20210471 Ver 1_Kipling.Add Info.091521_20210915

Headwater 910.777.3908.1 121 Military Cutoff Dr. Suite C #306. Wilminaton. NC 28405
/ ENV I R ON MENTAL INC. www.headwaterenvironmental.com
September 15, 2021
Submitted as attachment to PCN Submittal
Harnett County Field Representative
United States Army Corps of Engineers
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403
Reference: Permit Comments and Revisions
The Preserve at Kipling
Action ID SAW-2020-01392
Fuquay-Varina, Harnett County, North Carolina
Headwater Project 201932B
To whom it may concern
As you are aware we received comments from Ms. Emily Greer with U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers on May 6, 2021. We understand she has been assigned to a project in California. A
summary of the comments, action items and revisions is summarize below:
The proposed project does not comply with the terms and conditions of a general permit.
For the proposed project to be considered single and complete, the northeast and
southwest road termini must be designed and constructed in the form of T-
stubs/hammerheads or cul-de-sacs without impacts to aquatic resources. Additionally,
general permits limit the loss of stream bed to no more than 0.05-acre, and for any general
permit that results in the loss of more than 0.02-acre of stream bed, the applicant is
required to provide compensatory mitigation. As proposed, the project will require the loss
of 0.07-acre of stream bed, and the applicant did not provide a stream mitigation proposal
or an adequate justification for not proposing stream mitigation.
a. The site plans have been revised and stream impacts reduced to 0.02 acre
(rounded up from 0.0198 acre). Wetland impacts remain the same.
i. Impact 3C - The site plans are based on a survey and the stream width
was originally calculated from the top -of -bank, instead of width of ordinary
high water mark. This resulted in an exaggerated stream width of 10 feet.
Based on our GPS data collected in the field, the stream width varies
between 4.0 to 4.5 feet wide along this reach. At Impact 3C, we used the
average width of 4.25' w x 203' long = 0.0198 acre.
Please note, the stream is already impacted by an existing gravel road.
The gravel road serves as an artificial impoundment to the stream. The
stream width at the impact area is based on measurements upstream and
downstream of the gravel road.
Impact 4D — Impacts to Neills Creek have been eliminated. The sewer line
will be installed with a "jack and bore" construction technique. This method
involves boring below grade and avoids stream impacts all together.

The Preserve at Kipling
Headwater Project 201932B
September 15, 2021
2. The hierarchy for compensatory mitigation requires mitigation to occur within the
watershed of the impact site before mitigating outside of the shared watershed. Given the
significant distance between the LCF mitigation bank and the impact site, increased
mitigation ratios would be needed to adequately offset adverse project effects. Because
the within service area mitigation bank does not have the required credits to offset project
impacts, mitigation will be required to occur with NCDMS. Based only on the provided
NCWAM data, wetland mitigation will be required at a minimum 1.5:1 ratio; however, the
Corps will provide the required ratio for wetland and stream mitigation at a later date.
a. Understood, a mitigation request form has been submitted to NCDMS (enclosed).
Payment to DMS shall be made prior to construction activity.
3. To reduce confusion, consistency of aquatic resources and impact nomenclature between
the PCN and project drawings is needed. PCN impact tables should reflect the impact IDs
used in the discussion and on the impact maps. Also, because reference is made in the
PCN to nomenclature used in the delineation and JD, aquatic resources should be labeled
accordingly on the project drawings to ease the review. Additionally, the applicant
confuses their nomenclature in the discussion, which further complicates the review.
Please correct these inconsistencies prior to resubmitting.
a. We use an alphanumeric nomenclature when delineating wetlands and streams.
Refer to our Wetland Delineation map included with the JD issued on 12/31/2020.
The narrative has been reviewed and any inconsistences have been adjusted.
b. We do not control site plan design. The Timmons Group Identifies the impact
areas as Impact Number 1A, 213, 3C, and 4D. The impact identification naming
system remains the same.
4. Please clarify if the utility easement will be permanently maintained in an herbaceous
state.
a. Timmons Group indicated the sewer easement would be a maintained easement.
After installation of the pipe, the conditions within the easement will return to a
naturally vegetated state.
b. The wetlands at Impact Number 2B are in an emergent/scrub-shrub setting,
resulting from previous timbering activity. No tree clearing shall occur.
5. Please provide a justification for open trench impacts as opposed to avoiding impacts by
using the direct bore methodology for the proposed sewer line.
a. According to Timmons Group, the pipe installation at Impact 2B will be an open
trench impact due to future maintenance concerns. The pipe at Impact 4D will now
be bored below ground and will not include impacts.
6. To expedite permit processing, the applicant is encouraged to begin consultation with the
appliable USFWS office on potential project effects to the Cape Fear Shiner prior to
resubmitting. Otherwise, the Corps will not initiate formal consultation until a complete
application has been received.
a. According to a telephone conversation with Mr. John Ellis with USFWS,
consultation with USFWS is not required if the "jack and bore" construction method
will be utilized at Neills Creek (Impact 4D).
0

The Preserve at Kipling
Headwater Project 201932B
September 15, 2021
b. A silt curtain will be utilized at Impact 3C to reduce potential downstream effects
to Neills Creek.
7. Stream Impact 3C:
a. The Corps needs to note that the applicant's description of the existing conditions at
Impact 3C and the project drawings seem to conflict and do not provide a clear picture.
The Corps intends to conduct a site visit to eliminate some of the confusion addressed in
these comments.
o As previously mentioned, the existing gravel road serves as an impoundment to
the stream. Headwater determined the average stream width based on
calculations upstream and downstream of the gravel road. In area where the
stream is in a more natural state.
o Headwater attempted to schedule a site visit with Ms. Emily Greer on numerous
occasions via voicemail and email. We never received a response with an
available meeting date.
b. Please provide a scaled cross-section with a viewpoint from the middle of the stream
looking down the head of the culverts. This view is required to determine compliance with
permit conditions.
o A cross section is being shown looking at the head of the culverts on sheet CWI
2.4
Based on the provided information and permit requirements for culvert installation, please
provide a written justification for the crossing design and the purpose and need of the
downstream plunge pool. It should be noted that the area of the plunge pool and the
embedded rip rap is not a temporary impact. The plunge pool is a permanent impact, no
permanent loss but converts the stream into an open water and, therefore, requires a
minimum 1:1 mitigation ratio. The dissipater is a permanent impact, no permanent loss.
o The plunge pool has been removed from this location. The banks are now to be
lined with embedded rip rap. No additional stream impacts will be required at this
location due to rip rap installation.
d. Based on the project drawings, it appears that the average stream width provided in the
PCN is not accurate. Additionally, impacts were not fully documented in the PCN tables.
o A typo occurred with Wetland Impact 2C, should be "3C". This typo has been
corrected.
o The existing gravel road has caused the stream to sheet flow over said road. The
previous stream width of 10 feet was incorrect and based on this "sheet flow width".
o Headwater reviewed GPS data collected during the wetland/stream delineation.
We analyzed stream widths upstream and downstream of the existing gravel road.
We determined the average stream width is 4.25 feet.
e. Updated impact totals must reflect these comments in the resubmittal.
o Included with revised PCN submittal
K

The Preserve at Kipling
Headwater Project 201932B
September 15, 2021
f Please clarify that the depth of the plunge pool is actually greater than 2 feet when
measured from the existing ground level. The Corps is using the Culvert Crossing Profile
for reference.
o The plunge pool has been removed from this location.
8. Overall Site Plan:
a. The entire property needs to be shown.
a. Overall site plan has been revised to show the entire parcel boundary.
b. Clearly mark and label the limits of disturbance and the location of all sediment and erosion
control structures and measures on all project drawings, including insets.
a. Limit of disturbance and erosion control measures have been called out on sheet
CWI-2.2
c. Please provide an additional overall impact map without the topo layers so the project can
be clearly viewed.
a. This sheet has been added to the plan set as sheet CWI-2.2
d. Clearly mark the mapped boundary of the FEMA floodway.
a. Refer to Sheet CWI-2.2
e. Label all open space required for the development. The availability of open space,
specifically southeast and north of Lots 94-95 and in the northwest corner of the property,
provides for the possibility of additional development if a floodplain permit is later granted.
All anticipated, reasonably foreseeable development and associated impacts within the
boundary of a single and complete project must be presented in the permit application.
a. Simply put, this is not a phased project and there are no plans to encroach within
the floodplain.
9. Inset Impact Maps:
a. Clearly mark the mapped boundary of the FEMA floodway and the boundaries of all
aquatic resources.
a. Refer to Sheet CWI-2.2
b. Drawing 2.3 needs to show more of the surrounding area to complete the review of this
impact.
a. In additional to Sheet CWI-2.1, CWI-2.2, Sheet CWI-2.3 includes a scale of 1" _
50'. This should provide adequate coverage for review
c. Please provide to scale plan view insets and typical cross-section(s) depicting the wetland
boundary and the fill toe of slope for the rear of Lots: 40, 43-45, 52-71, 78-89 (including
the cul-de-sac), 95, 103-113. Ensure that proposed and existing contour lines can be
easily distinguished from one another and the floodway boundary is clearly marked and
12

The Preserve at Kipling
Headwater Project 201932B
September 15, 2021
labeled. The Corps has concerns regarding encroachment into the floodway as it relates
to Regional Condition C of NWP 29.
a. The tie in slopes in the rear yards of the lots mentioned do not exceed 3:1. The
grading does not encroach into the wetlands and does not cause any impacts.
Erosion control is permitted outside the jurisdiction of USACE and will follow all
proper regulations. As such, no additional insets or cross sections have been
provided.
d. What is the slope (%) for the rear of these lots? The Corps has concerns regarding the
slope of these lots and the proximity of work limits (and/or the toe of slope) to the wetland
boundary as they relate to secondary impacts caused by the failure of S&E measures due
to slope shear and the amount of exposed surface during construction. Due to the
repetitiveness of permit non-compliance directly related to the combination of these
factors, the Corps' position is that these impacts are reasonable and foreseeable. Upon
receipt of additional information provided in the resubmittal, the Corps will provide clarity
on how these concerns must be addressed by the applicant.
a. The tie in slopes in the rear yards of the lots mentioned do not exceed 3:1. The
grading does not encroach into the wetlands and does not cause any impacts.
Erosion control is permitted outside the jurisdiction of USACE and will follow all
proper regulations. As such, no additional insets or cross sections have been
provided.
Thank you for your help with this project.
Respectfully Submitted,
Headwater Environmental, Inc.
C. Paul Pascarosa
President
cc: Zach Daughtery, Garden Street Communities
Mike Ziccardo, Timmons Group
Chad Turlington, NCDWR
4"