20130702 Ver 1_Mitigation Project Review_20130814

Mdj
/ II @I
EEP NUTRIENT OFFSET
PROJECT SUMMARY
Town of Cary BMP
Stormwater Wetland BMPs
EEP #676
Synopsis
EEP has a contract with the Town of Cary for the delivery of nutrient reduction credit from their Phase I
and Phase II Maynard Road stream restoration and BMP project located in Cary, North Carolina within
the Neuse River Basin CU 03020201. The project was initiated by NCEEP to offset nutrient loading as a
third -party credit provider in the Neuse River Basin (15A NCAC 02B.0240 and 15ANCAC 2B.0235).
Stantec designed and oversaw construction of the linear stormwater wetland BMPs. Final construction
and planting of the BMPs was completed in November 2007, however associated Phase II stream
restoration and the As- Builts were not completed until June 2013. The City of Cary is charged with
maintaining the site per a BMP MOA maintenance agreement, which extends for a 30 -year period. The
Town has contracted with Stantec to perform monitoring on the site. The Town is contracted to provide
EEP a nutrient credit value over 30 years of 36,450 lbs reduction of Total Nitrogen for this project,
however, engineering calculations report the site will reduce more TN than that. Additionally, a
reduction of Total Phosphorous is anticipated, however TP reduction credit is not available in the Neuse
River Basin at this time.
Site Location
River Basin:
CU:
14 -digit HUC:
County:
Municipality:
Receiving Waters:
Project History
Neuse
03020201
03020201
Wake
Cary, NC
Swift Creek
MOA /Easement:
MOA October 2004
Feasibility Study:
January 2008
Final Design:
February 2011
401 permit:
04 -0313, issued 5/10/2004
Construction:
unknown -2012
DWQ site visit:
April 22, 2009
As- Builts:
June 2013 (waited until Phase II work was finished)
Planting:
2007 -2012
Final Report due:
September 2015

Protect Participants
Source Agency:
Project Management:
Designer:
Landowner:
BMP Management:
BMP Design Parameters
NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program
Town of Cary
Stantec
Town of Cary
Town of Cary
BMP Type: Linear Stormwater Wetlands on non - jurisdictional streams
Watershed Area: 624 acres
Watershed Description: Urban, impervious residential, parking lots, roadways
Nutrient Removal (TN = Total Nitrogen)
Pre -BMP TN Loading:
443.6 lbs /yr
Post -BMP TN Loading:
266.2 lbs /yr
Post -BMP TN Removal:
177.4 lbs /yr
30 -yr TN Removal:
5,322 lbs
Property Protection & Maintenance
Property Protection Method: Town of Cary
Maintenance: Town of Cary is responsible for regular maintenance inspections
and submitting quarterly reports to EEP for 2 years. The stream,
buffer and BMP are also being monitored by Stantec.
Attachments:
• Site Location Map
• Design Calculations
• MOA
• DWQ Correspondence
• As- Builts
2
Mdj

SITE MAP

Legend
Phase II Restoration
Roads
Phase I Restoration
Hydrography
Dorothy Park Drainage Area
uj Subbasins
Phase II Parcels
Property Line
Figure 2. Project Site

PHOTOS

Current Photos (July 2013)
Project Site Sign
Stormivater Wetland
111111m
Stormivater Wetland #5
Stormivater Wetland #3

Current Photos (July 2013)
Stormivater Wetland #1
Stormivater Wetland #2
1uuuu „,
Stormivater Wetland #9
Stormivater Wetland #8

CALCULATIONS
Excerpt from 2008 Feasibility Report

TOWN OF CARY
NITROGEN REMOVAL BMP PROJECT
PHASE II
FEASIBILITY STUDY / PROPOSAL
January 2008

INTRODUCTION
In 2007, approximately 2000 feet of stream was restored for the Town of Cary as on -site
mitigation for the widening of SW Maynard Road. In addition to the restoration, the Town
obtained funding for a nutrient offset project to be constructed simultaneously. The Town
designed, installed, and is currently monitoring this watershed -scale nitrogen (N)
reduction best management practice (BMP) system in the Neuse River Watershed. Prior
to installation a feasibility study was conducted and estimated that the project could
reduce N loads by approximately 1339 pounds per year.
Recently, the Town has approved a second phase of stream restoration to include 4
additional upstream segments, for an additional 3,920 feet of stream restoration. This
report investigates possible BMP opportunities and estimates the N load reductions
possible with this second phase of stream restoration.
Factors and assumptions considered in this report are the same as those in the original
feasibility study (Stantec, 2005) and include the N loading within the watershed, site
constraints, BMP N- removal efficiency, size requirements and the cost of various BMPs.
A number of assumptions were made for this study. Where appropriate, the assumptions
and their basis have been outlined, or can be referred to in the Phase I feasibility report.
2 THE STUDY AREA
2.1 The Watershed
The original nitrogen removal study divided the study area into two subbasins. Because
full nitrogen removal opportunities in the lower subbasin were addressed in the first
phase of the restoration, this report investigates new opportunities available in the upper
subbasin. This subbasin was further delineated into two subbasins based on two -foot
contours derived from LIDAR data (NCDOT, 2005). Subbasin 1, which comprises
approximately 334 acres, drains the downtown of Cary and residential areas. The 146 -
acre Subbasin 2 drains primarily residential areas (Figure 1).
2.2 The Site
The Phase II stream restoration will occur on parcels owned by the Town of Cary,
including Dorothy Park (PIN 0763270987). Additionally, restoration will occur on an
easement on parcel PIN 0763089429 and a 60 -foot easement between parcels
0763185130 and 0763175924. Dorothy Park and the easement parcel (0763089429)
represent the best possible locations for BMP installation on the restoration site.
2.3 Waters of the US
According to current interpretations of the Clean Water Act, the Waters of the US cannot
be used as a water treatment system. This has implications for the placement of BMPs.
Field reconnaissance has revealed that mostly jurisdictional waters are present on the
parcels where proposed BMPs can be installed, limiting the use of in -line BMPs.
Exceptions exist in Dorothy Park. A stormwater drain and curb inlets are present in the

park which drain roughly one - fourth of Subbasin 2 (Figure 2). Furthermore, stormwater
from one parcel to the northwest of the easement parcel drains to non - jurisdictional
waters in the easement parcel before entering the restoration site (Figure 2)
3 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
3.1 Selected BMP
Based on a consideration of location constraints, total N reduction efficiency, cost, and
site hydrology, constructed stormwater wetlands appear to be the most appropriate
choice within this watershed. These BMP structures have an estimated nitrogen removal
efficiency of 40% (NCDWQ, 1999). Given the number of BMPs that must be installed
and the different types of situations that are likely to be encountered during design, it is
possible that several different types of BMP structures will ultimately be installed.
3.2 BMP Opportunities
As discussed in section 2.3, in -line BMP opportunities are limited. However, a significant
amount of the drainage in Subbasin 2 can be treated through the installation of BMPs in
Dorothy Park. Additionally, BMPs can be installed on the easement parcel to address
stormwater drainage from PIN 0763086990 (Figure 2).
While no other BMP opportunities have been located which can address current
stormwater runoff, opportunities exist to address future development scheduled to occur
in the easement parcel PIN 0763089429. The development of townhouses is planned for
this 8.3 -acre parcel. Current regulations require the developer to install stormwater
BMPs. However, given that stormwater ponds are the most common structure used in
these cases, with an estimated removal efficiency of 25% (NCDWQ, 1999) further
reduction of N loads from this parcel is possible.
4 NITROGEN REMOVAL
This section of the report identifies the current N loadings within the drainage area of
Dorothy Park, parcel PIN 0763086990, and from future development on parcel PIN
0763089429. It then identifies how much N may be removed from the system by
properly designed and installed BMPs during the Phase II restoration.
4.1 Nitrogen Loadings
Nitrogen loading from the drainage area of Dorothy Park, parcel PIN 0763086990 and
parcel PIN 0763089429 were estimated using the parcel -based method previously
described in the Town of Cary Nitrogen Removal BMP Project Feasibility Study prepared
by Stantec Consulting Ltd. The same assumptions, land use categories, and event mean
concentrations apply to the current study.
A load of approximately 360 Ibs /acre /yr of N was calculated for the 35.4 -acre drainage
area of Dorothy Park. Additionally, it was estimated that 19 Ibs of N per acre /yr is loaded
2

from the 0.9 acre parcel located northwest of the easement parcel. A total load of 85.8
Ibs /acre /yr of N was estimated for the future development of the easement parcel.
However, given that stormwater runoff from the new development will likely be treated
using stormwater ponds prior to leaving the development (with an estimated removal
efficiency of 25 %); the final load from the parcel was calculated to be 64.4 Ibs /acre /yr.
4.2 Nitrogen Removal Estimates
The maximum possible nitrogen load reduction in the entire watershed by floodplain
wetlands via overbank flow was previously addressed in the Town of Cary Nitrogen
Removal BMP Project Feasibility Study (Stantec, 2005). As such, this report only
addresses treatment attributable to in -line BMP installation in the second phase of
restoration in order to avoid accounting for this method of reduction twice.
It is assumed that all loads calculated in section 4.1 will be delivered in well defined
drainage systems where BMPs can be installed, with an N removal efficiency of 40 %.
Table 1 summarizes the parcel -based nutrient loading analysis, resulting in an estimated
reduction of 177 Ibs of total N.
Table 1. Total nitrogen (TN) loading and BMP reductions by parcel
Parcel
Parcel Zone
Code
Area
(acres)
TN Loading
(Ibs /yr)
763086990
B -2
0.92
19.38
763089429
RMF8
8.29
64.36'
Dorothy
Park
Drainage
Area
R12
22.98
155.60
Undeveloped
1 3.13
1 9.39
Road
9.28
194.87
Total
44.61
443.60
BMP Removal Efficiency 40 %2
Total TN Load Reduction Ibs / r 177.44
Assumes 25% of N previously removed due to installation of stormwater ponds by future development
2 NCDWQ, 1999b
5 MONITORING
An upstream and a downstream site were isolated for N monitoring after the construction
of the first phase of stream restoration. The upstream monitoring site is currently located
within the future site of the second phase of restoration. In order to continue post -
construction monitoring for the N removal achieved by the project, this site will be
relocated further upstream.
6 ESTIMATED COST
The estimated costs for the design, construction, and monitoring of the proposed BMPs
for N removal are presented in Table 2. Note that there is no proposed cost for Property
3

and Monitoring. The proposed BMPs can be constructed on parcels already owned by
the Town of Cary. Also, there will be no monitoring costs, as monitoring of N reductions
can be included in the existing monitoring scheme for the first series of BMPs, as noted
in Section 5.
Table 2. Cost estimate for the proposed nitrogen removal BMP project
Cost Estimate
Service
Cost
study
$5,000
-Feasibility
$25,000
-Design
Survey
$5,000
$0.
-Property
Construction
Earthwork
$20,000
Planting
$10,000
Monitoring
$0t
Total
$65,000
" Proposed BMPs will be constructed on property already owned by the Town of Cary.
t Monitoring will be included in the existing monitoring scheme for the first series of BMPs.
7 CONCLUSIONS
The results of this study indicate that it is feasible to additionally remove approximately
177 pounds of total N per year from the Neuse River watershed through the installation
of BMPs in the second phase of stream restoration near Maynard Road. With an
approximately 30 -year life of a BMP, the total removal is estimated to amount to 5,310
pounds of nitrogen.
It should be noted that the 177 pounds of total N per year is an estimate based on a
number of assumptions. The estimate will vary depending on the actual design. The
actual amount of N removal achieved by the project will be determined after the project
is completed through post- construction monitoring.
M

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT

DENR Contract #D05009
STATE ON NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF WAKE
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
THIS MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT, made this the 27`h day of
September, 2004, by and between the TOWN OF CARY, NC (TOC) and, the North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources ( NCDENR), ECOSYSTEM
ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM (EEP).
WITNESSETH
THAT WHEREAS, the TOWN OF CARY and the EEP have authority to enter into this
memorandum of agreement under G.S. 113 -8 and G.S. 113 -20;
WHEREAS, Town submitted a Proposal for "Nitrogen BMP System Implementation and
Monitoring in an Urbanized Portion of the Town of Cary" ( "Proposal "), which Proposal has
been accepted for grant funding in the amount of $400,950 by NCDENR (EEP); and
WHEREAS, the parties desire to enter into this MOA to set forth the terms of the grant.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises, obligations, and benefits
hereunder exchanged and obtained, the TOWN OF CARY and the EEP mutually covenant
and agree as follows:
SECTION 1 - Back ound
The mission of the NC -DENR Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP; formerly the NC
Wetlands Restoration Program) is to restore, enhance, and preserve wetlands, streams, and
riparian buffer areas throughout North Carolina's 17 major river basins with the overall goals
of improving water quality, instream and riparian habitat, floodwater storage, and recreation.
The EEP is interested in restoring and protecting the wetlands, streams and unnamed
tributaries within the Upper Swift Creek Drainage area (which includes portions of the Town
of Cary) as part of a Local Watershed Planning effort initiated in 2003.
SECTION 2 — Purpose
The purpose of this Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) is to define and set forth the
responsibilities of the TOWN OF CARY (TOC) and the ECOSYSTEM ENHANCMENT
PROGRAM (EEP) for the nutrient offset project to be completed by the TOWN OF CARY
and funded by the EEP. The project will be located within the western portion of the Swift
Creek watershed. The project will occur on parcels identified as:
PIN # 1) 076305085505 (2.08 A)
PIN # 2) 076305072902 (2.90 A)
Additional parcels may be added to this list if identified in the design process.

DENR Contract 9DO5009
The project is intended to enhance water quality within the Swift Creek watershed through
the reduction of nitrogen loading rates into the surface water within the watershed. This
reduction is to be accomplished through the use of specified best management practices as
outlined in the project proposal. The project proposal entitles "Nitrogen BMP System
Implementation and Monitoring in an Urbanized Portion of the Town of Cary" defines the
timeframe, payment schedule, and project specifics not specifically addressed in this MOA
and is attached hereto as Attachment 1 and incorporated herein by reference.
SECTION 3 — Areas of Authority and_Responsibilit
This project is located entirely within the jurisdiction of the TOWN OF CARY and on TOC
owned property. The TOC's primary responsibilities during and after this project will be:
To install and maintain BMP's that will treat stormwater runoff generated from 270 -acres
within the Swift Creek Watershed. The BMP's will be designed to achieve at minimum a
reduction in the nitrogen loading rate of 4.5 lbs /ac /yr from the established estimated
baseline loading rate. This should result in a total annual reduction of 1,215 lbs of
nitrogen per year.
2. To apply for and receive approval for all applicable environmental permits prior to the
construction phase of this project.
3. To assume responsibility for the selection, oversight, and supervision of designated
contractors and consultants to conduct this work.
4. To provide and ensure reasonable access for the EEP staff to all work sites during normal
working hours for the project's duration.
5. To provide for public safety and work place security by keeping some or all of the work
areas closed to the public as necessary, or, for the project's duration, whichever is
deemed most prudent. Contractors will follow standard OSHA guidelines and will post
the construction site. All law enforcement activities will be the responsibility of the
TOC.
6. To have the TOC Public Information Officer notify or consult with EEP prior to issuing
news releases relating to the nitrogen BMP grant project.
7. To meet with the EEP and/or its contractors and consultants every two months, or at a
greater frequency sufficient to review and assess the project's progress and plans.
S. To notify EEP of any proposed changes to the scope of work contained in the proposal
(Attachment 1) prior to adopting the change.
9. To provide a designated contact person from the TOC to coordinate and review all
aspects of the project with the EEP, and its contractors or consultants.

DENR Contract #D05009
10. To furnish water quality monitoring data to EEP on a quarterly basis for a two year
period following BMP construction. Additionally, a BMP maintenance and inspection
report will be submitted every five years for the term delineated in item #I 1 of this MOA.
11. To maintain the BMP's to ensure functionality for a period of 30- years.
The EEP is charged with restoring degraded wetlands, streams, and riparian areas throughout
the State of North Carolina for the purposes of water quality protection, wildlife and fish
habitat, floodwater storage, and recreation. EEP, its contractors, and its consultants will be
allowed reasonable free access to all EEP funded BMP implementation sites. The primary
responsibilities of the EEP and the contractors and consultants during and after this project
will be:
1. To provide monetary funds at a rate of $ 330.00/lb of nitrogen removal estimated over a
period of 30- years. For this TOC project the total funding has been established at
$400,950 to be paid -out as outlined in attachment 1.
2. To review and comment on design plans submitted by the TOC and communicate with
the TOC designated project manager within a reasonable timeframe.
To consult with the TOC's Public Information Officer and staff prior to issuing news
releases relating to the nutrient offset project, and, to provide any comments needed to
TOC PI Officer within 2- business days upon receipt of the draft news releases prepared
by TOC regarding this project. If comments are not received by TOC in this time -frame it
will be assumed that EEP has no comments. Additionally, DENR will identify and
provide the name of the applicable DENR PI Officer to the TOC PI Officer (and staff) for
media communication purposes related to this project.
4. To meet with the TOC staff at a frequency sufficient to review and assess the project's
progress, as specified in section 3, item #7 of this MOA.
Both parties agree:
To work cooperatively to develop and implement a design plan that is agreeable to both
entities. Both entities also agree to work cooperatively to develop a remedial action plan
(RAP) that is agreeable to both entities in the event that post - construction remedial activities
are necessary. Details related to the implementation of the RAP will be jointly discussed by
both entities as necessary, if triggered.
SECTION 4 — Duration of this Agreement
The nutrient offset project guided by this agreement shall commence on the date that this
agreement is signed by all parties and the agreement shall terminate upon submission of the
final water quality monitoring report anticipated to be submitted or before September 30,
2007. The site maintenance phase of the project will commence upon completion of BMP
construction and the subsequent two -year water quality monitoring phase (anticipated to
terminate in September 2007). The Town of Cary also agrees to maintain the constructed
BMP sites for a 30 -year period and to submit a BMP site maintenance report to NCEEP upon
completion of the 3 0th year.

DENR Contract ##D05009
SECTION 5 — Considerations
The parties mutually agree that this agreement does not at any time transfer ownership or
management of any portion of the lands in the TOC and that all provisions of this MOA are
consistent with this understanding. Furthermore, the parties mutually agree that payment for
the project shall be established at the percentages and milestones outlined in the
schedule/Payment table contained in Attachment 1.
SECTION 6 — Review of Proiect Plans
In order to protect the interests of all parties the TOC or its approved contractors and
consultants shall furnish the EEP with copies of all plans and maps for this project for review
and comment prior to the project's implementation.
SECTION 7 - Inspection
In order to ensure compliance with all EEP regulations and policies, the EEP staff shall have
unrestricted access to all project areas during working hours.
SECTION 8 — Termination for Cause
If either party fails to perform or comply with any condition of this agreement and such
failure should continue more than 30 -days after written notice from the other party, and if the
non - compliant party should not within 30 -days commence to cure with due diligence the
failure, then the aggrieved party may terminate this MOA on written notice to the non-
compliant party, termination to be effective in not less than 15 -days from receipt of the
written notice. Additionally it is understood that if the project has progressed to the stage
where the Town of Cary has committed to fund contractors, EEP will honor that funding in
the event that the project was terminated.
SECTION 9 -- No Waiver
The failure of either party to insist on strict performance of any condition of this agreement
shall not be construed as a waiver of the right to insist on the performance of that condition in
any other instance.
SECTION 10 — Modification or Termination by Consent
This MOA may be modified or terminated by mutual agreement of the parties as long as such
modifications or termination are made in writing and signed by authorized officers from both
agencies.
SECTION I 1 — Notices

DEN Contract #D05009
All notices required to be given under this agreement shall be deemed to have been given
when reduced to writing and deposited, postage -paid, in the U.S. Mail or delivered by courier
or in person to these addresses:
TOWN OF CARY (TOC)
Engineering Department
Tim Bailey, PE, Engineering Director
P.O. Box 8005
Cary, NC 27512
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT
OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL
RESOURCES (NCDENR)
Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP)
Bill Gilmore, Program Director
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1652
_2 By
(Date) Engineering Director,
Town of Cary
By
( ate) Program Director
Department of Environment and
Natural Resources;
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
c/mydocuments /carymoa3

DENR Contract 9D05009
Attachment 1
Nitrogen BMP System Implementation and Monitoring in an
Urbanized Portion of the Town of Cary
Town Center Area Plan (TCAP) Area
Proposal for $400,950
Submitted to the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Ecosystem
Enhancement Program
Submitted by the Town of Cary Engineering Department
September 27, 2004
OVERVIEW
The Town of Cary (TOC) will work with the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) to
design, install, and monitor a watershed -scale nitrogen reduction best management practice (BMP) system in
the Neuse River Basin. The study will focus on a sub -basin which drained a portion of Cary's proposed Town
Center Area Plan (TCAP) downtown revitalization area. It is located in the western portion of the 8,000 -acre
Swift Creek watershed. Swift Creek (and unnamed tributaries which flow into Swift Creek in the TCAP area)
are designated as 303(d) listed streams and contain protected species (Carolina Heel Splitter) downstream of the
TCAP revitalization area. The Swift Creek watershed and the protected species benefit from the
implementation of this proposed BMP system.
The purpose of the proposed BMP system is to improve the water quality in Swift Creek sub -basin by reducing
nitrogen exports by approximately 1,215 pounds per year from a 636 -acre urbanized watershed within the
western portion of the Swift Creek sub - basin. The project will serve as a model demonstration site for
urbanized watershed scale nitrogen reduction, and will provide a series of BMP's along an unnamed tributary to
Swift Creek which drains approximately two thirds of the TCAP area, as necessary to properly manage existing
and projected stormwater run -off and nitrogen management needs. Project tasks will be performed by a team of
engineers, scientists, and technicians associated with the Town of Cary or its subcontractor. Total project cost
is estimated at approximately $400,950.
If the Town is unsuccessful in finding enough suitable locations for BMP's within the identified sub - basin,
adjacent sub - basins located within the Swift Creek Watershed will be analyzed, Prior approval will be sought
from NCEEP prior to any changes in sub - basins.
SCOPE
Task 1. BMP Feasibility Assessment of TCAP Area Watershed
The project team will assess all possible nitrogen- reduction BMP's in the watershed and determine their cost -
effectiveness and environmental benefit. The project team will recommend a system of BMP's that will result in
average annual watershed nitrogen export reductions of approximately 1,215 pounds per year (4.5 pounds per
acre from 270 treated acres).
Potential BMP's may include but are not limited to, the following:
• Stormwater wetlands designed to treat up to approximately 200 -acres of developed watershed. The
wetlands will be constructed within the floodplain and a remnant oxbow lake with several wetland
complexes being integrated into the existing topography.
• At least three hundred linear feet of level spreaders helping to treat runoff from a 50 -acre residential
apartment complex/neighborhood completed approximately 15 -years ago. The level spreader will be
constructed on land owned by the Town of Cary along land adjacent to an unnamed tributary of Swift
Creek, making construction relatively simple.

DENR Contract #D05009
• The conversion of several stormwater ditches, which provide essentially no nitrogen reduction, to
small pocket stormwater wetlands. These ditches are scattered throughout the watershed and treat a
combined 12 -20 acres.
Task 2. BMP Design
The project team will prepare construction plan sheets for each BMP to include a title sheet, existing
conditions, a grading plan, typical cross sections, structure and vegetation details, and a summary of
quantities. Other design items will include erosion control plans, vegetation planting plans, specifications,
and a construction cost estimate. The Town will provide NCEEP with one set of the final plans.
Task 3. Permit Preparation
The project team will prepare documents associated with relevant permit applications.
Task 4. Construction Management
The project team will prepare construction bid packages and participate in the pre -bid, bid opening, and
pre - construction meetings. The bid package will include final plans, specifications, and contract
documents. The project team will provide construction oversight to ensure that construction is completed in
accordance with plans and specifications.
Task _5 Water Quality Monitoring
The project team will design and install a water quality monitoring plan to evaluate water quality changes
resulting from BMP implementation. Monitoring stations will be installed at several locations, including
the watershed outlet to determine stream discharge, baseflow nutrient concentrations, and stormwater
nutrient concentrations. Benthic and invertebrate monitoring established for the adjacent (downstream)
Maynard Road stream restoration monitoring will be continued to help determine water quality benefits on
Nitrogen BMP's. Data will be analyzed to determine average, annual nitrogen export from the watershed
and upstream/downstream of selected BMP's. Water quality monitoring will be carried out for a minimum
of 2 -years following BMP construction with an interim report to be submitted at the end of year 1, and a
final report submitted after completion of the second year. Water quality monitoring data will be submitted
quarterly to NCEEP during the 2 -year post - construction period.
Task-6.- Project Management
The project manager will provide quarterly progress reports to NCEEP and coordinate invoices, phone
conferences, letters, and meetings with NCEEP and other project personnel. The project manager will
review all aspects of the project with NCEEP and other project personnel during regularly scheduled
meetings.
Task 7. Education
The project team will conduct educational programs associated with this innovative project, including field
tours, workshops, signage, and publications. Educational programs will be aimed at local officials, natural
resource professionals working in watershed management, professional engineers and landscape architects,
State/Federal regulatory agencies and the public.
Task $. Remedial Action Plan (RAP)
The project team will develop a remedial action plan (RAP) that is agreeable to NCEEP and the TOC
which can be used in the event that post - construction remedial activities are necessary.
SCHEDULE /PAYMENT MILESTONES
The proposed project timeline and payment schedule is as follows:
Milestone
Date
Cumulative Funding
Complete Project Contract
September, 2004
$0 (0 %)
Install Monitoring
E ui ment
November, 2004
$40,000 (10 %)
Complete BMP Feasibility
Analysis and Remedial
Action Plan
January, 2005
$40,950 (10 %)
Complete BMP Desi n
February, 2005
$60,000 (15 %}

DENR Contract MD05009
Complete Permit
April, 2005
$20,000 (5 %)
_,A 2plications
Supplies/Miscellaneous ODC's
$30,000
Complete Construction
$369,950
Total
Documents, Bid Opening,
and Begin Construction
.tune, 2005
$80,000 (20 %)
Complete Construction
September, 2005
$80,000 (20 %)
Com lete Monitoring
September, 2007
$40,000 (10 %)
Final Report
September, 2007
$40,000 (10 %)
BUDGET
The proposed project budget is as follows:
Budget Item
Requested Funding
Travel
$ t,000
Supplies/Miscellaneous ODC's
$30,000
Contracted Services
$369,950
Total
$400,950
Travel funding ($1,000) will be used to support approximately 300 person - strips to the project location,
typically involving two project personnel. Each trip is approximately 5 -miles roundtrip from Cary Town
Hall. Supplies funding ($30,000) will support monitoring, data analysis, education programs, report
preparation, plan development, and construction oversight. Contracted services funding ($369,950) will
support engineering and surveying costs associated with BMP design, monitoring, and construction.
MBE REQUIREMENT
The Town of Cary will ensure that NCEEP's MBE requirements are met. Documentation of this will be
provided with the construction documents.
c /mydo cuments/carymoa3

CORRESPONDENCE

NOTES OF THE JANUARY 16, 2003, MEETING WITH THE DWQ
STREAM RESTORATION /BANKING ON SW MAYNARD ROAD WIDENING
TOWN OF CARY
Attendees: Mike Babuin, John Dorney, Brad Fairley, Pete Colwell
A brief meeting was held to discuss the process for Town of Cary obtaining mitigation
credits for the proposed stream restoration project associated with SW Maynard Road
Widening.
During the discussion, John Dorney offered the following comments:
He indicated that the Town would probably not be required to go through the
Mitigation Banking Review Team process. The MBRT process is long and
tedious because it requires the agreement of at least 5 agencies (i.e., DWQ,
Corps, WRC, Fish and Wildlife Service and EPA). He suggested that the Town
do the project as off -site mitigation following the standard 401/404 permitting
process. This requires agreement of only DWQ and the Corps. The mitigation
plan submitted would have to include the following sections: existing conditions,
methodology, proposed conditions, monitoring plan, dispensation of the property,
establishment of the bank, the proposed service area and proposed credit
release. H encourage the Town to get the Corps to buy -in to the Town's
proposal to do the project as off -site mitigation rather than as a formal Mitigation
Bank.
John noted that a formal credit release schedule has not been established for
streams. DWQ had proposed a fairly aggressive schedule (i.e., 50 percent after
the first year) but this has yet to be adopted. He noted that the Town, a public
agency that will not go bankrupt and that is willing to provide a bond for the
required 5 years of monitoring /repair, would be in a strong position to argue for
an aggressive release schedule.
John Dorney encouraged us to arrange an on -site meeting with Todd St. John
and the Corps Representative for the stream restoration and Bob Zarzecki for the
buffers to ensure that they agree that the site is worth restoring and that credits
would be given. He encouraged us to invite Steve Mitchell as a courtesy since
he was involved at the beginning of the project when the 500 feet of restoration
was mandated.
• John Dorney noted that although the 50 feet of buffer would be required for the
stream mitigation, the Town would be able to get buffer and stream credit for the
project — that is, they could double dip. He noted that all of the Town land would
eligible for buffer credit but the credit ratio diminishes rapidly beyond the 50 feet.
• John Dorney encouraged Mike Babuin to contact the Mary Kay Murray from the
City of Charlotte about their mitigation banking program. The City of Charlotte is
in the process of doing the same thing that the Town of Cary is considering —

developing a bank of credits for internal use only. There is no plan to sell the
credits.
John also offered some thoughts on the stream reach upstream of the 2000 feet
identified for restoration as part of the initial project.
• He noted that the Town could expand the project in the future to bank additional
credits.
• He noted that Charlotte had had a lot of success with stream restoration
programs, even when there were many landowners involved — suggesting that it
may be possible to do more stream restoration further upstream.
He noted that even if it was impossible to get landowner cooperation for the
upstream reach, that it might be possible to get more credits by developing
wetlands to treat stormwater runoff on the Town owned property on the west side
of the stream. John noted that in order to obtain credit for this work, a strong
argument supporting the water quality benefits to the watershed of the
stormwater retrofits would be needed. A benthic monitoring program would
probably be the best way to create the necessary argument.
John noted that in order to maximize credits on some projects with severe
constraints, Charlotte had piped stormwater across a stream and developed a
wetland on the other side to treat the stormwater prior to releasing it into the
stream.

UT to Swift Creek and Proposed Wetland Areas
Meeting Minutes
May 10, 2005
Attendees: Andrea Wade, US Army Corps of Engineers
John Dorney, NCDWQ
Brad Fairley, Stantec Consulting Ltd.
Pete Colewell, Stantec Consulting Ltd.
Catherine Barker, Stantec Consulting Ltd.
Proposed wetland areas along the UT to Swift Creek were discussed in order to
determine if it was feasible to use existing ditches and tributaries for hydrology for the
created wetlands.
Overview:
- Discussed project and the primary goal of trying to improve water quality benefits
- Andrea brought up the fact that the stream should have been permitted as an I and
not Nationwide 27
-Pete discussed site specifics and the nature of the hydrology and existing conditions
Jurisdictional Waters:
- Andrea brought up the discussion of the existing wetlands being isolated vs
jurisdictional -would have to go out to the field to verify
-John asked if the wetlands in the upper end were jurisdictional - limited with flow if it is
-Pete discussed the tributary next to the sewerline and how it would be best to restore it
and widen the floodplain giving it a wetland buffer
-Pete also discussed the tributary at the top of the property and restoring it by stepping it
down and widening its floodplain to provide a wetland buffer
-The rip rapped ditch that flows under the road to a culvert at the upper end of the
property could potentially be a jurisdictional tributary depending on how the ACOE and
NCDWQ view it and if it intercepts groundwater
-Other options for creating these wetlands is to expand on the existing wetland areas,
meaning we could build beside them thereby increasing their treatment benefits - Andrea
suggested that if the stormwater is piped and there is no mechanized machinery in the
existing wetland while building the adjacent wetland, then they could not regulate and it
could be possible
-The current JD map was discussed - Andrea says it would need to be resigned in order
to call out those wetlands that are isolated
- USACE and DWQ support the idea of making water quality improvements but any
improvements on jurisdictional waters must be in compliance with the Clean Water Act
Nonjurisdictional Waters:
- Dorney was concerned with the way the sizing looked for the proposed wetlands -would
want to see the calculations for verification
- Dorney also asked if we were using the NCDWQ BMP Manual for calculations -
Catherine confirmed and also added that we are also using Bill Hunt's manual

-10 -year flooding was discussed and checking on that elevation to see if it leaves the
channel would be useful in determining if the wetlands are going get any of that water
- USACE and DWQ fully support water quality improvements involving non - jurisdictional
waters. There will be fewer regulatory requirements on such waters
Additional Credits:
-The topic of additional credits was brought up and Dorney doesn't believe the BMPs are
going to do enough to warrant getting additional credits although the restoration of the
tributaries would offer several hundreds of feet of stream for credit
-If the stormwater credits were met there might be discussion on whether or not
additional credit could be obtained
- Dormey mentioned the NCEEP developing a flexible wetland mitigation program
- Andrea doesn't think there would be any additional credits from the ACOE for the
wetlands because they lose jurisdiction if the wetlands are used for stormwater
treatment -could give additional credits for the streams though
Permitting:
- Permitting that would be required would be a Nationwide 27, NCDWQ Buffer Rules, and
the isolated wetland rules.
-Set up a meeting for May 31s' at 8:30

WC 6" VEN, R
Nuth Ca rd 1n Depadrnen t of E nviron rlient and Natural Resou rtes
Di v1sol mpt Watv Quatl,t
kk,ve6q Emes perdue Culpen H. Sulkrls
Gcmieamr �00,001
June 8,1 2009
Suumw K114t5ek -- NCEEP
Ic ff Jurvk • NCEEP
FROM! Cyndi Ktu-oly - 401 OvcrsigN and Exprvss Pumits Unit r K
I Buffer mifigafioul sdw Evahlatkms
BMP jowll Of Cory) - Wake Cmtn y fNcuse 0 1)
EEII 41 676(no UWQ h)
Site Visit; 4/22109 TLAARD
DWQ Contact Persom'Taminy Hill
Dee r`reu-rjjar�
Se(;rillllzr�
Ilh,c BMP (Town of Car� ) Site contains cm sq,,-Hes of line,,ar wefland BMPs desig,,niod to yicid nutHem off �r,-t credic �%u
the fi mv of the site wish, BW conistru"c"Lion wa's nearing cornplPetian- Monkwing and o1her repons were awavAk6k.,
and ft pr�jccted nuunberof twiriew, offs t, cired its was m1known. Several 13Ws had been lqsita.Hed jmralW to aa
stream that k behig re atom` i)y the T(,)Nvn of Cary a,s part of 9argcr gmenway proJeci, Jeff 9Z Q� aiA Greg Mehn
firom EEP and Brad Fak,ley ftowri the dessign firrp Were u[so present on site. ';,k,(4, r
Ttwshe is in k.,s fimt year post-co nstmmdom The BmIls appearodr to'be fiaEotiooing as expecWd BNoTF1 detAhs
ramgod from 10-24" with variable bt,'Yaom profifles. Weiland vcg, ,taflon (0•g, pickerehyced, Hvird's tail, Hs, lup=uy
,Y,p) liml ba,,,n planted and was becoming estabdshed. 71iie BIJAPs YAIJ require oocaskmnl muintenuvxTto ren'W"A"
sedirnent in oiler to ensure Wrig-tenrl, fimclionalRy.
VVE,MSTO ADDRESS.- Please provide 11me 96tal nuumber of nutden't offselt cmilts to The getterwed on 00's Site,
Wtmn available, submit an llas�boiftll plars to DWQ,
The BWAOsest to M4YaRurd Romi was experiencing c,,jrosloim, aftd lowvegOation mrvivarl. These ikskies rnust
Ike evrrected,gild domment-aflon of rep airs mmist be subudited to DWQ, CaftsiN were mllllrcady moving iwo,
the tfltltts. These and other apporNOWic Plants 'will need'IN, be minaktored and may need taw be, Cosliti-all ed
(without Iserbicides) as part of the ongoing maintellance of the site. Plesse gwovide the BMP misaintenwince
Plan to DWQ,.
CIC: Matt malthows
401 Ovmsrqh'VlExprpss R& view Peffrd[lng!GJm�
v65AI Phil 90,rVO, Ceder, Raleigh, NoOf ,N C.q(t)Jino 2mq,%50
Lzrmfinrr V21 Crabom Bsvd Rakd gh, Woh r,;jrok@ 27r,a%
PIrme: 919-713 1786 k FAX 919,733-6893
gnImmA hUpvVh2)v
An EqUal Qppata1r41a� v ad wwa itl.4an AcUm Erimpkqgr
0113c
N ()N-thLCaI'r(.)I i na
,AWA(ragil

AS- BUILTS

ELEV.: 22.38'
me /\
BEN RR DIDD IN
ODI RD ,2eD
�m
PK NAIL
N: )38035.6332
E' 2081640.8959
ELEV. 429.31'
"v
,
V � /
v` m iw x uvwnt
,zq 1^
s�x
",
n uxx rwa
LE
=LOG SILL
RS
= ROCK SILL
l
= RIFFLES
Ew LOFMNI
E LJOOK
H
r
QS
= SEWER MANHOLE
I
= ASPHALT WALKWAY
rnov v -a
f�A
HANC BARS
L11 11 RED
Ct. 1
WOODEN FENCE
v
_
i°
SR
COND. BRIDGE ABUTMENT
J
[ E
1 /
TREE LINE
4 D
I rnn emu
-
E %ISnNG ROCK OU
TCROP
1 (Ex )
2 (STARn
GREEN— TRAIL DITCH
2 (ENDI)
(EtND) )
I
= RIP —RAP
J
4 GI
sI
60
= BRUSH TOE
5 (Erns,)
BRUSH MATTRESS
s
ART)
D (END,
GENETI.
�\
= CONSTRUCTION LIMITS
9 (( "A"
BANK UL BENCH LIMITS
a (Ex )
SEWER CLEANOUT
NZ
—ETPU s (ErvD)n
G
o =N
,D
) EN
­uml 111 11
11 (D)
12 n
n n
f
DR`,
Dx m ED RI LE „ n Rn
A
(ExD, 2,a
Co_ D
15 ( N) ,D RPAE ET T,
ODN—D RIFFLE „(IT
EDNIGRUCIDED 111HE ;a (END
;s
CON-11 111
;s i ND,°
CON ED R ,o aA
(RT
e
, R»
a
l j
E�_
�D n
CON— "ILE 23 (END)
2, = ( M
,(
20 (END) '11171
No ,
._,
u (E )
— A� ; FN
2, (1 n
a (END)
2R MARn
2D , ND)
JD (nARn
D (END>
(JTARn
(END)
coxs-RU;T RnLE
�pp�H
a
DuNS<RUCTED Rn� D2 �D) ;1
RD . NANE ,
RuDK N VANE J 28aD,
2R.J.
DNRDDRJJ4 n
EDNUTRUD,ED R .1 JJ xo) tea„
F1111 DID
rc;
601n6.00oso� ,qb ,Vj
SIZg11}
3 1Z
ROOK x VANE ,0 1.11 Js%3 Js,so Js I.>z
�m

dN�'o
a�—
PR INN6
- -- -- --- - - - - --
wxE .•.-,
NACVS ss vasx
°cwr¢ uc Anx j
erRx�LL w��E° I
� ski. � ., elu o76m6R<nR I
r-------
�•,����° �� 'I xoo Rs EuxIFERe
w we aw
v 0
swxou ­1
I
i
\ Cxl D xE g
--------- - - - - -a
�
oAa ° i n
s Z4. n
\\ ?
I
\ � •.` � \ ee � ° I xxttxex t onEReER I � I
I
..xu I —
3 rifiat ,
A�{N CA
SEAL
STEWART— PROCTOR PLLC
ENGINEERING and EUSYENNG
'
DATE: 29 MAY 2013 9195UMEYED BY
SCALE 1' =100' DRAWN BY
REVISIONS
IMPROVEMENT AND ADJACENT
STREAM RESTORATION
PROJECT
° _ ,oeiROJ °e °i �oe PR
-
TOWN OF CARY NORTH CAROLINA
WAKE COUNTY OWNER
ZONE P.I.N.
- -\ �0jP8N iY
'r
j l %
igtai 2; ousA I i
F 4
°
% aesrok'lisas rs 5
P&
-------------- -
w
i
m,
RoAs�^C --..
CS °RCS xoR� -- .
— '�vROP owxeRS RscOC S�
vlx o,mo,6uR °oe
-
oo.R.LO x
1 sn
i
s cxw S Auu,�
vlx o,66on,,,
ago,,
i
N
�1 d
l
o
°
..
�•aoxx so:
aERr, � xsxT a Rx�Tr
'
;ae r
j i
1�
'
RoaSRr x R Rx,x v vxos � �'
�
1
�u o,6eo6z6s
— —
i
wx w02214.
a
/
0, e° x o x R me si[ *Ru 11
vIN 176x°syss 11
�I
;I
'�•i, $
'N, E MORSE
PIN 0263062557
�1
xpx`"ptsso6xAe6 ��, ,I
—
' -- -
9nxWJ1n ° 1 1
NRNER i
4 (\
PR INN6
- -- -- --- - - - - --
wxE .•.-,
NACVS ss vasx
°cwr¢ uc Anx j
erRx�LL w��E° I
� ski. � ., elu o76m6R<nR I
r-------
�•,����° �� 'I xoo Rs EuxIFERe
w we aw
v 0
swxou ­1
I
i
\ Cxl D xE g
--------- - - - - -a
�
oAa ° i n
s Z4. n
\\ ?
I
\ � •.` � \ ee � ° I xxttxex t onEReER I � I
I
..xu I —
3 rifiat ,
A�{N CA
SEAL
STEWART— PROCTOR PLLC
ENGINEERING and EUSYENNG
'
DATE: 29 MAY 2013 9195UMEYED BY
SCALE 1' =100' DRAWN BY
REVISIONS
IMPROVEMENT AND ADJACENT
STREAM RESTORATION
PROJECT
° _ ,oeiROJ °e °i �oe PR
-
TOWN OF CARY NORTH CAROLINA
WAKE COUNTY OWNER
ZONE P.I.N.

\ xraes
= w000w rw.E
1 f
E"
�f
i
wL
PROFILE
IlPR MIT,— TA
RESTORATION
-
- -
I
a'�' wcEVlART— PROCTOsRN PLLC
�k

#2
4- rF
\ I� /�- � I �� I \ ,�% .,s,o .,om , 1 � aaF OR �a Roc« su
2=1
=2M
=M :2
=2 —X

ILL
a
w, oe
I
+.@.
x
_
i
°
3 •k
_ a �xC �
A
°mow- �. ,m x O
e
D �,�'3 , �'2
00��9
� -
•.,.... �
� _ \� �.xr // ��
\ l I �e
$ \ � x
J
��
-
O� A--ea Jam. .
;uxo ren is ro \
I
$
�
—_
rl
/
✓_
_ \
€N{ REACH 2
SPAR�$FACH
w,l,J -u�rxe i'mry-
xt"` °13,r -,ozse
� "". ^..
/-
, �j \ I �.zv �
5!A' 22 k3
�.S •_
© cxcwwnv muc onex I c
avusnmr
_ `-
_ - --
— -- /
= coxsTreurn xESUmvs
�'�„?c e re �mzsxm
...•..
earvxrui erxcx uun s
m�
©� = ss_v;cre ciuxom
= w000 roE
c- ww'murnm ,mvxo axour
w
°= I - --
-
__
- -
- /'
5fEWRRT PROCTvORu PLLC H GG NS TRIILGR.EENIAY,, vucx z wo xu<
S / +III
5
vov

Sr"
Tb
uwpe
0 Al
-2 - 2a— rerncx I
12-
—PM6cT&vi 1-2

4os
-
404
--
A/A1NGR.-
.W/YTRAIL
ao2--.
-
412
4
DATUM EL6V
�•
M4IN GRI
E,my TRAL
PROFLE
— __
III.__
wowsm
vn
_
^-
mgr
rmnse
-_- -
22
414
at 2
+00
23
+00
24 +00
2—
26 +00
—00
28
+00 29 +00
3o
+a0
31 +00
32
+00
33
+00
34
_ �_�_
+00
__
'••'I
"�°`
I
REENWAY
TRAIL PROFILE
-. --
- _..-
-___
__....__
axasovxaru.
__•
_ __.__
--
'-
- -__.. -1r
Di'
424
SPUR
xl ro»srxuc
a
DArUdt csc
430 __
121 ,:'
SPUR $2 PROFlLE _
m e
- __ -
- `� —_aaE w s.aTxo c
DAT Le.V - i
10 +0o 11 +00 12 +00 13 +o0
430 _........i - - _- �
426 taAl GREEN-WA TRAIL PRO LE - -- - -
zas inn m s. x xo
424 n• -- - __ -- -�._- __ -____ -
� n
n n r
a m m m m a
47100 a0 +00 49 +00 —00 51 +00
FOR PLAN VIEW SEE SNEE15 PP1 PP4
r SIEWEART PROCTORN PLL 0 GwEMEUT�E IUOPno
ory
0.0 oary
il PROFILE
ox xc cvauao
fo +oo
1tio0