20160285 Ver 1_USACE Correspondence_20160729

Regulatory Division/1200A
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
69 DARLINGTON AVENUE
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403-1343
Action ID: SAW -2016-00095
Lermar Corporation
Attn: Mr. Mitch Barron
909 Aviation Parkway, Suite 700
Morrisville, North Carolina 27560
July 13, 2016
Dear Mr. Barron:
Please reference your Individual Permit application for Department of the Army (DA)
authorization to discharge fill material into 0.97 acre of riparian, non-riverine wetlands and
the placement of fill material into a total of 262 linear feet of intermittent stream channel and
115 linear feet of perennial stream channel associated with the construction of 4 road
crossings, lot fill, sewer crossing, and greenway trail for the Oak Point residential subdivision.
The proposed project is located on the south side of Old Jenks Rd. before its intersection with
Castleburg Rd., in Apex, Wake County, North Carolina.
This proposal was previously advertised by public notice dated March 23, 2016, with
K. Hovnanian Homes as the applicant. No changes have been requested from the original
submittal, therefore no additional public notice will be required. Comments in response to the
original notice were received from the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
(NCWRC), North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources State Historic
Preservation Office (NCSHPO), and three adjacent property owners, Mr. Daniel B. Martin,
Mr. Ken McAdams, and Ms. Nellie M. Greer. The comments received are enclosed for your
information and to provide you with the opportunity to address any of the stated concerns.
Please provide written responses to the comments from the NCWRC, and Mr. Daniel B.
Martin.
The Corps requested additional information from the previous applicant K. Hovnanian
Homes, by letter dated April 29, 2016 in accordance with 33 CFR Part325.1(e) in order to
make a public interest review and to determine compliance with section 404(B)(1). No
additional information was received and the application was withdrawn by letter dated June 1,
2016. Since there have been no changes to the proposal, the following information is still
needed in order to complete the review of the current proposal.

Further, on February 6, 1990, the Department of the Army (DA) and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) signed a memorandum of agreement (MOA)
establishing procedures to determine the type and level of mitigation necessary to comply
with Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines. This MOA provides for first,
avoiding impacts to waters and wetlands through the selection of the least damaging, practical
alternative; second, taking appropriate and practical steps to reduce impacts on waters and
wetlands; and finally, compensation for remaining unavoidable impacts to the extent
appropriate and practical. To enable us to process your application, in compliance with the
MOA, we request that you provide the following additional information:
a. Permits for work within wetlands or other special aquatic sites are available only if the
proposed work is the least environmentally damaging, practicable alternative. Please
furnish information regarding any other alternatives, including upland alternatives, to
the work for which you have applied and provide justification that your selected plan
is the least damaging to water or wetland areas.
1) Specifically, please add to the alternatives analysis provided in your Individual
Permit application, received March 10, 2016, to further explore a No Permit
alternative, including avoiding all Waters of the U.S. subject to Clean Water Act
Section 404 jurisdiction. Note that this alternative is different from the No Build
alternative, which also needs to be presented. If a No Permit alternative is not
practicable, please explain why.
2) I have evaluated your on-site alternatives analysis and determined it to be
insufficient. Please provide comparisons, including cost between alternatives
presented. The information also needs to include the site layouts for various
alternatives as described in your permit application that led you to exclude those
alternatives. This information would be utilized to address those alternatives
that have less jurisdictional impacts than the applicants preferred alternative.
3) Please include the locations of all stoimwater features on submitted plans.
4) In addition, your off-site alternatives analysis is insufficient, you need to
provide maps for Off -Site Alternatives and you should utilize soils and NWI
maps at a minimum, if you are going to utilize remote sensing for elimination of
alternatives instead of USGS mapping. We recommend utilizing your selection
criteria in a tabular format for comparison of the sites. Finally, you need to
provide maps of the properties evaluated, which would include the layout of
your building footprint on those maps (can include topography, soils and NWI
maps).
b. It is necessary for you to have taken all appropriate and practicable steps to minimize losses of
Waters of the U.S., including wetlands. Please indicate all that you have done, especially
regarding development and modification of plans and proposed construction techniques, to
minimize adverse impacts.
2

1) Please provide further information regarding the need for proposed lot fill at impact
area E and impact area Dl, including but not limited to financial viability data should
these lots not be constructed.
2) Although a large portion of wetland was avoided at impact area E, it appears that the
construction of Blue Point Path and Orange Oak Lane will isolate the remainder of
this wetland from downstream waters. Please provide further information regarding the
potential for loss of function due to secondary and cumulative effects to this wetland
area. Should it be determined that a loss of function will occur from you analysis
mitigation will be required, and should be included in your final compensatory
mitigation plan.
3) The greenway trail does not appear to have a required fixed alignment, and could be
moved to avoid impacts to jurisdictional waters. Please provide further justification for
impacts associated with the greenway trail at impact area C and B. It appears a span or
avoidance of these impacts through the relocation of the greenway along proposed
roadways is possible.
4) Please provide further information regarding the placement of Point Crossing (impact
area D2), primarily through the relocation north of the proposed crossing or spanning of
jurisdictional waters at the proposed location. Please be aware that each alternative
cost analysis should take into account the cost of proposed compensatory mitigation
(stream, wetland, and buffer) when evaluating total cost of each alternative.
5) Please provide further information used to conclude that hydrologic trespass would
occur should the crossing be placed north of its current proposed location.
6) Permanent impacts to jurisdictional streams and wetlands from sewer line installation
can typically be avoided through the use of bore and jack methods or temporary open
cutting. Impacts from sewer line installation at impact area F are unclear at this time.
Please provide further information and justification regarding the type of impact to the
stream from sewer line installation.
The MOA requires that appropriate and practicable mitigation will be required for all
unavoidable adverse impacts remaining after the applicant has employed all appropriate and
practicable minimization. Please indicate your plan to mitigate for the projected, unavoidable
loss of waters or wetlands or provide information as to the absence of any such appropriate
and practicable measures.
1) The Corps has evaluated the compensatory mitigation plan included in your
application, including payment to the NC Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS),
for the permanent stream and wetland impacts associated with this project. However, as
directed in 33 CFR 332.3, preference should generally be given to satisfying
compensatory mitigation requirements through mitigation banks if available, secondly
by in -lieu fee program, and lastly by on-site restoration, creation, or preservation, based
on a variety of considerations. Please refine your proposal, including determining if

appropriate stream and wetland credits are available from mitigation banks (see
Restoration Systems, LLC letter). If not, or if only a portion of the mitigation need is
available from a bank, you may propose to satisfy the remainder of the mitigation
requirement through the NCDMS.
2) Note also that your application did not indicate proposed stream/wetland credit
to impact ratios; this information is necessary to continue processing your
application. Justification for credit to impact ratios less than 2:1 must be
provided based on functional quality using stream reach and/or wetland
functional assessments in the form of NC Stream Assessment Method
(NCSAM) or NC Wetland Assessment Method (NCWAM) evaluations,
respectively, per the Corps Public Notice dated April 21, 2015.
Additionally, the following items must be resolved prior to continuing to process your
permit request:
1) Please itemize all proposed impacts into stream and wetland impacts due to
culvert/road fill/lot fill (permanent loss of waters), rip rap dissipater pads (permanent
impact, not a loss of waters), wetland conversion within sewer easements (permanent
conversion) and temporary impacts for construction access, sewer line installation, etc.
Also, provide a concise restoration plan for all temporary impacts.
2) Regarding construction of the proposed project within a flood zone, please submit
information regarding the flood zone authority in this area, whether federal, state or
local, as well as a document from that authority expressly authorizing construction
within the flood zone (i.e. Elevation Certificate). Please clearly depict the FEMA
mapped 100-floodzone on all plans submitted.
The aforementioned requested information is essential to the expeditious processing of
your application; please forward this information to us within 45 days of your receipt of this
letter, or your application will be withdrawn. If you have any questions regarding these
matters, please contact me at [phone] extension 32 or
James. C.Lastinger(a�usace.army. mil.
Enclosures
Sincerely,
aames C. Lastinger
Regulatory Specialist
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
0

Copies Furnished w/enclosures:
Mr. Robert Turnbull
Environmental Services, Inc.
4901 Trademark Drive
Raleigh, North Carolina 27610
Mr. Jim Spangler
Spangler Environmental
4338 Bland Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27610
Copies Furnished w/o enclosures:
Ms. Karen Higgins
401 Oversight/Express Review Permitting Unit
Division of Water Resources
Department of Environmental Quality
1617 Mail Service Room
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699
Ms. Jennifer Burdette
Division of Water Resources — 401 & Buffer Permitting Branch
Department of Environmental Quality
1617 Mail Service Room
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699
5