20191383 Ver 1_Appeal REQUEST_20190820

Leonardo Cruz
1624 Crystal Creek Drive
Durham, NC 27712
[phone]
Ms. Linda Culpepper
c/o Paul Wojoski
NC Division of Water Resources
401 and Buffer Permitting Branch
512 North Salisbury Street
Archdale Building, 9th Floor
Raleigh, NC 27604
August 20, 2019
Dear Ms. Linda Culpepper:
A few months ago, my wife and I decided that we would like to install an in -ground pool to improve our quality of life.
In requesting a permit for our planned pool, Durham City planning told me that I would need a stream determination
letter from NC DENR for a drainage ditch that flows through my property and all of the properties of my neighbors on
Crystal Creek Drive. Prior to purchasing our property, we investigated the deed and all permits associated with the
property. According to our deed and plat, there is a drainage ditch in our yard. By performing our due diligence, we
should have been able to have a reasonable guarantee that the information that was filed with the planning office was
accurate and in line with state regulations. Had we been made aware of our yard containing a riparian buffer, we would
not have purchased the property. In addition, I previously dealt with Durham City planning on 07/12/2012 and
received Permit Number: 1211206 to install a garden shed. At that time, Riparian buffers were not discussed.
Recently, as part of the stream determination, an NC DENR representative came out and determined that the feature
was a stream and not a drainage ditch, which is in contrast to what is depicted on the official subdivision plat recorded
with Durham County. The representative's determination was based on the fact that the feature had water present at
the time of the visit and the NRCS Soil Survey map. It is my understanding that prior to construction, the developer of
this community had requested a stream determination whereby all streams in the neighborhood were thought to be
subject to the 50' buffer rules. A determination letter from 1998, sent by NC DENR, mentioned that only 1 feature was
subject to the rules. I contend that the feature subject to the rules is already accounted for on the plat diagrams and is
located farther away from our property.
I can understand regulations changing for property owners of undeveloped land; however, once construction is
complete, any future development on that property should be governed by the decisions made at the time it was
developed unless there is an absolute necessity such as public safety. I have attached supporting documentation for
this request and created a Dropbox location which contains high resolution images and PDF's should you require them.
httos://www.droobox.com/sh/zhizer9vcii0kxhtl/AACzWIV82RQOoiVPHhoZ nlra?dl=0.
Having a pool is important to us, as my wife suffers from chronic back pain due to scoliosis with spinal fusion. Low
impact exercise including swimming would be beneficial for her condition. After speaking with my Homeowners
Association president, who lives on my street, and performing my own investigation, I am respectfully requesting an
official change in position from the stream determination that was recently performed (determination number:
NBRRO# 19-198). Additionally, I would like to request a copy of the official NC Stream ID Form v4.11 from that
determination, which would spell out the score for this feature. From Durham City planning's perspective, this feature
is a drainage ditch and I would like NC DENR to reassess in the hopes of reaching a similar conclusion.
If you have additional questions or would like to discuss further, please call me at [phone].
Sincerely,
- � A

Inaccuracy of Soil and Topographical Maps
Source:
https://fiIes.nc.,eov/ncdeci/Water%2OQuaIity/Surface%2OWater%2OProtection/PDU/Headwater%2OStream
s/TopograohicandSoiIMapsdonotaccuratelvdepictheadwaterstreamnetworks. Of
Topographic and Soil Maps Do
Not Accurately Depict Headwater
Stream. Networks
BY THomAs CoLsoN, JAmEs GREGORr, JoF-rK DoRm-Y, AND Fi%PjANN Russpu_
Topographic and soil romps are i fr n used to determine the }neutron of headwater stream corridors for
federal and state planning and regulatory purposes. Yet these maps are often inaccurate, raisingserious
questions about their use in regulatory applications.
berween
dwater streams are the first- and second -order
termittent or perennialstreams throughout atershed that serve as a critical hydrologic link the surrounding landscape and the larg-
er, connecting stream outflows (Stan Ford, 1996). Small ftrst-
order streams can represent up to 95% of the drainage network
(Peterson et al., 2001) and often drain a major portion of the
watershed area (M1CGlynn and Seibert, 2002).
Federal and state water quality programs designed to pro-
tect the ecological functions of- headwater stream C rridors of-
ten utilize U.S. Geological Survey (USCS) topographic maps,
with a 1:24,000 scale, to determine the location of headwater
streams For planning and regulatory purposes. The significant
nexus assessments now required by the U S. Army Corps of En-
gineers For "waters ofthe United States" determinations often
Focus on small streams and the hydrologiclecologic connections
of those streams to wetlands and to the nearest downstream
traditional navigable waters (Corps, 2W7). Many consultants
are using the National Hyduography Dataset (NHD) (USGS,
2000), the digital equivalent of USCS topographic map blue
lines (blue lines represent water), to substantiate significant
nexus determinations.
North Carolina's 1997 Neuse River Basin riparian buffer
rule (15A NCAC 02B .0233) and subsequent buffer rules ap-
ply to intermittent and perennial streams as shown on USGS
1:24,000 scale topographic maps and Natural Resources Con-
servation Service (NRCS) county soil survey raps. Yet apply-
ing these rules reveals several errors in the USCS topographic
maps and the NRCS soil maps depiction of small First-, sec-
! hunwar Cbffvn, CFM, GI.SP. Ph.D. u u l rujecr Manrtger ar i+uchling
d• Rahrman to Raletfflh. North Cem b. J.C:rxgn y cm , pws.
AkD. is a Pmfevor in Ar Departmmr of itrrxrrry & Panamnmentae
Al,ww ray a1 Nareh Lilmkma Siam Unrraerrlry in Rafth, M rxb
Cambns_ John Dnrr M_.S it Supervisar and 6Prianx Ruatea M
& it Geomwrphokgrat twftb rbe Ph rtrm & PoPey Devriapmenr UnA
l-naiads and.Swrn wwwr 13n ,*, Nurtb Ciwrlrma Dav&iax ofwamr
Quaksy in Rakrgh. Norrh Cormhm
and-, and, sometimes, third -order streams. John Dorney and
staff of the Wetlands and Stormwater Branch of the North
Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) manage the
state'sri par tan buffer rule program. Given the stream mapping
errors and the Fact that the inaccurate maps were being used
for planning and regulatory purposes, John Dorney; with assis-
tance From James Cregory, set out to develop a field methodol-
ogy for identifying the origins of fuss -Order streams (NCD-
WQ, 2005) and to initiate research on the nature and extent of
stream mapping errors. The NCDWQ methods for identifying
the origins of intermittent and perennial streams were imple-
mented in early 1999 and have been extensively tested across
North Carolina and in several other states. The methods are
used in North Carolina For the riparian buFFer rules and other
regulatory applications as well as For field mapping of headwa-
ter streams to determine map errors. For an extensive literature
review on stream mapping standards and map errors in depic-
tion ofstre2m networks. see Colson (2006).
This article focuses on work in North Carolina to assess
headwater stream errors on NRCS and USCS maps. The ex-
tensive stream mapping errors on USCS topographic maps and
NRCS soils maps raise serious questions about use of these maps
in regulatory applications for which they were not intended.
I'Mimina y Stream Surveys
fn 1998 and 2000, teams ❑FNCDWQ staff members conduct-
ed global positioning system (GPS) ground surveys of head-
water stream networks in small catchments (about 0.5 mi' in
size) in all three major physiographic regions of the state and
compared total stream length on the ground to that shown on
maps (Gregory, e[ al.. 2002). Those data showed that NRCS
soil maps usually overestimate the presence of small streams
and that USGS 1:24.000 scale topographic maps greatly un-
derestimate the presence of small streams {Tab]e I ). The only
exception was in the Coastal Plain where many ditches are de-
picted as blue lines on USCS maps.
These preliminary studies Found several types of errors
with the USCS maps:
MAY-JUFE 2008 25

Preliminary Plat for Phase II and Phase III
of Autumn Ridge
Prior to meeting with Durham City Planning, I met with Durham City StormWater Management to discuss
my pool installation. They printed a copy of the plat that they have on file. As you can see, there is a
Riparian buffer in our neighborhood, but it is towards the top of the below diagram and not in the area of
concern. Please also see accompanying document, 1624 Crystal Creek, Cruz, Planning Meeting Minutes
and Designs.pdf, which can be found in the following Dropbox location:
https://www.dror)box.com/sh/zhizer9vaiOkxhtl/AACzWIV82RQOoiVPHhoZ nlra?dl=0
A UTUMM R117CE
PHASE II & III
DURHAM, NORTH CAROLINA
MARCH 22, 2"
WATER FERNf.:
F
i
SEWER P—W'EU
FO. fi.CO�
'd'pa�2. rm
—�°� •ass
3"F W�J34'V.9'tllC.'C..��m
r. � mr
DUANE K SI"EWART 8t ASSOCIATES " CONSULTING ENGINEERS - DURHAK NORTH CAROLINA
A0WmN `919eff —FA gL -

1624 Crystal Creek Survey
This survey references Plat Book 160 and page 361 as the source for the drainage ditch easement. This was
a survey my wife and I paid for prior to purchasing this property in 8/2011.
138
P.B. 160, P- 559-363
unrn� uErx \ ` IJIEAW RNIPE'
Re \
PX+EF 3
EP
OPEN SPACE &
Biwa
TREE SAVE AREA
Roj uHSIe.L 1 `\ \ P.R 1% P. 359-363
\ S 'AViBIM RM'
CEH1ERLflE OE' t ` O�
VICINITY MAP W WIDE STORM DRUHAa ryo p ` PNaSE 3
(NOT N SCALE) EASE
MEH7 - ` •r ,_ ` \ �'
(Pe. 150. P. 361)
OUTDOOR
16
PR. 160, P. 359-393
'AUNMN RIDGE'
PHASE 7 CWCREtE0@ PATIO UW 17
PAIAIpN IpXIM PrA Orod
Pa- 1°0P• "' slDLwux ex,ulos ae' � 0.3 Acres
BEYOND s' STRMr ��Gs �°tk3122.0 Sq. root
EASDOf •t 3j y0 .B. ,60. P, 359 -363 \\
5' SUM �.��'
EASEMENT �B• ' 9a rB� PHASE 3 . ,ia
PARCEL IOg195635 •.' y$ i�ipfE'
9N EM5-O4•-70-a,au �� :4 ee .rnrn 4 d•[rl+•A n�.a wru
L-4754 - Pad 111D rr. L 10k
LEGEND - �` � � •Sti ?�til •' a ti
• (EIP)-E)SnNG IRON WPE \EFB �^%' �ry0 ': �'4'•
0' 30' 60' 90'
• (E51)-E%ISRNG SOUP IRON 'f i.-,,.•
.• (ERR}-E.CISTNG REPAR r " -• 5 t E� •.J ....
L1 h��$5i �0
i '" BAA (AAPN 1 I" - 30 FEET
• (Res}-REenR ssr q �, ,•,,, / � ,� ��'�-----•-
o (IPS)-IRON PIPE SET r0-` C eeC �gwwA PB. 16D. P. 359-363+; HUNT LAND S17RYfYING, P.C. 1
O (MR)_M474E0ATrq[ \ 'OG C,p u, �'•'•' .-r --rv- •AUTIMN RIDW P,O. BO% 7f165 EARN M. N.C. 27772 1
POINT \ 8� P'i '� snewu emwS R.S, PHASE s TELEPHONE (RIP) see-05ar /Pax 1-e¢e-31-5sd
O �%ITY POW: `C�,�- r � TMRT IMPERIACUS SURFACE CKLCULA71ONS
® c,o(9ENER CLEAN dNT)(CHORD TIE) ti LEONARDO CRUZ
� DP
536'A7'3rE JENNIFER CRUZ
{R WNC BEARING 1ASTAN
(TIE TO E}P) f Li I-N S154za�'—I LEaANDN nrP. vuRN+w co. NORTH cAseDUNA
A NGTH &V e CH IN tEN SCALE: 1'=40' 0ATE:7-18-11 JN 110718
ns� rfq°r ru`YOor r1V°a K"oa�i nr�a`"ru c1 g�5.79 su1�i9Ll o �, 76' �� 1 `

Autumn Ridge Phase 3 (RB 160, Page 361)
Source: https://rodweb.dconc.gov/RealEstate/Map/SearchResults.asi3x
Excerpt: Note #2:
Centerline of variable width public storm water drainage easements, ownership of, and responsibility for
improvement and maintenance of stormwater facilities in this easement remains with the grantor. If the
property is within or becomes a part of the city, the easement and access points to the easement are
subject to the terms and restrictions stated in the "revised declaration of rights and privileges of the city of
Durham in Storm Water management facility easements" recorded in the real estate book 2298, page 208...
_ w�K
5'TW
sxm5rt
bt
bi
YxSI
5Pr]YS.Y
SFIryY
,
�AT
rorww
�]YmT
as
w b]yw
w
wK
N
x'srW
0'.4t S� RW
0.N
SH]F3.T
Sir V4c
6
Lm uE. unr� oIE�P.
ffiMX0'u`�'
�1 e c xd�°
SPECIAL CONDITIONS Box
li'iol
IXR
a[ nmp
•'
.....- •_ - ••......��� NGII WRPb
L�
a �lY'M
rs wi m3 wvLr a 9N Im
xl w�.Yu w IRCI ALLMO f(R Wb
n2 xu .v.e.m ra rm ,n
r]d3�0. �u� nmrvbis YEa .[,um ma rm to
�,
].1 ,w mxxrt oc5a xu u
m :4
L ,
a1�SrryrM ror
x1�
]oncn �
rra
L-
�+ •,� 10.N
34
TIN PLAT WM GM CGHT 0i t
rGiI6Y 7MECr.RY.
"'Pyyd£j5ysi
�ww�rur�xvn£
a'rSVa
APPBOYPLY0O4GVAVGFFWH o
4
OKTE.
111�
11# RATb APL1r 2 ocxEcnav
lAm PE
LOT Lq
LOT 11{8 OF LATB tl ADO a
F LM
]4lYE ®Y CpPbClFil
mw
CABE ND. �I 404- O 1+i
ca�Plxc uy r
raw .ur wn nart�r-vr omicmo. rw
FILED
AUTUMN RIDGE — PHASE 3
�RrTM ]
r 01.) s51.
o-

Real Estate Book 2298, page 208
Source: https://rodweb.dconc.gov/RealEstate/SearchResults.aspxx
Easement granted "...to City of Durham to construct, repair, maintain, and gain access to stormwater
management facilities".
[vim -C4
Box 2MPd6i 208
REVISED DECLARATION OF RIGHTS AND PRIM EGES OF THE CITY of
^� DURHAM IN STORM WATER MANAGEMENT FACILITY EASEMENTS
I ,
TM* DECLARATWN acts out the rights of the City of Durham, its agents, and corstfactara
(hereafter the City") to construct. Operate. repair, maintain, and gain access tv otafm watef
management facilities. These faoilitles are wcated upon strips of land (hereafter 'strips of land'I Wif f
which the owner -or owners (hereafter `the Grantor'l have granted an easement to the City in a
Separate document incorporating this Declaration by reference. This peGlnration also allows access to
the strips of land through land owned by the Grantor (hereatter 'access points'). Nothing kn tills
Declaration shall prevent tfie Grantor from using the strips at land in a way that does not interfere with
the City's rights as set forth in this Declaration. The terms of this Declaration are as follows:
The City shall have the following rights in, Over, under, end through the strips Of
Land wWlof access points, which rights it may exercise in its sole discretion except as Otherwise
indicated: the right of on" over the strips of land and access points for parsons, rttectunery, and
equipment; the right to construct, operate, repair, maintain, replace, and inspect storm water
management facilities and other appurtenances in the strips of land; the right to obtain samples of
storm water from the strips of land: the right to clear the strips of land of structures, f ill, embankments,
plants, flora, vegetation, encroachmenlS. obstructions, end Improvements; the right to place materials
and equipment on the strips Of land; the right to modify the grade in tha strips at land; and the right
of ingress, egress, and regress through tilt access points, inolud(ttg but not limited to 08ved areas,
which right shall include the right to remove any fencing that blocks ingress or egress, subiect to the
obligation to replace such fencing defined below. The Grantor and the City shall jointly agree to the
bcat(on of the access paints prior tb the time they are first used under this Declaration.
jyj�nhs l�o¢n GratSt4i. GF ElhtOr Shall enjure that the fallowing does not occur in. over, under, OF
through the Strips of land: erection of oncroachraents, okxsV lCtians, improvements, or embankments:
placement of Jill; construction of paved drives Dr parking lots that involve a Change in grade an the
strips of land; placement of plants Of fora, with the exception of gardens or similar cultivation; or
blockage or attempted rbLocksge of the natural flow ofwater On the strips of land. Notwithstanding
these restrictions, the City Manager, or the manager's designee, may agree in writing to allow one of
more of the foregoing conditions if It is determined not to iMerlara VATh the City s rights under this
Declaratian. Such approval shall be effective only if it i8 reigned by the City Nianager, City Engineer,
II Assistant City Managerr or Assistant City Engineer.
! ow , If the City disturbs the grade of thei find either In the Strips of land or the
access points it shall restore such grade, exCapt where the City has determined to modify the Qrada
in the strips of land to hetter manage storm water, as provided in "Frights of the Cary" above. The City
1 shall repair any sVuctues it damages, wrth the exceptron of suumurea prohibited under "Rigfita Of the
City' and 'Restrictions tfpan Grantor" above•
The City will replace #encing that it has removed in the access points and the strips of land, with the
fexception of fencing in ttie strips of land that InterferOS with the proper operation of the storm water
l management facility. The City shall eliminate ruts and depressions it has crewted and not be I eb1ed gyressed
the
areas it has disturbed in the Snips of land and aceass points. The City
shaLl l repairs resulting from its activities, including, but not Ihmiiad to, damage to paved yvelks or paved
1 driveways and damage to [rees, plants, and other vegetation.

Autumn Ridge Phase 3 Final (P.B 159, Page 1)
Source: httr)s://rodweb.dconc.2ov/RealEstate/Mar)/SearchEntrv.asr)x
This is the final plat recorded for my subdivision according to the following parcel report:
htto://maiis2.roktech.net/durhamnc Roma ps4/Reports/UserDefined/parcelReport.cfm?obiectids=1987966
91&visLayers=46,54.57,56,89,27,28,29,30,50,75,78&aerial=false&hiIIShade=false&bbox=-8787715.1144158
67,4312585.465870796,-8787584.63770671,4312714.504555354&basema p=streets
��•'vrr sues ss�xm �
w¢ em ai ="n'x'
11 sr e= _e -osa� xr m�aa wiwirM m®MI
-11,r1=1
Tyr, `•
�� •� � : `� k lP� u !P 'l a r� u uasr ,o am mu mz a,�c Pa,oe \��
? r .�® r �" CRYgT�gL ".'.-r. DRry `® � %-� \.: �\,.�`.�•`` � ��:: ,�8
u.
I���� �� ®�'"' ?'m �/ �® �� �• \ \� \�+� \� A �a'�E emu.„
I i u ® x 'I.� �•`�." \.a,w,ai FINAL PLAT
ED
qAn<I rold If mt Mn
/N �Yroa«q'
Mir ,e ✓.'® rt \ '> oa.6--6-63nma 9:36 CASE NO. D03-M
:.r1 1-
m""swYw,aiwY. s, i- ^°iOLia'a, s1H°�`�oNi 9A Pur aPs oar AUTULiNRIDGE � PHASE 3
a ,..�MG1°c ®,mrx sir sows �'� ,' �.�•��ama CF'�s' �mw°"`"r. ,<,i„w va�u�an n.00
Ru5 PUT RAS. EM CElr m M.
cEwwc sPxr •• _ ` � � Paa«xs THE owxax ten.
' t6EVYJP a /' / �a ( `mil i� CdIMTY PLf IM OIP�RTNH![
y�Pa a � P n, onsa-,o-e,n GATE _ 4-S •uj = MW KRR.m cam•
,.a P,a. �.� . m,. APPf1oYRL vole eo Hare rhos e -

Grande Oaks Plat (P.B 97, Page 112)
Source: httr)s://rodweb.dconc.eov/RealEstate/Map/SearchEntrv.asDx
According to Durham Go Maps, the canal/ditch begins on lot 3 of the below Grande Oaks plat. This plat was
approved in 1980 and there is no water feature mentioned on or near lot 3. Additionally, in the top left-hand
corner, there is a "Water Storage Area" defined with a 20' easement. This is the start of the storm water
management drainage ditch and it flows down Red Coach road via a combination of a man-made ditch and
concrete tubes. The ditch then goes under the roadway via a culvert and exits on the other end for drainage
behind lot 3 which is the beginning of the ditch that runs behind Crystal Creek Drive.

Autumn Ridge + Grande Oaks Map Depicting Drainage
System
Source: http://maps2.roktech.net/durhamnc gomaps4/

2013 USGS Topology Map
Source: https://namdb.usgs.izov/topoview/viewer
The below image, with the blue dot representing 1624 crystal creek drive, shows the water feature that is
depicted on the Autumn Ridge plat as being subject to a Riparian buffer, but it does not show the drainage
ditch running behind the properties on Crystal Creek that are now being associated with that buffer. The
scale of this map and all others from this site dating back to 1973 that I used for reference are all at the
1:24000 scale.
E4CC

Grande Oaks Storm Water Drainage Ditch Image 1
This is the view of the left side of Red Coach Road facing North. This artificially created ditch is the major
source of the water flowing behind Crystal Creek Drive in the Autumn Ridge subdivision

Grande Oaks Storm Water Drainage Ditch Image 2
This image is a closer look at the artificially created ditch which is the major source of the water flowing
behind Crystal Creek Drive in the Autumn Ridge subdivision

Grande Oaks Storm Water Drainage Ditch Image 3
This is the view of the right side of Red Coach Road, the other end of the culvert, facing North. This is the
beginning of the drainage ditch that borders the Crystal Creek properties.

Bivins Road Drainage Ditch, which is similar to
construction in Grande Oaks Development
uY.

Sullivan, Shelton
From: Haupt, Mac
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2019 3:14 PM
To: Sullivan, Shelton
Cc: Maher, Niki; Wojoski, Paul A
Subject: FW: [External] Re: Cruz, Leo - 1624 Crystal Creek - Development Plot Plan
Attachments: 1624 Crystal Creek Drive, Cruz, NC DENR Appeal Letter.pdf, 1624 Crystal Creek Drive,
Cruz, NC DENR Supporting Documentation.pdf
Shelton,
I would like you to take the lead on this Appeal if possible. If Niki can help, that might be good as well.
Also, you may want to chat with Paul, he has been out there...
Let me know if you need to discuss.
Thanks,
Mac
From: Wojoski, Paul A
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2019 12:33 PM
To: Haupt, Mac <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: [External] Re: Cruz, Leo - 1624 Crystal Creek - Development Plot Plan
Hi Mac —
Attached is a stream call appeal we received yesterday. I am familiar with site/case history if you would like to discuss.
It's your choice to whom it should be assigned.
Thanks,
Paul
Paul Wojoski
401 & Buffer Permitting Branch
Division of Water Resources
Department of Environmental Quality
[phone] office
Pau l.Woioskia-ncdenr.gov
512 N. Salisbury Street (Archdale Building), Suite 942-F, Raleigh, NC 27604
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
From: Leo Cruz [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, August 26, 2019 12:36 PM
1

To: Wojoski, Paul A <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [External] Re: Cruz, Leo - 1624 Crystal Creek - Development Plot Plan
External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to
[e-mail]
Hi Paul,
I have attached my appeal request. Please keep me updated on the progress. Thank you
- Leo
On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 6:52 PM Leo Cruz <leocruzIkgmail.com> wrote:
Thanks Paul. I appreciate all your assistance with this. Have a great weekend
-Leo
On Aug 16, 2019, at 4:14 PM, Wojoski, Paul A <Paul.Wojoski(c�r�,ncdenr.gov> wrote:
Hi Leo —
Stream determinations are good for 5 years, therefore the stream determination from 1999 would be
expired irrespective as to whether the feature was called subject or not subject. Further the file
unfortunately does not have a color copy and includes very little documentation. That being said it's
publically available here for your review:
https://edocs.deg. nc.govMaterResources/Browse.aspx?dbid=0&startid=342587
I couldn't locate a stream form in the file, but am coordinating with Raleigh Regional Office to see if
they have one. Here's the link to that file for your reference, see ID 19-198:
https://edocs.deg. nc.govMaterResources/Browse.aspx?dbid=0&startid=785682
Thanks,
Paul
Paul Wojoski
401 & Buffer Permitting Branch

Division of Water Resources
Department of Environmental Quality
[phone] office
Pau l.Woioskia-ncdenr.gov
512 N. Salisbury Street (Archdale Building), Suite 942-F, Raleigh, NC 27604
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
From: Leo Cruz [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2019 7:06 PM
To: Wojoski, Paul A <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [External] Re: Cruz, Leo - 1624 Crystal Creek - Development Plot Plan
External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an
I received all the information from the planning office (attached). Nothing earth shattering here.
All the diagrams and approvals mention only 1 buffer to protect in this subdivision.
I met with a Durham County storm water representative earlier today, which just so happens to
also perform stream determinations, and we were wondering
1) The verbiage on the stream determination from 1998 states that the owner felt that all the
features indicated on the map (black permanent marker) were subject to the Neuse Buffer Rules
but that the determination ONLY subjected feature 1 as subject to the 50' buffer rules and that
the feature was marked by blue highlighter. Unfortunately, the black and white copy does not
show the blue highlighter marking. If only 1 feature was subject to the rules and there are
multiple features present in the proposed development, it would explain why the ditch/canal
behind my property was NOT considered subject to the rules and the stream to the North was.
Would you be able to locate and provide the color copy?

2) Was a North Carolina Stream ID Form Version 4.11 completed and if so, could I have a
copy?
Once I have the above information, I should be ready to submit my appeal letter. Thanks
- Leo
On 8/2/2019 2:52 PM, Wojoski, Paul A wrote:
Hi Leo,
Sounds good. I appreciate you updating me.
Thanks,
Paul
Paul Wojoski
401 & Buffer Permitting Branch
Division of Water Resources
Department of Environmental Quality
[phone] office
Pau l.Woioskia-ncdenr.gov
512 N. Salisbury Street (Archdale Building), Suite 942-F, Raleigh, NC 27604
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
From: Leo Cruz [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, August 2, 2019 1:52 PM
To: Wojoski, Paul A <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [External] Re: Cruz, Leo - 1624 Crystal Creek - Development Plot Plan
4

External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all
suspicious email as an attachment to [e-mail]
Hi Paul,
I have spoken with everyone that I need to, but I am still waiting on information
from the Durham planning office before I submit my appeal. They should
hopefully be able to provide this information within a few business days which
should still put me within the 60 day window. Have a great weekend
Leo
On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 9:26 AM Wojoski, Paul A
<Paul.Wojoski(c�r�,ncdenr.gov> wrote:
Understood. Thanks for the update.
Paul Wojoski
401 & Buffer Permitting Branch
Division of Water Resources
Department of Environmental Quality
[phone] office
Pau l.Woioskia-ncdenr.gov
512 N. Salisbury Street (Archdale Building), Suite 942-F, Raleigh, NC 27604
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
5

From: Leo Cruz [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2019 6:10 PM
To: Wojoski, Paul A <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [External] Re: Cruz, Leo - 1624 Crystal Creek - Development Plot Plan
WExternal email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all
suspiaous email as an attachment to report.seam@nc.k,c .
Yes, I am moving forward with the stream appeal. I'm just trying to gather a bit
more information before sending the appeal letter your way. Thanks
-Leo
On Jul 30, 2019, at 5:38 PM, Wojoski, Paul A <Paul.Wojoski(c�r�,ncdenr.gov>
wrote:
Hi Leo —
Just wanted to check in with you on the appeal. I will be withdrawing
the Major Variance request tomorrow, so I just wanted to confirm
you were moving forward on the steam appeal.
Thanks,
Paul
Paul Wojoski
401 & Buffer Permitting Branch
Division of Water Resources
Department of Environmental Quality
[phone] office
Paul.Woioskia-ncdenr.gov
6

512 N. Salisbury Street (Archdale Building), Suite 942-F, Raleigh, NC
27604
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
From: Leo Cruz [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, July 29, 2019 10:52 AM
To: Wojoski, Paul A <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [External] Re: Cruz, Leo - 1624 Crystal Creek -
Development Plot Plan
r External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
&rify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to [e-mail]
Thanks Paul. I will draft a formal letter and email it to you after I
hear back from a few more people(hopefully today). Thanks
-Leo
On Jul 29, 2019, at 10:43 AM, Wojoski, Paul A
<Paul.Wojoski(c�r�,ncdenr.gov> wrote:
Hi Leo —
You received a Stream Determination Letter for the
subject feature on June 24, 2019 (attached). This
stream call determined the feature was subject to the
Neuse Buffer Rules as it was show on the soils map
and the field staff rated it Intermittent. If you
disagree with that call, you have a right to appeal it to
the DWR Director within 60 days (as outlined in the
letter), so you're still within your timeframe. To
appeal, we just need a signed letter stating the
reasons and specifics of what you are appealing.
(Basically what you emailed, but in a formal letter
addressed to the director.)

Do bear in mind that often stormwater conveyance
(curb and gutters, etc) often discharge to natural
stream features and that stream features that are
intermittent may not have water in the dry months of
the year. That being said, it is within your rights to
appeal the classification. If an onsite re-evaluation
determines the stream is indeed ephemeral as you
suggest, it would not be subject to the buffer rules,
and hence no need for the pool variance. The appeals
can take a few weeks to get staff on site depending
on workload. We will work to do it quickly, but I'd
estimate it will take a minimum of 2 weeks to do a
field evaluation and issue a letter. Therefore moving
forward with the appeal will withdraw the variance
request until the appeal is completed.
You can mail or email me the signed appeal letter,
please address it to:
Ms. Linda Culpepper, Director
c/o Paul Wojoski
NC Division of Water Resources
401 and Buffer Permitting Branch
512 North Salisbury Street
Archdale Building, 9t" Floor
Raleigh, NC 27604
Also please reference the stream call determination
number: NBRRO# 19-198
Thanks,
Paul
Paul Wojoski
s

401 & Buffer Permitting Branch
Division of Water Resources
Department of Environmental Quality
[phone] office
Pau l.Woioskia-ncdenr.gov
512 N. Salisbury Street (Archdale Building), Suite 942-
F, Raleigh, NC 27604
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to
the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to
third parties.
From: Leo Cruz [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, July 26, 2019 8:57 PM
To: Wojoski, Paul A <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [External] Re: Cruz, Leo - 1624 Crystal
Creek - Development Plot Plan
External email. Do not click links or open
attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as
an attachment to i: I _ci i I� i i i
Hi Paul,
After our email exchange, I received a callback
from my Title Insurance company. Essentially
they told me that they do not get involved in
matters pertaining to government regulations :(...
then reached out to the HOA president to discuss
my own personal options and the implications for
the Autumn Ridge community at large. After that
conversation culminated, I decided to go on a

nature hike. I walked the length of the ditch until I
reached its source located on Red Coach Rd,
which is depicted on the following Durham NC
Go Map. I also took pictures, but the size of them
were considerably larger than what should be sent
via email. The link to the Dropbox folder that
contains the images is:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/zhger9yqiOkxhtFA
ACzWIV82ROOoiVPHhoZ nIra?dl=0
The source of the drainage ditch seems, in my
opinion, to constitute a legitimate drainage ditch
and not a stream -- an ephemeral stream if
anything. The source of the creek is currently dry
and no water is flowing. Any flow of water down
stream could be any number of things including
leaking irrigation systems, septic tank systems,
etc. I am requesting an official re-classification of
this canal/ditch from NC DENR's perspective
because from a survey perspective, it is already
classified as a drainage ditch similar to what is
installed on Bivins Rd.
I understand that you will probably have to
request someone from your office to come onsite
to perform their own inspection. If you concur
with my findings, I would like an official
determination letter as soon as possible so that I
may move forward with my plans. Please let me
know what time frame we are looking at and if
you would like to discuss further. Thank you
<image002.jpg>
- Leo
On 7/26/2019 2:12 PM, Wojoski, Paul A wrote:
Hi Leo —
I understand. Let me clarify that this
is not a requirement to put a deed
restriction on your property, but is a
statement saying that one could be
necessary if you use a stormwater
SCM to address the impervious
surface in the buffer. It's rare/unlikely
that this would be the case for what
you've proposed. A wet -pond SCM is
10

the type of thing that would be
subject to a deed restriction. That
being said, your signature is
necessary to make the application
complete and we can not process it
without one.
Thanks,
Paul
Paul Wojoski
401 & Buffer Permitting Branch
Division of Water Resources
Department of Environmental Quality
[phone] office
Pau l.Woioskia-ncdenr.gov
512 N. Salisbury Street (Archdale
Building), Suite 942-F, Raleigh, NC
27604
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh,
NC 27699-1617
Email correspondence to and from this
address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and
may be disclosed to third parties.
From: Leo Cruz
[mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, July 26, 2019 11:36 AM
To: Wojoski, Paul A
<[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [External] Re: Cruz, Leo -
11

1624 Crystal Creek - Development
Plot Plan
External email. Do not click
links or open attachments unless you
verify. Send all suspicious email as an
attachment to [e-mail]
Thanks for the information, but as
I stated, I don't feel comfortable
placing a voluntary restriction on
my property. If my signature is
required to move forward, I will
have to review with my wife, HOA
President, and possibly a lawyer
before moving forward.
Please let me know if the lack of
signature prevents the submission.
Thanks
-Leo
On Jul 26, 2019, at 11:14 AM,
Wojoski, Paul A
<Paul. Wojoski(c�r�,ncdenr.gov>
wrote:
Hi Leo —
I've reviewed your
application and it
mostly looks good.
There are a few
minor
things/questions
1. In Section 10,
please add any
permits/approval
that have been
12

obtained from
Durham. Specifically,
in Section E, question
4. You mentioned the
prior approval from
Durham City Planning
for the installation of
the shed.
2. Can you clarify
how you became
aware of the Buffer
Rules that apply to
the property? Did the
City of Durham
mention it when you
sought approval for
the pool? Which
department? Did
they mention the
Buffer Rules when
seeking approval for
the shed?
3. Please provide a
signature a date to
the application.
Mitigation
You've proposed
Permittee-
responsible
mitigation for the
2,054 square feet of
required mitigation.
This activity is
governed by the
Consolidate
Mitigation Rule. This
rule basically says you
need to plant 260
stems/acre of impact.
Therefore, 2,054 sq.
ft. = 0.047 acres.
0.047 acres = 12.22
stems. So 12 native
hardwood stems
would need to be
planted to offset the
13

buffer impacts.
Please add marks
(' 's or similar) to
the site plan showing
where these stems
will be planted and
what species. They
must be within the
stream buffer and on
your property.
To answer your
questions:
1. I've attached the
stream determination
done in 1998, that
show the area listed
on the plat as subject
to the rules as well as
the feature that runs
through your
property as subject. It
is curious why the
developer didn't
show that feature as
buffered on the
subdivision plat. It's
labeled as "Waters of
the US" which nearly
always means it
would be subject to
the buffered rules if
in a buffered basin.
I've been searching
our files to see if
there are other
permits that would
show the stream to
no avail.
2. It's likely that the
developer build the
open space area to
meet a City ordinance
for "tree save" area
or similar
requirement. We
14

wouldn't allow for
the developer to
impact one area and
conserve another as
the rules that
preserve the buffers
apply to both
features. In the
unlikely case that it
was authorized as
some sort of
developer mitigation,
we would have
permits, conservation
easements approved,
etc in our file which
we don't.
3. The deed
restriction must be
placed as part of any
stormwater
management built on
the property. So far,
you have proposed
splash pad to diffuse
flow before Zone 1,
so deed restriction
wouldn't be
necessary. I haven't
reviewed the
stormwater
calculations in detail,
but if for some
reason splash pads
weren't enough (they
likely are) and you
proposed a different
stormwater control
like a rain garden or
pond, you would be
required as part of
the approval to
restrict the deed so it
couldn't be removed
by a future owner.
I'll be working on this
today and let you
15

know if anything else
comes up.
Thanks,
Paul
Paul Wojoski
401 & Buffer
Permitting Branch
Division of Water
Resources
Department of
Environmental Quality
[phone] office
Paul.Woioskia-ncden
r.qov
512 N. Salisbury
Street (Archdale
Building), Suite 942-
F, Raleigh, NC 27604
1617 Mail Service
Center, Raleigh, NC
27699-1617
Email correspondence
to and from this address
is subject to the
North Carolina Public
Records Law and may
be disclosed to third
parties.
From: Leo Cruz
[mailto:leocruzl@gm
ail.com]
Sent: Thursday, July
16

25, 2019 11:52 PM
To: Wojoski, Paul A
<Paul.Woioski@ncde
nr.gov>
Subject: Re:
[External] Re: Cruz,
Leo - 1624 Crystal
Creek - Development
Plot Plan
Mrl External
email. Do not click links
or open attachments
unless you verify. SJas
all suspicious email
an attachment to
re ort.s am nc.
Hi Paul,
I completed the
major variance
application to the
best of my
knowledge and
hope that it is
complete. Please get
back to me as soon
as you get this on
Friday to work out
any questions
before the deadline.
Couple of things
1) When you found
that a stream
determination
inquiry was made
back in 1998, can
you reconfirm what
the outcome of that
inquiry was? After
looking at the
Autumn Ridge
Phase 2 and 3 Plat
info.pdf document,
it appears as though
17

the developer DID
mention a 50' buffer
rule, but it ONLY
applies to the
section of the
neighborhood that
is considered non -
developed land.
You can see the
notation at the
bottom of page 1
about the rule and
on page 2, towards
the top of the
diagram, you will
see the 50'
restriction (see
below as well)
<image002.jpg>
2) Is it possible that
the developer built
in the Open Space
and Tree Save
Area to compensate
for the properties on
Crystal Creek?
3) I don't feel
comfortable with
the following
declaration. If an
existing restriction
is not currently on
my deed, I don't
feel comfortable
voluntarily adding
restrictions
By your signature in
Section G of this
application, you certify
that all structural
stormwater BMPs
required by this
variance shall be
located in recorded
drainage easements,
that the easements will
run with the land, that
the easements cannot
18

be changed or deleted
without concurrence
from the State, and that
the easements will be
recorded prior to the
sale of any lot
- Leo
On 7/25/2019 5:23
PM, Wojoski, Paul
A wrote:
Hi
Leo —
woul
d try
to
help
with
the
mitig
ation
calcul
ation
s,
water
shed
classi
ficati
on,
etc,
but
you
will
need
to
provi
de
the
case
for
the
varia
nce
reque
19

st
(justif
icatio
n of
hards
hip)
and
the
specif
is
plans
and
desig
n.
ca n't
com
ment
as to
the
deed
restri
ction
s
(why
what
is
recor
ded),
but
the
rules
that
apply
to
the
strea
m are
state
laws.
Paul
Wojo
ski
401 &
Buffe
r
20

Permi
tting
Branc
h
Divisi
on of
Wate
r
Reso
urces
Depa
rtmen
t of
Envir
onme
ntal
Qualit
Y
(919)
707-
3631
office
Paul.
Woio
ski
ncde
nr.go
v
512
N.
Salis
bury
Stree
t
(Arch
dale
Buildi
ng),
Suite
942-
F,
Ralei
gh,
NC
2760
4
1617
Mail
Servi
21

ce
Cent
er,
Ralei
gh,
NC
2769
9-
1617
Email
corres
ponde
nce to
and
from
this
addre
ss is
subjec
t to
the
North
Caroli
na
Public
Recor
ds
Law
and
may
be
disclo
sed to
third
partie
S.
From
: Leo
Cruz
[mailt
o:leo
cruzl
@9m
ail.co
m]
Sent:
Thurs
day,
July
25,
2019
2:37
22

PM
To:
Wojo
ski,
Paul
A
<Paul
.Woo
oski
ncd
enr.g
ov>
Subje
ct:
Re:
[Exte
rnal]
Re:
Cruz,
Leo -
1624
Cryst
al
Creek
Devel
opme
nt
Plot
Plan
Extern
al
email.
Do
not
click
links
or
open
attach
ments
unless
you
verify.
Send
all
suspic
ious
email
23

Jan
My
unde
rstan
ding
was
that I
was
respo
nsibl
e for
fillin
g in
the
open
ende
d
quest
ions
and
you
woul
d
take
care
of
the
rest.
I will
work
on
the
highl
ighte
d
secti
ons
and
emai
1
them
to
24

you
by
tonig
ht.
On a
side
note,
altho
ugh
we
are
goin
g
throu
gh
this
proc
ess,
can
you
expla
in to
me
how
I am
bein
g
held
to a
regul
ation
that
is not
listed
on
my
deed
Than
ks
-Leo
On
Jul
25,
2019
25

, at
1:04
PM,
woj
oski,
Paul
A
<Pau
two
joski
nc
denr.
9 -Ov- >
wrot
e:
T
h
a
n
k
s
f
0
r
t
h
e
i
n
f
0
r
m
a
t
i
0
n
a
n
d
a
26

27

n
0
u
9
h
t
0
p
r
0
c
e
s
s
28

29

30

t
31

32

t
s
t
0
m
0
v
e
f
0
r
w
a
r
d
33

34

s
w
e
c
a
n
9
e
t
a
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
c
0
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
0
n
d
e
s
i
g
n
p
I
a
c
e
a
s
a
p
w
e
w
n
35

36

e
m
e
e
t
n
9
T
h
a
n
k
s
37

B
r
a
n
c
h
D
i
v
i
s
0
n
0
f
W
a
t
e
r
R
e
s
0
u
r
c
e
s
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
0
f
E
n
v
i
r
0
n
m
e
n
t
a
I
Q
u
a
I
38

v
9
1
9
7
0
7
S
39

F
1
6
1
40

N
C
2
7
6
9
9
1
6
1
7
41

a
n
d
f
r
0
m
t
h
i
s
a
d
d
r
e
s
s
i
s
s
u
b
1
e
c
t
t
0
t
h
e
N
0
r
t
h
c
a
r
0
i
n
a
P
u
b
c
R
e
c
0
r
d
s
L
a
w
a
n
d
m
a
Y
42

F
r
0
m
L
e
0
c
r
u
FA
re
43

W
e
d
n
e
s
d
a
Y
2
0
1
9
1
1
3
5
A
M
T
0
44

I
E
x
t
e
r
45

46

47

0
u
v
e
r
f
Y
s
e
n
d
a
I
I
s
u
s
P
i
c
i
0
u
s
e
m
a
i
I
a
s
a
n
a
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
t
0
r
e
P
0
r
t
48

Q
n
c
9
0
v
H
i
P
a
u
1
L
a
s
t
n
i
9
h
t
m
Y
w
i
f
e
a
n
d
I
c
r
e
a
t
e
a
s
c
a
e
49

d
r
e
P
1
i
c
a
0
f
t
h
e
i
m
P
a
c
t
a
t
t
a
c
h
e
d
W
e
t
r
i
e
d
P
1
a
c
i
n
g
t
h
e
P
0
0
1
50

a
51

P
i
t
0
u
t
0
f
z
0
n
e
1
L
e
t
m
e
k
n
0
w
i
f
Y
0
u
h
a
v
e
q
u
e
s
t
i
0
n
s
a
b
0
u
t
t
h
e
i
m
52

a
g
e
s
a
n
d
1
e
t
m
e
k
n
0
w
w
h
a
t
t
h
e
n
e
x
t
s
t
e
P
s
a
r
e
L
e
0
O
n
T
u
e
53

J
u
1
2
3
2
0
1
9
a
t
1
2
0
C
r
u
z
1
e
0
c
r
u
z
1
m
a
i
1
c
0
m
w
r
0
t
54

e
H
i
P
a
u
1
T
h
a
n
k
s
f
0
r
c
0
m
i
n
g
0
u
t
t
0
d
a
Y
t
0
m
e
e
t
w
i
t
h
m
e
a
n
d
h
55

O
P
e
f
u
1
1
Y
w
e
c
a
n
9
e
t
a
P
O
s
i
t
i
v
e
O
u
t
c
O
m
e
I
h
a
v
e
a
t
t
a
c
h
e
d
t
h
e
m
a
56

i
0
r
v
a
r
i
a
n
c
e
a
P
P
1
i
c
a
t
i
0
n
P
1
e
a
s
e
1
e
t
m
e
k
n
0
w
w
h
a
t
e
1
s
e
I
n
e
e
d
57

t
0
d
0
t
0
g
e
t
t
h
i
s
m
0
v
i
n
9
f
0
r
w
a
r
d
T
h
a
n
k
s
L
e
0
O
n
w
e
d
58

1
7
2
0
1
9
a
t
2
5
2
P
M
L
e
0
C
r
u
z
1
e
0
c
r
u
z
1
9
m
a
i
1
c
0
m
w
r
0
t
e
� � L
59

e
0
P
W
E
60

C
a
<19990025 Ver
1—COMPLETE
FILE 19980105.pdf
<Stream Determination - 1624 Crystal Creek
Drive.pdf>
61