20020413 Ver 1_COMPLETE FILE_20020319

do,
3 +?
® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: John Dorney, Wetland Scientist
Wetlands/401 Water Quality Certification Unit
vision of Water Q lity
FROM: Danielle R. Pender, Piedmont Region Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE:.: 5 June 2002
SUBJECT: Pre-construction Notification Application for 7217 Mine Shaft Road Streambank
Stabilization Project, Wake County, North Carolina. DWQ ID: 020413
Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) have
reviewed the subject document, and we are familiar with the habitat values of the area. Our
comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the Clean Water Act of 1977 (as
amended), the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-
667d), and North Carolina General Statutes (G.S. 113-131 et seq.).
The applicant proposes to stabilize 131 linear feet of an unnamed tributary to Mine Creek
by reinforcing the side slopes and channel bottom with filter fabric and riprap. Plans are to
excavate the side slopes and remove sediment in the channel bottom prior to placing the filter
fabric and riprap. Mine Creek is a tributary of Crabtree Creek in the Neuse River basin. Several
listed species have been found to exist in Crabtree Creek including the federal species of concern
and state threatened Atlantic pigtoe (Fusconaia masoni), the federal species of concern and
significantly rare pinewoods shiner (Lythrurus matutinus), the state threatened creeper
(Strophitus undulatus) and triangle floater (Alasmidonta undulata), and the significantly rare
notched rainbow (Villosa constricta). In addition, there are spawning runs of blueback herring
(Alosa aestivalis), hickory shad (Alosa mediocris), alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus), American
shad (Alosa sapidissima), and striped bass (Morone saxatilis) in Crabtree creek.
We are not opposed to the project; however, we recommend that the applicant avoid the
placing of riprap on the streambed and instead limit riprap placement to the toe of the slope, and
to use rock veins to turn energy flow off of the bank. For rock veins, proper placement of rocks
and appropriate rock size is essential. In addition, we suggest the use of appropriate native
vegetation, in conjunction with fiber matting if needed, to help stabilize the stream bank. These
repair and restoration techniques will provide both stream stabilization and habitat enhancement,
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
-- Telephone: [phone] ext. 281 • Fax: [phone]

Page 2
5 June 2002
Mine Shaft Road Stream Stabilization
NCDWQ No. 020413
and be more beneficial to fish and wildlife. For more information on innovative stream
restoration techniques, we encourage the applicant to contact the Stream Restoration Institute, a
division of the North Carolina State University Water Quality Group, at [phone]. Stream
restoration specialists are available to provide advice and site visits. Also, contact Joe Mickey,
NCWRC, at [phone] for more information on stream restoration techniques to benefit
fish and wildlife.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input during the planning stages for this project.
If we can be of further assistance, please contact our office at [phone].
cc: Mr. Carl R. Dawson, P.E., City of Raleigh, Central Engineering Department
Amanda Jones, USACOE
Greg Jennings, NCSU
E-mail: Steve Mitchell, DWQ
Joe Mickey, NCWRC

v a.
Qz

North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: John R. Dorney, Division of Water Quality
Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources
FROM: Ron Linville, Regional Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: April 2, 2002
SUBJECT: Review of Shoreline Stabilization Application, Gary Becker, Lot 197,
South Pointe, Lake James, DWQ 0_ 204 Burke County
The applicant is requesting 401 Water Quality Certification from the North Carolina Division of
Water Quality. The NCWRC has reviewed information provided by the applicant, and field
biologists on our staff are familiar with habitat values of the project area. These comments are
provided in accordance with provisions of the Clean Water Act of 1977 (33 U.S.C. 466 et. seq.)
and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d).
The permit application proposes to stabilize 105 linear feet of shoreline on a private lot. An
eight-foot pathway and pier (120') are also indicated.
Mr. Bob Brown, Assistant Fishery Biologist with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission (NCWRC) visited the site on April 1, 2002. According to Mr. Brown, it appears
that this site will require some shoreline stabilization on about 20' on the right side and 70' on the
left side looking towards the lake. Approximately 110' of sandy beach area is present. This
beach should remain untouched as a nursery area for game fish such as walleye and as important
habitat for forage fish species.
Mr. Brown indicates that stabilization can include the use of riprap to the edge of the full
pool level in the two stabilization areas indicated above. Other than the shoreline edge, fill should
not occur below the high water elevation on the sandy beach area. Limited sloping of the banks
can be permitted; however,` impacts to vegetation and trees in the buffer zone should adhere to
Burke Co. shoreline management guidelines.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this project. If you have any
questions regarding these comments, please contact me at 336/769-9453.
Cc:: Bob Brown, WRC
Mark Cantrell, USFWS
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] ext. 281 • Fax: [phone]

Michael F. Easley
Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, PE, Director
Division of Water Quality
June 14, 2002
DWQ Project # 02-0413
Wake County
City of Raleigh
Central Engineering Department
Attn: Mr. Carl R. Dawson, Jr., PE or Mr. James K. Leumas, PE
PO Box 590
Raleigh, NC 27602
Subject Property: 7217 Mine Shaft Road, Raleigh, NC
Streambank Stabilization Project
Unnamed tributary stream of Mine Creek [03-04-02; 27-33-14; C NSW]
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification and Authorization Certificate per the Neuse River Buffer Protection Rules
(15A NCAC 2B.0233)
Dear Sirs:
You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions, to impact 131 feet of perennial stream and it's associated riparian
buffers to construct the proposed shoreline stabilization project at the subject property as described within your application dated
March 14, 2002 with revisions dated June 11, 2002. After reviewing your application, we have determined that the stream impacts are
covered by the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) General Water Quality Certification Number 3353. This Certification allows you to
use Nationwide Permit No. 13 when issued by the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). This letter shall also act as your approved
Authorization Certificate for impacts to the protected Neuse River Buffers as required under 15A NCAC 2B .0233(8). In addition,
you should get or otherwise comply with any other federal, state and local requirements before you go ahead with your project
including (but not limited to) Erosion and Sediment Control Permit. Also, this approval will expire when the accompanying 404
permit expires unless otherwise specified in the General Certification.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your application with revisions. If you change your
project, you must notify us and you may be required to send us a new application. If the property is sold, the new owner must be
given a copy of this Certification and approval letter and is thereby responsible for complying with all conditions. If total fills for this
project (now or in the future) exceed one acre of wetland or 150 feet stream, compensatory mitigation may be required as described in
15A NCAC 21-1.0506 (h). For this approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed in the DWQ General Water Quality
Certification No. 3353.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act and the Neuse Buffer
Rules. If you have any questions, please telephone Mr. Bob Zarzecki at [phone].
Sincerely,
Attachment: General Water Quality
I?
limek P
Q, Director
i
Certification No. 3 3
Cc: Steve Mitchell, DWQ Raleigh Regional Office
USACE Raleigh Regulatory Field Office, 6508 Falls of Neuse Road, Suite 120, Raleigh, NC 27615
File Copy
Central Files
North Carolina Division of Water Quality, 401 Wetlands Certification Unit,
- 1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 (Mailing Address)
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 (Location)
919-733-1786 (phone), 919-733-6893 (fax), http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetiands/

City Of (Raleigh
9Yorth Carolina
June 11, 2002
Mr. John Dorney
North Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
401/Wetlands Certification Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
RE: Response to Letter Dated May 14, 2002
Pre-Construction Notification Application
Form for Stream Bank Stabilization at:
7217 Mine Shaft Road
Raleigh, NC 27615-6019
DWQ Project # 02-0413
Dear Mr. Dorney:
Reply To:
City of Raleigh
Central Engineering Department - 2210
Stormwater Services Division
Post Office Box 590
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602
11 3W
United States Army Corps of Engineers
Nationwide Permit Number 13
Authorization Issued: April 3, 2002
Action ID 200220772
Thank you for your letter dated May 14, 2002 to Mr. Carl R. Dawson, Jr., P. E., City Engineer. Mr.
Dawson has asked that I respond to your request for additional information or revisions for the referenced
project. The following information is in response to the concerns expressed in your letter. I have listed
your concerns in Italics for convenience in reviewing the responses.
The DWQ recommends that the side slope be excavated to 3H.•1 V (or greater) instead of the proposed
2H.-IV The DWQ believes that a less steep slope will ensure better stability of the stream bank and
improve infiltration of overland flow into the soil prior to discharging to the stream. Please provide
additional information as to why the slope can not be excavated to 3H.•I V (or greater). Also, many
urban and suburban streams in the piedmont are incised. Providing a flood plain bench ("bankfull
bench') to accept overbank flows can reduce velocities and shear stress in the stream, providing
additional protection to the stream bank to be repaired.
Our office concurs that a 3H:1 V side slope would better ensure stability of the stream bank. For
overland flow, however, there is essentially negligible difference in the length of overland flow with
the use of a 2H:1V side slope versus a 3H:1V side slope. Exhibits 1 and IA provide schematic
comparisons for illustrative purposes. The side yard and backyard of the property are to the left of
Point A in Exhibit 1. A Plan View of the house at 7217 Mine Shaft Road showing its proximity to
the stream is also provided.
OFFICES • 222 WEST HARGETT STREET • POST OFFICE BOX 590 • RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27602
Recycled Paper
Mr. John Dorney
June 11, 2002
Page 2
The 2H:1 V side slope allows for 4 feet of overland flow in the relatively flat back yard before flowing
over a 2H:1 V side slope length of approximately 8.9 feet. Thus, from Point A to the toe of the slope
the total linear distance of travel is 12.9 feet before the flow enters the lower part of the channel.
With a 3H:1 V side slope from Point A to the toe of the slope the distance of travel is approximately
12.6 feet with 4 feet less of overland flow before discharging into the channel. With a composite side
slope of 2H:1 V near the toe of the channel and 3H:1 V near the top bank of the channel, from Point A
to the toe of the slope the distance of travel is approximately 12.8 feet with 2 feet less of overland
flow before discharging into the channel as compared to a single 2H:1 V side slope. Our office
proposes to use a composite side slope of 2H:1 V in the lower 2 feet (vertically) in the channel to be
lined with riprap and 3H:1 V in the upper 2 feet (vertically) in the channel. The riprap is essential for
the expected velocities ranging from the 1-Year 24-Hour storm event through the 25-Year 24-Hour
storm event. A discussion of the hydraulics analysis follows:
The bottom width of the channel varies, but is generally between 4 and 8 feet. Only the right bank of
the channel is to be stabilized because the owner on the left side of the channel has not requested City
assistance to stabilize the left side of the channel which is on his adjacent property. The existing side
slopes of the channel are nearly vertical. The velocities and depths for the 1-Year 24-Hour and 25-
Year 24-Hour storm events were determined using the United States Army Corps of Engineers' HEC-
1 program and Haestad Methods' Flowmaster program. The results of these analyses are shown
below:
Storm Discharge, Bottom Flow Depth, Flow
Event cfs Width, ft ft Velocity, fps
1-Yr 24-Hr 67 4 1.41 8.50
1-Yr 24-Hr 67 8 0.95 7.79
25-Yr 24-Hr 229 4 2.80 11.29
25-Yr 24-Hr 229 8 1.97 11.35
The velocities for even small storm events exceed the maximum permissible velocities for the soils
along the channel. (Per the Sedimentation Pollution Control Act Rules, 15A NCAC 4B .0109(d), the
maximum permissible velocities for fine sands, sandy loam soils and silty loam soils range between
2.5 and 3.0 feet per second.) I am enclosing calculations for the discharges and velocities that were
determined from the United States Army Corps of Engineers' HEC-1 program and Haestad Methods'
Flowmaster program.
Based on the velocities and flow depths in the channel, and considering the risk of occurrence of
various storm events, our office respectfully requests that the toe of the slope be stabilized for a
vertical depth of 2 feet on a 2H:1 V side slope, and then using vegetation and live stakes for the upper
2 feet (vertically) of the channel on a 3H:1 V side slope.
There are 3 to 4 trees that the owner and our office would like to prevent removing within Zone A of
the buffer area. There is a 5-trunked 24-inch diameter (at the base) Silver Maple tree approximately 7
feet from the top bank; a 12-inch diameter Cedar tree located approximately 26 feet from the top
bank; a 12-inch diameter Bradford Pear tree about 11 feet from the top bank; and a Holly tree
approximately 12 feet from the top bank. The 12-inch Cedar tree may need to be removed for
Mr. John Dorney
June 11, 2002
Page 3
equipment access. It is the owner's desire to minimize the loss of usable property in the side yard and
backyard. The owner and our office would also like to retain all of these trees, if possible, because of
their beneficial aspects as related to water quality. In order to prevent damaging the root systems, our
office requests that transitions from 3H:1 V to approximately 2H:1 V be provided in the areas around
the trees so as to minimize the potential for damaging the root systems of the trees. Transitions will
be necessary for this stabilization project where the 131-foot length ties into the existing channel at
the upstream end and at the downstream end near the Silver Maple tree where the channel ties into the
twin 48-inch diameter reinforced concrete pipe culvert headwall.
For storms larger than the 25-Year 24-Hour storm event, some erosion above the riprap may be
expected. Because of the smaller frequency of such storm events, however, it is believed that the
level of risk is acceptable and will require maintenance following storm events larger than the 25-year
storm event. One the vegetation and live stakes become well established, this will help to restrain
erosion of the right side slope of the channel for the larger storm events.
While a flood plain bench is desirable, such a bench would also require extending the top right bank
of the channel closer to the house. Also, because the drainage area is approximately 69.4 acres (per
planimetric measurement of the USGS 7.5-minute Bayleaf quadrangle map) with a Soil Conservation
Method lag time of 0.33 hour, the flow of water through this 131-foot section would be for a
relatively short period of time with respect to the filtration properties of a flood plain bench. (Note:
Digitizing of the City of Raleigh topographic GIS map of the watershed, the drainage area is 78.2
acres. A drainage area of 78.2 acres was used in the computer analyses to determine discharges.)
Because of the limited usable side yard and backyard areas, the relatively short length of channel to
be stabilized, and the hydraulic properties of the proposed stabilized channel section, it is respectfully
requested that a composite 2H:1 V lower side slope and 311:1 V upper side slope be allowed to be used
in this case without a flood plain (bankfull) bench.
2. The DWQ recommends planting native woody vegetation on the proposed side slope and within
fifteen (I5) feet of the stream (or greater) to aid in stabilizing the stream bank and in the removal of
nitrogen from overland flow. Your application states that the side slope will be vegetated, but does
not indicate the type of vegetation used. We presume that you are referring to grass. Please provide
additional information as to why woody vegetation can not be used. Also, please provide a planting
plan indicating the type of vegetation to be used, location ofplantings and schedule ofplanting.
Our office concurs with the use of native woody plant species on the proposed side slopes. Live
stakes will be used along the 131-foot length of stream bank to be stabilized. It is the intent of this
project to plant the live stakes, one live stake every 2.5 to 3.0 square feet of stabilized area, during the
fall or winter which is generally the best planting time for many species. Preferred species will
include River Birch (Betula Nigra), Green Ash (Fraxinus Pennsylvanica), Black Willow (Salix
Nigra), Tag Alder (Alnus Serrulata), Silky Dogwood (Cornus Amomum), Buttonbush (Cephalanthus
Occidentalis) and Witch Hazel (Hamamelis Virginiana). (Other species for the Piedmont Region as
outlined in "Recommended Native Plant Species for Stream Restoration in North Carolina" prepared
by Ms. Karen Hall with the North Carolina Stream Restoration Institute, North Carolina State
University, January 2001 will also be acceptable.) It is intended that a mixture of different live stake
species will be used. A mixture, however, may be dependent on availability from nurseries at the
time of construction.
Mr. John Dorney
June 11, 2002
Page 4
The live stakes will be in addition to Tall Fescue (K-31) grass seed to be sowed at a rate of 100
pounds per acre to stabilize the stream bank prior to the live stakes firmly taking root. The Tall
Fescue grass seed will be sowed following the completion of grading activities for the project. It is
expected the seeding would be performed during the time frame of August 20 through October 25.
Should construction activity occur outside of this time frame, then temporary grass vegetative cover
would be used until permanent grass vegetation can be established. Temporary grass vegetative cover
would consist of Rye Grain (Abruzzi Rye) at 120 pounds per acre from January 1 to May 1 and from
October 25 to December 31; and German Millet at a rate of 40 pounds per acre from May 1 to August
20.
Figure 4 from the Pre-Construction Notification application form has been revised and is enclosed
herewith to reflect the aforementioned information.
3. The DWQ prefers the use of woody vegetation as the primary means of long-term stability, and "soft"
techniques such as root wads that encourage the establishment of dense woody vegetation. The DWQ
believes that the construction of a bankfull bench along the toe of the proposed stream bank may aid
in stabilizing the stream bank and require less (or no) riprap. If riprap is determined to be the best
solution for this project, then it shall be installed no higher than the bankfull stage (unless the need
for more riprap is convincingly shown). Please provide additional information as to why a bankfull
bench can not be constructed along the proposed stream bank or why you think it is not the best
option for this project. If riprap is determined to be the best option for this project, then please
provide additional information that the proposed riprap will not exceed bankfull stage.
The high discharge velocities in the channel and the erosive properties of the soil materials
comprising the channel section warrant the use of riprap along the lower 2 feet of the right side slope.
Please note that the riprap is to be placed only on the right side slope from the toe of the slope to a
vertical height of 2 feet above the toe. Riprap will not be placed on the bottom width of the channel.
Live stakes and vegetation will be placed on the flatter 311:1 V side slope above the riprap for the 2-
foot vertical height from the top of the riprap to the top right bank of the channel. Steepening the side
slope of the channel steeper than 2H:1 V to provide a bankfull bench would cause the riprap lining to
become unstable during high velocity discharges.
Again, because of the limited usable side yard and backyard area, the relatively short length of
channel to be stabilized, and the hydraulic properties of the proposed stabilized channel section, it is
respectfully requested that a bankfull bench not be required for this case. (Also, see response to Item
1 above.)
Regarding the Wildlife Resources Commission's comments dated June 5, 2002, as described above, the
riprap will only be placed along the toe of the slope. Rock veins should not be necessary based on the
flow depths, and because only one side of the channel is being stabilized for this project. Such rock veins
may direct water to the left side of the channel, which is also severely eroded, causing further erosion.
(Again, it should be noted that the owner of the property on the left side of the channel is not participating
in this project, and thus, the City of Raleigh does not have permission to access his property to perform
repairs on the left side of the channel. The house on the left side of the channel is a rental house owned
by a developer. He was approached about having the left side of the channel stabilized by the property
owner of 7217 Mine Shaft Road, but the developer was not interested in participating) Also, it should be
Mr. John Dorney
June 11, 2002
Page 5
noted that this channel is shown on both the USGS 7.5-minute Bayleaf quadrangle map and in the Wake
County Soil Survey as an intermittent stream. It is felt that the use of live stakes and vegetation in the
upper half of the channel will provide stream stabilization and habitat enhancement to the extent possible
based on limitations of the flow depths and velocities that are anticipated in the channel.
It is felt that there are no practical alternatives to impacting the protected riparian buffers for this project.
It should be noted that this project is not for a development activity, but rather to stabilize an existing
problem that is contributing to degradation of water quality in the Mine Creek Watershed of the Neuse
River Basin. The activities for this project are intended to provide long-term protection for the 131-foot
length of stream bank that has severely eroded and continues to experience active erosion on the right side
of the channel. This stabilization project is intended to restrain further erosion, thereby improving water
quality in the Mine Creek Watershed that flows into Crabtree Creek and then to the Neuse River.
Your consideration of this information for issuance of the Section 401 Water Quality Certification and
Neuse Buffer Basin Riparian Buffer Rules Authorization Certificate is greatly appreciated. Please contact
me at telephone number [phone] if I may answer any questions concerning this matter or be of
further assistance.
Sincerely,
o
n? SEAL .
,Yt?
,37
James K. Leumas, P. E. 150
Stormwater Services Engineer
?oSaB?$Q?:tD9E?a
c' •ll. O?
JKL/
Enclosures
cc: Mr. Carl R. Dawson, Jr., P. E.
Mr. H. Daniel Bowden, P. E.
Ms. Veronica K. Erby
Exhibit 1
7217 Mine Shaft Road
211: IV vs. 3H: IV Side Slopes
D..,.,+ A
Existing Ground
Line
- ------ ---------------------
r
r
r
r
From Point A:
With 2HA V Side Slope Distance to Channel Tie-In = 4'+ 8.9'= 12.9'
With 3H:1V Side Slope Distance to Channel Tie-In = 12.6'
Exhibit IA
7217 Mine Shaft Road
Composite 2H:1 V and 3H:1 V Side Slopes
Point A
12'

6.3" L
4.5'
From Point A:
Existing Ground
Line
?- ------ --------
r
,
r
r
r 4'
r
r
r
r
r
r
t
- With Composite 2H:1 V and 3h:ly Side Slopes Distance to
- Channel Tie-In = 4.5' + 6.3' + 2' = 12.8'

Holly Treec 12
Near Back of Property
12" Bradford Pear
Sewer Cleanout
22' 11'
4'
25'
8'
12" Cedar I8'
14'
24" 5-Trunk Silver Maple -
Mine Shaft. R6ad
26'
L
Flow
Break Lines
L
l
4
1
7' 1
N
l
Right Top Bank
2 - 48" RCPs
4.?' ,Curb Inlet
Drawing Not to Scale
Curb Inlet
_.- Left Top Bank
7217 Mine Shaft Road
Right Side of Channel
(Facing Downstream)
Live Stakes
Grass Vegetation
Riprap with '-------------
Filter Fabric
1 Underliner
3 to 4 feet 3
1
- ---- ----
Existing Ground Line
Figure 4 - Typical Repair Section
NTS
Live Stakes to be planted during fall or winter. Mixture may be selected from the
following species: River Birch, Green Ash, Black Willow, Tag Alder, Silky
Dogwood, Buttonbush, Witch Hazel. 300 live stakes to be planted for this project at a
rate of one live stake for each 2.5 to 3.0 square feet of stabilized area.
Permanent Grass Vegetation to be Tall Fescue (K-31) to be planted from August 20 to
October 25. Temporary Grass Cover to be planted as follows: Rye Grain at 120
pounds per acre from January 1 to May 1 and from October 25 to December 31; and
German Millet at a rate of 40 pounds per acre from May 1 to August 20.

a
+ m w ?
a E
+ w z

z?
W
m
C7 C7
z z w
k
O
W H a
? H ? ?
a H
E
z
W
4
a 7
O W
Z z O ?

K N
H W k
2
O
H r
az
U
O W
u
w +
U co
U x
H a,
C7 O W
d b H
k
a A

ul
q

+? x x

a ?

O

? U ao
? W H

to
H

? W
C7 W
? RC oo £
i 0 H
U H E
H

x z o
F
F3 m

o w
a 5

W
? E.

+ O q
O

W z
Z
?
a

H
w

E. Z
O
]
v]
E. W4
to W

D r >
rr
U ,?yyW
z
W H R? W

wE,a
q .1 04 W
2, 134
W
FC G
F

W M x C7 O
Q r F r? H
H 0) E, El
H
to U)
rn
W H
x W W E
x ul F a
E H H H
ca xaw
0 xEl 32
H E H
U H m m
W S + ul E
x m q a a

w
w

v
i
z
?w
(
?
° N U)
>C SC ?C ?C x ?C r 7
y
W 03

SC ?4 r a
a
zz U] N
P
?
W U W
F W c
?7
SC F 4 a £
F

k
Q U p
;
x O
w
W W
W ID r
j
H
x U) w
w
F
x x
c z
W a w
a Q 0 P4

??CC 3
scscscscN Z W
z.7 in H ,1

x a
w W 04

F w F a
H > z a x M
k ?
? W ? IW7 a H ? W N H

k
k x Q C7 ?w r? ?Q N o
H
O
W
0 O 0z? H z
FA
V)
H El W

x ? '?-I ff
M
r
C;
>CSC>C>C>C SC ? In H
O a
a
x
z Q
U O O

.ki H
E I-a
W U
M N
x O
xx?k?sk sc a ?3w?`? ? y
? s
C7 x W p
O N >+
q
ol .1 f
?
W a
W £ 4
£ FC E >
o h
F-I C4
?
u
H
H JQ W
a CO N O O
N
W 44
U) ?+ a
H E- 04 X
T El
a O a H 0
a
W w W
N Q
Q
N
£ U
I-7 H
Ff'i .? W '-I a ri In Lo 00

?
j H
cn W .SC G+ N a• O
>
W r31-iul£
U I
w3

W Z
O w
0 Q Q Q Q Q Q F O a
F4 U]
ri) H H H H H H H H fj
a W
z z q

H
E
F
F
I
z E

°a NNEl El
a w w a w
Q Q O a
W
H W w 3 a1 z W H N M dl In l0 r m
x F F z Q x
a

O W H U) Ln w N O H Ln H VI N
M w r w dl N O Ln Ln o M [M
Ln d d' VI .4
M M P Ln w r ro o ri Ln r OD
a w H
rl U) O N O O 00 O O M m 0 Ln
0 0 .
O '? M H w r N O co 10 OD H Ln
E m Q d M r M M
qq W M H U N M d' dl N w r O ri vl r W
FC C7 U U]
a z w z w
m r m m rC Q a IIq >'I OD DO H O Ln LO o w N OD o N
z Ln w H r Ln H r m o H m" w w
W q H O r W O SC N 0.i dl N ri ri N
dl d? E O H" r OJ
ON Y, W O II M In w
?+ W E N ? N
.
E Q F W (A 0 li 'A r p] Q 00 W u r O O 0) m 00 O H O N
C7 ,?.I H E m a w Cl) m In O m z d d O LO r
Ul f,C • Q,' H \ E O M ri In o ri
N Q m O o z N m <r a o H M r m
x O I` x a O U] r0i r u u W
°a a ,1-1 Lo ? F O U) o o w a
W N H x W it O a M ?N O N O O O r w M a, r
Q H I at W E * o 'i H r N w H In E w a ao O r
ry 2i /-? ri U1 N O w 0) 0
W U II1 ri ?D O Q U H- H N N M M dl dl O H N w OD
w a °w r14 W H m o w
z W o W yc a Ln rn O rn M Cl) r Ln m r m
H a Ln w 14 ??--II x U1 r H N O1 N w \ N Ln W" r -
x H m ?+ P O U m E ri N rn H r 0%
H I N H W R H . w w I-1 N N N M M W O O N w r
x
a aai 2O 4 Ix £O? w x
CO
H
U)? a w O w a% o a o 11
W .7 x N a r '--' O W H o ri H w H a. ON r m OD 01
Ix CY O Ol N m N E O H M N w w O w w " r r -
U W U] d .] ri d Q W H Do O to co
dI O N
E W E'' 0 z w a s C7 O H O O a H o o N w r
H 0 P: ppqq
fh ON H Q,' £ O I-a a w£ W r? O O E F E w O
w U o E O E w w Q W fx E co E Ln m H m m U) Ln N E (14 m m o Ln
RI x m d > w H 'J Q x W U1 [M U] Un w w r
Q 'J a w U] pq H 00 w 0) r
11 W II GI W a U) O W H x • a H H r 00 m r -
m O Q W z ,7 U O Q D ,7 O 0.4 o O H w r
r.C E CO z a H z O O O x E .....
3 W w O O a Q x W II O O x x x O w
O ai 0 a H x w Cl) W W w a x x I I I
N a 9 z U E I 0.l H fx E Q a1 i I dl dl <r N xi Q
z r4 UI E ,71 N O£ U U M U dl O dl 0 N O N O N O O w w N r CO w
.7 fj4 Q r W H Ln N N a N O H W w
H U I.D N H O aa z x 1 £ a • a fr?C o r r H w
H co U E W w WSW ErCr-FC raj raj a0 ooriwr
rr?? a w pq a x a:? Q II O M£
,? !k U1 Ix I rC co p r.C >+ 1 I o m o o \ w
H Q H Cl a Q H O U R: co ca O ?7 x m N N o m Ln O H O Ul N dl w Ln N r H H N ri E Ln M (D -V o 00 N
N Ln M LO N H co o c,4 W O Ln
H O W Ln m Ln
O1 O O H In r
QH .??+ `?i .?4 ro r?4 w JG ^?. Y. a .?4 ^?. i-? .?. J4 a ,4 `?. a X a r4 rte. a .4 a x `?. a X H a a a a a a
Z m O H N M dl m w r w m o H N M VI m w r W m o H N m dl m w r m m O H N M dl m w r m m o H N M d'
H H ri H H H H H H H H N N N N N N N N N N M M M m m M m m m m v v 'r VI v v v yl dl v m m m m m
a
o m in
H rn N
H 00
O Cl
rn O 10
M O
• H r
rn rn
C? H ID
ID O
• o r
• m rn
r 0 a
m
rn W
m m
m Ln
H w
rn Ln
m m
In d co
d N
N N
0? m
00 0
ID
r -V
00 0l
M O ID O
0) m 0
ko m 0
W 0) 0
H
N 00 H N
1D M d1
Ln m o)
00 at D1
rl r N M
N 1D W
N N 00
co rn rn
HH W a m N
W Ln ?o r 00
z u) Ln Ln Lo
a
**
*
* *******
*
*
*
*
* *
*
a *
* m w
* a F *
* w z
* w w +
* z u L
* H E N
z z w 0%
?
w
?
* *
a E H
* fL W rn 2 •-I
°
zz°io
H
P4 C7 O
o w w 4
-
* U UI U to
* U H
* H rn m

?'
L
?
* R
C
* O FC
*
*
*
*
*
*
* * a Q *
*
*
*
*

* * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * *
* *
* *
* *

* U co
* W F *
* x

* H *
* *
* W *
* C7 W
* r? cD

* D

x
H
H
r) (3) 1 El
*
H
*
* a a
* N
* x z o *
* H
? h Cf) FD
C7 ?
K °
a
* *
* *
* w
* E *
* Q r•C
* O Q
* O
* a
*

* W it
* a *
* *
* *
* * * * * * * * *
H
a
x
w
N Cl)
a a
ul)
N
E £
U
a 0
w a
0
? a E
a a x w z
z >1
° `°
H O
H H °
x W O
W a P4 < F W
C14 x \ av 4
i CO??
Q N O E fZ
FC ("
C4 ? o 14
H
1 o 04 0a4 °?cHx W w?4 pu):co
x ,'i E a H Q F r-4 Q,' H
°o q9 mzzoQF °xx
9 N a a s >+ 6 z z z o
W W U
H o X a a M U] U) z N
W H U]
M N W In o O In 0 0 0 0 m m
a o o W H a W
rj) >1 zEzfxx ?
M m
N w °°
z D x a ?WH? 0 o
£ °c,4 c N Q > Q z
a H W H H
r3?voi a a El r4 W OtW W H?
E
z x [I El
0 a a (a(?? Q E A F w F4 O M E,
H H O! fY• H H z z H
a a O
u
o x
O F
H H
r
R cn
U E-
W H
cn ? a
a z w
W W O
W a x
a E w
W E. £ w
W W
a w w co
r-1 U U) w
?C x F H W W w z
O?UZ W m w U W oo
v]H W UFCFCq w
w
z0
z H w o a
W O F a
q E W O O O
z? O
[k W 'AM W El o
4W >4 az l?Ho
yH o a x 0r? U? F E+ ? H
'J izi U CE7 $ f? W a
?Wzo0z £
M g a a w M M F
H
a
z
w
h h
H
ri)
z
0
H
F
Q
E
a
0
U
U
H
0
O
z
O W
U W
w a
H
O x
H
E W
i x
C0
C0
a z
H
w
a r
rj)
P4 w
e
El o
0
0 q H
0 o x
W U W
W W
a CO a
W O
u] F £
W H
W E
q w
x H
C34 ]
? U
0 H
z m
w 3
14 w
E
m
O
N
W
W
a
Cl)
3
O
a
w
0
M
W
I
a
a
m
0
9
H O
r• N rn• N N N N N N o• r
o ??mwN?rna 'o?N??o
? ?O r M of N 10 O 00
H H N N H N H N N N N N M N M N
$ W 0 W 0 W 3 W 0 W 0 x W$ W
o z 0 H o E o o z 0 O E o"
a H a H O H a E. a H a H H a H a H a H
w
'ma?yj F w p W E. w E w E W F N E w F
f.? H N M Vlf7 10 r W
W
O H
E
E
U)
x
z a
O
o
x
w
C14 x
H
U
W
x
w
0
z
w
a
°z
Worksheet for Curve Number & Lag Time
Project: 7217 MINE SHAFT ROAD
County: WAKE
Catchment: 1
Name: JKL
Date: 6.10.02
Curve Number
HSG: A B C D
% of Basin 100.0
Land Use % of Basin CN A CN B CN C CN D
Pasture, Fair 49 69 79 84
Woods, Fair 36 60 73 79
Residential - 1/4 ac 88.0 61 75 83 87
Roads 9.0 98 98 98 98
Water 3.0 98 98 98 98
Sum: 100.0
Curve numbers taken from: TR-55
Sum
100.0
CN
66.00
8.82
2.94
Sum: 77.76
Use: 78
Lag Time
S: 2.82
I: 4200 [ft]
Y: 10.5 [%]
Lag Time, L: 0.33 [hr]
S = 1000/CN - 10
Hydraulic length of watershed
Average land slope of watershed
L = (I^0.8 * (S+1)^0.7)/(1900 * Y^0.5)
7217 Mine Shaft Road -1-Yr 24-hr Storm, 4' Bottom Width, 2HAV and 31-1:1V Composite SS
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Worksheet Irregular Channel - 2, 4-foot bottom width
Flow Element Irregular Channel
Method Manning's Formula
Solve For Channel Depth
Input Data
Slope 0.050000 ft/ft
Discharge 67.00 cfs
Options
Current Roughness Method mproved Lotter's Method
Open Channel Weighting Method mproved Lotter's Method
Closed Channel Weighting Metho Horton's Method
Results
Mannings Coefficient 0.037
Water Surface Elevation 1.41 ft
Elevation Range 0.00 to 4.00
Flow Area 7.9 ft2
Wetted Perimeter 8.61 ft
Top Width 7.17 ft
Actual Depth 1.41 ft
Critical Elevation 1.74 ft
Critical Slope 0.023705 ft/ft
Velocity 8.50 ft/s
Velocity Head 1.12 ft
Specific Energy 2.53 ft
Froude Number 1.43
Flow Type Supercritical
Roughness Segments
Start End Mannings
Station Station Coefficient
0+00 0+02 0.035
0+02 0+08 0.042
0+08 0+12 0.040
0+12 0+19 0.035
Natural Channel Points
Station Elevation
(ft) (ft)
0+00 4.00
0+02 4.00
0+08 2.00
0+12 0.00
0+16 0.00
0+17 4.00
0+19 4.00
Title: 7217 Mine Shaft Road Project Engineer: Jim Leumas
c:\haestad\fmw\7217 mine shaft road.fm2 City of Raleigh FlowMaster v6.0 [614b]
06/11/02 01:44:39 PM © Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA [phone] Page 1 of 1
Cross Section
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Worksheet Irregular Channel - 2, 4-foot bottom width
Flow Element Irregular Channel
Method Manning's Formula
Solve For Channel Depth
Section Data
Mannings Coefficient 0.037
Slope 0.050000 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation 1.41 ft
Elevation Range 0.00 to 4.00
Discharge 67.00 cfs
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00-
0+00 0+02 0+04 0+06 0+08 0+10 0+12 0+14 0+16 0+18 0+20
V:1 N
H:1
NTS
Title: 7217 Mine Shaft Road Project Engineer: Jim Leumas
c:\haestad\fmw\7217 mine shaft road.fm2 City of Raleigh FlowMaster v6.0 [614b]
06/11/02 01:43:43 PM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA [phone] Page 1 of 1
7217 Mine Shaft Road - 25-Yr 24-hr Storm, 4' Bottom Width, 21-1:1V and 3HAV Composite SS
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Worksheet Irregular Channel - 2, 4-foot bottom width
Flow Element Irregular Channel
Method Manning's Formula
Solve For Channel Depth

Input Data
Slope 0.050000 ft/ft
Discharge 229.00 cfs
Options
Current Roughness Method mproved Lotter's Method
Open Channel Weighting Method mproved Lotter's Method
Closed Channel Weighting Metho Horton's Method
Results
Mannings Coefficient 0.038
Water Surface Elevation 2.80 ft
Elevation Range 0.00 to 4.00
Flow Area 20.3 ft2
Wetted Perimeter 13.87 ft
Top Width 11.09 ft
Actual Depth 2.80 ft
Critical Elevation 3.41 ft
Critical Slope 0.022154 ft/ft
Velocity 11.29 ft/s
Velocity Head 1.98 ft
Specific Energy. 4.78 ft
Froude Number 1.47
Flow Type Supercritical
Roughness Segments
Start End Mannings
Station Station Coefficient
0+00 0+02 0.035
0+02 0+08 0.042
0+08 0+12 0.040
0+12 0+19 0.035
Natural Channel Points
Station Elevation
(ft) (ft)
0+00 4.00
0+02 4.00
0+08 2.00
0+12 0.00
0+16 0.00
0+17 4.00
0+19 4.00
Title: 7217 Mine Shaft Road Project Engineer: Jim Leumas
c:\haestad\fmw\7217 mine shaft road.fm2 City of Raleigh FlowMaster v6.0 [614b]
06/11/02 01:46:03 PM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA [phone] Page 1 of 1
Cross Section
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Worksheet Irregular Channel - 2, 4-foot bottom width
Flow Element Irregular Channel
Method Manning's Formula
Solve For Channel Depth
Section Data
Mannings Coefficient 0.038
Slope 0.050000 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation 2.80 ft
Elevation Range 0.00 to 4.00
Discharge 229.00 cfs
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
0+00 0+02 0+04 0+06 0+08 0+10 0+12 0+14 0+16 0+18 0+20
V:1
H:1
NTS
Title: 7217 Mine Shaft Road Project Engineer: Jim Leumas
c:\haestad\fmw\7217 mine shaft road.fm2 City of Raleigh FlowMaster v6.0 [614b]
06/11102 01:46:10 PM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA [phone] Page 1 of 1
7217 Mine Shaft Road - 1-Yr 24-hr Storm, 8' Bottom Width, 21-1:1V and 3HAV Composite SS
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Worksheet Irregular Channel - 1
Flow Element Irregular Channel
Method Manning's Formula
Solve For Channel Depth
Input Data
Slope 0.050000 ft/ft
Discharge 67.00 cfs
Options
Current Roughness Method mproved Lotter's Method
Open Channel Weighting Method mproved Lotter's Method
Closed Channel Weighting Metho Horton's Method
Results
Mannings Coefficient 0.036
Water Surface Elevation 0.95 ft
Elevation Range 0.00 to 4.00
Flow Area 8.6 ft2
Wetted Perimeter 11.10 ft
Top Width 10.13 ft
Actual Depth 0.95 ft
Critical Elevation 1.22. ft
Critical Slope 0.021374 ft/ft
Velocity 7.79 ft/s
Velocity Head 0.94 ft
Specific Energy 1.89 ft
Froude Number 1.49
Flow Type Supercritical
Roughness Segments
Start End Mannings
Station Station Coefficient
0+00 0+02 0.035
0+02 0+08 0.042
0+08 0+12 0.040
0+12 0+23 0.035
Natural Channel Points
Station Elevation
(ft) (ft)
0+00 4.00
0+02 4.00
0+08 2.00
0+12 0.00
0+20 0.00
0+21 4.00
0+23 4.00
Title: 7217 Mine Shaft Road Project Engineer: Jim Leumas
c:\haestad\fmw\7217 mine shaft road.fm2 City of Raleigh FlowMaster v6.0 (614b]
06/11/02 01:29:06 PM © Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA [phone] Page 1 of 1
Cross Section
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Worksheet Irregular Channel - 1
Flow Element Irregular Channel
Method Manning's Formula
Solve For Channel Depth

Section Data
Mannings Coefficient 0.036
Slope 0.050000 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation 0.95 ft
Elevation Range 0.00 to 4.00
Discharge 67.00 cfs
4.00
3.00-
2.00-
1.00-
0.00-
0+00
V:1
H:1
N TS
Title: 7217 Mine Shaft Road Project Engineer: Jim Leumas
c:\haestad\fmw\7217 mine shaft road.fm2 City of Raleigh FlowMaster v6.0 [614b]
06/11/02 01:29:40 PM © Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA [phone] Page 1 of 1
0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25
7217 Mine Shaft Road - 25-Yr 24-hr Storm, 8' Bottom Width, 21-1:1V and 31-1:1V Composite SS
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Worksheet Irregular Channel - 1
Flow Element Irregular Channel
Method Manning's Formula
Solve For Channel Depth
Input Data
Slope 0.050000 ft/ft
Discharge 229.00 cfs
Options
Current Roughness Method mproved Lotter's Method
Open Channel Weighting Method mproved Lotter's Method
Closed Channel Weighting Metho Horton's Method
Results
Mannings Coefficient 0.037
Water Surface Elevation 1.97 ft
Elevation Range 0.00 to 4.00
Flow Area 20.2 ft2
Wetted Perimeter 14.45 ft
Top Width 12.44 ft
Actual Depth 1.97 ft
Critical Elevation 2.61 ft
Critical Slope 0.019340 ft/ft
Velocity 11.35 ft/s
Velocity Head 2.00 ft
Specific Energy 3.98 ft
Froude Number 1.57
Flow Type Supercritical
Roughness Segments
Start End Mannings
Station Station Coefficient
0+00 0+02 0.035
0+02 0+08 0.042
0+08 0+12 0.040
0+12 0+23 0.035
Natural Channel Points
Station Elevation
(ft) (ft)
0+00 4.00
0+02 4.00
0+08 2.00
0+12 0.00
0+20 0.00
0+21 4.00
0+23 4.00
Title: 7217 Mine Shaft Road Project Engineer: Jim Leumas
c:\haestad\fmw\7217 mine shaft road.fm2 City of Raleigh FlowMaster v6.0 [614b]
06/11/02 01:30:40 PM © Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA [phone] Page 1 of 1

Cross Section
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Worksheet Irregular Channel - 1
Flow Element Irregular Channel
Method Manning's Formula
Solve For Channel Depth

Section Data
Mannings Coefficient 0.037
Slope 0.050000 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation 1.97 ft
Elevation Range 0.00 to 4.00
Discharge 229.00 cfs
4.00
3.00-
2.00-
1.00-
0.00-
0+00
V:1 N
H:1
NTS
Title: 7217 Mine Shaft Road Project Engineer: Jim Leumas
c:\haestad\fmw\7217 mine shaft road.fm2 City of Raleigh FlowMaster v6.0 (614b]
06/11102 01:30:58 PM © Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA [phone] Page 1 of 1
0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25
g1A[ V r
> VW\.,/? =f
Michael F. Easley
Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Q Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Acting Director
Division of Water Quality
May 14, 2002
DWQ Project # 02-0413
Wake County
Page 1 of 2
CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
City of Raleigh
Central Engineering Department
Attn: Mr. Carl R. Dawson, Jr., PE
PO Box 590
Raleigh, NC 27602
Subject Property: 7217 Mine Shaft Road, Raleigh, NC
Streambank Stabilization Project
Unnamed tributary stream of Mine Creek [03-04-02; 27-33-14; C NSW]
Dear Mr. Dawson:
On March 19, 2002, the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) received your application dated March 14, 2002 to
stabilize 131 feet of stream bank at the subject property. The DWQ has determined that the proposed project will require
written authorization for impacts to riparian areas protected under the Neuse Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0233). In
order to issue this authorization the DWQ must ensure that your project meets the no practical alternatives test required
under these rules. The DWQ is preparing to approve the proposed activity, however insufficient evidence is present in our
files to conclude that your project must be built as planned in the protected riparian buffers in accordance with 15A
NCAC 2B .0233. Therefore, unless modifications of the proposal are made as described below, we will have to move
toward denial of your authorization certificate as required by 15A NCAC 2B .0233(8) and will place this project on hold
as incomplete until we receive this additional information.
Please provide us with information supporting your position that states your project must be constructed as planned
and that you have no practicable alternative to impacting these protected riparian buffers. Specifically;
The DWQ recommends that the side slope be excavated to 3H: IV (or greater) instead of the proposed 2H: IV.
The DWQ believes that a less steep slope will ensure better stability of the stream bank and improve infiltration
of overland flow into the soil prior to discharging to the stream. Please provide additional information as to why
the slope can not be excavated to 31-1: IV (or greater). Also, many urban and suburban streams in the piedmont
are incised. Proving a flood plain bench ("bankfull bench") to accept overbank flows can reduce velocities and
shear stress in the stream, providing additional protection to the stream bank to be repaired.
2. The DWQ recommends planting native woody vegetation on the proposed side slope and within fifteen (15) feet
of the stream (or greater) to aid in stabilizing the stream bank and in the removal of nitrogen from overland flow:
Your application states that the side slope will be vegetated, but does not indicate the type of vegetation used.
We presume that you are referring to grass. Please provide additional information as to why woody vegetation
can not be used. Also please provide a planting plan indicating the type of vegetation to be used, location of
plantings and schedule of planting.
3. The DWQ prefers the use of woody vegetation as the primary means of long-term stability, and "soft" techniques
such as root wads that encourage the establishment of dense woody vegetation. The DWQ believes that the
North Carolina Division of Water Quality, 401 Wetlands Certification Unit,
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 (Mailing Address)
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 (Location)
919-733-1786 (phone), 919-733-6893 (fax), http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/
t'age z of z
construction of a bankfull bench along the toe of the proposed stream bank may aid in stabilizing the stream bank
and require less (or no) riprap. If riprap is determined to be the best solution for this project, then it shall be
installed no higher than the bankfull stage (unless the need for more riprap is convincingly shown). Please
provide additional information as to why a bankfull bench can not be constructed along the proposed stream
bank or why you think it is not the best option for this project. If riprap is determined to be the best option for
this project, then please provide additional information that the proposed riprap will not exceed bankfull stage.
This letter only addresses the application review and does not authorize any impacts to wetlands, waters or protected
buffers. Please be aware any impacts requested'within your application are not authorized (at this time) by the DWQ.
Please call Mr. Todd St. John ofAis.office at 9,19-733-9584 if you have any questions regarding this matter.
Sincerely,

John Dorney,
401 Wetlands Unit, DWQ, DENR
Cc: Steve Mitchell, DWQ Raleigh Regional Office
File Copy
Central Files
DWQ 020413
May 14, 2002
Stream Bank Stabilization Projects w/ Buffers
Subject: Stream Bank Stabilization Projects w/ Buffers
Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 08:27:18 -0400 / */I r
co

From: Bob Zarzecki <[e-mail]> p
Organization: Division of Water Quality; 401 Certification Unit
To: "Todd St. John" <[e-mail]>
CC: Steve Mitchell <[e-mail]>, Cyndi Karoly <[e-mail]>

Todd:
?
Attached is the draft "on hold" letter for DWQ020413. It involves a ?v
, call,
?
stream bank stabilization project that uses riprap and no woody ti ?p
vegetation. The RRO doesn't like the use of riprap. I think I have '0"`
h
requested additional information that will address the RRO concerns. I e,
?f
©
have put the file and a hard copy of this letter in your box. Please o
review the letter, make any changes to the language and pass on to Cyndi
to send out by next Tuesday. Thanks.
- Bob
8 ?

Name: MineShaftRoad020413.doc
r7tMMineShaftRoad0204l3.doc Type: Microsoft Word Document (application/msword)
Encoding: base64
Bob Zarzecki
NC DENR/DWQ 401 Wetlands Certification Unit
919-733-9726
1 of 1 5/10/02 8:27
MEMORANDUM
TO: John Dorney Regional Contact:
Non-Discharge Branch WQ Supervisor:
Date:
SUBJECT: WETLAND STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Facility Name 7217 Mine Shaft Road
Project Number 02 0413
Recvd From APP
Received Date 3/19/02 Recvd,By Region
Project Type Streambank Sta`--' '
Certificates ovv `? WkN
County Wake
County2
Region Raleigh
Permit Wetland Wetland Wetlar ? Acres Feet
Type Type Impact Scor( -? c j?es Basin Req. Req.
F13 Stream P _Y OO N F_ rJr 30,402. F 131.00
F Ni TT F O }' OO N 30;402: F-
Mitigation Wetland
MitigationType Type Acres Feet
I-- r
Stream Impacts (ft.)
Is Wetland Rating Sheet Attached? 0 Y 0 N Did you request more info? 0 Y 0 N
Have Project Changes/Conditions Been Discussed With Applicant? 0 Y 0 N
Is Mitigation required? 0 Y 0 N Recommendation: 0 Issue 0 Issue/Cond 0 Deny
Provided by Region: Latitude (ddmmss) 355234 Longitude (ddmmss) 783938
Comments:
As everyone knows, I DO NOT LIKE RIPRAP.
Have they persued alternatives, ie lay back the creek side and plant willows, J hooks, stump
defelectors????!?????
It would be cheaper than ,$35,000 worth of rock. Have homeowner contact Jennings.
cc: Regional Office
Central Office Page Number 1
? 4Ft
..5
.
fiec
nap-EC
Q a x r k. S,
Date.
To E'.P,O Steve Mrtc3l p k µ. n'?
?FRo ki4 Aven DtiI1fQ Ptir ? f
[1VaR0 Deborah
QWiRO Joanne Ses x ?` ti}
• C -.. =.c K ? fit r
?h?+} ?V?JSPo ?Jrvfer Fri r xx
rat _ •, . -?. ? 'F"?? ?"+ _, 4, ? , ? l
? 1R0 M 'e Paef,-,
QMPO PE.e c,otvv??s
From: i ete? (919) T
The file at'hed is being fccwarded_to you for your a s%;at on. PlBase rQ lryou new
ass"is??nr_ - - -
C Siream, 1~-,tPi impacted
_ CI Sir->?r? ??rruri-? - ? _ _ - _, -? _ _. _ _ _
Wedand dw=fm --jc n and disttanc:: to blues-4a a sur.aca mata_. on USGW topm Maps
01?nimiz? .-vc issues --: `_
,?'fx*'?er RUBS (N-,Ta-PamOco `Catawb;P
Cl Pond 0 - - - -
- - -i?-
x-?
CI ?j v L Tv ?L' lJ tI ?-i3 oc wefiand mmgation ?s ?=??o? and Kab(e? ~- - -- - - -
a2-++in0s fir acbLracy ?? -_ ?- - - _
C! is tna a?ii bon x writ pre-appfir ?neetraas?
j

City Of 6Raleigh
.North Gvarolina
March 14, 2002
Mr. Todd St. J,
North Carolina
And Natural
Division of W er Quality
01/Wetl s Unit
16 ail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
Environment
RE: Pre-Construction Notification Application Form fo
Streambank Stabilization at:
7217 Mine Shaft Road
MAR 2 2nd?
WETLANDS GIFDUF ?.;
3,. ?'ATErT UALtTY SECTl.'
FILE COp

r
Awl-
Raleigh, NC 27615
Dear Mr. St. John:
Please find enclosed seven copies of a completed "Pre-Construction Notification
Application Form" for the referenced project. I am submitting one copy of this application
to Ms. Amanda Jones with the United States Army Corps of Engineers. Written
approval is sought solely for Buffer Rules, and thus the application fee does not
apply for this project.
Thank you for your assistance in processing this application. If I may answer any
questions concerning the application, please contact me at telephone number (919) 890-
3818.
Sincerely,

James K. Leumas, P. E.
Stormwater Services Engineer
J KL/
Enclosure
cc: Mr. H. Daniel Bowden, P. E.
Ms. Veronica K. Erby
Mr. John Dorney
Ms. Amanda Jones
OFFICES • 222 WEST HARGETT STREET • POST OFFICE BOX 590 • RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27602
Recycled Paper
r
j
City Of 6i aleigh
.Worth Carolina
March 14, 2002
Mr. Todd St. John
North Carolina Department of Environment
And Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
401/Wetlands Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
RE: Pre-Construction Notification Application Form for
Streambank Stabilization at:
7217 Mine Shaft Road
Raleigh, NC 27615
Dear Mr. St. John:
P ?? ' 1 y
7
/r f
j
020413
Please find enclosed seven copies of a completed "Pre-Construction Notification
Application Form" for the referenced project. I am submitting one copy of this application
to Ms. Amanda Jones with the United States Army Corps of Engineers. Written
approval is sought solely for Buffer Rules, and thus the application fee does not
apply for this project.
Thank you for your assistance in processing this application. If I may answer any
questions concerning the application, please contact me at telephone number (919) 890-
3818.
Sincerely,
James K. Leumas, P. E.
Stormwater Services Engineer
J KL/
Enclosure
cc: Mr. H. Daniel Bowden, P. E.
Ms. Veronica K. Erby
Mr. John Dorney
Ms. Amanda Jones
OFFICES • 222 WEST HARGETT STREET • POST OFFICE BOX 590 • RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27602
Recycled Paper
F!? r, 7
E;1
City Of ?Raleigh
5Vorth earolina
March 14, 2002
Ms. Amanda Jones
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
United States Army Corps of Engineers
6508 Falls of Neuse Road
Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
RE: Pre-Construction Notification Application Form for
Streambank Stabilization at:
7217 Mine Shaft Road
Raleigh, NC 27615
Dear Ms. Jones:

Please find enclosed one copy of a completed "Pre-Construction Notification Application
Form" for the referenced project. I am submitting seven copies of this application to Mr.
Todd St. John with the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, Division of Water Quality, 401/Wetlands Unit.
Thank you for your assistance in processing this application. If I may answer any
questions concerning the application, please contact me at telephone number (919) 890-
3818.
Sincerely,
k
James K. Leumas, P. E.
Stormwater Services Engineer
J KL/
Enclosure
cc: Mr. H. Daniel Bowden, P. E.
Ms. Veronica K. Erby
Mr. Todd St. John
OFFICES • 222 WEST HARGETT STREET • POST OFFICE BOX 590 • RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27602
Recycled Paper
x
Office Use Only: Form Version February 2002
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No. ?U4
If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable"..,Q?__" N/A" rather than
leaving the space blank. 10 W k
1. Processing
MR ! 9 2002
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit WETLANDS GROUP
i'?1,"?TEt tEr`:UTY' SECT
Section 10 Permit ?°- - --
401 Water Quality Certification
® Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NWP 13
II.
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here:
4. If payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) is proposed for
mitigation of impacts (see section VIII - Mitigation), check here:
Applicant Information
1. Owner/Applicant Information
Name: City of Raleigh
Mailing Address: Post Office Box 590
Central Engineering Department
Raleigh, NC 27602
Attention: Mr. Carl R. Dawson, Jr., P. E.
Telephone Number: [phone] Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address: [e-mail]
2. Agent Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter must be
attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name:
Company Affiliation:
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number:
E-mail Address:
Fax Number:
Page 5 of 13
III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map
landmarks such as towns
`- location of the
boundaries and developr
and site plan must incl, n >
impervious surfaces, or
include the appropriate
boundaries outlined. P
so long as the proper) -Dq
USACE requires infoi
however, DWQ may 02
drawings rather than ' -
reduced to a small sc,- - - 5 C U
the project has been f J
1. Name ofproject: \2?
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Numoe,
property with respect to local
'-a site plan showing property
;ies. Both the vicinity map
footprints of all buildings,
-, the maps and plans should
oil Survey with the property
at the applicant's discretion,
id distribution purposes, the
than 11 by 17-inch format;
prefers full-size construction
plans. If full-size plans are
applicant will be informed that
ovided.
ilization Project
y): N/A
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): 1707.13 04 6076
4. Location
County: Wake Nearest Town: Raleigh
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): Mountainbrook Subdivision/Lot # 5
Directions to site (include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): From downtown Raleigh, take
Glenwood Avenue (U. S. 70) going west. Take right turn (heading north) . onto
Leadmine Road. After crossing Lynn Road, take ri ht turn (heading east onto Mine
Shaft Road. 7217 Mine Shaft Road is fifth house on the left.
5. Site coordinates, if available (UTM or Lat/Long): 35° 52' 34" / -78° 39' 38"
(Note - If project is linear, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that separately lists the
coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
6. Describe the existing land use or condition of the site at the time of this application:Existing
land use is 1/4-acre and 1/3-acre residential; site is a local unnamed drainage feature
that drains into Mine Creek..
7. Property size (acres): Lot size is 0.32 acre; streambank stabilization area is - 0.03 acre
8. Nearest body of water (stream/river/sound/ocean/lake): Mine Creek
9. River Basin: Neuse River
(Note - this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)
Page 6 of 13
10. Describe the purpose of the proposed work: The purpose of the proposed work is to
stabilize a section of stream bank (approximate) 131 feet in length) that has severe)
eroded. This protect will help to minimize future erosion potential of streambank
erosion along this section of channel.
11. List the type of equipment to be used to construct the project: A rubber-tired backhoe will
be used for shaping/grading activities and materials placement; and a dump truck will
be used for disposition of materials. Construction equipment will not need to cross or
get into the channel. All work can be completed working from the right side of the
channel.
12. Describe the land use in the vicinity of this project: Residential, single-family homes on
1/4-acre and 1/3-acre lots. Further upstream are some townhomes
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules.
N/A
V. Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
None anticipated.
Page 7 of 13
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. The applicant must also
provide justification for these impacts in Section VII below. All proposed impacts, permanent
and temporary, must be listed herein, and must be clearly identifiable on an accompanying site
plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial) must be shown on a
delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems. Wetland and stream
evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate. Photographs may be
included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for wetland or stream
mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional space is needed for
listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
1. Provide a brief written description of the proposed impacts: There are no indicators of
wetlands on the site. A field investigation b staff of the City of Raleigh Central
Engineering Department/Stormwater Services Division was made to determine the
severity of the streambank erosion and sedimentation as a result of the erosion Please
see the enclosed report titled "Stream Bank Repair Summary - 7217 Mine Shaft Road"
for a narrative including digital photographs of the site.
2. Individually list wetland impacts below:
Wetland Impact
Site Number
(indicate on map)
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
(acres) Located within
100-year Floodplain**
(yes/no) Distance to
Nearest Stream
(linear feet)
Type of Wetland***
See Enclosed
Report

* List each imnact se narately and id-f;fi,
-- -- ----•, •,.,,•...., ., ...r.,.- y .,..YaV, . lll,PdULb ,uctuue, out are not nmued to: mechanized clearing, grading, fill,
excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams, separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
** 100-Year floodplains are identified through the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(FIRM), or FEMA-approved local floodplain maps. Maps are available through the FEMA Map Service Center at 1-800-358-9616, or
online at http://www.fema.gov.
*** List a wetland type that best describes wetland to be impacted (e.g., freshwater/saltwater marsh, forested wetland, beaver pond,
Carolina Bay, bog, etc.)
List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: 0.0 acres
Total area of wetland impact proposed: 0.0 acres (No indicators of wetlands observed.)
Page 8 of 13
3. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts below:
Stream Impact
Site Number
(indicate on map)
See Enclosed
Type of Impact* Length of
Impact
(linear feet)
Stream Name** Average Width
of Stream
Before Impact Perennial or
Intermittent?
(please specify)
Report

* List each imnact c anarately and ;?lant;f., to, r T____
--r^• --•j •__-'.Y ==,F--Y ...ya?LZI. iinhacw include, out are not umtted to: culverts and associated rip-rap,
dams (separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding), relocation (include linear feet before and after, and net loss/gain),
stabilization activities (cement wall, rip-rap, crib wall, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is
proposed, plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams must be included.
** Stream names can be found on USGS topographic maps. If a stream has no name, list as UT (unnamed tributary) to the nearest
downstream named stream into which it flows. USGS maps are available through the USGS at 1-800-358-9616, or online at
www.usgs.gov. Several intemet sites also allow direct download and printing of USGS maps (e.g., www.topozone.com,
www.mapquest.com, etc.).
Cumulative impacts (linear distance in feet) to all streams on site: 131 linear feet
4. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.) below:
Open Water Impact
Site Number

(indicate on map)
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact

(acres)
(if Name p Waterbody
applicable) Type of Waterbody

(lake, pond, estuary, sound,
bay, ocean, etc.)
N/A

* List each impact se paratel and id-;-F t
y y emporary Impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: fill, excavation, dredging,
flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
5. Pond Creation N/A
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): 7 uplands 0 stream wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.): N/A
rroposea use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.): N/A
oize or watersnea arammg to pond: N/A Expected pond surface area: N/A
Page 9 of 13
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts.
This streambank stabilization project is intended to restrain further erosion on a 131-foot
reach of an unnamed tributary to Mine Creek in the Neuse River Basin Standard
protection measures will be used during construction to minimize erosion and off-site
sedimentation in accordance with the "North Carolina Erosion and Sediment Control
Planning and Design Manual" prepared b the North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources.
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on March 9, 2000, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCWRP concurrence shall be placed on hold as
incomplete. An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration
in DWQ's Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/stn-ngide.html.
Page 10 of 13
Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
N/A
IX.
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration
Program (NCWRP) with the NCWRP's written agreement. Check the box indicating that
you would like to pay into the NCWRP. Please note that payment into the NCWRP must be
reviewed and approved before it can be used to satisfy mitigation requirements. Applicants
will be notified early in the review process by the 401/Wetlands Unit if payment into the
NCWRP is available as an option. For additional information regarding the application
process for the NCWRP, check the NCWRP website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htrn. If
use of the NCWRP is proposed, please check the appropriate box on page three and provide
the following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet): N/A
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet): N/A
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Amount of Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Only)
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state) funds or the use of public
(federal/state) land?
Yes 0 No
If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes 7 No 7
If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please attach a
copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter.
Yes ? No 7
N/A
Page 11 of 13
X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (DWQ Only)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Meuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and
Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please identify 9
Yes ® No [] If you answered " es" )
y ,provide the following information:
Identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers. If buffer
mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the buffer
multipliers.
Zone* Impact
(square feet) Multi pher
1 1310 3
2 0 1.5
Total 1310
Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e., Donation
of Property, Conservation Easement, Riparian Buffer Restoration / Enhancement, Preservation or
Payment into the Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as
identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or.0260.
N/A
XI. Stormwater (DWQ Only)
Describe impervious acreage (both existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site.
Discuss stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands
downstream from the property.
Existing impervious acreage includes the house and drivewa on the perty. These
features account for 17 percent of the total property acreage of 0.32 acre. No additional
impervious surfaces are to be constructed Erosion and sediment control measures, such as
silt fencing and a temporary sediment tra are to be used durm construction to minimize
the potential for off-site sedimentation during construction activities
Page 12 of 13
XII. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Only)
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.
N/A
XIII. Violations (DWQ Only)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H.0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes F? No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application?
Yes F-1 No
XIV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
Applic;KtN ent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorize
3 // 4 /,-0 v
letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 13 of 13
Page 1 of 1
MP'ST
Everyone need. a Unit dirac on in I1
7217 Mine Shaft Rd
Raleigh, NC 27615-6019
4
r
NI.
4-1
aMAPULAST11
gay,Rt9tt Rd ,
f
m to
v
a
62001 4; nky Corp, GDT
,,..x 1000 ft
L icon Lautuae: 35.61137, Longitude:-78.660669 ]
V ? G kI t r'v Rf
http://www.mapblast.comlmyblastImPrint.mb?CT=35.876237%3A-78.660669%3A20000&LV= 3/12/02
55'
I. MILE *"""?? 1Gaµ ROAD CLASSIFICATION
100 FEET Primary highway, Light-duty road, hard or
I

-TER hard surface .......................
improved surface.........
Secondary highway,
hard surface ...................... . Unimproved road
........._________
Interstate R oute 0 U. S. Route O State Route
N.C.• ,?
BAYLEAF
N. C.
QUADRANGLE LOCATION ,
NW/4 RALEIGH 15' QUADRANGLE
35078-H 6-TF-024
JEST
1967
PHOTOREVISED 1987
DMA 5255 1 NW-SERIES V842
977
976
75
'4
3ooom.N.
5 ° 52'30"
0„
sti
ov
m u?

M m?
and
yC
A
S u
OC
G uV
e6
e?
off

? a a
vm

ice' f rr DTI 11i ?? mf

,I
1 l
dib?t i ?? l rn
III )
w
lz_
I
I 44YYII'''
l
a?
,r
I
\I
I e
I ?

0
o
I/
0
M
Wake County Multi Access Parcel System
MAPS
Multi Access Parcel
System

CLICK HERE FOR DETAILED PROPERTY DATA
PARCEL NUMBER: 1707046076
REID ,,.,
OWNERI DONAHUE, GEORGE C
ADDRI 7217 MINE SHAFT RD
ADDR2 RALEIGH NC 27615 6019
.N0.
DEED-BOOK 6186
0841
DEED-DATE 6/26/94
0.32

Page 1 of 2
http://imaps.co.wake.ne. us/scriptslesrimap.dl]?Name=Wake&Cmd=Prt&Left=2100476.9613 8.6.1 3/12/02
MULTIPLE RECORDS FOR SELECTED PARCEL
w axe county Multi Access Parcel System
BLDG_VALUE_ASSD 92734
•
VALUE •
34000

BILLING-CLASS
ST NAME 2

MINE SHAFT
ST-TYPE RD
DIR PREFIX
DIR SUFFIX
ST
NUM _
7217
-
ST MISC _
ZIP CODE 27615
,
MAP-NAME 170713
PIN-NUM 1707046076

PIN_EXT 000
IVCSNUM '07RA101

CITY RAL
TOWNSHIP 7
FIRE DISTRICT
BTYR _
1984
TOTAL_SALE_PRICE 102500
TOTAL
SALE
DATE 6/29/94
-
_
TYPE-AND-USE 01

LAND-CLASS R
Page 2 of 2
THIS IS NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT.
DISCLAIMER: The COiJNTY OF WAKE or the CITY OF RALEIGH shall assume no tiahiti
any errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in
for
r%r nn
aecision made or action taken or not taken by user in reliance upon any information or data?furnished
hereunder. The user knowingly waives any and all claims for damages against any and all of the entities
comprising iMAPS that may arise from the maDDm2 data-
Tue Mar 1212:19: SS EST 2002
http://imaps.co.wake.nc.us/scripts/esrimap. dll?Name=Wake&Cmd=Prt&Left=2100476.9613 86.1 3/12/02

e
o 9,
?f
uF
'pal ?yS 9UIVY L?ZL k
04
a''d
o?
0
a
O

0
>
--l
a
r
fV
N
IV
O
O
N
O
T
City Of Raleigh
fflYorth (?arolina
Stream Bank Repair Summary - 7217 Mine Shaft Road
INTRODUCTION
This narrative supplements the Pre-Construction Notification Application for the
referenced project. The City of Raleigh is submitting this stream bank repair request on
behalf of Mr. George C. Donahue, resident at 7217 Mine Shaft Road. The City of
Raleigh Stormwater Drainage Policy Resolution (1998)-833 is a cost-share program that
provides financial and technical assistance in alleviating severe erosion, structural
flooding and/or public nuisances on fully-developed private property. This policy is
available to citizens within the City of Raleigh's corporate limits.
PROJECT SCOPE
An unnamed tributary in the Mine Creek watershed running through this location
experiences severe erosion and is causing off-site sedimentation. A site inspection was
performed by staff of the City of Raleigh Central Engineering Department, Stormwater
Services Division. The enclosed digital photographs (Figures 1 through 3) indicate the
findings of the site inspection.
Th area described below was selected as the primary focus of the proposed stream
bank stabilization:
DESCRIPTION PROBLEM
131 linear feet of Severe erosion has occurred along the stream
stream channel channel, causing sloughing of the channel bank
that is shifting towards an existing residential
home. The right side slope of the stream bank channel
is approximately vertical.
OFFICES • 222 WEST HARGETT STREET • POST OFFICE BOX 590 • RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27602
Recycled Paper
PROPOSEDIMPROVEMENTS
The City of Raleigh proposes to stabilize the channel by reinforcing the right (facing
downstream) side slope of the channel with filter fabric and riprap for a length of
approximately 131 feet. Excavation of the side slope to 2H:1 V and removal of sediment
in the channel bottom will be required prior to placing the filter fabric and riprap. The
vertical depth of the channel section varies between approximately two feet to four feet.
While the USGS Bayleaf 7.5-Minute Quadrangle map dated photorevised 1987 and the
Wake County Soil Survey issued in November 1970 indicate that the stream is an
intermittent stream, several site inspections by staff of the Stormwater Services Division
suggest that the stream may be an ephemeral stream, based on observations that the
stream did not normally have flow except during wet-weather events. The drainage area
of the channel at this property is approximately 69.4 acres.
As indicated in Figure No. 1, Figure No. 2 and Figure No. 3, the right bank of the channel
is immediately adjacent to a well-grassed yard. The proposed work will be performed
from this side of the channel. There is one cedar tree located approximately 20 to 30
feet from the right bank of the channel in the yard that will need to be removed for
equipment access.
The proposed project will stabilize the right side slope of the channel from further
erosion. A vicinity map and more detailed site map are attached. Figure 4 shows a
typical repair section.
--000--
2
Figure 1
7217 Mine Shaft Road
Severe erosion of right (facing downstream) stream bank.
Note: Digital Picture was taken on 03-11-02. (Date on camera was not properly set.)
I .* 1 ?
3Sr
Figure 2
7217 Mine Shaft Road
Severe erosion of right stream bank. (Digital picture was taken looking upstream)
Note: Digital Picture was taken on 03-11-02. (Date on camera was not properly set.)

T
r?

{
11,
?.1 0 u' ? rti ? ?t
- ?rk?I?i? ` ?r ..? '?,, - I? y .? '`1. ? Tai ?• ?o- d
r
t"?:'".' ?k?1'- Y..cr.•. k?'i`r"? ?St ??'T; .:'t+:-,'fir ,..s'?.i t5.<<t?t.2 'y..-}.°.'S i????'L
Figure 3
7217 Mine Shaft Road
Severe erosion of right (facing downstream) stream bank.
Note: Digital Picture was taken on 03-11-02. (Date on camera was not properly set.)
7217 Mine Shaft Road
Right Side of Channel
Vegetation (Facing Downstream)
Riprap with ??- ------------
Filter Fabric
Underliner '
2 to 4 feet
2 1
Existing Ground Line
Figure 4 - Typical Repair Section
NTS