20150852 Ver 2_401 Application_20160216

Water 2esriurccs
LNVIRONI'L-Nt..L CUAL17 e
February 4, 2016
WK Dickson & Co., Inc
Attn: Marc Horstman
720 Corporate Center Dr
Raleigh, NC 27607
Subject: REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Town Creek
Dear Mr. Horstman:
PAT MCCRORY
cove,nni
DONALD R. VAN DER VAART
Secretary
S. JAY ZIMMERMAN
Direclor
DWR # 15-0852V2
Pitt County
On February 2, 2016, the Division of Water Resources (Division) received your application
requesting a 401 Water Quality Certification / Buffer Authorization from the Division for the
subject project. The Division has determined that your application is incomplete and cannot be
processed. The application is on -hold until all of the following information is received:
Need More Fee
A review of the Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form indicates this application is for
_195_ linear feet of stream impacts. Pursuant to 143-215.31) (e), a $570 permitting fee is
required to process this application. Check # 71504 was applied; however, the remaining
balance to remit is $330. Please remit a check to DENR-DWR, 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit,
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617.
Pursuant to Title 15A NCAC 02H .0502(e) / [Tar -Pam] .0259 the applicant shall furnish all of the
above requested information for the proper consideration of the application. If all of the
requested information is not received in writing at the address below within 30 calendar days of
receipt of this letter, the Division will be unable to process the application and it will be returned.
The return of this project will necessitate reapplication to the Division for approval, including a
complete application package and the appropriate fee.
Please be aware that you have no authorization under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act/ the
Buffer Rules for this activity and any work done within waters of the state may be a violation of
North Carolina General Statutes and Administrative Code.
State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality I Water Resources 1 401 & Buffer Permitting
1617 Mad service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
919 707 6300

DWR # 15-0852V2
Request for Additional Info
Page 2 of 2
Please contact Sheri Montalvo at 919-807-6303 or [e-mail] if you have any
questions or concerns.
cc: USACE Washington Regulatory Field Office
DWR WARO 401 file
DWR 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit file
Sincerely,
1
Karen Higgins, Super i r
401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
Filename: 150852v2TownCreek(Pitt)_HOLD

Montalvo, Sheri A
From: Scarbraugh, Anthony
Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2016 9:15 AM
To: Montalvo, Sheri A
Subject: RE: Town Creek Culvert Storm Drain Improvements
Yes. Thanks!
Anthony Scarbraugh
Environmental Senior Specialist
Division of Water Resources — Water Quality Regional Operations
Department of Environmental Quality
252 948 3924 office
anthony [e-mail]
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington, NC 27889
A0. - "Nothing Compares -.,
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties
From: Montalvo, Sheri A
Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2016 1:55 PM
To: Scarbraugh, Anthony <[e-mail]>
Subject: Town Creek Culvert Storm Drain Improvements
Anthony,
I just got in a PCN for the above project. Should I version this to 20150852?
Thanks
sher� MovLtalvo
401 & Buffer Permitting Unit - Administrative Assistant
Department of Water Resources
Division of Environmental Quality
919-807-6303 (office)
[e-mail]
1

�WK
�DICKSON
community infrastructure consultants
February 2, 2016
Karen Higgins
NC Division of Water Resources
Archdale Building — 90' Floor
512 N. Salisbury St.
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Dear Ms. Higgins,
a0 lsa9se)-,
Y'6--
WK
Dickson is pleased to submit a Nationwide Permit 3 Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) for the Town
Creek Culvert Storm Drain Improvements Project. The PCN is being submitted as a notification on behalf of
the City of Greenville.
The Town Creek Culvert Project will address a variety of water quantity and quality issues associated with a
failing stormwater conveyance system draining 308.6 acres of highly urbanized landscape. This conveyance
system, currently composed of brick and unreinforced concrete installed in or prior to the 1930s, can only
successfully pass the 2 -year storm event without flooding significant business areas and roadways within
Uptown Greenville. The Town Creek Culvert system outlets into the Tar River, which is currently listed as a
nutrient -sensitive waterway; mainly excessive nitrogen and phosphorus have contributed to the excessive
nutrient loading. The BMPs proposed will remove a substantial amount of nutrients from the watershed
prior to flowing into the Tar River.
The attached PCN package includes PCN Form, supporting figures, stream data forms, and design plans.
Total impacts resulting from the proposed project are 195 LF of stream impact (145 LF of permanent impacts)
and 2,422 sq. ft of buffer impact (913 sq ft of zone 1 impact which require mitigation). The project meets all
conditions of the NWP 3 and GC 3883.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this important project and please let me know if you have any
questions or require any additional information.
Sincerely,
W.K. Dickson & Co., Inc.
Marc Horstman, PE, CFM
Project Engineer
cc: Lisa Kirby, Project Manager, City of Greenville
Kyle Barnes, United State Army Corps of Engineers
720 Corporate Center Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
Tel [phone]
Fax [phone]
www wkdickson com Transportation • Nater Resources • Urban Development • Geomahcs

I,—
\ -ot WA rF9OG
O Y
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no
DWQ project no
Form Version 14 January 2009
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1 4 January 2009
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A.
Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1a
Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps-
❑X Section 404 Permit ❑ Section 10 Permit
1 b Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number 3 or General Permit (GP) number.
1c
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes Q No
1d
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply)
Q 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
le
Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ
401 Certification
❑X Yes ❑ No
For the record only for Corps Permit.
Q Yes ❑ No
1f
Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for
mitigation of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank
or in -lieu fee program
❑x Yes ❑ No
1g
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties If yes, answer 1h
below
Yes Q No
1h
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes Q No
2.
Project Information
2a.
Name of project.
Town Creek Culvert Storm Drain Improvements
2b
County
Pitt County
2c.
Nearest municipality / town-
Greenville
2d. Subdivision name
NA
2e.
3.
NCDOT only, T I P or state project no
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed.
See Attached PCN Narrative
3b
Deed Book and Page No
p
3c
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable).
3d
Street address
3e
City, state, zip
3f
Telephone no
3g
Fax no
3h
Email address
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1 4 January 2009

4.
Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a
Applicant is:
❑X Agent ❑ Other, specify
4b
Name
Lisa Kirby
4c
Business name
(if applicable)
City of Greenville - Public Works Department
4d
Street address.
1500 Beatty Street
4e.
City, state, zip
Greenville, NC 27834
4f
Telephone no:
252-329-4683
4g.
Fax no.
252-329-4535
4h
Email address.
[e-mail]
5.
Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a
Name.
Marc Horstman
5b
Business name
(if applicable).
WK Dickson & Co, Inc.
5c
Street address.
720 Corporate Center Drive
5d
City, state, zip
Raleigh, NC 27607
5e
Telephone no
919-782-0495
5f
Fax no
919-782-9672
5g.
Email address
[e-mail]
Page 2 of 10

B.
Project Information and Prior Project History
1.
Property Identification
1a.
Property identification no (tax PIN or parcel ID):
See attached PCN Narrative
1b.
Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude 35 610546 Longitude -77.370411
1c.
Property size
acres
2.
Surface Waters
2a.
Name of nearest body of water to proposed project
Town Creek/Tar River
2b
Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
C, NSW
2c.
River basin:
Tar -Pamlico Basin, USGS Cataloging Unit 03020103
3.
Project Description
3a Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application
See attached PCN Narrative Information
3b
List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 0 1
3c.
List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 922
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
See attached PCN Narrative Information
3e
Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
4.
Jurisdictional Determinations
4a.
Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project(including all priorphases) in thepast?
❑X Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
Comments' Final Determination was not made during the Field Visit
4b
If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
❑ Preliminary ❑ Final
4c.
If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known):
Agency/Consultant Company WK Dickson
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation
On 2/10/2015, Kyle Barnes met with WK Dickson to review their Stream Determination Form and 60% Project Plans Meeting Minutes and Stream
Determination Forms are attached for reference During this meeting, Kyle agreed to the determination, however no official documentation was provided
5.
Project History
5a
Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
El Yes ❑X No ❑ Unknown
5b
If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6.
Future Project Plans
6a
Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes ❑X No
6b
If yes, explain
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
la Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑ Wetlands Q Streams — tributaries ❑X Buffers ❑ Open Waters Q Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted
2a.
2b
2c
2d.
2e
2f.
Wetland impact
Type of impact
Type of wetland
Forested
Type of jurisdiction
Area of
number
Corps (404,10) or
impact
Permanent (P) or
DWQ (401, other)
(acres)
Temporary T
W1
Choose one
Choose one
YestNo
W2
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W3
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W4
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W5 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W6
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
2g Total Wetland Impacts:
2h Comments
No wetland impacts
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted
3a
3b
3c
3d
3e.
3f
3g.
Stream impact
Type of impact
Stream name
Perennial (PER) or
Type of
Average
Impact
number
intermittent (INT)?
jurisdiction
stream
length
Permanent (P) or
width
(linear
Temporary (T)
(feet)
feet)
S1 P
Culvert
Town Creek
PER
Corps
25
16
S2 P
Culvert
Town Creek
PER
Corps
20
55
S3 P
Culvert
Town Creek
PER
Corps
20
74
S4 T
Plunge pool
Town Creek
PER
Corps
20
50
S5 -
Choose one
S6 -
Choose one
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
195
31 Comments
Permanent stream impacts include 145 linear feet of culvert extension and headwall replacement Temporary stream impacts include 40 linear feet
resulting from a plunge pool downstream of the culvert replacement at 3rd street Short term impacts during construction may increase sediment from
runoff, however, erosion control measures will be installed as appropriate See narrative for detailed explanation of impacts
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed Impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U S then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
Open water
Impact number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable)
4c
Type of Impact
4d.
Waterbody
type _
4e
Area of Impact (acres)
01
Choose one
Choose
02 -
Choose one
Choose
03 -
Choose one
Choose
04 -
Choose one
Choose
4f Total open water impacts
4g. Comments NO open water impacts
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, the complete the chart below.
5a
Pond ID number
5b
Proposed use or
purpose of pond
5c
Wetland Impacts (acres)
5d
Stream Impacts (feet)
5e
Upland
(acres)
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
P1
Stormwater
013
P2
Choose one
5f Tota 1:
5g. Comments There will be no impacts to jurisdictional waters from the construction of the stormwater wetland
5h Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes Q No If yes, permit ID no.
51 Expected pond surface area (acres)
008
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres)
1.33
5k Method of construction
Excavation
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below If yes, then Individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then vou MUST fill out Section D of this form
6a. Project Is in which protected basin?
❑ Neuse X❑ Tar -Pamlico ❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman ❑ Other
6b
Buffer Impact
number —
Permanent (P) or
Temporary
6c.
Reason for Impact
6d
Stream name
6e
Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f
Zone 1
impact
(square
feet)
6g
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet
131 P
Stormwater Wetland
Town Creek
Yes
0
913
B2 P
Outfall Replacement
Town Creek
No
407
293
133 P
Stabilization
Town Creek
No
802
64 -
Yes/No
B5 -
Yes/No
136 -
Yes/No
6h Total Buffer Impacts:
1,215
1,207
61 Comments
Page 5 of 10

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
See Attached PCN Narrative
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques
See Attached PCN Narrative
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 Q No
2b If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ ❑ Corps
2c. If yes, ? hich mitigation option will be used for this
project
❑ Mitigation bank
El Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Type Choose one
Quantity.
Quantity,
Quantity.
3c Comments
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached
❑ Yes
4b Stream mitigation requested
linear feet
4c If using stream mitigation, stream temperature,
Choose one
4d Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only).
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested.
acres
4f Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested-
acres
4g Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h. Comments.
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
9Yes ❑ No
buffer mitigation?
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of Impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation Calculate the
amount of mitigation required
6c
6d
6e.
Zone
Reason for impact
Total impact
Multiplier
Required mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
Stormwater Wetland
913
1 5
1,3695
6f Total buffer mitigation required:
1,3695
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation Is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund).
Payment to private mitigation bank- Greene Environmental Services, However a variance will be requested before the EMC board
Buffer Impact 131 includes the construction of a stormwater wetland designed to treat runoff from the Town Common parking lot near
6h Comments the 1st Street crossing This Zone 2
impact is allowable with mitigation Buffer impact B2 is exempt from mitigation(Existing
stormwater outfall) Buffer Impact B3 is exempt from mitigation (Bank stabilization)
Page 7 of 10

E.
Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1.
Diffuse Flow Plan
1a
Does the project Include or Is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers Identified
❑X Yes ❑ No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1b.
If yes, then Is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why
Mitigating for impacts in buffer
❑ Yes Q No
2.
Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What Is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
2b
Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ Yes ❑X No
2c.
If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why -
This is an infrastructure rehabilitation project
2d
If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan -
2e
Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
3.
Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a
In which localgovernment's jurisdiction is this project?
City of Greenville
❑x Phase II
3b.
Which of the following locally -Implemented stormwater management programs
NSW
apply (check all that apply)*
❑ USMP
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other
3c
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
El Yes ❑X No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑Coastal counties
❑HQW❑ORW
4a
Which of the following state -implemented stormwater management programs apply
(check all that apply)
❑Session Law 2006-246
❑ Other
4b
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑X No
attached?
S. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a
Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5b.
Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑X Yes ❑ No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

F.
Supplementary Information
1.
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1a
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
9 Yes ❑ No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b.
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
El Yes Q No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1c
If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter)
❑ Yes ❑ No
Comments
2.
Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a
Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H 1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑Yes ❑X No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B 0200)?
2b.
Is this an after -the -fact permit application?
❑Yes Q No
2c
If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s)-
3.
Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a.
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
El Yes Q No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b
If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description
4.
Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non -discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility
This
project will not generate or ultimately treat wastewater This project details stormwater structures being designed and constructed to convey
stormwater runoff Portions of Town Creek will be removed from culverts "Daylighted" and stormwater wetlands will be constructed to retain and treat
stormwater
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1 4 January 2009

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
0 Yes ❑ No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
❑ Yes © No
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Raleigh
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
Natural Heritage Program Database website and GIS Dataset (www.ncnhp.org); USFWS Ecological Services - Pitt County No impacts to
endangered species or designated critical habitat are anticipated from this project.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes © No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
National Oceanic aand Atmospheric Administration (NOAA website www.noaa.gov) and NOAA GIS Dataset
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
© Yes ❑ No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)
7b What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office Database. There are historic districts and buildings with the project vicinity, but the proposed project
will not have any adverse effects to structures or viewsheds.
B. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA -designated 100 -year Floodplain?
Q Yes ❑ No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
See attached PCN Narrative.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination
NC Floodplain Mapping Program, Pitt County GIS Data
Lisa Kirby
A4 it k�&
ApplicanUAgent's Printed Name
V Applicant/Agent's Si nature
Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant isprovided.)
Page 10 of 10

Supplemental Information for Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
Town Creek Culvert Storm Drain Improvements
PCN Narrative
Town Creek Culvert Storm Drain Improvements
For City of Greenville Public Works Department
Nationwide Permit 12
Pre -Construction Notification
Name and Address of the Applicant:
City of Greenville Public Works Department
c/o Lisa Kirby
1500 Beatty Street
Greenville, NC 27834
Page 1 of 6

Supplemental Information for Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
Town Creek Culvert Storm Drain Improvements
A. Applicant Information
3a. Names on Recorded Deed:
Page 2 of 6
Parcel
Name(s) on Recorded Deed
Number
Deed Book and Page No.
Address
PO BOX 7207
GREENVILLE CITY OF
27654
L42@19
GREENVILLE, NC 27835
GO NC DEPT OF ADM NSTRATION
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
29282
A40@186
RALEIGH, NC 27611
411 E 4TH ST
SAINT PAUL'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH
26996
NA
GREENVILLE, NC 27858
C/O NC DEPT OF ADMINSTRATION
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
29290
K38@712
RALEIGH, NC 27611
C/O NC DEPT OF ADMINSTRATION
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
29291
U47@511
RALEIGH, NC 27611
901 E FIFTH ST
EAST CAROLINA UNIV ERSITY
37964
N40@403
GREENViLLE, NC 27834
PO BOX 629
NORTH CAROLINA STATE OF
28978
217@188
RALEIGH, NC 27602
RAWL GEORGEr'OWN SHOPS
RAWL JULIAN W
18721
439@583
GREENVILLE, NC 27835
PO BOX 7207
GREENVII.LE CITY OF
28634
NA
GREENVILLE, NC 27835
C/O BB&T
UNITED CAROLINA BANK
11236
479@95
WINSTON-SALEM, NC 27102
1205 DREXEL LANE
MAY LOUIS GARRIS
28624
99E@353
GREENVILLE NC 27858
106 LAKEVIEW DRIVE
PANT IDIS NICOLAOS
16467
110@784
GREENVILLE, NC 27858
1105A CORPORATE DR
READE VENTURES LLC
34637
2303@88
GREENVILLE, NC 27858
P O. BOX 7206
UNX CHEMICAL INC
21572
NA
GREENVILLE, NC 27835
100 HICKORY ST. D-107
DAVENPORT DORIS N
05612
G54@701
GREENVILLE, NC 27858
106 LAKEVIEW DRIVE
PANTELEDIS NICK P
34659
210@14
GREENVILLE, NC 27858
516 COTANCHIE ST
EDWARDS ISAAC JACKSON JR
22624
217@173
GREENVILLE, NC 27858
208 WINDSOR RD
EDWARDS I JACKSON JR
04592
217@173
GREENVILLE, NC 27858
208 WINDSOR RD
EDWARDS IJACKSON JR
04591
217@173
GREENVII.LENC27858
P. O. BOX 7206
UNX CHEMICAL INC
03613
153@109
GREENVILLE, NC 27835
P. O. BOX 0000
MAYOR OF CITY OF G'VILLETTEE
28647
284@545
GREENVILLE, NC 27834
Page 2 of 6

Supplemental Information for Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
Town Creek Culvert Storm Drain Improvements
B. Project Information and Prior Project HistM
1a. Prope , identification no. (tax PIN or parcel IM See table above -Owner Information
3a. 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 Town Creek Culvert Project will treat stormwater from an existing 308.6 acre highly urbanized
drainage area, with an additional 45.6 acres included with a future NCDOT project, for total suspended
solids, nitrogen, and phosphorus removal by using a variety of Best Management Practices (BMPs) and
will also redirect and convey drainage to relieve flooding at several locations in Uptown Greenville. The
project is located in Uptown Greenville between 10th and 1st Streets, adjacent to East Carolina University.
The existing drainage infrastructure begins near the intersection of West 9th Street and Ficklen Street and
continues for approximately 4,200 linear feet to its outlet downstream of East 3rd Street. An open channel
section runs for approximately 1,500 linear feet downstream of East 3rd Street before reaching its
confluence with the Tar River. The project area is located in an older section of Uptown Greenville with
segments of the drainage tunnel being constructed in or prior to the 1930s. The culvert system is
structurally in poor to fair condition with multiple utility conflicts throughout the project corridor.
Additionally, there is a history of flooding at several locations in the project area, including the Reade
Circle - Cotanche Street area (referred to as the Reade - Cotanche bowl) and West 8th Street - Washington
Street area near the UNX Chemical Building.
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The Town Creek Culvert Project will address a variety of water quantity and quality issues associated
with a failing stormwater conveyance system draining 308.6 acres of highly urbanized landscape. This
conveyance system, currently composed of brick and unreinforced concrete installed in or prior to the
1930s, can only successfully pass the 2 -year storm event without flooding significant business areas and
roadways within Uptown Greenville. The flooding conditions results in a public safety hazard along
Reade Circle, a major downtown thoroughfare, and an adjacent East Carolina University (ECU)
dormitory. On multiple occasions, flood depths prevent vehicular passage through the Reade-Cotanche
Bowl area. Additionally, flooding has significant impacts to numerous Uptown restaurants and
businesses, many of which have experienced first floor flooding on multiple occasions. Several
businesses have used sandbags to mitigate damage from flooding. An adjacent NCDOT project, the 10th
Street Connector (U-3315), is anticipated to add 45.6 acres, or --130 cfs for the 25 -year event, to the
upstream portion of Town Creek Culvert. This addition is expected to increase the flooding issues
experienced within Uptown Greenville. This additional watershed is expected to add to the excessive
nutrient loading already occurring due to a lack of water quality treatment within the project area. The
Town Creek Culvert system outlets into the Tar River, which is currently listed as a nutrient -sensitive
waterway; mainly excessive nitrogen and phosphorus have contributed to the excessive nutrient loading.
The BMPs proposed will remove a substantial amount of nutrients from the watershed prior to flowing
into the Tar River. The 10th Street Connector Project, the poor to fair condition of the existing tunnel,
untreated runoff coming from a highly urbanized watershed and constant flooding experienced
throughout the project corridor are the main components driving this project. To address the above
stated issues and reach the City's Stormwater objectives, this project's goals include the following:
• Reduce flooding along the project corridor, especially around the highly trafficked Reade-
Contache intersection.
• Bring the storm drainage system up to a 25 -yr Level of Service with the NCDOT 10th Street
Project online.
Page 3 of 6

Supplemental Information for Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
Town Creek Culvert Storm Drain Improvements
• Install BMPs throughout the watershed to reduce nutrient loading into a nitrogen and
phosphorus -sensitive Tar River.
• Decrease sediment pollutant loading through volume controlled infiltration -based BMPs.
• Educate public on stormwater runoff including pollutant sources and treatment options.
Additionally, this project meets requirements of the City's Stormwater Management Program, NPDES
Phase II Permit, and the Tar -Pamlico NSW Stormwater Ordinance by removing illicit connections,
supplying post -construction treatment and providing an opportunity for public education related to
stormwater treatment.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) recently awarded the City a no -interest loan to design
and construct a series of practices to improve water quality of runoff discharging to the Tar
River. Practices such as bioretention cells with internal water storage (IWS), Regenerative Stormwater
Conveyance (RSC), stormwater wetlands, and permeable pavement were chosen to serve a built -out
drainage area with the least impact to existing residents and businesses. In addition to providing water
quality benefits, the Town Creek Culvert Storm Drainage Improvement Project will also construct
approximately 306 linear feet (LF) of one 84 -inch reinforced concrete pipe culvert, 236 LF of dual 72 -inch
reinforced concrete pipe culverts, 1,707 LF of dual 84 -inch reinforced concrete pipe culverts,
approximately 21,780 square feet (ft2) of a bioretention area, two regenerative stormwater conveyance
systems including a small system with approximately 1,307 ft2 of total area and a large system with
approximately 10,000 ft2 of total area, approximately 7,380 ft2 of street replacement with permeable
pavement and an inlet capture device. The contractor will install sediment and erosion control measures,
as shown in the plans, and coordinate with the City of Greenville regarding the temporary closing of
impacted roads. Construction shall proceed from downstream to upstream, mainly to prevent flooding
during construction as conveyance increases. For construction of both the dual 84" RCPs and the 10' X 8'
RCBC, it is expects that crane will be used to lift the pipes and box culvert into the trench, which will be
up to 20 feet deep in some cases. The contractor will be forced to produce a dewatering plan, which will
be review and approved by a certified geotechnical engineer. The intent of the design is to leave sections
of the existing culvert, that were recommended as usable, in place so sections of the new culvert can be
installed. It is noted that in some sections, the existing culvert will be removed during the construction
process. Once the new culvert is installed and the watershed is stabilized, the proposed BMPs the will
capture the majority of the surface flow will be installed.
D. Proposed Impacts Inventory
3. Stream Impacts
Impact S1(Figure 5, Sheet 4)
Stream Impact S1 includes replacing a failing gabion wall with a new pre -cast headwall at the
downstream end of the 1st street culvert. To connect the new headwall to the two existing 60"concrete
pipes and one 30" concrete pipe, 16 additional feet of pipe will be placed, to extend the existing culvert. A
concrete energy dissipater below the current pipe ends will also be removed to accommodate the new 16
feet of pipe. Stream Impact S1 will result in 16 linear feet of permanent stream impacts within Town
Creek and is proposed for authorization under NWP 3 — Maintenance.
Page 4 of 6

Supplemental Information for Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
Town Creek Culvert Storm Drain Improvements
Impact S2 (Figure 5; Sheet 5)
Stream Impact S2 includes replacing a failing gabion wall with a new pre -cast headwall at the upstream
end of the 1�t street culvert. To connect the new headwall to the two existing 60"concrete pipes an
additional 8 feet of pipe will be placed, to extend the existing culvert. To stabilize the bank at the failing
gabion wall, approximately 47 linear feet of stream bed bank will need to be re -graded and stabilized to
prevent future failures. Stream Impact S3 will result in 55 linear feet of permanent stream impacts within
Town Creek and is proposed for authorization under NWP 3 — Maintenance.
Impact S3 (Figure 5; Sheet 6 and BMP -12)
At the 3rd street crossing a 4x10 foot box culvert and a 36" corrugated metal pipe (CMP) will be replaced
with 144 linear feet of dual 84 -inch reinforced concrete pipes (RCP) and a new headwall will be installed.
The new culvert and headwall will extend 9 feet into the existing stream channel and will include the
construction of two single wing deflectors. Stream impact S3 result in 74 linear feet of permanent stream
impacts within Town Creek and is proposed for authorization under NWP 3 — Maintenance.
Impact S4 (Figure 5; Sheet BMP -12)
Stream Impact S5 is a temporary impact related that the installation of a 40 linear -foot plunge pool
structure for scour protection at the outlet of the new culvert and headwall below the crossing at 3,d
Street. The bottom 2.5' of this structure will be composed of mixed riprap on filter fabric and will be
located below the stream bed. Once installed, the plunge pool will act as an energy dissipater below the
downstream headwall, which will protect it from being undercut. Stream Impact S5 will result in 40
linear feet of temporary stream impacts and is proposed for authorization under NWP 3 — Maintenance.
D. Impact justification and Mitigation
la. & 1b.: Avoidance and Minimization: Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the
proposed impacts in designing project and through construction techniques
During the planning and design phase of the project, efforts were made to avoid impacts to the greatest
extent practicable. Certain unavoidable impacts are necessary to fulfill the applicant's purpose and need.
To minimize impacts to surface water resources during project construction and maintenance, an
approved erosion and sedimentation control plan will be included in the project's design plans.
Installation of the proposed project will reduce the amount of sediment that is generated and transported
via auto traffic and that ultimately drains into the Tar River.
Soft stabilization practices including installation of grade control structures, live staking, coir matting
installation, and container plantings will be used throughout the project. Traditional rip -rap scour
protection will be replaced with riffle grade controls to allow for a more natural channel botttom while
still providing scour protection at pipe outfalls. Riffle grade control consists of a stone scour protection
pad at outfalls that is one foot below the natural channel bottom and backfilled with natural channel
material. All erosion control measures will be placed in accordance with the Erosion Control
Regulations. Local storm water and erosion control regulations will be followed on the project site.
Page 5 of 6

Supplemental Information for Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
Town Creek Culvert Storm Drain Improvements
The proposed stream modifications are necessary because of flooding, gabion wall failure, and significant
erosion of the streams' banks. No other alternatives were considered due to the existing footprint of the
closed systems and the highly developed watershed.
Stream impacts have been reduced by minimizing the size of the project area and with construction
techniques. Closed systems on jurisdictional streams have been lengthened to reduce the chance of future
failures. Installations of rip -rap and grade control structures below OHWMs are limited in placement
and size to the minimum necessary to ensure channel stability. Also, to avoid permanent impacts to
jurisdictional waters, existing channel substrates will be restored following construction.
Ongoing on-site construction inspections will ensure that construction contractors are following all
DENR-approved plans.
F. SuRRIementary Information
Sa. Flood Zone Designation; Explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
All FEMA floodplain mapping was taken into consideration while planning and designing the project.
The FEMA base flood elevation for the proposed project site is 23 feet along the Town Creek floodplain.
Much of the project consists of installation of twin reinforced concrete pipes within the alignment of the
existing Town Creek Culvert drainage tunnel. The existing topography will be restored above the new
pipes. Multiple BMPs, including bioretention areas, permeable pavement, sand filters, regenerative
stormwater conveyances, and riparian wetlands will be constructed along the length of the Town Creek
Culvert system to treat and detain runoff from surrounding buildings, parking lots, and neighborhoods.
The impacts within the 100 -year floodplain include daylighting the channel downstream of E. 4th
Street, constructing riparian wetlands, regenerative stormwater conveyances, and bioretention
areas, and installing bank and toe stabilization measures.
Page 6 of 6

J'�
Bei
1
� 1
c `tr
J
0
r t" 0`
4—
N. G
10Th
w`
U,
Greenville
'4rh
Greenville
P Figure 1. Town Creek Culvert Storm Drain Improvements 0 0.25 0.5
Vicinity Map Miles
Cnmm ily infrastructure consultants Greenville, NC 1 in = 0.5 miles

oil
�F=
T.W
41U, -
16
1U r F i.' r _
L 2ND.
F'ti
W3 STS ''� s`,� rSTSJ
R
_ W,4;THrS� =° ' '"u' i , '�• � J,'>r. W ';� g + �� �� � E 3R ." + � F2N,
T W3 q,;E•co-+DST QST
LIJ
Town Creek Culvert Project7.
.�
! � � ��•.r •fir _ �,t � ✓O
of
� a a�Y+ • ICKiNS�N A�� ��; -• � � T��
} !yr}
Q6-
6- T.FES^Wy TMST ai
-. _.
j, mn_ O LL yyrlr cyq
T - N
E
+ Ov
�: _ Zt � _ • JQ r0
T S'T`,�
t ' -
' E`977 S , # ` Legend
i
Streets
lN' Proposed Conveyance
VI AIL -
Open ST
H_ "_ • ' Open Channel
qffSoil Symbol Soil Mapping Unit
! - — Existing Conveyance
Bb Bibb complex Proposed BMPs
plfc `Oaroc,.��CrB Craven fine sandy loam, 1 - 6% slopes 0 Inlet Capture Device
h ; 11T +ST CrC Craven fine sandy loam, 6 -10%slopes ® Regenerative Stormwater Conveyance
v ExA Exum fine sandy loam, 0 - 1% slopes - Stormwater Wetland
117- Ly Lynchburg fine sandy loam
OcB Ocilla loamy fine sand, 0 - 4% slopes Permeable Pavement
a W Water Bioretention
Scources:-2o12-Google Aerial Imagery WaB Wagram loamy sand, 0 - 6% slopes Pitt County NRCS Soils
NRCS Soiis_Pitt CountyLt. , WaC Wagram loamy sand. 6 -10°/a sloces Ir
Figure 3. Town Creek Culvert Storm Drain Improvements 0 250 500
WDIICKSON Soils Map Kiiiiiiii Feet
community intlastructure consultants Greenville, NC
1 in = 500 feet

P 'V/1< Figure 4.Town Creek Culvert Storm Drain Improvements 0 75 150
WDICKSC_ Jurisdictional Waters Feet
community infrastructure consultants Greenville, NC
1 in = 150 feet

Legend
Streams
Top of Bank
Buffer Zone
Zone 1
-Zone 2
Stormwater V*tland Permanent Pool
Stormwater Vegetated Area
Jurisdictional Wetland
Existing Headwall
Buffer Impact
Td, -
B1- Stormwater Wetland -
t
CO
U_/ F �STST
r;
7 '� r
S2- Culvert Extension and
Bank Stabilization
S1- Culvert Extension.
�WK Figure 5. Town Creek Culvert Storm Drain Improvements o 75 150
IDICKSO, Potential Impacts f=eet
ommunity infrostructure consultants Greenville, NC 1 in = 150 feet
err
B2- Outfall Replacement
`
"+
.
B3- Bank Stabilization
- S4- Plunge Pool
GHf
QV PC.eq!
O
�-�- E:3 - -
S3 -Culvert Extension
LOW
�WK Figure 5. Town Creek Culvert Storm Drain Improvements o 75 150
IDICKSO, Potential Impacts f=eet
ommunity infrostructure consultants Greenville, NC 1 in = 150 feet

FWA
4
.....�
I EMIR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Pat McCrory
Governor
September 4, 2015
City of Greenville
Attn: Ms. Lisa Kirby
PO Box 7207
Greenville, NC 27835
Subject Property: Town Creek Culvert and Storm Drain Improvements
UT to Tar River, Tar -Pamlico River Basin
Donald R. van der Vaart
Secretary
DWQ # 15.0851
Pitt County
On -Site Determination for Applicability to the Tar -Pamlico River Riparian Area Protection Rules (15A NCAC
2B .0259)
Dear Ms. Kirby:
On September 1, 2015, at request your consultant Mr. Brad Breslow of WK Dickson and Company, Inc.,
Anthony Scarbraugh conducted on-site determination to review unnamed tributary (UT) to Tar River
located on the subject property for applicability to the Tar -Pamlico Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0259). The
feature is labeled as "15-0852" on the attached map(s) initialed by Mr. Scarbraugh on September 4, 2015.
The subject project is located on northwest intersection of East 3"d Street and Reade Street and continues
to the northwest of the intersection of East V and Reade Street in Greenville, Pitt County.
At your request, Mr. Scarbraugh conducted on-site determination as stated above. During his review, he
evaluated the stream using the DWR Stream Classification Form.
Feature
Not
Subject
E/1/P*
Start@ Stop@
Subject to
to
Buffers
Buffers
15-0852
X
P
@ Flag 15-0852 Begin @ Flag 15-0852 End
• E/I/P— Ephemeral/Intermittent/Perennial
The Division of Water Resources (DWR) has determined that a portion of feature labeled as "15-0852" on
the attached map(s), and highlighted In blue is subject to the Tar -Pamlico Suffer Rules. The feature and
the associated buffers should be identified on any future plans for this property. The owner (or future
owners) should notify the DWR (and other relevant agencies) of this decision in any future correspondences
concerning this property. This on-site determination shall expire five (5) years from the date of this letter.
Landowners or affected parties that dispute a determination made by the DWR or Delegated Local
Authority that a surface water exists and that it is subject to the buffer rule may request a determination by
Division of Water Resources — Water Quality Regional Operations Section — Washington Regional Office
943 Washington Square Mail, Washington, NC 27889
Phone: [phone] Fax [phone] Internet: www.ncdenr.gov
An Equal opportunhy\AfBmietiveAction Employer— Made In part by recycled paper

City of Greenville
Attn: Ms. Lisa Kirby
Stream Determination
Page 2 of 2
the Director. A request for a determination by the Director shall be referred to the Director in writing c/o
Karen Higgins, DWR 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit, 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617.
Individuals that dispute a determination by the DWR or Delegated Local Authority that "exempts" a surface
water from the buffer rule may ask for an adjudicatory hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date
that you receive this letter. Applicants are hereby notified that the 60 -day statutory appeal time does not
start until the affected party (including downstream and adjacent landowners) is notified of this decision.
DWR recommends that the applicant conduct this notification in order to be certain that third party appeals
are made in a timely manner. To ask for a hearing, send a written petition, which conforms to Chapter
1508 of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service
Center, Raleigh, N.C. 27699-6714. This determination is final and binding unless you ask for a hearing
within 60 days.
This letter only addresses the applicability to the buffer rules and does not approve any activity within the
buffers. Nor does this letter approve any activity within Waters of the United States or Waters of the State.
If you have any additional questions or require additional information please call Anthony Scarbraugh in the
Washington Regional Office at [phone].
Sincerely,
Robert Tankard, Assistant Regional Supervisor
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Division of Water Resources, NCDENR
Attachments: copy of sheet 34, 1974 version of Pitt County Soil Survey
cc: Laserfiche
File Copy
Kyle Barnes, USACE Washington Regulatory Field Office (via email)
Brad Breslow, W.K. Dickson & Company, Inc. (via email: [e-mail])
Filename 15-0852

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.x I
Data: j k 7 - Z0(3
ProjectlSite: Ta, r � j „�, � E�
Latitude:
Evaluator:9, 40af'
County: �� �-
Longitude:
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent
er►f
Stream Determination (circle o
Other
If 30t`'
ff >_ 19 or rennlal ff i 30
Ephemeral Intermittent erenn5D
I e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = O
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1" Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
1 0 1 0.5
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
1
3
B. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
1
3
8. Headcuts
0
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5
Other = 0
3
9. Grade control
0
CW1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0.'S:
f° yqr=
Sketch.
arUflGal ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 11-5 )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0 1
2 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
1
2
14. Leaf litter
1
0.5 0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0 0.5
1 1
16. Organic debris lines or piles
1 0 1 0.5
1 1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal = 1.5
)
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants In streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
JQ1
11,0-V1
1.5
25. Algae
0.5 1
1
1.5
26. Welland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5
Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual
Notes:
Sketch.

USACE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
M
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET ;
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: 2. Evaluator's name:
3. Date of evaluation: r i — 07 — 2 o 13 4. Time of evaluation: 9 O o a-
5. Name of stream: To✓ 2iy a/ 6. River basin: Tot-- -P.—.44
7. Approximate drainage area:
9. Length of reach evaluated:
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees.
Latitude (ex 34.872312):
8. Strean► order:
10. County: YIff V/^�
6wZ1
12. Subdivision name (if any):
Longitude (ex. —77 556611):
Method location determined (circle): GPS Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
of &rGN
G
14. Proposed channel work (if any):
11 1
15. Recent weather conditions: Ami iA Afo.ltz l4A of Jolt U/ r/,�-
16. Site conditions at time of visit:_ Wd 1.);44 So14, s w,4Rc 2 �w+o FBF
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: Section 10 _Tidal Waters Essential Fisheries Habitat
_Trout Waters _Outstanding Resource Waters _ Nutrient Sensitive Waters _Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES NO If yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? Sr O 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? ('4 )N0
21. Estimated watershed land use: _% Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial _% Agricultural
_% Forested % Cleared / Logged _% Other ( )
22. Bankfull width: 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank):
24. Channel slope down center of stream: X Flat (0 to 2%)_Gentle (2 to 4%) _Moderate (4 to 10%) _Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight ,Occasional bends _Frequent meander Very sinuous _Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 5 3 - Comments:
Evaluator's Signature Date
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change — version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.

_
- '1
:r
r .
it
_ _ •T a
_ - _ - - - - -'� S'i .vi' •, wi..t;Lf:i2 �...:.-; 5r,�r:_%f:'.'�:"i.�' `::�h C`.`fiasv
- ( )�.-: • � M__16
r�� NY;. 1.:17:...•':.,:') t. �r�y,
-- - n
.- i c
v(
fix. .'Y; �..�� '�� _ ..,1•�•�-r:'.i.'.• �SC: Y,._ .4 '>i'•,� .. u.
:
=r f
74-
yr•'fit:«..
_ fy_
R:i � •- _!Y:. � a.. NF1:=iLT:Fi�-.[�:.�'.rt�..5.
_
q� •s y�
• r.i
- -:\'._;5�'�'=;'•Y,'.=;'?�.ar:��•s�•5;+-`'-fir �L': "-r�:;��;
i'
_ —
T _
:
ial L,
_ '_..:,'1:',f'.dl".x".::111 �:::�w:1i���':�-.:.':•_- _
- - - - - _:
i
S 1 �• c S {
�S4f•i',, �, {,h.S.., z -:t_:
- . 7... 1.
f,
:fie y
'1. • Js M
'1
,'+ii,~-
- - - --iNw-
-51 - -
-
.....•:.. �.,.:!.:i.-... :.^:':. ✓, �.:.,:..-.: ::., _.: ..:": :�'y _ - - - - _ '•�{-:.5.1'�:�i'��1: ::W�•.., ��'1:.���r'-Lam:'.. �.'�
� L -
y: _
- - - r - `�c� �'M 1 •�rti
- , _.L. _ ,: - •�'•- - ._ j`, T.`j . �i� ' �'S �:,'�; ,::.._ "' _ .=.cam•'
� ttyi.' c� v . �'t•6
�1 •Y
-
- ::,-:-� - - Fes:`--'` •,
.:It ,
tit=rr•.0 --r:'y.'. -_ — - -x _� .e "}i}'
:..Y,. _'�-.v.T :_ � �l:v+•'%-a.:n _ 'Y: '.'.T ', "�t':"� '-{'i';•m:,'7�':'.h:��t~ *, ����'F• i�
..y; �`)- - }:'S�.y .-. _.- :•d :•A -'dam 2.�'— 4•, t-,..1 M1`1F: xl'C: sY' >-.i4,L
',l-: �•1w' i.-= - - _ —!f :Y, �j lt' rf ', `..l ._._w - � M'J_^1•l+_
K • ^�h's z j Mal
._ -- - _r',: i7:w�:+.'T _G"�.;.:,!;{�� -.-:rid- .: (;; ".��ti`,,. "-:i ���l;.t. `�1-:�•.::_ _-'{`,�i ::\
. r
` :7' r IS. •.� ( .1..11 -�-� -,: •, ._1_ ,Ar h'! It r'�
-.2^ ':.0 a. _. _.i.. :•fli...T ''�~`:r'•_r:'... ',.._.
" .:.�:' ._1�L•.t-:.i-i.f
pct. - _`'1'r-:. •A; <. ``.�•--;'.: :i�lG'.. �-_�..h.�_r-. :.:: j:�
ML

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: /-1- '7- 7,o/3
Project/Site: T,,,, C -Ma
Latitude:
Evaluator: f '
County:?; it
Longitude:
Total Points:
Stream Determinatio ne
Other
Stream is at feast intermittent �q a
if a 19 or perennial If a 30" J l
Ephemeral Interml t Perennia
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = 2
Absent
Weak
Moderate
S ng
1' Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
, 2
15. Sediment on plants or debris
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3 In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
-"1
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
0.5
1
1.5
5. Ac6ve/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
1
Cp
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
1
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
Notes:
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
Sketch:
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual J2_
B. Hvdroloov (Subtotal = 11,5 )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0 1
2
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
1
2 3
14. Leaf litter
1. 1
0.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0.5
1 1.
16 Organic debris lines or piles
0 0.5
1 71-5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes
G. Biolociv (Subtotal= I l
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5
Other = 0
"perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

USACE AID#
DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach ander assessment: Q
1. Applicant's name: 2. Evaluator's name: S. Aoctfq
3. Date of evaluation: 11- D ' 10i3 4. Time of evaluation: �a ow -11///1:30
5. Name of stream: foy - Ciftk 6. River basin: / POLI �
7. Approximate drainage area:
9. Length of reach evaluated:
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees.
Latitude (ex. 34.872312):
& Stream orderer:
10. County: f j -ft C �i
12. Subdivision name (if any):
Longitude (ex -77.556611):
Method location determined (circle): GPS Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
14. Proposed channel work (if
15. Recent weather conditions:
16. Site conditions at time of visit: %,->O wA- SoM.e. gUAt (.*T
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: _Section 10 Tidal Waters Essential Fisheries Habitat
_Trout Waters _Outstanding Resource Waters _Nutrient Sensitive Waters _Water Supply Watershed (I-IV}
I& Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES NO If yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: _% Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial _% Agricultural
_% Forested % Cleared / Logged _% Other ( 1
22. Bankfull width: ^' 0/ f � 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bb - % 14t
24. Channel slope down center of stream: Flat (0 to 2%) Gentle (2 to 40/6) Moderate (4 to 10%) _Steep (>100/6)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight ,Occasional bends _Frequent meander _Very sinuous _Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 3 A6.O Comments:
Evaluator's Signature Date
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.

:, - - - -
,:... - - . - .�
. _..
;.
-.
_ �I _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _
4�
_ _ __._ ____ -_ _-__ _ __ ___ _- _ - _ - - __ __ _ _ - _ -- - ___I
T
... - .. : .. r.. ... -
. . I . . . -..-..5 -I - - - - - m. - ..-.. 7. -, �*�-,�� .�., '.:� �� 1; F ---- -I - --- - -.�. ':,'. -- ;: , ., - -� - .. . -1� =
., .., - - _
.1 _.. -'4_r. -
. _
.. _.i,. r,.. .. .., -_ - - - -
._ .. r_ _ - .. ........ _
_.
. ,'
..- 1 _
. =
__ . ___....... _.___._.____ - -,-.-� _- __ - __ _ _ _ - _ _ _ __ - _ _ _-_ - _ _ _ _ _ - -
.. .: .:. _.. _ :-r -
I .
�- - _-_ - _ _ _ _ - - - :.=
. _., - _
.. _ ..a--. - -
i4:'
LL _
_ _ _ 5I. , r_
Is -- _ _ _ _-- _ _ -__ -_-_ _ _ __ - _ ,_1
t " _(T t ' kr k
- . � . .71�--, .,.- � -:� -t- , . . . =
._- __._,-- -_.. _ _ _ _.I.... ray- .t.
::. _
2y
...._ - - -
.,.._...._--- i. _ .- r.. - - _
:i
:ti
.- . .. ... n. ....._-,-....
r
r.., ..
4_.1r .'I i.�:
I.._... .r. ..
_�
{.
_ ..._,.. _.. -J. - -_ - _
-- -- _ ---- - _ - - =-_ -- -- - - - - --i�, i
._
;; - - - -
:I..
-t - -r a:r
r.
...,.
' le^
=`1�i
•
--�--�.---,-;zk1rI=
r :..:..... ..:�.
5 -
.._: -. —___ --— _— — ___— - — -- - --_ - -
,...
1 r.. :.. ._ .: - - -
........ ......... .... ...... ... ... ..t_,, .. .
... r ...... , r - -_
..... .i-
{.
., -, _ �...- - _ - - -" -
:�r-- - , - =
,.,a.::
.. . .., .. _ ..1. - - Z.
" '
:=
,
J
:, ..., .
r.
,: ='
- - - .!
ar
r
�: _ _
:i:
�:•
�_. ._._.__. _ ._iii -::`.W©
- - _ _ _ _ ___ _ __ _ __ __ .,,r_ __ _r _ _ _
- _
�. _
c: ,.
7.- -
. .:... .. .. :. ,�... - d...: -
I s Z:
I
,
.f::�
i �' 1'ri
>:..
is `s:r::>
, , =
a
e -
,1
-_...'._..IL
'_--.---_.- - - -- - __ ._- -- �.-_c..
..... ....... ...... _ - - _ _ _
.. ..a .C.... ...:.:z .. .. ... - .. .. .. - - . •i:i - -
_ h:l
-t - ."' _
j.
.. ....-. _ _. _ _ ,--
_ . -.. .. - -
_ ... ..... .1-"-- _ .-.. _
.., ..,.,.., .... c_. :... ..........•.._ .-..-r...., , ._. Ir rte.... _ - _
. - =
,,,_:,_ _..,.. ,.
_ j `%'s
arra _ '- _ - I[. 4. ! - = ia? ��
i..• -ter.. :,1
�:,.
.:�_: a-_ .._ ..-. .. _ - a� =
_ -__ - - - - -
..-_.-._, ^.�-_w-.-.'.— _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -_ _ _ _ _ _
-.
r - fIG'.
e
7":"' _
z:tt
,r
c. I: _ :til': - .... -
- - � . I , . r . _... -� ..., _ - _
is
._. ..
"
,.y,. .n .- - =
...
til:
L
-r_
_
%,:.,.-,:."-, r,. .Ar ,. .. .. ,. ...,.... .... ... ...__.._..-_._.._ _ _. _.-__ _
- i"
t' -
_ . , .. r,.
7`
,
Y, T
.... 1 - , .. ... ... . _. .-. .::-r -
- - _. ..... _ � ... _ .. _ _-..:..... _.....: _.... �.__: -• .rte .'lT
O.O.:w.cv •
,.. ... .... ... ... ., -, ,... C
_.-_.-..._. __.. __.. _._.._.-...,r. .__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _- _ _-__ __ __ _ ___ _ _
1 -:.
a:':
.: C..: - - ' - - .t :, ,.:� -, i '�j�-�-� ;m,N =
-
11;`% --,-rte _f r.f�r.. ,�..,_-,
a' ...,I,.:. , ....:.,. 0......
:.,
'
:;; T
,
,
.r/ f. 2.
r.r r: _ _
r
I M%
'::i; �..rig's:,:>:::�:'�,':•�'%'`!�..:.
q- t .I 11 .;y
I_ _e.. __ _ ____ __ _-_-- ---_ _ _ _ -_ _ _ _ _ _
:-
.� '�J:L.% „A i:'
r.. •' : _ _
v.. .,•
. �: =
.. , r a
,.{--` — _ �� 1
.. _
- --,.._ ___ _ ___ _ y
-' -
v
I:","..; � -L . - - =
1 t s, W - '[. x.7,4 r- _ 5 ,c 1.{. ( rl L
r: _ !, 1 - - Via': :., %i , �'� S I�. = S 'i?;;�{ : , a {'+:zi!
LJl L f rt o` 7 �_ {� +"� r ii L �'7o i Y��'�
_ - �t Wil. _ H _ _ h ,�.:_
,_ . ...
--
nl
;'!
4 • -
11 Y'a .
4 �;;b=: SLC• :.
ti-
,. .. =
� - i ' --,
�....
�r :,V_y"
- Y
_`'. �:.�r inti" - :=.h
A
In'`
. .; ._.E;�. •: -:..yam _
:
"r
'5',:':r: �,:::i �i
yr
y �.
i--';' ': _F i.. _..,fie.,,.-.
a� �1:ilpio-i 'i - ���
L, , �.----: - - -:IT- - ---, -- ,, 1 0.
r =S' _
�' -
-,
,y.•.+ _ St .:y,': div -
;1 -
": , I - , -1 � I , " =
I -
,
�.Fr�-
.+ai'
7
;�
_..--___. .--.__ _ _ _ ...__ . _ . -__ _ - _ _ . _ _ _ _ --.-
I
. _ - __ ..
, - .. .. .--_--._-_.. - .... . --- . - . - ------ - . - . . .. . . . - - . -- -- -- . -- - -. - - . -- - . -- --- -- . ---- I =

TOWN CREEK CULVERT PROJECT
ARMY CORPS PEM ITTING MEETING MINUTES
VW CMFI DDICKSON and A -Horn Wp leers
� and Associates, Inc. &Associates,lnc.
oanunun y Wrmlfn=Wm canadlaaft SincelM
DATE: February 10, 2015
TO: City of Greenville Staff; WKD File; Dan Robinson
RE: Town Creek Culvert Pre -Permitting Field Meeting
PRO). #: 20130122.02.RA
1. Attendees:
Name
Kyle Barnes
Daniel Ingram
Scott Sigmon
2. Project Discussion
Organization
US Army Corps of Engineers
WK Dickson
WK Dickson
Phone
910-251-4610
919-782-0495
919-782-0495
A. The purpose of the meeting was to provide the project details and goals to the Army Corps of
Engineers representative, Kyle Barnes, and to discuss a permitting path forward based on
interpretation of stream and wetland impacts.
B. The field walk began at the proposed wetland at the City Park adjacent to the pedestrian bridge.
Due to the high water level along the Tar River, flagged wetlands were currently under water.
Kyle agreed that the proposed wetland BMP would not impact any existing wetlands.
C. We next walked upstream of 1s` Street and discussed extending the upstream pipes and adding
a new concrete headwall. The bank to the west would be regraded to a 3:1 slope for stabilization
purposes. No work was proposed on the east bank. Some work would be completed below the ordinary
high water mark. This could be included on a NWP-3 for culvert maintenance.
D. The regenerative stormwater conveyance BMP was deemed to be built above the ordinary high
water and would not be an impact.

TOWN CREEK CULVERT PRE -PERMITTING MEETING
E. Next, we walked the portion of open channel between 2"d and 3 I Street, which is currently rip -
rap lined. Kyle stated that adding additional stone to the rip -rap channel would be considered
maintenance. He also stated that work to re -stabilize the channel, as shown on the 60% plans, would
require excavation below the ordinary high water mark and would be considered an impact because the
proposed cross section shows a hardened approach using non-native material (boulders) in a sand bed
channel. Based on the length of this section (380 feet) this would exceed the typical allowed length of
work authorized by NWP-3 and would potentially require an Individual Permit. Based on the functional
and aesthetics improvements proposed and low quality existing condition, Kyle agreed to further
evaluate other methods to allow the stabilization approach, as shown on the 60% plans, to be
completed under existing Nationwide Permits.
F. The final area was the closed system to be opened up between 3rd and 4th Street. Kyle stated
that since this area is currently a closed system, the Army Corp would not claim jurisdiction for this
segment; therefore, any work in this reach would not be considered an impact.
G. Kyle suggested providing project details to the DWR representative, (Anthony Scarborough or
Roberto Scheller).
3. Additional Discussion Items
A. Scott Sigmon confirmed that the current proposed stream stabilization measures, to replace the
rip -rap section downstream of 3rd Street, would be considered an impact. At the time of the
meeting, Kyle deemed this an impact, even with the current stream conditions impacted by rip
rap, lack of bedform diversity, and excessive channel slope. In short, Kyle felt that the proposed
boulder stabilized channel was not a significant enough improvement to classify as restoration
or enhancement and utilize NWP-27 Aquatic Habitat Restoration and Enhancement. It was
noted that the bolder walls as shown on the 60% plans were necessary due to the high velocity
and scour from the highly urbanized watershed. A natural stream design approach was not
feasible due to the combination of the steep valley cross section and the high velocities from the
urban runoff. Kyle mentioned that the engineering reasons for the boulder walls would need to
be included if this is the final direction of the project. Kyle noted that the boulder toe walls
upstream of 3`d Street would not be an issue since the Army Corps was not claiming jurisdiction
on this reach.
B. Scott Sigmon stated that the current requirements of the Clean Water State Revolving Fund did
not require the project to convert this rip -rap section with a stream section as shown on the 60%
plans: however, one of the underlying goals of the project was to eliminate the rip -rap look
through this reach. Scott confirmed that the project could include aesthetic improvements to
the current rip -rap section by means that would qualify as maintenance according to the
Nationwide Permits. This could be accomplished by adding additional boulders and plantings
above the ordinary high water mark. Kyle agreed that adding additional stone for maintenance
would not contribute to additional linear footage of impact for the Nationwide Permit.
C. At the time of the meeting, both Daniel and Scott were concerned with the timing of the
Individual Permit. As a comparison, a Nationwide Permit has a turn -around time of
approximately 45 days and an Individual Permit could take as long as 18 months. Kyle stated
that the turn -around time for comments on an Individual Permit application is 120 days and,
based on the quality of the application, approval can be obtained in that time frame. Kyle did
not feel that the TCC project would be a difficult Individual Permit to obtain based on the overall
benefits of the project. However, based on real-world experience, 6-18 months is a reasonable
schedule estimate for obtaining an Individual Permit.
K

TOWN CREEK CULVERT PRE -PERMITTING MEETING
D. In planning out our final strategy, it would be WK Dickson's recommendation to proceed with
calling this work to fall under NWP-3 and include areas of impact upstream of V Street and
downstream of 3 d Street to keep the total impact under the threshold of 200 linear feet.
E. Kyle agreed to follow up to see if there were any other strategies to use multiple Nationwide
Permits to allow the project to change the rip -rap section to have a more aesthetic natural
channel design approach.
F. Kyle agreed that the project reaches were not anadromous spawning areas and aquatic passage
would not be a primary concern for the project.
G. Kyle confirmed that stream mitigation will not be required for any of the proposed stream
impacts, regardless of permitting strategy. Buffer mitigation, if required, will be determined by
NCDWR.
In