?
North Carolina Department of
Health, and Natural Resources
'? QU.VA'P?Y
5bm-V,

DATE: ? /// SUBJECT:

SM
d?-el
Cw
Environment,
09 Printed on Recycled Paper
1?/ l??l ! I V AUS i KJ'? 1 /?9?r_1 /7xa S? r
IA .4 Aac c
L- k P-1 ? i
9
N
CAC uPLA?-N9 ez>K-\"\-ONS 5 4,, ?7TAL E? r?tic
U-sv

_3i4a - 4,4q-
f 1
_ f ? ?6'? _ ??tS -T?-?-s"" G??.wC- ?3?0??c... L?? ?^(z-? S O?c.?'zvy?? ?
i
-
-
V6F r _ ? D?r'c?o?vLtJ 1 G f ?`I l??d$© 6uoulrp Nay ??

_ ?1isi?-<-? 3?`a? Nz t????'??. j ?v2?.? ?l (F L-- ?,v Sa?rE
I ;

Q 5,

- _ I
I
i

w 3,E. 2 c 1L ? z-
D r+0 _ _ ra j2.N t ?- •? r ? r?,v
w (L-4L- Sic 9 kc-j A? p
/WAS,

I l,)-N v Lt S 72?
i
il t
i
. t
v ??Eo
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
James G. Martin, Governor
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary
June 17, 1992
Mr. Julian Ford
North Hills Properties Inc.
P.O. Box 17004
Raleigh, N.C. 27619
Dear Mr. Ford:
George T. Everett, Ph.D.
Director
Subject: Certification Pursuant to Section 401 of the Federal
Clean Water Act,
Proposed Evans Road extension over Crabtree Creek
Project # 91513, COE # 199100143, DOT # U-2403
Wake County
Attached hereto is a copy of Certification No. 2743 issued
to N.C. Department of Transportation, Mr. Julian Ford and Mr.
Frank Robuck dated June 16, 1992.
If we can be of further assistance, do not hesitate to
contact us.
Sincerely,
Attachments
o?Qe rge T. Everett
Director
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Raleigh Regional Office
Raleigh DEM Regional Office
Mr. John Dorney
Mr. John Parker
Central Files
Mr. Roger Lewis, BAKK-Raleigh
Mr. Barney O'Quinn, N.8KKI4g+Wik??nt of Transportation
Asheville Fayetteville Mooresville Raleigh Washington Wilmington
704251-6208 919/486-1541 704/663-1699 919/571-4700 919/946-6481 919/395-3900
Winston-Salem
919/896-7007
Pollution Prevention Pays
PO. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone]
An Fqual ( )prortunity Affirmative Action Employer

NORTH CAROLINA
Wake County
CERTIFICATION
THIS CERTIFICATION is issued in conformity with the
requirements of Section 401 Public Laws 92-500 and 95-217 of the
United States and subject to the North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management Regulations in 15 NCAC 2H, Section .0500
to N.C. Department of Transportation, Mr. Julian Ford and Mr.
Frank Robuck pursuant to an application filed on the 26 day of
December, 1991 to fill 2.64 acres of wetlands for Evans Road
extension over Crabtree Creek in Cary, N.C.
The Application provides adequate assurance that the
discharge of fill material into the waters of Crabtree Creek and
adjacent wetlands in conjunction with the proposed Evans Road
extension in Wake County will not result in a violation of
applicable Water Quality Standards and discharge guidelines.
Therefore, the State of North Carolina certifies that this
activity will not violate Sections 301, 302, 303, 306, 307 of PL
92-500 and PL 95-217 if conducted in accordance with the
application and conditions hereinafter set forth.
Condition(s) of Certification:
1. That the activity be conducted in such a manner as
to prevent significant increase in turbidity
outside the area of construction or construction
related discharge (increases such that the
turbidity in the Stream is 25 NTU's or less are not
considered significant).
2. Mitigation shall be conducted according to the
letter dated 2 June 1992 from Mr. Roger Lewis,
BAKK. Copies of the annual mitigation reports
shall be sent to DEM for our review.
Violations of any condition herein set forth shall result in
revocation of this Certification.
This Certification shall become null and void unless the
above conditions are made conditions of the Federal Permit.
This the 16th day of June, 1992.
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
or e T. Everett, Dire for
WQC# 2743
I
duo
State of North Carolina
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Governor
December 19, 1990
Dr. George T-. Everett
Division of Environmental Management
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Dear Dr. Everett:
VLLlian W. Ccbey, Jr., Secretary
The attached U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Public Notice No. 00143 dated ,
12/13/90 describing a project proposed by North HilT-s--Froperties, Inc.
is being circulated to interested state agencies for comments on applicable
Section 404 and/or Section 10 permits.
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed
project and return this form by 1/14/91
Very sincerely,
John R. Parker, Jr.
404 Coordinator
REPLY This office objects to the project as proposed.
Comments on t is project are attached.
/ vl.o l
L, This office pall parrs the Xj'Cect proposal.
No comment.
\ ti,
Signed
Date
Agency
JRP:jr/aw
P.O. Box 27687• Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity / Affirmative Action Employer

II
II
ill
II I
II III
li
,II
I
I '
I'
I
Ii
II
i i
4

December 14, 1992
Burton, Adams, Kemp & King, Inc.
E
??F? ?, 1 1992
224 Fayetteville Street Mall
Post Office Box 311
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602-0311
919/856-1777
FAX [phone]
Mr. G. Wayne Wright
Chief, Regulatory Branch
Department of the Army
Wilmington District
Corps of Engineers
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina
28402-1890
SUBJECT: Modification of Section 404 Permit Special Conditions, COE Action ID #199100143,
NCDOT Project #U-2403, Evans Road Extension over Crabtree Creek in Cary, North
Carolina.
Dear Mr. Wright:
Construction of this project began on November 18, 1992 under authority of the above-referenced individual
permit. Discussions just prior to this date between the Corps of Engineers (COE) and the permittees (North
Hills Properties, Inc., Silverton, Inc., and the North Carolina Department of Transportation) revealed differing
interpretations of Permit Special Condition a.3.
Special Condition a.3. states "Construction of the mitigation sites will be initiated at such time to provide for
planting of seedlings the first suitable planting period (November 15 through March 15) following
commencement of project construction."
The permittees' interpretation was that if a project began after the start of the mitigation planting window
then the condition would allow for an extra year to complete the mitigation plantings. The COE interpreted
the condition such that if any part of the project began during any portion of the planting window then all
mitigation planting must be finished during this "initial" planting period.
The permittees in attempting to complete this project as expeditiously as possible may choose to begin
construction of mitigation site 4 should weather and ground conditions over the winter months allow such
activity. Access to site 4 requires minor filling of a small area of existing wetlands on the west side of Crabtree
Creek and thereby would trigger the permit special conditions. However, due to the winter conditions only
a short period of acceptable construction time may be available. This time frame will probably not be
sufficient to complete all the required grading and planting of site 4, and most assuredly would be insufficient
time to complete work for all the mitigation sites required for this project under the Corps interpretation.
In addition, the material excavated during grading of the remaining mitigation sites is proposed for use as
roadway fill for this project. Since construction may be suspended for long portions of the winter months
these sites should not be disturbed until such time as the borrow material can be effectively moved and used
as project fill.
Therefore, in accordance with the general and special conditions of the individual Section 404 permit for this
project, the permittees hereby request a modification of the permit to reflect a necessary change in the
language of Special Condition a.3. to allow for flexibility in the construction schedule of the mitigation sites.
The permittees request that Special Condition a.3. be revised to read as follows: "Construction of the
mitigation sites will be initiated at such time to provide for planting of seedlings during the first or second
suitable planting period as necessitated by construction phasing or scheduling." This or other similar language
as preferred by COE would allow for a logical compliance to the permit conditions.
By copy of this letter, we also request NC DEHNR Division of Environmental Management 401 Water Quality
Certification for the permit modification.
If there are any questions concerning this request please call Mr. Ron Hain, at [phone].
Thank you for your consideration of this matter.
Sincerely,
BURTON, ADAMS, KEW & KING, INC.
(a subsidiary of SEC Donohue)
c4l? c-
oger Lewis, P.E.
Senior Vice President, Special Services
RDL:RGH:jfa
cc: Mr. Julian Ford, North Hills Properties, Inc.
Mr. Frank Robuck, Jr., Silverton, Inc.
Dr. Larry R. Goode, Programs, Policy & Budget - NCDOT
Mr. B. J. O'Quinn, NCDOT
Ms. Sandy Nance, NCDOT
Mr. Ken Jolly, US Army Corps of Engineers
Mr. Eric Alsmeyer, US Army Corps of Engineers
Mr. Doug Spell, Town of Cary
Mr. John Parker, NC Department of EHNR
Mr. John Dorsey, NC Department of ENHR
Ms. L. K. (Mike) Gantt, US Fish and Wildlife Service
Mr. Dennis Stewart, NC Wildlife Resources Commission
Mr. David Proper, Wake County Community Development
\90004.01\Wright.lt2

JAMES G. MARTIN
GOVERNOR
THOMAS J. HARRELSON
SECRETARY

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P.O. BOX 25201
RALEIGH 27611-5201
July 22, 1991
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
WILLIAM G. MARLEY, JR., P.E.
STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR
Mr. G. Wayne Wright
Chief, Regulatory Branch
Department of the Army
Wilmington District
Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
'M p
,tq
SIP ?s ?
RE: Proposed Evans Road Extension over Crabtree Creek in Cary,
. NCDOT Project U-2403, COE Action ID # 199100143
Dear Mr. Wright:
Thank you for the opportunity to expand upon our recent discussions of reasonable
alternatives for the Evans Road Extension project. At our last meeting on June 26, 1991
considerable discussion centered on the apparent availability of a practicable alternative to
extending Evans Road across Crabtree Creek to Aviation Parkway. That alternative being
the widening and improvement of a section of NC 54 from Maynard Road in Cary to
Aviation Parkway.
The supposition that improving NC 54 provides a reasonable and practicable
alternative to extending Evans Road cannot be supported after carefully examining the
Greater Raleigh Urban Area Thoroughfare Plan and comparing the costs associated with
the two alternatives in question.
A brief explanation of the transportation planning process for the Cary area may help
in understanding why improvements to NC 54 do not meet the project need. The Federal
government requires under Section 134 of Title 23 that urbanized areas prepare a
transportation plan or program that is consistent with the comprehensively planned
development of the area. The plan, called the Thoroughfare Plan here, integrates
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer

Page 2
Mr. G. Wayne Wright
July 22, 1991
transportation, land use and environmental considerations. This process which includes
regional and corridor planning has been completed by the state for this area. Some factors
which have gone into this process included forecasts of vehicle miles of travel, travel
demand, highway and travel speeds, traffic diversion, accident rates and traffic peaking
characteristics. Public hearings were held to solicit public input and discussion. The data and
input collected helped in the development of the long range Thoroughfare Plan for the area.
(A portion of the Thoroughfare Plan Map is attached for your use.) Wake County, Raleigh,
Cary and all other cities and towns have approved (March 1986 - July 1988) and
incorporated the Thoroughfare Plan into their own long range development and land use
plans. They have subsequently based many of their decisions and public expenditures over
the years for placement of water and sewer lines, pump stations, fire departments,
recreational areas, residential and commercial land use approvals and industrial zoning
on this approved Thoroughfare Plan. The Evans Road corridor was developed as part of this
process and substantial local planning by the Towns of Cary and Morrisville has taken place
based on this route. An example includes the current project by Cary to install a 16 inch
water main along Evans Road. The water line is a critical section in Cary's Master Water
Plan and is needed to supplement circulation and provide a loop system. It is also the
primary connector between Weston and Aviation Parkway and the Raleigh-Durham
International Airport.
Of more important specific interest to us however is that inspection of the
Thoroughfare Plan reveals the future Evans Road alignment as a replacement corridor for
NC 54 northwest of Cary. As you study the Thoroughfare Plan Map you will note that the
NC 54 and Hillsborough Street facilities which are shown as existing major thoroughfares
enter Cary from Raleigh and merge just north of downtown Cary. From this point near
Harrison Avenue the merged highways follow the existing NC 54 alignment until it reaches
Evans Road near Maynard Road. Here the continuity of this major thoroughfare
incorporates Evans Road and leaves the NC 54 alignment. The Evans Road corridor extends
to Aviation Parkway, bypasses Morrisville and continues until it interchanges with Koppers
Road. From this junction Evans Road is proposed as an access controlled freeway and
interchanges with the future Northern Wake Expressway. It is readily apparent that Evans
Road has been designated as the major route out of Cary to the northwest replacing NC 54.
The rationale for this selection is the very poor horizontal and vertical alignment along NC
54, as well as significant interference from the adjacent railroad line and numerous driveways
and residences. NC 54 keeps its designation as a major thoroughfare northwest of Cary,
however it no longer provides the continuity of the primary through route and its roadway
deficiencies preclude significant improvement without extensive costs.
Page 3
Mr. G. Wayne Wright
July 22, 1991
As shown on the Thoroughfare Plan, NC 54 is earmarked for replacement as the
primary thoroughfare out of Cary by Evans Road. Consequently, any improvement to a
section of NC 54 would ignore and in fact circumvent the entire comprehensive planning
process that has taken place over many years. In effect, the entire Evans Road corridor
would be jeopardized by this action.
Previous discussion also involved a misunderstanding that NC 54 would have to be
widened in the future anyway. Statements to the effect that even with the Evans Road
Extension, NC 54 would require four lanes or ultimately six lanes are observations made by
the'engineers after performing the technical analyses of highway segment capacity and level
of service on a given fixed network with projected traffic volumes. They were intended only
to illustrate the need for additional travel lanes in the area under study. Whether they were
added to NC 54 or another future route is strictly problematic. In the case of NC 54 it is
probably not feasible (cost effective) to totally reconstruct the road to bring it up to
acceptable standards as a multilane facility. Currently, no projects are planned or
programmed for improving NC 54 in this area. NCDOT has recognized this difficulty in
upgrading NC 54 and placed priority for highway improvements on the Evans Road corridor.
If we agree for the sake of argument however, that improving NC 54 is a reasonable
alternative it is only prudent to compare the two alternatives on an equal basis. Our analysis
selected appropriate (and identical) beginning and ending terminals for NC 54 and Evans
Road. The beginning point is the Maynard Road intersections with both routes. The ending
terminus is the Aviation Parkway intersections with each. The approximate length is 2.9
miles.
Our analysis looked at the traffic capacity calculations and a determination of the
number of travel lanes required to achieve the appropriate Level of Service (LOS) D for
a twenty (20) year design period. A cost estimate to provide these roadway segments was
prepared for each alternative.
The capacity calculations (available for review) indicated NC 54 requires a b lane
highway with multiple turning lanes at the intersections of Maynard Road, Cary Parkway,
Weston Parkway and Aviation Parkway.
Evans Road has previously been analyzed and requires a basic four lane or five lane
(center turning lane) highway from Maynard Road to Aviation Parkway. Turning lanes will
also be needed on the same intersecting roads. An additional 1.0 mile section of existing
Evans Road requires widening from two lanes to the five lane section. This section was
included in the analysis and cost estimate preparation.

Page 4
Mr. G. Wayne Wright
July 22, 1991
The cost estimate for each alternative as analyzed is shown in the following table.
COST ESTIMATE
NC 54 Evans Road
Construction $7,266,000 $2,650,000
(U-2403)
$1,600,000
(1 mile addition)
Right of Way $1,570,000 Donated
(U-2403)
$ 510,000
(1 mile addition)
TOTAL $8,836,000 $4,760,000
The cost for NC 54 included reconstruction of the roadway to a 50 mph design
criteria for a six lane curb and gutter road with turning lanes and widening the existing
bridge over Crabtree Creek. The Evans Road estimate included the previously calculated
cost for the extension over Crabtree Creek and the widening and geometric improvement
of a one mile section of Evans Road that connects to Maynard Road.
It is obvious after comparing the cost estimates for the two alternatives that
improving the substandard section of NC 54 does not favorably compare with continuing
with the extension of Evans Road. The extreme cost difference of over 4 million dollars can
be primarily attributed to the major reconstruction required for the horizontal and vertical
alignment along NC 54. This high cost per mile to bring NC 54 up to acceptable standards
is a primary reason why NCDOT has placed priority on the development of a new corridor
in the future to handle the through traffic demand currently accommodated on NC 54.
Based upon this analysis it should be apparent that reconstructing this section of NC 54
cannot be considered a reasonable or practicable alternative to the Evans Road Extension.
In summary, there are limits to what can be considered a "reasonable or practicable
alternative" in complying with Executive Order 11990 and the section 404 (b)(1) guidelines.
If an alternative does not meet the projects' purpose or satisfy the project needs then the
alternative is not considered to be prudent nor practicable.
In this case, we can see that improving a section of NC 54 does not satisfy the project
need because (1) it is not consistent with the overall comprehensively developed and
approved Thoroughfare Plan for the area and (2) even assuming it was a reasonable
alternative the cost difference between the two alternatives of approximately four million
dollars precludes it from being accepted as a practicable alternative.
Page 5
Mr. G. Wayne Wright
July 22, 1991
We appreciate the opportunity to clarify these matters and look forward to working
with you on this important project.
If we can provide further assistance in expediting the Section 404 permit please feel
free to contact us.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Dr. Larry R. Goode
Director, Programs, Policy & Budget
t
Mr. Julian Ford
North Hills Properties, Inc.
Mr. Silverton, Inc.
Attachments
cc: Ms. L.K. Mike Gantt, US Fish and Wildlife Service
Mr. Ron Ferrell, NC Division of Environment, Health, Natural Resources -
Division of Environmental Management
Mr. David Wagner, North Hills Properties, Inc.
Mr. Glenn Dunn, Poyner & Spruill
Mr. B.J. O'Quinn, NCDOT
Ms. Sandi Nance, NCDOT
Mr. Ken Jolly, US Army Corps of Engineers
Mr. Eric Alsmeyer, US Army Corps of Engineers
Mr. Doug Spell, Town of Cary
Mr. Lee Pelej, US Environmental Protection Agency
Mr. Mike Crocker, US Fish and Wildlife Service
Mr. Roger D. Lewis, BAKK Engineers
Mr. Ron Hairr, BAKK Engineers
h

TO: Ron Hairr
FROM: Jack Baldwin
SUBJECT: R/W Cost Estimates - Evans-Road Extension
DATE: July 11, 1991
Per your request, I am listing below estimated right of way
costs for NC 54, Evans Road and North Harrison Avenue in the
Cary area.
EVANS ROAD FROM NW MAYNARD ROAD TO DYNASTY DRIVE
Land and Damages $ 300,000
Relocation Assistance 60,000
Utilities 30,000
Acquisition Costs 120,000
TOTAL $ 510,000
NC 54 FROM NW MAYNARD ROAD TO 0.1 MILE WEST OF AVIATION PARKWAY
Land and Damages $ 965,000
Relocation Assistance 200,000
Utilities 180,000
Acquisition Costs 225,000
TOTAL $ 1,570,000
NORTH HARRISON DRIVE FROM WESTON PARKWAY TO NW MAYNARD ROAD
Construction Easements $ 50,000
Utilities 30,000
Acquisition Costs 10,000
TOTAL $ 90,000
C
7/3/91
COST ESTIMATES FOR RE-ROUTING
EVANS ROAD FROM WESTON PARKWAY VIA NC 54
TO AVIATION PARKWAY AT MORRISVILLE AND IMPROVEMENTS
TO-NORTH HARRISON AVENUE AND BRIDGE
G EVANS ROAD FROM THE END OF EVANS ROAD IMPROVEMENT TO NC 54
Length 1.0 miles - widen exist t 24' Pavement to 5 Lane C & G;
some horizontal and vertical improvements needed in order to
attain 50 mph design speed.
Est. Const. cost = $1;600,000
O NC 54-FROM EVANS ROAD/MAYNARD ROAD INTERSECTION TO MORRISVILLE
Length 2.9 miles - widen exist t 24' Pavement
to 5 Lane or 7 Lane C & G; some horizontal and vertical
improvements needed in order to attain 50 mph design speed.
Existing 2 @ 39' Span Bridge would have to be widened.
Est. Const. Widening Cost from 2 Lanes to 5 Lanes
(including bridge widening) = $4,822,000
Est. Const. cost widening from 2 Lanes to 7 Lanes
(including bridge widening) = $7,266,000
NORTH HARRISON AVENUE - widening existing t 24' pavement to 5
Lane C & G. Length 1.9 miles horizontal and vertical alignment
appears to be adequate for 50 mph design speed.
Est. coast. cost to widen from 2 Lanes to 5 Lanes C & G
= $3,040,000
c NORTH HARRISON AVENUE INTERCHANGE AND BRIDGE #138 OVER I-40
L = 295', 34' Clear Roadway, 16.02' vertical clearance,
Vertical clearance would be less than standard if
widened, therefore, bridge would have to be replaced.
Est. cost to remove and replace existing bridge and
make interchange improvements (70' Clear roadway width)
= $1,576,000
RMW/JD
OP NULJ tvj,' f
OUTER Lo
/d j
? i
o ! ) Ali
5£91 ?s? y? , .??
WOO "no 40 i
000
000 to
0100
000 100 I 100
00
cn c,, \ I
. SR 1613 L
OWL,
?..
11-W so
o
1
1
i
o --------L= - ' ` hypo.
?, -? , i 4,4
1
7- - ` 4T
nl O
?e .
it
ARRISON ,`'AVE.
w 1
? .N R`• _? '0.S_ ,f j i ? o -
Ii R
ftfto
R 1 'i \(
O
Y
.08
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
IN REPLY REFER TO August 5, 1993
Regulatory Branch
Action ID. 199100143
North Carolina Department of Transportation
North Hills Properties, Inc.
Silverton, Inc.
c/o Mr. Roger D. Lewis. P.E.
RUST Environment & Infrastructure
5510 Six Forks Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609
Dear Mr. Lewis:
Reference the Department of the Army permit issued on September 2, 1992,
and subsequent modification, for discharges-of fill material to facilitate
construction of the Evans Road extension, NCDOT Project No. U-2403, in Cary,
RWe=suht?r-, North Carolina. Reference also your letter of July 23, 1993, on
behalf of the permittees, requesting modification of the permit to allow a
change in the size and location of the mitigation-sites, and to authorize,
after-the-fact, a temporary construction access road.
Specifically, you propose to change the nature of four previously proposed
flood storage mitigation sites 2,5,6 and 7 on-the southeast side of make _
Crabtree to provide 4.08 acres of.bottomland hardwood mitigation. This change
would be to compensate for a 2.13 acre shortfall in the-actual-size of the
originally proposed hardwood mitigation sites,-and to ensure survival
requirements on a minimum of 6.47 acres, as originally required by the permit.
The additional hardwood sites would be graded to elevation 276.5 and prepared
and planted as required for the original sites.
The existing temporary construction road on the sewerline easement is
necessary for access to mitigation sites 2,5,6, and 7. All of the fill
material for the road will be removed to high ground after construction is
completed, and preconstruction elevations will be restored.
The permit is hereby modified to authorize the mitigation plan changes and
temporary access road described above, subject to the following additional
condition:
?- ? ,s

r t
-2-
The temporary road fill will be entirely removed to upland areas
following completion of the construction activity, and the affected areas
restored to pre-project conditions. It is understood that all other
conditions of the original permit remain applicable and that the expiration
date is unchanged.
FOR THE COMMANDER
James H. Bradley
Chief, Construction-Operations
Division
Copy Furnished
John Dorney
Water Quality Sect-ion
Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Past Office Box 29535
Raleigh, North Carolina 2.762-6-0535
r.
F'
V'
PRO].REFERENCE NO. SHEET N TOTAL SHEETS
9.8050364 L-2 Q 2
STATE PROJ. NO. A. PROD. NO. DESCRIPTION
9.8050364 P.E., R/W, UTIL, CONST.
WAKE COUNTY
O
2,0 ACR WETLAND RE ,ND REFORESTATION

I 1,4 ACR WETLAND REFORESTATION I
3
a ~ I I
z ~
o ~ ~ i
a I
~ ii'
SEE SHEET 5 FOR ROADWAY PLANS ¢
I~
i
o
I i. !
~ j
4
C
a o
z a
w
I
30
~ I t
'T~
F 3 cRAeTR F FF
c9FF~' Cq~. F~-
W
0.6 ACR WETLAND REFORESTATION
Upland Area ~ (200 Acre) Area to be cleared and grad (Approximately -400 feet or as directe Levee Area ~ (2a0 Acre) Area to be graded to wetlan (Approximately -305 feet or as directe NOTEo See, Project Special Provisions for Wetland graded to wetland elevation
ected by the engineer)
~tland elevation
?cted by the Engineer)
EVANS R~.~D ~~~']EN~I~N
land Reforestation u-~~o3
~Westom ~aa~way< ~o E~viaEion ~ar~wa~y.)
WAKE COUNTY
50 25 0 50 100

PROD. REFERENCE NO. SHEET MO. TOTAL SHEETS
9.8050 364 L I 1.
STATE ?ROJ. iiO. F. A. PROJ. NO. DESCRIPTION
~ } -
F a
zQ aN~ O
J v = Z a W ~ ~ O Z
w Z O } O N O
O N ~ Q ~ ~ ~
~ z _ _ 2 Q N 3
~ fn } J = - _ Z - r
Q = J A W Q w Q
, Qcn3 wzz~oN _ a -O
w ~-Q O z Z ~
. w z z z z m m z p a O Z m ' -f cc~aa ~ ~ O _o z
w W m w J O - r -f" OJOO - _ W W N J ~z ~
~t~ oQOa~-w - - aJ Q O n W N J
=z~n a ~ a>
0 l.i. ~ J ~ ~ Z ~ `o 0 U ~
~ ~ W O Q W Z Q a v i' r . a tY W Z Z ~ ~ u p 2 Q v o
C O I- W I Q- 3 Q J= O J J Z ~ ~ Q _
o J w~ w O J
i+ f a° Jw ~ z ~ ~ Z O N O W Q O O W W U F- U ~ O ~ z
- J Z mX F-ZZ~ Z W w Q o
' J= a J W O w O O _ _ ~ w- O a - o U ~ U _Z U
i w o o J o ~ m W - - m a F- ~ Q 3 cn =Na~mwz CO ~ a Q 2 Z ~ ~
. ~ w w a Z = W a- m a c Y w ~ ~ w O a ~
O> O O Z a ~ O Z ~ - ~ a. i Oc7 Z Om ~wrrO - - wQ o d _ w z 0 3 a" a W ~ u ~ Z c Y
i }NZ ~ JZOWZ O JJ u ~ ~ r
F- v v Z
~ D F- w~ J W w Z~ _ 3z ~ u~=mOw>m i Q Q J
~ NNQ O F-a Zp _ - _Z ~
U f- O
1 - Q H O O 00 . J O O Z l0
~naaaa i.r: }
J r- W J W
3 i S Qc Q
. " X X ~ O
, - O ~ ~ i~' . . . _ ~ F.. a a
~ , : N to ~ W ~ - - Q ~ a O to = _ - m O 0 a
l.'~, C o JOIE} - - Wam O c
aom w JZ zQ = ~
' ~ O w a- w W J W w ~
- ~ O - O J O ~ _ ~ O z 0 Z~~ I _ z a N Z z
~ w ~ ~ ~ a - a (1.~ W w
QZN m Hw O~ Jai Z Z z ~
J a a Y~ w - J 3 I O • ?r Q O . ~°•l 3
f o I ~ J c I~ ~ a~~ 3 j J ~ j J Z a m m W N _ U
. Z (7 J ~ j ~ f Zw0 ~ O JQQ(o
Z z ~ Z ' NF- Q JZZO U _ -7 U W Z =
3 ~ J ~=Q00 Z app a ~cnUUI ~ -
Wy0 J C~ I, ! ZIW Z Q ~ ~
Q a w > ~ ~ W
4 J U I W Q W ~taai-J > W F- ~ > w
, _ I Q ~ O Q W
i m w ~ _ ~ ~ W Z Z
_ - Z Q c~ U - W
~ ~ ~ ~ J Z W Q - a - Q ~ ~ ~ ~ Q m m m m W
i ~ Z J ~ ~ - _ c o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a
J I W /M~ :y? a Q W W ~ ~ U _ c c c
- J ~ O W ~ O Z ~ v v ~ Z
- N W O - Z . ~ _ - N I Q 0 3 ~ a~ a~ a~ Z a~ a~ v a~ I-
~ _ ~ I'n ~ N W ~ C JO cn cn cn cn Z ~ J Q
- Z W O Cn Q7 (l7
3aJ ~ ~ ~ w - - _ a w
33 - ~ z S N Q . i Z o Z ~ ~ ~ ~ p _ - - z ~ W
a ~ W3c~ w w ~
W z ; I Q Z U U O ~ O F- o W
a = ~ ~cna woo Z Z O
p z ~ 2 W (A - ~ O w 3- ~ - f H h- Q J - O ~ s W ~ ~ _
` ~ J 0 - _ _ Q O U J p a W I Q Z _ _ m Z ~ O O ~ - li
W _ =J I O Q Q N a - U J H H 3 Y J H J Z 0 a O O Z o v c~
~ ~ - U J W Q J C7 O p _ H W W f- f- O ~ t O r Z U ~ U O
a 3 _ \ i M a W O 47 J Z Z- I - Z~ ~ m3 aa_a3W a J m Q a J
J I U' = I - J W O ~ c~ J c v a Q ~ E
W Z (n F- Z~ W 0 - a Q W 3 i ' H I a o ~ - - w a I ~ Q a~ ~ ~ o D 4 = ~ > 3 W
- ~ j - - 0 > o ~ - ~ Z ml~~~ _ o ~ W ~ ~ U O ~ ~ F- Q
r i Q za = - fo z o _ J O-N~ - wzF Q Z = ~ Q ~ Z
= 3 ~ ~ ~ d. Z 3 Y N I Q Q J
fA ~ _ i ~ ~ F- W to c U W ~ 1 1 ; I U Z N I a- TZ W ~ U
Q ~ Q Q O ~ W ~ ~ I U m m _ , ~ Z W J J I W W ~ Z m W o O
Z ~ Y am ~m_ t - _ i W c9 J J ~c U
' I i ~ ~ I G ~ J ~ i Z a J ~ ~ _ > ~x W Q Z ~ c m
N ~ - ~ 3 ~ ~ _ ~ ~ _ Q cn c o z
~ O o ~ E" W W o c o v O Z N ~ a i. F'
? i' ~ ~ ~ Z _ - - ~ z Z - - ~ O ~ . 3 i ~ o a _ I J Z O_ ~ E - ~ cn
- ~ m- Q - aJa Z - - ~ - 1 > _ m~J ~ z _ - ~ o J a s O Q ~ ~ N N ~ N ~ Q _ o ~ ~ ~ Z Z _
W 7 'x ~ Q O Z n~.
~ J ~ ~ a I - ~ m z ~ a # - ~ Ja ~ - za vi o W j a~ ~ > > ~ N ~ -
Z - c W a w~ o ~ ~ m lL d d ' ~ U O X (n - cn
Q ~ Q J Z ~ ~ V ~ li _ W W ~ w
w _ a w ~ _ O W w ~ Q F- - > w ~ z J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O w ~
w v a s W~ a o Z a O ~ ~ ° ° ~ W H
O ~ X: - ~~Q z I .J NWa ~ _ZQ 2 Q Z } o c ~ o ~ _ Q ~ lI') ~ ~
i W J H N ~ N N
F- j Q w ~ w ~ W ~ ~
° 3 3 0~
Q
Z
n _
L

PRO].REFERENCE NO. SHEET N TOTAL SHEETS
9.8050364 L-2 Q 2
STATE PROJ. NO. A. PROD. NO. DESCRIPTION
9.8050364 P.E., R/W, UTIL, CONST.
WAKE COUNTY
O
2,0 ACR WETLAND RE ,ND REFORESTATION

I 1,4 ACR WETLAND REFORESTATION I
3
a ~ I I
z ~
o ~ ~ i
a I
~ ii'
SEE SHEET 5 FOR ROADWAY PLANS ¢
I~
i
o
I i. !
~ j
4
C
a o
z a
w
I
30
~ I t
'T~
F 3 cRAeTR F FF
c9FF~' Cq~. F~-
W
0.6 ACR WETLAND REFORESTATION
Upland Area ~ (200 Acre) Area to be cleared and grad (Approximately -400 feet or as directe Levee Area ~ (2a0 Acre) Area to be graded to wetlan (Approximately -305 feet or as directe NOTEo See, Project Special Provisions for Wetland graded to wetland elevation
ected by the engineer)
~tland elevation
?cted by the Engineer)
EVANS R~.~D ~~~']EN~I~N
land Reforestation u-~~o3
~Westom ~aa~way< ~o E~viaEion ~ar~wa~y.)
WAKE COUNTY
50 25 0 50 100

PROD. REFERENCE NO. SHEET MO. TOTAL SHEETS
9.8050 364 L I 1.
STATE ?ROJ. iiO. F. A. PROJ. NO. DESCRIPTION
~ } -
F a
zQ aN~ O
J v = Z a W ~ ~ O Z
w Z O } O N O
O N ~ Q ~ ~ ~
~ z _ _ 2 Q N 3
~ fn } J = - _ Z - r
Q = J A W Q w Q
, Qcn3 wzz~oN _ a -O
w ~-Q O z Z ~
. w z z z z m m z p a O Z m ' -f cc~aa ~ ~ O _o z
w W m w J O - r -f" OJOO - _ W W N J ~z ~
~t~ oQOa~-w - - aJ Q O n W N J
=z~n a ~ a>
0 l.i. ~ J ~ ~ Z ~ `o 0 U ~
~ ~ W O Q W Z Q a v i' r . a tY W Z Z ~ ~ u p 2 Q v o
C O I- W I Q- 3 Q J= O J J Z ~ ~ Q _
o J w~ w O J
i+ f a° Jw ~ z ~ ~ Z O N O W Q O O W W U F- U ~ O ~ z
- J Z mX F-ZZ~ Z W w Q o
' J= a J W O w O O _ _ ~ w- O a - o U ~ U _Z U
i w o o J o ~ m W - - m a F- ~ Q 3 cn =Na~mwz CO ~ a Q 2 Z ~ ~
. ~ w w a Z = W a- m a c Y w ~ ~ w O a ~
O> O O Z a ~ O Z ~ - ~ a. i Oc7 Z Om ~wrrO - - wQ o d _ w z 0 3 a" a W ~ u ~ Z c Y
i }NZ ~ JZOWZ O JJ u ~ ~ r
F- v v Z
~ D F- w~ J W w Z~ _ 3z ~ u~=mOw>m i Q Q J
~ NNQ O F-a Zp _ - _Z ~
U f- O
1 - Q H O O 00 . J O O Z l0
~naaaa i.r: }
J r- W J W
3 i S Qc Q
. " X X ~ O
, - O ~ ~ i~' . . . _ ~ F.. a a
~ , : N to ~ W ~ - - Q ~ a O to = _ - m O 0 a
l.'~, C o JOIE} - - Wam O c
aom w JZ zQ = ~
' ~ O w a- w W J W w ~
- ~ O - O J O ~ _ ~ O z 0 Z~~ I _ z a N Z z
~ w ~ ~ ~ a - a (1.~ W w
QZN m Hw O~ Jai Z Z z ~
J a a Y~ w - J 3 I O • ?r Q O . ~°•l 3
f o I ~ J c I~ ~ a~~ 3 j J ~ j J Z a m m W N _ U
. Z (7 J ~ j ~ f Zw0 ~ O JQQ(o
Z z ~ Z ' NF- Q JZZO U _ -7 U W Z =
3 ~ J ~=Q00 Z app a ~cnUUI ~ -
Wy0 J C~ I, ! ZIW Z Q ~ ~
Q a w > ~ ~ W
4 J U I W Q W ~taai-J > W F- ~ > w
, _ I Q ~ O Q W
i m w ~ _ ~ ~ W Z Z
_ - Z Q c~ U - W
~ ~ ~ ~ J Z W Q - a - Q ~ ~ ~ ~ Q m m m m W
i ~ Z J ~ ~ - _ c o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a
J I W /M~ :y? a Q W W ~ ~ U _ c c c
- J ~ O W ~ O Z ~ v v ~ Z
- N W O - Z . ~ _ - N I Q 0 3 ~ a~ a~ a~ Z a~ a~ v a~ I-
~ _ ~ I'n ~ N W ~ C JO cn cn cn cn Z ~ J Q
- Z W O Cn Q7 (l7
3aJ ~ ~ ~ w - - _ a w
33 - ~ z S N Q . i Z o Z ~ ~ ~ ~ p _ - - z ~ W
a ~ W3c~ w w ~
W z ; I Q Z U U O ~ O F- o W
a = ~ ~cna woo Z Z O
p z ~ 2 W (A - ~ O w 3- ~ - f H h- Q J - O ~ s W ~ ~ _
` ~ J 0 - _ _ Q O U J p a W I Q Z _ _ m Z ~ O O ~ - li
W _ =J I O Q Q N a - U J H H 3 Y J H J Z 0 a O O Z o v c~
~ ~ - U J W Q J C7 O p _ H W W f- f- O ~ t O r Z U ~ U O
a 3 _ \ i M a W O 47 J Z Z- I - Z~ ~ m3 aa_a3W a J m Q a J
J I U' = I - J W O ~ c~ J c v a Q ~ E
W Z (n F- Z~ W 0 - a Q W 3 i ' H I a o ~ - - w a I ~ Q a~ ~ ~ o D 4 = ~ > 3 W
- ~ j - - 0 > o ~ - ~ Z ml~~~ _ o ~ W ~ ~ U O ~ ~ F- Q
r i Q za = - fo z o _ J O-N~ - wzF Q Z = ~ Q ~ Z
= 3 ~ ~ ~ d. Z 3 Y N I Q Q J
fA ~ _ i ~ ~ F- W to c U W ~ 1 1 ; I U Z N I a- TZ W ~ U
Q ~ Q Q O ~ W ~ ~ I U m m _ , ~ Z W J J I W W ~ Z m W o O
Z ~ Y am ~m_ t - _ i W c9 J J ~c U
' I i ~ ~ I G ~ J ~ i Z a J ~ ~ _ > ~x W Q Z ~ c m
N ~ - ~ 3 ~ ~ _ ~ ~ _ Q cn c o z
~ O o ~ E" W W o c o v O Z N ~ a i. F'
? i' ~ ~ ~ Z _ - - ~ z Z - - ~ O ~ . 3 i ~ o a _ I J Z O_ ~ E - ~ cn
- ~ m- Q - aJa Z - - ~ - 1 > _ m~J ~ z _ - ~ o J a s O Q ~ ~ N N ~ N ~ Q _ o ~ ~ ~ Z Z _
W 7 'x ~ Q O Z n~.
~ J ~ ~ a I - ~ m z ~ a # - ~ Ja ~ - za vi o W j a~ ~ > > ~ N ~ -
Z - c W a w~ o ~ ~ m lL d d ' ~ U O X (n - cn
Q ~ Q J Z ~ ~ V ~ li _ W W ~ w
w _ a w ~ _ O W w ~ Q F- - > w ~ z J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O w ~
w v a s W~ a o Z a O ~ ~ ° ° ~ W H
O ~ X: - ~~Q z I .J NWa ~ _ZQ 2 Q Z } o c ~ o ~ _ Q ~ lI') ~ ~
i W J H N ~ N N
F- j Q w ~ w ~ W ~ ~
° 3 3 0~
Q
Z
n _
L