20060447 Ver 3_01_Individual Appliction_2020-02-03_20200205

�� MCADAMS
February 3, 2020
Mr. James Lastinger
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
RE: Individual Permit Application
Olde Towne Master Plan Community
Raleigh, Wake County, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Lastinger and Mr. Wojoski:
INDIVIDUAL PERMIT > HLE-18020
Mr. Paul Wojoski
NC Division of Water Resources
401 & Buffer Permitting Branch
512 N. Salisbury St.
Archdale Bldg. 9th Floor
Raleigh, NC 27604
On behalf of Olde Towne WEH, LP, we are applying for a Individual Permit from the US Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) and an Individual Water Quality Certification and Riparian Buffer Authorization from the NC Division of
Water Resources (DWR) for proposed impacts to jurisdictional waters and Neuse buffers associated with the project
known as Olde Towne Master Plan Community. The project area is located in the northeast quadrant of S. New
Hope Road and Rock Quarry Road in Raleigh, North Carolina. The project lies within the Neuse River Basin. The
following attachments are included as part of this permit application:
> Application for Department of the Army Permit (Eng Form 4345,
> Individual Permit Application Report) and
> Check $570 (DWR only)
Consideration of this project is greatly appreciated. If you should have any questions or require additional
information, please do not hesitate to contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
MCADAMS
4
Jennifer Burdette
Senior Environmental Consultant
cc: Eric Rifkin, Olde Towne WEH, LP
creating experiences through experience 1 of 1

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
APPLICATION FOR DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT
OMB APPROVAL 003
EXPIRES: 28 FEBRURUARY RY 20 2013
33 CFR 325. The proponent agency is CECW-CO-R.
Public reporting for this collection of information is estimated to average 11 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching
existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding
this burden estimate or any other aspect of the collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Department of Defense,
Washington Headquarters, Executive Services and Communications Directorate, Information Management Division and to the Office of Management and
Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0710-0003). Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be
subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. Please DO NOT
RETURN your form to either of those addresses. Completed applications must be submitted to the District Engineer having jurisdiction over the location of
the proposed activity.
PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT
Authorities: Rivers and Harbors Act, Section 10, 33 USC 403; Clean Water Act, Section 404, 33 USC 1344; Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries
Act, Section 103, 33 USC 1413; Regulatory Programs of the Corps of Engineers; Final Rule 33 CFR 320-332. Principal Purpose: Information provided on
this form will be used in evaluating the application for a permit. Routine Uses: This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other
federal, state, and local government agencies, and the public and may be made available as part of a public notice as required by Federal law. Submission
of requested information is voluntary, however, if information is not provided the permit application cannot be evaluated nor can a permit be issued. One set
of original drawings or good reproducible copies which show the location and character of the proposed activity must be attached to this application (see
sample drawings and/or instructions) and be submitted to the District Engineer having jurisdiction over the location of the proposed activity. An application
that is not completed in full will be returned.
(ITEMS 1 THRU 4 TO BE FILLED BY THE CORPS)
1. APPLICATION NO.
2. FIELD OFFICE CODE
3. DATE RECEIVED
4. DATE APPLICATION COMPLETE
(ITEMS BELOW TO BE FILLED BYAPPLICANT)
5. APPLICANT'S NAME
8. AUTHORIZED AGENT'S NAME AND TITLE (agent is not required)
First - Eric Middle - Last- Rifkin
First - Jennifer Middle -A. Last - Burdette
Company - Olde Towne WEH, LP
Company - McAdams Company
E-mail [e-mail]
E-mail [e-mail]
6. APPLICANT'S ADDRESS:
9. AGENT'S ADDRESS:
Address- 56 Hunter Street
Address- 2905 Meridian Parkway
City - Apex State - NC Zip - 27502 Country -USA
City - Durham State - NC Zip - 27713 Country -USA
7. APPLICANT'S PHONE NOs. w/AREA CODE
10. AGENTS PHONE NOs. w/AREA CODE
a. Residence b. Business c. Fax
a. Residence b. Business c. Fax
NA 919-387-1885 NA
NA 919-361-5000 NA
STATEMENT OF AUTHORIZATION
11. 1 hereby authorize, Jennifer A. Burdette to act in my behalf as my agent in the processing of this application and to furnish, upon request,
supplemental information in support of this permit application.
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE
NAME, LOCATION, AND DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT OR ACTIVITY
12. PROJECT NAME OR TITLE (see instructions)
Olde Towne Master Plan Community
13. NAME OF WATERBODY, IF KNOWN (if applicable)
14. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS (if applicable)
Walnut Creek & Big Branch
Address NE quadrant of S. New Hope & Rock Quarry Road
Raleigh NC
15. LOCATION OF PROJECT
Latitude: �N 35.743344 Longitude: -W 78.554096
Latitude:
City - State- Zip -
OTHER LOCATION DESCRIPTIONS, IF KNOWN (see instructions)
State Tax Parcel ID See application attachment Municipality Raleigh
Section - NA Township - St. Mary's Range - NA
ENG FORM 4345, OCT 2012 PREVIOUS EDITIONS ARE OBSOLETE. Page 1 of 3

17. DIRECTIONS TO THE SITE
From Raleigh, take the I-440 beltline to I-87 east. Take S. New Hope Road south to Rock Quarry Road. The site is located in the northeast
quadrant of the intersection of S. New Hope Road and Rock Quarry Road.
18. Nature of Activity (Description of project, include all features)
See application attachment
19. Project Purpose (Describe the reason or purpose of the project, see instructions)
The purpose of the proposed Olde Towne Master Plan Community project is to create a large-scale residential community with a complete
range of housing options, a commercial district, recreational amenities and necessary infrastructure such as roadways, utilities and
stormwater management facilities. This project is needed to meet the current demand for residential housing mixed with commercial space
near downtown Raleigh. Therefore, the project is not water dependent.
The overall purpose of this project is to provide a residential community that balances community goals and market dynamics for Raleigh
and the surrounding areas.
USE BLOCKS 20-23 IF DREDGED AND/OR FILL MATERIAL IS TO BE DISCHARGED
20. Reason(s) for Discharge
Fill material, culverts, and riprap will be placed in stream channels and wetlands to construct road and utility crossings, stormwater BMPs,
and suitable development sites for the residential and recreational components of the project.
21. Type(s) of Material Being Discharged and the Amount of Each Type in Cubic Yards:
Type Type Type
Amount in Cubic Yards Amount in Cubic Yards Amount in Cubic Yards
Soil
22. Surface Area in Acres of Wetlands or Other Waters Filled (see instructions)
Acres See IP Application Report
or
Linear Feet
23. Description of Avoidance, Minimization, and Compensation (see instructions)
See IP Application Report
ENG FORM 4345, OCT 2012 Page 2 of 3

24. Is Any Portion of the Work Already Complete? �X Yes F—]No IF YES, DESCRIBE THE COMPLETED WORK
See IP Application Report
25. Addresses of Adjoining Property Owners, Lessees, Etc., Whose Property Adjoins the Waterbody (if more than can be entered here, please attach a supplemental list).
a. Address- See IP Application Report
City - State - Zip -
b. Address -
City - State - Zip -
c. Address -
City - State - Zip -
d. Address -
City - State - Zip -
e. Address -
City - State - Zip -
26. List of Other Certificates or Approvals/Denials received from other Federal, State, or Local Agencies for Work Described in This Application.
AGENCY TYPE APPROVAL* IDENTIFICATION DATE APPLIED DATE APPROVED DATE DENIED
NUMBER
See IP Permit
Application Report
* Would include but is not restricted to zoning, building, and flood plain permits
27. Application is hereby made for permit or permits to authorize the work described in this application. I certify that this information in this application is
complete and accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to undertake the work described herein or am acting as the duly authorized agent of the
applicant.
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE SIGNATURE OF AGENT DATE
The Application must be signed by the person who desires to undertake the proposed activity (applicant) or it may be signed by a duly
authorized agent if the statement in block 11 has been filled out and signed.
18 U.S.C. Section 1001 provides that: Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States
knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up any trick, scheme, or disguises a material fact or makes any false, fictitious or
fraudulent statements or representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false, fictitious or
fraudulent statements or entry, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years or both.
ENG FORM 4345, OCT 2012 Page 3 of 3

'' MCADAMS INDIVIDUAL PERMIT APPLICATION > OLDE TOWNE
OLDE TOWNE MASTER PLAN COMMUNITY
INDIVIDUAL PERMIT APPLICATION REPORT
PREPARED FOR:
OLDE TOWNE WEH, LP
ATTN: MR. ERIC RIFKIN
PREPARED BY:
MCADAMS COMPANY
PROJECT #: HLE-18020
'J
MCADAMS
FEBRUARY 3, 2020
creating experiences through experience 2905 Meridian Parkway, Durham, NC 27713 / 919. 361. 5000

'J MCADAMS INDIVIDUAL PERMIT APPLICATION > OLDE TOWNE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVESUMMARY.........................................................................................................................................6
SECTION 1.0 PROJECT INFORMATION...................................................................................................................9
SECTION 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION...................................................................................................................10
2.1 BACKGROUND.............................................................................................................................................
11
2.2 ZONING........................................................................................................................................................
11
2.3 ROAD & GREENWAY REQUIREMENTS/IMPROVEMENTS............................................................................
12
2.3.1 ONSITE..............................................................................................................................................
12
2.3.2 OFFSITE.............................................................................................................................................
12
2.4 DEVELOPMENT PLAN & SCHEDULE.............................................................................................................
12
SECTION 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION...................................................................................................................13
3.1 SITE LOCATION............................................................................................................................................
13
3.2 SITE CONDITIONS.........................................................................................................................................
13
3.3 PERMIT HISTORY..........................................................................................................................................
14
3.4 JURISDICTIONAL WATERS AND WETLANDS + RIPARIAN BUFFERS..............................................................
15
3.4.1 DELINEATION AND VERIFICATION....................................................................................................
15
3.4.2 ASSESSMENTS..................................................................................................................................
15
SECTION4.0 PURPOSE AND NEED.......................................................................................................................17
SECTION 5.0 ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS..................................................................................................................17
5.1 SITE SELECTION............................................................................................................................................
17
5.1.1 OLDE TOWNE....................................................................................................................................
17
5.1.2 RIVER TOWNE...................................................................................................................................
18
5.1.3 401/BUFFALOE ROAD.......................................................................................................................
18
5.1.4 SWIFT CREEK STATION.....................................................................................................................
18
5.2 PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES.....................................................................................................
19
5.2.1 PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE................................................................................................................
19
5.2.2 NO -ACTION ALTERNATIVE................................................................................................................
20
5.2.3 OFF -SITE ALTERNATIVES...................................................................................................................
20
5.2.3.1 RIVER TOWNE...................................................................................................................... 20
5.2.3.2 401/BUFFALOE ROAD.......................................................................................................... 21
5.2.4 LEAST ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGING PRACTICABLE ALTERNATIVE(LEDPA)................................... 22
creating experiences through experience 2 of 28

'J MCADAMS INDIVIDUAL PERMIT APPLICATION > OLDE TOWNE
SECTION 6.0 AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION...................................................................................................22
6.1 ON -SITE ALTERNATIVES...............................................................................................................................
22
6.2 PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE JURISDICTIONAL + RIPARIAN BUFFER IMPACTS ...............................................
23
SECTION 7.0 COMPENSATORY MITIGATION........................................................................................................24
SECTION 8.0 ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT.............................................................................................................26
SECTION 9.0 NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT........................................................................................27
SECTION 10.0 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT.....................................................................................................27
10.1 PEAK RUNOFF CONTROL REQUIREMENTS................................................................................................
27
10.2 POLLUTANT AND NUTRIENT CONTROL REQUIREMENTS..........................................................................
27
SECTION 11.0 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS.................................................................................................................27
SECTION 12.0 CONCLUSIONS..............................................................................................................................28
creating experiences through experience 3 of 28

'' MCADAMS
INDIVIDUAL PERMIT APPLICATION > OLDE TOWNE
FIGURES
Figure 1.
Vicinity Map
Figure 2.
Project Area Parcels & Adjacent Properties Map
Figures 3-9.
Overall Master Plan & Amenity Vision
Figure 10.
Overall Master Plan Phases
Figure 11.
City of Raleigh Street Plan Excerpt
Figure 12.
Proposed Greenway Exhibit
Figure 13.
USGS Topographic Map
Figure 14.
2017 Aerial Map
Figure 15.
Wake County WEB Soil Survey Map
Figure 16.
Historic Wake County Soil Survey Map (1970)
Figure 17.
NC Floodplain Mapping Program
Figure 18.
March 2007 Aerial Map
Figure 19.
Delineation Map
Figure 20.
Stream & Wetland Assessment Map
Figure 21.
Alternative Sites Location Map
Figure 22.
River Towne Site Plan
Figure 23.
River Towne Sewer Expansion
Figure 24.
401/Buffaloe Road Site Assessment
Figure 25.
401/Buffaloe Road Sewer Expansion
Figure 26.
Original Site Development Plan
Figure 27.
Alternative Site Development Plan
Figure 28.
Overall Impact Area Map
Figure 29-31.
Grading Plan
Figure 32-42.
Impact Area Insets (A-K)
Figure 43.
Road Crossing Cross-section
Figure 44.
Stream Realignment Details
TABLES
Table 1.
Master Plan
Table 2.
Assessment Summary
Table 3.
Site Selection Criteria
Table 4.
Alternative Analysis Summary
Table 5.
Federally Protected Species for the Project Study Area
ATTACHMENTS
A. Agent Authorization Forms
B. Adjacent Property Owner Names + Addresses
C. Draft Transportation Impact Analysis Excerpt
D. Nationwide Permit 12 & 39 (SAW-2006-20287-292 - 12/15/2005)
E. 401 Water Quality Certification (#06-0447 - 6/30/2006)
F. NCEEP Receipt (1/31/2007)
G. 401 Water Quality Certification (#06-0447 V2 - 11/6/2009)
H. NCDWR Close -Out Letter (#06-0447 V2 - 12/2/2015)
creating experiences through experience 4 of 28

'' MCADAMS INDIVIDUAL PERMIT APPLICATION > OLDE TOWNE
ATTACHMENTS (continued)
I. Olde Towne Residential Development NCDEQ Neuse Buffer Determination Letter (4/10/19)
J. Additional Wetland Data Forms
K. Commercial District NCDEQ Neuse Buffer Determination Letter (12/3/19)
L. Wetland and Stream Assessments
M. Jurisdictional Stream and Wetland + Riparian Buffer Impact Tables
N. Wetland + Riparian Buffer Mitigation Statements of Availability
O. Stream Realignment Monitoring Plan
P. Protected Species Review Package + Correspondence
Q. State Historic Preservation Office Letter
creating experiences through experience 5 of 28

'J MCADAMS INDIVIDUAL PERMIT APPLICATION > OLDIE TOWNE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this Individual Permit application is to demonstrate that the proposed Olde Towne development
plan is the Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative (LEDPA) that meets the project's purpose to
create a large-scale master -planned community and that fulfills the need to meet the current demand for residential
housing mixed with commercial space near downtown Raleigh. Olde Towne is a proposed 574-acre master planned
community comprised of five residential sub -communities, a commercial district, amenity center, greenways, a
multi -use path, a road network and public gathering spaces located at the northeast quadrant of S. New Hope Road
and Rock Quarry Road in southeast Raleigh, North Carolina (Figures 1-9).
Early construction for the project, which was originally planned as a golf course community, focused on Phase 1 of
the development and ceased in 2008 before any structures or roads were constructed (Figure 10). The applicant has
obtained approval to update the zoning of the property to allow up to 360 multi -family units, including age
restricted housing. The City of Raleigh's Street Plan requires a two-lane, undivided avenue with an on -street
greenway from S. New Hope Road across the project site to Barwell Road (Figure 11). A second greenway trail will
connect from this through road to Holiday Drive on the northeast side of Olde Towne (Figure 12). A Transportation
Impact Analysis (TIA) required by the re -zone amendment established the road improvements necessary to
accommodate the current and future impacts of the development as it progresses through the phased development
(see Attachment C for details).
A stream and wetland delineation within the project site owned by Olde Towne WEH, LP was performed in late 2018
by McAdams staff and was field verified by Ross Sullivan of the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) on April 24,
2019. Jurisdictional areas within the commercial district and off -site road improvement area were delineated by
McAdams staff in the fall of 2019 but have not been verified by the USACE (Figure 19). Determinations of streams
subject to the Neuse Riparian Buffer Rule were issued by the NC Department of Environmental Quality on April 10,
2019 for the parcels owned by Olde Towne WEH, LP (Attachment 1) and December 3, 2019 for the commercial
district (Attachment K). The overall project site, including the commercial district and area necessary for road
improvements, contains approximately 20,804 linear feet of jurisdictional streams, 3.3 acres of open water and 57
acres of jurisdictional wetlands. No isolated waters or wetlands were identified on the project site. Wetlands and
streams were evaluated using the North Carolina Wetland and Stream Assessment Methods (NCWAM, NCSAM),
respectively, at each proposed impact area (Attachment Q. Proposed stream and wetland mitigation ratios range
from 0.5:1 to 2:1 depending on each impact area's NCWAM or NCSAM rating.
The preferred alternative (Olde Towne) and three other alternative sites were analyzed using the following site
selection criteria: project size, proximity to target market, proximity to utilities, zoning and cost. The locations of
these sites are provided on Figure 21.
The preferred alternative, no -action alternative and economically viable off -site alternatives were evaluated to
determine the Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative (LEDPA). The following environmental
factors were used to evaluate the practicable alternatives identified: total stream impacts (LF), total wetland impacts
creating experiences through experience 6 of 28

'J MCADAMS INDIVIDUAL PERMIT APPLICATION > OLDIE TOWNE
(AC), potential cumulative impact (high/medium/low), potential impact to Federally listed species (yes/no), and
potential impact to historic resources (yes/no).
Other factors evaluated were project size (high/medium/low) and whether the site had been previously graded
(yes/no). Considering the seven factors described above, the applicant's preferred alternative is the least
environmentally damaging practicable alternative (LEDPA) that would meet the overall project purpose.
The LEDPA site development plan avoids and minimizes impacts to streams and wetlands to the maximum extent
practicable while achieving the project purpose and need. Approximately 700 LF of stream and 2.5 AC of wetland
impacts shown on the original Olde Towne site plan from September 2018 were avoided by shifting and
reconfiguring the entrance road from S. New Hope Road and reconfiguring the site plan to avoid wetlands (Figure
26). An Alternative Site Development Plan (Figure 27) further minimized impacts but was not the LEDPA due to 1.64
AC of wetland and 1,165 LF of stream impacts necessitated by four additional road crossings required by the City of
Raleigh. A waiver of these requirements will be requested to avoid 0.207 AC of wetland and 550 LF of stream
impacts.
The final site plan (Figures 28-31) minimizes and avoids jurisdictional stream and wetland and riparian buffer
impacts to the maximum practicable extent. The proposed impacts are depicted in Figures 32-42. Four road
crossings (Impact Areas A, B, D and E) are required to provide safe egress from all portions of the site; these impacts
are unavoidable due to three tributaries bisecting the site. All culverts will be designed to maintain the dimension,
pattern and profile of the stream and will buried one foot below the stream bed to maintain aquatic life passage
(Figure 43). Mass grading is proposed at Impact Areas C, E, F and G; these impacts are impractical to avoid due to
the need for a functional road network. A retaining wall will minimize wetland impacts at Impact Area C. Road
improvements at the intersection of Rock Quarry Road and S. New Hope/Jones Sausage Road and widening of Rock
Quarry Road necessitate the stream, wetland and buffer impacts in Impact Areas H and I, including the relocation of
a portion of Stream C. A monitoring plan to ensure stability of the realigned stream and planting success is provided
in Attachment N. The preferred alternative as proposed would result in the following total impacts, which are
summarized in Attachment M:
• 368 LF of permanent, perennial stream loss,
• 247 LF of permanent, intermittent stream loss,
• 431 LF of permanent, perennial stream impact with no loss (riprap dissipators/stream realignment),
• 37 LF of permanent, intermittent stream impact with no loss (riprap dissipators/stream realignment),
• 47 LF of temporary, perennial stream impact,
• 18 LF of temporary, intermittent stream impact,
• 1.154 AC of permanent, wetland impact and
• 0.012 AC of temporary, wetland impact.
A total of 580 LF of stream credits and 1.9835 AC of riparian wetland credits are proposed to mitigate the project's
impact to these jurisdictional resources. Proposed mitigation ratios for each impact are listed in Table L1
creating experiences through experience 7 of 28

'J MCADAMS INDIVIDUAL PERMIT APPLICATION > OLDIE TOWNE
(Attachment M). Before the original project was abandoned, payment was made for 300 stream credits and 0.4752
AC riparian wetland credits; 0.283 AC of wetland impacts with an approved mitigation ratio of 1:1 were completed
at that time. Therefore, 0.1922 AC of wetland and 300 LF of stream mitigation credits paid for this project remains.
An additional 280 LF of stream and 1.7913 AC of wetland credits must be acquired to mitigate impacts for the
proposed project. Buffer mitigation is required for Impact Areas A and E due to the required width of the mixed -use
street from S. New Hope Road to Barwell Road and for Impact Area B because the road alignment was adjusted to
avoid wetland impacts, resulting in additional buffer impacts. The applicant proposes to purchase stream, wetland
and buffer credits from a private mitigation bank prior development of each phase of the project.
McAdams conducted assessments of the projects potential effect on federally protected species and historical
resources. The US Fish and Wildlife (USFWS) concurred with biological opinions of "may affect, not likely to
adversely affect" for Michaux's sumac, Neuse River waterdog, Carolina madtom, Atlantic pigtoe, and dwarf
wedgemussel, and "no effect" for the red -cockaded woodpecker within the residential portion of the project based
on a review package submitted to the USFWS on September 9, 2019. Additional habitat evaluations were conducted
on the commercial portion of the project in October 2019, after the decision was made to include this portion with
the residential portion of the project. The addition of the commercial site did not change the biological opinions for
any of the listed species. Coordination with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) resulted in a
recommendation to conduct a comprehensive archaeological survey due to a high probability for pre -colonial
American Indian sites to be present given the property's proximity to Walnut Creek and four mapped structures that
may contain associated archaeological remains. The SHPO concluded that the project will not have an effect on any
historic properties.
Per City of Raleigh regulations, stormwater management on this site shall address two primary issues: (1) peak
discharge rates and (2) water quality management. Eleven proposed stormwater control measures will be designed
to attenuate peak flows such that post -development peak flow rates are reduced below the pre -development rates
in the 2- and 10-year storm events and meet the water quality design requirements in the NC Stormwater BMP
Manual.
Cumulative impacts anticipated by the Olde Towne development include additional commercial and retail
development in the area around the project site to serve the large number of residents anticipated. This additional
development is not anticipated to impact downstream water quality.
In conclusion, the site selection and alternatives analyses resulted in the selection of the preferred alternative as the
LEDPA. Impacts to jurisdictional streams, wetlands and buffers have been minimized to the maximum extent
practicable by altering the original site design to reduce road crossings, installing culverts to maintain aquatic life
passage, and minimizing mass grading impacts to the greatest practicable extent. The resulting site design allows the
project purpose and need to be fulfilled while minimizing impacts to Water of the U.S.
creating experiences through experience 8 of 28

'' MCADAMS
INDIVIDUAL PERMIT APPLICATION > OLDE TOWNE
1.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
Applicant Information: Eric Rifkin, Assistant Vice President
Olde Towne WEH, LP
56 Hunter Street
Apex, NC 27502
Email - [e-mail]
Telephone - [phone]
Authorized Agent Information
Jennifer A. Burdette
McAdams Company
2905 Meridian Parkway
Durham, NC 27713
Email — burdette(@mcadamsco.com
Telephone — [phone]
Project Name: Olde Towne Master Plan Community
Name of Waterbody: Walnut Creek & Big Branch (HUC — 03020201)
Project Street Address: NE quadrant of S. New Hope & Rock Quarry Road (Figure 1— Vicinity Map)
Location of Project: Latitude N 35.743344' Longitude W 78.554096°
State Tax Parcel IDs for Individual Tracts:
Tract ID
PIN
Size (ac)
Owner
A
1732073161
69.5
Olde Towne WEH, LP
B
1732373509
54.1
Olde Towne WEH, LP
C
1732062346
14.4
Olde Towne WEH, LP
D
1732372031
40.6
Olde Towne WEH, LP
E
1732150043
87.5
Olde Towne WEH, LP
F
1732268167
33.6
Olde Towne WEH, LP
G
1732254316
24.7
Olde Towne WEH, LP
H
1732358949
23.4
Olde Towne WEH, LP
1
1732451381
12.4
Olde Towne WEH, LP
J
1732355204
11.6
Olde Towne WEH, LP
K
1732346972
11.4
Olde Towne WEH, LP
L
1732344507
15.8
Olde Towne WEH, LP
M
1722846111
6.5
Olde Towne WEH, LP
N
1732040116
24.9
Olde Towne WEH, LP
creating experiences through experience 9 of 28

'J MCADAMS
Tract ID
PIN
0
1732111958
P
1722939573
Q
1722937105
R
1722848717
S
1722945976
T
1732041995
Total (20)
INDIVIDUAL PERMIT APPLICATION > OLDE TOWNE
Size (ac)
Owner
37.7
Olde Towne WEH, LP
19.4
Olde Towne WEH, LP
27.1
Olde Towne WEH, LP
17.2
OT Retail East Company, LLC
22.2
LOBRO, LLC
19.3
OT Retail East Company, LLC
574
Figure 2 — Project Area Parcels & Adjacent Properties Map shows the individual parcels that make up the project
and key for adjacent properties. Agent authorizations forms for the applicant/owner and other property owners
included within the project are provided in Attachment A. Names and address of adjacent property owners are
provided in Attachment B.
Municipality: Raleigh
Township: St. Mary's
List of Other Certificates or Approvals/Denials received from other Federal, State, or Local Agencies:
Agency
Type Approval
Identification
Number
Date
Applied*
Date Date
Approved Denied
City of Raleigh
Rezoning
Z-7-2018
2018-03-06
2018-09-04 NA
...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................._....................................................................................................................
City of Raleigh
Phase 1 Mass Grading
MASS-0070-2019
2019-03-28
2019-09-17 NA
Cityof Raleigh
g
Phase 1 Preliminary
Y
2019-05
2020-01
( )
Subdivision Plan
NCDWR
401 W C Buffer
Q /
06-0447 V3
2020-02
( )
Authorization
...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................._....................................................................................................................
NCDOT
Off -site TIA
(2020-02)
(2020-05)
Improvements
...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................._....................................................................................................................
City of Raleigh
Phase 1 Final
(2020-02)
(2020-04)
Subdivision Plat
Cityof Raleigh
g
Phase 2 Master
2020-09
( )
2021-03
( )
Subdivision &
Infrastructure
*(Date) = anticipated submittal/approval date
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Olde Towne is a large-scale, master plan community comprised of five residential sub -communities, a commercial
district and a central amenity center combined with greenways, a multi -use path, a road network and public spaces
creating experiences through experience 10 of 28

'J MCADAMS INDIVIDUAL PERMIT APPLICATION > OLDIE TOWNE
designed to facilitate community connections (Figures 3-9 — Overall Master Plan & Amenity Vision). The five sub -
communities will provide a complete range of residential dwelling options including single-family homes, duplexes,
townhomes and apartments. Two sub -communities are planned as single-family housing developments including
some duplexes. The largest of these is a high -density subdivision. A conservation subdivision, with a larger
percentage of the total project area dedicated to common open space, is planned for the second sub -community.
One apartment and two townhouse developments make up the remaining three sub -communities proposed for the
project. Table 1 lists the types and number of units planned for each proposed sub -community.
Table 1. Master Plan
Sub -community
Development Pod - Type
Units
Meadow Village
1— Conservation Subdivision
74 Duplex Units (37 Buildings)
88 Single-family Homes
Hilltop Townes
2 & 3 - Townhomes
225
Knollridge Apartments
4 - Apartments
360 (15 Buildings)
Cobblestone Cove
5 & 6 - Townhomes
255
Hamlet Green
7 — Single -Family Homes
633
This master plan community also includes a commercial district, called Crossroad Market, that is owned and will be
developed by others. Crossroad Market shares the entrance from S. New Hope Road, and stormwater from this
outparcel will be treated by stormwater control measures (SCMs) located within the residential development area of
Olde Towne.
2.1 BACKGROUND
Olde Towne was originally planned as a golf course community. Construction was in progress but ceased in 2008
during the economic recession. Early construction was focused on what was then referred to as Olde Towne
Phase 1. This was generally the area west of the north/south stream feature that runs from the western terminus of
Royal Acres Road in the central south portion of the site due north to Walnut Creek. The overall master plan
rendering shows two phases of development as currently envisioned (Figure 10); these phases are comparable to
the plan in 2008.
The previous developer/owner had recorded City of Raleigh Tree Conservation areas for the previously entitled
master planned community. That deeded and recorded tree conservation, in concert with the current, updated
jurisdictional determinations of streams and wetlands, allowed for the current developers to obtain a mass grading
permit for those areas outside of the environmental features and required conservation areas (Phase 1).
2.2 ZONING
Olde Towne was zoned in 2017 to a base residential zoning (R-10) district with conditional uses by PNC Bank. In the
rezoning, there were conditions placed on the development capping the total number of units to 1,700 with a
maximum of 300 that could be multifamily and a portion that must be age restricted (55 years and older). That
creating experiences through experience 11 of 28

'J MCADAMS INDIVIDUAL PERMIT APPLICATION > OLDIE TOWNE
rezoning posed challenges with the current applicant's desire to provide a mix of uses and affordable products for
this region. As such, the applicant obtained approval for an updated zoning (Re -zone Amendment) that allows up to
360 multi -family units and the age restricted portions to be located in other phases and subphases of Olde Towne.
2.3 ROAD & GREENWAY REQUIREMENTS/IMPROVEMENTS
2.3.1 ONSITE
The City of Raleigh's Street Plan, updated August 4, 2015, calls for a mixed -use street from S. New Hope Road across
the project site to Barwell Road. This proposed road is required to be a two-lane, undivided avenue with an on -
street greenway. Figure 11 shows the area of the project site on an excerpt from the City's Street Plan. A second
greenway trail is planned from this through road north along the eastern most road network and connecting to
Holiday Drive. Proposed greenway trail access and routes along with a typical cross-section of an on -street greenway
are shown on Figure 12.
2.3.2 OFFSITE
As required by the re -zone amendment, a Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) was performed by Ramey & Kemp
and Associates to establish the road improvements necessary to accommodate the current and future impacts of
the development as it progresses through the phased development. These recommendations from the draft TIA
require the following off -site road improvements for full build -out of the project and are provided in Attachment C:
> Widen the southeast side of S. New Hope Road from the project site's entrance (Site Drive #1) south to its
intersection with Rock Quarry Road,
> Widen the northwest side of S. New Hope Road for approximately 375 feet from its intersection with Rock
Quarry Road,
> Widen the southeast side of Jones Sausage Road for approximately 360 feet from its intersection with Rock
Quarry Road,
> Minor widening in the western quadrant of the intersection of Jones Sausage Road and Rock Quarry Road, and
> Widen the northeast side of Rock Quarry Road from Site Drive #3 to the its intersection with S. New Hope
Road/Jones Sausage Road.
2.4 DEVELOPMENT PLAN & SCHEDULE
As discussed above, a Re -zone Amendment and Phase 1 Mass Grading Permit have been issued for the project.
There are no jurisdictional waters or riparian buffers within the area of this permit. A Preliminary Subdivision Plan
for Phase 1 was submitted in May 2019 and is anticipated to be approved in January 2020. The only jurisdictional
waters and riparian buffer impacts required for Phase 1 are related to the off -site road improvements required by
the TIA for this phase. Pending issuance of an Individual Permit and Water Quality Certification, concurrent
construction drawings for these improvements are anticipated to be submitted February 2020 for an anticipated
approval in May. Submission and approval of the Final Subdivision Plat for Phase 1 follows the same general
timeframe. Master Plan and Infrastructure for Phase 2 is planned to be submitted in September 2020 with approval
anticipated by March 2021.
creating experiences through experience 12 of 28

'J MCADAMS INDIVIDUAL PERMIT APPLICATION > OLDIE TOWNE
Typical construction equipment will be used consisting of excavators, graders, bulldozers, front end loaders, dump
trucks and pump around equipment. Due to the presence of shallow rock, blasting may be necessary in some areas.
W1=4111 9 4 11*14.112 9 W L11
3.1 SITE LOCATION
The proposed Olde Towne Master Plan Community site (project site) is located on the southeast side of Raleigh in
Wake County, North Carolina. This 574-acre site is bordered by Walnut Creek to the north, S. New Hope Road to the
west, Rock Quarry Road to the southwest and residential properties along Holiday Drive and Barwell Road to the
east and southeast. Figure 13 depicts the location of the property on the US Geological Survey (USGS) Garner and
Raleigh East, NC 7.5-minute quadrangle topographic maps.
3.2 SITE CONDITIONS
The project site was partially developed for a planned residential golf community; however, the project was
abandoned after 2008 before any structures or roads were constructed. Alterations to the site that remain include
areas graded for lots and roads, installed and uninstalled sewer and stormwater pipes, stormwater control facilities,
tree protection fencing, sediment and erosion control fencing, and two 48-inch bottomless arch culverts for golf cart
crossings.
The previously disturbed areas across the site now primarily consist of early successional herbaceous vegetation
mixed with stands of young loblolly pines (Pinus taeda). A power transmission line runs generally along South New
Hope Road north -south across the project site. The northern project area contains a forested floodplain along
Walnut Creek. The undisturbed areas in the northeast portion of the project area are forested with mature
hardwoods. Uplands are vegetated by white oak (Quercus alba), southern red oak (Quercus falcata), hickory (Carya),
American beech (Fagus grandiflora), sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua), loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) and tulip
poplar (Liridendron tulipifera). Wetlands are vegetated by red maple (Acer rubrum), tulip poplar (Liridendron
tulipifera), sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua) and ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana). The existing site conditions are
shown on the attached 2017 Aerial Map (Figure 14).
Situated in the Piedmont Physiographic Province of the state, topography of the project site consists of gently rolling
hills with side slopes primarily ranging from 2 to 10 percent; some areas, mainly along Walnut Creek, are as steep as
25 percent. Walnut Creek and its floodplain form the northern border of the project site. Elevations on the project
site range from 170 to 300 feet above mean sea level.
Soil series mapped by the NRCS on the property are Augusta fine sandy loam, Chewacla and Wehadkee soils, Helena
sandy loam, Rawlings -Rion complex, Udorthents loamy, Wake-Rolesville complex, Wedowee sandy loam and
Wedowee -Saw complex. Figure 15 shows the subject property overlaid with the Wake County soil map units
obtained from the Natural Resource Conservation Service WEB Soil Survey. The most recently published Wake
County Soil Survey map (1970) is provided for Neuse River Riparian Buffer rule applicability (Figure 16).
creating experiences through experience 13 of 28

'J MCADAMS INDIVIDUAL PERMIT APPLICATION > OLDIE TOWNE
The most abundant soil series within the project area are Rawlings -Rion complex, Udorthents loamy, Wake-
Rolesville complex and Chewacla and Wehadkee soils. Areas of the site that were graded as part of the abandoned
development project are now mapped as Udorthents loamy. Rawlings -Rion and Wake-Rolesville complexes are well
drained soils found in upland areas and the uppermost portions of stream valleys. Chewacla and Wehadkee soils are
found on the floodplain of Walnut Creek and lower stream valleys.
Walnut Creek flows east across the northern boundary of the project site. A FEMA 100-year floodplain is mapped
along Walnut Creek (Figure 17 — NC Floodplain Mapping Program) and includes a contiguous bottomland hardwood
wetland that abuts the stream. All but one headwater stream on the project site, several of which originate on the
site, flow generally north to Walnut Creek. Riparian wetlands occur along and in headwater drainages that connect
to these streams. One headwater stream located on the southwestern portion of the site flows west to Big Branch.
This drainage way contains riparian wetlands and a pond above the start point of the stream. Streams on the project
site have surface water classifications of aquatic life, secondary recreation, fresh water (C) and Nutrient Sensitive
Waters (NSW). Walnut Creek (DWR Stream Index Number 27-34-(4)b) is listed on the 2018 Final 303(d) List as
exceeding criteria for Copper and PCB Fish Tissue Advisory.
3.3 PERMIT HISTORY
In 2006, a Nationwide Permit (NWP) 12 and 39 and a corresponding 401 General Water Quality Certification
approval (WQC) were issued to Olde Towne, LLC for a mixed -use golf course development that encompassed the
project site and other adjacent tracts (Attachment D & E). The Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) issued the
attached receipt for payment of 300 linear feet (LF) of perennial stream impact and 0.4752 acre (AC) of riparian
wetland impact on January 31, 2007 (Attachment F). Kelly Williams with the NC Division of Mitigation Services
(formerly EEP) confirmed that this compensatory mitigation payment had not been reimbursed. By March 2007 as
shown in Figure 18, approximately 180 AC of the project site had been graded. A compliance visit by the US Army
Corps of Engineers (USACE) in November 2007 found an intermittent stream that was determined to be
"unimportant" and was not subject to riparian buffers had been relocated without approval. The Division of Water
Resources (DWR) issued two Notices of Violation (NOV-2008-PC-0158) for this issue as well as sediment and erosion
control issues in March and April 2008. A plan to delineate, clean up and stabilize problem areas on the site was
approved and completed to resolve the sediment and erosion control issues. Because the NWP had expired, an
application to request re -authorization of NWP 12 and 29 with corresponding WQCs and approval of a restoration
plan to resolve the stream relocation violation was submitted in June 2008. This application indicated that a total of
0.283 AC of permanent wetland impact from two road crossings (P-1 & P-6) and 145 LF of temporary stream impacts
from three sanitary sewer crossings (T-4, T-5 & T-6) had been completed. The application also reported that the
unauthorized stream relocation had impacted 340 LF of intermittent stream channel and 0.03 AC of wetland and
provided a restoration plan for 341 LF of stream and 0.04 AC of wetland. By the time the WQC approval was issued
on November 6, 2009, the property had been transferred to National City Bank and development of the project had
discontinued (Attachment G). After five years of monitoring, the USACE and DWR staff reviewed the final
creating experiences through experience 14 of 28

'J MCADAMS INDIVIDUAL PERMIT APPLICATION > OLDIE TOWNE
monitoring report and conducted a site inspection of the restoration. On December 2, 2015, DWR issued a close-out
letter indicating that the stream and wetland mitigation requirements had been met (Attachment H).
3.4 JURISDICTIONAL WATERS AND WETLANDS + RIPARIAN BUFFERS
3.4.1 DELINEATION AND VERIFICATION
McAdams staff re -delineated the project site owned by Olde Towne WEH, LP in late 2018. Ross Sullivan with the
USACE conducted a field visit on April 24, 2019 to verify the streams and wetland boundaries within the area labeled
as verified on the attached Delineation Map (Figure 19). On April 8, 2019, a field determination of streams subject to
the Neuse Riparian Buffer Rule was completed by Gary Kreiser and reported in the attached Department of
Environmental Quality letter dated April 10, 2019 (Attachment 1).
On October 14, 2019, McAdams staff completed a delineation of jurisdictional streams and wetlands and riparian
buffers within the limit of disturbance identified for off -site road improvements involving S. New Hope Road, Rock
Quarry Road, Jones Sausage Road and the project entrance road from S. New Hope Road. These features are also
shown on the Delineation Map (Figure 19). It was then determined that the commercial district by others would be
included with Olde Towne residential development project due primarily to its dependency on this project for
stormwater treatment. On November 5, 2019, McAdams staff completed a delineation of jurisdictional streams and
wetlands and riparian buffers on the commercial district portion of the project. It was at this time additional wetland
area within the residential portion immediately south of the commercial district (extension of the Wetland AA) was
identified. Data forms to support the additional delineation are provided in Attachment J and the locations are
shown on the Delineation Map (Figure 19). While delineating the area required for road improvements along S. New
Hope Road, the boundary of Wetland Z within the verified delineation area was also revised slightly. Neither of these
areas were examined in the field by Ross Sullivan. On December 3, 2019, a field determination of streams subject to
the Neuse Riparian Buffer Rule within the commercial district property was completed by Erin Deck and Zach
Thomas and reported in the attached Department of Environmental Quality letter dated the same day (Attachment
K).
It is important to note that Stream G was classified as perennial on the delineation map provided for the Preliminary
Jurisdictional Determination. The original delineation was completed at time of extended wetter than normal
conditions. During the assessment field work discussed below, this stream was determined to be intermittent at
Impact Area E and upstream.
The overall project site, including the commercial district and area necessary for road improvements, contains
approximately 20,804 linear feet of jurisdictional streams, 3.3 acres of open water and 57 acres of jurisdictional
wetlands. No isolated waters or wetlands were identified on the project site.
3.4.2 ASSESSMENTS
At each impact area, wetlands and streams were evaluated using the North Carolina Wetland and Stream
Assessment Methods, respectively. A summary of the wetland and stream rating results are provided in Table 2
below. Field assessment results, rating sheets and supporting photographs are included as Attachment L.
creating experiences through experience 15 of 28

'J MCADAMS INDIVIDUAL PERMIT APPLICATION > OLDIE TOWNE
Table 2. Assessment Summary
Impact
Area
Name
Assessment
Area/Reach
AA Size
(AC/LF)
Hydrology
Rating
WQl
Rating
Habitat
Rating
Overall
Rating
Mitigation
Ratio
Impact
ID
Wetlands
B
A
B-1
0.323
Medium
High
High
High
2
W3
C
W
C-1
0.037
High
Medium
High
High
2
W5
C
X
C-2
0.097
High
High
Low
High
1.5
W6
E
A
E-1
0.013
High
High
Medium
High
2
W7
E, F, G
O
F-1
0.424
High
High
High
High
2
W8
H
Z
H-1
0.031
Low
Low
Low
Low
0.5
W9
H
Z
H-2
0.033
High
High
Medium
High
2
W9
H
KK
H-3
0.134
Low
Low
Low
Low
0.5
W10
I
BB
1-1
0.005
Low
Medium
Low
Low
1
W12
I
BB
1-2
0.114
Medium
High
Medium
Medium
1.5
W11-15
Streams
A
B
A-1
178
Low
High
High
High
1.5
S2-3
B
R
B-1
225
High
Medium
High
High
2
S6-7
D
O
D-1
53
Low
High
Low
Low
0.5
S9
D
F
D-2
75
Low
Low
Low
Low
0
S7
E
G
E-1
172
Low
Low
Low
Low
0
S12
H
C
H-1
54
High
Low
Low
Low
13
S17
I
C
1-1
274
Medium
Low
Low
Low
0.5
S18
I
C
1-2
130
Low
Low
Low
Low
0
S18
t Water Quality Condition/Opportunity
2 see Impact Area Insets A — I (Figures 32-40) and Attachment L discussed later in section 6.2
3 perennial stream
A mitigation ratio of 2:1 is proposed for wetlands with an overall rating of high and no subcategory rating of low. For wetlands
with an overall rating of medium and overall rating of high but at least one subcategory rating of low, a mitigation ratio of 1.5:1
is proposed. A mitigation ratio of 1:1 is proposed for wetlands with an overall rating of low but at least one subcategory rating
of medium or high. For wetlands with an overall rating and all subcategory ratings of low, a mitigation ratio of 0.5:1 is proposed.
A mitigation ratio of 2:1 is proposed for streams with an overall rating of high and no subcategory rating of low. For streams
with an overall rating of high but at least one subcategory rating of low, a mitigation ratio of 1.5:1 is proposed. A mitigation ratio
of 1:1 or 0.5:1 is proposed for streams with an overall rating of low but at least one subcategory rating of high or medium,
respectively. For streams that are rated as low overall and in all subcategories, no mitigation is proposed based on the retention
of aquatic life passage and stream bed sediments within the culverts.
creating experiences through experience 16 of 28

'J MCADAMS INDIVIDUAL PERMIT APPLICATION > OLDIE TOWNE
4.0 PURPOSE AND NEED
The purpose of the proposed Olde Towne Master Plan Community project is to create a large-scale residential
community with a complete range of housing options, a commercial district, recreational amenities and necessary
infrastructure such as roadways, utilities and stormwater management facilities. This project is needed to meet the
current demand for residential housing mixed with commercial space near downtown Raleigh. Therefore, the
project is not water dependent.
5.0 ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
5.1 SITE SELECTION
Site selection criteria discussed in detail below were used to identify the preferred alternative and three alternative
sites. Locations of these sites are provided on Figure 21. Alternative Sites Location Map. The applicant has prepared
a confidential analysis of projected return on capital investment to evaluate these sites. It is available upon request
provided this information may be kept confidential.
> Project Size: A minimum of 300 acres is necessary for a mixed -use development of a large-scale, residential
community that includes a commercial component and a complete range of residential dwelling options
including single-family homes, duplexes, townhomes and apartments.
> Proximity to Target Market: The purpose of the project is to provide a full -service housing community to
serve the major employment centers in the Triangle including downtown Raleigh, downtown Durham and
Research Triangle Park. Only sites within a 15-mile radius of Triangle meet this purpose.
> Proximity to major highways: For the proposed community to meet the needs of two -career households that
may require travel to more than one employment center, it must have access to major highways. Project sites
located within 3 miles of major highways would meet this criterion.
> Proximity to utilities: Availability of sanitary sewer service is critical to the economic viability of a residential
community.
> Zoning: Potential project sites must be zoned for residential development.
> Costs: For a successful project, the overall cost of development including costs for the property, entitlement,
engineering, sanitary sewer infrastructure to the site, construction and mitigation balanced with the return on
that investment must be economically viable.
5.1.1 OLDE TOWNE
Olde Towne is the applicant's preferred site. It is 574 acres in size and located in the in the northeast quadrant of
Rock Quarry Road and S. New Hope Road southeast of Raleigh in Wake County. It is zoned as residential and
approximately 2.2 miles from the Interstate 440 beltline around Raleigh. Approximately one half of this site consists
of early successional herbaceous vegetation mixed with stands of young loblolly pines. A power transmission line
runs generally along South New Hope Road north -south across the project site. The northern project area contains a
forested floodplain along Walnut Creek. The undisturbed areas in the northeast portion of the project area are
forested with mature hardwoods except for a few former agricultural fields that are now dominated by kudzu.
Several headwater streams originate on or flow north through the site to Walnut Creek. One tributary in the
creating experiences through experience 17 of 28

'J MCADAMS INDIVIDUAL PERMIT APPLICATION > OLDIE TOWNE
southern end of the site flows west to Big Branch. These streams have surface water classifications of C; NSW.
Sanitary sewer service is available on the site. Construction of the project on this site would be economically viable.
5.1.2 RIVER TOWNE
This approximately 307-acre site is located on the north side of Buffaloe Road east of Raleigh in Wake County. It is
zoned as residential and approximately 2.3 miles from Interstate 540. It is primarily forested with mixed
hardwood/pine and a few pine stands. Several agricultural fields are also located on the site. Several headwater
streams originate on the site and flow north to Hodges Mill Creek or south to Beaverdam Creek. These streams have
surface water classifications of C; NSW. To provide sanitary sewer service to this site, a pump station and
approximately 2.9 miles of gravity sewer line, including easement acquisition, would need to be constructed.
Construction of the project with the additional infrastructure cost required for this site would be economically
viable.
5.1.3 401/BUFFALOE ROAD
This approximately 364-acre site is located on the southeast side of Fayetteville Road (US Highway 401) south of
Raleigh in Wake County. It is zoned as residential and located on a major highway approximately 5.8 miles from the
Interstate 440 beltline around Raleigh. It is primarily forested with mixed hardwood/pine, young pine stands,
successional areas and a pine planation. Agricultural fields also occupy approximately 40 acres of the site. Several
headwater streams originate on the site and flow east to an unnamed tributary to Swift Creek or north to Swift
Creek. These streams have surface water classifications of WS-III; NSW. Although sanitary sewer service is available
to this site, it is currently at capacity and would need upgrades to handle the additional discharge from development
of this site. This would not require new easement acquisition but would require upsizing the gravity sewer, pump
station and force main. Construction of the project with the additional infrastructure cost required for this site
would be economically viable.
5.1.4 SWIFT CREEK STATION
This approximately 434-acre site is located between Fayetteville Road (US Highway 401) and Old Stage Road along
the north side of Swift Creek south of Raleigh in Wake County. It is zoned as residential and approximately 4.9 miles
from the Interstate 440 beltline around Raleigh. This site is primarily forested with mixed hardwood/pine and a few
pine stands. Grading for a spine road and a few cul-de-sac roads are present on the site. In addition to the FEMA-
designated 100-year floodplain there are a few headwater streams that originate on the site and flow east to Swift
Creek. These streams have surface water classifications of WS-III; NSW. Although sanitary sewer service is available
to this site, the pump station and force main are currently at capacity and would need upgrades to handle the
additional discharge from development of this site. This would not require new easement acquisition. This site also
poses an additional expense related to boring a road under the railroad corridor that bisects the site. Construction of
the project with the additional infrastructure cost required for this site would not be economically viable.
creating experiences through experience 18 of 28

'J MCADAMS INDIVIDUAL PERMIT APPLICATION > OLDIE TOWNE
Table 3 summarizes the evaluation criteria of the alternative sites and preferred alternative.
Table 3. Site Selection Criteria
Site Selection Criteria
Preferred
Alternative
Rivertowne
401/Buffaloe Road
Swift Creek Station
Project Size
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Proximity to Target Market
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Proximity to Utilities
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Zoning
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Cost
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Practicable Site
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
5.2 PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES
The preferred alternative, no -action alternative and economically viable off -site alternatives were evaluated to
determine the Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative (LEDPA). The following environmental
factors were used to evaluate the practicable alternatives identified:
• Total stream impacts (LF),
• Total wetland impacts (AC),
• Potential cumulative impact (high/medium/low),
• Potential impact to Federally listed species (yes/no), and
• Potential impact to historic resources (yes/no).
Other factors evaluated were project size (high/medium/low) and whether the site had been previously graded
(yes/no). The results of the analysis of each practicable site based on these seven factors were used to determine
the LEDPA.
5.2.1 PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE
The applicant's preferred alternative requires four road crossings to provide safe egress from each pod of
development and road improvements to the existing intersection of Rock Quarry Road and S. New Hope Road/Jones
Sausage Road. These road crossings involve 570 LF of permanent stream impact for installation of culverts and
riprap. Because the stream channel (Stream C) runs parallel to the existing fill slope of the northeast side of Rock
Quarry Road, the widening of this road would permanently impact approximately 225 LF of stream that appears to
have been straighten as part of the construction of Rock Quarry Road. To minimize this impact, 404 LF of low -quality
stream will be realigned using natural channel design techniques to create 359 LF of stable, high quality stream for a
net loss of 45 LF. Impacts to wetlands resulting from the project include 0.37 AC for road crossings, 0.31 AC for road
improvements and 0.47 AC for mass grading for a total of 1.2 AC. Wetland impacts from partial development of the
site under a previous permit total 0.28 AC for a cumulative project total of 1.43 AC.
creating experiences through experience 19 of 28

'J MCADAMS INDIVIDUAL PERMIT APPLICATION > OLDIE TOWNE
Sufficient sanitary sewer infrastructure to serve the proposed development is present on the project site. Therefore,
this alternative does not require installation of sanitary sewer infrastructure off -site that would be expected to spur
additional development around the project site. Therefore, the potential cumulative impact for the preferred
alternative is rated as low.
Habitat assessments and surveys for federally threatened or endangered species were completed and compiled into
a review package that was submitted to the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). The USFWS concurred with
biological conclusions of no effect or may affect, not likely to adversely affect for protected species identified on the
Official Species List.
An environmental review by the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) indicated a high probability for pre-
colonial American Indian sites given the property's proximity to Walnut Creek but did not identify any historic
properties that may be affected by the project.
Although the minimum project size is 300 acres, larger sites are most conducive to development of a community
with a complete range of residential dwelling options and supporting commercial space and recreational amenities.
The preferred alternative is rated as high in regard to Project Size because it is greater than 500 acres.
Approximately one-half of the preferred alternative was graded in preparation for development prior to its
abandonment due to the economic recession. This alternative utilizes a previously disturbed site.
5.2.2 NO -ACTION ALTERNATIVE
One alternative to the proposed project would be for the applicant to avoid jurisdictional impacts by taking no
action to develop the site. This alternative would prevent the applicant from developing private property and not
achieve the applicant's purpose to create a large-scale, master planned community to meet the demand for
residential and commercial space in the Triangle area.
5.2.3 OFF -SITE ALTERNATIVES
5.2.3.1 RIVER TOWNE
Impacts for this alternative are based on a previously approved site plan obtained from DWR's Public Record
Laserfiche Document Management System and an estimate of impacts required for road improvements to Buffaloe
Road designed by McAdams (Figure 22. River Towne Site Plan). River Towne requires three road crossings and road
improvements to Buffaloe Road. These road crossings and improvements involve 382 LF of permanent stream
impact and 0.40 AC of permanent wetland impact for installation of culverts and riprap and stormwater outlets.
In order to provide sanitary sewer service for this alternative, approximately 2.3 miles of off -site gravity sanitary
sewer must be constructed within a new easement. This expansion would provide sanitary sewer service to
approximately 5,200 acres around this alternative site (Figure 23. River Towne Sewer Expansion). New access to
creating experiences through experience 20 of 28

'J MCADAMS INDIVIDUAL PERMIT APPLICATION > OLDIE TOWNE
sanitary sewer service would be expected to spur additional high -density development that warrants a high rating
for potential cumulative impacts.
A preliminary review of the USFWS Official Species List and element occurrences reported by the NC Natural
Heritage Program database was conducted for this site. From a desktop review, suitable habitat for protected
species does not appear to be present on the site except for approximately 800 feet of a powerline easement
suitable for Michaux's sumac. The nearest known occurrence of this species is approximately 3.5 miles southwest of
the site. Since a Nationwide permit was previously issued for this site, development of this alternative would not be
expected to affect federally protected species.
A review of NC Historic Preservation Office's HPOWEB 2.0 indicates the presence of the Battle C. Jones House on this
site. However, this house was determined ineligible for listing on the National Register in 2013. Therefore, this
alternative would not be expected to affect historic resources.
Although the minimum project size is 300 acres, larger sites are most conducive to development of a community
with a complete range of residential dwelling options and supporting commercial space and recreational amenities.
At 307 acres, this alternative is rated as low for its suitability for project size.
Although previously permitted for development, this site has not been disturbed by mass grading. This alternative
does not utilize a previously disturbed site.
5.2.3.2 401/BUFFALOE ROAD
A delineation of jurisdictional areas was not available for this site. The extent of streams on the site were estimated
from available sources including the USGS topographic map, Wake County Soil Survey, flood prone soils, LIDAR
elevation data, National Wetlands Inventory map and aerial photography. No wetland areas were identified by the
available information on the site. This alternative would require four roading crossings to provide safe egress and
access to the upland areas of the site. Based on the presence of Wehadkee soils along the drainageways through the
site, jurisdictional wetland areas are presumed present in these areas. It is estimated that 508 LF of stream for
culvert and riprap installation and 0.40 acres of wetlands would be impacted by development of this site (See
Figure 24. 401/Buffaloe Road Site Assessment).
Providing sanitary sewer service for this site requires upgrades to off -site gravity sewer, force main and a pump
station. These upgrades will allow future high -density development connections to an additional 92 acres by gravity
sewer and 380 acres west of 401 that would be able to pump over to this discharge basin (Figure 25. 401/Buffaloe
Road Sewer Expansion). The potential cumulative impact for this alternative was rated as medium based additional
development that would be possible by sewer expansion to these new areas.
A preliminary review of the USFWS Official Species List and element occurrences reported by the NC Natural
Heritage Program database was conducted for this site. From a desktop review, suitable habitat for protected
creating experiences through experience 21 of 28

'J MCADAMS INDIVIDUAL PERMIT APPLICATION > OLDIE TOWNE
species does not appear to be present on the site. Development of this alternative would not be expected to affect
federally protected species.
A review of NC Historic Preservation Office's HPOWEB 2.0 indicates the Dr. L. J. Faulhaber Farm is present on the
site. A determination of eligibility under Criterion A was prepared for this farm complex in 2014. Development of
this site would affect this resource.
This site has not been disturbed by mass grading and does not utilize a previously disturbed site.
5.2.4 LEAST ENVIRONMENTALLY DAMAGING PRACTICABLE ALTERNATIVE (LEDPA)
Table 4 summarizes the alternatives analysis. Considering the seven factors described at the beginning of Section
5.2, the applicant's preferred alternative is the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative (LEDPA) that
would meet the overall project purpose.
Table 4. Alternative Analysis Summary
FACTORS
No Action
Alternative
Applicant's
Preferred
Rivertowne
401/Buffaloe Road
Environmental Factors
Stream Impacts (LF)
None
615'
382'
508'
Wetland Impacts (AC)
None
1.432
0.40
0.32
Potential Cumulative Impact
NA
Low
High
Medium
Federal Endangered Species
NA
No
No
No
Historic Resources
NA
No
No
Yes
Other Factors
Property Size
NA
High
Low
Low
Previous Grading Disturbance
NA
Yes
No
No
LEDPA
No
Yes
No
No
1 These are permanent impacts from culvert and riprap installation
Z Includes permanent impacts of 0.28 AC completed under a previous permit
6.0 AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION
6.1 ON -SITE ALTERNATIVES
Due to the constraints of the site topography and stream network, the proposed project cannot be reduced in size
or shifted to avoid all jurisdictional impacts and meet the purpose of the project. The original site development plan
from September 2018 shows that this plan was not the LEDPA due to 3.9 AC of wetland impact and 1,315 LF of
stream impact. Impacts to these features were reduced by shifting and reconfiguring the entrance road from S. New
Hope Road and reconfiguring the site plan to avoid wetlands as shown on Figure 26. Original Site Development
Plan. Approximately 700 LF of stream and 2.5 AC of wetland impacts were avoided by the revisions to the final plan.
An Alternative Site Development Plan (Figure 27) was developed to refine the development plan and further
minimize impacts. This plan included four additional road crossings that the City of Raleigh requires based on
creating experiences through experience 22 of 28

'J MCADAMS INDIVIDUAL PERMIT APPLICATION > OLDIE TOWNE
development block perimeters. This alternative site plan was not the LEDPA due to 1.64 AC of wetland and 1,165 LF
of stream impacts. A waiver of these requirements will be requested to avoid 0.207 AC of wetland and 550 LF of
stream impacts.
6.2 PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE JURISDICTIONAL + RIPARIAN BUFFER IMPACTS
The final site plan is shown on the Overall Impact Area Map (Figure 28) and serves as a key for the Grading Plan
(Figure 29-31) and Impact Area Insets A — K (Figures 32-42). Jurisdictional stream and wetland and riparian buffer
impacts (Table M1 and M2) for the preferred alternative are summarized in Attachment M. There are four road
crossings that are unavoidable due to three tributaries bisecting the site. These crossings are the minimum number
of crossings required to provide safe egress (i.e. two ways of egress for each upland development pod) and were
designed to cross perpendicular to each channel to minimize stream and riparian buffer impacts. Impact Areas A and
E (Stream B and G) are necessary to construct the mixed -use street from S. New Hope Road across the project site to
Barwell Road required by the City of Raleigh's Street Plan. This proposed road must be a two-lane, undivided avenue
with an on -street greenway. Road crossings shown as Impact Area B (Stream R) and D (Stream F and O) are required
to provide two means of egress from the northwest corner of the site. The alignment for road crossing B was
adjusted to minimize the impact to adjacent wetlands and avoid the stream confluence. Road crossing D was also
shifted to the upper end of two highly degraded channels (See NCSAM forms for SAR D-1 and D-2 in Attachment L)
instead of impacting the high -quality downstream portion of the stream.
All culverts will be designed to maintain the dimension, pattern and profile of the stream and will buried one foot
below the stream bed to maintain aquatic life passage. The four road crossings will be completed in Phase 2 of the
project. A culvert cross-section for the road crossing at Impact Area A is provided as an example of the measures to
be implemented for each proposed road crossing (Figure 43). Because these road crossings will not be completed in
Phase 1 of the project, final culvert designs have also not been completed. The applicant requests final design of
road crossings and culvert designs be provided as a special condition of the permit.
The majority of Wetland O is proposed to be impacted by mass grading (Impact Area E-G). With a mass grading
project, the linear shape and location of this wetland combined with the necessity for functional road network
makes the impact impractical to avoid. Similarly, the upper end of two wetlands (W and X) at Impact Area C are
proposed to be impacted by mass grading. A retaining wall is planned in this area to minimize the amount of impact
to these wetlands.
Road improvements are required at the intersection of Rock Quarry Road and S. New Hope/Jones Sausage Road.
Impact Area H shows a portion of two wetlands (KK and Z) located along the toe of the existing fill slope of the road
that will be impacted by road widening. The existing culvert on Stream C will also need to be extended at this
intersection.
Widening of Rock Quarry Road will also impact a wetland area (BB) and stream (C) that runs parallel and close to the
fill slope of the existing road (Impact Area 1). As previously mentioned in section 5.2.1, this low -quality stream reach
creating experiences through experience 23 of 28

'J MCADAMS INDIVIDUAL PERMIT APPLICATION > OLDIE TOWNE
will be realigned using natural channel design. Planting plan and J-hook log vane details are provided on Figure 44.
The stream realignment will result in a stream length reduction of approximately 45 linear feet, largely due to the
removal of a 90 degree turn at the upstream end of the realigned reach. Because up and downstream of the
realigned section appear to be historically straightened, the realigned section was designed at the lower end of the
sinuosity range in order to better mimic the sediment transport characteristics of the existing stream and prevent
potential any aggradation or degradation. This realignment will create a more stable channel with a larger left bank
riparian buffer resulting in a functional uplift to the stream. A monitoring plan to ensure stability of the realigned
stream and planting success is provided in Attachment N.
The preferred alternative as proposed would result in the following total jurisdictional impacts:
• 368 LF of permanent, perennial stream loss,
• 247 LF of permanent, intermittent stream loss,
• 431 LF of permanent, perennial stream impact with no loss (riprap dissipators/stream realignment),
• 37 LF of permanent, intermittent stream impact with no loss (riprap dissipators/stream realignment),
• 47 LF of temporary, perennial stream impact,
• 18 LF of temporary, intermittent stream impact,
• 1.154 AC of permanent, wetland impact and
• 0.012 AC of temporary, wetland impact.
Permanent stream impacts for the proposed project total 1,083 LF and temporary stream impacts total 65 LF.
Installation of previously permitted, sanitary sewer line resulted in 30 LF of perennial stream impact and 115 LF of
intermittent stream impact for a total of 145 LF of previously permitted and completed temporary stream impacts.
The proposed project would increase the cumulative temporary perennial stream impacts to 77 LF and intermittent
stream impact to 133 LF. The proposed permanent wetland impact of 1.154 AC combined with previously permitted
wetland impacts (0.283 AC) brings the cumulative, permanent wetland impact for the proposed project to 1.437 AC.
The project will also permanently impact 44,901 SF of Zone 1 and 31,676 SF of Zone 2 riparian buffer
7.0 COMPENSATORY MITIGATION
As previously discussed in section 3.4.2, assessments were completed for each permanent, jurisdictional impact
area. Mitigation ratios proposed for each impact listed in Table M1 (Attachment M) reflects the results of these
quality assessments except for the loss from the stream realignment (Impact Area I — S18). Because no mitigation
was proposed for 130 LF of the impacted stream, no mitigation is proposed for 40 LF of stream loss from the
realignment. A total of 580 LF of stream credits and 1.9835 AC of riparian wetland credits are proposed to mitigate
the project's impact to these jurisdictional resources. Before the original project was abandoned, payment was
made for 300 stream credits and 0.4752 AC riparian wetland credits. Of the permitted impacts, only 0.283 AC of
wetland impacts were completed. The approved mitigation ratio for these permitted impacts was 1:1. Therefore,
0.1922 AC of wetland and 300 LF of stream mitigation credits paid for this project remains. An additional 280 LF of
stream and 1.7913 AC of wetland credits must be acquired to mitigate impacts for the proposed project.
creating experiences through experience 24 of 28

'J MCADAMS INDIVIDUAL PERMIT APPLICATION > OLDIE TOWNE
Impact Areas H and I are the only impacts located within Phase 1 of the project requiring 35 LF of stream and 0.3110
AC of wetland mitigation credits. These stream credits have already been paid with 265 LF of paid stream credits
remaining for Phase 2 of the project. After deducting the remaining wetland credits that have been paid but unused,
0.1188 AC of wetland credits need to be purchased for Phase 1 of the project. Mitigation required for Phase 2 of
project consists of 545 LF of stream and 1.6725 AC of wetland credits. After deducting the remaining stream credits
that have been paid but unused by the original project and Phase 1 of the proposed project, 280 LF of additional
stream credits and the entire amount of wetland credits (1.6725 AC) need to be purchased for Phase 2 of the
project.
Because road crossings shown as Impact Areas A and E (Stream B and G) include a greenway, they each exceed one-
third of an acre of buffer impact and require buffer mitigation. The road crossing shown as Impact Area B (Stream R)
crosses the riparian buffer perpendicularly but buffer impacts exceed one-third of an acre and require buffer
mitigation. Road crossing D (Stream F and O) crosses the riparian buffer perpendicularly, impacts less than one-third
of an acre of buffer and does not require buffer mitigation. These road crossings are proposed to be completed in
Phase 2 of the project.
Road improvements are required at the intersection of Rock Quarry Road and S. New Hope/Jones Sausage Road are
proposed to be completed in Phase 1 of the project. As shown on Impact Area H, the existing culvert on Stream C
will need to be extended at this intersection. The existing alignment of the road across the stream is not aligned
perpendicularly and requires buffer mitigation. The road widening on the northwest side of S. New Hope Road does
not require buffer mitigation because it is perpendicular to the buffer and less than one-third of an acre of buffer
impact.
Widening of Rock Quarry Road will also impact a stream (C) that runs parallel and close to the fill slope of the
existing road (Impact Area 1). As previously mentioned in section 5.2.1, this low -quality stream reach will be
realigned using natural channel design. This realignment will create a more stable channel with a larger left bank
riparian buffer resulting in a functional uplift to the stream. Non perpendicular impacts to the newly established
buffer will require buffer mitigation.
Table M2 within Attachment M lists the buffer mitigation required for each proposed impact. The applicant
requests that buffer mitigation be paid prior to commencement of the phase of construction. Buffer mitigation
credits for Phase 1 (Impact Area H and 1) and Phase 2 (Impact Area A, B, D and E) total 10,920 SF and 137,540 SF,
respectively.
The applicant proposes to purchase stream, wetland and buffer credits from a private mitigation bank prior
development of each phase of the project. A statement of availability from Wildland Holdings III, LLC for the wetland
and riparian buffer mitigation for both Phase I and II is provided in Attachment O. Stream mitigation credits are
currently not available from private mitigation banks. However, stream mitigation is not required for Phase 1 as
discussed above. Prior to beginning any impact to streams in Phase 2, stream mitigation credits will be obtained
creating experiences through experience 25 of 28

'J MCADAMS INDIVIDUAL PERMIT APPLICATION > OLDIE TOWNE
from a private mitigation bank or NC Division of Mitigation Services if stream credits are not available from a private
bank.
8.0 ENDANDGERED SPECIES ACT
On July 12, 2019, McAdams used the US Fish and Wildlife (USFWS) Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC)
website to obtain a list of threatened and endangered species that may occur in the proposed project location
and/or may be affected by the proposed Olde Towne residential project. This process generates an Official Species
List that is summarized in Table 5. Critical Habitat was not identified within one mile of the project area. A list of
natural heritage resources was obtained from the NC Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) on August 14, 2019.
Table 5. Federally Protected Species for the Project Study Area
(7/12/2019)
Scientific Name T
Common Name
Federal Status
Birds
Picoides borealis
Red -cockaded Woodpecker
Endangered
Amphibians
Necturus lewisi
Neuse River Waterdog
Proposed Threatened
Fishes
Noturus furiosus
Carolina Madtom
Proposed Endangered
Clams
Fusconaia masoni
Atlantic Pigtoe
Proposed Threatened
Alasmidonta heterodon
Dwarf Wedgemussel
Endangered
Flowering Plants
Rhus michauxii
Michaux's Sumac
Endangered
The protected species assessment concluded that suitable habitat for certain federally protected species was
present within the project area. McAdams staff evaluated the site for potential protected species habitat and
conducted a survey on August 15, 2019 and August 21, 2019. Michaux's sumac was not observed during field
surveys conducted by McAdams resulting in a biological opinion of "may affect, not likely to adversely affect". A
biological opinion of "no effect" was determined for the red -cockaded woodpecker due to the lack of suitable
habitat. A biological opinion of "may affect, not likely to adversely affect" was determined for the Neuse River
waterdog, Carolina madtom, Atlantic pigtoe, and dwarf wedgemussel based on the project's avoidance of Walnut
Creek and its associated wetlands, floodplain and riparian buffer. The assessment also determined that no Eagle Act
permit would be required for the project.
A review package, including a self -certification letter, was submitted to the USFWS on September 9, 2019
(Attachment P). John Ellis with the USFWS confirmed that, in addition to the maintained rights -of way, the
disturbed areas of the site were surveyed and concurred with the determinations of the assessment.
creating experiences through experience 26 of 28

'J MCADAMS INDIVIDUAL PERMIT APPLICATION > OLDIE TOWNE
After it was determined that the commercial district by others would be included with Olde Towne residential
development project, a habitat evaluation for federally protected species was conducted. The only suitable habitat
present on the commercial property was maintained right -of way and disturbed areas for Michaux's sumac.
McAdams staff conducted a field survey of these areas on October 25, 2019 and did not find individuals of Michaux's
sumac. An updated Official Species List was requested on January 3, 2020, which did not contain any species that
were not identified by the list obtained on July 12, 2019 (Attachment P).
9.0 NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT
An Environmental Review request was sent to SHPO on August 2, 2019 to solicit their comments on potential
impacts to historic and cultural resources that may result from the proposed project. In a letter dated September 10,
2019 the SHPO stated, "There are no recorded archaeological sites located within the proposed project area.
However, there is a high probability for pre -colonial American Indian sites to be present given the property's
proximity to Walnut Creek. The 1914 Wake County Soil Survey map also shows four structures in the proposed
project area, that may contain associated archaeological remains." SHPO recommended a comprehensive
archaeological survey and that the project will not have an effect on any historic properties. Their response is
provided in Attachment Q. Guidance regarding the action areas for the proposed project that are subject to SHPO
review is requested.
10.0 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
The proposed development shall be subject to the stormwater management requirements set forth in Section 9.2.2.
of the City of Raleigh regulations. Per City of Raleigh regulations, stormwater management on this site shall address
two primary issues: (1) peak discharge rates and (2) water quality management.
10.1 PEAK RUNOFF CONTROL REQUIREMENTS
To mitigate impacts from proposed development compared to the predevelopment conditions (prior to 2007 mass
grading) at the points of analysis, eleven stormwater control measures are proposed and will be designed to attenuate
peak flows such that post -development peak flow rates are reduced below the pre -development rates in the 2- and
10-year storm events. A portion of the site drains directly to a FEMA 100-year floodplain located on -site. Detention
will not be provided where the site discharges directly to the floodplain as a detained flow would compound with the
much larger watershed and have an adverse impact downstream.
10.2 POLLUTANT AND NUTRIENT CONTROL REQUIREMENTS
The eleven proposed stormwater control measures will be designed to meet the water quality design requirements
in the NC Stormwater BMP Manual. The site will meet the nitrogen loading rate target 3.6 Ibs/ac/yr through on -site
treatment and nutrient offset credits.
11.0 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
A residential development of this size would be expected to induce additional commercial and retail development in
the area around the project site to serve the large number of residents anticipated. This area is located within the
creating experiences through experience 27 of 28

'J MCADAMS INDIVIDUAL PERMIT APPLICATION > OLDE TOWNE
City of Raleigh's planning jurisdiction, which has developed a program to meet the Neuse Nutrient Sensitive Waters
Strategy and Phase II post -construction stormwater requirements. Therefore, this additional development is not
anticipated to impact downstream water quality. Although Walnut Creek is listed on the 2018 Final 303(d) List for
copper and PCB fish tissue advisory, the proposed project is not anticipated to contribute to these parameters of
interest. Additionally, future buffer authorizations will be required for some stormwater outlets in Phase 1 and all of
those in Phase 2 that have not yet been designed.
12.0 CONCLUSIONS
In conclusion, the site selection and alternatives analyses resulted in the selection of the preferred alternative as the
LEDPA. Impacts to jurisdictional streams, wetlands and buffers have been minimized to the maximum extent
practicable by altering the original site design to reduce road crossings, installing culverts to maintain aquatic life
passage, and minimizing mass grading impacts to the greatest practicable extent. The resulting site design allows the
project purpose and need to be fulfilled while minimizing impacts to Water of the U.S.
creating experiences through experience 28 of 28