20200447 Ver 2_More Information Received_20210626

Staff Review
Does this application have all the attachments needed to accept it into the review process?*
r Yes r No
ID#* Version* 2
20200447
Is this project a public transportation project?* r Yes
r No
Reviewer List:* Stephanie Goss: eads\szgoss
Select Reviewing Office:* Raleigh Regional Office - [phone]
Does this project require a request for payment to be sent?*
r
Yes
r
No

Project Submittal Form
Please note: fields marked with a red asterisk below are required. You will not be able to submit the form until all
mandatory questions are answered.
Project Type: * r
For the Record Only (Courtesy Copy)
r
New Project
r
Modification/New Project with Existing ID
r
More Information Response
r
Other Agency Comments
r
Pre -Application Submittal
r
Re-Issuance\Renewal Request
r
Stream or Buffer Appeal
Is this supplemental information that needs to be sent to the Corps?*
r Yes r No
Project Contact Information
Name: Wyatt I brown
Who is subrritting the inforrration?
Email Address: [e-mail]
Project Information
Existing ID #: Existing Version:
20200447 2
20170001(no dashes) 1
Project Name: Kyli Knolls
Is this a public transportation project?
r Yes
r No
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
r Yes r No r Unknown
County (ies)
Johnston
Please upload all files that need to be submited.
C7ickthe upload button or drag and drop files here to attach document
17016-CONST-Wetland Impact.pdf 888.93KB
Revised impacts from PCN.pdf 908.15KB
Answers to Chris' Questions.pdf 103.72KB
Only pdf or kr17 files are accepted.
Describe the attachments
or comments:

The first attachment is a revised construction plan/impact map deleting the impact on lot 6 and reducing the
impact on lot 7.
The second attachment is a revised impact sheet and avoidance and minimization explanation sheet from the
previously submitted PCN.
The third attachment is the answers to Chris Hoppers' email concerning the originally submitted PCN.
Sign and Submit
P By checking the box and signing box below, I certify that:
■ I, the project proponent, hereby certifies that all information contained herein is true, accurate, and complete to
the best of my knowledge and belief.
■ I, the project proponent, hereby requests that the certifying authority review and take action on this CWA 401
certification request within the applicable reasonable period of time.
■ I agree that submission of this online form is a "transaction" subject to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General
Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
■ I agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General
Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
■ 1 understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as a
written signature; AND
■ I intend to electronically sign and submit the online form.
Signature:
Submittal Date: Is filled in autorratically.

U i. the :ckxd butim s d iq anj drop I tes here to attach dxunin
Kyli Knolls Wetlands Subdivision 5-7-21.pdf
Fie rr o: —t re D.:I
5. Jurisdictional Determinations
Sa. Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the property or proposed impact areas?
r Yes e- No
Comments:
Stream Buffer Determination January 712020 (attached)
513. It the corps made a jurisdictional determination, what type of determination was made?`
r Preliminary r Approved r Not Verified r' Unknown r WA
Corps AID Numb —
Ex -pie SAWF2017-99e9e
SAW-2020-00251
5c. If Sa is yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): Wyatt Brown
Agency/Consultant Company. Brown's Environmental Group. Inc
Other:
789.09KB
r Unknown
5dl. Jurisdictional determination upload
Ockthe LcWd butt.+ a dray addrup firs lyreto aw,d_urn'
Kylt Knolls Buffer 2321 Amelta Church Rd..pdf 3.23MB
Fie tYM rrust be RF
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? *
r Yes r No
Are any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permits(s) used, or intended to be used, to authorize any part of the proposed project or related activity? This
includes other separate and distant crossing for linear projects that require Department of the Army authorization but don't require pre -construction notification.
Not to my knonledgc
D. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
la. Where are the impacts associated with your project? (check all that apply):
W Wetlands r Streams -tributaries
r Open Waters r Pond Construction
1— Buffers
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
"W." will be used in the table below to represent the word "wetland".
2a. Site 71* 2al Reason* 2b. Impact type
2c. Type of W.
12d. W. name 2e. forested * Type of Jurist c t on"Iljarge
Impact
�r
v+�t6�nc�3-
�.'Lill
—
t��l
/S
EII
P
Seep
Welland Q
Pb
Borh
(df1 0.087-
2g. Total Temporary Wetland Impact
0.000
2g. Total Permanent Wetland Impact
—&.%& 0.087
2g. Total Wetland Impact
e:es6 0.087
2i. Comments:
All strike troughs and red letter revisions performed by Wyatt Brown on 6/26/21 with permission of owner.
E. Impact Justification and Mitigation

1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:*
In planning, minimisation and avoidance was practiced in filling only the top of Wetland B, t the originally proposed fill on lot 6 has been deleted
1 and the proposed fill on Lot 7 has bee reduced to 0.087 acres, the fill is needed to accommodate the larger proposed house boxes and covered
porch/patio.
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques:*
Silt fence mill be placed between the fill and the remaining wetland during construction to protect it from sedimentation. The remaining wetlands and
pond will be protected from sedimentation by temporary sediment control and temporary seeding. The project will be inspected by the Town of Clayton
for sedimentation and erosion control. an approved sedimentation and erosion control plan will be followed.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
r Yes r No
2b. If this project DOES NOT require CompensatoryMitigation, explain why.
Impacts will be less than the required 0.10 acre threshold.
NC Stream Temperature Classification Maps can be found under the Mitigation Concepts tab on the Wilmington District's 41511 �. websile.
F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWR)
— Recent changes to the stomtwater rules have required updates to this section
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
r Yes r-r No
For a list of options to meet the diffuse flow requirements, click',, -
If no, explain why
No Neuse buttered streams on or beside the project.
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. Is this a NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's Individual NPDES permit NCS000250?*
r Yes r No
2b. Does this project meet the requirements for low densityprojects as defined in 15ANCAC 02H A003(2)?*
r Yes r No
to lookup low density requirement dick here 1 : v- 0.)H 1 ]1':);' .
Comments:
G. Supplementary information
1. Environmental Documentation
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (le derallstate/local) funds or the use of public (federal/state) land?*
r Yes r No
2. Violations (DWR Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWR Water Quality Certification Rules (15A NCAC 21-1.0500), Isolated Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 21-1.1300), or DWR Surface Water or Wetland Standards or
Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)? *
r Yes r• No
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWR Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?*
r Yes r No
3b. If you onswered "no," provide a short narrative description.
This S/D has no more phases and should not result in generating additional development.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)
4a. Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project?*
r Yes r No r WA

1) On May 14, 2020 the developer submitted the attached plans to demonstrate the lots
would be built without impact to wetlands. Please explain what changed from these
designs to make the lots unbuildable. A new developer is purchasing the S/D after
all permits are approved. The new developer is making the S/D more upscale and
building a larger home from the original 50'X50' to a larger 60'x80' each with
either a covered porch or patio on the back of the house. We have reduced the
proposed impact to 0.0847, we feel this amount of impact is necessary to make
this a viable lot.
2)The project requests 0.096 acre of wetland impact. Because this is only .004 acre
from mitigation thresholds, please provide additional detail regarding how this area of fill
would be limited. Would retaining walls or similar structure be used? Would as -built
surveys be provided by a Professional Land Surveyor? We have reduced the total
impact to 0.0847 acres. We feel this amount of impact can be managed by having
the amount of proposed impact surveyed and a silt fence placed marking the
proposed fill area.
3) If authorized, all future impact(s) to wetlands within any Kyli Knolls lot would require
mitigation. How would landowners be made aware of the need to contact USACE prior
to ground disturbance? The existing wetlands will be shown on each lot and placed
on the final plat with a note stating the wetlands are protected by the US Army
Corps of engineers and any impact or alteration must be approved by their office.
The S/D Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions will plainly state
all wetlands must be protected and will be enforced by the local board.
4) A wetland being undesirable is subjective and not justification for its loss. Please
expand on the impact's purpose and need, and what efforts to avoid and minimize the
impact were made. What is the justification for fill requested within Lot 6S? We have
avoided impact by deleting the impact on Lot 6. We feel the impact on Lot 7 is
necessary to have a viable lot.