20061421 Ver 1_More Info Letter_20060922

~~F ~AT~~Q Michael F. Easley, Governor
~ (,~ William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
`
Vj ~
S` North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
5
p ; _ sf r ~.~; '- ~ ~
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
~ ~~ ° ~ Division of Water Quality
~. ,~-
September 22, 2006
DWQ EXP No. 06-1421
Johnston County
CERTIFIED MAIL: RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Regency Centers/Elizabeth T. Barber
Attn: Mr. David Smith
101 Maynard Crossing Court, Suite 211
Cary, NC 27513
Subject Property: Middle. Creek Commons
REQUEST FOR MORE INFORMATION-EXPRESS REVIEW PROGRAM
Dear Mr. Smith:
On September 20, 2006 the Division of Water Quality received the additional information requested to
accompany the PCN application for the above-referenced project. The DWQ has determined that this
information is incomplete. Please provide the additional information requested below in order to
continue review of your project and to prevent denial of your application as required by 15A NCAC 2H
.0506:
Stormwater Management:
a. The extended detention wetland does not appear to have a forebay (sheet C4.1).
b. Please consult the information in the 1999 DENR Stormwater BMP Manual for extended
detention wetlands, particularly Figure 2 on page 14. DWQ has concerns about the routing
of the stormwater within your wetland. This relates to our concerns regarding the
drawdown period.
c. The sheet C4.1 appears to be exactly the same as the previous submittal. Please re-examine
your planting plan. DWQ has concerns with the water depths and spacing you have
indicated for some of your plant material.
d. The orifice appears to be sized incorrectly for optimum drawdown. Please recheck this
parameter. According to our calculations, your drawdown is 15+ days.
e. Operation and Maintenance Agreement: The submitted document appears to be more
suited to a wet detention basin. DWQ has concerns that the second item in the maintenance
activity would imply that a person should mow the entire constructed wetland. Item
number 4 is vague and discusses the permanent pool depth in the main pond; constructed
wetlands have micropools rather than main ponds. Will replanting of wetland plant
material occur after sediment removal? This is not clear in your Operation and
Maintenance Agreement. What do you mean by "Remove cattails and other indigenous
wetland plants when they cover 50% of the basin surface"? Most of the constructed
wetland is planted with wetland plants and could lead someone to think that all plants
should be removed. It is confusing and not an appropriate instruction for an extended
detention wetland. Please redraft your Agreement and resubmit.
401 Oversight I Express Review Permitting Unit
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] FAX [phone]nternet: http l(h2o.enr.state.nc.usincwetlands
No thCarolina
~~rturally
An Equal OpportunitylAffirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper

Middle Creek Commons
Page 2 of 2
September 22, 2006
Please respond within three (3) days of the date of this letter by sending five (5) copies of the above
information in writing.
This letter only addresses the application review and does not authorize any impacts to wetlands, waters
or protected buffers. Please be aware that any impacts requested within your application are not
authorized (at this time) by the DWQ.
Please contact Cynthia Van Der Wiele at [phone] or Lia Myott at [phone] if you have any
questions regarding or would like to set up a meeting to discuss this matter.
Sincerely,
/~
t~
Cyndi Karoly,
401 OversightlExpress Review Permitting Unit
CBKlcvdw/lem
cc: USACE Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
DWQ Raleigh Regional Office
File Copy
Central Files
Debbie Edwards, S&EC, 11010 Raven Ridge Road, Suite 120, Raleigh, NC 27614
Filename: 061421 MiddleCreekCommons(Johnston)EXP+hold2