20160681 Ver 2_Reponse to USACE RFAI_20170922

Burdette, Jennifer a
From: David Syster <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, September 22, 2017 5:36 PM
To: 'Greer, Emily C CIV USARMY CESAW (US)'; Steenhuis, Joanne
Cc: Burdette, Jennifer a
Subject: Blake Farm response to Corps RFAI
Attachments: 9-22-17 RFAI Cover Letter.pdf, Blake Farm IP RFAI Submittal 9-22-17.doc; Blake Farm
Ditch X-3 Monitoring Locations 9-22-17.pdf
Emily, Joanne and Jennifer,
We have completed the final response to the Corps July 7 RFAI. Normally I drop off a copy of the document and just e-
mail the Word file to you. In this case, you do not have the hard copy yet but I wanted to provide DWQ with the weir
information to understand what we need to do with the 401. I've attached the Cover Letter (pdf), Response Submittal
(.doc) minus the attachments as they are too large to transmit via e-mail. Emily I have transmitted a complete set to you
via your FTP site. Jennifer and Joanne, I will mail you both a copy and/or try and send you a link to download from our
server; just let me know what is best.
As you know, the weir had been a topic of discussion and the applicant has chosen to remove it and monitor the wetland
area at the upper reach of ditch X-3. There is a narrative on page 3 that explains the concerns with ditch X-3 and a
monitoring plan on page 6. I've also attached a map of the monitoring area which I had reviewed with Joanne and
Jennifer earlier (this one is shown on the current map with monitoring locations). The monitoring map/sheet is also
included in Appendix N.
Joanne and Jennifer it is my understanding you will need to modify or amend our 401 Certification. Do you need a formal
request or will you be utilizing our response to the Corps to as justification for the modification? If you do need a formal
request please let me know and I will draft that immediately.
Please let me know if you have any questions or need any additional information.
Thank you and have a great weekend,
David A. Syster
President
Southern Environmental Group, Inc.
5315 South College Road Suite E
Wilmington, North Carolina 28412
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
�'� Mobile: [phone]

150utkern Environmental Group, Inc.
53 1 5jouth College Koa�,juite Wilmington,North Carolina 2841 2
910.452.2711 - rax: 910.452.2899 - o{fice@se,2;i.us
www. seri. us
22 September 2017
Electronic Mail
Ms. Emily Greer
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office
US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, NC 28403
Emily. C. Greer(c_usace.aM. mil
Re: Response to USACE Request for Additional Information
Blake Farm
Scott's Hill, Pender County, North Carolina
USACE AID# - SAW -2012-01624
Dear Emily,
C SEGi raje °t #05-159.011
This correspondence is in response to your 7 July 2017, Request for Additional Information, for the Blake
Farm Subdivision (herein referred to as the "Applicant") Individual Permit application. We have updated
the previous 18 May 2017 (revised 25 May 2017) submittal narrative in response to your request. Below
you will find specific locations within the submittal where each request was addressed:
1. Please include a discussion in the narrative that addresses the later hydrologic effect of P-11 and
the large linear pond located above Wetland E on Wetland F and Wetland E, respectively.
Please See: Attachment 1, Section V - Avoidance and Minimization (Pg. 2-3).
-Please also include in the narrative a discussion regarding whether or not Wetland H is expected
to remain viable after construction.
Please See: Attachment 1, Section V — Avoidance and Minimization (Pg. 3).
2. During previous discussions, the Corps addressed the need for all plans (i.e. stormwater, sediment
and erosion control, and construction) to match. The approved stormwater plans showed three
48 " RCP 's at the crossing of P-6 and Farm House Drive as P-6 discharges into a Linear Pond;
however, the plans provided to the Corps showed only two 48" pipes. Please clarify which plans
are correct.
The engineer has confirmed that the plans with two 48" pipes are correct and are shown on all
plans as such.
3. The current plans show that a flashboard riser will be installed in the upper reach of ditch X-3.

5r—Gi
Recent discussions revealed that NC DWR approved the installation of the riser to hold hydrology
in the large, off-site wetland. Please provide detailed information about the purpose, design, and
long-term management of this structure and the potential impacts on the wetlands as well as the
potential for hydrologic trespass on upstream properties.
The proposed riser / weir has been removed and monitoring of the wetlands adjacent to the
upper reaches of X-3 have been proposed. Please see Attachment 1, Section V — Avoidance and
Minimization (Pg. 3) and Section VII — Compensatory Mitigation and Monitoring (Pg. 6).
4. According to the narrative, the location of the outlet for SCM -4 on the drawing is incorrect.
Please make the appropriate corrections.
All corrections have been completed.
5. Please provide separate totals of avoided impacts versus minimized impacts for each separate
wetland impact where appropriate.
Please See Table 2 Summary of Avoided and Minimized Impacts on Pg. 3.
6. The amount of mitigation is incorrect on the credit reservation letter: The letter reflects that 2.80
credits/acres have been secured; however, the required mitigation is 2.90 credits/acres, based on
the current information provided to the Corps. Please provide a corrected credit reservation
letter:
Please see Appendix L (Pg. xv) for an updated credit reservation letter reflecting 2.90
credits/acres.
7. Please correct the page numbers of the Appendices to correctly match the Table of Contents.
The Table of Contents page numbers have been corrected.
It is SEGi's hope the information found within and attached to this correspondence is sufficient to
complete the IP process and issue the requested permit. However, should you have questions, concerns
or need additional information, please feel free to contact me at 910.443.5330. Thank you in advance for
your assistance with this project.
Sincerely,
SEGi President
cc: Ms. Karen Higgins — NC DWR 401 and Buffer Unit Raleigh (hard copy)
Ms. Joanne Steenhuis
Enclosures: (1)

Attachment I
Blake Farm
Supplemental Documentation to the Individual Permit Application
Requested By:
Pender Farm Development, LLC
Mr. Raiford Trask, III
1202 Eastwood Road
Wilmington, NC 28403
Prepared By:
Southern Environmental Group, Inc.
5315 South College Road, Suite E
Wilmington, NC 28412
910.452.2711
Date:
18 May 2017
Revised 25 May 2017
Revised 22 September 2017

Table of Contents
Section
Title
Page
I.
Purpose and Need..................................................................................
1
II.
Location and Existing Conditions..............................................................
1
III.
Project History......................................................................................
1
IV.
Project Description.................................................................................
1
V.
Avoidance and Minimization....................................................................
2
VI.
Alternatives Analysis.............................................................................
4
A.
Off -Site Alternatives.......................................................................
4
B.
On -Site Alternatives.........................................................................
5
C.
Alternatives Conclusion...................................................................
6
VII.
Compensatory Mitigation and Monitoring......................................................
6
VIII.
Additional Authorizations........................................................................
6
IX.
Summary............................................................................................
7
Appendices
A.
Pender County Tax Information.................................................................
i
B.
Pender 1164 LLC & Pender Farm Development, LLC Sec. of State Corp Pages........
ii
C. Agent Authorization.............................................................................. iii
D. Adjacent Property Owner Information......................................................... iv
E. Vicinity Map........................................................................................ v
F. Proposed Site Plan & Wetland Impact Map ................................................... vi
G. Jurisdictional Wetland Determinations........................................................ vii
H. Natural Resource Information................................................................... xi
I. Alternative Analysis Map........................................................................ xii
J. Threatened and Endangered Species Study .................................................... xiii
K. Historic Properties & Archaeological Resources ............................................ xiv
L. North East Cape Fear Mitigation Bank Credit Reservation Letter ......................... xv
M. Scope and Effect Maps........................................................................... xvi
N. Wetland Monitoring Map........................................................................ xvii
TOC -i

Blake Farm IP Supplemental Information SEGi
I. Purpose and Need
The purpose of this project is to construct a 255 lot residential development with associated amenities in the Scott's
Hill area and provide access to NC 17 and I-140. The Wilmington to Hampstead corridor is a rapidly growing area
of southeastern North Carolina. With the construction of I-140 and completion of a local waste water treatment
facility, the Scott's Hill area has become a prime area for residential development. At this time few planned
residential neighborhoods with associated amenities are located within this area. The closest subdivisions to the
east are along Scott's Hill Loop Road but do not contain additional lots for development. Whitebridge is located
further north on the east side of Highway 17 but again, does not contain additional lots. The Applicant believes
there is a need for residential lots in this region to meet current demands.
II. Location and Existing Conditions
The project is located west of Highway 17 and north of Sidbury Road; Scott's Hill, Pender County, North Carolina
and is locally known as Blake Farm (See Appendix E).
The project area for the proposed subdivision is located on 1164 acres of timber land. Wetlands present within the
project area are primarily wetflats and pocosins. These wetlands have been timbered historically and the last cut
was completed in approximately 2011. Ditches which run through the project area connect the wetland pockets
and ultimately flow to a single discharge point along the eastern property line. From this point a large ditch
continues off the property to a tributary of Futch Creek. The wetland hydrology is primarily rainfall and
groundwater recharge. During summer months the ditch system is normally dry and only flows during periods of
heavy rainfall.
To access the site take NC 17 North from Wilmington. Turn left onto Sidbury Rd in Scott's Hill and travel 0.54
miles west to Huggins Rd/Hogans Trail (unmarked dirt road). Turn right on Huggins Rd and follow approximately
0.66 miles. The site will be directly north and east (See Appendix E).
III. Project History
A Department of the Army (DoA) wetland Jurisdicitonal Determination (JD) was issued for a portion of the project
area in November 2013 and the remaining area has been varified by Ms. Emily Hughes (See Appendix G for JD
Maps and Forms). Wetland impacts for the portion of Blake Farm Boulevard extending from the NC 17 to the SF
(Single Family 1), Phase IA area were covered under a separate Nationwide Permit (NWP) 14. This portion of
Blake Farm Boulevard was determined to be a single an complete project allowing development of SF1, Phase IA
and is shown on Sheet 2 in Appendix F. A JD was also completed for this parcel in November 2013. No other
DoA or DWR permits have been obtained. The project numbers, assigned by the regulatory agencies, include
those listed below:
Issuing Agency
Document
Project Number
Date Issued
Expiration Date
Authorized
Impacts (AC)
USACE
Signed Weiland Survey
2012-01624
11/19/13
11/19/18
N/A
USACE
Signed Weiland Survey*
2013-01397
04/28/14
04/28/19
N/A
DCM
CAMA Consistency
CD17-032
06/29/17
Concurrent with 404
N/A
Table]. Project numbers associated with the project. *Adjacent Property JD for Blake Farm Boulevard.
IV. Project Description
The Applicant anticipates permanently impacting 1.44 acres of Section 404 jurisdictional wetlands and
temporarily impacting 0.22 acres of Section 404 jurisdictional wetlands. Impacts to 6,521 If (0.53 acres) of
Relatively Permanent Waters (RPWs) are also proposed. The proposed unavoidable impacts are necessary to
facilitate the development of roads, lots and associated infrastructure. Please refer to Appendix F — Proposed Site
1

Blake Farm IP Supplemental Information SEGi
Plan and Impact Map, for details of the proposed impacts.
Heavy machinery, such as a bulldozers, graders, back hoes, and excavators, will be utilized during the construction
process. The machinery will be used to clear the land, establish grade, stabilize the soil and to transport and
deposit the fill material within the project boundaries. Sediment and erosion control measures will be installed
prior to commencement of land disturbing activities.
Threatened and Endangered species and archaeological concerns were addressed by coordination with the
appropriate agencies and on site reconnaissance. Findings from these studies did not reveal any areas of concern
associated within the project limits. Please see Appendix J for Threatened and Endangered species information
and Appendix K for Historical Preservation information.
V. Avoidance and Minimization
It is the Applicant's desire to avoid and/or minimize impacts to wetlands to the greatest extent practicable. During
the design phase of the project the engineer and design team reviewed multiple layouts to accomplish the
Applicants purpose and need while limiting wetland impacts. Through this process it became apparent that Impact
Area H would contain the largest impact due to the NCDOT width and curve radius requirements for Blake Farm
Boulevard. For that reason the layout chosen contained only one wetland crossing along Blake Farm Boulevard
and avoided additional impacts to the larger, high functioning wetland systems. These wetland areas (Wetland "E"
and large system to the south) can be noted to the east and west of Blake Farm Boulevard on the design drawings
(see Appendix F, Sheet 3).
Avoidance of permanent impacts that would bisect larger contiguous wetlands was accomplished by a road design
that optimized uplands within the project area. This process eliminated some desired connectivity but lead to only
minimal fringe impacts to these systems and lower overall project impacts. The road and lot design in the Bent
Oak Dr. and Tangmere Ct. area is an example of this effort. Earlier design phases proposed connectivity through
Wetland C to Atlantic Ave. Impacts to Wetland M were also avoided by re -designing proposed ditch P-7 to pass
to the east of Wetland M and tie into existing ditch X-3.
Minimization efforts are evident throughout the project in both direct and secondary impact forms. A number of
originally proposed impacts have been reduced during the design process. Several existing ditches that were
proposed to be filled or modified are now proposed to remain intact. Impacts to Wetland C was also minimized by
adjusting the roadside slope and utility impacts. Minimization of Impact F was accomplished by removal of the
proposed median on Atlantic Avenue and reducing the overall road width in the vicinity of Wetland F. Please see
Appendix F, Sheet 8.
Secondary impacts have also been minimized by detailed design of the project's hydrological aspects. Attention
was given to areas in which drainage swales, roadside ditches or stormwater features may adversely impact
adjacent wetlands in the future. To accomplish this a review of the project's hydrologic impact was conducted
utilizing the NRCS North Carolina Scope & Effect Guide. Hydrologic effects on adjacent wetlands were
compared both pre and post construction. Results indicated that Wetland E and Wetland F contained areas that
could be adversely effected by the proposed adjacent stormwater pond and ditch P-11 respectively. However, after
further study it was determined that only Wetland E had the potential to be adversely affected by modification of
the site's hydrology. Wetland F has a number of existing ditches within its boundary which do not appear to have
reduced the hydrology within the wetland over time. Based on a review of aerial photography and topographic
data it is apparent that Wetland F receives significant hydrologic input from the north. This hydrologic input has
been sufficient to maintain the hydrology within Wetland F, even in the presence of the existing ditches.
Therefore, P-11, situated outside of Wetland F, should not cause an adverse hydrologic impact to Wetland F. The
applicant has agreed to monitor Wetland E in order to ensure no lateral drainage is occurring post construction.
2

Blake Farm IP Supplemental Information SEGi
Please see Appendix M for results of this study and Section VII — Compensatory Mitigation and Monitoring for
monitoring details.
Secondary impacts to Wetland E have also been minimized by raising the elevation of Blake Farm Blvd and
associated roadside swale to an elevation similar to the adjacent wetlands (Appendix F, Sheet 18). Proposed ditch
P-7 and associated culverts under Tangmere Ct. have also been raised in effort to minimize any secondary impacts
to Wetland C. Existing ditch X-7 within Wetland C has a bottom elevation of 34.65 while the proposed ditch P-7
has an elevation of 35.00. This will ensure Wetland C will pond during storm events and draw down slowly.
Please see Appendix F, Sheet 17.
Design consideration was also given to provide additional hydrology to the remaining portion of Wetland H on the
west side of Blake Farm Boulevard. This was accomplished by creating a nick point in existing ditch bank at the
western end of Wetland H. This low area along the bank will allow water to flow into the remaining wetland area.
The downstream end of existing ditches X -I and X-2 will then be filled allowing water to pond within the wetland
area. Please see Appendix F, Sheet 4 and Sheet 12. Please refer to Sheet 13 for the Cross -Section drawing for this
area.
Secondary impacts were also taken into account during the design of the Constructed Wetland located at the east of
Wetland C. This is denoted as SCM 4 in Appendix F, Sheet 20. The proposed design has a normal pool elevation
of 36.00 which is similar to that of the surrounding wetland to the east and Wetland C which is surrounded by the
Constructed Wetland. Although there are several deeper retention areas within the Constructed Wetland, they do
not have contiguous flow (i.e. direct connection to the outfall) and are designed to hold water during periods of
heavy rain and draw down slowly. Wetland C and existing ditch X-6 are also higher in elevation at this north end
near the constructed wetland compared to the southern end near Bent Oak Dr. The current design of the
Constructed Wetland will allow for the collected stormwater to migrate through the SCM and treated water
discharge into Wetland C at its highest point. Thus, maintaining the natural flow of water through the system.
Concerns were also raised by commenting agencies over head -cutting and subsequent drainage of wetlands
upstream of X-3. In order to alleviate these secondary impact concerns, the Applicant has agreed to monitor a
portion of this wetland system post construction. Please see Section VII. — Compensatory Mitigation and
Monitoring.
To assist in minimizing secondary impacts to downstream water quality, the Applicant proposes to enhance
existing ditches within the site by creating an adjacent flood plain. This will increase storage volume and retention
time during periods of heavy rain. The increased contact time within the floodplain will allow the natural chemical
and biological processes to occur, that will protect downstream waters. Please see Proposed Ditch Detail in
Appendix F, Sheet 2.
Summary of Avoided or Minimized Impacts
Wetland
Avoided
Minimized
Ditch
Avoided
Minimized
A
0.039
0.000
XD -1
0.023
0.000
C
0.200
0.040
XD -2
0.000
0.000
E
0.550
0.000
XD -3
0.650
0.000
F
0.000
0.090
XD -4
0.025
0.000
H
0.100
0.100
XD -5
0.197
0.000
M
0.070
0.000
XD -9
0.094
0.000
Wetland Total
0.959
0.230
Ditch Total
0.990
0.000
Table 2. Summary ofAvoided and Minimized Impacts
3

Blake Farm IP Supplemental Information
VL Alternatives
SEGi
The Applicant investigated other potential means of developing the subject parcel, and has been unable to find a
practicable alternative that would achieve the proposed goal and stated purpose. They are as follows:
Site Selection Criteria
Site selection criteria used for the project include: Sites with at least 130 acres of buildable area, reasonable
proximity to Highway 17 within a reasonable distance from I-140 in the Scott's Hill area, zoned for residential
development or have the potential to be re -zoned for residential development, and have access to public or private
sanitary sewer and water.
A. Off -Site Alternative Analysis
A comprehensive off-site alternatives analysis has been conducted, as part of the Individual Permit
process. SEGi applied the Section 404(b)(1) guidelines by utilizing, current Pender County Zoning Maps,
Public or Private utility company service area information, historical aerial photography and available
current land use records, to best determine if any off-site alternatives existed which met site selection
criteria.
Considering the desired location being in close proximity to Scott's Hill and have access to Highway 17
corridor, multiple sites were reviewed in and around the proposed site. These sites were chosen for their
size, access from US Highway 17 and zoning. Once these criterion were met, their potential to
accommodate the project, with accompanying infrastructure (sewer and water) were reviewed. If the sites
did meet the infrastructure criterion then the degree of wetland impact associated with each remaining
alternative site was considered to determine which would provide the Least Environmentally Damaging
Practicable Alternative (LEDPA). The following table contains the properties that were evaluated as
alternative sites for the development:
Map
ID
County
Parcel ID
Property Owner
Size (AC)
1
Pender
3271-94-4437-0000
Blakes Of Scott's Hill LLC
469.89
2
Pender
3281-15-7192-0000
Corbett, Wilbur R
2921.99
3
New Hanover
R02100-001-001-002
Blake, Henry C. II
57.24
4
New Hanover
R02900-001-067-000
Skipper Family Properties, LLC
94.52
5
New Hanover
R02100-001-001-001
Seagrove, LLC
160.64
Table 3. Alternative Site Information.
These sites and their ability to meet the required site selection criteria are discussed below.
1. Alternative Site 1— Parcel ID: 3271-94-4437-0000
This site met the size, location and access to sewer and water criterion. So it was included in
further review for site practicability. However a cursory review of LIDAR and the Pender County
GIS Wetland Inventory Map reveals the need for wetland impacts, greater than what is currently
being proposed, in order to achieve the Applicant's stated goal. Therefore, Alternative Site 1 was
rejected.
4

Blake Farm IP Supplemental Information
SEGi
2. Alternative Site 2 — Parcel ID: 3281-15-7192-0000
This site, similar to Alternative Site 1, meets site selection criteria and was included for further
review for site practicability. However, a review of LIDAR and the Pender County GIS Wetland
Inventory Map reveals the need for wetland impacts, greater than what is currently being
proposed, in order to achieve the Applicant's stated goal. Therefore, this site was rejected.
3. Alternative Site 3 & 4 — Parcel ID's: R02100-001-001-002 & R2900-001-067-00
In order to meet the necessary size requirement these two parcels will need to be combined to be
considered. Once combined these sites meet the size and location requirement within Scott's Hill.
However, it does not provide access to Highway 17, nor is sewer and water available at this time.
The lack of access, as well as sewer and water make this alternative impracticable. For these
reasons Alternative Site 3 and 4 was rejected.
4. Alternative Site 5 — Parcel IDs: R02100-001-001-001
This site, similar to Alternative Sites 3 and 4 does not have direct access to Highway 17, and does
not have sewer and water available. For these reasons this site is not practicable and was rejected.
5. Preferred Alternative — Proposed site
The proposed site does meet the site location, size, access to Highway 17 and available sewer and
water criterion. For these reasons the proposed site was reviewed in more detail and found to
present less environmental (wetland) impacts than Alternatives 1 and 2. For this reason the
Proposed Site was accepted as the Least Damaging Practicable Alternative.
B. On -Site Alternatives Analysis
During the design and permitting of the project, several on-site alternatives were considered.
1. Alternative 1 — Current Proposed Design:
This alternative was designed to utilize as much of the uplands within the property as possible,
while impacting the least amount of wetlands. Alternative 1 was accepted as it was the least
environmentally damaging practicable alternative.
2. Alternative 2 — Re -alignment of Blake Farm Boulevard:
The option to reduce or eliminate Impact H was considered. However due to NCDOT's required
turning radius all attempts to reduce or eliminate Impact H resulted in a similar or larger impact
elsewhere. Therefore, Alternative 2 was rejected due to a similar or increased amount of wetland
impacts.
3. Alternative 3 — Elimination or Reduction of Impacts to Wetlands and RPW's:
This alternative was considered, but due to the size and location of both wetlands and RPWs
within the property, additional minimization was not practicable and this Alternative was rejected.
Consideration was given to reduce impacts on Lot 57 to that necessary for the house pad only.
During a review of this alternative it was apparent that due to the height (5') of fill material
necessary to grade this lot, construction of the pad would be prohibitive without the proposed
impact. Additionally, as the remaining wetlands would be within the property of the future
homeowner they would be more susceptible to secondary impacts. For these reasons this
alternative was rejected. Please see Appendix F, Sheet 19.
5

Blake Farm IP Supplemental Information
SEGi
4. Alternative 4 — No Action Alternative:
The No Action Alternative or the alterative that proposes no impacts would remove access to the
site from Blake Farm Boulevard and limit interconnectivity within the subdivision. Additionally,
due to the various lengths and placement of ditches within the tract the site could not be developed
with the no action alternative. For these reasons the No Action Alternative is not practicable and
was rejected.
C. Alternative Analysis Conclusion:
Based on the results of the on-site and off-site Alternative Analysis, it is apparent that on-site Alternative 1
is the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative.
VII. Compensatory Mitigation and Monitoring
A. Compensatory Mitigation:
The Applicant has chosen to purchase 2.90 acres of wetland restoration credit, through the North East
Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank (NECFUMB). These credits will be used to replace the permanent
loss of 1.44 acres of wetlands proposed within this permit application. Please see Appendix J, NECFUB
Credit Reservation. In order to off -set the proposed impacts to 6521 if (0.53 acres) of RPW's within the
project area, the Applicant has proposed to construct a new network of ditches totaling 3542 if in length.
The design of these ditches will include a large flood plain encompassing approximately 1.63 acres to
better enhance on-site and downstream water quality.
B. Wetland Monitoring:
The permittee proposes to monitor Wetland E and a portion of the wetlands at the upstream end of Ditch
X-3 to ensure these areas maintain appropriate wetland hydrology based on the Corps Wetland Delineation
Manual Regional Supplement. To document monitoring following completion of construction, the
permittee will provide two wetland delineation forms documenting wetland vegetation, soil, and hydrology
to the Corps prior to construction (baseline) and in years 2 and 4. The two data points used for the wetland
delineation forms shall be located in each of the subject wetland areas. In Wetland E these points will be
located to the south and west of the proposed wet pond and shall remain consistent throughout the
monitoring period. For the monitoring adjacent to Ditch X-3 these monitoring points will be located to the
north and south of the ditch. See Appendix N for a map of these locations. The Corps will review the
submitted forms and conduct a site visit as necessary to determine if the wetlands have maintained
appropriate hydrology. If the wetlands exhibit a loss of wetland hydrology such that wetland functions are
adversely affected, compensatory mitigation may be required by the Corps to offset the lost wetland
function.
VIII. Additional Authorizations
The proposed project will require the following environmental permits:
Type
Agency
Date Issued or Applied For
401 Water Quality Certification
NC DWR
Applying for concurrently with IP
CAMA Consistency
NC DCM
Applying for concurrently with IP
State Stormwater Permit
NC DWR
Issued
S&EC Permit
NC DLR
Issued
Table 4. Other state and local environmental authorizations

Blake Farm IP Supplemental Information
IX. Summary
SEGi
The Applicant is proposing to permanently impact 1.44 acres of Section 404 wetlands, as well as the temporary
impact of 0.22 acres of wetlands, which are necessary to facilitate the construction of infrastructure, dwellings and
driveways, within the Blake Farm subdivision. The Applicant intends to offset the proposed permanent wetland
impacts in the form of payment to the Northeast Cape Fear Mitigation Bank, for 2.9 acres of wetland restoration
credit. The Applicant and SEGi believe the project, as proposed, is the least environmentally damaging,
practicable alternative.
7

Blake Farm IP Supplemental Information
Attachment A
Pender County Tax Information
SEGi

Blake Farm IP Supplemental Information
Attachment B
Pender 1164, LLC Secretary of State Corporate Page
Pender Farm Development, LLC Secretary of State Corporate Page
SEGi

Blake Farm IP Supplemental Information
Attachment C
Agent Authorization
SEGi

Blake Farm IP Supplemental Information
SEGi
Attachment D
Adjacent Property Owner Information
iv

Blake Farm IP Supplemental Information
Attachment E
Vicinity Map
SEGi

Blake Farm IP Supplemental Information
SEGi
Attachment F
Proposed Site Plan & Wetland Impact Maps
vi

Blake Farm IP Supplemental Information
SEGi
Attachment G
Jurisdictional Wetland Determination
vii

Blake Farm IP Supplemental Information
SEGi
2017 Wetland Maps Verified By Ms. Emily Greer

Blake Farm IP Supplemental Information
SEGi
2013 Jurisdictional Determination
ix

Blake Farm IP Supplemental Information
A acent Property / Blake Farm Blvd.
2014 Jurisdictional Determination
SEGi

Blake Farm IP Supplemental Information
SEGi
Attachment H
Natural Resource Information
Division of Water Resources Water Classification Map
USGS Topographic Map
Soils Map
Pender County GIS Flood Map
xi

Blake Farm IP Supplemental Information
SEGi
Attachment I
Alternative Analysis Map
Xii

Blake Farm IP Supplemental Information
Attachment J
Threatened and Endangered Species Study
SEGi

Blake Farm IP Supplemental Information
SEGi
Attachment K
Historic Properties (SHPO) and Archaeological Resources
Xiv

Blake Farm IP Supplemental Information
SEGi
Attachment L
North East Cape Fear Mitigation Bank Credit Reservation Letter
Xv

Blake Farm IP Supplemental Information
Attachment M
Scope and Effect Maps
Xvi
SEGi

Blake Farm IP Supplemental Information
Attachment N
Wetland Monitoring Map
SEGi

>O
3
W
Y
CU
Q
Q
c
m
CI
O
O
O
tf)
N
LIDm
01
LL
m1
O
r
O
N
rn
O
C
co
0
U
a
E
rn
co
rn
O
C
O
W
'v
O
O
O
LO
N
LO
O
00 —
X-3 Monitoring Area
- Monitoring Location 1
_ — —
_ - 2 � ,
_ — 29 ,
T
S i
— - 2
g ,
_ _ - R
I I
L ,
— L '
C
_ _ T E F ,. y
/ � \7111
70
` J
69 I
198 16 r 19 X-8 I 1
r � . X- y � 1
- I I
- _ _I 2011 I 1200 11 FJ L J L 1952zs
—f— —/
194/ WI -202
193 / 1 r r =73.
FF-
— rWI-103
6
-
'� � pllryi o
— — WI -3O1 9 /jl\\%/�� 111!1' /C 133` ���\0� P $
J LJ__J .111'111(1++1i!'•lu ..lii'ljiii '1 // // 1f —, —, �/ 134 \ 76 5 r` ,
WI -401209 r l r 1 r" r- — \ q� 157 // ^ / 128` `'
1 ;n14ry+�+ll,lq'4,lilllq,4+4141 pl �� ^, \
W I -5O1 I Y hn'11+4 "+,ryi'14hi41+44pllnn ... 210 II _ CO..) +l4f1l1li1n11/I1t141r1l"u+,I1p4fhll4lil'/l",lIl/,14In"n+�i'"+ '41i114+u, �iU4d4l �u4iit1 �` JL —JL1 2—J 1 \ 16I1I1I11IIII 135
1 — — — n!hn+,Il, l' ""+;';/ 4,i 1j iiiri'il,iiiAlllli;+ 1piiitll'lllli'li+gi inl'—C \ 11� /` \ C 63 \\ -7 L
_ r- r (( _.,, a Il p +p +h 4l ,Iq / 125 5 / V %
_ 1 � � r � r � 11 r � r- � r- � r- ,,,;St+,lll', !� ;!lllb't,lllq,�+lllir,l,l,�1111 154 ;� � 86 / rj \ J I 9 i �� �
1225 11224x11 1I I1 �r 1 r- „''1n"+ul+ali"+iiln �✓ Y"
237 J 111223 11222 11 221 1 220 11 219 � 1218 11217 11216 1 215 11 214 112 I 1 11'-�'+i�41„iii �1t+4 153 � � `\ J R / /\ ' \/ i \ i '62 I
_ �Jl 13 124 v
L_JL_JL_JL_JL_JL-JL_JL 1 1 1761175 // �/�� +n, )/ / as / ) L --J L==J X-.3
"lin+11`'11
1 239 -1 r- � r- � r -1 r � r- � r- � r - �6T 'hlil4i!'b4+ll p1"y 22 87 // I � � � J
—_ — r 152 88 \ _
240 241 1242 11243 11244 11245 11246 11247 11248 11249 11250 11251 11252 11253 11254 11255 1 1 11r \ �\ J/ P /
V/7 Monitoring Location 2
J I II II II II II II II 60
I -- LJLJ JLJLJLJLJLJLJLJLJI II II II 11117811,79//180//x''/` 151 140 / ;u,iiip�iliiiii"'1d1"1a,, / 9 ' \ 8 / � / � I
— STl1 B L J L J L J L J L JL 11 //181 // \ 141 i!!1!iiinllpii�'ll,ii�lllf,l // 90
- — JL J 182 // %/1 �L 150 qui"'lq�+,1 J� // 91 S,C Q /• / 59 `\ 1
142
//184 % 143 �y 120 / !itlllilli\. L v(/ 92
1
L
—
j'
146 Q+pi.'14iry1+4iU+4, \ I II 5411 5311 52 I
STUB
Ilfll�"1+111"+4/"114 j4h1 t ` WI -102 55 I II I 1
109 / "l+riil i111rin'ii — LF RRR 1
WI -202
—
fY
1 110 I I D 102 1 y TR t"tyfill ry lt I 'li '+ll+ L — 1
EA r 14
��101 ::E +1�,� +1 i! r �� ,6 151 L--- 1
111 I 0100 I /lilt ntr L.— L J r — 13
49
112 I '' C' 99 I , , !iii = i 12 1
_� x48 �� 2 23 24 5 261 L ---J
113 Q 98 i' L._ J ---�
97 I ry X- — J �� 10 I I
0 4 1111,�I LJG lilul�;�': L—_—J 2 31 30 29 28 271 —= J
••7771 , 4, , X45 J L8 J
Q ! STUB
tiJ •�C•E'J`5`/'. \� ,ii"l4. 44 J �33 34 35 36 3711 L_ �_J
r � • � IN + YJAMENITY
!"bili" a \ i \ ` — — J F 6SEAL ,-:p °%''7�4'^F___25+4 - EXISTING DITCH AREA \ "' '' _ L _5
r \ yui A2 // 1x1 r
-k \e/��`39 ---�
44141 <\41 1140 I E---� 4 I
GRAPHIC SCALE ,���•....., \v,� L7
300 0 150 300 600 '���+�5;,��1+, WI-101� 1
1 inch = 300 ft.
Trask Land BLAKE FARM SF -1 SUBDIVISION °"� 9"8'201 .��100 ` I
(�/'�'\//``'' (� //�� SCALE
� �-i MCE PRGJ. R MAB, °4 u WI-, pp
TOPSAIL TOWNSHIP °RANK MAR, RMC HGRIZON TAL:
DESIGNED RMC BLAKE ARM BLVD
PENDER COUNTY NORTH CAROLINANflasNaTEo o� 3 , 'I ` i.'
VERTICAL:
243 North Front Street PRO.1CHECKED RMC P_1 EXTENCiS TO HWY 17
Wilmington, North Carolina 28401 PRGJ. MGR. RMC
Phone: [phone] , F— [phone] 1202 Eastwood Road , .
Wilmington, NC 28403 WETLAND IMPACT MAP KEY sTArus: WETLANDS PLAN
NC LIC. No. F-1222
ww.mckimcreed.com [phone] NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION , y /H� 1