20210553 Ver 1_ePCN Application_20211011

DWR
Dlrlslon of Water Resources
Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) Form
April4,2021 Ver4
Initial Review
Has this project met the requirements for acceptance in to the review process?*
r Yes
r No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
G Yes r No
Change only if needed.
BIMS#Assigned* Version#*
20210553 1
Is a payment required for this project?*
r No payment required
r Fee received Reviewing Office*
r Fee needed-send electronic notification Central Office-[phone]
Select Project Reviewer*
Ryan Conchilla:eads\rjconchilla
Information for Initial Review
1a.Name of project:
U-5896-The Reconstruction of the US 29/US 70/13usiness I-85 and SR 1009(South Main Street)interchange in High Point,Guilford County
1a.Who is the Primary Contact?*
NCDOT
1b.Primary Contact Email:* 1c.Primary Contact Phone:*
[e-mail] [phone]
Date Submitted
10/11/2021
Nearest Body of Water
Richland Creek
Basin
Cape Fear
Water Classification
WS-N
Site Coordinates
Latitude: Longitude:
35.935133 -77.991623
A. Processing Information U
County(or Counties)where the project is located:
Guilford
Is this a NCDMS Project
r Yes r No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
r Yes r No
Is this a NCDOT Project?*
r Yes r No
(NCDOT only)T.I.P.or state project number:
U-5896

WBS#M
WBS Element 44674.1.2
Pre-Filing Meeting Information
Is this a courtesy copy notification?*
r Yes r No
ID# Version
20210553
Pre-fling Meeting or Request Date
4/10/2021
Attach documentation of Pre-Filing Meeting Request here:
pick the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach document
U-5896 Pre Filing Documents.pdf 141.07KB
File type mast be FCF
1a.Type(s)of approval sought from the Corps:
W Section 404 Permit(wetlands,streams and waters,Clean Water Act)
r Section 10 Permit(navigable waters,tidal waters,Rivers and Harbors Act)
Has this PCN previously been submitted?*
r Yes
IT No
1b.What type(s)of permit(s)do you wish to seek authorization?
r Nationwide Permit(NWP)
W Regional General Permit(RGP)
r Standard(IP)
1c.Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
r Yes r No
Regional General Permit(RGP)Number: 201902350-Work associated with bridge construction,widening,replacement,and
interchanges
RGP Numbers(for multiple RGPS):
1d.Type(s)of approval sought from the DWR:
W 401 Water Quality Certification-Regular r 401 Water Quality Certification-E)press
r Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit r Riparian Buffer Authorization
r Individual 401 Water Quality Certification
le.Is this notification solely for the record because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWR401 Certification: r Yes IT No
For the record onlyfor Corps Permit: r Yes r No
1f.Is this an after-the-fact permit application?*
r Yes r No
1g.Is payment into a mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
r Yes r No
1g.Is payment into a mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
r Yes r No
Acceptance Letter Attachment
1h.Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties?
r Yes r No
1j.Is the project located in a designated trout watershed?
CS Yes r No
B.Applicant Information U
1d.Who is applying for the permit?
r Owner W Applicant(other than owner)
le.Is there an Agent/Consultant for this project?*

C' Yes a No
2. Owner Information
2a.Name(s)on recorded deed:
N/A
2b.Deed book and page no.:
2c.Contact Person:
2d.Address
Street Address
wA
Address tine 2
City State/Rovince/legion
N/A N/A
Postal/Zip Code Country
N/A NIA
2e.Telephone Number: 2f.Fax Number:
[phone]
2g.Email Address:*
[e-mail]
3.Applicant Information(if different from owner)
3a.Name:
NCDOT
3b.Business Name:
3c.Address
Street Address
1598 Mail Service Center
Address tine 2
Cy State/Rovince/legion
Raleigh NC
Fbstal/Zip Code Country
Postal/Zip Code 27699-1598 United State of America
3d.Telephone Number: 3e.Fax Number:
[phone]
3f.Email Address:*
[e-mail]
C. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Project Information
1b.Subdivision name:
(d appropriate)
1c.Nearest municipality/town:
Figh Point
2. Project Identification
2a.Property Identification Number: 2b.Property size:
2c.Project Address
Street Address
Address tine 2
City State/Province/legion
Postal/Zip Code Country
3.Surface Waters
3a.Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project:*

Richland Creek
3b.Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving water:*
WS-IV
3c. What river basin(s)is your project located in?*
Cape Fear
3d.Please provide the 12-digit HUC in which the project is located.
030300030103
4. Project Description and History
4a.Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this application:*
Urban Interchange with residential and commercial property interspersed along with undeveloped land.
4b.Have Corps permits or DWR certifications been obtained for this project(including all prior phases)in the past?*
r Yes r No r Unknown
4d.Attach an 8 1/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the USGS topographic map indicating the location of the project site.(for DWR)
4e.Attach an 8 1/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the published County NRCS Soil Survey map depicting the project site.(for DWR)
4f.List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
0.22 Ac.
4g.List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:
3,847 If.
4h.Explain the purpose of the proposed project:*
Improve mobility in the U.S.29-70/1-85 and S.R.1009(South Main Street)and interchange by limiting driveway access along and in proximity to the interchange.
Alleviate existing congestion at several of the existing un-signalized ramp terminals.
Upgrade interchange design to meet current design standards.
Replace a functionally obsolete bridge.
4i.Describe the overall project in detail,including indirect impacts and the type of equipment to be used:*
Project U-5896 involves the reconstruction of an interchange at 1-85 Business/US 29/70 and South Main Street/Business 311 near High Point.
This interchange contains non-standard ramps,including businesses with driveway access within the ramp,which results in congestion at the interchange.In addition,bridge 147 is
functionally obsolete and will be replaced with this project.
This project is located in the Randleman Lake watershed and is buffered according to the rules of that watershed.A retaining wall will be used to avoid and minimize impacts to Richland
Creek.Existing erosion was noted and rock plating was used to minimize further erosion of the stream banks and to aid in the stability of the proposed retaining wall.
The project area has been reduced to avoid impacts to Richland Creek.2:1 slopes are used were possible.
Erosion Control devices such as preformed scour holes,stilling basins,special stilling basins,silt fence,special sediment control fence,rock inlet sediment traps,pipe inlet sediment
traps,and slope drains will be utilized to contain and minimize sedimentation.
4j.Please upload project drawings for the proposed project.
5.Jurisdictional Determinations
5a.Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the property or proposed impact areas?*
r Yes r No C Unknown
Comments:
5b.If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination,what type of determination was made?*
r Preliminary r Approved C Not Verified r Unknown r N/A
Corps AID Number:
5c.If 5a is yes,who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name(if known): Nathan Howell
Agency/Consultant Company: Three Oaks
Other:
5d.List the dates of the Corp jurisdiction determination or State determination if a determination was made by the Corps or DWR
June 19,2018-David Bailey USACE,April Norton NCDWR
5d1.Jurisdictional determination upload
NCDWR_STIP 5896_Stream Determination Letter.pdf 632.25KB
6. Future Project Plans

6a.Is this a phased project?*
C Yes G- 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?
D. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
la.Where are the impacts associated with your project?(check all that apply):
P1 Wetlands P Streams-tributaries W Buffers
r-Open Waters r"Pond Construction
2.Wetland Impacts
2a1 Reason(?) 2b.Impact type*M 2c.Type of W.* 2d.W.name* 2e.Forested* 2f.Type of 2g.Impact
Jurisdicition*(?) area
Site 3 0.004
Toe Protection P r�odplain Pool Yes Both
(acres)
Site 3 Mech.Clearing P rloodplain Pool WC Yes Both 0.005
(acres)
ff7R= P Bottomland Hardwood Forest WE Yes ]Both 0.040
(acres)
___]
___]
2g.Total Temporary Wetland Impact 2g.Total Permanent Wetland Impact
0.000 0.049
2g.Total Wetland Impact
0.049
21.Comments:
3.Stream Impacts
F
3a.Reason for impact(?) 3b.lmpact type* 3c.Type of impact* 3d.S.name* 3e.Stream Type* �[3f.Type of 3g S width 3h.I(?) urisdiction* length*
S1
Stream Bank Stabilization Permanent Bank Stabilization JRichland Creek Perennial Both 22 101 Average(feet) (linearfeet)
Stabilization S2
Stream Bank Tem orar Bank Stabilization Richland Creek Perennial Both 22 111 P Y Average(feet) (linearfeet)
S3
Stream Bank Stabilization Permanent Bank Stabilization J
Richland Creek Perennial Both 22 103 Average(feet) (linearfeet)
Stabilization S4
Stream Bank Tem orar Bank Stabilization Richland Creek Perennial Both 22 73 P Y Average(feet) (linearfeet)
S5
Scour Hole Stabilization Permanent Stabilization Richland Creek Perennial Both 22 40 Average(feet) (linearfeet)
Stabilization S6
Scour Hole Tem ora Stabilization Richland Creek Perennial Both 22 23 P rY Average(feet) (linearfeet)
S7
Stream Bank Stabilization Permanent Bank Stabilization J
SA-Ur to Richland Creek Perennial Both 8 40 Average(feet) (lir�rfeet)
Stabilization SS
Stream Bank Tem orar Bank Stabilization SA-Ur to Richland Creek Perennial Both 8 16 P Y Average(feet) (lirtearfeet)
S9
Culvert Permanent Culvert SA-Ur to Richland Creek Perennial Both 8 21 Average(feet) (lir�rfeet)
S10 Stream Relocation Permanent Rip Rap Fill SF-Ur to Richland Creek Intermittent Corps 4 149
Aver�ge(feet) (lir�rfeet)
S11
Stream Bank Stabilization Permanent Bank Stabilization Richland Creek Perennial Both 22 4
Aver�ge(feet) (lir�rfeet)
Stream Bank Stabili��Tt�]
Bank Stabilization RichlandCreek Perennial BothS12
Average(feet) (lir�rfeet)
3i.Total jurisdictional ditch impact in square feet:
0

31.Total permanent stream impacts: 31.Total temporary stream impacts:
458 238
31.Total stream and ditch impacts:
696
3j.Comments:
6. Buffer Impacts(for DWR)
6a.Project is in which protect basin(s)?
Check all that apply.
r"Neuse r Tar-Pamlico
C Catawba I7 Randleman
C Goose Creek r Jordan Lake
C Other
6b.Impact Type 6c.Per or Temp 6d.Stream name 6e.Buffer mitigation required? 6f.Zone 1 impact 6g.Zone 2 impact
1A:Parallel Impact-Mitigation P Richland Creek Yes 3,445 2,166
1 B:Parallel Impact-Mitigation P Richland Creek Yes 3,445 329
1C:Parallel Impact-Mitigation P Richland Creek Yes 3,883 2,025
1D:Parallel Impact-Mitigation P Richland Creek Yes 6,439 1,574
1 D2:Road Crossing-Allowable P Richland Creek No 2,488 0
1 E:Parallel Impact-Mitigation P Richland Creek Yes 3,246 621
2:Road Crossing-Allowable P SA-UT to Richland Creek No 7,941 4,596
3:Parallel Impact-Mitigation P Richland Creek Yes 1,437 2,875
4:Parallel Impact-Mitigation P Richland Creek Yes 1,292 901
6h. Total buffer impacts:
Zone 1 Zone 2
Total Temporary impacts: 0.00 0.00
Zone 1 Zone 2
Total Permanent impacts: 33,616.00 15,087.00
Zone 1 Zone 2
Total combined buffer impacts: 33,616.00 15,087.00
61.Comments:
There are Utility Buffer Impacts at Buffer Impact Sites 1 D,1 D2,1 E,and 2.These impacts are completely encompassed in the Hydro Utility Impacts in
the table above.
Supporting Documentation
E. Impact Justification and Mitigation u
1.Avoidance and Minimization
la.Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:

Due to the probmity of Richland Creek to the ebsting US-29-70/1-85 BUS,the originally proposed typical for the interchange improvements pushed
slope stake lines into Richland Creek and would have created significant relocation and impact to Richland Creek.A retaining wall from-L-STA.
10+00 to STA.15+50 was designed in order to minimize impacts and prevent relocation of Richland Creek.
The location of the proposed retaining wall and the ebsting conditions of Richland Creek's bank in this location raised erosion and stability concerns if
left as bare soil.It was determined through coordination with multiple disciplines that rock plating should be utilized to stabilize the bank of Richland
Creek and to protect the stream bank,retaining wall,and roadway.Stabilizing the ebsting bank with rock plating should reduce ebsting bank erosion
and sedimentation downstream.
The ebsting 5'x6'RCBC crossing has a scour hole at the outfall in Richland Creek likely due to the ebsting crossing being undersized.A supplemental
48"Welded Steel pipe has been proposed to reduce crossing outlet velocities which will help reduce scour of Richland Creek.Class 11 Rip Rap is
proposed in our current design in order to bring the current scour hole up to the natural Richland Creek bed elevation and protect Richland Creek
from further scouring.The ebsting 5'x6'RCBC is also being retained in order to minimize impacts to the UT to Richland Creek and Richland Creek
itself.It was considered to replace the ebsting 5'u6'with an upsized crossing,however due to the ebsting site conditions and necessary crossing
relocation for constructability,it was likely to create additional impacts to JS features and deemed not appropriate.It was considered to not add the 48"
supplemental pipe and maintain the ebsting RCBC.However,due to the anticipated future buildout of the upstream drainage area,the undersized
crossing,along with the current and future scour potential downstream,it was determined a supplemental pipe would be beneficial.
11b.Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques:
Best Construction Practices will be adhered to.
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
2c.If yes,mitigation is required by(check all that apply):
W DWR W Corps
2d.If yes,which mitigation option(s)will be used for this project?
r Mitigation bank W Payment to in-lieu fee r Permittee Responsible
program Mitigation
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In-lieu Fee Program
4a.Approval letter from in-lieu fee program is attached.
r Yes r No
4b.Stream mitigation requested:
(linear feet) 4c.If using stream mitigation,what is the stream temperature:
210 warm
4d.Buffer mitigation requested(DWR only): 4e.Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
(square feet) (acres)
33,678 0.05
4f.Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested: 4g.Coastal(tidal)wetland mitigation requested:
(acres) (acres)
4h.Comments
6. Buffer mitigation(State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules)-required by DWR
6a.Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires buffer mitigation?If yes,you must fill out this entire form-please contact DWR for more
information.
r Yes r No
61b.If yes,then identify the square feet of impact.
6c.Reason for impact 6d.Total impact Multiplier 6e.Required mitigation
(square feet) (square feet)
Zone 1 23,187 3 69,561
Zone 2 10,491 1.5 15,737
6f.Total buffer mitigation required
85298
6g.If buffer mitigation is required,is payment to a mitigation bank or NC Division of Mitigation Services proposed?
r Yes r No
6h.Attach the acceptance letter from the mitigation bank or NC Division of Mitigation Services.
U-5896 DMS Acceptance Letter.pdf 240.58KB
6j.Comments:

Mitigation will be secured from NCDMS
F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWR)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
la.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 No
What type of SCM are you providing?
r Level Spreader
r Vegetated Conveyance(lower SHWT)
r Wetland Swale(higher SHWT)
W Other SCM that removes minimum 30%nitrogen
r Proposed project will not create concentrated stormvrater flow through the buffer
Diffuse Flow Documentation
2.Stormwater Management Plan
2a.Is this a NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's Individual NPDES permit NCS000250?*
r Yes r- No
Comments:
This project is located in the Randleman Lake watershed and is buffered according to the rules of that watershed.A retaining wall has been used to limit erosion and disturbance to
Richland Creek.Existing erosion was noted and rock plating was used to minimize further erosion of the stream banks and to aid in the stability of the proposed retaining wall in areas
from 10+50 to 14+00-L-LT.Typical sections at the start of the-Y-line were adjusted to minimize impacts to Richland Creek.2:1 side slopes were used where possible to limit
permanent fill impacts to jurisdictional features.Erosion Control devices such as preformed scour holes,stilling basins,special stilling basins,silt fence,special sediment control fence,
rock inlet sediment traps,pipe inlet sediment traps,and slope drains will be utilized to contain and minimize sedimentation.
G. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation
1a.Does the project involve an expenditure of public(federal/state/local)funds or the use of public(federal/state)land?*
r Yes r No
1b.If you answered"yes"to the above,does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State(North Carolina)
Environmental Policy Act(NEPA/SEPA)?*
r Yes r No
1c.If you answered"yes"to the above,has the document review been finalized bythe State Clearing House?*
r Yes r- No
NEPAor SEPA Final Approval Letter
LJ-5896 CE.pdf 14.71 MIS
2.Violations(DWR Requirement)
2a.Is the site in violation of DWR Water Quality Certification Rules(15A NCAC 2H.0500),Isolated Wetland Rules(15A NCAC 2H.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 result in additional development,which could impact nearby downstream water quality?*
r Yes r No
3b.If you answered"no,"provide a short narrative description.
The project Will not alter travel patterns,reduce travel time,affect access to properties in the area,or open areas for development or redevelopment.
Due to its minimal transportation impact-causing activities,this project will neither influence nearby land uses nor stimulate growth.Therefore,a
detailed indirect and cumulative effects study will not be necessary.
4.Sewage Disposal(DWR Requirement)
4a.Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project?*
r Yes r Nor N/A
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat(Corps Requirement)
5a.Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or habitat?*
r Yes r No

5b.Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act impacts?*
r Yes r No
5d.Is another Federal agency involved?*
r Yes r No r Unknown
5e.Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?
r Yes r No
5j.What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat?
USFWS IPAC website.A review of IPAC on August 25,2021,resulted in two federally protected species listed in the project footprint with SchwelntiZs
sunflower being added since the issuance of the CE.A survey for Schweintits sunflower was conducted on October 29,2019 and found suitable
habitat but no specimens were observed.An October 7,2021 survey found no specimens.There is no habitat for small whorled pogonia in the project
footprint.
Consultation Documentation Upload
6. Essential Fish Habitat(Corps Requirement)
6a.Will this project occur in or near an area designated as an Essential Fish Habitat?*
r Yes r No
6b.What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact an Essential Fish Habitat?*
Review of online mapping sources
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources(Corps Requirement)
7a.Will this project occur in or near an area that the state,federal or tribal governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation status?*
r Yes r No
7b.What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?*
The attached Historical Architecture and Archeology Survey forms.
7c.Historic or Prehistoric Information Upload
U-5896 Guilford No Archaeological Survey Required Form.pdf 1.62MB
U-5896 No HistoricProps.pdf 1.63MB
U-5896 Final CIA.pdf 5.63MB
8. Flood Zone Designation(Corps Requirement)
8a.Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?*
r Yes r No
8b.If yes,explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
The existing Culvert#401286 is extended with a 5'x 6'RCBC with concrete beveled headwall and additional 48"RCP for floodplain conveyance that
decreases the 100Iyr water surface elevations from the downstream limit of the study(RS 92)of the project to the downstream face of the parking lot
culvert at RS 469.The maAmum decrease in water surface elevation of 2.6'occurs at RS 248,RS 259,RS 297,RS 312,and RS 332.This dictates
that the Culvert#840290 be submitted as a MOA Type 2b.
8c.What source(s)did you use to make the floodplain determination?*
FEMA Floodmaps
Miscellaneous U
Comments
Miscellaneous attachments not previously requested.
U-5896 Final Permit Drawings.pdf 15.76MB
U-5896_hyd_prm_buf_20210826.pdf 2.41 MB
U-5896 Roadway Plansheets.pdf 12.04MB
U-5896 Permit Application Cover Letter.pdf 258.24KB
Signature
*
W By checking the box and signing below,I certify that:
• The project proponent hereby certifies that all information contained herein is true,accurate,and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief;and
• 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 have given true,accurate,and complete information on this form;
• I agree that submission of this PCN 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");
• I 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 PCN form.
Full Name:

Michael Anthony Turchy
Signature
4 " T
Date
10/11/2021