20220392 Ver 1_USACE Request for Additional Information_20220608

Strickland, Bev
From: Phillips, George L CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 8, 2022 4:25 PM
To: Lisa Long
Cc: Cohn, Colleen M
Subject: [External] RE: Retreat at Friendship / Heelan / Apex / Wake County / SAW-2020-01098
/ Request for Additional Information
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to
Report Spam.
Ms. Long,
I have reviewed the additional information provided May 11, 2022, and have the following comments/questions that
need to be addressed in order to verify compliance with permit conditions.
1) In reviewing the response for comment 1 in the email below it is still unclear if impacts at Impact Area C have
been minimized to the maximum extent practicable as required by general conditions 23 (a) and (b). While the
need for the road connection has been provided the justification for the lot fill has not. NCSAM and NCWAM are
field -based rapid assessment methods and should not be used to predict future function. Additionally, the direct
impact of fill within the wetlands would result in a total loss. Based on past experience, subdivisions have been
designed to avoid wetland fill for the purpose of lot fill. Please redesign to avoid wetland impacts for lot fill or
provide information to support compliance with general conditions 23 (a) and (b).
2) In reviewing the response for comment 2 in the email below it is still unclear if impacts at Impact Area F have
been minimized to the maximum extent practicable as required by general conditions 23 (a) and (b). The
requested justification for the lot fill has not provided. NCSAM and NCWAM are field -based rapid assessment
methods and should not be used to predict future function. Additionally, the direct impact of fill within stream
channel would result in a total loss. Based on past experience, subdivisions have been designed to avoid stream
channel fill for the purpose of lot fill. Please redesign to avoid stream channel impacts for lot fill or provide
information to support compliance with general conditions 23 (a) and (b).
3) Please see comment 5 below. Impacts A and D still show the rip rap dissipator pads as part of the "Temporary
Stream `No Loss' Impact" on both the maps and the impact table. Impact H maps still labels the rip rap as
"Temporary Stream 'No Loss' Impact" but the impact map appears to have been updated to include the rip rap
as a permanent -no loss impact. Please revise the plans and impact table to show the embedded rip rap as
permanent impacts.
Please submit the above information within 30 days of receipt of this Notification or we may consider your application
withdrawn and close the file. Please email ([e-mail]) me if you have any questions.
Lyle Phillips
Regulatory Specialist
US Army Corps of Engineers
CE-SAW-RG-R
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
Phone: [phone], Ext. 25.
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
1

We would appreciate your feedback on how we are performing our duties. Our automated Customer Service Survey is
located at https://regulatory.ops.usace.army.mil/customer-service-survey/ . Thank you for taking the time to visit this
site and complete the survey.
From: Lisa Long
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2022 3:45 PM
To: Phillips, George L CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>
Cc: Cohn, Colleen M <[e-mail]>; Ward Marotti <[e-mail]>; Alex Hornaday
<[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Retreat at Friendship / Heelan / Apex / Wake County / SAW-2020-01098 / Request for Additional
Information
Hi Lyle,
Please see attached updated PCN, and below response to comments.
1) Based on the application the project proposes to discharge fill material at Impact Area C. The need residential
development is not disputed; however, you have not demonstrated avoidance and minimization to the
maximum extent practicable as required by NWP General Conditions 23(a) and (b). For example, given the scale
of the site (455 residential lots), it appears that impacts at Impact Area C for lot fill could be avoided or
minimized while still achieving the project purpose. Please redesign to avoid or minimize to the maximum extent
practicable or provide additional information to justify the proposed fill.
Alternatives to the proposed design in this area were considered (i.e. elimination of the adjacent lots that
resulted in total resource loss and "stubbing" of the road(s) at the crossing). Continuity of the road at this
location is necessary for both traffic connectivity and public safety. As a result, this alternative was removed
from consideration. It was determined that elimination of some or all of the lots north of the required crossing
would negatively impact this feature's hydrology, which would result in significant functional loss, if not
complete impact. To document/quantify this, SEI completed two iterations of the North Carolina Wetland
Assessment Method (WAM; attached). The wetland feature rated medium, based on its existing condition. By
revising the design (conceptually) to avoid fill of this feature, except as necessary for the road, the quality of the
wetland changed from medium to low, due to anticipated changes to hydrologic connectivity, a drastically
reduced/eliminated buffer area, and significant adjacent land use changes. Based on the proposed design, the
loss of the feature's upslope function is accounted for (i.e. included as an impact) and, as a result, a 2:1
mitigation:impact ratio is proposed to offset it (i.e. purchase of mitigation credits within a highly functioning
mitigation site protected in perpetuity under a conservation easement). Please see the attached WAM forms
referenced above: one representing existing conditions (medium rating) and the other considering avoidance of
direct impacts to it (i.e. fill: low rating).
2) Based on the application the project proposes to discharge fill material at Impact Area F. The need residential
development is not disputed; however, you have not demonstrated avoidance and minimization to the
maximum extent practicable as required by NWP General Conditions 23(a) and (b). For example, given the scale
of the site (455 residential lots), it appears that impacts at Impact Area F for lot fill could be avoided or
minimized while still achieving the project purpose. Please redesign to avoid or minimize to the maximum extent
practicable or provide additional information to justify the proposed fill.
Avoidance of direct impacts (i.e. fill) within this area were considered. In order to determine the resultant
impacts to stream function, if any, SEI completed a North Carolina Stream Assessment Method (SAM) evaluation
for this feature, for both existing and anticipated post -construction conditions. The results documented that,
under existing conditions, the stream is of medium functional quality. By avoiding impacts to this feature but
proceeding with development of the adjacent areas (note: this feature was determined by NCDWR to NOT have
at least intermittent hydrology and, as a result, it is NOT subject to the Jordan Lake Buffer Rules) the feature's
quality is rated as low, due to anticipated streamside impacts such as conversion to maintained lawn, drastically
2

reduced buffer area, and anticipated increases of water quality stressors. Under the proposed design, the loss of
function of the feature's upstream portions are accounted for and offset, using a 2:1 mitigation:impact ratio (i.e.
purchase of mitigation credits within a highly functioning mitigation site protected in perpetuity under a
conservation easement). Please see the attached SAM forms referenced above: one representing existing
conditions (medium rating) and the other considering avoidance of direct impacts to it (i.e. fill: low rating).
3) Generally speaking, elevated boardwalk pilings are evaluated as structures and not a discharge of fill material.
Based on the spacing of the pilings it appears that the proposed activities at Impact Area G does not result in a
permanent discharge of fill material. However, typically boardwalks within forested wetlands are viewed as
permanent conversion impacts because of a partial loss of function through conversion of forested wetlands to
herbaceous wetlands. Conversion impacts would consists of areas that forested wetlands are converted and
maintained as herbaceous wetlands through maintenance in perpetuity. Please update the PCN impact table,
plans and compensatory mitigation plan to account for permanent wetland convers. Typically a 1:1 ratio
compensatory mitigation ratio is required to ensure minimal adverse effects.
Please see updated site plans included in the attached, updated PCN.
4) Based on the application the proposed activities will result in a loss of 0.026 acre of streambed and 0.4201 acres
of wetlands. Per General Condition 23 and Regional Condition 7 a compensatory mitigation plan is required.
Typically, compensatory mitigation is required at a 2:1 credit to impact ratio unless otherwise justified based on
evaluation of aquatic function (NCSAM and NCWAM). Please provide a compensatory mitigation plan to include
a proposed mitigation ratio and ILF letter and/or SOA.
Please see SOAs included in the attached, updated PCN.
5) Note: the proposed activities that consists of installation of riprap within streambed is viewed as a permanent
impact because fille will be permanently placed within the streambed. As proposed (embedded to match
preexisting elevations/contours) are typically viewed as permanent impacts that do not result in a total loss of
feature and therefore typically mitigation is not required. It appears that riprap will be installed downstream at
Impact Areas A, D and H.
Please see updated site plans included in the attached, updated PCN.
6) Based on review of the proposed plans (Retreat at Friendship) and review of the previously authorized impacts
for the construction of Horton Ridge Blvd. it is unclear if additional wetland impacts are proposed at wetland
"W13" depicted on the "Wetlands/Stream Map". It appears that impacts to a portion of W13 was authorized,
however, it is unclear if additional impacts are occurring for lot construction. Based on the JD "W13" was
approximately 0.13 acres in size and only 0.09 acres of fill was authorized. If fill is proposed within "W13" for
proposed lot fill then a redesign to avoid and minimize to the maximum extent practicable or additional
information is required to justify the proposed fill (see comment 1 and 2 above).
Best,
The acreage calculations within the JD were based on preliminary GPS data, while the quantities in the plans are
based on formal survey data. The latter is more accurate. The Horton Ridge Blvd. application covered 3,996 SF,
which is the entire area of feature W13. Therefore, impacts to the areas depicted currently under lot
development have already been permitted. The feature is shown as an existing condition because the Horton
Ridge impact has not yet been completed.
3

ENVIRONMENTAL. INC.
Lisa Long
Environmental Scientist
Raleigh • Charlotte • Charleston • Tampa
866-772-6453
, 919-689-5283
spanglerenvironmental.com
[e-mail]
4338 Bland Rd., Raleigh, NC 27609
mon
Any email message sent by any employee of Spangler Environmental is intended only for the identified recipient. It (and any attachment) is strictly confidential
and may contain attorney -privileged work product. If you have obtained an email by error or you are not the identified recipient, please notify the sender by
calling toll free 1-866-772-6453, then delete the email (and any attachment) from your system. Use of the email (or any attachment) by any person other than the
identified recipient is strictly prohibited.
From: Phillips, George L CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2022 4:04 PM
To: Lisa Long<[e-mail]>
Cc: Cohn, Colleen M <[e-mail]>
Subject: Retreat at Friendship / Heelan / Apex / Wake County / SAW-2020-01098 / Request for Additional Information
Ms. Long,
I have reviewed the above referenced project and need the following comments/questions addressed to evaluate the
proposed activities.
1) Based on the application the project proposes to discharge fill material at Impact Area C. The need residential
development is not disputed; however, you have not demonstrated avoidance and minimization to the
maximum extent practicable as required by NWP General Conditions 23(a) and (b). For example, given the scale
of the site (455 residential lots), it appears that impacts at Impact Area C for lot fill could be avoided or
minimized while still achieving the project purpose. Please redesign to avoid or minimize to the maximum extent
practicable or provide additional information to justify the proposed fill.
2) Based on the application the project proposes to discharge fill material at Impact Area F. The need residential
development is not disputed; however, you have not demonstrated avoidance and minimization to the
maximum extent practicable as required by NWP General Conditions 23(a) and (b). For example, given the scale
of the site (455 residential lots), it appears that impacts at Impact Area F for lot fill could be avoided or
minimized while still achieving the project purpose. Please redesign to avoid or minimize to the maximum extent
practicable or provide additional information to justify the proposed fill.
3) Generally speaking, elevated boardwalk pilings are evaluated as structures and not a discharge of fill material.
Based on the spacing of the pilings it appears that the proposed activities at Impact Area G does not result in a
permanent discharge of fill material. However, typically boardwalks within forested wetlands are viewed as
permanent conversion impacts because of a partial loss of function through conversion of forested wetlands to
herbaceous wetlands. Conversion impacts would consists of areas that forested wetlands are converted and
4

maintained as herbaceous wetlands through maintenance in perpetuity. Please update the PCN impact table,
plans and compensatory mitigation plan to account for permanent wetland convers. Typically a 1:1 ratio
compensatory mitigation ratio is required to ensure minimal adverse effects.
4) Based on the application the proposed activities will result in a loss of 0.026 acre of streambed and 0.4201 acres
of wetlands. Per General Condition 23 and Regional Condition 7 a compensatory mitigation plan is required.
Typically, compensatory mitigation is required at a 2:1 credit to impact ratio unless otherwise justified based on
evaluation of aquatic function (NCSAM and NCWAM). Please provide a compensatory mitigation plan to include
a proposed mitigation ratio and ILF letter and/or SOA.
5) Note: the proposed activities that consists of installation of riprap within streambed is viewed as a permanent
impacts because fille will be permanently placed within the streambed. As proposed (embedded to match
preexisting elevations/contours) are typically viewed as permanent impacts that do not result in a total loss of
feature and therefore typically mitigation is not required. It appears that riprap will be installed downstream at
Impact Areas A, D and H.
6) Based on review of the proposed plans (Retreat at Friendship) and review of the previously authorized impacts
for the construction of Horton Ridge Blvd. it is unclear if additional wetland impacts are proposed at wetland
"W13" depicted on the "Wetlands/Stream Map". It appears that impacts to a portion of W13 was authorized,
however, it is unclear if additional impacts are occurring for lot construction. Based on the JD "W13" was
approximately 0.13 acres in size and only 0.09 acres of fill was authorized. If fill is proposed within "W13" for
proposed lot fill then a redesign to avoid and minimize to the maximum extent practicable or additional
information is required to justify the proposed fill (see comment 1 and 2 above).
Please submit the above information within 30 days of receipt of this Notification or we may consider your application
withdrawn and close the file. Please email ([e-mail]) me if you have any questions.
Lyle Phillips
Regulatory Specialist
US Army Corps of Engineers
CE-SAW-RG-R
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
Phone: [phone], Ext. 25.
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
We would appreciate your feedback on how we are performing our duties. Our automated Customer Service Survey is
located at https://regulatory.ops.usace.army.mil/customer-service-survey/ . Thank you for taking the time to visit this
site and complete the survey.
5