20050040 Ver 1_Complete File_20050118

r

0'( V'IA r~1y

O~~c.
Id r-
2: ~Qug ~
o ,,_._- ---... "
\~
'<;~

Michael F. Easley. Governor

William G. Ross Jr.. Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources

Alan W. Klimek, r.E. Director
Division of Water Quality

January 18,2005

DWQ Project # 05-0040
Wake County
Page 1 of 3

CERTIFIED MAIL: RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

Soil & Environmental Consultants, Inc.
Attn: Patrick K. Smith, P.E.
11010 Rave Ridge Road
Raleigh, NC 27614

Subject Property:

Hammond Street Road Widening Project, Raleigh, NC
Marjan Limited Property (49.7 acrcs)
Wildcat Branch [03-04-02, 27-34-7, C NSW]

Dear Mr. Smith:

On January 4,2004, the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) received your Conceptual Stream & Wetland
Restoration Plan for the HallUllond Street Widening Project dated January 3, 2004 to impact 0.133 acres
of wetlands, 510 feet of stream and associated protected riparian buffers to relocate and restore an
unnamed tributary of Wildcat Branch to allow for the widening of HallUllond Street. In your cover letter
you requested that the agencies review your conceptual plan and provide comments. A copy of your
conceptual plan was sent to our Raleigh Regional Office (RRO). The Wetlands Unit comments are
provided below. The RRO may decide to provide additional comments under separate cover.

Please note that the DWQ does not consider your Conceptual Stream & Wetland Restoration Plan as a
complete application for the proposed impacts as required under 15A NCAC 2H .0506 and 2B .0233(8).
The DWQ will require additional information in order to process your application to impact protected
wetland, streams and/or buffers on the subject property. The DWQ has placed this project on hold as
incomplete until we receive the additional information listed below. Please provide the following
information so that we may continue to review your project. As stated above the RRO may require
additional information beyond that listed within this letter.

Additional Information Requested:

1. Permitting
a. Since the basic project purpose is the widening of HallUllond Street, the DWQ recollUllends
that the proposed impacts be permitted under Nationwide Permit (NWP) No. 14. The
proposed stream and wetland restoration should be considered on site mitigation for the
proposed impacts associated with the road widening. If the US Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) accepts this approach, then the DWQ will review this project under General
Water Quality Certification (GC) No. 3404.
b. The proposal to use natural channel design to relocate and restore the stream is preferred by
the DWQ over piping the stream.
c. The proposed buffer impacts to the project will be reviewed under the "Road crossings of
stream and other surface waters subject to this Rule (Neuse Buffer Rule): Road crossings

N~'ithcarolina
401 Wetlands Certification Unit ,Nat/lfllll!!
1650 Mail Service Cenler, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone]/ FAX [phone]/lnternet: htto:/Ih2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands

An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper

~.
Hammond Street Road Widening, Marjan Limited '~~
Page 2 of 3
January 18,2005

that impact greater than 150 feet or one-third of an acre of riparian buffer" use of the Neuse
Buffer Rule. TIlls use is classified as "allowable with mitigation". You must first
determine the amount of mitigation required under 15A NCAC 02B .0242(3) and propose
an on-site Riparian Buffer Restoration or Enhancement plan as per 15A NCAC 02B
.0242(9). It's understood that this plan will be based on your Conceptual Mitigation Plan
dated January 3, 2004.
d. The stream, wetland and buffer restoration plan should be provided as an attachment to
your completed Pre-Construction Notification application requesting the use of NWP14
and GC3404 for the proposed road widening impacts. The DWQ plans to review this as
one project, assuming that the US ACE agrees with this approach.

2. Stream & Buffer Restoration
a. The proposed conservation easement that will ultimately be placed on the restored stream,
wetland and buffer restoration site must include the restored stream reach, wetlands and at
least 50 feet of riparian buffers on both sides of the restored stream with the only exception
being for allowances to maintain the existing sewer system and roadway infrastructure.
b. Transplants of on-site native tree and shrub species should be utilized as much as
practicable.
c. The DWQ encourages your proposal to provide grade control and step-down structures
below the existing culverts in Wildcat Branch and the proposed restoration reach.
d. The DWQ is concerned with the number of structures proposed in your design. The DWQ
would prefer for you to use less structures if possible. Also, we are concerned with the use
of the proposed log cross vanes and j-hooks. We have seen several projects in the past
where these structures have failed due to undercutting or other reasons. We would prefer
for you to use rock in the construction of any structures used for grade control or channel
protection. You may use logs for in stream habitat if you choose to do so.
e. You have proposed the use of structures to "step down" the stream throughout the design
reach to account for the 4-foot drop over the 625 feet of proposed channel. The DWQ
believes that the downstream culvert should prevent any head cuts from moving up and
through the reach and encourages a design that does not require the use of structures to
"step down" the channel. If you still feel the need for such structures the DWQ
recommends that no structures be result in a single drop of more than one foot in height.
f. The protected buffer area needs to be at least 50 feet with at least 30 feet of forested buffer.
g. The 5-year survivability density within the buffer areas needs to be 320 trees per acre and
not 260. You will need to ensure that there is at least 320 trees per acre within the buffers
through out the reach not just within the two vegetative sampling plots.
h. A planting plan will need to be provided showing where the individual species will be
planted.
1. The reference reach appears to have channel substrate material twice as large as the existing
channel proposed for restoration. You will need to provide sediment transport data. The
DWQ is concerned that if you design this channel based on the reference reach that it could
become incised. You will need to provide assurances to the DWQ that this will not occur.
J. The flood prone area and entrenchment ratio ofthe design is only approximately one third
of the reference reach. The DWQ recommends that you increase the flood prone area as
much as practicable and provide assurances to the DWQ that the smaller flood prone area
will not adversely affect the stability of the restored channel.
k. The DWQ reserves the right to require modifications to the proposed biological monitoring
plan once the final restoration plan is received.

/.

Hammond Street Road Widening, Marjan Limited
Page 3 of3
January 18, 2005

3. Wetland Restoration
a. You have stated that 0.133 acres of existing wetlands will be impacted by the proposed
project. While the DWQ does not require mitigation for the loss of less than one acre of
wetlands, the DWQ recommends that the USACE require that you replace these wetlands
with at least twice as much area of created wetlands.
b. The stream and riparian wetlands will be relocated from predominately Chewacla and
Colfax soils into upland Cecil soils. Also, the grading work proposed would relocate the
stream and wetlands into most likely the C horizon or deeper horizons of the Cecil soils.
As such, the DWQ is concerned that this will make it difficult to re-establish vegetation
within the riparian and wetland areas. Therefore, the DWQ encourages your proposal to
stockpile the existing hydric soil and topsoil material on site to be reused within the created
wetlands, floodplain and riparian areas.
c. Created wetlands have a poor rate of success compared to other forms of wetland
mitigation due to a number of reasons one of which (if not the primary reason) is
inadequate wetland hydrology. Your final restoration plan will need to address how
wetland hydrology will be maintained within the created wetland areas. This may require a
study using well data to determine the depth of the local shallow groundwater within the
areas of the proposed restoration area. If you are proposing over-bank flooding as the
primary source of hydrology and not groundwater, then you will need to address this within
in your design. Be sure to include data on how often over-bank flooding will occur and
how long the wetlands will be inundated.

Please respond within three weeks of the date of this letter by sending this information to Deborah
Edwards of this office in writing and Eric Kulz of the DWQ Raleigh Regional Office. If we do not hear
from you within three weeks, we will assume that you no longer want to pursue this project and we will
consider the project as withdrawn.

This letter only addresses the application review and does not authorize any impacts to wetlands, waters
or protected buffers. Please be aware that any impacts requested within your application are not
authorized (at this time) by the DWQ. Please call Ms. Deborah Edwards at [phone] if you have
any questions regarding or would like to set up a meeting to discuss tillS matter.

~'r~

Cyndi Karoly,
DWQ, Wetlands 1 401 Unit

CBKJdae

cc: Eric Kulz, DWQ Raleigh Regional Office
USACE Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
File Copy
Central Files

Filename: 05-0040HammondSt(W ake }hold