20180815 Ver 1_401 Application_20180618

kimley-horn.com 421 Fayetteville Street, Suite 600, Raleigh, NC 27601 919 677 2000

June 8, 2018

Mr. James Lastinger
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587

Ms. Karen Higgins
NC Division of Water Resources
401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27604

RE: Nationwide Permit 27 Application – Ailey Young Park Dam and Stream Restoration
Town of Wake Forest, Wake County, North Carolina

Dear Mr. Lastinger and Ms. Higgins:

On behalf of the Town of Wake Forest, Kimley-Horn is submitting the attached application for
authorization under Nationwide Permit (NWP) 27 for the above referenced project. The project
proposes to enhance a section of an unnamed tributary to Dunn Creek by breaching a failing dam,
converting a pond to floodplain wetlands, protecting the surrounding environment, and improving the
stream’s hydraulic and geomorphic functions. The purpose of this project is to improve the water
quality and the experience of the users for the proposed Dunn Creek greenway by restoring the visual
and functional connections along this upper reach of the Dunn Creek watershed. These goals will be
achieved by removing a failing dam, reshaping the channel, adding grade control structures, bank
stabilization, and planting of native vegetation. The stream profile and alignment was designed using
a stable, natural reference reach located immediately downstream of the project (where t he proposed
project ties in). When possible, construction materials will come from the project area or a localized,
native source. To establish wetlands in the existing pond bottom, the project includes the
supplemental planting of the pond bed to enhance the natural development of wetland vegetation and
function. This area will be monitored under an Adaptive Management Plan and additional plantings
will be implemented in the future if necessary.

Jurisdictional features occurring within the project area were delineated as part of the Town’s Dunn
Creek Greenway - Phase III project (USACE SAW ID: SAW -2017-02221; attached). Temporary
impacts will occur to stream S9 (UT to Dunn Creek), wetland W2, and the riparian buffer zones to
allow for construction access and the restoration of the S9 channel. Permanent impacts will occur to
pond OW1 and stream S10 to allow for the realignment and restoration of stream S9. Timber mats
and mud mats will be utilized in areas where construction access crosses streams and wetlands to
minimize impacts. All areas impacted by temporary construction will be restored to pre-construction
contours and replanted with native vegetation. Additionally, where ever possible, the proposed project
Page 2
kimley-horn.com 421 Fayetteville Street, Suite 600, Raleigh, NC 27601 919 677 2000

will make use of the previously permitted areas of the Town’s Dunn Creek Greenway project to
reduce the extent of new impacts.

The following information is included as part of this application:

• PCN Application Form
• Signed Agent Authorization
• Vicinity Map
• USGS Topographic Map
• Jurisdictional Features Map
• NRCS Soil Survey of Wake County
• Proposed Impacts Figure
• Dunn Creek Greenway-Ph III Preliminary JD
Covering Project Area
• Dunn Creek Greenway-Ph III Buffer
Determination Covering Project Area
• Dunn Creek Greenway-Ph III USFWS
Coordination Covering Project Area
• Plan Set
• Check for DWR Water Quality Certification
Fee of $570.00
If there is any additional information you need to assist in the processing of this NWP application,
please do not hesitate to contact me at 919-677-2113 or [e-mail].

Sincerely,

William Sullivan

Page 1 of 12
PCN Form – Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no. _____________
DWQ project no. _______________
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps: Section 404 Permit Section 10 Permit
1b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 27 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps? Yes No
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
401 Water Quality Certification – Regular Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
401 Water Quality Certification – Express Riparian Buffer Authorization
1e. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?

For the record only for DWQ 401
Certification:
Yes No
For the record only for Corps Permit:

Yes No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program proposed for mitigation
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in-lieu
fee program.
Yes No

1g. Is the project located in any of NC’s twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1h
below.
Yes No

1h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)? Yes No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project: Ailey Young Park Dam and Stream Restoration
2b. County: Wake County
2c. Nearest municipality / town: Wake Forest
2d. Subdivision name: n/a
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no: n/a
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed: Town of Wake Forest
3b. Deed Book and Page No. DB 2916; PG 176
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable): Holly Miller, P.E.
3d. Street address: 301 S. Brooks Street
3e. City, state, zip: Wake Forest, NC 27587
3f. Telephone no.: 919-435-9443
3g. Fax no.: n/a
3h. Email address: [e-mail]

Page 2 of 12
PCN Form – Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is: Agent Other, specify:
4b. Name:
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
4d. Street address:
4e. City, state, zip:
4f. Telephone no.:
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name: William Sullivan
5b. Business name
(if applicable): Kimley-Horn
5c. Street address: 421 Fayetteville St., Suite 600
5d. City, state, zip: Raleigh, NC, 26701
5e. Telephone no.: 919-677-2113
5f. Fax no.: n/a
5g. Email address: [e-mail]

Page 3 of 12
PCN Form – Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID): 1841829179
1b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): Latitude: 35.980826 Longitude: - 78.496186
(DD.DDDDDD) (-DD.DDDDDD)
1c. Property size: 3.1 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to
proposed project: Dunn Creek (Hatters Branch)
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water: C; NSW
2c. River basin: Neuse
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
The proposed project will occur along an unnamed perennial tributary to Dunn Creek. The project will occur within the
upper reach of the stream, in an area that has been impounded by a man-made berm. The project corridor is bounded to
the north by Ailey Young Park, to the south and west by single-family residential housing, and to the east by a proposed
greenway and sanitary sewer easement.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
0.17 acre of wetland; 0.4 acre of open water
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
630 lf
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The goals of the dam and stream restoration at the Ailey Young Park are to improve visual and functional connections
along the stream corridor, the partial removal of existing dam, conversion of the existing pond into floodplain wetlands,
protect surrounding environment, and improve the stream’s hydraulic and geomorphic functions that could help support
improved water quality and habitat functions and values.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The proposed project will include the breach of a failing dam that is impounding water on an unnamed tributary to Dunn
Creek. In addition to the dam removal, the project will include channel reshaping, grade control structures, bank
stabilization, and planting native vegetation. To establish wetlands in the existing pond bottom, the project includes
supplemental planting of the pond bottom to enhance the natural development. After approximately one year, the pond
bottom area will be reevaluated to determine if additional stream grading and stabilization within the pond or wetland
plantings are required to fully establish the wetlands and stream restoration in this area. At that time, if the stream is
stable, the wetlands will not be disturbed except for additional plantings as needed. The stream structures in and out of
the existing pond will also be evaluated to determine if any invert adjustments need to be made to establish the wetlands
and stream through the existing pond. An observation deck will be constructed that connects to the proposed greenway,
which will provide educational opportunities and access to the devel oping wetland and stream restoration project.
Equipment including excavators, pans, track trucks, and other earthmoving equipment typical of stream restoration
projects is expected to be used during the construction of the project.

Page 4 of 12
PCN Form – Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Comments: The Town’s Dunn Creek Greenway – Phase III
project is adjacent and overlapping the proposed stream
restoration. The Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination and
Buffer Determination issued for the Dunn Creek project cover
the project area for the Ailey Young Stream Restoration. The
Dunn Creek PreJD was issued by James Lastinger of the
USACE on February 21, 2018 (SAW -2017-02221).
Additionally, the Buffer Determination was conducted by
Stephanie Goss of NCDWR on May 18, 2017 (NBRRO #17-
098). The two determinations have been attached as part of
this application.
Yes No Unknown
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made? Preliminary Final
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): Jason Hartshorn & William Sullivan
Agency/Consultant Company: Kimley-Horn
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
The Dunn Creek PreJD was issued by James Lastinger of the USACE on February 21, 2018 (SAW -2017-02221).
Additionally, the Buffer Determination was conducted by Stephanie Goss of NCDWR on May 18, 2017 (NBRRO #17-
098). These determinations cover the proposed project area for the Ailey Young Stream Restoration.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past? Yes No Unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to “help file” instructions.
n/a
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? Yes No
6b. If yes, explain.
n/a

Page 5 of 12
PCN Form – Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
Wetlands Streams - tributaries Buffers
Open Waters Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
Wetland impact
number –
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
2b.

Type of impact
2c.

Type of wetland
(if known)
2d.

Forested

2e.
Type of jurisdiction
(Corps - 404, 10
DWQ – non-404, other)
2f.

Area of impact
(acres)
W1 P T Construction Access Riverine/Emergent Yes
No
Corps
DWQ 0.17
2g. Total wetland impacts 0.17
2h. Comments: Temporary impacts to wetland W1 will result from the construction access needed to restore the stream. All
temporary impacts will be returned to preconstruction conditions and replanted/reseeded upon completion of the project.
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
Stream impact
number -
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
3b.
Type of impact
3c.
Stream name
3d.
Perennial
(PER) or
intermittent
(INT)?
3e.
Type of jurisdiction
(Corps - 404, 10
DWQ – non-404,
other)
3f.
Average
stream
width
(feet)
3g.
Impact
length
(linear
feet)
S9 P T Stream Restoration Stream S9 – UT to
Dunn Creek
PER
INT
Corps
DWQ 10 523
S10 P T Fill Stream S10 – UT
to Dunn Creek
PER
INT
Corps
DWQ 5 107
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts 630
3i. Comments: Temporary impacts will result to stream S9 as a result of stream restoration and channel improvements.
Stream S10, a relic channel from a prior berm failure parallel to S9, will be permanently filled as a result of bank and channel
restoration.
4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other ope n water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
Open water
impact number –
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable)
4c.

Type of impact
4d.

Waterbody type
4e.

Area of impact (acres)
OW 1 P T OW1 Fill/Grade Pond 0.02
4f. Total open water impacts 0.02
4g. Comments: Permanent impacts to pond OW1 will result from the removal and grading of an existing berm.
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.

Page 6 of 12
PCN Form – Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5a.

Pond ID
number
5b.

Proposed use or purpose of
pond

5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
5d.
Stream Impacts (feet)
5e.
Upland
(acres)
Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded
P1
5f. Total
5g. Comments: No ponds or lakes will be constructed as part of the proposed project.
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
Yes No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres): n/a
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres): n/a
5k. Method of construction: n/a
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
Project is in which protected basin?
Neuse Tar-Pamlico Other:
Catawba Randleman
6b.
Buffer impact
number –
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
6c.

Reason for
impact
6d.

Stream name
6e.

Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f.

Zone 1 impact
(square feet)
6g.

Zone 2 impact
(square feet)
B1 P T Construction
Access
Stream S9 – UT to Dunn
Creek
Yes
No 32,535 14,222
6h. Total buffer impacts 35,535 14,222
6i. Comments: Temporary impacts to buffer zones 1 and 2 will result from the temporary construction access required to
construct the stream restoration project. All temporary impacts will be restored to pre-construction conditions upon completion
of the project.
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
This project has been designed to restore habitat and improve water quality within the project area, a portion of the Dunn
Creek watershed. Access to the site will be limited to designated construction access areas which have been intentionally
aligned to make use of the existing maintained sewer easements and the previously permitted Dunn Creek Greenway. Buffers
and streams will only be impacted when necessary and when targeted restoration activities are underway.
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Silt fences will be used throughout construction to prevent sediment runoff into Stream S9 (UT to Dunn Creek). Additionally,
construction access and access roads are specified and located in areas designated to result in the lowest possible impact to
buffers, wetlands, and streams. All temporary wetland and stream crossings will be protected with timber and mud mats during
construction activities.

Page 7 of 12
PCN Form – Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
Yes No

2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply): DWQ Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this project?
Mitigation bank
Payment to in-lieu fee program
Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter) Type Quantity
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In-lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in-lieu fee program is attached. Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested: linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature: warm cool cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only): square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4f. Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested: acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
n/a
6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) – required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation?
Yes No

6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
Zone
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Total impact
(square feet)

Multiplier
6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1 3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2 1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in-lieu fee fund).

Page 8 of 12
PCN Form – Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

6h. Comments: No buffer mitigation is required for the proposed project. All buffer impacts resulting from temporary roads and
stream restoration activities are deemed “Allowable” or “Exempt” under the Neuse River Basin Riparian Buffer Rules:
Table of Uses.

Page 9 of 12
PCN Form – Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules? Yes No
1b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
Comments: No stormwater will be concentrated or discharged as a result of the
proposed project.
Yes No
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project? <5 %
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan? Yes No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why: No stormwater will be collected as part of
the proposed project.
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:

2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
Certified Local Government
DWQ Stormwater Program
DWQ 401 Unit
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government’s jurisdiction is this project? Town of Wake Forest
3b. Which of the following locally-implemented stormwater management programs
apply (check all that apply):
Phase II
NSW
USMP
Water Supply Watershed
Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached?
Yes No
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
4a. Which of the following state-implemented stormwater management programs apply
(check all that apply):
Coastal counties
HQW
ORW
Session Law 2006-246
Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached? Yes No
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements? Yes No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met? Yes No

Page 10 of 12
PCN Form – Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local ) funds or the
use of public (federal/state) land? Yes No
1b. If you answered “yes” to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Yes No
1c. If you answered “yes” to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.)
Comments: n/a
Yes No
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
Yes No
2b. Is this an after-the-fact permit application? Yes No
2c. If you answered “yes” to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s): n/a
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? Yes No
3b. If you answered “yes” to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered “no,” provide a short narrative description.
The purpose of the proposed project is to improve water quality within the local watershed.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
No waste will be generated as a result of the proposed project.

Page 11 of 12
PCN Form – Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
habitat? Yes No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
impacts? Yes No
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted. Raleigh
Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Crit ical
Habitat?
The USFWS lists seven federally-protected species known to occur in Wake County: bald eagle, Cape Fear shiner, red-
cockaded woodpecker, Michaux’s sumac, dwarf wedgemussel, Tar River spinymussel, and yellow lance. A review of the
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) element occurrence database records (updated January 2018) did
not identify any federally listed species occurrences within the study area or within 1-mile of the project limits.
Suitable habitat for Cape Fear shiner may be present within the study area; however, the project will likely have no effect
on this species due to the lack of connectivity to the Cape Fear River – the shiner’s only known range.
Suitable habitat is not present within the study area for red-cockaded woodpecker due to the lack of open, mature pine
stands.
Potentially suitable habitat is present for Michaux's sumac along maintained easements and rights-of-way. Kimley-Horn
biologists conducted pedestrian surveys for Michaux's sumac on October 28, 2016 and no individuals were identified.
Suitable habitat for dwarf wedgemussel, Tar River spinymussel, and yellow lance is not present within the study area due
to the lack of well oxygenated, fast flowing streams with stable root-lined banks.
Habitat for bald eagle primarily consists of mature forest in proximity to large bodies of open water for foraging. Large
dominant trees are utilized for nesting sites, typically within 1.0 mile of open water. Potential bald eagle nesting habitat is
present within the study area. One water body (Wake Forest Reservoir) large enough or sufficiently open to be
considered a potential feeding source was found to occur in or within 1.0 mile of the study area. However, the project
study area is separated from Wake Forest Reservoir and bordered by high density residential development and only
supports marginal habitat in comparison to the forestland surrounding the reservoir. A review of the NCNHP database,
updated January 2018, revealed no known occurrences of this species within 1.0 mile of the study area. Due to the
presence of only marginal habitat and the lack of known occurrences, it is anticipated that the proposed project will not
affect this species.
Kimley-Horn biologists consulted with USFWS in regard to a CLOMR application for the adjacent Dunn Creek Greenway
project, which contains the proposed study area for the Ailey Young Stream Restoration, and it was determined that the
Dunn Creek Greenway project would have no effect on the red-cockaded woodpecker, Michaux’s sumac, or dwarf
wedgemussel (attached).
Based on NCNHP records, lack of suitable habitat, pedestrian surveys conducted by Kimley-Horn staff, and the past
USFWS consultation, it has been determined the proposed project will have “no effect” on Cape Fear shiner, Michaux’s
sumac, red-cockaded woodpecker, Tar River spinymussel, dwarf wedgemussel, or yellow lance.

6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat? Yes No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
The NOAA EFH Mapper was accessed on March 26, 2018. No Essential Fish Habitat was found within the project area or
within the vicinity of the project.

Page 12 of 12
PCN Form – Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
Yes No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
The State Historic Preservation Office HPOWEB GIS Service was reviewed on March 26, 2018 and 10 national register or
study list sites were found to occur within 1.0 mile of the project area. The 10 sites include:
- Wake Forest Historic District: National Register historic district, approximately 3,000' west of the study area;
- Downtown Wake Forest Historic District: National Register historic district, approximately 3,000' west of the study area;
- Glen Royall Mill Village Historic District: National Register historic district, approximately 2,200' north of the study area;
- W.E.B. DuBois School: National Register individual listing, approximately 900' north of the study area;
- Royall Cotton Mill Commissary: National Register individual listing, approximately 2,700' north of the study area;
- Dr. Calvin Jones House: National Register individual listing, approximately 2,800' west of the study area;
- Lea Laboratory: National Register individual listing, approximately 3,700' west of the study area;
- South Birck House (Folk House): National Register individual listing and Local Landmark, approximately 3,800' west of
the study area
- Battle-Purnell House: Study List individual entry, Determined Eligble, Local Landmark, approximately 5,260' north of the
study area;
- Ailey Young House: Study List individual entry, Local Landmark, approximately 2,750' west of the study area.
The proposed project will drain an impoundment along a stream that is located entirely within a wooded forest owned by the
Town. A majority of these cultural resources are separated from the project area by residential neighborhoods and wooded
areas. Due to the distance and separation from most of the sites, and the low impacts associated with stream restoration
projects, it is anticipated that the proposed project will have no effect on any of the historical or cultural resources identified
within the project vicinity.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain? Yes No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements: n/a
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? The FEMA Digital Flood Insurance Map (DFIRM) Panel
3720184100J (effective May 2, 2006) was accessed on March 26, 2018, and no FEMA regulated floodplains or floodways
were found to occur in the project area.

William Sullivan

Applicant/Agent's Printed Name

_______________________________
Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant
is provided.)

5/24/2018

Date

AGENT AUTHORIZATION
FORM

FIGURES

WJuniperAve N Taylor StN Wingate StEPineAve
ECedarAve
Ridgetop
W
ay
BrewerCirElizabeth AveEChestnutAve
BrooksStE
P
erry
A
v
e N Franklin StBrewerAveGroveton Trl
Brick St
EEOakAve
Seventh StPearce Ave Jubilee CtE Spring St
CarrollStEOwenAve
WCedarAve
Havish a m CtN College StHighgate CirWaitAve
Lee St
Flaherty A
ve
Best St
Hill S tR
ook
w
oo
d
CtMill StCardinal DrCaddellStSixth StEJonesAve
ENelsonAve
EWalnutAve Thorn ro s e Way
S White StEJuniperAve
WWOakAve
Elm Ave NAllenRdN White StSFranklinStOak Grove Church Rd
SAllenRdSpringBranchHattersBranch¬«98
£¤1
FranklinOrangeDurham Nash
WakeChatham Wilson
JohnstonLee
WayneHarnettMoore
Sampson Duplin
WarrenVance
Granville
Caswell Person
Proje ct L ocation
Legend
Limits of Disturbance
Wake Forest
Wake County
Figure 1: Vicinity MapAiley Young Park Dam and Stream RestorationWake Forest, Wake County, NC
0 10 20Miles
Kentucky Virginia
NorthCarolina
Tennessee
Georgia
SouthCarolina
Atlantic Ocean04080Miles
^_
0 2,0001,000 Feet
±
Legend
Limits of Disturbance
Figure 2: USGS Topographic MapAiley Young Park Dam and Stream RestorationWake Forest, Wake County, NC
0 1,000500Feet
±
S1
0
S9S9
W2
E J u n ip e rA v e
OakGroveChurchRd
OW1
Legend
Stream s
Open Water
Limits of Disturbance
Figure 3: Jurisdictional Features MapAiley Young Park Dam and Stream RestorationWake Forest, Wake County, NC
0 200100Feet
±
A i l e y Y oungAiley Y oungParkPark
Figure 4: NRCS Soil Survey Map(Wake County, 1970)Ailey Young Park Dam and Stream RestorationWake Forest, Wake County, NC
Legend
Limits of Disturbance
±
0 1,000500Feet
Legend
Permanent Stream Im pacts
Temporary Stream Im pacts
Temporary Wetland Im pacts
Buffer Zone 1 - Tempo rary Im pacts
Buffer Zone 2 - Tempo rary Im pacts
Open Wa ter Im pacts
Existing Stream s
Proposed Stream Alignm ent
Proposed Structures and Grade
Existing Open W ater
Limits of Disturbance
Dunn Creek Greenway LOD
Figure 5: Proposed ImpactsAiley Young Park Dam and Stream RestorationWake Forest, Wake County, NC
0 100 200Feet
±
A i l e y Y oungAiley Y oungParkPark
(SAW-2017-02221; NBRRO #17-098)
Fe ature Type of Impact SizeWetland W1 (T) Constructi on A cce ss 0.17 acreStream S9 (T) Stre am Re storati on 523 LFStream S10 (P) Fi l l 107 LFPond OW1 (P) Fi l l /Grade 0.02 acre
Wetland W 1
Stream S9
Stream S9
Stream S10
DUNN CREEK
PRELIMINARY
JURISDICTIONAL
DETERMINATION
DUNN CREEK
NCDWR BUFFER
DETERMINATION
LETTER
DUNN CREEK
USFWS
COORDINATION
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh ES Field Office
Post Office Box33726
Ralei gh, North Carolin a 27 63 6-3726
March 22,2018
William Sullivan
Kimley-Horn
421Fayetteville Street, Suite 600
Raleigh, NC 27601
Re: Dunn Creek Greenway Phase III - Wake County, NC
Dear Mr. Sullivan:
This letter is to inform you that the Service has established an on-line project planning and
consultation process which assists developers and consultants in determining whether a
federally-listed species or designated critical habitat may be affected by a proposed project. For
future projects, please visit the Raleigh Field Office's project plaruring website at
https://www.fivs.goviraleigh/pp.html. If you are only searching for a list of species that may be
present in the project's Action Area, then you may use the Service's Information, Planning, and
Consultation System (IPaC) website to determine if any listed, proposed, or candidate species
may be present in the Action Area and generate a species list. The IPaC website may be viewed
at https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/. The lPaC web site contains a complete and fieqr"rently updated list
ofall endangered and threatened species protected by the provisions ofthe Endangered Species
Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.)(Act), a list of federal species of concern' that
are known to occur in each county in North Carolina. and other resources.
Section 7 of the Act requires that all federal agencies (or their designated non-federal
representative), in consultation with the Service, insure that any action federally authorized,
funded, or camied out by such agencies is not likely to jeopardizethe continued existence of any
federally-listed endangered or threatened species. A biological assessment or evaluation may be
prepared to fulfill that requirement and in determining whether additional consultation with the
Service is necessary. In addition to the federally-protected species list, information on the
species' life histories and habitats and information on completing a biological assessment or
' The term "federal species of concern" refers to those species which the Service believes might be in need of
concentrated conservation actions. Federal species of concern receive no legal protection and their designation does
not necessarily imply that the species will eventually be proposed for listing as a federally endangered or threatened
species. However, we recommend that all practicable measures be taken to avoid or minimize adverse impacts to
federal species of concern.
evaluation and can be found on our web page at http://www.fws.gov/raleigh. Please check the
web site often for updated information or changes.
If your project contains suitable habitat for any of the federally-listed species known to be
present within the county where your project occurs, the proposed action has the potential to
adversely affect those species. As such, we recommend that surveys be conducted to determine
the species' presence or absence within the project area. The use of North Carolina Natural
Heritage program data should not be substituted for actual field surveys.
If you determine that the proposed action may affect (i.e., likely to adversely affect or not likely
to adversely affect) a federally-protected species, you should notify this office with your
determination, the results of your suryeys, survey methodologies, and an analysis of the effects
of the action on listed species, including consideration of direct, indirect, and cumulative effects,
before conducting any activities that might affect the species. If you determine that the proposed
action will have no effect (i.e., no beneficial or adverse, direct or indirect effect) on federally
listed species, then you are not required to contact our office for concunence (unless an
Environmental Impact Statement is prepared). However, you should maintain a complete record
of the assessment, including steps leading to your determination of effect, the qualified personnel
conducting the assessment, habitat conditions, site photographs, and any other related articles.
With regard to the above-referenced project, we offer the following remarks. Our comments are
submitted pursuant to, and in accordance with, provisions of the Endangered Species Act.
Based on the information provided and other information available, it appears that the proposed
action is not likely to adversely affect any federally-listed endangered or threatened species, their
formally designated critical habitat, or species currently proposed for listing under the Act at
these sites. We believe that the requirements of sectionT(a)(2) of the Act have been satisfied for
your project. Please remember that obligations under section 7 consultation must be
reconsidered if: (1) new information reveals impacts of this identified action that may affect
listed species or critical habitat in a manner not previously considered; (2) this action is
subsequently modified in a manner that was not considered in this review; or, (3) a new species
is listed or critical habitat determined that may be affected by the identified action.
However, the Service is concerned about the potential impacts the proposed action might have
on aquatic species. Aquatic resources are highly susceptible to sedimentation. Therefore, we
recommend that all practicable measures be taken to avoid adverse impacts to aquatic species,
including implementing directional boring methods and stringent sediment and erosion control
measures. An erosion and sedimentation control plan should be submitted to and approved by
the North Carolina Division of Land Resources, Land Quality Section prior to construction.
Erosion and sedimentation controls should be installed and maintained between the construction
site and any nearby down-gradient surface waters. In addition, we recommend maintaining
natural, vegetated buffers on all streams and creeks adjacent to the project site.
The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission has developed a Guidance Memorandum (a
copy can be found on our website at (http://www.fws.gov/raleigh) to address and mitigate
secondary and cumulative impacts to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife resources and water quality.
We recommend that you consider this document in the development of your projects and in
completing an initiation package for consultation (if necessary).
We hope you find our web page useful and informative and that following the process described
above will reduce the time required, and eliminate the need, for general correspondence for
species' lists. If you have any questions or comments, please contact John Ellis of this office at
[phone] ext.26.
Field Supervisor