Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20080499 Ver 3_Corps of Engineer Correspondence_20150916�11T �F STATES'o4 Regulatory Division/1200A DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS 69 DARLINGTON AVENUE WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403 -1343 Action ID: SAW - 2013 -00556 Mr. Brian Hall TDO Land Holdings, LLC 309 Gallimore Dairy Road, Suite 102 Greensboro, North Carolina 27409 Dear Mr. Hall: September 16, 2015 RECEIVED N C Dept of ENR SEP 18 2015 Winston -Salem Regional Office Please reference your Individual Permit application for Department of the Army (DA) authorization to permanently discharge fill material into 190 linear feet of stream channel and 0.59 acre of riparian, non - riverine wetlands, and temporarily discharge fill material into 45 linear feet of stream channel and 0.06 acre of riparian, non - riverine wetlands associated with providing safe and adequate industrial access to phase II of Triad Business Park. The project area is located in an undeveloped tract of land south of West Market Street and north of I -40 Business, between the Guilford /Forsythe County line and Bunker Hill Road in Colfax, Guilford County, North Carolina. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District (Corps) advertised your proposal by public notice dated August 4, 2015. Comments in response to the notice were received from the North Carolina Division of Water Resources ( NCDWR), North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission ( NCWRC), and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). The comments received are enclosed for your information and to provide you with the opportunity to address any of the stated concerns. Please provide written responses to the comments from the NCDWR and NCWRC Please note that the USFWS, in a letter dated September 4, 2015, stated that the action is not likely to adversely affect federally listed species or their critical habitat, and that they have no objection to the activity as described in the permit application. Further, on February 6, 1990, the Department of the Army (DA) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) signed a memorandum of agreement (MOA) establishing procedures to determine the type and level of mitigation necessary to comply with Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines This MOA provides for first, avoiding impacts to waters and wetlands through the selection of the least damaging, practical alternative; second, taking appropriate and practical steps to reduce impacts on waters and wetlands; and finally, compensation for remaining unavoidable impacts to the extent appropriate and practical To -2- enable us to process your application, in compliance with the MOA, we request that you provide the following additional information: a. Permits for work within wetlands or other special aquatic sites are available only if the proposed work is the least environmentally damaging, practicable alternative. Please furnish information regarding any other alternatives, including upland alternatives, to the work for which you have applied and provide justification that your selected plan is the least damaging to water or wetland areas. The application states that the on -site bridge alternative would cost $1 million more than the preferred alternative. However, the itemized preferred alternative cost analysis does not appear to take the cost of proposed compensatory mitigation (stream, wetland, and buffer) into account. Please re- evaluate and compare the total cost each alternative including the cost of proposed compensatory mitigation. ii. The Corps agrees with NCDWR that the applicant was sufficiently notified regarding permitting the project in phases and the resulting infrastructure investments in phase I would not preclude alternatives available to phase II of the project. Further, the Corps cannot include the applicant's sunk costs when determining the least environmentally damaging, practicable alternative per 40 CFR 230 As such, it is not appropriate to include prior infrastructure costs in the current alternatives analysis. iii. The Corps agrees with NCDWR that On -Site Alternative Crossing Location 3 should be revised to include retaining walls to minimize the impacts to streams and wetlands in order to provide a comparable alternative to On -Site Alternative Crossing Location 2 b. It is necessary for you to have taken all appropriate and practicable steps to minimize losses of Waters of the U.S., including wetlands. Please indicate all that you have done, especially regarding development and modification of plans and proposed construction techniques, to minimize adverse impacts. For the on -site alternatives, do the proposed crossings include two or three lanes? Please provide information on proposed lane widths. If more than two lanes are proposed, please modify your plans and impact estimates accordingly, or provide information justifying why a two lane design is not practicable. -3- c. The MOA requires that appropriate and practicable mitigation will be required for all unavoidable adverse impacts remaining after the applicant has employed all appropriate and practicable minimization. Please indicate your plan to mitigate for the projected, unavoidable loss of waters or wetlands or provide information as to the absence of any such appropriate and practicable measures. i. I have evaluated the compensatory mitigation plan included in your application, and have determined the details to be generally sufficient for our evaluation However, all of the on -site alternatives require encroaching within the wetland conservation area required by Special Conditions 2 and 3of the Nationwide Permit (NWP) 12, verified under Action ID: SAW- 2008 -02029 on September 12, 2008. In addition to proposing to record an amendment to the conservation area boundaries with the Guilford County Register of Deeds, you must submit a plan to compensate for the proposed loss of compensatory mitigation pursuant to the authorization verified under SAW - 2008 - 02029. Additionally, the following items must be resolved prior to continuing to process your permit request: 1) Item 18 of your permit application describes — and Appendix VII (Transportation Analysis) of your application package evaluates — extending Old Greensboro Road to South Bunker Hill Road. Further, the letters of support included in Appendix VII of your permit application are based on extending Old Greensboro Road to South Bunker Hill Road. However, all exhibits in Appendix II of your application package show proposed Old Greensboro Road terminating via cul -de -sac within the Triad Business Park property. Also, your written alternatives analyses do not specifically describe extending Old Greensboro Road to South Bunker Hill Road as a through road. Please clearly explain and /or correct this discrepancy 2) Item 19 of your permit application states the project purpose as providing safe and adequate industrial access to phase II of Triad Business Park. However, Appendix VII (Transportation Analysis and letters of support) of your application package evaluates the benefits of extending Old Greensboro Road to South Bunker Hill Road as a through road. Note that the two purposes are not the same. For your stated purpose, the Transportation Analysis should instead focus on accessing undeveloped portions of Triad Business Park property via the preferred alternative versus accessing via existing roads in a way that would not require a CWA 404 permit. 3) If the purpose of your project is instead a through road for vehicular traffic (general and industrial), please resubmit your permit application package such that all aspects are consistent with that purpose. Note that your alternatives analysis would likely change considerably, and would likely resemble a NCDOT -type road project. -4- 4) The Transportation Analysis (pg. 27) states that NCDOT TIP project U -2800 will create ideal access to Triad Business Park from 1 -40 Business, while the next nearest interchange with 1 -40 is Sandy Ridge Road to the east which experiences capacity deficiencies. However, TIP U -4758 proposes improvements to Sandy Ridge Road with the northern terminus as its interchange with 1 -40. As such, the premise that the Sandy Ridge Road interchange is insufficient to handle the increase in truck traffic is not necessarily supported given proposed capacity improvements Would access to Triad Business Park via the Off -site No Build alternative be practicable with improvements to the Sandy Ridge Road /I -40 interchange? 5) Please itemize all proposed impacts into stream and wetland impacts due to culvert/road fill (permanent loss of waters), rip rap dissipater pads (permanent impact, not a loss of waters), and temporary impacts for construction access, etc. Also, provide a concise restoration plan for all temporary impacts 6) Several items in the administrative records of previously permitted portions of Triad Business Park (SAW- 2008 -01894 and SAW- 2008 - 02092) document plans or commitments to avoid impacts to jurisdictional waters in the area of proposed access to phase 2 of the property, including: a. A "Preliminary Plat, Phase I, Triad Business Park ", dated April 14, 2008, showing access from Bunker Hill Road with cul -de -sac termini on each side of the wetland- stream complex; b A letter titled "Exhibit B" of the Pre Construction Notice (PCN) dated July 18, 2008, signed by Mr. Arthur Samet, stating that "the intention of ... amending the protective covenants of Triad Business Park is to protect the balance of the jurisdictional waters from further impacts in the portion of Triad Business Park that is yet to be developed, informally known as Phase 2." c. A letter from Mr Jeffrey Hatling, Community Development Director of the Town of Kernersville, dated July 21, 2008, stated that the elimination of a road crossing proposed for Triad Business Park would not be a mayor variance from that initially conceived for the Subdivision. This indicated to the Corps that the Triad Business Park could be completed without the proposed road crossing, that no additional impacts would be necessary, and that the three portions of Triad Business Park proposed could each be authorized via NWPs. See also the e -mail exchange between Mr. Andrew Williams of the Corps and Mr. Brian Hall of Samet Corporation dated October 4, 2011. -5- d. Special Conditions 2 and 3 of the NWP 12 verification, dated September 12, 2008, required that remaining jurisdictional areas be preserved and maintained, as documented by Restrictive Covenants recorded in the Guilford County Register of Deeds, including the area proposed for impacts by on -site alternatives. Considering this information (6 a -d), clearly describe what changes have occurred at the site that now require the proposed crossing, when, in 2008, it was determined to be unnecessary. The aforementioned requested information is essential to the expeditious processing of your application; please forward this information to us within 30 days of your receipt of this letter If you have any questions regarding these matters, please contact me at (919) 554 -4884 extension 30 or David E.BailevU( usace armv.mil Sincerely, David E. Bailey Regulatory Project Manager Raleigh Field Office Enclosures Copies Furnished: Mr. Brad Luckey Pilot Environmental Inc. Post Office Box 128 Kernersville, North Carolina 27285 Mr. Todd Bowers Permit Review Specialist Wetlands Regulatory Section U S Environmental Protection Agency - Region IV Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth Street, SW Atlanta, Georgia 30303 IN Ms. Karen Higgins NCDENR — Division of Water Resources Water Quality Programs 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699 -1617 Ms. Sue Homewood Division of Water Resources North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources 450 W. Hanes Mill Rd, Suite 300 Winston Salem, North Carolina 27105 OQpP�MeNT O,'Ty�2m United States Department of the intefio o FISPI AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Raleigh ES Field Office M ag Post Office Box 33726 Q�e" �e Raleigh, North Catolina'2.7636 -3726 September 4, 2015 David Bailey U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District Raleigh Regulatory Field Office 3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105 Wake Forest, NC 27587 Re: TDO Land Holdings LLC/ SAW -2013- 00556 /Guilford County Dear Mi. Bailey: R ( ,'3E C 1 E � i SEP 10 2015 RALEIGH REGULATORY FIFH D OFFICE j The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed the project advertised in the above referenced Public Notice. The project, as advei tised in the Public Notice, is expected to have minimal adverse impacts to fish and wildlife resources. Therefore, we have no objection to the activity as described in the permit application. In accordance with the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, (ESA) and based on the information provided, and other available information, it appears the action is not likely to adversely affect federally listed species or their critical habitat as defined by the ESA. We believe that the i equirements of section 7 (a)(2) of the ESA have been satisfied for this project. Please remember that obligations under the ESA must be reconsidered if. (1) new information identifies impacts of this action that may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner not previously consider ed; (2) this action is modified in a manner that was not considered in this review; or, (3) a new species is listed or critical habitat determined that may be affected by the identified action. For your convenience a list of all federally protected endangered and threatened species in North Carolina is now available on our website at <http : / /www.fws.gov /sleigh, Our web page contains a complete and updated list of federally protected species, and a list of federal species of concern known to occur in each county in Noah Carolina. The Service appreciates the opportunity to review and provide comments on the proposed action. Should you have any questions regarding the project, please contact John Ellis at (919) 856 -4520, extension 26. cc: NMFS, Beaufort, NC EPA, Atlanta, GA WRC, Raleigh Sincerely, C Pete enjamin, Field Supervisor i�I"* ECEI V �. CDEN � SEP Z 1 2015 North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resou ceRALEIGH LDOFFlaroRY p FIELD OFFICE Pat McCrory DondTdl van ddr VWd(L Governor Secretary September 3, 2015 David Bailey U.S Army Corps of Engineers Raleigh Regulatory Field Office 3 33 1 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105 Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587 Corps Action ID# SAW- 2013 -00556 DWQ Project #08 -0499 v3 Guilford County Subject. Public Notice for TDO Land Holdings LLC for Triad Business Park Phase II Individual Pen-nit Dear Mi. Bailey On behalf of the NC Division of Water Resources, we respectfully request that you consider the following comments within your review of the 404 Individual Permit request for the above referenced property• 1. The applicant states that On -Site Alternative Ciossing Location 3 would be a costly option due to prior investments into infrastructure on Lot 3. Through the permitting process for Phase I, the applicant was notified that their decision to permit the project in phases and the resulting infrastructure investments in Phase I would not preclude alternatives available to Phase If of the project Theiefore, the Division does not believe that it is appropriate to include prior infrastructure costs in the current alternatives analysis. 2. The Division believes that On -Site Alternative Crossing Location 3 should be revised to include retaining walls to minimize the impacts to streams and wetlands in order to provide an equivalent alternative to On -Site Alternative Crossing Location 2. The applicant has provided a traffic analysis conducted by Davenport in support for their purpose and need and their alternatives analysis. The Division has noted that the traffic analysis states "This study was conducted to provide an evaluation of the potential extension of Old Greensboro Road through the Triad Business Park to Bunker Hill Road" The proposed project plans show Old Greensboro Road terminating within the business park, therefore it appears that the traffic analysis contradicts the project proposed Winston -Salem Regional Office Localion 450 W Hanes Mill Rd, Winston Salem NC 27105 Phone 336 - 776 -9800 \ FAX 336 - 776 -9797\ Customer Service 1- 877 -623 -6748 Internet vAvw rimaterquality org An Equal Opportunity \ Affirmative Action Employer Noi thCarolina Natul,al USACE SAW- 2013 -00556 —TDO Land Holdings Inc DWQ# 08- 0499v3 Request for Additional Information Page 2 of 2 Thank you f6r your considering the Division's comments during your review of this Individual Permit If you have any questions, please contact me at 336 - 776 -9693. Sincerely, Sue Homewood DWQ Winston -Salem Regional Office cc: Brad Lucky, Pilot Environmental Inc (via email) DWR WSRO DWR — 401 Wetlands & Buffer Permitting Unit North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission 9 Gordon Myers, Executive Director MEMORANDUM TO David E Bailey, Raleigh Regulatory Field Office U S. Army Corps of Engineers FROM- Shari L Bryant, Western Piedmont Coordinator Habitat Conservation Division DATE 31 August 2015 SUBJECT Public Notice for TDO Land Holdings, LLC for Phase II of Triad Business Park, Guilford County, North Carolina Corps Action ID # SAW -2013 -00556 Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) have reviewed the subject document Our comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the Clean Water Act of 1977 (as amended), Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat 401, as amended, 16 U S C 661- 667e), and North Carolina General Statutes (G S 113 -131 et seq ) The applicant proposes to permanently impact 190 linear feet of stream channel and 0 59 acre of wetlands, and temporarily impact 45 linear feet of stream channel and 0 06 acre of wetlands to construct a road crossing for Phase II of the Triad Business Park (TBP) If authorized, cumulative impacts for Phases I and 11 of the TBP include permanent impacts to 415 linear feet of stream channel, 0 78 acre of wetlands, and 0 22 acre of open waters, and temporary impacts to 369 linear feet of stream channel and 0 56 acre of wetlands. Additional impacts to streams and wetlands for future development of Phase 11 of the TBP are not anticipated Impacts are proposed to be compensated through payment to the N C Division of Mitigation Services, a 2 1 mitigation ratio is proposed for the permanent stream and wetland impacts Unnamed tributaries to West Fork Deep River in the Cape Fear River basin flow through the site The U.S Fish and Wildlife Service recently listed the Northern long -eared bat (Myotis septentrionahs) as threatened under the Endangered Species Act The Northern long -eared bat maybe present within or in the vicinity of the project site Therefore, the project may impact this species and consultation with the U S Fish and Wildlife Service may be required For more information, please see httr)-Hwww.fws aov /midwest /endangered/ mammals /nleb /Interim4dRu]eKevNLEB html or contact the U S Fish and Wildlife Service at (919) 856 -4520 to ensure that any issues related to this species are addressed We hesitate to concur with the piping of stream channels due to the potential for long -term and cumulative impacts Stream piping and placing fill in aquatic resources can alter hydrology, result in significant negative impacts to downstream areas, and eliminate aquatic and terrestrial wildlife habitat Stream piping reduces the infiltration of stormwater and associated pollutants, as well as the dissipation of stream energy In addition, we hesitate to concur with the filling of wetlands due to their wildlife habitat value and the well -known beneficial functions they provide for flood control and water quality protection Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries o 1721 Mail Service Center e Raleigh, NC 27699 -1721 Telephone: (919) 707 -0220 ^ Fax: (919) 707 -0028 Page 2 31 August 2015 Triad Business Park — Phase II Corps Action ID No SAW- 2013 -00556 Although the proposed project is for a road crossing, the lots within Phase II of the TBP will be developed in the future Changes in land use and increases in impervious surfaces may exacerbate channel degradation and sediment impacts to stream ecosystems due to increased stormwater runoff and elevated flooding Pollutants (e g , sediment, heavy metals, pesticides, and fertilizers) washed from roads and developed landscapes can adversely affect and extirpate species downstream Should the permit be issued, we offer the following recommendations to minimize impacts to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife resources. 1. Maintain a minimum 100 -foot undisturbed, native, forested buffer along perennial streams, and a minimum 50 -foot buffer along intermittent streams and wetlands Maintaining undisturbed, forested buffers along these areas will minimize impacts to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife resources, water quality, and aquatic habitat both within and downstream of the project area Also, wide riparian buffers are helpful in maintaining stability of stream banks, for treatment of pollutants associated with urban stormwater, and provide a travel corridor for wildlife species 2 Avoid development and fill in the 100 -year floodplain Development and fill in the floodplain increases the potential for flooding and interferes with the natural hydrologic process of the waterways It also disrupts the continuity of migration corridors for wildlife 3. Limit impervious surface to less than 10% or use stormwater control measures to mimic the hydrograph consistent with an impervious coverage of less than 10% 4 Sewer lines, water lines, and other utility infrastructure should be kept out of riparian buffer areas The directional bore (installation of utilities beneath the riverbed, avoiding impacts to the stream and buffer) stream crossing method should be used for utility crossings wherever practicable. The open cut stream crossing method should be used only when water level is low and stream flow is minimal Maintain a minimum 100 -foot setback on perennial streams and a 50 -foot setback on intermittent streams Pesticides should not be used for maintenance of rights -of -way within 100 feet of perennial streains and 50 feet of intermittent streams, or within floodplains and wetlands associated with these streams 5 Use landscaping that consists of non - invasive native species and Low Impact Development (LID) technology Using native species instead of ornamentals should provide benefits by reducing the need for water, fertilizers, and pesticides Using LID technology in landscaping will not only help maintain the predevelopment hydrologic regime, but also enhance the aesthetic and habitat value of the site. 6 Sediment and erosion control measures should be installed prior to any land clearing or construction The use of biodegradable and wildlife - friendly sediment and erosion control devices is strongly recoinmended Silt fencing, fiber rolls and/or other products should have loose -weave netting that is made of natural fiber materials with movable joints between the vertical and horizontal twines Silt fencing that has been reinforced with plastic or metal mesh should be avoided as it impedes the movement of terrestrial wildlife species These measures should be routinely inspected and properly maintained Excessive silt and sediment loads can have numerous detrimental effects on aquatic resources including destruction of spawning habitat, suffocation of eggs, and clogging of gills of aquatic species. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this project. If we can provide further assistance, please contact our office at (336) 449 -7625 or shari brvant amewildlife ora ec Sue Homewood, NCDWR (DWR ID. 20150740)