20070174 Ver 2_Staff Comments_20071016

Re: FW: Un-Buffered Streams- impacts (DWQ # 07-0174 v.2 -Corp...
Subject: Re: FW: Un-Buffered Streams- impacts (DWQ # 07-0174 v.2 -Corporate Center)
From: Ian McMillan <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 13:57:01 -0400
To: "Yates, Kevin" <[e-mail]>
CC: Lauren Cobb <[e-mail]>
Kevin, you are correct since the stream is "un-buffered". -Ian
Yates, Kevin wrote:
Ian / Laura,
- The attached request for fee letter, is associated with a project that
only requires "Riparian Buffer Authorization" all impacts are
non-reporting, the proposed stream impact is a non-buffered stream
channel. I corresponded with Cyndi (below) to confirm. The full PCN
submittal was sent as a requirement for the use of NWP 18, and is a
courtesy copy, that does not require a fee, as required in WQ # 3631.
Therefore a review should not be required. I have revised the LOT,
(last page of attachment) to provide better clarity.
- The stormwater wetlands are provided in lieu of traditional
level-spreaders due to the steep slopes at this site.
Please let me know if this is not the correct interpretation.
Thanks,
Kevin
-----Original Message-----
From: Cyndi Karoly <cyndi.karoly~ncmail.net>
To: Yates, Kevin
Sent: Fri Aug 10 16:57:18 2007
Subject: Re: Un-Buffered Streams- impacts
Since it's not mapped, it's exempt, so it's below the notification
threshold - assuming that it's under all the other caveats in the GC
you're using. If it were actually on the map, you would have to apply,
since at > 25 feet it's "allowable" not "exempt". we already have about
50 people on the waiting list - sorry, we'll see you at the first one
you get onto.
Yates, Kevin wrote:
Cyndi,
It is field verified, it is not mapped on USGS or Soils map, not
buffered. They need about 30 ft of stream impact to get across, would
this fall under the current 1501f no notification? I have hear this
scenario go both ways, in a buffered basin. BTW, please call my cell
624-6901 if you have any no shows next week and I will drop what I am
doing and get over there, to fill slot if available.
1 of 3 11/14/2007 3:57 PM

Re: FW: Un-Buffered Streams- impacts (DWQ # 07-0174 v.2 -Corp...
Thanks,
Kevin
-----Original Message----- -
From: Cyndi Karoly <[e-mail]>
To: Yates, Kevin
Sent: Fri Aug 10 16:26:40 2007
Subject: Re: Un-Buffered Streams- impacts
Does unbuffered mean unmapped or lacking vegetation? The buffer
exemption is 25 feet, not 40 feet, see the table of uses. I'll talk
next
week on the GC's - we're going back to 150 feet based on comments from
the public notice.
Yates, Kevin wrote:
Cyndi,
I know you are busy gearing up for next week. We have an un-buffered
intermittent stream channel in the Neuse Basin, in which we need to
cross to access a land locked parcel. If impacts to the un-buffered
intermittent stream stay less than 40 linear feet will we have a
notification "Exemption" per the upcoming GC's?
Thanks,
Kevin
*Kevin Yates*
*Sr. Environmental/Wetlands Scientist*
*THE JOHN R. McADAMS COMPANY, INC.*
2905 Meridian Parkway
Durham, NC 27713
919-361-5000 RTP, NC Office
704-527-0800 Charlotte, NC Office
[e-mail] <mailto:yates@j ohnrmcadams.com> _//
The John R. McAdams Company, Inc. provides a unique collection of land
2 of3 11/14/2007 3:57 PM

Re: FW: Un-Buffered Streams- impacts (DWQ # 07-0174 v.2 -Corp...
development design services including land planning, zoning
administration and permitting, surveying, site engineering, contract
administration, landscape architecture, stormwater management, and
traffic engineering. McAdams has offices in Durham and Charlotte,
North Carolina. For more information, visit _www.johnrmcadams.com _
*McADAMS COMPANY: /Assisting our clients to have successful projects
for over 25 years./*
3 of 3 11/14/2007 3:57 PM