20061617 Ver 1_WRC Comments_20061215

Q,-f ~
~~~ ~~~~
~~,,~, I ~.a ~d Vie,, ji
4n ._._. ; ,..; .. _ r~ y~ f
.. ~. i .v ~ +"~
is r~,~-.~..
RNA] S rnyaa~QTFR~BRANCrI
1~Iorth Carolina V~ildlife Resources Commission ~~~>'
Richard B. Hamilton, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM ~ ~A
TO: Mr. Monte Matthews, Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
U.~,. Army Corps of Engineers N~~ ~~ ~ ~~y;~
FROM: S~hajrirL Bryant, l~~ ont Region Coordinator ~~{~~~~~.C
Habitat Conservation Program T.~ ,~3r~~.
DATE: 9 November 2006
~~~GS~
SUBJECT: Public Notice for Mercury Development for Construction of Wendell Fates, Wake
County, North Carolina. Corps Action ID No. SAW-2005-20100-292
Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) have reviewed the
subject document and we are familiar with the habitat values of the area. Our comments are provided in
accordance with provisions of the Clean Water Act of 1977 (as amended), Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d}, and North Carolzna General Statutes (G.S. 113-131
et seq.).
Mercury Development proposes to construct a mixed use development consisting of residential,
commercial, office, institutional, and recreational parks. The project will permanently impact 3.09 acres
of jurisdictional wetlands and 2,191 linear feet of streams having important aquatic function, and
temporarily impact 1.65 acres of jurisdictional wetlands and 7201inear feet of streams having important
aquatic function. The applicant is developing a compensatory mitigation package containing possible on-
site preservation and paymen# to the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program.
Wendell Farms is approximately 1,300 acres and contains approximately 195 acres of wetlands
and 6.6 miles of stream channels. The wetlands are comprised of headwater forest, naturalized beaver
impoundments, seeps, and freshwater marshes. The proposed development includes construction of 4,000
residential units and approximately 450,040 square feet of retail and office space. In addition, the
applicant proposes to construct an interchange at U.S. 64J264 to handle projected traffic. The
deceleration ramp would have 4-foot paved shoulders and a 16-foot wide lane. The acceleration ramp
would be curb-and-gutter with 4-foot paved shoulders and a 20-foot wide lane. Nearly 160 acres of land
along Marks Creek and Lake Myra will be dedicated to Wake County for a park.
The site drains to Marks Creek in the Neuse River basin. There are records for the federal species
of concern and state significantly rare pinewoods shiner (Lythrurus matutinus) and the state threatened
least brook lamprey (Lampetra aepyptera) in Marks Creek. According to aerial photography (28
February 1999}, the site appears to be a mixture of forested and agricultural lands.
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries 1721 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: (919} 707-0220 Fax: (919} 707-0028
Z ' d SZ9L-6~i~-9EE ~.ueR~g ' 1 ' S dzE ~ z0 90 60 ~oN

Page 2
9 November 2006
Wendell Farms
Corps Action ID No. SAW-2005-20100-292
At this time, we are unable to complete our review of the permit application because it is unclear
whether the proposed project will avoid and minimize impacts to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife resources
to the maximum extent possible. To complete our review, we request the following information.
• Please clarify the reasons} curb-and-gutter will be used on the acceleration ramp and how
stormwa#er runoff will be managed. Curb-and gutter increases stormwater runoff velocities and
without proper stormwater management, can lead to degradation of water quality and aquatic
habitat in receiving streams.
• A table that delineates each stream crossing (e.g., FM1) and includes stream type (i.e., perennial ar
intermittent), impact (i.e., temporary of permanent), the total linear feet of impact, and the type of
impac# (e.g., culvert) would be very helpful in our review of the proposed project.
• A table that delineates each of the wetland impacts and includes wetland type (e.g., headwater
forest), impact (i.e., temporary or permanent), the total acreage of the impact, and the type of
impact {e.g., road crossing) would be very helpful in our review of the proposed project.
• Use of directional bore (installation of utilities beneath the stream bed, avoiding impacts to the
stream and buffer) at utility crossings (i.e., water and sewer) would avoid impacts to several
stream channels and/or wetlands within the project boundaries. Please provide information on
whether directional bore was evaluated for installation of utilities. If it was evaluated, but not .
considered, please provide information on the reason{s) it was not considered. If it was not
evaluated, we request the applicant evaluate and consider directional bore to avoid impacts to
stream channels and wetlands.
• For sewer crossings Sl, S7, and S1 1, the reason{s) these stream crossings are needed is unclear.
The Overall Stream Impact Map does not show sufficient detail as to whether these stream
crossings could be avoided. Please provide informatian on the need for each of these stream
crossings.
• It appears gravity sewer will be installed along Marks Creek and several tributaries to Marks
Creek. There is the potential for indirect impacts to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife resources
depending on the proposed setback for the sewer and whether any sections would be installed
within the 100-year floodplain. Therefore, please provide information on the proposed setback
from the stream channel and what portion, if any, of the sewer will be installed within the 100-
year floodplain. Please see recommendations 1, 3 and 4 below for measures to minimize impacts
to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife resources.
• Please provide information on how the greenway trail would cross streams and/or wetlands. We
recommend the use of bridges for stream crossings and boardwalks for wetland areas. If culverts
are proposed for stream crossings, please include the reason why bridges or boardwalks are not
proposed or were not considered.
• A detailed mitigation plan should be submitted.
Vt~e hesitate to concur with the piping of stream channels due to the potential for long-term and
cumulative impacts. Stream piping and placing fill in aquatic resources can result in significant negative
impacts to downstream areas and eliminate aquatic and terrestrial wildlife habitat. Likewise, we hesitate
to concur with the filling of wetlands due to their wildlife habitat value and the well-known beneficial
functions they provide for flood control and water quality protection. In addition, this area is
experiencing rapid urban growth and changes inland use from a primarily forested area to an urban
E'd SZ9L-6~~-9EE ~ueR~g •~•g dZE:ZO 90 60 ~oN

Page 3
9 November 2006
Wendell Farms
Corps Action ID No. SAW-2005-20100-292
landscape may exacerbate channel degradation and sediment impacts to stream ecosystems due to
increased stormwater runoff and elevated flooding. Multiple studies have shown that stream degradation
occurs at I O% impervious (Schueler 1994; Arnold and Gibbons 1996; DoII et al. 2000; Mallin et aI.2000;
May and Homer 2000; Stewart et al. 2000; Paul and Meyer 2001 }. We are pleased to see the applicant
proposes to dedicate nearly 1.60 acres of land along Marks Creek and Lake Myra to Wake County for a
park.
Although we are unable to complete our review of the proposed project at this time, we offer the
fallowing recommendations to further minimize impacts to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife resources.
1. We recommend the maintenance or establishment of a minimum .100-foot native forested buffer along
each side of perennial streams and SO-foot native forested buffer along each side of intermittent
streams and wetlands. Maintaining undisturbed, forested buffers along these areas will minimize
impacts to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife resources, water quality, and aquatic habitat both within and
downstream of the project area. In addition, wide riparian buffers are helpful in maintaining stability
of stream banks and for treatment of poiluta.nts associated with stormwater runoff. Whereas, a
grassed buffer, particularly fescue, is a vegetated buffer but will not provide the necessary and highly
valuable functions as discussed for forested buffers.
2. We recommend that all remaining wetlands and streams on the site should be protected from
additional impacts by placing them in a permanent conservation easement to prohibit filling, draining,
flooding, and excavation.
3. We recommend that sewer lines, water lines, and other utility infrastructure be kept out of riparian
buffer areas. All utility crossings should be kept to a minimum, which includes careful routing design
and the combination of utility crossings into the same right-of way (provided there is not a safety
issue). The directional bore (installation of utilities beneath the stream bed, avoiding impacts to the
stream and buffer) stream crossing method should be used for utility crossings wherever practicable,
and the open cut stream crossing method should only be used when water level is low and stream
flow is minimal. Manholes or similar access structures should not be allowed within buffer azeas.
Stream crossings should be near perpendicular (75° to 105°} to stream flow. VVe recommend a
minimum 100 foot setback for perennial streams and a 50-foot setback for intermittent streams and
wetlands. In circumstances where minimum setbacks cannot be attained, sewer Eines shall be
constructed of ductile iron or other substance of equal durability. Further, pesticides should not be
used for maintenance ofrights-of--way within 100 feet of perennial streams and 50 feet of intermittent
streams, or within floodplains and wetlands associated with these streams.
4. Avoid the removal of large trees at the edges of construction corridors. Ra-seed disturbed areas with
seed mixtures that are beneficial to wildlife. Avoid fescue based mixtures because fescue is invasive
and provides little benefit to wildlife, Minimize corridor maintenance and prohibit mowing between
April 1 and October 1 to minimize impacts to nesting wildlife.
5. Use bridges for all permanent roadway crossings of streams and associated wetlands to eliminate the
need to fill and culvert, where practicable. If culverts must be used, the culvert should be designed to
allow passage of aquatic organisms. Generally, this means that the culvert or pipe invert is buried at
least one foot below the natural streambed. If multiple cells are required, the second and/or third cells
should be placed so that their bottoms are at stream bankfuil stage. This will allow sufficient water
depth in the culvert or pipe during normal flows to accommodate movements of aquatic organisms. If
culverts are long and sufficient slope exists, baffle systems are recommended to trap gravel and
provide resting areas for fish and other aquatic organisms. If multiple pipes or cells are used, at least
one pipe or box should be designed to remain dry during normal flows to allow for wildlife passage.
fr ' d Sz9L-6tri~-9EE ~.ueR~g • 1 - g dZE ~ ZO 90 60 ~oN

Page 4
9 November 2006
Wendell Farms
Corps Action ID No. SAW-2005-20100-292
In addition, culverts or pipes should be situated so that no channel realignment or widening is
required. Widening of the stream channel at the inlet or outlet of structures usually causes a decrease
in water velocity causing sedimen# deposition that will require future maintenance. Finally, riprap
should not be placed on the streambed.
6. To adequately protect streams, it is suggested that impervious surface is limited to less than IO%.
Suggested examples to accomplish the <l 0% impervious goal are using conventional designs at a
level of <10% imperviousness or using conservation clusters with higher densities, with dedicated
open space end other stormwater control measures to mimic th.e hydrograph consistent with an
impervious coverage of less than 10%.
7. We recommend that Landscaping consist of non-invasive native species and Low Impact
Development (LID} technology. Using native species instead of ornamentals should provide benefits
by reducing the need for fertilizers and pesticides. Additionally, native species should require less
water. Using LID technology in landscaping will not only help maintain the predevelopment
hydrologic regime, but also enhance the aesthetic and habitat value of the site.
8. For greenway trails, porous pavement materials are preferred over asphalt. Porous pavement would
facilitate infiltration of stormwater as opposed to the direct runoffproduced from asphalt. Also,
maximize sheet-flow of stormwater runoff and prevent direct discharge into streams. If culverts must
be used for stream crossings, these should be designed to allow passage of aquatic organisms.
9. Specialized efforts and techniques are implemented to reduce sediment runoff from construction
activities. Excessive silt and sediment loads can have numerous detrimental effects on aquatic
resources including destruction of spawning habitat, suffocation of eggs, and clogging of gills of
aquatic species,
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this project. We look forward to reviewing the
additional information. If we can provide further assistance, please contact our office at {336) 449-7625.
Literature cited
Arnold, C. L., and C. J. Gibbons. 1996. Impervious surface coverage-the emergence of a key
environmental indicator. Journal of the American Planning Association 62:243-258.
Dail, B. A., D. E. Wise-Frederick, C_ M. Buckner, S. D. Wilkerson, W. A. Harman, and R. E. Smith.
2000. Hydraulic geometry relationships for urban streams throughout the piedmont of North
Carolina. Pages 299-304 in P_ J. Wigingtan, Jr. and R. L_ Beschta, eds. Proceedings of the
American Water Resources Association International Conference an riparian ecology and
management in multi-land use watersheds, Portland, Oregon.
Mallin, M. A., K. E. Williams, E. C. Esham, and R. P. Lowe. 2000. Effect of human development on
bacteriological water quality in coastal watersheds. Ecological Applica#ions 10(4}:104?-1056.
May, C. W. and R. R. Horner. 2000_ The cumulative impacts of watershed urbanization on stream-
riparian ecosystems. Pages 281-2$6 irr P. J. Wigington, Jr. and R. L. Beschta, eds. Proceedings
of the American Water Resources Association International Conference on riparian ecology and
management in multi-land use watersheds, Portland, Oregon.
Paul, M. J., and J. L. Meyer. 2001. Streams in the urban landscape. Annual Review of Ecology and
Systematics 32:333-365.
S'd SZ9G-6frfr-9EE ~.ueR~g •~•g dEE:ZO 90 60 nQN

Page 5
9 November 2006
Wendell Farms
Carps Action 1D No. SAW-2005-20100-292
Scheeler, T. 1994. The importance of imperviousness. Watershed Protection Techniques. 1(3):100-
l l 1.
Stewart, J. S., D. M. Downes, L_ Wang, J. A_ Wierl, and R. Bannerman. 2000. Influences of riparian
corridors on aquatic biota in agricultural watersheds. Pages 209-214 in P. J. Wigington, Jr. and
R. L. Beschta, eds. Proceedings of the American Water Resources Association International
Conference on riparian ecology and management in multi-land use watersheds, Portland, Oregon.
cc: Cyndi Karoly, DWQ
9 ' d SZ9G-61~~-9EE ~ueR.aH ' 1 ' S dEE ~ ZO 90 60 noN