20072046 Ver 1_More Info Received_20080610

June 6, 2008
TO: Mr. Chad Coburn
NC Division of Water Quality
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405

i
JUN 1 0 2008
RE: Additional Information for the Nationwide Permit 29 Application DENR -',VA1ER GuAUTy
Brunswick Forest Subdivision; Brunswick County, NC WETLANDS AND STORMWATER BRANCH
DWQ# 07-2046
Dear Chad:
Thank you for your letter dated May 29, 2008 in which you request additional information for the
401 Water Quality Certification application submitted for the Brunswick Forest Subdivision project.
Below is a response to each of your comments.
1. The submitted mitigation plan states that 1.27 acres of uplands will be restored. These uplands
were listed as 404 wetlands in the prior jurisdictional determination from 2001. Provide
evidence that the applicant did not drain these upland areas via the constructed ditch in the
previous seven years.
This ditch was constructed many years ago to aid forestry activities within the site. It was present
during the wetland delineation conducted in 1999; however, its drainage effect was not evaluated at
that time and an area of wetlands was delineated adjacent to it. Groundwater monitoring wells were
installed in this area in 2006 and data from these wells conclusively showed that the ditch drained
adjacent soils. An inspection of the area by Jennifer Frye of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on
February 22, 2008 determined that the area was indeed drained and should be classified as uplands.
No violation in this area was noted by her.
2. Provide as built cross sectional details for the impacts already constructed showing the
provisions for aquatic life passage.
As discussed in the previous submittal, all of the forestry roads within Brunswick Forest were
installed many years ago and are not jurisdictional. Therefore, we do not believe that cross sections
of each of these impacts are necessary. However, there are two road crossings that were installed in
2005 and impacted 0.1 acre of Waters of the U.S. Plan views that document the amount of
disturbance from these impacts are shown in Figures 18 and 19. Cross sections of these impacts are
also enclosed.
3. Since there are impacts to greater than 150 feet of perennial stream for this project, mitigation
www.imgroup.net • infoClmgroup.net • Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
3805 Wrightsville Ave., Suite 15, Wilmington, NC 28403 • P.O. Box 2522, Wilmington, NC 28402
is required for DWQ. The application states that the mitigation requirements will be met by
paying into the NCEEP for 298 linear feet of stream. The acceptance letter from NCEEP
expires on June 4, 2008. Please submit a new acceptance letter from NCEEP upon expiration.
Enclosed is the updated EEP acceptance letter, dated April 15, 2008. Please note that stream
impacts have decreased to 262 LF.
4. Upon the approval of an Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan issued by the Division of
Land Resources (DLR) or a DLR delegated local erosion and sedimentation control program,
an NPDES General stormwater permit administered by DWQ is automatically issued to the
project...... Please provide a written narrative explaining how you intend to comply with this
permit and who will be delegated to inspect the site and maintain required rain gauge and
monitoring reports. During a site visit on May 29, 2008 by the DWQ several areas of possible
non-compliance with the NCG010000 permit were noted pertaining to turbidity. Explain what
measures are being taken to keep the site in compliance with the North Carolina Turbidity
Stream Standard.
The applicant has obtained Erosion and Sedimentation Control Permits for Phases 3 and 5 of
development (enclosed). Mr. Jeff Malpass with Malpass Engineering regularly monitors discharge
points and erosion control devices such as silt fences (once a week or after every 'h inch of rainfall;
whichever is more frequent) to ensure they are functioning properly and that the site is compliant
with the above-mentioned permits. In addition, representatives of DLR have made routine visits on
this site and have found the site to be in compliance. We are not aware of any recent non-
compliance citations regarding turbidity.
5. Please be advised any proposed bottomless culvert must include submittal of a signed and
sealed geotechnical investigation of subsurface soils which directly complies with the Division
of Highways- Guidelines for Drainage Studies and Hydraulic Design.....
As stated in our previous submittal, the applicant installed two bottomless culverts in Phase One of
development in 2005. This was prior to the implementation of DWQ's above-referenced
requirements for bottomless culverts. No additional bottomless culverts are proposed because the
Town of Leland does not support these structures.
6 Please revise the Pre-Construction Notification application to reflect any revised impacts as
referenced above and any amount of streams andlor wetlands already impacted. Also, revise the
application to reflect changes in the type of DA permit required or any other changes as
necessary.
Several changes to the previous PCN have been made. The ephemeral stream impact (#3) is now
listed under the wetland impacts instead of the stream impacts, as directed by both DWQ and Corps
guidelines. In addition, wetland and stream impacts have decreased slightly based on minor
revisions to the site plan. Finally, the previous PCN form had incorrectly listed the point of contact
2
for Funston Land and Timber. We have revised the PCN to list Mr. Jeff Earp as the point of contact.
The revised PCN form is enclosed.
I hope this response adequately addresses your concerns. Please contact me if you have any
additional questions. Thank you for your assistance with this project.
Sincerely,
Kim Williams
Wetland Scientist
Encl.
C: Mr. Jeff Earp, Funston Land and Timber, LLC
Mr. Greg Wayne, Hanover Design
Mr. Joe Taylor, Murchison, Taylor, and Gibson
Mr. Ian McMillan, DWQ
Ms. Kim Garvey, ACOE
Ms. Molly Ellwood, WRC
LMG
LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP INC.
Environmental Consultants
June 6, 2008
TO: Ms. Kim Garvey
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402
RE: Additional Information for the Nationwide Permit 29 Application
Brunswick Forest Subdivision; Brunswick County, NC
Action ID# SAW-2007-530
Dear Kim:
Thank you for your letter dated May 13, 2008 in which you request additional information for the
Nationwide Permit application submitted for the Brunswick Forest Subdivision project. Below is a
response to each of your comments.
1. It appears based on your application and supplemental information received]] Apr 2008 that
impacts to wetlands could be further avoided and minimized. Please explain why the following
alternatives were not considered and/or why it may/may not be practicable (MWP General
Condition 20 (a)).
a. It does not appear that any available on-site alternatives were evaluated, specifically
bridging the road crossings. Explain and document why this may/may not be
practicable, particularly for high quality aquatic resources.
The applicant evaluated the construction of bridges, especially at the proposed stream
crossings. Bridges are expensive to construct and maintain. The Town of Leland will
ultimately be responsible for maintaining these bridges. Communication with Town
representatives indicated they did not want to take on this financial responsibility (see
attached letter from project engineer). In addition, proposed stream impacts will occur in
areas were there are existing roads. Culverts are present in these areas and the streams are
not considered high quality. However, the applicant will examine the possibility of utilizing
bridges in future phases of development, especially in areas of high quality streams or other
resources.
b. The proposed road crossings appear to be larger than would normally be needed for this
type of development. Please provide justification for the road widths for our evaluation
or reduce the impacts.
As stated previously, most of the road rights-of-way in Phases 3 and 5 are 80' wide. These
roads are considered major arteries and will handle a large volume of traffic. The road
through Phase 3 will shuttle cars to and from the club house. The applicant will utilize
www.lmgroup.net • [e-mail] • Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
3805 Wrightsville Ave., Suite 15, Wilmington, NC 28403 • P.O. Box 2522, Wilmington, NC 28402
retaining walls at Crossings #2-6 to minimize stream and wetland impacts. Furthermore, the
shoulder width has been decreased to 8', which will reduce proposed impacts. Finally,
utilities located outside of the ROW (impacts 2 and 3) will be directionally bored. Total
impacts have been further reduced to 0.228 acre of 404 wetlands and 262 LF of stream. The
project engineer has determined that the road widths at these crossings cannot be decreased
any further without causing traffic safety issues (please see attached letter).
2. Please submit a plan view and cross-section for each of the proposed impacts, not included in
your most recent submittal.
Plan view drawings and cross sections for each of the proposed crossings are enclosed.
3. The as-builts you submitted were difficult to understand and did not show cross sections Please
provide this office with a spreadsheet listing each of the crossings, the type of aquatic resource
impact and the acres/linear feet of impact. Please further provide a functional assessment of the
resource that has been impacted. This information is needed to show the amount of impact to
waters of the United States that you have already completed.
As discussed in the previous submittal, all of the forestry roads within Brunswick Forest were
installed prior to 1977 and are not subject to the "recapture provision". Therefore, we do not believe
that a spread sheet listing each of these impacts is necessary. However, there are two road crossings
that were installed in 2005 and impacted 0.1 acre of a ditch labeled `Waters of the U. S.' Plan views
that document the amount of disturbance from these crossings are shown in Figures 18 and 19.
Cross sections of these impacts are also enclosed. This ditch was dug many years ago through
uplands and eventually connects to Piney Branch. During a recent site visit, this ditch was found to
contain water, but is maintained and does not appear to support a high quality resource (please see
enclosed pictures). The Waters of the U. S. impacts were performed under a no-notification NWP 3 9
in 2005. These impacts were listed in the recently submitted PCN under the IV. Prior Project
History and VI. Cumulative Impacts sections. This 0.1 acre impact was added to the overall impacts
and was factored into mitigation totals.
Please note that we have modified the PCN form to list the ephemeral stream impact (#3) under the
wetlands table based on guidance from DWQ and the Corps. In addition, proposed wetland and
stream crossings have been revised to further reduce impacts and accurately show the limits of rip
rap. Revised plan views and cross sections are enclosed.
4. Please clarify if your proposed preservation area is all wetland or if there will be some stream
preservation as well. In addition to preservation of remaining streams on the property, this
office also recommends 100 foot upland buffers to further protect the resource.
LMG has evaluated the areas shown on the preservation map and established the limits of streams
within the wetlands. We have calculated 777 linear feet of stream preservation. Please note that
other streams within the site will be deeded to third parties at a later date and are not a part of the
mitigation proposal.
2
The applicant is proposing to preserve approximately 122.9 acres of wetlands, 12 acres of uplands,
and 777 linear feet of streams on site. In addition, the applicant will restore 1.27 acres and enhance
2.44 acres of wetlands on site. Finally, the applicant will buy into the NC EEP for the restoration of
between 262 LF and 524 LF of stream (ratio to be determined by your office). This mitigation will
be used to offset impacts to 262 LF of stream, 0.228 acre of wetlands, and 0.1 acre of Waters of the
U. S. Based on these values, we do not believe that 100 foot upland buffers are needed.
5. Please provide this office with an]]" by 17" map of the proposed preservation areas.
We have enclosed a draft preservation map prepared by the surveyor. The applicant is proposing to
preserve approximately 122.9 acres of wetlands, 12 acres of uplands, and 777 linear feet of streams
on site. Please note that the amount of wetlands to be preserved has decreased from the previous
submittal because this previous map incorrectly showed the preservation of some wetlands that
were already sold.
6 Your proposed compensatory mitigation proposal is not accepted
a. Without knowing the amount of streams already impacted and having a functional
assessment of each of the proposed stream crossings, this office cannot accept your
proposed ratio of 1:1 payment to NC EEP.
As discussed above, there are no previous stream impacts within the site that require
mitigation because these road crossings were installed prior to 1977. The two Waters of the
U. S. impacts installed in 2005 are not streams. Therefore, only 262 LF of proposed stream
impact require mitigation. Staff of LMG prepared stream determination forms that give
information regarding the quality of these streams at these crossings (enclosed). We believe
that buying into the NC EEP at between a 1:1 and 2:1 ratio and preserving 777 LF of stream
on-site is adequate mitigation.
b. Prior to accepting your wetland restoration and enhancement proposal, please provide
clarification for the proposed restoration area. Specifically, provide evidence that you
did not drain this area via constructing the ditch. It appears based on your mitigation
plan that the hydrology at this location has changed within the last seven years.
This ditch was constructed many years ago to aid forestry activities within the site. It was
present during the wetland delineation conducted in 1999; however, its drainage effect was
not evaluated at that time and an area of wetlands was delineated adjacent to it. Groundwater
monitoring wells were installed in this area in 2006 and data from these wells conclusively
showed that the ditch drained adjacent soils. An inspection of the area by Jennifer Frye of
the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers on February 22, 2008 determined that the area was
indeed drained and should be classified as uplands. No violation in this area was noted by
her.
c. We have the following changes to your proposal:
i. Monitoring will occur annually until
successful
this office determines the site to be
3
The Corps' Regulatory Guidance Letter (RGL) 06-03 states that the DA permit
and/or the mitigation plan "must specify the length of monitoring required". Five
years of monitoring is a commonly-used mitigation timeframe, however, this RGL
also states that "the DE may waive any remaining monitoring requirements upon a
determination that the compensatory mitigation project has achieved its performance
standards". We strongly disagree with leaving the monitoring period open-ended, but
do agree to change the language to read "monitoring will occur annually for five
years or until agencies determine the site to be successful."
ii. Wetland mitigation activities will commence prior to construction within
jurisdictional areas.
Although we believe that this is a permit condition, we have added this language to
the mitigation plan.
Please note that we have enclosed a revised PCN form that accurately reflects the modified
impact areas. In addition, the previous PCN form had incorrectly listed the point of contact for
Funston Land and Timber. We have revised the PCN to list Mr. Jeff Earp as the point of contact.
As requested, we have also enclosed the draft preservation document that clearly shows how
the document differs from the Corps' standard preservation language. Areas highlighted have been
added and areas marked out have been deleted. A brief narrative that describes the need for the
proposed changes was prepared by the applicant's attorney, Mr. Joseph Taylor, and is enclosed.
I hope this response adequately addresses your concerns. Please contact me if you have any
additional questions. Thank you for your assistance with this project.
Sincerely,
V _` ?,.` ,
Kim Williams
Wetland Scientist
Encl.
C: Mr. Jeff Earp, Funston Land and Timber, LLC
Mr. Greg Wayne, Hanover Design
Mr. Joe Taylor, Murchison, Taylor, and Gibson
Mr. Chad Coburn, DWQ
Mr. Ian McMillan, DWQ
Ms. Molly Ellwood, WRC
4
Office Use Only: Form Version March 05
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No.
(If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "iNot Appncame or iNiti .)
1. Processing
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit ? Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
? Section 10 Permit ? Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
® 401 Water Quality Certification ? Express 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NWP 29; GC 3404
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here: ?
4. If payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is proposed
for mitigation of impacts, attach the acceptance letter from NCEEP, complete section VIII,
and check here:
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), check here
II. Applicant Information PM
1. Owner/Applicant Information JUN 1 0 2008
Name: Funston Land and Timber LLC ^urv
Mailing Address: c/o Mr. Jeff Earp WETLANDS AND STORMWATER BRANCH
1007 Evangeline Drive
Leland NC 28451
Telephone Number: [phone] Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address:
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name: Kim Williams
Company Affiliation: Land Management Group Inc.
Mailing Address: PO Box 2522
Wilmington NC 28402
Telephone Number: [phone] Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address: kwilliams a hngroup.net
III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 5 of 12
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable snaps are provided.
1. Name of project: Brunswick Forest Subdivision; Phases 3 & 5
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only):
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): 219500647946
4. Location
County: Brunswick Nearest Town: Leland
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): Brunswick Forest; Phases 3 & 5
Directions to site (include road numbers/names, landmarks, etc.): From Wilmington, take
17 S into Brunswick County. Site is located directly off of 17S on left (see vicinity map).
5. Site coordinates (For linear projects, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that
separately lists the coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
Decimal Degrees (6 digits minimum): 34.1844 ON 78.0482 °W
6. Property size (acres): Total tract: 4290 ac Phase 3: 471.8 ac Phase 5: 198 ac
7. Name of nearest receiving body of water: Town Creek
8. River Basin: Cape Fear
(Note - this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: Phases 1 and 2 have already been partially developed and
contain residential homes Other phases contain old dirt logging roads but are otherwise
undeveloped Adjacent land use is residential commercial or forested.
10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used: Phase 3 of
this residential subdivision will contain 193 single-family lots and a golf course. Phase 5 will
contain 323 single-family lots The subdivision will tie in to the existing sewer system via
developer installed sewer lines A stormwater plan and erosion control plan are being
developed Sediment and erosion shall be minimized with the use of silt fencing.
Updated I 1 /1 /2005
Page 6 of 12
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: Purpose of the proposed work is to provide
access to uplands located throughout the subdivision.
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules. There is a previously signed Notification of Jurisdictional Determination
signed by Mr. Allen Davis of the US Army Corps of Engineers dated 9/10/2001 (IP Realty
Corporation Brunswick Forest) This determination has expired and the delineation has been
revised in areas. LMG recently submitted a revised wetland survey to Jennifer Frye. In 2005, the
applicant notified the Corps of 1000 sf of Waters of the U.S. impact for two road crossings.
These crossings have been constructed and it was determined that actual impacts were 4300 sf.
In addition two old culverts were replaced with bottomless culverts in 2006. Impacts were
temporary and no permit was obtained. Finally, the applicant has received a CAMA Major
permit associated with a beach club in Oak Island.
V. Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
The applicant may have future wetland impacts in later phases of residential development, but
land planning for these phases has not yet been completed. Any future wetland or stream impacts
will be considered to be cumulative and will be applied for through the Corps and DWQ
accordinuly.
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. Each impact must be
listed separately in the tables below (e.g., culvert installation should be listed separately from
riprap dissipater pads). Be sure to indicate if an impact is temporary. All proposed impacts,
permanent and temporary, must be listed, and must be labeled and clearly identifiable on an
accompanying site plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial)
should be shown on a delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems.
Wetland and stream evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate.
Photographs may be included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for
wetland or stream mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional
space is needed for listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts: The proposed road crossings will
impact 0.228 ac of wetlands and 262 LF of stream. The applicant has already impacted 0.1
acre of Waters of the U.S.
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 7of12
2. Individually list wetland impacts. Types of impacts include, but are not limited to
mechanized clearing, grading, fill, excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams,
cPnnrntely list imnnctc rlne to hoth atnlcture and flooding.
Located within Distance to Area of
Wetland Impact Type of Wetland 100-year Nearest Impact
Site Number Type of Impact (e.g., forested, marsh, Floodplain Stream (acres)
(indicate on map) herbaceous, bog, etc.) (yes/no) (linear feet)
2 Fill/Culvert for Forested Wetland (Phase 3) No adjacent 0.019
Road Crossing
3 Fill/Culvert for Forested Wetland/Ephemeral No adjacent 0.045
Road Crossing Stream (Phase 3)
4 Fill/Culvert for Forested Wetland (Phase 3) No adjacent 0.096
Road Crossing
5 Fill/Culvert for Forested Wetland (Phase 5) No adjacent 0.028
Existing Road Crossing
6 Fill/Culvert for Forested Wetland (Phase 5) No 2000 0.040
Existing Road Crossing
Total Wetland Impact (acres) 0.228
3. List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: 1200 acres
4. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts. Be sure to identify temporary
impacts. Stream impacts include, but are not limited to placement of fill or culverts, dam
construction, flooding, relocation, stabilization activities (e.g., cement walls, rip-rap, crib
walls, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is proposed,
plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams
mnct No inPllidi- l Tn Pale„late nnrenoe_ rrnltinly length X width- then divide by 43.560.
Stream Impact _ Perennial or Average Impact Area of
Number Stream Name Type of Impact Intermittent? Stream Width Length Impact
(indicate on map) Before Impact (linear feet) (acres)

1 Mallory Creek Fill/Culvert for Perennial 8' 105 0.019
Existing Road Crossing
2 UT to Mallory Fill/Culvert for Intermittent 5' 63 0.007
Creek Road Crossing
4 UT to Mallory Fill/Culvert for Perennial 5' 62 0.007
Creek Road Crossing
5 UT to Mallory Fill/Culvert for Perennial 8' 32 0.006
Creek Existing Road Crossing
Total Stream Impact (by length and acreage) 262 0.039
5. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.). Open water impacts include, but are not limited to
fill PxPnvntinn di-t-daino flnntlina rlrninnge_ bulkheads- etc.
Open Water Impact Name Waterbody Type of Waterbody Area of
Site Number (if applicable) Type of Impact (lake, pond, estuary, sound, bay, Impact
(indicate on map) )
ocean, etc. (acres)

N/A

Total Open Water Impact (acres) N/A
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 8 of 12
6. List the cumulative impact to all Waters of the U.S. resulting from the project:
Stream Impact (acres): 0.039
Wetland Impact (acres): 0.228
Open Water Impact (acres): N/A
Total Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres) 0.367
Total Stream Impact (linear feet): 262
7. Isolated Waters
Do any isolated waters exist on the property? ? Yes ® No
Describe all impacts to isolated waters, and include the type of water (wetland or stream) and
the size of the proposed impact (acres or linear feet). Please note that this section only
applies to waters that have specifically been determined to be isolated by the USACE.
8. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ® uplands ? stream ? wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.): excavation of uplands
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.):
Current land use in the vicinity of the pond: undeveloped
Size of watershed draining to pond: Expected pond surface area:
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts. Wetland impacts were minimized
to the maximum extent bracticable. However, several wetland fingers _extend the entire length of the
property and some impact could not be avoided. The applicant will use retaining walls and will decrease
road widths at the impact areas to minimize impacts. Furthermore roads were designed in the footprint of
existing roads where possible to reduce overall impacts. No wetland impact from lot fill is proposed.
Please note that the applicant has reduced impacts from the original submittal.
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
Updated I t/L/2005
Page 9 of 12
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Pennits, published in the Federal Register on January 15, 2002, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCEEP concurrence shall be placed on hold as incomplete.
An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration in DWQ's
Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/'iicwetiands/strmgide.litm1.
1. Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
The applicant will restore 1.27 acres of non-riparian wetlands on site by filhu a ditch located in the
southern part of Phase 3 There are no stream restoration opportunities on site. Therefore, the
qpplicant will buy into the EEP for the restoration of 262 linear feet of stream. In addition, the
lid cant proposes to preserve remaining wetlands located on individual lots within Phases 3 and 5.
They are in the process of developing a draft wetlands preservation map and document. The applicant
also avrees that wetlands located on individual lots in future phases will be preserved prior to being
sold Furthermore approximately 122 acres of wetlands 12 acres of uplands, and 777 LF of stream
within the tract will be preserved using restrictive covenants (see map). Remaining, wetlands on site
cannot be preserved at this time for several reasons. They are either under hydroloizical study, are
located in future phases of development where precise impact locations have not yet been determined
or are in areas that the applicant is planning to deed to third parties (NC State University and the NC
Coastal Land Trust) for research/conservation purposes
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (NCEEP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCEEP at
[phone] to determine availability, and written approval from the NCEEP indicating
that they are will to accept payment for the mitigation must be attached to this form. For
additional information regarding the application process for the NCEEP, check the NCEEP
website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htm. If use of the NCEEP is proposed, please
check the appropriate box on page five and provide the following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet): 262
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 10 of 12
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet):
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres):
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
1. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of
public (federal/state) land? Yes ? No
2. If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ? No ?
3. If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please
attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter. Yes ? No ?
X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
1. Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Neuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 02B .0243 (Catawba) 15A NCAC
2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please
identify )? Yes ? No
2. If "yes", identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers.
If buffer mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the
buffer multipliers.
Zone* Impact Multiplier Required
(square feet) Mitigation
I N/A 3 (2 for Catawba)
2 1.5
Total
* Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from the top of the near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
3. If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e.,
Donation of Property, Riparian Buffer Restoration / Enhancement, or Payment into the
Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as identified
within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or.0244, or.0260. N/A
Updated 11/1/2005
Page I 1 of 12
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site. Discuss stormwater
controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands downstream from the property. If
percent impervious surface exceeds 20%, please provide calculations demonstrating total proposed
impervious level. There are several dirt roads within Phases 3 and 5. Proposed impervious cover will
include the roadways 516 homes and associated driveways. Phase 3 will have +/- 46 ac of impervious
cover, or 10% of the phase Phase 5 will have +/- 52 acres of impervious cover, or 26% of the phase A
s_tormwater plan is being developed by the project engineer.
XII. Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
The project will tie into existing sewer services provided by the Town of Leland. Sewer lines will be
installed by the developer.
XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ? No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application? Yes ? No
XIV. Cumulative Impacts (required by DWQ)
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in additional
development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? Yes ? No
If yes, please submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with
the most recent North Carolina Division of Water Quality policy posted on our website at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. If no, please provide a short narrative description: The
project will not provide connections or utilities to other tracts. Remaining wetlands within Phases 3 and 5
will be preserved. Additional impacts may occur in future phases (road crossings) and will be considered
cumulative. However, these phases have not been planned and impacts cannot be assessed at this time
XV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
N/A
J -t-
Applicant/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 12 of 12
(fB 0VN) 0180 ON
U)
o=
Q?
0
mZ
?YN
?W
aUJa
1` q
> Q m
WJa
K?
0
0
W
U
ro
U
m
10 R 535 \
258 .- ?
is
Q) o
'k Q,
a\-
1
W N
1
moti ?
I
a
odo ft
?n`i?.1? °n
o
1 _
a
5g?e
LL.
oa
o -
? ? fr

E? v / W
Z
CL
I
?pw
\ F -
t \
/ o y
j

oR
/µ
-.

n

\ m
n °w a

W ma
2 =? Yd
U
w d
¢?
'
eJ
o ij
?JpO
?

• ? 11, i
? t \
_ i
11
K

a?6
U)
? U
C)
? Q
w E
Q ?
L
z
_O Z o00
(!? T (Do
c 3 a
Q o
o >
m 3 ? l
u? U O n
-C
3 N
U) 2 O
LLJ ? M Q
O
U
z
m
a
a
? M
O
00 (N
3NOo
C(naZeo
C E C;
Q D)oO O Co
N fn W m _O
C, C_
Q n1 ? ?
N
0
m
x

U)
c
ca
NT
E O
'IT
(Q O
L y..I
? U
U
E
W
O
Q
C) 2
41- a
ail
Z
O
F-
U
zZ
O
U
O
H
F-
0
z
}
zz
J
W
d
z ' I
Li
o O',
L
p "J
I
1 Q?Q
w_ I
y III
Proposed Rip Rap
Existing Culvert
(to be removed)
80
36"CMP
__ asement -'
10
. Propos d Rip Ra G
-
- _ -Stream -lmpacf V : ?\ T
---------------
105 LF
ti
I ,
PRELIMINARY: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
Site plan by: BRUNSWICK FOREST SUBDIVISION
Hanover Design Services, P.A. Brunswick County, NC
404 Wetlands/RPW
1123 Floral Parkway
D711, Wilmington, NC 28403
Proposed Impact to Stream [phone] Figure 10. Stream Impact #1
SCALE: 1" = 50'
Utilities directionally
88 -- bored (no impoct)
n,
,o .
'2 00
ox.)
------ --------- - -----
am-(AP
.;
,?,,?Blue Lin
?i
--------------
i3'-36 RGP ? 1 2x
IMPACT REP*? _
Retaining Wall
3 -
#2:00Interm tent Stream Impact: 63 LF
We land Impact: 0.019 acre (829.4 std
70
?? rp
2 5
s2 A
C1? i
7r
PRELIMINARY: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
Blue-Line Stream (Approx.) Site plan by: BRUNSWICK FOREST SUBDIVISION
404 Wetlands Hanover Design Services, P.A. Brunswick County, NC
1123 Floral Parkway
Proposed Impact to 404 Wetlands/RPW Wilmington, NC 28403 Figure 11 . Stream/Wetland Impact #2 (Phase 3)
[phone]
SCALE: 1 ?r = 40' REVISED MAY 2008
7 Utilities
bored

? `----Retaining Wd'//
aye s,°d
i, #3. Wetly emeral Stream Impact.
j' h AAK •-sAra /4=79Z iefl
i
PRELIMINARY: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
Blue-Line Stream (Approx.)
404 Wetlands
Proposed Impact to 404 Wetlands/RPW
SCALE: 1 40'
cq\O e° ?a
?C
/ ?FqR? R?tir?w
Nq
? ?•? oC ?R??E
1. f
D
2 ,
a
Site plan by: BRUNSWICK FOREST SUBDIVISION
Hanover Design Services, P.A. Brunswick County, NC
1123 Parkway
Wilmington, , NC 28403 Figure 12. Ephemeral Stream/Wetland Impact #3
[phone] (Phase 3)
REVISED MAY 2008

PRELIMINARY: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
- Blue-Line Stream (Approx.) Site plan by: BRUNSWICK FOREST SUBDIVISION
Hanover Design Services, P.A. Brunswick County, NC
® 404 Wetlands 1123 Floral Parkway
Proposed Impact to 404 Wetlands/RPW Wilmington, NC 28403 Figure 13. Stream/Wetland Impact #4 (Phase 3)
[phone]
SCALE: 1 ?? - 4?? REVISED MAY 2008
s-
s
a
?• N
AG Laf
Impact Pye ?,? \
Wetland: 0:028 acre 3?.9 std
s?°eW I\ 5 F o S t r e a rrk
\ ?p?F
Stream.
c
- ----- '' cQ
a f
IueI?neS
A 7
Pprox? Alw?
s \ 1
%
\
\ 4?. Pcr6\\_
S•
1
17 LF of Stream m, a'Ct
\ 2• ^6,
i
?a l
80
cp _ <p
\ Py
a D

PRELIMINARY: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
SCALE: 1" = 30'
Blue-Line Stream (Approx.) Site plan by:
® 404 Wetlands/RPW Hanover Design Services, P.A.
1123 Floral Parkway
Wilmington, NC 28403
Proposed Impact to 404 Wetlands/RPW [phone]
proposed lot 323
phase 5
BRUNSWICK FOREST SUBDIVISION
Brunswick County, NC
Figure 14. Wetland/Stream Impact #5 (Phase 5)
REVISED MAY 2008
STREAM/WETLAND IMPACT # 2 (PHASE 3)
CROSS SECTION VIEW
STREAM/WETLAND IMPACT # 3 (PHASE 3)
CROSS SECTION VIEW
STREAM/WETLAND IMPACT # 4 (PHASE 3)
CROSS SECTION VIEW
STREAM/WETLAND IMPACT # 5 (PHASES)
CROSS SECTION VIEW
STREAM/WETLAND IMPACT # 6 (PHASE5)
CROSS SECTION VIEW

C),
J'
D ?
0
0 0 ??
4L
9
NV.
21.6IN W911
W
EX. SEWER
-:m 4,2P ??NCRE l
COQ 5\DEWA
.4?4P 2N .
INV
22.6
no

2Q-
® E4-A
t.
?S. o
`? xne
0
?e
?a
PRELIMINARY: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
SCALE: 1" = 50'
vvaiers u1 uM v..7. 111t,0a.a•
1897.42 sf; 0.043 ac
(installed)
7\S9
Site plan by: BRUNSWICK FOREST SUBDIVISION
Hanover Design Services, P.A. Brunswick County, NC
404 Wetlands 1123 Floral Parkway
Wilmington, NC 28403 Figure 19. As-Built of Existing Road Crossing E
[phone] E4-A (No-Notification NWP 39)
--- ----------------
u 1A j
FIRE HYDRANT
WATER VALVE j
p
STOP SIGN
74
n G0"
om WATER VALVE N o 5\0
`t a2
t 'c
WATER VALVE
J
® p4 i
Way? 745
n+
\ !V
744
Rip-Rap o
% INV. \ -
is a? the 't.\
Ovate vat 744
i
"XI VE \V © I
104 W
10.3 W --'1
102 W -
PRELIMINARY: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
404 Wetlands
SCALE: 1" = 50'
E7-A j
Waters of the U.S. Impact:;
2364.12 sf; 0.054 ac 74,3
-,q (installed)
Site plan by: BRUNSWICK FOREST SUBDIVISION
Hanover Design Services, P.A. Brunswick County, NC
1123 Floral Parkway
Wilmington, INC 28403 Figure 18. As-Built of Existing Road Crossing
[phone] E7-A (No-Notification NWP 39)
E7-A AS-BU?LT EkSPNG ROAD
CR OSS HG P -1
WATE RS OF TH E US

Q wk- W?-
zz zz
::]Lu ui
,

35 >
Z z < 4

0

35
WIDE ELEVATED
a o W ADEN WALKWAY j
RETAINING = - -
WALL
?
? \\\
2.5' CURB 2.5' CURB
O
?
30 30
RETAINING c
WALL
TWIN 48"RCPs
FLOW SEE TABLE .FOR LINE
_
FLOW
LENGTHS and SLOPES. J
25 ' 25
LINE
INVERT LINE
"A" NORTH PIPE LINE
"B" SOUTH PIPE
- INV. (W) INV. (E) SIZE LEN. SLOPE INV. (W) INV. (E) SIZE LEN. SLOPE
CULVERT "P1" 25.8' 26.0' 48" 130' .15% 25.7' 25.9' 48" 130' .15%
E4-A AS-BUIT EKST N G R OAD

CROSSNG P- 2
WATERS OF THE US

35 0 35
w
_Jol

-10' WID
E ELEVATED o
>
WOODEN WALKWAY

_ _ -z <c
2' CURB Lou 1 2' CURB
30 30
RETAINING
WALL RETAINING
WALL_
25 TWIN 48"RCPs 25
SEE TABLE -FOR LINE

FLOW LENGTHS and SLOPES.
RETAINING RETAININ
FLAW
-WALL WALL
r °

20

RIP-RAP N
N
w
N

III

RIP-RAP
20
W
0+00 0+50 1+00 1 +,50 2+00

LINE LINE LINE
INVERT "A" WEST PIPE "B" EAST P IPE
- INV. (S) INV. (N) SIZE LEN. SLOPE INV. (S) INV. (N) SIZE LEN. SLOPE
CULVERT "P1" 22.0' 21 .6' 48" 130.3' .31 % 22.0' 21.5' 48" 130.3' .38%

Hanover Design Services, P.A.
MNNMEEZ=':?7 71-17.
Land Surveyors, Engineers, Land Planners
May 19, 2008
Ms. Kim Williams
Land Management Group, Inc.
P.O. Box 2522
Wilmington, N.C. 28402
Re: Brunswick Forest Road Crossing Wetland Fill Areas
Dear Ms. Williams:

The proposed roads within Brunswick Forest are public and will be accepted and
maintained by the Town of Leland. We have discussed bridges in the past and the Town
of Leland has informed us that bridges would not be acceptable as part of their road
system.
We have looked at each proposed wetland crossing within Phases 3 and 5 of Brunswick
Forest, and have determined that we cannot decrease the width of proposed fill any more
than what is shown. We are proposing only an eight foot shoulder between the back of
curb and the proposed retaining wall. To decrease the shoulder width any further would
cause traffic safety issues.
If you have any questions, please let me know.
Sincerely,
9Q4xe
Greg A. Wayne, PLS
president
1123 Floral Parkway Wilmington, N.C. 28403 Phone [phone] Fax [phone]
Table of Constructed Waters of the U.S. Imnacts within Rninswick Fc)rPSt
Type of Wetland Located within
WOUS Impact (e.g., forested, 100- year

y Leng
th of
Area of Impact
(Constructed)
( Type of Impact marsh Floodplain Impact (acres)
herbaceous, bog, (yes/no) (linear feet)
etc.)
E4-A Fill/Culvert for
Road Crossing ditch No 134 0.043
E7-A Fill/Culvert for
Road Crossing ditch No 178 0.054
TOTAL 0.097
Brunswick Forest Subdivision LMG Crossing E4-A:
Brunswick County, NC LAVAMI9'AGLNILNIGROUP- Site Photographs
03-05-440W E„vl,on,ne„tar co„s„iro
2008
Looking northeast at crossing from culvert.
Looking northeast at ditch, just north of crossing.
Brunswick Forest Subdivision LMG Crossing E7-A:
Brunswick County, NC LAND MINAGBMENTGROCP-.
Site Photographs
03-05-440W Consurtnnu+
May 2008
Looking east at crossing from culvert.
Looking west along ditch, just west of crossing.
USAGE AID# DWQ # 0 1 2 Le Site # (indicate on attached map)
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:'
1. Applicant's name: Brunswick Forest - Phase 3 2. Evaluator's name: Corey Novak
3. Date of evaluation: 3/26/08 4. Time of evaluation: 11:45
5. Name of stream: Mallory Creek (headwaters) 6. River basin: Cape Fear
7. Approximate drainage area: 200 acres
9. Length of reach evaluated: 1000 feet
8. Stream order: first
10. County: Brunswick
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any): Brunswick Forest
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 34.1769 Longitude (ex. -77.556611): 78.0265
Method location determined (circle): GPS Fopo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note near y roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
identified on attached survey as "Stream Impact #1"
14. Proposed channel work (if any): -PP nnnriina permit application and attached Plat
15. Recent weather conditions: sunny, cool
16. Site conditions at time of visit: sunny, cool, d
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: -Section 10 -Tidal Waters -Essential Fisheries Habitat
-Trout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YE NO yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES O 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES O
21. Estimated watershed land use: 0 % Residential 0 % Commercial 0 % Industrial 0 % Agricultural
20 % Forested 80 % Cleared / Logged o % Other
22. Bankfull width: 3 feet
23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 3 feet
24. Channel slope down center of stream: -Flat (0 to 2%) X Gentle (2 to 4%) -Moderate (4 to 10%) -Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight Occasional bends -Frequent meander X Very sinuous -Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality
Total Score (from reverse): 63 Comments:
Date 3/31/08
Evaluator's Signature k y7LZA
This channel evaluation form is int ed to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
ECOREG ION POINT RANGE
SCORE
# CHARACTERISTICS
Coastal Piedmont Mountain
1 Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream 0-5 0-4 0-5 5
(no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points)
2 Evidence of past human alteration 0-6 0-5 0-5 3
(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
3 Riparian zone 0-6 0-4 0-5 3
(no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max points)

4 Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
0-4
0-4
4
(extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)
a
5 Groundwater discharge 0-3 0-4 0-4 3
d (no discharge = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points)
6 Presence of adjacent floodplain 0-4 0-4 0-2 4
(no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
Entrenchment / floodplain access 0- 5 0- 4 0- 2 3
p (deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points)
8 Presence of adjacent wetlands 0-6 0-4 0-2 6
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
9 Channel sinuosity 0-5 0-4 0-3
5
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max points)
10 Sediment input 0-5 0-4 0-4 4
(extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment = max points)
11 Size & diversity of channel bed substrate NA* 0-4 0-5 N/A
(fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points)
12 Evidence of channel incision or widening 0-5 0-4 0-5 3
>? (deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max points)

E-
**

13 Presence of major bank failures

0-5

0-5

0-5

2
?4 (severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)
14 Root depth and density on banks 0-3 0-4 0-5 3
F (no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max points)

15 Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
0-5
0-4
0-5
3
(substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points)
16 Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes 0-3 0-5 0-6 0
E (no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well-developed = max points)

1 Habitat complexity
0-6
0-6
0-6 4
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)

18 Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0-5
0-5
2
x (no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = max points)

19 Substrate embeddedness NA* 0-4 0-4 N/A
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max)

20 Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
0-4
0-5
0-5
2
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
>4 21 Presence of amphibians 0-4 0-4 0-4 1
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)

22 Presence of fish
0-4
0-4
0-4
0
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
23 Evidence of wildlife use 0-6 0-5 0-5 3
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points)

Total Points Possible 100 100 100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page) 63
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
USAGE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: Brunswick Forest - Phase 3 2. Evaluator's name: Corey Novak
3. Date of evaluation: 3/26/08
5. Name of stream: unnamed tributary to Mallory Creek
7. Approximate drainage area: 100 acres
9. Length of reach evaluated: 500 feet
4. Time of evaluation: 12:15
6. River basin: Cape Fear
8. Stream order: first
10. County: Brunswick
I]. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any): Brunswick Forest
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 34.1733 Longitude (ex. -77.556611): 78.0263
Method location determined (circle): GPS fopo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note near y roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
identified on attached survey as "Wetland Impact #2"
14. Proposed channel work (if any): -PP rnrrespoodino permit application and attached Plat
15. Recent weather conditions: sunny, cool
16. Site conditions at time of visit: sunny, cool, d
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: -Section 10 -Tidal Waters -Essential Fisheries Habitat
-Trout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters -Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YE CD f yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES O
21. Estimated watershed land use: 0 % Residential 0 % Commercial 0 % Industrial 0 % Agricultural
50 % Forested 50 % Cleared / Logged o% Other
22. Bankfull width: 2 feet
23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 2 feet
24. Channel slope down center of stream: -Flat (0 to 2%) X Gentle (2 to 4%) -Moderate (4 to 10%) -Steep (> 10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight -Occasional bends -Frequent meander X Very sinuous -Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 64 Comments:
1
Evaluator's Signature ( ' Date 3/31/08
This channel evaluation form is int ded to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
ECOREG ION POINT RANGE
SCORE
# CHARACTERISTICS
Coastal Piedmont Mountain
1 Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream 0-5 0-4 0-5 4
(no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points)
2 Evidence of past human alteration 0-6 0-5 0-5 5
(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
3 Riparian zone 0-6 0-4 0-5 4
(no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max points)
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges 0-5 0-4 0-4 4
4 (extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)
a
5 Groundwater discharge 0-3 0-4 0-4 2
U (no discharge = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points)
6 Presence of adjacent floodplain 0- 4 0- 4 0- 2 3
(no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
7 Entrenchment / floodplain access 0-5 0-4 0-2 4
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points)
8 Presence of adjacent wetlands 0-6 0-4 0-2 5
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
9 Channel sinuosity 0-5 0-4 0-3 4
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max points)
10 Sediment input 0-5 0-4 0-4 4
(extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment = max points)
11 Size & diversity of channel bed substrate NA* 0-4 0-5 N/A
(fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points)
12 . Evidence of channel incision or widening 0-5 0-4 0-5 3
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max points)

1' Presence of major bank failures 0-5 0-5 0-5 3
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)
14 Root depth and density on banks 0-3 0-4 0-5 2
(no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max points)
15 Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
0-5
0-4
0-5
4
(substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points)
16 Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes 0-3 0-5 0-6 0
(no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well-developed = max points)
17
Habitat complexity
0-6
0-6
0-6
4
F (little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
? 18 Canopy coverage over streambed 0-5 0-5 0-5 3
(no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = max points)
r19 Substrate embeddedness NA* 0-4 0-4 N/A
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max)
20 Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4) 0-4 0-5 0-5 1
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)

l Presence of amphibians 0-4 0-4 0-4 2
O (no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
04

22 Presence of fish
0-4
0-4
0-4
0
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
23 Evidence of wildlife use 0-6 0-5 0-5 3
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points)

Total Points Possible 100 100 100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page) 64
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
USAGE AID#
DWQ # Site 9 -
(indicate on attached map)
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: Brunswick Forest - Phase 3 2. Evaluator's name: Corey Novak
3. Date of evaluation: 3/26/08
5. Name of stream: unnamed tributary to Mallory Creek
7. Approximate drainage area: 100 acres
9. Length of reach evaluated: 500 feet
4. Time of evaluation:
6. River basin: Cape Fear
8. Stream order:
10. County: Brunswick
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any): Brunswick Forest
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 34.17 19 Longitude (ex. -77.556611): 78.0249
Method location determined (circle): GPS 1"opo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note near y roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
identified on attached survey as "Wetland Impact #3"
14. Proposed channel work (if any): gep oorre-pandinq Permit application and attached plat
15. Recent weather conditions: sunny, cool
16. Site conditions at time of visit: sunny, cool, dry
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: -Section 10 -Tidal Waters -Essential Fisheries Habitat
-Trout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters _ Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (MV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YE NO f yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES O
21. Estimated watershed land use: 0 % Residential 0 % Commercial 0 % Industrial 0 % Agricultural
50_% Forested 50 % Cleared / Logged o% Other (
22. Bankfull width: 1 foot 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 1 foot
24. Channel slope down center of stream: -Flat (0 to 2%) X Gentle (2 to 4%) -Moderate (4 to 10%) -Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight -Occasional bends X Frequent meander -Very sinuous -Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 46 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature Date 3/31/08
This channel evaluation form is inte d to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the Inited States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
ECOREG ION POINT RANGE SCORE
# CHARACTERISTICS Coastal Piedmont Mountain
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream 0-5 0-4 0-5 1
1 (no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points)
Evidence of past human alteration 0-6 0-5 0-5 5
2 (extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
3 Riparian zone 0-6 0-4 0-5 3
(no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max points)
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges 0-5 0-4 0-4 4
4 (extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)
a 5 Groundwater discharge 0-3 0-4 0-4 2
d (no dischar e = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points)
Presence of adjacent floodplain 0- 4 0- 4 0- 2 2
6 (no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
x Entrenchment / floodplain access 0- 5 0- 4 0- 2 2
a 2 (deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points)
Presence of adjacent wetlands 0-6 0-4 0-2 3
8 (no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
9 Channel sinuosity 0-5 0-4 0-3 4
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max points)
10 Sediment input 0-5 0-4 0-4 4
(extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment = max points)
11 Size & diversity of channel bed substrate NA* 0-4 0-5 N/A
(fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max oints)
Evidence of channel incision or widening 0-5 0-4 0-5 1
12 (deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max points)

13 Presence of major bank failures
0-5
0-5
0-5
1
a (severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)
Root depth and density on banks 0-3 4
0 - 0-5 1
E„{ 14 (no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max points) .
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production 0-5 0-4 0-5 4
15 (substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points)
Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes 0-3 0-5 0-6 0
16 (no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well-developed = max points)

i 2 Habitat complexity 0- 6 0-6 0-6 1
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
Canopy coverage over streambed 0-5 0-5 0-5 4
18 (no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = max points)
19 Substrate embeddedness NA* 0-4 0-4 N/A
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max)
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
0-4
0-5
0-5
1
20 (no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)

1 Presence of amphibians 0-4 0-4 0-4 1
Q (no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
a

22 Presence of fish
0-4
0-4
0-4
0
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
23 Evidence of wildlife use 0- 6 0- 5 0- 5 2
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points)

Total Points Possible 100 100 100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page) 46
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
USACE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment.
1. Applicant's name: Brunswick Forest - Phase 3 2. Evaluator's name: Corey Novak
3. Date of evaluation: 3/26/08
5. Name of stream: unnamed tributary to Mallory Creek
7. Approximate drainage area: 100 acres
9. Length of reach evaluated: 500 feet
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees.
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 34.1698
4. Time of evaluation
6. River basin: Cape Fear
8. Stream order: first
10. County: Brunswi
12. Subdivision name (if any): Brunswick Forest
Longitude (ex. -77.556611): 78.0228
Method location determined (circle): GPS I'opo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note near y roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
identified on attached survey as "Wetland Impact #4"
14. Proposed channel work (if any): aep rorrespondina permit application and attached plat
15. Recent weather conditions:
16. Site conditions at time of visit: sunn
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: -.Section 10 -Tidal Waters -Essential Fisheries Habitat
-Trout Waters Outstanding Resource Waters _Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YE NO f yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES O
21. Estimated watershed land use: 0 % Residential 0 % Commercial 0 % Industrial 0 % Agricultural
50 % Forested 50 % Cleared / Logged o% Other
22. Bankfull width: 1 foot
23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 1 foot
24. Channel slope down center of stream: -Flat (0 to 2%) X Gentle (2 to 4%) -Moderate (4 to 10%) -Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight -Occasional bends -Frequent meander X Very sinuous -Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 72 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature ->( V Date 3/31/08
This channel evaluation form is int ed to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
c
y.
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
ECOREGION POINT RANGE
S
R
# CHARACTERISTICS
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain CO
E
1 Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream 0-5 0-4 0-5 4
(no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points)
2 Evidence of past human alteration 0-6 0-5 0-5 5
(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
3 Riparian zone 0-6 0-4 0-5 3
(no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max points)

4 Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
0-4
0-4
4
(extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)

5 Groundwater discharge
0-3
0-4
0-4
3
(no discharge = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points)
#.,
6 Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0-4
0-2
4
(no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
x Entrenchment / floodplain access 0- 5 0- 4 0- 2 4
P
, (deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points)

8 Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0-4
0-2
6
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
9 Channel sinuosity 0-5 0-4 0-3 5
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max points)
10 Sediment input 0-5 0-4 0-4 4
(extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment = max points)
11 Size & diversity of channel bed substrate NA* 0-4 0-5 N/A
(fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points)
12 Evidence of channel incision or widening 0-5 0-4 0-5
4
>q (deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max points)

13 Presence of major bank failures
0-5
0-5
0-5
4
a
*4 (severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)

14 Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0-4
0-5
2
(no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max points)
v
15 Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
0-5
0-4
0-5
3
(substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points)
16 Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes 0-3 0-5 0-6 0
(no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well-developed = max points)

<
1 Habitat complexity
0-6
0-6
0-6 4
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
18 Canopy coverage over streambed 0- 5 0- 5 0- 5 5
(no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = max points)
19 Substrate embeddedness NA* 0-4 0-4 N/A
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max)
20 Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4) 0-4 0-5 0-5 2
i (no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
21 Presence of amphibians 0-4 0-4 0-4 2
0 (no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)

22 Presence of fish
0-4
0-4
0-4
1
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)

23 Evidence of wildlife use 0-6 0-5 0-5 3
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points)
Total Points Possible 100 100 100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page) 72
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
1.-
tem
1111.111 'ellicilt.
PROGRAM
April 15, 2008
Fleming Gibson
Funston Land and Timber, LLC
1007 Evangeline Drive
Leland, NC 28451 Expiration of Acceptance: October 15, 2008
Project: Brunswick Forest Subdivision; Phases 3&5 County: Brunswick
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is willing to
accept payment for impacts associated with the above referenced project. Please note that this decision does not assure that
the payment will be approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation for project impacts. It is the responsibility of the
applicant to contact these agencies to determine if payment to the NCEEP will be approved.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter and is not transferable. If we have not received a copy of
the issued 404 Permit/401 Certification/CAMA permit within this time frame, this acceptance will expire. It is the
applicant's responsibility to send copies of the permits to NCEEP. Once NCEEP receives a copy of the permit(s) an invoice
will be issued based on the required mitigation in that permit and payment must be made prior to conducting the authorized
work. The amount of the In Lieu Fee to be paid to NCEEP by an applicant is calculated based upon the Fee Schedule and
policies listed at www.necep.net.
Based on the information supplied by you the impacts that may require compensatory mitigation are summarized in the
following table.
Cape Fear
03030005 Stream (feet) Wetlands (acres) Buffer I
(Sq. Ft.} Buffer II
(Sq. Ft.}
Cold Cool Warm Riparian Non-Riparian Coastal Marsh
Impacts 0 0 298 0.335 0 0 0 0
Credits 0 0 596 0.670 0 0 0 0
Upon receipt of payment, EEP will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. If the regulatory agencies
require mitigation credits greater than indicated above, and the applicant wants NCEEP to be responsible for the additional
mitigation, the applicant will need to submit a mitigation request to NCEEP for approval prior to permit issuance. The
mitigation will be performed in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding between the N. C. Department of
Environment and Natural Resources and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers dated November 4, 1998.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Valerie Mitchener at [phone].
Sincerely,
pj ' J??JIN?-hit'
Willis D. Gilmore, PE 1U1
Director
cc: Cyndi Karoly, NCDWQ Wetlands/401 Unit
Kim Garvey, USACE-Wilmington
Chad Coburn, NCDWQ-Wilmington
Kim Williams, agent
File
RatoYU-c... E ... Pro" ow rta &

North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 / 919-715-0476 1 www.nceep.net
Brunswick Forest Subdivision; Phases 3 and 5
Mitigation Plan
Brunswick County, North Carolina
Prepared by:
Land Management Group, Inc.
Wilmington, NC
Prepared for:
Funston Land and Timber, LLC
Leland, NC
April 2008
Table of Contents
List of Figures .......................................................................................................................... ii
1.0 Introduction .............................................................................................................................3
2.0 Site Description .......................................................................................................................3
2.1 Wetlands .............................................................................................................................3
2.2 Soils ....................................................................................................................................4
2.3 Vegetation ...........................................................................................................................4
3.0 Mitigation .................................................................................................................................4
3.1 Wetland Restoration ...........................................................................................................4
3.2 Wetland Enhancement ........................................................................................................5
3.3 Wetland Preservation .........................................................................................................5
4.0 Monitoring ...............................................................................................................................5
5.0 Implementation Schedule .......................................................................................................6
6.0 Summary ..................................................................................................................................6

List of Figures
Figure 1. Vicinity map .................................................................................................
Figure 2. Topographic map .........................................................................................
Figure 3. Soils map ......................................................................................................
Figure 4. Aerial photograph .........................................................................................
Figure 5. Site plan showing proposed wetland impacts and mitigation ......................
Figure 6. Wetland restoration and enhancement ........................................................
7
8
9
......10
......11
......12
I
1.0 Introduction
In order to mitigate for impacts to 0.335 acres of 404 wetlands and Waters of the U.S. and 298
linear feet of stream within Phases 3 and 5 of the Brunswick Forest Subdivision in Leland, North Carolina,
Funston Land and Timber, LLC agrees to restore, enhance, and preserve wetlands on site and buy into the
Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP). This tract is approximately 4290 acres in size and is located off
of Highway 17 in Brunswick County, NC (Figure 1).
2.0 Site Description
2.1 Wetlands
Staff of Land Management Group, Inc. delineated the entire tract in 2001 and Mr. Allen
Davis of the US Army Corps of Engineers (ALOE) signed the wetland survey on 9/10/2001 (for IF
Realty Corporation Brunswick Forest). This jurisdictional determination has since expired and the
delineation was revised in areas. LMG submitted a revised wetland survey and supporting
hydrology data to Ms. Jennifer Frye of the ACOE. Staff of LMG met with Ms. Frye on February
20, 2008 to review the wetlands in Phases 3 and 5 and she verbally approved the revised wetland
line. Copies of the wetland survey have been submitted to her for final sign off.
The site contains approximately 1200 acres of 404 wetlands. Several blue-line streams run
through the property: Mallory Creek, an unnamed tributary (UT) of Mallory Creek, and a UT of
Piney Branch extend into the eastern part of the site (Figure 2). Another UT of Mallory Creek
forms part of the eastern property boundary. Goodland Branch and two UT's of Morgan Branch
extend into the western part of the site. Goodland Branch flows into Town Creek, which forms part
of the southern boundary of the tract. Finally, Little Mallory Creek forms another section of the
southern property boundary. All named streams are classified as C; Swamp Waters by the Division
of Water Quality.
Please note that the proposed restoration area was delineated as wetlands in 2001.
Hydrology data collected from automated monitoring wells in 2006 and 2007 determined that the
3
ditch running through this area had effectively drained the soils so that they did not support wetland
hydrology. Therefore, it was not classified as wetlands in the reevaluation. This determination was
approved by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in February of 2008.
2.2 Soils
According to the Brunswick County Generalized Soil Survey, a majority of the uplands
within the site are classified as Baymeade fine sand, Foreston loamy fine sand, Goldsboro fine
sandy loam, Leon fine sand, and Newhan fine sand (Figure 3). Wetlands within the site are shown
mostly as Dorovan muck, Muckalee loam, Murville fine sand, Pantego mucky loam, and Torhunta
mucky fine sandy loam.
2.3 Vegetation
Pond pine (P. serotina), red maple (Ater rubrum), black gum (Nyssa sylvatica), titi (Cyrilla
racemiflora), and fetterbush (Lyonia lucida) are the dominant plant species that exist in the
wetlands on this property (Figure 4). Undeveloped uplands support loblolly pine (Pinus taeda),
sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), red maple, and wax myrtle (Myrica cerifera).
3.0 Mitigation
3.1 Wetland Restoration
A total of 1.27 acres of uplands will be restored to wetlands by filling approximately 730
linear feet of a ditch (Figures 5 and 6). Material used to fill the ditch will be taken from upland
areas within the site. The proposed restoration area is already vegetated with wetland species such
as black gum and red maple. Therefore, no wetland planting will occur. Two automated
monitoring wells will be installed to measure water levels on a daily basis.
In addition to the on-site restoration, the applicant will also buy into the Ecosystem
Enhancement Program for the restoration of 298 linear feet of stream located elsewhere within the
Lower Cape Fear Watershed.
4
3.2 Wetland Enhancement
A total of 2.44 acres of wetlands located adjacent to the ditch that the applicant proposes to
fill will be enhanced. Data collected from automated monitoring wells indicate that this area still
technically meets wetland hydrology parameters. However, the water levels in this area are
somewhat suppressed by the ditch. Filling the ditch will improve the wetland hydrology in this
region. Two monitoring wells will be installed in the area to document changes in water levels.
3.3 Wetland Preservation
The applicant will preserve approximately 163 acres of wetlands on site through restrictive
covenants.
4.0 Monitoring
A general site analysis will occur directly after mitigation activities have been completed and will
consist of performing an `as-built' survey and taking photographs of the site to evaluate initial success. A
small narrative will be written and submitted to the Corps and to DWQ. From then on, monitoring will
occur annually for five years or until agencies determine the site to be successful.
Hydrology will be measured by installing two automated wells in the restoration area, two wells
within the enhancement area, and one well in a reference wetland. The goal of the hydrological success
criterion is the establishment of a groundwater table at or above 12" from the soil surface for either 12% of
the growing season (March 7 - November 28) during periods of normal precipitation or at least as long as
that of the reference wetland.
Since no vegetation will be planted in the mitigation site, no vegetation sampling will occur.
However, photographs will be taken of the existing vegetation to ensure its continued health. A monitoring
report that summarizes these results and includes photographs of the restored area will be submitted to the
Corps and to DWQ.
5
f
5.0 Implementation Schedule
Wetland mitigation activities will commence as soon as all necessary permits have been obtained.
6.0 Summary
In order to mitigate for wetland impacts associated with development of Phases 3 and 5 within the
Brunswick Forest Subdivision, the applicant will restore 1.27 acres, enhance 2.44 acres, and preserve
approximately 163 acres of wetlands within the site. In addition, the applicant will buy into the NC EEP to
mitigate for proposed stream impacts. These mitigation actions will commence prior to construction within
jurisdictional areas. This proposed mitigation plan will compensate for permitted wetland and stream
impacts and fulfill the requirements of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the NC Division of Water
Quality.
6
BRUNSWICK FOREST SUBDIVISION
Proposed Changes to Preservation Language
The slight modifications requested to the U.S. Corps of Engineers language were to
enable the Applicant or its Owner's Association to protect the property and surrounding homes
in the event of a fire, hurricane, storm or flood.
The Applicant is requesting the right to take necessary measures to control a forest fire
that might break out in the Mitigation Property Conservation Area and endanger the property, the
surrounding lands and homes. The Applicant is further requesting the right to remove diseased
trees in order to control disease outbreaks in the Mitigation Property Conservation Area.
In the event of storms, flood or hurricane, the Applicant is also requesting the right to
remove storm debris so that it does not pose a fire or disease threat to the Mitigation Property
Conservation Area, the adjoining properties and homes.
Finally the Applicant has requested the right, subject to approval of the US Army Corps
of Engineers, to construct pathways or walkways which would transverse the Mitigation
Property Conservation Area as part of the Applicant's overall recreation and education plan for
its owners.
83039
MITIGATION PROPERTY CONSERVATION AREA
Mitigation Property Conservation Area. Those areas to the extent that they have been or will be
annexed into the Brunswick Forest Development and shown on maps of the Brunswick Forest
Development recorded in the Brunswick County Register of Deeds which are identified as mitigation
property pursuant to a mitigation condition of a Clean Water Act authorization issued by the United States
of America, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District, action ID as further set forth in Article
All of the Mitigation Property Conservation Area (as said term is defined in Section ) shall be
maintained in its natural or mitigated condition. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in
the Governing Documents, no person or entity shall perform any of the following activities on such
Mitigation Property Conservation Area:
(a) fill, grade, excavate or perform any other land disturbing activities;
(b) except for necessary manual operations, cut, mow, burn, remove, or harm any vegetation;
excluded are activities necessary for fire suppression, removal of hurricane, storm and flood
damage and debris, or removal of material for disease control;
(c) construct or place any roads, trails, walkways (except as set forth hereafter), buildings,
mobile homes, signs, utility poles or towers, or any other permanent or temporary
structures;
(d) drain or otherwise disrupt or alter the hydrology or drainage ways of the Mitigation
Property Conservation Area;
(e) dump or store soil, trash or other waste; or
(f) graze or water animals, or use for any agricultural or horticultural purpose.
Applicability. The covenants and restrictions described in ARTICLE are intended to ensure
continued compliance with the mitigation condition of a Clean Water Act authorization issued by the
United States of America, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District, Action ID ; and
therefore may be enforced by the United States of America. The covenants and restrictions described in
ARTICLE are to run with the land title to the Mitigation Property Conservation Area, and shall be
binding on and shall inure to the benefit of the Owner(s)..thereof, all parties elai ing under- it having any
right, title or interest in the Mitigation Property Conservation Area or any part thereof, their heirs,
successors, and assigns.
Amendment. DECLARANT hereby reserves the right to impose additional restrictions upon the
Mitigation Property Conservation Area as and to the extent required by the terms of said Clean Water Act
authorization (including, but not limited to revision(s) to the Mitigation Property Conservation Area
described in Exhibit that are consistent with the definition provided in Section ). Such
additional restrictions may be imposed by DECLARANT by the recording of a Supplemental Declaration,
and no joinder or consent of the Association or any other Owner or Person (other than the United States of
America, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District, or its successor) shall be required on such
77758
Supplemental Declaration. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Governing Documents, the
covenants and restrictions described in ARTICLE may not be altered or rescinded (other than
revision(s) to the Mitigation Property Conservation Area described in Exhibit that are consistent
with the definition provided in Section ) without the express written consent of the United States of
America, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District, or its successor.
Elevated Paths, Walkways, and Boardwalks. DECLARANT herby reserves the right, subject to any and
all required approval(s) of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District, or its successor, to
construct elevated paths, walkways, and/or boardwalks to traverse the Mitigation Property Conservation
Area and/or be located adjacent to the Mitigation Property Conservation Area. Nothing in this Section
shall be construed as a representation by DECLARANT or the Brunswick Forest Master
Association, Inc. as to what, if any, paths, walkways, and/or boardwalks, if any, shall be constructed and
provided for the use of the Owners.
77758
A LF.?WA
,51a
C®E
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Land Resources
James D. Simons, PG, PE Land Quality Section Michael F. Easley, Governor
Director and State Geologist William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
May 26, 2005
LETTER OF APPROVAL WITH MODIFICATIONS AND
PERFORMANCE RESERVATIONS
Funston Land & Timber, LLC
Mr. Allen Jeffergon Earp, Mgr. _
PO Box 100
Winnabow, NC 28479
RE: Project Name: Brunswick Forest, Phase 3 Acres Approved: 366
Project ID: Bruns-2005-347 -EXPRESS OPTION
County/Street: Brunswick, US Hwy. 17
River Basin: Cape Fear
Submitted By: Hanover Design Services, PA
Date Received by LQS: May 24, 2005
Plan Type: NEW
Dear Mr. Earp:
This office has reviewed the subject erosion and sedimentation control plan and hereby
issues this Letter of Approval with Modifications and Performance Reservations. A list of the
modifications and reservations is attached. This plan approval shall expire three (3) years
following the date of approval, if no land-disturbing activity has been undertaken, as is required
by Title 15A NCAC 4B .0129. Should the plan not perform adequately, a revised plan will be
required (G.S. 113A-54.1)(b).
Please be advised that Title 15A NCAC 4B.01 18(a) requires that a copy of the approved
erosion control plan be on file at the job site. Also, you should consider this letter to give the
Notice required by G.S. 113A-61.1(a) of our right of periodic inspection to insure compliance
with the approved plan.
North Carolina's Sedimentation Pollution Control Program is performance-oriented,
requiring protection of existing natural resources and adjoining properties. If, following the
commencement of this project, it is determined that the erosion and sedimentation control plan is
inadequate to meet the requirements of the Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 (North
Carolina General Statute 113A-51 thru 66), this office may require revisions to the plan and
implementation of the revisions to insure compliance with the Act.
Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Ext., Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845 1 Phone: [phone] / FAX: [phone]
Letter of Approval with Modifications and Performance Reservations
Mr. Allen Jefferson Earp
May 26, 2005
Page 2 of 4
Acceptance and approval of this plan is conditioned upon your compliance with Federal
and State water quality laws, regulations, and rules. In addition, local city or county ordinances
or rules may also apply to this land-disturbing activity. This approval does not supersede any
other permit or approval.
Please be aware that your project will be covered by the enclosed NPDES General
Stormwater Permit NCGO1000 (Construction Activities). You should first become familiar with
all of the requirements for compliance with the enclosed general permit.
Please note that this approval is based in part on the accuracy of the information provided
in the Financial Responsibility Form, which you have provided. You are requested to file an
amended form if there is any change in the information included on the form. In addition, it
would be helpful if you notify this office of the proposed starting date for this project. Please
notify us if you plan to have a preconstruction conference.
Your cooperation is appreciated.
Sincerely,

Carol N. Miller
Assistant Regional Engineer
Land Quality Section
Enclosures: Certificate of Approval
Modifications and Performance Reservations
NPDES Permit
cc: Mr. David Brown, Hanover Design Services, PA
LQS-WiRO
Letter of Approval with Modifications and Performance Reservations
Mr. Allen Jefferson Earp
May 26, 2005
Page 3 of 4
MODIFICATIONS AND PERFORMANCE RESERVATIONS
Project Name: Brunswick Forest, Phase 3
Project ID: Bruns-2005-347 - EXPRESS OPTION
County: Brunswick
1. This plan approval shall expire three (3) years following the date of approval, if no land
disturbing activity has been undertaken, as is required by Title 15A NCAC 413.0029.
2. The developer is responsible for the control of sediment on-site. If the approved erosion and
sedimentation control -measures-prove insufficient, the developer must take those additional steps
necessary to stop sediment from leaving this site. Each sediment storage device must be
inspected after each storm event. Maintenance and/or clean out is necessary anytime the device
is at 50% capacity.
3. Any and all existing ditches on this project site are assumed to be left undisturbed by the
proposed development unless otherwise noted. The removal of vegetation within any existing
ditch or channel is prohibited unless the ditch or channel is to be regarded with side slopes of 2
horizontal to 1 vertical or less steep. Bank slopes may be mowed, but stripping of vegetation is
considered new earth work and is subject to the same erosion control requirements as new
ditches.
4. The developer is responsible for obtaining any and all permits and approvals necessary for the
development of this project prior to the commencement of this land disturbing activity. This
could include agencies such as the Division of Water Quality's stormwater regulations, their
enforcement requirements within Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers' jurisdiction of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the Division of Coastal
Management's CAMA requirements, the Division of Solid Waste Management's landfill
regulations, the Environmental Protection Agency and/or The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
jurisdiction of the Clean Water Act, local County or Municipalities' ordinances, or others that
may be required. This approval cannot supersede any other permit or approval; however, in the
case of a Cease and Desist Order from the Corps of Engineers, that Order would only apply to
wetland areas. All highland would still have to be in compliance with the N.C. Sedimentation
Pollution Control Act.
5. If any area on site falls within the jurisdiction of Section 401 or 404 of the Clean Water Act, the
developer is responsible for compliance with the requirements of the Division of Water Quality,
the Corps of Engineers and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) respectively. Any
erosion control measures that fall within jurisdictional wetland areas must be approved by the
aforementioned agencies prior to installation. The Land Quality Section must be notified of a
relocation of the measures in question to the transition point between the wetlands and the
uplands to assure that the migration of sediment will not occur. If that relocation presents a
problem or contradicts any requirements of either DWQ, the Corps, or the EPA, it is the
responsibility of the developer to inform the Land Quality Section regional office so that an
Letter of Approval with Modifications and Performance Reservations
Mr. Allen Jefferson Earp
May 26, 2005
Page 4 of 4
adequate contingency plan can be made to assure sufficient erosion control remains on site.
Failure to do so will be considered a violation of this approval.
6. Any borrow material brought onto this site must be from a legally operated mine or other
approved source. A single use borrow site or an area to waste material is only permissible if it is
operated under the total control of the Financially Responsible person or firm who is developing
this site and has been separately permitted and incorporated as part of this plan meeting all the
requirements of NC General Statue 74-49(7)f.
7. This permit allows for a land disturbance, as called for on the application plan, not to exceed
366 acres. Exceeding that acreage will be a violation of this permit and would require a
revised plan and additional application fee. Any addition in impervious surface, over that
already noted on the approved plan, would also require a revised plan to verify the
appropriateness of the erosion control measures and stormwater retention measures.
8. Because the stormwater retention ponds are shown on the plan as the primary sedimentation and
erosion control devices on this project, it is necessary that the ponds and their collection systems
be installed before any other grading takes place on site. If that proves to be impractical, a
revised plan must be submitted and approved that addresses erosion and sediment control needs
during the interim period until the ponds are fully functioning. .
9. It is assumed that the stockpile slopes will be no steeper than a 2 horizontal to 1 vertical ratio. If
it is necessary for the slopes to be any steeper, a revised plan will be necessary.
10. The North Carolina Sedimentation Pollution Control Act mandates a shortened time frame in
which to re-establish vegetative groundcover. Slopes (including cuts, fills, and ditch banks) left
exposed will, within 15 working days or 30 calendar days (whichever is shorter) after completion
of any phase of grading, be planted or otherwise provided with groundcover sufficient to
permanently restrain erosion.
CE
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Land Resources
James D. Simons, PG, PE Land Quality Section Michael F. Easley, Governor
Director and State Geologist William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
8/24/2007
LETTER OF APPROVAL, WITH MODIFICATIONS AND
PERFORMANCE RESERVATIONS
Funston Land & Timber, LLC
Mr. Allen Jefferson Earp, Manager
1007 Evangeline Dr.
Leland, NC 28451
RE: Project Name: Brunswick Forest Ph 5 Express Review
Project ID: Bruns-2008-084
County/Town/Street: Brunswick, Leland, US Hwy 17
River Basin: Cape Fear
Submitted By: Hanover Design Services, P.A.
Date Received by LQS: August 23, 2007
Plan Type: NEW
Dear Mr. Earp:
This office has reviewed the subject erosion and sedimentation control plan and hereby
issues this Letter of Approval with Modifications and Performance Reservations. A list of the
modifications and reservations is attached. This plan approval shall expire three (3) years
following the date of approval, if no land-disturbing activity has been undertaken, as is required
by Title 15A NCAC 4B .0129. Should the plan not perform adequately, a revised plan will be
required (G.S. 113A-54.1)(b).
Please be advised that Title 15A NCAC 4B.01 18(a) requires that a copy of the approved
erosion control plan be on file at the job site. Also, you should consider this letter to give the
Notice required by G.S. 113A-61.1(a) of our right of periodic inspection to insure compliance
with the approved plan.
North Carolina's Sedimentation Pollution Control Program is performance-oriented,
requiring protection of existing natural resources and adjoining properties. If, following the
commencement of this project, it is determined that the erosion and sedimentation control plan is
inadequate to meet the requirements of the Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 (North
Carolina General Statute 113A-51 thru 66), this office may require revisions to the plan and
implementation of the revisions to insure compliance with the Act.
Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Ext., Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845 • Phone: [phone] FAX. [phone]
Letter of Approval with Modifications and Performance Reservations
Mr. Allen Jefferson Earp
August 24, 2007
Page 2 of 4
Acceptance and approval of this plan is conditioned upon your compliance with Federal
and State water quality laws, regulations, and rules. In addition, local city or county ordinances
or rules may also apply to this land-disturbing activity. This approval does not supersede any
other permit or approval.
Please be aware that your project will be covered by the enclosed NPDES General
Stornnwater Permit NCGO1000 (Construction Activities). You should first become familiar with
all of the requirements for compliance with the enclosed general permit.
Please note that this approval is based in part on the accuracy of the information provided
in the Financial Responsibility Fonn, which you have provided. You are requested to file an
amended form if there is any change in the information included on the form. In addition, it
would be helpful if you notify this office of the proposed starting date for this project. Please
notify us if you plan to have a preconstruction conference.
Your cooperation is appreciated.
Sincerely,

Carol N. Miller
Assistant Regional Engineer
Land Quality Section
Enclosures: Certificate of Approval
Modifications and Performance Reservations
NPDES Permit
cc: David Brown, Hanover Design Services
LQS-WiRO
Letter of Approval Nvith Modifications and Performance Reservations
Mr. Allen Jefferson Earp
August 24, 2007
Page 3 of 4
A10DIFICAT'IONS AND PER>FORNIIANCE RESERVATIONS
Project Name: Brunswick Forest Ph 5
Project ID: Bruns-2008-084
County: Brunswick
This plan approval shall expire three (3) years following the date of approval, if no land
disturbing activity has been undertaken, as is required by Title 15A NCAC 4B.0029.
2. The developer is responsible for the control of sediment on-site. If the approved erosion and
sedimentation control measures prove insufficient, the developer must take those additional steps
necessary to stop sediment from leaving this site. Each sediment storage device must be
inspected after each storm event. Maintenance and/or clean out is necessary anytime the device
is at 50% capacity.
3. Any and all existing ditches on this project site are assumed to be left undisturbed by the
proposed development unless otherwise noted. The removal of vegetation within any existing
ditch or channel is prohibited unless the ditch or channel is to be regarded with side slopes of 2
horizontal to 1 vertical or less steep. Bank slopes may be mowed, but stripping of vegetation is
considered new earth work and is subject to the same erosion control requirements as new
ditches.
4. The developer is responsible for obtaining any and all permits and approvals necessary for the
development of this project prior to the commencement of this land disturbing activity. This
could include agencies such as the Division of Water Quality's stonnwater regulations, their
enforcement requirements within Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, the U.S. Anny Corps of
Engineers' jurisdiction of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the Division of Coastal
Management's CAMA requirements, the Division of Solid Waste Management's landfill
regulations, the Envirommental Protection Agency and/or The U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers
jurisdiction of the Clean Water Act, local County or Municipalities' ordinances, or others that
may be required. This approval cannot supersede any other permit or approval; however, in the
case of a Cease and Desist Order from the Corps of Engineers, that Order would only apply to
wetland areas. All highland would still have to be in compliance with the N.C. Sedimentation
Pollution Control Act.
5. If any area on site falls within the jurisdiction of Section 401 or 404 of the Clean Water Act, the
developer is responsible for compliance with the requirements of the Division of Water Quality,
the Corps of Engineers and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) respectively. Any
erosion control measures that fall within jurisdictional wetland areas must be approved by the
aforementioned agencies prior to installation. The Land Quality Section must be notified of a
relocation of the measures in question to the transition point between the wetlands and the
uplands to assure that the migration of sediment will not occur. If that relocation presents a
problem or contradicts any requirements of either DWQ, the Corps, or the EPA, it is the
responsibility of the developer to inform the Land Quality Section regional office so that an
Letter of Approval with Modifications and Performance Reservations
Mr. Allen Jefferson Earp
August 24, 2007
Page 4 of 4
adequate contingency plan can be made to assure sufficient erosion control remains on site.
Failure to do so will be considered a violation of this approval.
6. Any borrow material brought onto this site must be from a legally operated mine or other
approved source. A single use borrow site or an area to waste material is only permissible if it is
operated under the total control of the Financially Responsible person or fine who is developing
this site and has been separately permitted and incorporated as part of this plan meeting all the
requirements of NC General Statue 74-49(7)f.
7. This permit allows for a land disturbance, as called for on the application plan, not to exceed
73 acres. Exceeding that acreage will be a violation of this permit and would require a
revised plan and additional application fee. Any addition in impervious surface, over that
already noted on the approved plan, would also require a revised plan to verify the
appropriateness of the erosion control measures and stormwater retention measures.
8. The construction detail for the proposed silt fence requires reinforcing wire and steel posts a
maximum of 8.0 feet apart. Omission of the reinforcing wire is a construction change
that necessitates more posts for support, i.e., the spacing distance needs to be reduced to no
greater than 6 feet apart.
9. Because the storrmwater retention ponds are shown on the plan as the primary sedimentation and
erosion control devices on this project, it is necessary that the ponds and their collection systems
be installed before any other grading takes place on site. If that proves to be impractical, a
revised plan must be submitted and approved that addresses erosion and sediment control needs
during the interim period until the ponds are fully functioning.
10. A graveled construction entrance must be located at each point of access and egress available to
construction vehicles during the grading and construction phases of this project. Access and
egress from the project site at a point without a graveled entrance will be considered a violation
of this approval. Routine maintenance of the entrances is critical.
11. The North Carolina Sedimentation Pollution Control Act mandates a shortened time frame in
which to re-establish vegetative groundcover. Slopes (including cuts, fills, and ditch banks) left
exposed will, within 21 calendar days after completion of any phase of grading, be planted or
otherwise provided with groundcover sufficient to penmanently restrain erosion.

OF rl ?? O ci
'try,
d }
• F o d F§, o q/ 'I
-- ---- ---- --- --- -
? °rNO==
< I
/
n
_d h7 y
pa
\ \ i m y N ? ,Cjo
j \ l O ? s
- _ y
U e Fes,,
Ilya 1NIOd tNNf15 N
_ y
j Vf u1.f 1 __ o_ o ?, o
? i III ? F ?-+?? ? _ •? ? 4
.
?w A
s
i
Cl a ? v
Q as .?. +*,
b o v
I
o _ r^ ? ., .., .... .gyn..... _I
0
Z 1
,, m m
1NIOd kNOOS j -
,`"
fI
zn
?U
I ri1?1
D f?l
O -P
OVO21 IVa _ -
c
FTI
m
0
U
IT]
z_
{
?II
(20
c?D u
<a
n r
F
c>?Gw ? c?v c?av ©Un oc°'u
0000 (Dc??co ?0C?) o
o°

m = b o

c
FlI
Z
rTI
L
-I
N o
v
y
n
y

0
Uc?
= r ?o o c> ® o ?O®c>(D
CO
II P>
E° ?? D O G
? D D ? Cw> C O ???
1> 0@
OOO®n00OO ® O 10
C?C)O
0 O O
'oOU?uO, OC
('D
J O
\
v
\
\
\
\
v
\
\
1i
m
N?1J11
1 m -p '/TVI ?
5FF f u O ?l U
?. ,. a •?''• °- uU" .
A
- S
-01
I
2.. 4
---0 b
Ma??? ? y

i^
q
D

m

L7
r,
Fl I rr1
?F
`( I

y
0
FTI
y
u EM"
,.
-- kft :,?wr
IJJ
e :E.t IT

O
_ ID
v 2 a?

0

i

r

r
o ? ? ?? v1
i
en ??p
O Cj
y y
e

a ?m

1Fp/1 ONY M3MOd YMpyY,7 --._-

r? i
0
z ? ti ? r
? a O1 `/1 ? O n
e i
m
a C? t
` f
;? p b
y y
n
y

V1 I

r_
I
v
J ?
r?

l

?
I
?
u ? ?
^
r
O ?y
-W? 1