20000783 Ver 5_More Info Received - Email_20170228

Burdette, Jennifer a
From: Deborah Shirley <[e-mail]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2017 2:32 PM
To: Burdette, Jennifer a
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: RE: Traditions
Attachments: draft PCN -Traditions 213, 2C 2D_02-28-17.pdf, JPM-15010-Impact Area 4.pdf;
JPM-15010-Impact Area 5.pdf
Jennifer,
In further discussions with the project engineer, it seems that there was an oversight in the designing of the
bypass channels. The bypass channels will not require riprap to be within the stream channel, only riprap
through the riparian buffer and to the Ordinary High Water Mark within the channel on both Impact areas 4 &
5A. I have updated the PCN Section C.3 (see bold) and omitted those stream impacts. I have also removed the
justification within Section D.1a, and updated the mitigation plan with Resource Environmental Solutions as the
mitigation provider, sections D.2, D.3 & DA.
Please see attached update PCN form and exhibits.
Please let us know if you need anything further to continue your review.
Thank you,
Debbie
Debbie Edwards Shirley
Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
919-846-5900 (office)
919-673-8793 (mobile)
THINK BEFORE YOU PRINT
From: Burdette, Jennifer a[mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2017 12:10 PM
To: Deborah Shirley
Subject: Traditions
Debbie,
I have not seen stormwater bmp bypass channels designed to include riprap in the streambed before. I have
concerns about the disturbance to the bed causing stream instability. Is there a reason that this is necessary in
this particular circumstance?
Thanks,
Jennifer
Jennifer Burdette

401/BuferCoordinotor
Division ofWater Resources -4O1 & Buffer Permitting Branch
Department ofEnvironmental Quality
Q1Q8O76364office
1617Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
(Physical Address: 5Y2/KSalisbury St, Raleigh, NC27604-9th FIrArchdale Bldg — Room 042F)
Email oorrespoclenmeto and f�omthlo; address o;out-yect to t1he
NodhCano8na Public Records Lam/and may bedisclosed &oM7irdpadies,

Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Page 1 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A.
Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1 a.
Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
®Section 404 Permit El Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 29 or General Permit (GP) number: N/A
1c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
® Yes
❑ No
1d.
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
® 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ® Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e.
Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ 401
Certification:
❑ Yes ® No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ 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.
® Yes
❑ No
1g.
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
❑ Yes
® No
1 h.
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes
® No
2.
Project Information
2a.
Name of project:
Traditions Subdivision -Phases 2B,2C & 2D
2b.
County:
Wake
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Wake Forest
2d.
Subdivision name:
Traditions
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no:
N/A
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
WS-TWF Development, LLC
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
D.B. 10228; Pg. 1762
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
John P. Myers
3d.
Street address:
7208 Falls of Neuse Road, Suite 101
3e.
City, state, zip:
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
3f.
Telephone no.:
919-306-3330
3g.
Fax no.:
N/A
3h.
Email address:
lohnflipmsouth.com
Page 1 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4.
Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a.
Applicant is:
❑ Agent ® Other, specify: Owner -please send correspondence to Applicant &
Agent
4b.
Name:
John P. Myers
4c.
Business name
(if applicable):
WS-TWF Development, LLC
4d.
Street address:
7208 Falls of Neuse Rd., Ste. 101
4e.
City, state, zip:
Raleigh, NC 27615
4f.
Telephone no.:
919-306-3330
4g.
Fax no.:
N/A
4h.
Email address:
lohnflipmsouth.com
5.
Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a.
Name:
Deborah Edwards Shirley
5b.
Business name
(if applicable):
Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
5c.
Street address:
8412 Falls of Neuse Road, Ste. 104
5d.
City, state, zip:
Raleigh, NC 27615
5e.
Telephone no.:
919-846-5900
5f.
Fax no.:
919-846-9467
5g.
Email address:
DShirleyflSandEC.com
Page 2 of 12

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
Parcel ID: 1851-13-0562
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): IMPACT #3
Latitude: 35.9842 Longitude: - 78.4911
(DD.DDDDDD) (-DD.DDDDDD)
1 c. Property size:
± 47.60 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to
UT to Hatters Branch (27-23-4)
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
Cl- NSW
2c. River basin:
Neuse; Hydrologic Unit Code 03020201
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: Existing conditions consist of forested land with two utility easements bisecting the property. In addition, a
City of Raleigh sanitary sewer bisects the property to the east of the stream running through the property, and runs along
the north side of the Hatters Branch. The general land use in the vicinity of the project is residential to the northwest,
west, and south however to the northeast & east it is a mix of forested, rural residential and agricultural.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
There are no wetlands on property
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
Approximately 2,371 linear feet
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The purpose of the proposed project is to provide connection and additional access to the northeastern portion of the
property for a residential subdivision.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The overall project consists of the construction of Phases 2B, 2C & 2D of the Traditions development. Specifically,
the construction of the Traditions Ridge Drive stream crossing, two sanitary sewer crossings and riparian buffer
impacts associated with the road crossing, sanitary sewer and stormwater BMP's.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
®Yes E] No El Unknown
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Comments:
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
®Preliminary El Final
Comments: The PJD package will be sent via email,
following this PCN application package.
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Agency/Consultant Company: Soil & Environmental
Name (if known): Bob Zarzecki
Consultants, PA Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
USACE-A Jurisdictional Determination was issued in 2007 (Action ID# 200800443), it has since expired. In April 2014,
Bob Zarzecki re-evaluated the site and re-verified wetland and streams with James Lastinger on May 23, 2014. NCDWQ-
the original Neuse River Buffer Determination was conducted in June 2000, this letter does not include an expiration date
and therefore does not expire (#00-157). A new buffer delineation and field verification was completed for feature `BB',
Cherri Smith confirmed the new start point of feature `BB" on May 23, 2014 (NBRRO #14-168). Finally, an
IntermittenUPerennial Stream Determination was conducted by Lauren Witherspoon on August 21, 2007 (IPRRO# 07-
033).
Page 3 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
® Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
A 404 Nationwide Permit Verification 14 & 29 was issued for Phase I of this project on December 29, 2009 (AID SAW -
2009 -02330) and again on October 8, 2013 (AID SAW -2013-01789). In addition, a 401 Water Quality Certification
Approval 3704 & 3705 was issued for Phase I of this project on May 21, 2010 (DWQ Project # 00-0783, Ver. 2), followed
by an updated 401 Water Quality Certification Approval 3886 & 3890 being issued on September 24, 2013 (DWQ Project
# 00-0783, Ver. 3. Impacts within Phase I have been completed.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
® Yes ❑ No
6b. If yes, explain.
Traditions was a Master Planned Mixed-use development that was approved by the Town of Wake Forest in May 2008.
Currently Phase I has been constructed and Phase 2 is currently under construction. Portions of the Master Plan have
been sold and developed by other entities, which entail different "style" developments. Phases 28, 2C & 2D will be
constructed in phases.
Page 4 of 12

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑ Wetlands ® Streams - tributaries ® Buffers
❑ Open Waters ❑ 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 jurisdiction
number —
Type of impact
Type of wetland
Forested
(Corps - 404, 10
Area of impact
Permanent (P) or
(if known)
DWQ — non -404, other)
(acres)
Temporary T
W1 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W2 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W3 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W4 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
2g. Total wetland impacts
0
2h. Comments:
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
Type of jurisdiction
Average
Impact
number -
(PER) or
(Corps - 404, 10
stream
length
Permanent (P) or
intermittent
DWQ — non -404,
width
(linear
Temporary (T)
(INT)?
other)
(feet)
feet)
S1 (#3) ® P ❑ T
Road Crossing-
UT to Hatters
® PER
® Corps
10,
115
Culvert
Branch
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S2 (#3) ❑ P ® T
Road Crossing-
Temporary
UT to Hatters
® PER
® Corps
10,
62
Construction
Branch
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S3 (#3) ® P ❑ T
Dissipater-
Permanent, No
UT to Hatters
® PER
® Corps
10,
23
Permanent Loss
Branch
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
Bypass Channel-
-1T
RipRap Keyed
® PER
® Corps
S4 (#4) ® P F
into Streambed
Hatters Branch
E]INT
E]DWQ
$,
OMIT
(Perm, No Perm
Loss)
Bypass Channel-
-1T
RipRap Keyed
® PER
® Corps
S5 (#5) ® P F
into Streambed
Hatters Branch
E]INT
E], DWQ
OMIT
(Perm, No Perm
Loss)
S6 (#7A) ❑ P ® T
Sanitary Sewer-
Hatters Branch
® PER
® Corps
g'
30
Open Cut
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S7 (#7B) ❑ P ® T
Sanitary Sewer-
UT to Hatters
❑ PER
® Corps
g'
30
Open Cut
Branch
® INT
❑ DWQ
Page 5 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
260
3i. Comments: Total Permanent/Permanent Loss = 115 Linear Feet; Total Permanent/No Permanent Loss for Culvert
Dissipater/Channel Protection = 23 Linear Feet (Riprap keyed in to stream bed); Total Temporary
Impacts/Construction Corridor = 122 Linear Feet (construction corridor). Temporary stream impacts will be brought
back to pre-existing stream bed elevations and the stream banks stabilized.
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.
4b.
4c.
4d.
4e.
Open water impact
Name of
number —
waterbody
Type of impact
Waterbody type
Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or
(if applicable)
Temporary T
01 ❑P❑T
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, the complete the chart below.
5a.
5b.
5c.
5d.
5e.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
Stream Impacts (feet)
Upland
Pond ID
Proposed use or purpose of
(acres)
number
pond
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
P1
P2
5f. Total
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
Page 6 of 12

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 you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
® Neuse ❑ Tar -Pamlico ❑ Other:
Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman
6b.
6c.
6d.
6e.
6f.
6g.
Buffer impact
number —
Reason for impact
Buffer
Zone 1 impact
Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P) or
Stream name
mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
Temporary (T)
required?
B1 (#1) ® P ❑ T
Bypass Channel
UT to Hatters
Branch
❑ Yes
® No
385
211
B2 (#2) ® P ❑ T
Bypass Channel
UT to Hatters
Branch
❑ Yes
® No
665
786
B3 (#3) ® P ❑ T
Road Crossing
UT to Hatters
Branch
❑ Yes
® No
7,842
4,947
B4 (#4) ® P ❑ T
Bypass Channel
Hatters Branch
®Nos
748
578
B5 (#5A) ® P ❑ T
Bypass Channel
Hatters Branch
® Nos
1,285
2,276
B6 (#5B) ® P ❑ T
Level Spreader-
Veg Filter Strip &
UT to Hatters
❑ Yes
239
1,704
grading
Branch
® No
B7 (#6) ® P ❑ T
Sanitary Sewer
UT to Hatters
® Nos
96
632
Connection
Branch
B8 (#7A) ® P ❑ T
Sanitary Sewer
Crossing
Hatters Branch
❑ Yes
® No
1,878
2,628
B9 (#7B) ® P ❑ T
Sanitary Sewer
UT to Hatters
❑ Yes
1,761
2,815
Crossing
Branch
® No
6h. Total buffer impacts
14,899
16,577
6i. Comments:
Page 7 of 12

D.
Impact Justification and Mitigation
1.
Avoidance and Minimization
1a.
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
S&EC completed a wetland delineation and Neuse River Buffer evaluation for the entire property in order to identify
natural resources so that impacts could be avoided/minimized to the maximum extent practicable.
Impact #'s 1, 2, 4 and 5A are all riparian buffer impacts necessary for bypass channels for designed stormwater
BMP's. Impact Area 1 will tie into the existing storm drainage system along Juniper Ave.; Impact Area 2 is a
associated with a wet pond, Impact Area 3 is a proposed road crossing necessary to access the northeastern
portion of the property. Impacts include 115 LF of permanent stream impact for a culvert, 23 LF of permanent, no
permanent loss stream impact for an energy dissipater, and 62 LF of temporary stream impact needed for
construction activities. The road crossing was designed at a near perpendicular angle and is utilizing headwalls and
wing-walls to minimize impacts to the stream and riparian buffer. This impact location was determined by a Town of
Wake Forest collector road location, and the existing conditions of the stream and riparian buffer area. Field
observations include an historic road bed within riparian area and sever erosion on the western stream bank, please
see attached photos. Impact Area 5B is riparian buffer impacts associated with the vegetated filter strip and
grading necessary for a Level Spreader. Impact Area #6 is necessary for a connection to an existing sanitary
sewer easement, no stream impacts are proposed in this location. Impact Area 7 are two temporary stream
impacts and riparian buffer impacts associated with sanitary sewer crossings, both perpendicular to minimize
stream and riparian buffer impacts. These sewer crossings could not utilize Bore & Jack or directional drill
construction methods because the invert of the existing sewer outfall at the same elevation as the creek.
Furthermore, the applicant is aware of the regional conditions associated with the Nationwide Permits 29. With respect to
residential development conditions (NWP 29-Regional Conditions section 4.0) the applicant does not anticipate any
impacts to streams or wetlands associated with stormwater facilities, there are no impact associated with single -family
recreation facilities, there are no permanent wetland or stream fills proposed within the floodway/floodplain and the stream
classification for this project is C, NSW (i.e. not Outstanding Resource Waters, High Quality Waters, Coastal Wetlands or
wetland adjacent to these waters). All riprap at sewer crossings will be keyed in and stream banks stabilized.
1 b.
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Per the project engineer. tow temporary riser basins converting to permanent wet ponds, diversion ditches, silt fence,
and permanent level spreaders with filter strips are measures provided to treat the discharges from the disturbed areas
during construction and permanently treating impervious areas. Access to sensitive buffers and streams will be restricted
by tree protection limits of construction fencing. One road stream crossing is proposed. A temporary diversion ditch will
channel flow around culvert installation until permanent route is established.
2.
Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a.
Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
® Yes* ❑ No
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
*USA CE @ 2:1 = 230 LF; NCDWR @ 1:1 = 138 LF
2b.
If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
® DWQ ® Corps
® Mitigation bank
2c.
If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
El Payment to in-lieu fee program
project?
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3.
Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a.
Name of Mitigation Bank: EBX-Neuse sponsored Neu-Con Wetland & Stream Umbrella Mitigation Bank and the
EBX-EM sponsored Forrest Creek Bank.
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type: Stream
Quantity: 230
Page 8 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

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:
0 linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
❑ warm ❑ cool ❑cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
0 square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
0 acres
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
0 acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
0 acres
4h. Comments: Restoration Systems had a portion of the stream mitigation credits needed; therefore the applicant had to
request additional stream mitigation credits through the NCDMS. If Restoration System has sold out of their stream credits by
the time the 404 & 401 Approvals are issued, the applicant would like to make payment to the NCDMS for the full amount of
stream credits needed (i.e. 230 stream credits). UPDATE: February 15, 2015: All mitigation now through a Private
Bank, Resources Environmental Solutions.
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.
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
buffer mitigation?
❑ Yes ® No
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.
Zone
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
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).
6h. Comments:
Page 9 of 12

E.
Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1.
Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a.
Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
® Yes ❑ No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b.
If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
Comments: Stormwater Management Plans (SMP), to include diffuse flow
® Yes ❑ No
measures and/or facilities to treat nitrogen, has been reviewed and approved for
Traditions -Phase 28, 2C & 2D. The Approved Stormwater Management Plan has
been sent via email to the NCDWR; including the signed construction drawings.
2.
Stormwater Management Plan
2a.
What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
38
2b.
Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
® Yes ❑ No
2c.
If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d.
If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative
description of the plan:
The project has utilized a combination of wet ponds and level spreaders to treat new impervious. The Town of Wake
Forest has reviewed and Approved the Stormwater Management plan. The Approved Stormwater Management Plan has
been sent via email to the NCDWR; including the signed construction drawings.
® Certified Local Government
2e.
Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ DWQ Stormwater Program
❑ DWQ 401 Unit
3.
Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a.
In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
Town of Wake Forest
® Phase II
® NSW
3b.
Which of the following locally -implemented stormwater management programs
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply):
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
® Yes ❑ No
attached?
4.
DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑ Coastal counties
❑ HQW
4a.
Which of the following state -implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ 0 R
(check all that apply):
❑ Session Law 2006-246
❑ Other:
4b.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5.
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?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 10 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

F.
Supplementary Information
1.
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a.
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
❑ 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
❑ Yes ❑ No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c.
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 ® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b.
Is this an after -the -fact permit application?
❑ Yes ® 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
❑ Yes ® 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.
We have reviewed the "Draft Internal Policy, Cumulative impacts and the 401 Water Quality Certification and Isolated
Wetlands Programs" document prepared by the NC Division of Water Quality on April 10, 2004, version 2.1. The draft
states that many private developments are unlikely to cause cumulative impacts, including projects such as urban in -fill,
most residential subdivisions and small commercial developments as well as agricultural and silvicultural operations. The
Traditions -Phases 2B, 2C & 2D project is a residential development. Additionally, the project is located within the Wake
Forest ETJ, therefore the adjacent properties that have potential for development will have the following regulations to
protect downstream waters: 1) the Neuse River Basin Riparian Buffer Protection regulations, these regulations require
limited development within the riparian buffer areas, in addition to "diffuse flow" requirements at a minimum and could
require Best Management Practices that control nitrogen if diffuse flow cannot be achieved; 2) the Phase II NPDES
Stormwater Permit Program, this program includes permitting requirements for Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems
(MS4s) in addition to post -construction stormwater management requirements, and finally 3) the Neuse River Nutrient
Sensitive Waters Management Strategy requirements required by the Town of Wake Forest. We anticipate that the
NCDWR will advise us if any additional information is needed.
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.
All wastewater generated will be conveyed via gravity sewer to the local public wastewater treatment facility.
Page 11 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5.
Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a.
Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
❑ Yes ® No
habitat?
5b.
Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
❑ Yes ® No
impacts?
E] Raleigh
5c.
If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
❑ Asheville
5d.
What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat? The NC -Natural Heritage Programs Data Explorer Map was used to search for elemental occurrences of
federally protected species listed within 1 mile of the project boundaries. It was determined based on the search that
there are no elemental occurrences that are listed as federally Threatened/Endangered within or within 1 mile of the
project boundaries. Please note however that the Final 4(d) rule identifies the Northern Long-eared Bat as a Threatened
species within Wake County.
References: North Carolina Natural Heritage Program. 2016. Natural Heritage Data Explorer [web application].
NCDNCR, Raleigh, NC. Available at www.ncnhp.orq. (Accessed: June 22, 2016)
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? The NOAA Habitat
Conservation/Habitat Protection: National Marine Fish Service, Essential Fish Habitat Mapper website was referenced.
No Essential Fish Habitat was identified near the project.
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? A State
Historical Records Review via the NC SHPO HPOWEB GIS Service was completed, no structures were identified as
being on the Study List, Surveyed, Determined Eligible or on the National Register. Additionally, a letter requesting
comment was sent to the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) in 2009, SHPO responded with no comments. Please
note that the SHPO letter referenced "Phase 1'; however vicinity maps of the entire Master Plan was submitted.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA -designated 100 -year floodplain?
® Yes ❑ No
8b.
If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements: There are no permanent impacts proposed within the FEMA
floodplain, only sanitary sewer crossings.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? NC Floodplain Mapping Program
Digitally signed by Deborah E. Shirley
—DeDeborah E. ShirleyeDmail [e-mail],
Deborah E. Shirley
e dssh rUS
February 28,
Date. 20,,.0228,422.0,-05'00'
2017
Applicant/Agent's Signature
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant
is provided.)
Date
Page 12 of 12

ZONE 1 (NEUSE RIVER BUFFER)
A S REEADER 748 SF (0.01 AC)
ZONE 2 (NEUSE RIVER BUFFER)
578 SF (0.01 AC)
a I� i
FLOODWAY
100 YEAR N
FLOOD PLAIN
ZONE 2.,BUFFER ;IMPACT
(AREA 578 SF,
I
YPASS R P RAP
/ HANNEL �f0 BE
I
KEYED "IN AND STO�
T THI_ DINAR*
q
IGH WAT6[2 MARK
F THE SEAM
ESTI G CITY OF RALEIGH 30'
\
�(SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT'
.M 1999, PG. 803)
X,
LID A ��
y
ZONE 1 BUFFER IMPACT o
AREA = 748 SF
GRAPHIC SCALE
40 0 20 40 80
1 inch = 40 ft.
60F9
rj)N
z to°
F-1 i
w
0
cq0
izz
~N� w
a�a
a
iJ MCADAMS

IMPACT AREA 5•
ZONE 1 (NEUSE RIVER BUFFER)
5A — 1,285 SF (0.03 AC)
ZONE 2 (NEUSE RIVER BUFFER)
5A — 2,278 SF (0.05 AC)
ZONE 1 (NEUSE RIVER BUFFER) [BMP]
to/ 56 — 239 SF (0.01 AC)
ZONE 2 (NEUSE RIVER BUFFER) [BMP]
1
5B
1.704 SF (0.04 AC)
j'00
58 ZONE 2 BUFFER /
\ IMPACT AREA (BMP) = LEVEL
1,704 SF
SPREADER /
5A ZONFl2 BUFFER / / %�
\ IMPACT AREA — /� / /
2,p
27 SF
p A I BYPASS RIP RAP
CHANNL TO BE
KEYED EN AND STOP
As
AT THE ORDINARY..
HIGH WATER MARK
OF THE STREAM
O \ _ 100 YEAR
FLOOD PLAIN
I-
5A ZONE 1 BUFFER /
/ IMPACT AREA =
' 1,285 SF /
I
I � q
1
Iil I
I \ \ V
—FLOODWAY GRAPHIC SCALE
40 0 20 40 80
1 inch = 40 ft.
7OF9
O
X
W
�
r
i
1
00
N
�
=II
0
(V
a
O
d
�
z
..
u
�
z
raj
o
F
iJ MCADAMS