20071580 Ver 1_More Info Received_20080214

HAL OWEN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
SOIL & ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS
P.O. Box 400, 266 Old Coats Road
Lillington, NC 27546-0400
Phone [phone] / Fax [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
13 February 2008
Ms. Cindi Karoly Lr2 a V
DWQ 401 Wetlands Permitting Unit _
1650 Mail Service Center FEB 1 4 2008
Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 DENR-WATER QUAUTY
WETLANDS AND STORMWATER BRANCH
Reference: DWQ Request for More Information (6 Feb 2008)
Royal Woods, Laurenwood, and Princess Gate Developments
Whispering Pines, Moore County, North Carolina
DWQ Project# 07-1580
Dear Ms. Karoly,
We received notification in a letter dated 6 February 2008 that the processing of the
permit application for the above referenced property has been placed on hold pending submittal
of additional information. The following items are provided in response.
There are several lots where the building envelopes are located at the wetland line along
Roayl Woods and Amanda Drive. Either these lots will need to be reconfigured or
wetland fill applied for since they are not buildable lots.
The engineer used a generous 70ft X 70ft box on every lot to indicate a likely house
location; but in reality, these houses will not likely be 5,000 square feet. I have drawn a more
conservative 50ft X 50ft box on lots where the wetlands were close (see Figure 1). This provides
at least 20ft between the proposed house footprint and the wetland boundary, which is more than
enough space to establish a building pad and maneuver equipment without additional wetland
impacts. In conclusion, we believe that these lots do not need to be reconfigured and no
additional wetland impacts need to be included in the application.
2. The cul-de-sac on Princess Gate is problematic and will need to be relocated away from
the wetland. It is also not clear how homes can be constructed at the end of the cul-de-
sac without additional wetland fill.
Princess Gate is already constructed and paved. During its construction in 2006,
approximately 31,000 square feet of the wetland was impacted. The Catena Group designed and
supervised restoration of the wetland, which is detailed in the attached Wetland Restoration Plan
that was included in the previously submitted PCN. During restoration it was decided to move
forward with installation of the water line to minimize wetland disturbance, hence an after-the-
fact permit is requested for installation of the water line. At that time, the cul-de-sac was
redesigned and shortened to avoid the wetland areas. Actually, a narrow buffer of uplands exists
between the pavement and the wetland boundary. Since the cul-de-sac does not encroach into
the wetland and it is already built, the wetland has been restored, and the area has been
stabilized, it would cause more environmental harm to redesign and remove the cul-de-sac than it
would to leave it as is.
Soil Science Investigations • Wetland Delineations, Permitting, and Consulting
HAL OWEN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
The additional lots shown beyond the wetland at the end of Princess Gate will be
accessed from Queen's Way (see Figure 2). Knowing that he needs to avoid additional wetland
impacts, the owner anticipates creating a driveway easement to Isabella Court for the two lots
that were originally drawn as part of Princess Gate.
We trust that this provides the additional information that you requested and that the
permitting process can proceed as soon as possible. If you have any questions or need additional
information, please feel free to contact us at your convenience.
Sincerely,
Krissina B. Newcomb
Project Environmental Scientist I
CC: James Cothran
Ken Averitte, DWQ-FRO
Emily Burton, USACE
Soil Science Investigations • Wetland Delineations, Pennitting, and Consulting
?i qc? lei Revs sea f/
4ou s e- 4:;.I P S I n±s
Table s C'fl'F{1c-QA
0?0y41 W00145 _ LOurent o A-
Pri11 c ess DQVeIopM?gts c
2
Zg
1.
K

~'20
r9-4-1 2
9 ?
-leol
? 4
?'4-

cte?
1
o So Ioo

1

WI
4

s 2
r
F
I

?i guse o?. Qrin cess GaJe Lo+S
Tom e s C644? ran
ROya( Woods - Laure OCIOd -
PrinGess G-ife bevelopme/T?
60?2
u 60-10
4?0,r 0? 1
? so-1
6 0, 0-13
15 --? '
1\
Scale
1n (DOS{ ?--~
P
° so loo

r

The
Catena
Group
410-B Millstone Drive
Hillsborough, NC 27278
[phone]
Mr. Thomas Farrell
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington Regulatory Office
PO Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28412
March 20, 2007
RE: Wetland Restoration Plan for Princess Gate Development Violation, Moore
County, NC
Dear Mr. Farrell,
In late spring 2006, Chip Cothran of Dominion Development was notified by Ken
Averitte of the North Carolina Department of Water Quality (NCDWQ) that he had
violated Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. This violation occurred when Dominion
Development attempted to construct a residential cul-de-sac and cleared and excavated
0.7 acres (30, 492 ft2) of delineated wetland without a permit. Per discussions with
Thomas Farrell of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and Ken Averitte, it was
agreed that the disturbed wetland must be returned to its original state, both physically
and functionally. This correspondence details the restoration.
PROJECT LOCATION
The violation happened at the Princess Gate residential development, located north of
Airport Road (SR 1843), east of Whispering Pines in Moore County, North Carolina
(Figure 1). The wetland restoration site is located where the violation occurred, east of
Princess Gate Road (Figure 2).
HISTORIC WETLAND CONDITIONS
The wetland was originally delineated during 2005, by Shay Garriock, Steve Melin, Alex
Adams and Kate Montieth of The Catena Group, Inc. (TCG) (Appendix A). They
described the original wetland as a densely vegetated pocosin-like depression with no
defined stream channel. Soil was saturated at 6 inches. The boundaries of the wetland
were located and mapped using a Trimble Geo-XT with sub-meter accuracy.
PRE-RESTORATION CONDITIONS
The vegetation was removed from the wetland and surrounding areas by mechanized
clearing in March 2006 (Appendix B). In addition, several feet of topsoil were removed
to an offsite waste location in an effort to create a solid foundation for the road. Two
major ditches were the excavated in an attempt to draw the water into the adjacent,
The Site Location Map Date: March 2407 Figure
Catena Chip Cothran Property scate:
Group As Shown
Moore County, North Carolina Job No.: 211-1
-7-

The Wetland Impact Area Date: March 2007 Figure
Catena Chip Cothran Property Scale
Group As Shown
Moore County, North Carolina Job No.
2112
undisturbed wetland. The excavated soil was piled along the length of the ditches.
Culverts were installed in the ditches to facilitate water flow and to allow for vehicle
crossings. Several piles of soil, logs, and woody debris were observed throughout the
wetland.
RESTORATION GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The goal of this restoration project is to restore the topography, hydrology, and
vegetation of the impacted wetland. These actions will, over time, allow the wetland to
return to its original state, both physically and functionally.
Prior to beginning any restoration activities, TCG identified the wetland boundaries based
on the original GPS-surveyed delineation. Under TCG supervision, Dominion
Development removed culverts and backfilled ditches. Soil was replaced with the
original wetland soil that had been stored offsite and the area was graded to appropriate
slope and elevation. Finally, wetland vegetation similar to what had been removed was
planted.
RESTORATION PLAN
Wetland Re-delineation
On July 9, 2006, TCG re-marked the wetland boundary using the original GPS-surveyed
delineation data.
Restoration of Hydrology
Dominion Development conducted all earthwork and soil replacement between July and
November 2006. Soil that remained onsite from ditch excavation was used to refill the
ditches. The entire area was then graded and "top dressed" with topsoil that was returned
from the offsite waste area. Initially, when the site was graded and soil was replaced,
water continued to flow in a small channel across the site. Due to a misunderstanding,
Dominion Development used gravel fill to create a French drain-like feature to channel
water across the site. This error was discovered during a site visit by TCG and the
USACE on October 31, 2006. TCG supervised the removal of the gravel and re-grading
of the site on November 20, 2006. Cereal rye was planted across the site to deter erosion.
At a site visit on December 4, 2006, erosion was minimal and water appeared to once
again sheet flow across the site (Appendix C).
Restoration of Vegetation
Based on the vegetation described in the original delineation, as well as the vegetation
observed in the adjacent wetland, a planting design was created. Eight species of trees
and shrubs were chosen to recreate wetland vegetation (Table 1). In addition, a seed mix
was selected to ensure appropriate herbaceous species are present (Table 2).
-4-
Table 1. Tree and Shrubspecies

Common Name
Scientific Name
Type
Number Density
trees/acre)
Cherrybark Oak Quercus aaoda Bare root 75 107
Green Ash Fraxinus enns lvanica Bare root 50 71
Black Gum N ssa s lvatica biflora Bare root 100 143
Water Oak uercus ni a Bare root 75 107
Redba Persea borbonia Tublin 30 43
Blackhaw Virburnum runi olium Bare root 20 29
Red Chokeberr Aronia arbutifolia Bare root 20 29
Fetterbush Lyonia lucida Tubling 20 29
Table 2. Herbaceous species seed mix
Common Name Scientific Name % of Mix
Switch grass Panicum vir atum 25
Deer tongue Dichanthelium clandstinum 25
Fox sedge Carex vul inoidea 20
Broom sedge Andro 0 on vir inicus 5
Bush beard grass Andro 0 on lomeratus 10
Fringed sedge Carex crinita 8
Yellow-fruited sedge Carex annectens 4
Boneset Eu atorium er oliatum 3
On January 10, 2007, Tom Dickinson and Kate Montieth of TCG planted the trees and
shrubs (Appendix D). Trees and shrubs were planted on 1 - 1.5 in spacings with a
proposed density of 557 plants/acre. However, as additional plants were available
planted densities were higher then proposed (Table 3). On February 20, 2007, a
permanent 10 in x 10 in monitoring plot was established; corners were marked with rebar
and located using a Trimble Geo-XT GPS with sub-meter accuracy. Baseline vegetation
data (species, number, density, and location) were recorded and calculated (Figure 3;
Table 3). Vegetation density within the monitoring plot was 1862 plants/acre.
Table 3. Baseline Restoration data

Common Name
Scientific Name
Number Density
trees/acre
Cherrybark Oak Quercus aaoda 6 243
Green Ash Fraxinus enns lvanica 10 405
Black Gum N ssa s lvatica biflora 7 283
Water Oak Quercus ni a 10 405
Redba Persea borbonia 5 202
Blackhaw Virburnum runifolium 2 81
Red Chokeberry Aronia arbuti olia 5 202
Fetterbush L onia lucida 1 40
-5-
Figure 3. Location of plants in permanent sampling plot.3
[-D

30

25
? Q. pagoda
¦ F. pennsylvanica
20
N. sylvatica
d x Q. nigra
15 r
d b
e
)K
ay

• V. prunifolium
10 +A
arbutifoli
.
a
-L. lucidia
5

0

A 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 B
feet
The herbaceous seed mix was broadcast in spring 2007, after all danger of frost had
passed. The seed mix was applied throughout the restoration site at a rate of 20 pounds
per acre.
MONITORING
Success will be determined by the restoration of wetland hydrology and vegetation.
Monitoring will be conducted twice after the initial woody vegetation planting: at 6
months (June 2007) and at 12 months (January 2008). Monitoring will include general
observation of the site to ensure that vegetation is surviving and that original wetland
hydrology has returned to the site. Vegetation within the permanent monitoring plot will
be inspected at each site visit and the abundance and density of the baseline vegetation
(as shown in Table 3) will be noted to allow for the assessment of vegetative health and
the calculation of mortality rates. If plant mortality reduces the average stem density to
less than 320 stems/acre, additional vegetation will be planted. If, at the end of one year,
the restoration has not met the above goals, Mr. Cothran and TCG will consult with
USACE and NCDWQ for further guidance.
+

¦

X

X

X

¦

C
-6-
It is anticipated that this restoration plan will satisfy conditions discussed at the
December 4, 2006, site visit. Further, it will be included as an addendum with the
forthcoming Section 404 and Section 401 General Water Quality Certification permit
applications.
Sincerely,

Michael Wood
The Catena Group
CC: Chip Cothran, Dominion Development
Ken Averitte, NCDWQ
-7-
Appendix A:
Original data forms
-8-
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Determination Manual)
Project I Site: P, r " Date l e r S--
Applicant/ Owner: ar, s rI r4' PC Coumty: _tOe
Investigator: ,k4?_ ?cr ovta ou,c
Y-...... _..,.. State:_ A2 C.
Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes ?" No Community 1D.-U44-rd
is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical situation)? Yes. No ? Transect ID: 6V
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No ? Plot ID: z
(explain on reverse if needed)
VEGETATION
Daninant Plant Species stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. In xt ~x rt l=r? 9.
2. ?? t G d1F?r r , ? a;>,, 10.

4'"rte-?r ?tye?s 12.
5. ,•?ya?ac?? -t?it'G 1? FAG 13.
6. 14.
7. is.
a
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC excluding FAC ). o
Remarks:
L
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe In Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators
- Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
- Aerial' Photographs Primary Indicators:
Other _ Inundated

No Recorded Data Available .Saturated In Upper 12"
Water Marks
aai
r Drift Lines
Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits
_ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: (in.}
Secondary Indicators:
Depth to Free Water in Pit: ? 1, Oxidized Roots Channels in Upper 12"
Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Saturated Soil: >/
(in
j --- Local Soil Survey Data
. - FAG-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
?Vb ffrli"f7 -- rz4c'S

SOILS
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): 6 r
Drainage Class:
Taxonomy (Subgroup):yac /47 u c?S Confirm Mapped Type? Yes_ No'v`a
Profile Description: _
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
Onches Horizon (Munsell Moist) ( Munsell Moist) Ahundancexontrsst Structuure etc.

Hydric Soil Indicators:
- Histosoi - Concretions
- Histic Epipedon _ High Organic !Content in Surface Layer In Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Sails
- Aquic Moisture Regime --Xisted On Local Hydric Solis List
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
- Gleyed or Law-Chroma Colors 'Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampling Point
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Within a Wetland? Yes_Aef`- No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes ,/ No
Remarks:

DATA FORM Gv,
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands` Determination Manual)
Project 1 Site: (,:)? (,:)V f, c v? J?
Applicant / Owner. ! L MPS ?a r r4 K
Investigator: T r4 C4 ?,A ?e o u p Date: tC i 7 o 3V
County: y,1 i a lee
State:
_,_
Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes ?' Na
Is the site Significantly disturbed {Atypical situation}? Yes Norte
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No
(explainon reverse if needed) Community ID: '3 e-IN4 td
Transect,lD:
Plot 10:
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum lndkator Dominant Plant Species Stratum indicator
r
I. Ile 't
4co'i _
9

2.yir f7. 6C1 -tnC cur 10.

4. G"pSNt??•r/tt r??i rr nrorrr,r r C1 ,ti- 12.
5. Lr+J?(rd lkt.i/ / J 13.
6. 14.
7. is.
a. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAG excluding FAC+ / o o
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks); Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs Primary indicators:
Other - Inundated

"N _v &turated in tipper 12"
o Recorded Data Available _ water Marks
Drift Lines
Field Observations: invent Deposits
y' Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water:_(in } Secondary Indicators:
Depth to Free Water in Pit: /7, (in.) Oxidized Routs Channels in Upper 12"
w-? ater-Stalned Leaves
Depth to Saturated Soil? Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
_ Other, {Explain in Remarks}
Remarks:
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): rhb Drainage Class: 01044
Taxonomy (Subgroup): y ti; /ltd I/a y e(-'Ps Confirm Mapped Type? Yes_;. No
Profile oescrilston:
Depth MawX Colors Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretion,
riches Horizon (Munseli Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundanee/Contrast structure, etc.
d R_ rh
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosoi -;Concretions
Histic Epipedon ----;High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
.?--airlfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_?Aguic Moisture Regime v'Csted On Local Hydric Soils List
?5 using Conditions Llsted on National Hydric Soils List
_?Gieyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic )Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampling Point
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ?' Na Within a Wetland? Yes t,' o
Hydric Soils Present? Yes _ No
Remarks:
Appendix B:
Pre-restoration photos
-U-
-14-
-15-
-16-
-17-
Appendix C:
Grading and topsoil replacement photos
-18-
-19-
-?0-
Appendix D:
Tree and shrub planting photos
-21-
_'? 1) -
-2J-
Initial formation of erosion feature - January 10, 2007.
Appendix E:
Permanent plot sampling photos
-24-
-25-
Increased channelization of erosion feature - February 20, 2007.
-26-