20050311 Ver 1_Complete File_20051229

OF VVAr?iQ Michael F. Easley, Governor
C? William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
G9 North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
j r Alan W. I(iimek, P.E. Director
Q Division of Water Quality
DWQ Project No.: County:
Applicant: IVeXT PAI5 . T., S.14 ce
Project Name: S2 Z Z/ 3 kyle- Z>kt' e
Date of 1.%.Suance of 401 Water Quality Cerdficadon: D3 /i1os ,_
Certificate of Completion
Upon completion of all work approved within the 401 Water Quality Certification or applicable Buffer Rule-5, and
any subsequent mudifiications, the applicant is required to retum this certificate to the 401/Wedands Unit, North
Carolina Division of Water Quality, 162.1 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC, 27699,1621. This form may be
returned to DWQ by the applicant, the applicant's authorized agent, or the project engineer. It is not necessary to
send canificates from all of these.
Applicant's Ccrtitfrcatiion
I, T°"i 6. r'30`ncx_ , hereby state that, to the best of my abilities, due care and diligence
was used in the observation of the construction such that the construction was observed to be built within substantial
compliance and intent of the 401 Water Quality Certification and Buffer Rules, the approved plans and
specifications, and othe , upp aterials.
Signature: U Date:
,I*,gent's Certification
1. , hereby state that, to the best of my abilities, due care and diligence
was used in the observation of the construction such, that the construction was observed to be built witbin substantial
compliance and intent of the 401 Water Quality Certification and Buffer Mules, the approved plans and
specifications, and other supporting materials.
Signature:
Engineer's Certification
Partial Final
Date:
1. ?..._.. , as a duly registered Professional Engineer in the State of North
Carolina, having been authorized to observe (periodically, weekly, full time) the construction of the project. for the
Perrnittee hereby state that, to the best of my abilities, due care and diligence was used in the observation of the
construction such that the construction was observed to be built within substantial compliance and intent of the 401
Water Quality Certification and Buffer Rules, the approved plans and specifications, and other supporting materials.
Signature
Date
Registration No.
DEC 3r?r
2 9
WETLANDS AND STORMWATER BRANCH
Trenspoeatlon Permliong Unk
16N Mell SAvics Center. Raleigh, North Carolina 27699.1650
2321 Crebtine 6aulward. Suita 250, Raleigh, North Carorma 27604
Phone: [phone] /FAX
919733 6893! Internet htblRr2o wnr srara_ne.us/nrwcN?..w?
Ire • •• ?rs???
K11 e Dave pi PC Burial' 8- 8-05
b i?h CL?ar ?r??r e?? -?x?
&LWt,?. ?tQe - s?loKl?l loe Ilk Sro4ey,v<
t?.lv?ucLi? c??nc c(os?v -14?an wq Shmn,?C(
tM.c, ?'0 hG?P -WII? lUll? RUO
`vim\?t1Ylg?
15? ?k .? arctu ?6 `?loodwl..??v?n?t?
3 kk . aJtYoo?? U?bF.?h;oF G?nv?c1,
abvu.k sewer Icne
Sohn o.6k2d a?vuk moa-004a C,u.lvOs
ht\vs blem
kt b\@,??sfi`rti C00- Qzg sB
FEtAK!- i-tt2S
6S?
Sohn yak ?cs??w? bar R,
1?era y?..r c1? ?,w s s ve, n w ck.??
v? h?S G. T iw ho?v Z- k-
y
o Vow, o-o UtA Gib f, o p?
1 a11?. ?o M.:?? aJ?ouu-? on? ?=?e
hook a? Y ki - ( `, w
t S- q MMM& - ?1s bl uw hol
To po,&S 25 Im cskwm - 3ooc is
,w0-vkU ft%tij ft arcnl cOvOrs
vo?6V?
Y?? 2 lYll 61 C;
'i?, eccr\
Y
Kyle Drive, Wake Co (post construction)
Subject: Kyle Drive, Wake Co (post construction)
From: "Heather W. Montague" <hwmontague @dot. state.nc.us>
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 11:44:46 -0400
To: [e-mail]
----- The attached message is an automatically
----- generated copy of mail delivered to [e-mail]
Subject: Kyle Drive, Wake Co (post construction)
From: "Heather W. Montague" <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 11:44:44 -0400
To: Eric Alsmeyer <[e-mail]>, Nikki Thomson
<nicole.thomson @ncmail.net>
See attached for photos of the pipe replacement on Kyle Drive in
Wake County. Again the maintenance contract crew was able to
bury the pipes on the inlet but due to the sewer line on the
outlet - the outlet end of theses pipes couldn't be buried.
Please note that a headwall was constructed on the inlet end and
rip rap armoring was used on the outlet end - as opposed to walls
on both ends as my permit drawing indicated. This depiction was
a misunderstanding on my part, as our Hydraulics Unit actually
recommended a headwall singular not headwalls plural. Even with
this discrepancy, the impacts at this site have not changed. The
outlet end of these pipes are exposed and the rip rap armoring
tapers down from the road shoulder to the pipe ends.
I of 3 7/22/2005 8:40 AM
Kyle Drive, Wake Co (post construction)
Content-Type: image/jpeg
MVC-027S.JPG
Content-Encoding: base64
-------------
C-029S.JPG Content-Type: image/jpeg
2 of 3 7/22/2005 8:40 AM
Kyle Drive, Wake Co (post construction).eml' ` Content-Type: Message/RFC822
... .......
Kyle Drive - Permit MOD
Subject: Kyle Drive - Permit MOD
From: "Heather W. Montague" <hwmontague @dot. state.nc.us>
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 16:28:30 -0400
To: Christina Breen <[e-mail]>, Eric Alsmeyer
<Eric.C.Alsmeyer@ saw02.usace.army.mil>
CC: Chris Murray <[e-mail]>
Christina and Eric,
A request for a permit modification for Kyle Drive is being sent
out today. There are two separate issues at this site: 1) pipe
burial and 2) erosion control. The pipe burial issue was
unexpected and will require additional discussion. As far as
stream bank stabilization, I can see now that I should have made
sure rip rap armoring was included in the initial permit. I
mistakenly assumed "headwalls" meant walls on both ends of a pipe
and that the use of these replaced the need for rip rap
armoring. I now realize that you can have a headwall or and end
wall or both. Additionally, any project that leaves disturbed
areas without hard stabilization has the potential for sediment
loss. Our construction crews realized that rip rap was needed,
but didn't use it because I hadn't gotten it permitted. I must
continue to improve my coordination with them - so that these
issues are addressed ahead of time and if an error is ever
realized in the future we can take care of that before
construction is completed.
Christina - you've requested a meeting sometime the week of
August 8th to discuss this project again. Our permit
modification request attempts to head off some of this
discussion, please see this request and then we can talk more
about where we go from here. Christina- let me know where you'd
like to meet (someone's office or back on site) and if you feel
like having some of our construction folks and staff engineers
attend would be helpful. I'd need to coordinate with their
schedules and then I could get back with you on which date and
what time works best for everyone.
Thank your for your help with this project. Please continue to
let me know if you have questions or need additional information.
Heather Montague
1 of 1 7/26/2005 2:45 PM
SR 2213 Kyle Drive - Wake County
Subject: SR 2213 Kyle Drive - Wake County
From: "Heather W. Montague" <hwmontague @dot. state.nc.us>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 16:40:05 -0400
To: Christina Breen <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
CC: Donald Pearson <[e-mail]>, Joey Hopkins <jhopkins @dot. state.nc.us>, Chris
Murray <[e-mail]>, Jason Michael Holmes <j mholmes @dot. state.nc.us>, "Brandon H.
Jones" <bhj ones@ dot. state.nc.us>, "Jeffrey D. Allen" <[e-mail]>
Christina and Mike,
As you saw while onsite this morning, an area along the outlet
bank which was previously stabilized with matting and mulch, has
now become destabilized due to recent rain events. Immediately
following our meeting, I had our maintenance crews return to the
project site to pull back the slope and place rip rap along the
stream bank. Please see attached photographs. Please contact me
if you have any questions.
Heather Montague
560-6081
1 of 2 7/25/2005 1:20 PM
SR 2213 Kyle Drive - Wake County
Content-Type: image/jpeg
IMVC-025S.JPG
Content-Encoding: base64
2 of 2 7/25/2005 1:20 PM
?-2 2 _-?S
2b°70 --?-
es
st 2 1? b ..
,r ?(1
s ux'
-VI
OW w?.
4m t
SR 2213(Kyle Drive)Wake Co. maint pipe replacement
Subject: SR 2213(Kyle Drive)Wake Co. maint pipe replacement
From: "Heather W. Montague" <hwmontague @dot. state.nc.us>
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2005 10:20:20 -0400
To: [e-mail]
----- The attached message is an automatically
----- generated copy of mail delivered to Nicole. Thomson@dwq. denr.ncmail. net
Subject: SR 2213(Kyle Drive)Wake Co. maint pipe replacement
From: "Heather W. Montague" <hwmontague @dot. state.nc.us>
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2005 10:20:15 -0400
To: Eric Alsmeyer <[e-mail]>, Nikki Thomson
<nicole.thomson @ ncmail.net>
DWQ Project No. 050311 - dated 03/11/05
Action ID. 200520580 & 200520581 - dated 03/15/05
The pipe replacement activities on SR 2213 Kyle Drive in Wake
County are currently underway - expected to be completed within
the next two days. Our office has been informed by the Asst.
County Maintenance Engineer, Jason Holmes, that an existing
gravity fed sewer line across the stream bed on the outlet end
will prevent the contractor from properly burying the proposed
pipe on the outlet end. The sewer line was improperly installed
years ago and to fix it now would require the relocation of over
a thousand feet of line.
Therefore, the new pipe has been replaced and buried 20% on the
inlet but is perched about 1 foot on the outlet. I will forward
construction pictures to you as soon as I get those. If you
would like for me to join you for a site visit, please let me
know.
Thanks,
Heather Montague
560-6081
SR 2213(Kyle Drive)Wake Co. maint pipe replacement.eml Content-Type: Message/RFC822
1 of 1 7/22/2005 8:42 AM
9:30am on the 22nd
eSS( ?
Subject: 9:30am on the 22nd
From: "Heather W. Montague" <hwmontague @dot. state.nc.us>
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 08:52:29 -0400
To: Christina Breen <[e-mail]>
Christina- What about 9:30am on the 22nd - at the site? Otherwise anytime after that
would also work, I have no commitments scheduled for that day. Please note to get to
Kyle Drive from 401, you'll stay with 401 after the split from Capital Blvd. Then
approximately 0.3 mile past New Hope Rd, make a right onto Valley Stream Drive, then
the
first left onto Kyle Drive - this is different from how the topo map and Gazetteer
show
Kyle Drive coming directly off of 401. -Heather
Christina Breen wrote:
The day that is good for us is Friday of next week. What time would be
good for you, since you are the one that has to travel the farthest?
Heather W. Montague wrote:
I just got word from our Asst CME that the construction folks just finished up
late
yesterday - now would be a good time to see this site. I could come meet you
anytime - today, tomorrow, or whenever you can arrange a time. This project
isn't
far at all from your office, but it would take me about 45 minutes get there.
Please speak with Mike and see when you and he could get out there - then let
me
know and I'll meet you.
Heather
560-6081 office
691-1596 cell
Christina Breen
Environmental Specialist II
NC Division of Water Quality
Transportation Permitting Unit
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Suite 250
Raleigh, NC 27604-2260
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
1 of 1 7/22/2005 8:11 AM
o?
d,,.srnrE4
'? - H,Sr rFRQU S
Cy
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
August 10, 2005
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27609
Attention: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
NCDOT Coordinator
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
Subject: MODIFICATION REQUEST to replace the modification request dated
07/25/05 for permits issued for maintenance pipe improvement to a
structure conveying Beaverdam Creek on SR 2213 (Kyle Drive) in
Wake County.
References: 1) NCDENR-DWQ Project No. 050311.
2) USACE Action ID: 200520580, 200520581.
In an application letter, dated February 11, 2005 - the North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) provided information on the proposal to replace a pipe
conveying Beaverdam Creek on SR 2213 (Kyle Drive) in Wake County. On 03/11/05 the
NCDENR-DWQ approved a 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC) 3494 and 3366 to
correspond with the Nationwide Permit 3 and 33 issued by the USACE on 03/15/05.
REVISIONS
Construction of this project was completed 07/15/05. Several changes in the field became
necessary which differ from the proposal presented in the 02/11/05 letter. First of all,
conflicts with the position of a gravity fed sewer line prevented the replacement pipes
from being buried the required depths. The result is that the outlet ends of these pipes
were perched above the streambed slightly. Please note that the use of shorter pipes to
avoid the sewer line would have left this PVC sewer line exposed above the streambed
and very near the outlet of the new pipes - increasing the risk for a possible break in this
line associated with bank scour, debris forced against the line, as well as weathering
effects of an uncovered line.
Division 5, 2612 N. Duke Street, Durham, NC 27704
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]

2

Secondly, a headwall was constructed on the inlet end and riprap armoring was used on
the outlet end - as opposed to walls on both ends as indicated within the permit drawing
attached to the 02/11/05 letter. It was the recommendation of our Hydraulics Unit to use
headwall only with no end wall. Even with this discrepancy, the impacts to this site did
not exceed those permitted. The outlet end of these pipes are exposed and the riprap
armoring tapered down from the road shoulder to the pipe ends. The work area was then
matted, seeded, and mulched for stabilization.
On 07/22/05, Mike Horan and Christina Breen of NCDWQ met onsite with Heather
Montague of NCDOT. Upon review of this project site it was evident that additional
stabilization would be necessary in order to control sediment loss from the east bank at
the outlet end, as this bank had failed. In response to this problem, NCDOT maintenance
crews pulled back the bank and placed 15 if of riprap along the stream bank that same
day at the request of NCDWQ. NCDWQ also expressed concern with the amount of
sediment within the stream channel. NCDOT acknowledges our responsibility with the
bank failure and recovered this small section of collapsed bank material during the bank
repair work. NCDOT contends that the sediment volume within the stream channel and
particularly within the blowhole is pre-existing and not associated with the pipe
replacement activities. Photographs attached to the 02/11/05 letter show sandbars and
sediment deposits at both the inlet and outlet ends of the existing pipe. Additionally, Mr.
Jordan Allen, an adjacent landowner, documents his concern over washing silt
accumulation covering three strands of barbed wire fence in a letter from December
2003.
In an email 07/26/05, NCDWQ requested a meeting to discuss a way to permanently fix
the pipe burial issue, because there may be a worsening situation with the blowhole. It
was recommended that we talk to Randy Heneger of NCDOT Hydraulics Unit
concerning an outlet dissipater design of his which may or may not help in this case. A
meeting date of 08/08/05 was scheduled.
In preparation of this meeting, Randy Henegar and Randy Boyd of NCDOT Hydraulics
meet onsite 08/03/05 with Heather Montague and the Wake County Maintenance
Engineer, Jeff Allen, and Assistant County Maintenance Engineer, Jason Holmes. It was
discussed that this project site does not have right-of-way to accommodate an outlet
dissipater as there is only 2.5 ft from the new pipe outlet and the right-of-way limit.
During this site visit it was observed that utility work involving a gas line, on the inlet
side of the pipes, had resulted in disturbance to the seeding, mulching, and matting that
was previously established along both banks and surrounding roadway shoulders. In
order to rectify this situation, NCDOT maintenance crews placed 11 if of riprap along
these banks on 08/04/05, then re-seeded and mulched the surrounding area.
On 08/08/05 NCDOT staff Chris Murray, Heather Montague, Randy Boyd, Jeff Allen,
Jason Holmes, Wake County Maintenance Engineer-Chris McGee, and Division 5's
District 1 Engineer-Brandon Jones, met with Christina Breen and John Hennessy at
NCDWQ's office. Because it had been determined that there is not space to install a
outlet dissipater and the blowhole is expected to heal itself overtime, it was concluded
that from a water quality stand point control of sediment was the greatest concern at this
site. Since that NCDOT maintenance crews have already completed the requested
stabilization measures along with additional efforts to ensure stabilization, we propose
that control of sediment loss has been accomplished. No additional work at this site or
within the stream channel is proposed.
SUMMARY
Post construction conditions at this site have not increased surface water impacts or
riparian buffer impacts as previously permitted (as all activity falls within the
construction limits as described in the 02/11/05 letter). However, the conflicts of pipe
burial and the use of riprap as hard stabilization were not previously addressed. Attached
for your review, please see the revised drawing and post construction photographs. By
copy of this letter, a modification to the referenced permits is hereby requested. If you
have any questions or need additional information, please contact Ms. Heather Montague
at [phone].
S' ly,
n G. Nance, P.E.
Division Engineer, DIV 5
cc: Ms. Nicole Thomson, NCDWQ
Mr. Brandon Jones, NCDOT
Mr. Chris McGee, NCDOT
Ms. Katie Simmons, NCDOT

oj - t1d/'J''V?
t`?C'
November 19, 2003
Mr. Dave Henderson
State Hydraulics Engineer
1590 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1590
Dear Mr. Henderson:
Jordan L. Allen, Jr.
4800 Kyle Drive
Raleigh, North Carolina 27616-5110
Home Phone [phone]
Email [e-mail]
kYf -
% CEM
MOM OF HIGHWAYS
ftRAUUCS UNIT
'7) V
1.
As a resident living on Kyle Drive, my property is adjacent to the Beaverdam Branch. One of the major concern I
have is the stromwater runoff. Over the past 60 years I have witnessed the transformation of a well drained branch
to a wide flat marsh with the elevation at road level. I am referring to the area between Louisburg Road and Kyle
Drive. This has occurred due to lack of proper silt control during the time Louisburg Road was originally built. Of
course the construction of subdivisions and apartments in the area has also contributed to the problem. There are
three strands of barbwire covered by the washing silt. The wire encompassed land that was formally utilized as
pastureland. This was further evidenced when the City installed a sewer outfall line down Beaverdam Branch to
connect to the Neuse River line. I believe the contractor referred to this as a floating line. When the city had the
sewer line installed, the contractor re-routed the run of the branch located near and the north side of Kyle Drive more
to the east. The branch meanders toward Kyle Drive from Louisburg Road to a point. It then makes a 90 degree turn
to the west along Kyle Drive to a point, and then takes another 90 degree turn to allow the water to flow under Kyle
Drive. I mention this because a dam affect has been created which adds to the cause of flooding. I believe another
problem is with the size of the culvert under Kyle Drive. While it is adequate for the normal amount of water flowing,
it does appear to be inadequate for the amount of stormwater surges we experience during severe rain storms. The
culvert may have been OK when it was installed forty years ago but does not appear to be adequate for today.
I would appreciate your studying this problem and lend some assistance in alleviating the problem. The shoulder of
the road is being eroded to the point that it has become a hazard should a car run off the road along this area.
Sincerely,
ordan L. Allen, Jr.
cc: Mr. Jerry Linder
Mr. Brandon Jones
Mr. James K. Leumas
Mr. Curtis Stevens
T
U
v
U-
C

L O
°- v
L
-
0
3 O
C, 3 a.
O O L
4- L
~ =
L
D
c
N O
Q
O O
a
O
X L L

t L
L. 4- LL
41 N 3 W
i P T
v
? v
X O i
i
m
C ;
O
Li. W 0- N v'
N ?
N LL j I (! N
SL < CL at
O LLJ I a 3 Zone 2 + C
f O <[ p L
i to } W
to c +
,? ' N =
U) O
`? ;? E o 3
Y u ° - 1 O 4- 4-
m
w a c O Zone I 0 v
° O p a o (D - ' O} E
C
4- o m t I I C O ' a o L
4O
P - L O O '' 0 3 i L } O Q O N O
C ° n p a L 3 4- L a w E -
O L _ o m
P O
C ' d
N L _ ?.,S.,b,O _I Y" r
N ?? a
N
L } N
+ 3 N ?? n C
m
O O
N
F L + N _
O _a v
C
CD 4. O }
E L a 3
4-
CO
O N ;
O Zone f v r. C O c
v
rn a Zone o c m
C O ; O 4- O
i 4-
4- +
m
m C i to E
E ? y
ZOne 2 m 7 C p
Zone 2 v m o
v L c
m O a
rn E 7
L
a p >
? N >
rn > L O
N L a t
N ^
L
(x
m
N
T
i y
N
0

. 00
o
C3
p, A o

o 0
Cd L?' M

U>
?
N

SR 2213 (Kyle Drive) - Wake County
Photograph 1. View of Inlet - Post Construction.
Photograph 2. View of Outlet - Post Construction.
??Tyy STATEo
M.n
?2 v
?os?r alp
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
July 25, 2005
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27609
Attention: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
NCDOT Coordinator
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
Subject: MODIFICATION REQUEST for permits issued for maintenance pipe
improvement to a structure conveying Beaverdam Creek on SR 2213
(Kyle Drive) in Wake County.
References: 1) NCDENR-DWQ Project No. 050311.
2) USACE Action ID: 200520580, 200520581.
In an application letter, dated February 11, 2005 - the North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) provided information on the proposal to replace a pipe
conveying Beaverdam Creek on SR 2213 (Kyle Drive) in Wake County. On 03/11/05 the
NCDENR-DWQ approved a 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC) 3494 and 3366 to
correspond with the Nationwide Permit 3 and 33 issued by the USACE on 03/15/05.
REVISIONS
Construction of this project was completed July 15th. Several changes in the field became
necessary which differ from the proposal presented in the 02/11/05 letter. First of all,
conflicts with the position of a gravity fed sewer line prevented the replacement pipes
from being buried the required depths. The result is that the outlet ends of these pipes
were perched above the streambed slightly. Please note that the use of shorter pipes to
avoid the sewer line would have left this PVC sewer line exposed above the streambed
and very near the outlet of the new pipes - increasing the risk for a possible break in this
line associated with bank scour, debris forced against the line, as well as weathering
effects of an uncovered line.
Secondly, a headwall was constructed on the inlet end and riprap armoring was used on
the outlet end - as opposed to walls on both ends as indicated within the permit drawing
Division 5, 2612 N. Duke Street, Durham, NC 27704
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
2
attached to the 02/11/05 letter. It was the recommendation of our Hydraulics Unit to use
headwall only with no end wall. Even with this discrepancy, the impacts to this site did
not exceed those permitted. The outlet end of these pipes are exposed and the riprap
armoring tapered down from the road shoulder to the pipe ends. The work area was then
matted, seeded, and mulched for stabilization.
Upon review of this project site it was evident that additional stabilization would be
necessary in order to control sediment loss from the east bank at the outlet end.
Therefore, NCDOT maintenance crews pulled back the bank and placed 15 if of riprap
along the stream bank (see attached drawing, revised 01/22/05).
SUMMARY
Post construction conditions at this site have not increased surface water impacts or
riparian buffer impacts as previously permitted (as all activity falls within the
construction limits as described in the 02/11/05 letter). However, the conflicts of pipe
burial and the use of riprap as hard stabilization were not previously addressed.
Therefore, by copy of this letter a modification to the referenced permits is hereby
requested. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Ms.
Heather Montague at [phone].
Sincerely,
J G. Nance, P.E.
Division Engineer, DIV 5
cc: Ms. Nicole Thomson, NCDWQ
Mr. Brandon Jones, NCDOT
Mr. Chris McGee, NCDOT
Ms. Katie Simmons, NCDOT

r.
N ?
QQ ? v I
A ? ?
W
O C/1 ?
N ? ? A
II
W e^cf A'+ O
? O
p ? d b
N O
C
f
D
O
O
< O
p7 O ?
C
C 3
N O (n
m
40 (D a z BUOZ
m O
t ?
O O ------- ---
m 7 O 1 9UOZ
? m 7
CL £ m
+
F O
O 'O A
CD +
C,
O
J i
v ?aX
O n
O O 1 N
O ? d
m N O -h
+ 3 N (D O
CD O O
0 J O -h
+ 07
CL o 1 auoZ
-------------
rn
F
O CO
+ :y
m (n
I (o
57 ? Z 9uoZ
IQ
C N
v N
I N_
< W
ID
i
i
m
X
3
O N ?
9 O
? a
i
CD co
i
i
? i
O
F
C 10
'
O O i
O ?
3 + o
m (D
N
+ a m
o 3 a;
x m in ;
M + Ln
n o ;
Q - -h
F
n v
m
ti
i
Z m
O X
o
a (n
o ?
m E N
? a o
+ -h
:. +
Z auoZ
I 9uoZ
.I
m
O
O. N
F O
O J
CD
N
O
7
m
m

O
O
(D
O' O
T J
+
O O
m fi
F
? N
CD N
l (D
J t
O ?
7
i t { Z
o
4

M ,i
I -? X
O
0 O
0 U)
{ -

(A (A
(D D
tO N
a a

0 Q o
(D
O
O O.
?
O
?
O
fl ?
N
+
O
3
TI

n

L
ti
O? W AT
A ?RQG
r
p ?
March 11, 2005
Wake County
DWQ Project No. 050311
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification and NEUSE RIVER RIPARIAN BUFFER AUTHORIZATION
Mr. Jon G. Nance, P.E. Division Engineer
NCDOT, Division 5
2612 N. Duke Street
Durham, NC 27704
Dear Mr. Nance:
You have our approval, in accordance with the conditions fisted below, for the following impacts for the purpose of
proposed pipe maintenance and improvement to a structure conveying Beaverdam Cree on SR 2213 (Kylie Drive)
in Wake County.
Impact Stream Impacts - Concurrent Stream Impacts - Riparian Buffer Impacts (Square Feet)
Locations Permanent Fill Temporary Dewatering-
(Linear Feet) (Linear Feet)
Site 1 7 27 1,922 (1,922 Zone 1 + 0 Zone 2)
The project shall be constructed in accordance with your application dated received February 15, 2005. After
reviewing your application, we have decided that the stream impacts and riparian buffer impacts described are
covered by General Water Quality Certification Numbers 3494 and 3366. This certification corresponds to the
Nationwide Permit 3 and the Nationwide Permit 33 issued by the Corps of Engineers. This approval is also valid for
the Neuse River Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0233). In addition, you should acquire any other federal, state or
local permits before you proceed with your project including (but not limited to) Sediment and Erosion Control,
Non-Discharge and Water Supply Watershed regulations. This approval will expire with the accompanying 404
permit, unless otherwise specified in the Water Quality Certification.
This approval is valid solely for the purpose and design described in your application (unless modified below).
Should your project change, you must notify the DWQ and submit 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 the conditions. If total wetland fills for this project (now or in the future) exceed one acre, or of total
impacts to streams (now or in the future) exceed 150 linear feet, compensatory mitigation may be required as
described in 15A NCAC 2H .0506 (h) (6) and (7). For this approval to remain valid, you must adhere to the
conditions listed in the attached certification.
1.) Upon completion of the project, the NCDOT shall complete and return the enclosed "Certification of
Completion Form" to notify DWQ when all work included in the 401 Certification has been completed. The
responsible party shall complete the attached form and return it to the 401/Wetlands Unit of the Division of
Water Quality upon completion of the project.
2.) All stormwater runoff shall be directed to sheetflow through stream buffers at nonerosive velocities, unless
approved otherwise by this certification.
3.) During the construction of the project, no staging of equipment of any kind is permitted in waters of the U.S., or
protected riparian buffers.
Nose Carolina
Transportation Permitting Unit Nuturallf
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] /FAX [phone]/ Internet: http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer-50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper
r
18.) A copy of this Water Quality Certification shall be posted on the construction site at all times. In addition, the
Water Quality Certification and all subsequent modifications, if any, shall be maintained with the Division
Engineer and the on-site project manager.
19.) For 27 linear feet of stream at Site 1 being impacted due to site dewatering activties, the site shall be graded to
its preconstruction contours and revegetated with native vegetation.
20.) All protected riparian buffers impacted by the placement of temporary fill or clearing activities shall be restored
to the preconstruction contours and revegetated with native woody species upon completion of the project
construction. A post-construction as-built with the restoration activities included shall be submitted to the
DWQ no later than 60 days after the project is closed out by the Department of Transportation.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory hearing. You must
act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send a written petition that conforms
to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447,
Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7447. This certification and its conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. If you
have any questions, please contact Nicole Thomson at 919-715-3415.
ely,
C
Alan W. Klimek,
JEH/njt
Attachment
cc: Wilmington District, US Army Corps of Engineers
Mr. Eric Alsmeyer, US Army Corps of Engineers, Raleigh Field Office
Mr. Chris Murray, Division 5 Environmental Officer, 2612 N. Duke Street, Durham, NC 27704
NC DWQ Raleigh Regional Office
Central Files
File Copy
cACorrespondence\2005 SR Projects\DWQ050287\030705wgc.doc

vvnrFR
QG
..-r, ,a.,.,,,,,,,,
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
March 11, 2005
Durham County
DWQ Project No. 050287 .
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification and NEUSE RIVER RIPARIAN BUFFER AUTHORIZATION
Mr. Jon G. Nance, P.E. Division Engineer
NCDOT, Division 5
2612 N. Duke Street
Durham, NC 27704
Dear Mr. Nance:
You have our approval, in accordance with the conditions listed below, for the following impacts for the purpose of
proposed pipe maintenance and improvement to a structure conveying Beaverdam Cree on SR 2213 (Kylie Drive)
in Wake County.
Impact Stream Impacts - Concurrent Stream Impacts - Riparian Buffer Impacts (Square Feet)
Locations Permanent Fill Temporary Dewatering-
(Linear Feet) (Linear Feet)
Site 1 7 27 1,922 (1,922 Zone 1 + 0 Zone 2)
The project shall be constructed in accordance with your application dated received February 15, 2005. After
reviewing your application, we have decided that the stream impacts and riparian buffer impacts described are
covered by General Water Quality Certification Numbers 3494 and 3366. This certification corresponds to the
Nationwide Permit 3 and the Nationwide Permit 33 issued by the Corps of Engineers. This approval is also valid for
the Neuse River Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0233). In addition, you should acquire any other federal, state or
local permits before you proceed with your project including (but not limited to) Sediment and Erosion Control,
Non-Discharge and Water Supply Watershed regulations. This approval will expire with the accompanying 404
permit, unless otherwise specified in the Water Quality Certification.
This approval is valid solely for the purpose and design described in your application (unless modified below).
Should your project change, you must notify the DWQ and submit 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 the conditions. If total wetland fills for this project (now or in the future) exceed one acre, or of total
impacts to streams (now or in the future) exceed 150 linear feet, compensatory mitigation may be required as
described in 15A NCAC 2H .0506 (h) (6) and (7). For this approval to remain valid, you must adhere to the
conditions listed in the attached certification.
1.) Upon completion of the project, the NCDOT shall complete and return the enclosed "Certification of
Completion Form" to notify DWQ when all work included in the 401 Certification has been completed. The
responsible party shall complete the attached form and return it to the 401/Wetlands Unit of the Division of
Water Quality upon completion of the project.
2.) All stormwater runoff shall be directed to sheetflow through stream buffers at nonerosive velocities, unless
approved otherwise by this certification.
3.) During the construction of the project, no staging of equipment of any kind is permitted in waters of the U.S., or
protected riparian buffers.
Nose Carolina
Transportation Permitting Unit N tumlly
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone]/ FAX [phone]/ Internet: http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/nowetlands
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper
4.) Riparian vegetation must be reestablished within the construction limits of the project by the end of the growing
season following completion of construction.
5.) The dimension, pattern and profile of the stream above and below the crossing should not be modified by
widening the stream channel or reducing the depth of the stream. Disturbed floodplains and streams should be
restored to natural geomorphic conditions.
6.) Any riprap used must not interfere with thalweg performance and aquatic life passage during low flow
conditions.
7.) All mechanized equipment operated near surface waters must be regularly inspected and maintained to prevent
contamination of stream waters from fuels, lubricants, hydraulic fluids, or other toxic materials.
8.) Discharging hydroseed mixtures and washing out hydroseeders and other equipment in or adjacent to surface
waters is prohibited.
9.) The outside buffer, wetland or water boundary located within the construction corridor approved by this
authorization shall be clearly marked by highly visible fencing prior to any land disturbing activities. Impacts
to areas within the fencing are prohibited unless otherwise authorized by this certification.
10.) There shall be no excavation from or waste disposal into jurisdictional wetlands or waters associated with this
permit without appropriate modification of this permit. Should waste or borrow sites be located in wetlands or
stream, compensatory mitigation will be required since it is a direct impact from road construction activities.
11.) Pursuant to NCACI5A 2B.0233(6), sediment and.erosion control devices shall not be placed in Zone 1 of any
Neuse River Buffer without -prior approval by the N.CDWQ. At this time, the NCDWQ has approved no
sediment and erosion control devices in Zone 1, outside of the approved project impacts, anywhere on this
project. Moreover, sediment and erosion control devices shall be allowed in Zone 2 of the buffers provided that
Zone 1 is not compromised and that discharge is released as diffuse flow.
12.) Heavy equipment must be operated from the banks rather than in the stream channel in order to minimize
sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing other pollutants into the stream.
13.) Placement of culverts and other structures in waters, streams, and wetlands must be placed below the elevation
of the streambed by one foot for all culverts with a diameter greater than 48 inches, and 20 percent of the
culvert diameter for culverts having a diameter less than 48 inches, to allow low flow passage of water and
aquatic life. Design and placement of culverts and other structures including temporary erosion control
measures shall not be conducted in a manner that may result in dis-equilibrium of wetlands or stream beds or
banks, adjacent to or upstream and down stream of the above structures. The applicant is required to provide
evidence that the equilibrium shall be maintained if requested in writing by DWQ. ..
14.) No live or fresh concrete shall come into contact with waters of the state until the concrete has hardened
15.) The presence of equipment in the channels must be minimized. Under no circumstances must rock, sand or
other materials be dredged from the wetted stream channel under authorization of this permit, except in the
immediate vicinity of the culverts.
16.) All work shall be performed during low or normal flow conditions.
17.) All fill slopes located in jurisdictional wetlands shall be placed at slopes no flatter than 3:1.
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
TRANSMITTAL SLIP DATE
iy os
TO: REF. NO. OR ROOM, BLDG.
FROM:" ? REF. NO. qO?R ROOM, BLDG.
4 ` v r-
TION
? NOTE AND FILE ?, PER. OUR CONVERSATION
?'NOTE AND RETURN TO ME ? PER YOUR REQUEST
? RETURN WITH MORE DETAILS DS? APPROVAL
? NOTE AND SEE ME ABOUT THIS CC?YY/FOR YOUR INFORMATIO
? PLEASE ANSWER ? FOR YOUR COMMENTS
? PREPARE REPLY FOR MY SIGNATURE ? SIGNATURE
?'1 TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION ? INVESTIGATE AND REPORT
COMMENTS:
/ 3 33

?a?r cue Gf

0311
(k-t, G 1JAtc)

?
Of 0 31
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
February 11, 2005
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27609
Attention: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer, NCDOT Coordinator
p@m0ni P
FEB 1 5 2005
DENR - WATER QUALITY
WETLANDS AND STORMWATER BRANCH
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
Subject: Proposed maintenance pipe improvement to a structure conveying
Beaverdam Creek on SR 2213 (Kyle Drive) in Wake County.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace a pipe
conveying Beaverdam Creek on SR 2213 (Kyle Drive) in Wake County (Figures 1 - 4).
Please note that Kyle Drive is currently a paved roadway and information concerning this
maintenance activity is provided below:
Impacts to Waters of the United States
Site 1 - Waters of the U.S.
Maintenance activities at this site will impact a perennial stream, Beaverdam Creek
[NCDENR-DWQ Index No. 27-27, Best Usage Classification C NSW; HUC 03020201]
(Figure 3) in the Neuse River Basin. The existing structure that conveys the creek is a
48 inch corrugated metal pipe (cmp) that is 48 feet long (Photographs 1-2). Please note
that the existing structure is deteriorated and is undersized which has resulted in repeated
flooding and a failed roadway shoulder. The NCDOT proposes to replace the existing
structure with a double line of 48 inch cmps that are 55 feet long with metal headwalls.
The NCDOT proposes to temporarily dewater the work zone during the construction of
the project. This will involve the temporary placement of sheet piling in the creek at the
ten feet upstream and ten feet downstream limits the of construction. Once the stream has
been dewatered, the pipe will be replaced. Permanent impacts at the site associated with
the replacement of the structure include 7 linear feet existing channel impacted. The work
zone will be dewatered for approximately ten days. To maintain water flow during
construction, water upstream of the sheet piling will be temporarily pumped out and
conveyed around downstream of the sheet piling. Temporary concurrent impacts to the
stream from this activity will result in the dewatering of 27 linear feet of stream. The sheet
piling will be removed after construction.
Division 5, 2612 N. Duke Street, Durham, NC 27704
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]

Riparian Buffer

Site 1 - Buffers
The maintenance at this site involves a road crossing of a stream that is subject to the
Neuse River Buffer Rules. The perennial stream, Beaverdam Creek, at Site 1 is depicted
on the most recent version of the Raleigh East (USGS 1968,1987) topographic
quadrangle (Figure 1) and the Soil Survey of Wake County (USDA-SCS, 1970)
(Figure 2). Construction impacts at this site total 1,922 ftZ in Zone 1 and 0 ftz in Zone 2
(totaling 7 linear feet of riparian buffer impacts). Based on the impacts to the riparian
buffer at this site, this crossing is EXEMPT.
Waters of the U.S. Mitigation
Avoidance: All wetlands and surface waters not affected by the project will be protected
from unnecessary encroachment. No staging of construction equipment or storage of
construction supplies will be allowed in wetlands or near surface waters.
Minimization: The side slopes have been steepened to the extent possible at jurisdictional
sites. Strict enforcement of sedimentation and erosion control Best Management Practices
for the protection of wetlands and surface waters will be enforced during project
construction. Continued coordination will occur with maintenance forces and the
Environmental Officer during construction to minimize impacts to these sites.
Com enp satory Miti ag tion: Unavoidable impacts to 7 linear feet of stream associated with
this project will be mitigated (at a 2:1 ratio) by providing 14 linear feet of stream
restoration equivalent in the Neuse River Basin (Hydrologic Cataloging Unit 03020201).
All compensatory mitigation requirements will be assimilated on a quarterly basis and
provided to the Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) for their acceptance with a copy
provided to the USACE for verification and accounting purposes.
Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered, Threatened, Proposed
Endangered, and Proposed Threatened are protected under provisions of Section 7 and
Section 9 of the ESA. As of January 29, 2003, there are four federally protected species
listed for Wake County. They include bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus),
red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis), dwarf wedgemussel (Alasmidonta
heterdon), and Michaux's sumac (Rhus michauxii). Kyle Drive is not adjacent to nor is it
surrounded by open water suitable of supporting foraging habitat for the bald eagle. The
dense stands of mixed hardwood surrounding this roadway do not offer suitable forging or
nesting habitat for red-cockaded woodpecker. Although Beaverdam Creek is perennial, it is
within the headwaters of its drainage system and does not provide suitable habitat for mussel
fauna. Additionally, the roadway shoulders along Kyle Drive are heavily maintained from the
pavement to the woods line and maintained yards, eliminating the possibility for Michaux's
sumac to exist in this area. Therefore, based on lack of suitable habitat observed during the
11/16/04 site visit, biological conclusions of No Effect have been rendered for each species.

Summary
The NCDOT proposes to replace the existing undersized and deteriorated structure.
Permanent impacts at the site associated with this maintenance work include 7 linear feet
existing channel impacted. The work zone will be dewatered for approximately ten days.
Temporary concurrent impacts to the stream from this activity will result in the
dewatering of 27 linear feet of stream. The sheet piling will be removed after
construction. Riparian buffer impacts at Site 1 associated with this maintenance activity
total 1,922 ft' in Zone 1 and 0 ft' in Zone 2 (totaling 7 linear feet of riparian buffer
impacts outside the existing transportation facility). Based on the impacts to the riparian
buffer at this site, this crossing is EXEMPT.
Application is hereby made for a Department of the Army Section 404 Nationwide
Permit (NWP) 3 and NWP 33. Additionally, this application provides notification to the
NCDWQ as Section 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC) No. 3376 and No. 3366
will be utilized for activities at this site. The NCDOT will comply with all applicable
NWP, WQC, and riparian buffer conditions. A pre-construction notification is attached
with this request. If you have any questions or need additional infonnation, please contact
Ms. Heather Montague at [phone].
Sinc 1 ,
J G. Nance, P.E.
Division Engineer
cc: Ms. Nicole Thomson, NCDWQ
Mr. Brandon Jones, NCDOT
Mr. Chris McGee, NCDOT
Ms. Katie Simmons, NCDOT
SR 2213 (Kyle Drive) - Wake County
Photograph 1. View upstream of inlet.
Photograph 2. View downstream of outlet.
s t, IY (?4, ifj?F, ?-f?/' ?? i j?v. ???J}?1???.?(??~???1/. ???r. ?-t-jib ;t i ?fll?.ty; -..?_'•"'^s JV `:}
/?(/?1.
1 \? I ' St° j 1 ?• f `f : l V
_/ / 1 ! ?i 3 0 t? t I/ \ f
t
r ?r? ?!?,??J ? ?i ??' f e I 1 f--- 300 ??' J? ?r?? ? t ? J ? ??
?,1??"'-?"' ? '? ??:. ?'?•? :ti;• sJ ? J?'
• w t? •.. I' !../! f?l S? i??' 1 tr •. ?"'\:? s ? \' d,1' ?•_.''r,e,,,./..??? ??tr ?? :Y h• \ r -{ ? 'u^ ` L? wllke
?. _.% }i.? i'? 1tJ) }.1 1i a1+,. ( €` {. i ./; "-, f ?:.. ?;•ff y .l ??
?, r! i` s ? /'Y ( (` f???74??'^.`:?.,, ,rJ (?1.. ?? `o? r-,?.. ?? •• '':'??.} ,r :? ?O 297 ?!,? r ?.,
fl
((°° , , ,? , `? p ; r'' ?' ,? \\
1 tr r r
'L7!Ne
C>, ??'`/ i t s 'l?' Ri, j •'? ?+h,,`?r F'` ? ? w. -- ,, ,? ?,?Q ,rte >, ; _ - ?
x35 1,\ 7-r tr d ?c--•?
W -1.1
--?__.r"?'?? \ * ..I ?.?.. i, `. t ?. ?IW \t\ _+j ('-}.?`?•-''rte ?:.?` . ?.?.:
, r
t
fit,
?rf j / ? ? 1, ?, t 4 !t? ??` '?S ,.?,? ' ,,'?.._i1 4 , Y ? ( it, J ,ti ?./, l ( '• ij \ r ... ??,, L?-'^ ??: `: ? ,
- y
t,
a
? \ /• ? j ? 8+'? ,?li? I r ^ly? ? i? J?usti' , 3 r • ? CJ? ? v J
((?? / ? i ?• "r,;, ? ?? ? <;, tk ry? t ?j _• t ?h 1 ? ? ,v ?d q / J'
>w
"Ai
-1 'IJ
t `'°, > (i? f r r SITE
? ?...._ d } I, 71? '? - ?.?. 1 i 'wr???' ?• y, z..><".:,7 i ._ ?.. '? r ?.- wq ! ? ?-- t ??. ?`n !? 1 -.. t 1..
,?( ? .? ?? .i„ ,.. \•\? ? °~ ??? ` ? `. •.....^y ..,,...\ T f jib ?i I't4:,? y? ~
'F
_? d n? 1 s ?4 ,, ti
? r }}
?'' (?; f ?? . 1 `?•rnt :?`' iliil*? ??•3., )f...,. ?:+rr'- '' ?f ! l I W ? -- ` ,,??,
' {t /,• ?ti? rt ' ! 1 o;t ` ) I "/ V ???'',°'
? 3
l ` d ^ ' %? r 1, - i -?, ?? ice. ' t Y ?tjJ u' z
F I _f , s•r ? ?1 ?? ?\ -. , ?? t'`??a r; _? ?' r7 ?t/JiR? d? _..' ?mr^? ?,?
3 QM
,
` ?, f/ % f 1, '•r s .:..."? ? : ? ? ?? • ?,, v II \ Ii?J? }J aS t?? i ??--'" My. i` s f -1
'? f !? ' ??---?? .,?. ,? ? ?l ? ? 1 ? _? ? lam- ?' 1 'f_ ?.?-=r6„??, -?•? ?.?
M
4
!r 1 _ t ? "? ?.?,s s .» jAdit\, ? t,?? "'„'f•? ?r/t,.! f?(1 ?? ks ? ? ?•,? ,\• ? fr .yam. t
?8 .!`?tt, •~i-. t ,?? `v r1 .` f
I ) _ Irv y
^? a
. it
yam., ? w ?'' A.??"` ? ? ?, k ?-,-'"'..a.? ??`"..?*?;•-,1•- ?.?.
?CO
Copyright (C) 1998, Maptech• Inc.
j
Project Study Area
SR 2213 Kyle Drive
Wake County
Raleigh East
USGS Topo Map (1968/1987)
Figure 1 1:24,000
NORTH CAROLINA
WAKE COUNTY - SHEET NUMBER 40
LcC - ! 08 .
k PC
O FF LO
C ?° f o tI
CrYm? 's to
.
: IB2 Y j"'
w
' / / Lod;, m _

C2 ?ti?C2 !
,` .-
W} wC . `"? fa1 ;
1
•
*f e it . ` o? Du
?. Wp
L J
r
? "-, Lo?? ? i•y,, .c.Y ?
r
?
i ? W L?q? -! - C ?t
oC
t! - a x k
v. ?. Nr l.. WmB2 'N

{ ~
s P
Yp
1
t
I.q Ini
.
?i'A2 \ off? ZC 06 Log ` t Sb
l
! WkC-
CeG2

,y
CaCT
-oc WmB
+4«.?'. r { I 1 G
`_ '
,

3
" ? j . a Wm62
° LoC Ap pC Q? I
_. r:k ?
?y
A . f Q Wrt E2 ?. Y_ rc
F
ApC2
A
B
«
• L 2
WkC
1 G ,
W
?"°\ /
I
1
v '
? Wm 62
I
a Z Vol y ° icy`
o + Vn / Cn.
C

'?
-En8
?- _
`LwG2 WmB2
rch
1 , ? W
t'
?w

L'bB*-v
` WmB2

4 3
I
m C2
z
.. C
y
> WmB2 LwB2
:' S,
: r .r
•
WW& . 1wC2
.i
" _
.
.(s<sro Ap s
? ?
C2 _
APB7
SITE 1
DuB z
C2"
9
r
, i A
/ 2 m t ?m m
"
1 Gu f r Wm62
1
W XC k Wm j NmC2
1
C t
2
t A Ic
G
' °
'
Jrc
` ,
P
ACd
u y
?K
te ?rgm
h '
} Dr s
?
Cry
I
t
III 1 .. \?" _ ,j
?.- ; ?.
O try
>,i ;
r
S"T.-.- {a! « ¢ `
-.,VL,C WmC
•

•
Mall " ~? 101 3" LoC _
` fir.
a ; ` y Lo[ i ?
?
`i
z . Lo l :a ( a Y
y
?
loD' ? h
Apbz
Too \ R ° h? wmC 3 'WmC2

' Lo
L?
Aa

a C2 -« -
\\ y
\ \.;
Y
-
f
.
!
F
'
n
w Cy
.
f

_? • _ ? -
,.?
.
.,y
?
? Z
?
' o a-
rlrlF
m
x° Ades \ ?
?
?
?
1Nm B2 -
?c r ?
.?•: ".c .'
? -
3E
?
Ag62 .,./

IB3
Wm B2
r WmB2 s
y t WmB2 Ln
AD62

50) 1
T
U
v
lL.
C
O
L +
+ L =
O v
a 3
U C v
? v N
L x
L ~
C (A
c - o.
O
x X L
LL. LLI
LNIN
'I-N'Q
O LNIQ
W
Z
v?
C
d ?
+ c
? L
° o
? v
4- 3
O m
L
C O
N 4-
E
a)
U
v
CL
?' 11
11
I
+- r
4- 4- U-
0
N 3 w
c T
v
w v
x °O
m L
c
o
r'4
N
i a J ;
v
N 3
C °
o °
N ?
L
1
I_t
Zone I
Zone 2
} a a i Zone 2
4- - k
v o
,n + a
Q) w
° ; v Zone I
O +- 3
a v E
O Q) ; I
L :3 C N
a L C
Co 3
00 m
v a
zone
c ° i
4
N m
- E
Zone 2
m
r? >
N 'L
i N O
N O
Y
0
o,
? O

> 0
C '
o ?' ? M
II .

xa V
y
? ? M
O
V N r3 ?
oA

C
+ c
G) L
m m
L 4-
? v
O N
+- L
C o
a) 4-
E
m
U
v
CL
e
Office Use Only: Form Version May 2002
0.5 03.11
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No.
(If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".)
Processing
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit ? Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
? Section 10 Permit ? Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
? 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC 3376 and WQC 3366 do not require written
concurrence).
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NWP 3 and NWP 33
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 (verify availability with NCWRP prior to submittal of PCN), complete
section VIII and check here: ?
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), check here: ?
H. Applicant Information
1. Owner/Applicant Information
Name: NCDOT Division 5 Jon G. Nance, P.E.
Mailing Address: 2612 N. Duke St. Durham NC 27704
Telephone Number: [phone] Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address: JNancegdot.state.nc.us
2. Agent/Consultant 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: Fax Number:
E-mail Address:
Page 1 of 8
III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect.. to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project:- Proposed replacement of a structure conveying Beaverdam Creek on
SR 2213 (Kyle Drive) in Wake County.
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): Non-TIP and Non-Work
Order Number
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): N/A
4. Location
County: Wake Nearest Town: Raleigh
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): N/A
Directions to site (include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): From the Capital Blvd/ Hwy 401
split, take Hwy 401 towards Louisburg_Approximately 0.3 mile past New Hope Road
make a right onto Valley Stream Drive, then a left onto Kvle Drive to nroiect site.
5. Site coordinates, if available (UTM or Lat/Long): Site 1: 35.8449°N, 78.5651 °W
_(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. Property size (acres): Site 1: -0.13 acre
7. Nearest body of water (stream/river/sound/ocean/lake): Beaverdam Creek
8. River Basin: Neuse
(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/mos/.)
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: Site is surrounded by neighborhood streets and residences.
Page 2 of 8
10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
An undersized pipe which is also in an advanced stage of deterioration will be replaced with
a double line of larger pipes. Metal headwalls will be constructed at the inlet and the outlet
ends of the new pipes. The NCDOT will also dewater the work zone during, construction.
Equipment may include excavator, backhoe, bulldozer, grader, and crane.
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: Replace failed pipe. Which will allow shoulder
repair and will help to ease flooding conditions during hi flows.
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.
None that are known for NCDOT activities.
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.
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 written description of the proposed impacts The project proposes to replace the
existing structure at Site 1 The NCDOT will also dewater the work zone during construction.
Page 3 of 8
2. Individually list wetland impacts below:
Wetland Impact Area of Located within Distance to
Site Number Type of Impact* Impact 100-year Floodplain** Nearest Stream Type of Wetland***
(indicate on map) (acres) (yes/no) (linear feet)
N/A
a?wL Caen impact separately ana iaennry temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: mechanized clearing, grading, till,
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.) Indicate if wetland is isolated (determination of isolation to be made by USACE only).
List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: NONE
Total area of wetland impact proposed: NONE
3. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts below:
Stream Impact
Length
Impact Average Width Perennial or
Site Number Type of Impact* r
(linear feet) Stream Name** of Stream Intermittent'?
indicate on ma Before Impact (leasespecify)
Pipe replacement 7 ft -
(surface water fill)
1 Temporary
Dewatering 27 ft (concurrent) Beaverdam Creek 3.0 ft Perennial
List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited 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 internet sites also allow direct download and printing of USGS maps (e.g., www.topozone.cotn,
www.mapgucst.com, etc.).
Cumulative impacts (linear distance in feet) to all streams on site:
Site 1: 7 feet existing channel impacted concurrent 27 feet temp impact from dewatedu
(Dewaterin lg 0 ft upstream and 10 ft downstream to allow room to build headwalls)
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 ma
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
(acres) Name
(if applicable) ) Wat Type of Waterbody
(lake, pond, estuary, sound,
bay, ocean, etc.)
N/A

• List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: fill, excavation, dredging,
flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
5. Pond Creation
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): ? uplands ? stream ? wetlands
Page 4 of 8
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.): N/A
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.): N/A
Size of watershed draining to pond: N/A Expected pond surface area: N/A
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.
All surface waters not affected by construction will be protected from unnecessary encroachment
durinj4 construction. Strict enforcement of Best Management Practices for the protection of
surface waters will be enforced during construction. Only the smallest amount of fill necessary
to complete the project will be placed in waters of the United States or protected riparian buffers.
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
htW://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/strrngide.html.
Page 5 of 8
I . 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.
14 ft of stream restoration by payment in the Ecosystem Enhancement Program
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration
Program (NCWRP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCWRP at
[phone] to determine availability and to request written approval of mitigation prior
to submittal of a PCN. For additional information regarding the application process for the
NCWRP, check the NCWRP website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htm. 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): N/A
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state) funds or the use of public
(federal/state) land?
Yes ® 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 ? No
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 ?
X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
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.
Page 6 of 8
Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Neuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and
Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please identify )?
Yes ® No ? If you answered "yes", 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.
Site 1
I Impact Required
Zone* r__", I Multiplier I
1 1922 3 N/A
2 0 1.5 N/A
Total 1922 N/A
* Zone I 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 (required by DWQ)
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.
There is approximately 0.04 acre of existing impervious surface at this site. No increase in
impervious surface area is result from the proposed maintenance activities. Erosion and
sediment control devices along the project are comprised of temporary silt fence.
XII. Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
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.
The project will not generate wastewater.
XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ? No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application?
Yes ? No
Page 7 of 8
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).

xb
65
Ap icant/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's s' ature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 8 of 8