20240627 Ver 1_ePCN Application_20240425

DW R
DHlsloo of Water Resources
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
For Nationwide Permits and Regional General Permits
(along with corresponding Water Quality Certifications)
October 2, 2023 Ver 4.3
Initial Review
Has this project met the requirements for acceptance in to the review process?
Yes No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
Yes No
Change only If needed.
Does this project involve maintenance dredging funded by the Shallow Draft Navigation Channel Dredging and Aquatic Weed Fund or involve the distribution or transmission of energy or
fuel, including natural gas, diesel, petroleum, or electricity?
Yes No
BIMS # Assigned Version# *
20240627 1
Is a payment required for this project?*
No payment required
Fee received
Fee needed - send electronic notification
Reviewing Office*
Raleigh Regional Office - [phone]
Information for Initial Review
1a. Name of project:
Creekview Crossing
1a. Who is the Primary Contact?*
Sean Clark
1b. Primary Contact Email:*
[e-mail]
Date Submitted
4/25/2024
Nearest Body of Water
Mingo Creek
Basin
Neuse
Water Classification
C; NSW
Site Coordinates
Latitude:
35.7517
A. Processing Information
Is this project connected with ARPA funding?
Yes No
County (or Counties) where the project is located:
Wake
Is this a NCDMS Project
Yes No
Longitude:
-78.4348
What amount is owed?*
$240.00
$323.00
Select Project Reviewer*
Kristina Morales: Kristina.Morales
1c. Primary Contact Phone:*
[phone]
$570.00
$767.00
Is this project a public transportation project?*
Yes No

1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
Section 404 Permit (wetlands, streams and waters, Clean Water Act)
Section 10 Permit (navigable waters, tidal waters, Rivers and Harbors Act)
Has this PCN previously been submitted?*
Yes
No
1b. What type(s) of permit(s) do you wish to seek authorization?
Nationwide Permit (NWP)
Regional General Permit (RGP)
Standard (IP)
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
Yes No
Nationwide Permit (NWP) Number:
NWP Numbers (for multiple NWPS):
NWP 14
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:
401 Water Quality Certification - Regular
Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
Individual 401 Water Quality Certification
29 - Residential Developments
le. Is this notification solely for the record because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWR 401 Certification:
For the record only for Corps Permit:
1f. Is this an after -the -fact permit application? *
Yes No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
Yes No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
Yes No
1h. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties?
Yes No
1j. Is the project located in a designated trout watershed?
Yes No
B. Applicant Information
1d. Who is applying for the permit?
Owner Applicant (other than owner)
le. Is there an Agent/Consultant for this project?
Yes No
2. Owner Information
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
Teresa Ann Faison Hale, Debora Jane Keith, and Milton E. Tart, Jr.
2b. Deed book and page no.:
IDS 16323/PG 2009, DB 1009/PG 576
2c. Contact Person:
Jason Pfister
2d.Address
Street Address
305 Church at North Hill St., Ste 1110
Address Line 2
City
Raleigh
Postal / Zip Code
27609
401 Water Quality Certification - Express
Riparian Buffer Authorization
State / Province / Region
NC
Country
USA
Yes No
Yes No

2e. Telephone Number:
[phone]
2g. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
4. Agent/Consultant (if applicable)
4a. Name:
Nicole Duprey
4b. Business Name:
Sage Ecological Services, Inc.
4c.Address
Street Address
3707 Swift Drive
Address Line 2
City
Raleigh
Postal / Zip Code
27606
4d. Telephone Number:
[phone]
4f. Email Address:
[e-mail]
C. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Project Information
1b. Subdivision name:
(if appropriate)
Creekview Crossing
1c. Nearest municipality / town:
Knightdale
2. Project Identification
2f. Fax Number:
State / Province / Region
NC
Country
USA
4e. Fax Number:
2a. Property Identification Number:
1744711175, 174811114, 1744910921,
2b. Property size:
1744619718,1744713798,1744920445
100.43
2c. Project Address
Street Address
Widewaters Parkway
Address Line 2
City
State / Province / Region
Knightdale
NC
Postal / Zip Code
Country
27545
USA
3. Surface Waters
3a. Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project:
Mingo Creek
3b. Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving water:
C; NSW
3c. What river basin(s) is your project located in?
Neuse
3d. Please provide the 12-digit HUC in which the project is located.
030202010705
4. Project Description and History
a

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:*
The Site is comprised of six adjacent parcels. The Site is bounded to the south by a railroad. The Mingo Creek Greenway, sanitary sewer line, and a 100-ft overhead transmission
easement runs east -west near the northern Site boundary. Mingo Creek and its floodplain are also located within the northern portion of the Site and mostly parallels the greenway. A large
pond is present in the southeastern corner of the Site. Historical aerials depict a large agricultural area in the southcentral portion of the Site west of the pond and another large agricultural
area northeast of the pond along the eastern boundary. Neither area is currently in agriculture, and both contain successional forests with dense stands of pine. Evidence of old roads
traverse the southern half of the Site. The remainder of the forested portions of the Site are hardwood dominated forests with interspersed pines. The topography of the Site ranges from a
high point of +/- 260 feet above mean sea level (msl) in the southeastern corner of the Site, to a low point of +/- 210 feet msl in the northwestern portion of the Site where Mingo Creek
(Stream SA) exists the Site (see attached Figure 3).
4b. Have Corps permits or DWR certifications been obtained for this project (including all prior phases) in the past? *
Yes No Unknown
4f. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
24.72
4g. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:
11,303
4h. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:*
The purpose of the Project is to construct a residential subdivision with associated attendant features (roads, utilities, SCMs and other infrastructure).
4i. Describe the overall project in detail, including indirect impacts and the type of equipment to be used: *
The proposed Project is a residential development with associated roads, utilities, and infrastructure. Impacts to jurisdictional streams will result from road crossing to access upland
portions of the Site for development. No impacts to jurisdictional features are proposed for lot fill. Access to the Site is provided by a road connection to existing Widewaters Parkway to the
north and Southampton Drive to the east. The Project proposes to tie into existing water and sewer adjacent to the Site.
Stormwater detention ponds are proposed to treat stormwater on the Site. These stormwater devices will not impact jurisdictional features, however, there will be some minor grading into
Zone 2 of the riparian area to accommodate SCM #3 slopes and the outlet pipes from SCM #5. Typical equipment used in residential construction and utility projects (i.e., backhoes,
excavators, dump trucks) will be utilized.
Impacts to jurisdictional Waters of the US will result from three proposed road crossings to reach upland portions of the Site for development and to make the necessary connections to
existing roadway infrastructure as required by the municipality. Additionally, a bridge crossing of Mingo Creek is proposed to connect to the existing Widewaters Parkway. Proposed
permanent stream impacts total 237 linear feet (0.0365 acre) for the road crossings (which includes 7 linear feet of bank stabilization necessary for one of the interior bridge bents), 46
linear feet (0.006 acre) of permanent -no permanent loss impacts associated with countersunk rip rap dissipater pads - the dissipater pads will be embedded so that the top of the riprap
pad will not exceed the preexisting streambed elevation and will match the preexisting contours of the stream channel, and 93 linear feet (0.0125 acre) of temporary stream impact
associated with the installation of the culverts. There are also 0.3357 acre of permanent wetland impacts proposed for the above -mentioned roadway and bridge crossings, as well as
0.2696 acre of proposed hand clearing in wetlands (no grubbing, no stumping) for the bridge construction over Mingo Creek. There are another 0.0390 acre of temporary wetland impacts
proposed with the construction of the internal roadways. The existing greenway will need to be adjusted at the proposed bridge location which results in an additional 0.0097 acre of
permanent wetland impact.
There is a single sewer line installation which will result in 30 linear feet (0.0143 acre) of temporary stream impact.
Permanent Neuse Riparian Buffer impacts total 16,615 square feet in Zone 1 and 19,311 square feet in Zone 2 (all falling within the "allowable with authorization" category per the Table of
Uses) and temporary buffer impacts totaling 5,762 square feet in Zone 1 and 2,254 square feet in Zone 2.
5. Jurisdictional Determinations
5a. Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the property or proposed impact areas? *
Yes
Comments:
No
5b. If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination, what type of determination was made? *
Preliminary Approved Not Verified Unknown N/A
Corps AID Number:
SAW-2022-00160
5c. If 5a is yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): David Gainey & Kim Hamlin, PWS
Agency/Consultant Company: Sage Ecological Services, Inc
Other:
G Unknown
5d. List the dates of the Corp jurisdiction determination or State determination if a determination was made by the Corps or DWR
USACE PJD issued 3/4/2022 (SAW-2022-00160)
DWR Buffer Determination 1/10/2022 (NBRRO #22-192)
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?*
Yes 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?
No
D. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary

la. Where are the impacts associated with your project? (check all that apply):
Wetlands Streams -tributaries p Buffers
Open Waters Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
2a1 Reason (?)
2b. Impact type * (?)
2c. Type of W.
2d. W. name
2e. Forested"
2f. Type of Jurisdicition"
?)
2g• Impact
area
Roadway Crossing
P
Ftt-mland Hardwood Forest
WB
Yes
Both
0.077
(acres)
A
Roadway Crossing -
P
Fttomland Hardwood Forest
WB
Yes
Both
0.001
Riprap dissipator pad
(acres)
Bypassor
T
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
WB
Yes
Both
0(0 f s)
culverinstal piing
Roadway Crossing
P
Fttomiand Hardwood Forest
WH-1
Yes
Both
0.209
(acres)
Roadway Crossing -
P
ffmiand Hardwood Forest
WH-1
Yes
Both
0(00 s)
Riprap d ssipator pad
Fypass,or
T
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
WH-1
Yes
Both
0(02 s)
nstal piing
Roadway Crossing
P
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
WG-1
Yes
Both
0.002
(acres)
Roadway Crossing -
P
Fmiand Hardwood Forest
WG-1
Yes
Both
0(OOeSJ
Riprap d ssipator pad
Fpa pumpingfor
T
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
WG-1
Yes
Bothnstallation
(acres)
RoadwayCrossing -
P
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
WA-3
Yes
Both
0(09e
proach slabs
)
Greenway 1p
�Fttomland
Hardwood Forest _]
WA-3
Yes
Both
0.010
(acres)
Bridge Bents 1p
ffrniand Hardwoodt::Iff:
Yes
Both
0.010
(acres)
2g. Total Temporary Wetland Impact
0.044
2g. Total Wetland Impact
0.390
2i. Comments:
2g. Total Permanent Wetland Impact
0.346
There are an additional 0.2896 acres of hand clearing in wetlands proposed for the bridge construction. Historically, hand clearing impacts are not
considered a permanent or a temporary impact as there is no stumping or grubbing of vegetation proposed and no soil inversion. Access for clearing
machinery will be provided using crane mats or some other similar type of weight dispersing method.
Please note, there is a small amount of fill necessary within the 100-year floodplain for the bridge approach slabs. Therefore, we are requesting the
bridge crossing be approved under a Nationwide Permit 14 (Linear Transportation Projects).
3. Stream Impacts
3a. Reason for impact (?)
3b.lmpact type"
3c. Type of impact"
3d. S. name"
3e. Stream Type'
3f. Type of
3g. S. width
3h. Impact
F
(?)
Jurisdiction*
liength*
$1
A
Permanent
Culvert
SB
Perennial
Both
gAverege
B(Olinear
(feet)
feet)
S2
A
Permanent
Rip Rap Fill
SB
Perennial
Both
9
10
Averege (feet)
(linear feet)
S3
A
Temporary
Dewatering
SB
Perennial A
Both
gAverege
3(linear
(feet)
feet)
S4
A
Temporary
Excavation
SB
Perennial
Both
gAverege
3(Oinear
(feet)
feet)
SS
B
Permanent
Culvert
SH
Perennial
Both
4
70
Average (feet)
(linear feet)
S6
B
Permanent
RipRap Fill
P
SH
Perennial
Both
4
12
Averege (feet)
(linear feet)

S7
B
Temporary
Dewatering
SH
Perennial
Both
4Averege
2Qinear
(feet)
feet)
Sg
E
Permanent
Culvert
SG
Perennial
Both
6Averege
6(Olinear
(feet)
feet)
S9
E
Permanent
RipRap Fill
P
SG
Perennial
Both
6
24
Averege (feet)
(linear feet)
S10
E
Temporary
Dewatering
SG
Perennial
Both
6
28
Average (feet)
(linear feet)
S11
G
Permanent
Bank Stabilization
SA
Perennial
Both
Averege (feet)
(linear feet)
31. Total jurisdictional ditch impact in square feet:
0
31. Total permanent stream impacts:
283
3i. Total stream and ditch impacts:
407
31. Total temporary stream impacts:
124
3j. Comments:
Of the proposed 283 linear feet of permanent stream impact, only 230 feet (0.0353 acre) are associated with permanent loss of function stream impact.
There is also 7 linear feet (0.0012 acre) of bank stabilization proposed under the bridge over Mingo Creek and 46 linear feet (0.006 acre) of permanent -
no loss stream impact associated with countersunk riprap dissipator pads at the culvert outlets. Mitigation will be provided for the 230 linear feet of
permanent loss of function stream impacts. See attached NCDMS Letter of Acceptance.
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWR)
6a. Project is in which protect basin(s)?
Check all that apply.
Neuse Tar -Pamlico
Catawba Randleman
Goose Creek Jordan Lake
Other
6b. Impact Type
6c. Per or Temp
6d. Stream name
6e. Buffer mitigation required?
6f. Zone 1 impact
6g. Zone 2 impact
Area A - Road Crossing
P
SB
No
5,592
4,818
Area A - Road Crossing (Bypass Pump)
T
SB
No
765
0
Area A - Utility (Sewer)
T
SB
No
3,395
2,254
Area A - SCM #5 outfall
P
SB
No
23
485
Area A - Countersunk riprap pad
P
SB
No
18
0
Area B - Road Crossing
P
SH
No
4,274
2,989
Area B - Countersunk riprap pad
P
SH
No
74
0
Area B - Road Crossing (Bypass Pump)
T
SH
No
944
0
Area C - SCM #3
P
Pond
No
0
4,234
Area D - Roadway
P
SH
No
0
861
Area E - Road Crossing
P
SG
No
4,858
3,042
Area E - Countersunk riprap pad
P
SG
No
117
0
Area E - Road Crossing (Bypass Pump)
T
SG
No
1,055
0
Area F - SCM #1
P
SG
No
0
288
Area G - Road Crossing
P
SA
No
177
1,682
Area G - Greenway
P
SA
No
1,048
788
Area G - Bridge
P
SA
No
399
124
Area G - Handclearing
T
SA
No
6,610
1,461
6h. Total buffer impacts:
Zone 1 Zone 2
Total Temporary impacts: 12,769.00 3,715.00

Zone 1 Zone 2
Total Permanent impacts: 16,580.00 19,311.00
Zone 1 Zone 2
Total combined buffer impacts: 29,349.00 23,026.00
61. Comments:
Per the Neuse River Buffer rules (15A NCAC 02B .0714) Table of Uses (11) (y)(ii) perpendicular road crossings which "impact greater than one -tenth of
an acre but equal to or less than one-third of an acre of riparian buffer' are "allowable upon authorization."
Greenways [(11)(j)(iii)] "when built upon area is added to the riparian buffer, equal to or less than 10 feet wide with two -foot -wide shoulders. Shall be
located outside Zone 1 unless there is no practical alternative" is "allowable upon authorization." It should also be noted there is an existing greenway at
this location, however, the addition of the bridge crossing over Mingo Creek requires the greenway adjustment within the buffer area.
Utility/Sewer lines (new line construction) [(11)(kk)(ii)] where the "construction corridor of less than or equal to 40 linear feet wide and a permanent
maintenance corridor that is equal to or less than 30 feet wide" are "deemed allowable" and [(II)(i) and (ii)] where "Zone 2 impacts" are "deemed
allowable" and "Zone 1 impacts to less than 2,500 square feet when impacts are solely the result of tying into an existing utility line and when grubbing
or grading within 10 feet immediately adjacent to the surface water is avoided" are "allowable upon authorization." Bridges [(11)(c)(ii)] where "impact(s)
greater than one -tenth of an acre of riparian buffer" are "allowable upon authorization"
New stormwater devices [(9)(a)(i)] which comply with a stormwater management plan are "deemed allowable."
E. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
la. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:
Fourteen jurisdictional streams, one jurisdictional pond, and eleven jurisdictional wetlands are located on the Site. Impacts to jurisdictional Waters of the
US will result from three proposed road crossings to reach upland portions of the Site for development and to make the necessary connections to
existing roadway infrastructure as required by the municipality. Additionally, a bridge crossing of Mingo Creek is proposed to connect to the existing
Widewaters Parkway. Streams are not crossed multiple times. Lots were positioned to avoid additional fill and/or impact to streams and wetlands.
Retaining walls are proposed to further minimize fill impacts associated with roadway infrastructure and lot grading. Stormwater devices were designed
to avoid impacts to jurisdictional areas. Of the 24.72 acres of wetland the Site, only 0.345 acres of permanent impact are proposed. There are 11,303
linear feet of stream on the Site, and only 230 linear feet of permanent -loss of function stream impacts are proposed. Construction fencing will be used
to define the construction corridor and prevent any accidental additional impacts. Silt fencing will be installed to provide additional protection from
stormwater runoff.
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques:
General techniques include the use of construction fencing to define the construction corridor and prevent any accidental additional impacts. Silt fencing
and sediment basins will also be used to prevent sediment runoff into stream and wetland areas.
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?
Yes No
2c. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
D W R Corps
2d. If yes, which mitigation option(s) will be used for this project?
Mitigation bank Payment to in -lieu fee program Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
EBX-Neuse I (Blackbird Site & Meadow Spring) - Wetland; NCDMS for streams
3b. Credits Purchased/Requested (attach receipt and letter)
Type:
Quantity:
Riparian wetland
0.52
Riparian wetland
0.17
Stream
230
3c. Comments
F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWR)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
a
la. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
Yes No

What type of SCM are you providing?
Level Spreader
Vegetated Conveyance (lower SHWT)
Wetland Swale (higher SHWT)
Other SCM that removes minimum 30 % nitrogen
Proposed project will not create concentrated stormwater flow through the buffer
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. Is this a NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's Individual NPDES permit NCS000250? *
Yes No
2b. Does this project meet the requirements for low density projects as defined in 15A NCAC 02H .1003(2)?
Yes No
2c. Does this project have a stormwater management plan (SMP) reviewed and approved under a state stormwater program or state -approved local government stormwater program?
Yes No
N/A - project disturbs < 1 acre
2d. Which of the following stormwater management program(s) apply:
Local Government State
Local Government Stormwater Programs
Phase II NSW USMP Water Supply
Please identify which local government stormwater program you are using.
Town of Knightdale
Comments:
The Stormwater Management Plan (SMP) will be reviewed and approved by the locally delegated authority. The applicant requests a conditional 401 Water Quality Certification until the
local stormwater review is completed and the SMP is approved.
G. Supplementary Information O
1. Environmental Documentation
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of public (federal/state) land?
Yes No
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)? *
Yes No
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWR Requirement)
3a. Will this project result in additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? *
Yes No
3b. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
Per the NC DWQ April 2004 Version 2.1 Cumulative Impacts policy, small scale residential development projects have a "low potential for cumulative
impact" since the project already in a developed landscape (i.e. existing residences and development in the vicinity) and the area already contains the
necessary infrastructure (i.e. sewer, water, electricity, etc.). The project drains to Mingo Creek, which is Class C; Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW), (i.e.
not HQW or ORW). We anticipate the NCDWR will advise us if a qualitative or quantitative analysis is needed.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)
4a. Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project?
Yes No N/A
4b. Describe, in detail, the treatment methods and dispositions (non -discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from the proposed project. If the wastewater will be treated at a
treatment plant, list the capacity available at that plant.
The subdivision will connect to existing sanitary sewer lines in the vicinity. Town of Knightdale will ensure the capacity of their facility is not exceeded.
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?*
Yes No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act impacts?
Yes No
5d. Is another Federal agency involved?*
Yes No O Unknown

5e. Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?
Yes No
5f. Will you cut any trees in order to conduct the work in waters of the U.S.?
Yes No
5g. Does this project involve bridge maintenance or removal?
Yes No
5h. Does this project involve the construction/installation of a wind turbine(s)?*
Yes No
5i. Does this project involve (1) blasting, and/or (2) other percussive activities that will be conducted by machines, such as jackhammers, mechanized pile drivers, etc.?
Yes No
5j. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat?
No federally threatened or endangered species are listed to occur on the Site according to the NC Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) Database, (see
attached report dated April 19, 2024); however, there is an element occurrence of Rhus michauxii (Michaux's Sumac) within one mile of the subject site
(the known reference population on Barwell Road).
NEUSE RIVER WATERDOG
USFWS Recommended Survey Window: November 15 — March 15
SPECIES AND HABITAT DESCRIPTION
The Neuse River waterdog is a permanently aquatic salamander. It can grow up to 11 inches long. It has a reddish -brown body with an irregular pattern
of large blue or black spots. The waterdog has a laterally compressed tail the same coloration as the body; however, the belly is typically a dull brown or
gray color with spots similar to those seen elsewhere on the body. Adult Neuse River Waterdogs have elongated heads with squared -off noses,
cylindrical trunks, and tails that are laterally compressed and ridged. Three dark -red, bushy gills project from either side of the head and a dark line runs
through the eye. The skin is smooth, slimy and a light rusty brown color, with the belly being a paler brown or grayish. There are dark brown or blackish
spots throughout the surface that are smaller on the underside. The limbs are rather small, and the front and hind feet have four toes each (unlike most
salamanders, which have five toes on each back foot). Its appearance is significantly different in earlier life stages, as hatchlings and larvae. Hatchlings
are light brown in color with dark lines from each nostril through the eye to the gills, with a white patch behind the eye and above the line. Their heads
are round when compared to the square, elongated heads of the adults. Hatchlings have spots with concentrations highest on the tail, making the tail
darker than the head and trunk. Their forelimbs have three complete toes, and a bud that will later develop into the inner fourth toe. The hindlimbs are
not yet developed.
The Neuse River waterdog specific habitat characteristics include low to moderate gradient streams and low current velocity. It is a fully aquatic
salamander, never leaving the water. It lacks lungs, getting oxygen from the water via external gills and needs clean, flowing water with high dissolved
oxygen concentrations. The species dwells in streams wider than 15 meters but has been found in smaller creeks.
CAROLINA MADTOM
USFWS Recommended Survey Window: Year-round; April — October (optimal)
SPECIES AND HABITAT DESCRIPTION
The Carolina madtom is a small catfish, reaching a maximum length of nearly five inches. When compared to other madtoms, the Carolina madtom has
a short, chunky body and a distinct color pattern. Three dark saddles along its back connect a wide, black stripe along its side extending from its snout to
the base of its tail. The adipose fin has a dark blotch that does not quite reach the fin's edge, giving the impression of a fourth saddle. Yellowish to tan
blotches space the saddles, while the rest of the fish is tan. The belly is un-speckled, and the tail has crescent -shaped brown bands near its edge and
center. Its pectoral spines have well-defined serrated (saw -like) projections along both margins. Stinging spines in its pectoral fins, earn this fish the
"furiosus" title that is part of its scientific name.
The species occurs in riffles, runs, and pools in medium to large streams and rivers. Ideally, it inhabits fresh waters with continuous, year-round flow and
moderate gradient in both the Piedmont and Coastal Plain physiographic regions. Optimal substrate for the Carolina madtom is predominantly silt -free,
stable, gravel and cobble bottom habitat, and it must have cover for nest sites, including under rocks, bark, relic mussel shells, and even cans and
bottles.
ATLANTIC PIGTOE
USFWS Recommended Survey Window: March 1 — November 1
SPECIES AND HABITAT DESCRIPTION
The Atlantic pigtoe is a small freshwater mussel with a sub -rhomboidal shaped shell up to two inches long. Individuals in headwater streams may be
more elongated in shape. The posterior ridge is angular and very distinct. The periostracum is yellow to dark brown and has been described as cloth -like
or parchment -like.
The species is dependent on clean, moderate flowing water with high dissolved oxygen content in creeks and rivers. The species is typically found in
headwaters and rural watersheds and is associated with gravel and coarse sand substrates at the downstream edge of riffles, and less commonly
occurs in cobble, silt, or sand detritus mixtures.
USFWS Recommended Survey Window: March 1 - November 1 (optimal)
SPECIES AND HABITAT DESCRIPTION
The dwarf wedgemussel is a small bivalve, rarely exceeding 45 mm in length. Clean young shells are usually greenish brown with green rays. As the
animal ages, the shell color becomes obscured by diatoms or mineral deposits and appears black or brown. The shell is thin but does thicken somewhat
with age, especially toward the anterior end. The anterior end is rounded while the posterior end is angular forming a point near the posterior -ventral
margin. The ventral margin is only slightly curved. The nacre is bluish white, appearing whiter in the thicker anterior end. The most distinctive shell
character of the dwarfwedgemussel is the arrangement of the lateral teeth. There are two lateral teeth in the right valve and one in the left valve. The
typical arrangement for most freshwater mussel species consists of two lateral teeth in the left valve and one in the right valve. The incurrent and
excurrent apertures and their associated papillae are usually white. The foot and other organs are also white. Maximum age for the dwarf wedgemussel
is around twelve years. The species is a bradytictic breeder, meaning that females become gravid in the early fall and glochidia are released by mid -
spring.
The dwarf wedgemussel appears to be a generalist in terms of its preference for stream size, substrate and flow conditions — it inhabits small streams
less than five meters wide to large rivers more than 100 meters wide; it is found in a variety of substrate types including clay, sand, gravel and pebble,
and sometimes in silt depositional areas near banks; and it usually inhabits hydrologically stable areas, including very shallow water along streambanks
and under root mats, but it has also been found at depths of 25 feet in the Connecticut River. Dwarf wedgemussels are often patchily distributed in
rivers.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as an Essential Fish Habitat?*
Yes No

6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact an Essential Fish Habitat? *
The proposed project is in Wake County which is not near any coastal or tidal habitat which would support EFH (i.e., salt marshes, oyster reefs, etc.).
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?
Yes No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
A review of the NC State Historic Preservation Office (NCSHPO) database show the Site is not listed as a historic property or within a historic district. No
historic structures were found on the Site. There are two historic districts and two national register listings (one is gone) within a mile of the Site. Multiple
surveyed properties are also within a mile of the Site.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain? *
Yes No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
There are no permanent fills for the development proposed within the designated 100-year floodplain, with the exception of the bridge crossing over
Mingo Creek. The bridge requires permanent piers for construction which will be within the floodplain, however, a "no rise" was completed for the bridge
structure, completed by Alpha and Omega Group, and reviewed by Kevin Lewis (Knightdale).
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?*
Design firm provided information and designation on the proposed Site plan.
Miscellaneous
Please use the space below to attach all required documentation or any additional information you feel is helpful for application review. Documents should be combined into one file when
possible, with a Cover Letter, Table of Contents, and a Cover Sheet for each Section preferred.
Click the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach document
Supplemental Info for Creekview PCN.pdf
File must be PDF or KMZ
Comments
Pre -construction Notification (PCN) Application Form
Agent Authorization Forms
Figure 1-USGS Site Vicinity Map
Figure 2-Soil Survey Site Vicinity Map
Figure 3 - Wetland Sketch Map
Figure 4 — NCSHPO Map
NCNHP Database Report
USFWS IPaC Report
USACE SAW-2022-00160 PJD concurrence email
DWR Buffer Determination Letter, NBRRO #21-192 (dated 01/10/2022)
Impact Maps
EBX-Neuse I, LLC SOA Letter
NCDMS Letter of Acceptance
Signature
By checking the box and signing below, I certify that:
35.3MB
• 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:
Nicole J Duprey
Signature
Akevle J bitweX
Date
4/25/2024
Q