20061144 Ver 2_NOV Response_20090603

itry Of C'aleigh
.9vorth &Mhns
May 29, 2009
Mr. Danny Smith
Regional Supervisor
Surface Water Protection Section
N.C. Division of Water Quality
1628 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, N.C. 27699-1628
If%
!UN 2009
DE14R - WATER QUALITY
WETLANDS AND STOW WATER BRANCH
Subject: Notice of Violation for DEBWTP Water Transmission Main Project
Project ID: DWQ # 06-1144 Ver. 2.
Dear Mr. Smith:
This letter is to acknowledge the receipt of the subject Notice of Violation (NOV) dated
May 26, 2009 by the City on May 28, 2009 via US mail and to provide the City's
required response to the NOV. The City takes its responsibility to comply with the land
disturbing / erosion control and sedimentation preventive measure extremely seriously for
all of our construction projects and our standard practice is to install these measures in
addition to what is required by your office in order to protect the water quality
environment. In response to being made aware of deficiencies with erosion control
measures the City, its consultants and contractor took reasonable measures and moved as
quickly as feasibly possible to address these concerns and to fully comply with our
responsibilities regarding this project prior to formal receipt of the NOV on May 28th.
Below is a timeline from our staff and consultants since the March 26, 2009 inspection by
the Land Quality Section referenced in your letter
1. On March 26`" Joe Dupree and Karyn Pageau of the Land Quality staff made a
site inspection of Phase 3 of the DEBWTP Water Transmission Main Project. Bo
Denbo, the City's onsite construction inspector employed by Arcadis, the City's
engineering consultants for the project, accompanied Mr. Dupree and Ms. Pageau
and took field notes of their verbal concerns. That same day these verbal
concerns were given to the contractor in writing as field order directed work to be
performed. These documented verbal concerns in the field order were fully
addressed by the City's contractor by April 1, 2009 and re-inspected by Bo Denbo
on behalf of the City.
2. On April 7, 2009 Natalie Landry of N.C. Division of Water Quality (DWQ) made
a site inspection of Phase 3 and was accompanied by Bo Denbo. Ms. Landry
reviewed the area where sediment was lost to the stream as a result of a broken
water main and observed that the sediment had been properly reclaimed. Ms.
Landry, however, had concerns with a ditch crossing on the project at another
location approximately 3 80 feet north of Tryon Road. Bo Denbo took field notes
of Ms. Landry's concerns and issued a written field order directive to the
contractor that same day. This work was immediately completed by the City's
contractor, Park Construction.
3. On April 13, 2009 Nichole Johnson hand delivered a letter to Joe Dupree with an
update on the status of field corrections that had been made to address the
concerns discussed at the March 26th site inspection.
4. On April 15, 2009 Nichole Johnson received an email from Karyn Pageau
requesting updates on our stream crossing and stabilization details.
5. On April 20, 2009 Nichole Johnson responded by email with updated details for
her review.
6. On April 22, 2009 Joe Dupree LQS and Natalie Landry from DWQ made a site
inspection of Phase 1 and Phase 3 of the subject project. They were again
accompanied by Bo Denbo, who again took field notes of their concerns and
issued those concerns in writing to the City's contractor that same day as a field
order directive. The majority of the concerns (10 of 13) were completed the same
day and all were completed by April 27, 2009 by the City's contractor. Ms.
Landry of DWQ verbally indicated at that time that she was satisfied with the
measures taken since her last inspection and that she would not be issuing an
NOV. Mr. Dupree made verbal comment that corrections had also been made
since his last field inspection, but he also indicated that a NOV had already been
issued to the City, but did not provide a copy of the NOV at that time.
7. On April 27th Nichole Johnson received an email from Karyn Pageau with
comments on the revised details that were submitted via e-mail on April 20". She
also made further comments regarding revisions to stabilization and silt fence.
8. Nichole Johnson made several unsuccessful attempts to contact Ms. Pageau to
finalize the requested revisions. In order to be proactive, on May 5th a field order
directive was issued to the contractor with updated stream crossing details and
further direction regarding silt fence. The City's contractor completed these
directed changes on May 8, 2009.
9. On May 6th, Nichole Johnson issued a written response from Arcadis on behalf of
the City, which details each issue and direction from LQS listed in the NOV along
with a copy of the field order that was issued to the contractor on May 5th
Nichole Johnson hand delivered the response letter to the LQS Office and spoke
with Karyn Pageau, who indicated she would review and respond by May 8th
10. On May 26`h Mr. John Holley and Mr. Joe Dupree of the Land Quality Section
inspected the project including permitted stream impacts S21 and S23 referenced
in your letter dated May 26, 2009. Both permitted stream impacts were found to
be in compliance with the approved sedimentation and erosion control plan.
Specific to permitted stream impacts S23 and S21, the NOV dated May 26, 2009 states
the following.
"DWQ observations during the site inspections show that at Stream Impact S23, fill is in
the perennial stream for approximately 25 linear feet. The approved authorized impact at
S23 is 40 linear feet of temporary excavation. DWQ observed excavation, bank
destabilization and erosion in approximately 75 linear feet of stream at Stream Impact
521."
We believe that the fill material observed by DWQ at stream impact S23 consisted
primarily of tree / vegetative material grindings generated during clearing of the City's
water transmission main easement, which was performed prior to excavation. As of May
12, 2009 all of the fill has been removed and the stream banks have been stabilized in
accordance with the approved Sedimentation and Erosion Control Plan. Attached is a
photograph showing the current condition at stream impact S23 taken on May 28, 2009.
Construction of the water main has been completed at permitted stream impact 521. The
stream has been restored and the banks have been stabilized in accordance with the
approved Sedimentation and Erosion Control Plan. Attached is a photograph showing the
current condition at stream impact S21 taken on May 27, 2009. As you have stated the
permitted impact at this location was 40 linear feet although it was measured to be 75
linear feet during the site inspection. The construction corridor for the water transmission
main is 40 feet. When our consultant prepared the PCN they assumed the impact to be
equal to the construction corridor and did not account for the meander of the stream
which resulted in the additional length. We have attached a permit modification
requesting an additional 35' of permitted temporary impacts in this location to correct
this oversight by the City's consultant.
The subject NOV identifies 5 items to be addressed in writing and submitted to Natalie
Landry at the DWQ Raleigh Regional Office. Attached is a copy of the letter and
supporting documentation from our consultant, ARCADIS, addressing in detail each of
these 5 items.
As previously stated, we believe that all the field work necessary to resolve the issues
referenced in the NOV was completed on or before May 26'?' and hither we believe that
this submittal package of additional information resolves any compliance questions
regarding permit information for this project with DWQ or DLRLQS.
If you have any questions regarding this response or if our project team needs to meet
with you to further discuss this project, please contact me at (919)-857-4540.
Sincerel ,
H. Dal C
Raleigh`R
Director
Cc: City Manager - J. Russell Allen
Asst. City Attorney - McLawhorn
Natalie Landry - DWQ Raleigh RO
John Holley - Land Quality Raleigh RO
Ian McMillan, 401 Wetlands Permitting Unit, 1650 MSC, Raleigh, NC 27604
USACE Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
Construction Projects Administrators - Allen and Wheeler
Arcadis - Johnson, Denbo, Diebolt

Permitted Stream
S21 Mav 28.2009
Iv \,
'-2'7f UJ/ 240+09 16

0 ARCADIS
ARCADIS
Infrastructure, environment, buildings 801 Corporate Center Drive
Suite 300
Raleigh
North Carolina 27607
Ms. Natalie Landry Tel [phone]
N.C. Division of Water Quality Fax [phone]
Raleigh Regional Office www.arcadis-us.com
3800 Barrett Drive
Raleigh, NC 27609
WATER RESOURCES
Subject:
Notice of Violation, NOV-2009-PC-0383
DWQ Project # 06-1144 Ver 2
City of Raleigh Dempsey Benton Water Transmission Main
Date:
29 May 2009
Dear Ms. Landry:
Contact:
A Notice of Violation (NOV) was issued by the North Carolina Department of Linda Diebolt
Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), Division of Water Quality (DWQ), for
the above referenced project. This letter has been generated in response to the Phone:
NOV, as requested by the NOV. 919.854.1282
Email:
1) Comment. Explain in your response when you anticipate being in full [e-mail]
compliance with your Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan.
Our ref:
Response: Per a conversation with Joe Dupree, DENR Land Quality Section NC703027.1000
(LQS), on 27 May 2009, the project is in full compliance with the Erosion and
Sedimentation Control Plan.
2) Comment: Please provide documentation (including a detailed site
map/survey) depicting all jurisdictional water features (e.g. streams and
buffers) on the site. This documentation should describe and quantify the
impacts to those jurisdictional features, and should include plans to avoid
further stream, buffer and wetland impacts on the sites.
Response: Attached is a map showing the location of the jurisdictional
features within the project corridor. The type of impact and impact amounts
are also provided. Measures to avoid further impacts to jurisdictional areas
will be employed. These measures include modification of the Sedimentation
and Erosion Control Plan (SECP) for the project, which has been completed.
The modified SECP provides for temporary stream crossing using log mats
or other methods to traverse equipment over streams with minimal impacts.
ARCADIS Cyndi Karoly
29 May 2009
Regular meetings are held with contractors during which potential impacts to
project areas are discussed.
3) Comment. Stream Restoration Plan - Please explain how you plant to
restore the pattern, profile and dimension of the impacted stream channels.
The streambed must be restored to the original profile, the stream banks
must be stabilized and any fill material must be removed from the stream
channel and riparian zone. Replanting of the riparian buffer zone is required.
Response: The stream segments noted in the NOV have been restored to
their original profile, the stream banks have been stabilized, fill material has
been removed from the stream channel and riparian areas, and the riparian
buffer zones have been replanted. Photographs showing the restored stream
segments are attached.
4) Comment: If you wish for any impacts to remain in place, you must contact
the US. Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE) for information on the type(s)
of permit required. Depending on the type of permits USACOE requires,
application for a 401 Water Quality Certification to DWQ will also be required.
Response: A Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) application has been
generated and will be provided to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) and DWQ. The PCN application requests a permit modification that
includes the additional 35 feet of temporary stream excavation at S21 and
the fill material that was temporarily placed within S23.
5) Comment: Please indicate in your response a detailed schedule with dates
explaining when the restoration will be accomplished, and if you plan to seek
a permit for the permittable impacts, when an application will be submitted.
Response: Restoration has been completed at S21 and S23. Attached are
pictures showing the stream restoration areas upon completion of the
restoration activities. As previously stated, a PCN application will be provided
to the USACE and DWQ for the activities noted in the NOV. The PCN
application will be submitted to the regulatory agencies on or before 1 June
2009.
Page:
2/3
ARCADIS Cyndi Karoly
29 May 2009
Please feel free to call or e-mail me at [e-mail] if you have any
questions or require additional information.
Sincerely,
ARCAPIS
Linda Diebol
Senior Scien st
Copies:
Raleigh RO - Land Quality (Karyn Pageau)
John Hennessy, NPS Assistance and Compliance Oversight Unit
Ian McMillan, 401 Wetlands Permitting Unit, 1650 MSC, Raleigh, NC 27604
USACE Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
Page:
3/3
,/
X11

:71? 1.1 n?

N

rr
1. ?: Ir ,? ? ?1 Glee¢ Abat.?

711

• ?' ,
?u?nu ?
r sit iI

Ali;
$ `
? i
r1.
E.B. BAIN
WATER TREATMENT PLANT

Transmission Main Route
DEMPSEY E. BENTON -
h.
WATER TREATMENT PLANT -'
currently under construction
---- --- ar--r - T
1 tin

,I
.(? 1
Legend SITE LOCATION MAP
Transmission Main Route Dempsey E. Benton WTP Figure
City of Raleigh
0 0.375 0.75 1.5 Source: 7.5 Minute USGS Topographic Maps
Miles Garner, Lake Wheeler, Raleigh West,
1 inch = 0.75 mile and Raleigh East, North Carolina
M (ail' - (nw
@T @ C1 E.B. BAIN
Cr :r t
EN t 1 WATER TREATMENT PLANT Co
Cs Lw'
/1 r 1 r
cc,
Co - ci
s cj
OV l• 1?
-Im
aD Co-
j?f. mm
otz (DID
911
© crr,?
LAP).: t w"+ :+rrn.e? r? r C t?7 .^(uIYA.
ID &p t??
OT)
? (0 15M A1a6'[l. @I A pcT. l'A'111? ?A'. mW?
fl ?^tt
mot/
??r,.??_..SC"?1.:7 =. •.:r ?v?,""/?{:Lnti-L•'S i.+•?73 •!n ?%?-y-?ry„,? pyl ' :? ?(? ? ?I?:,.
y??L..L•
M
4.LLly coif, \=S GO ,J
cc- 6
M (ft
rT r a RD P,?
;&?U @1 A @I
rj '5K3
ft ? ct`d a.A ??? ME
c
t M. V, iwlzovu .1
tln..r_ryU? .
64 a*
r ?
° CMG cto 6v
M. C-n MR MM (krn
Cam'
.r
Ox%
r. r , M a
M chi _ n
?`
f), tn U0 C3`0 o'f3 ° y ' ?wr
f1 MA 6v
Mffi
. GT,? Cam'
CT?t?i?T' 013
L -r%
T1 M.
G`
+ Transmission Main Route
n @1' C, gat r C@Si, (gip
' DEMPSEY E. BENTON
' WATER TREATMENT PLANT -? „C,,:,,? • _ bAP%19r-- ? c
urrently under construction C _.
10
Lot C?fnl
4 V?A`??
°31
,
MS zi
Legend SOILS MAP Figure
Transmission Main Route
Dempsey E. Benton WTP
0 0.375 0.75 1.5 City of Raleigh
Miles
1 inch = 0.75 mile
Continued on Figure 5''� N
S14
Stream Impacts: 0.006 acre a
Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre y�'. N ON.o
F� A - Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acre �5°�'
ENRYUR CAPIT
Blow Off 2 � ,.
Stream Impacts. 0.001 acre A r' CURTSS,DR ARELEAN
d Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre N
'•! ��Pa�PNa° Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acre r• ,, W CHARLE s'
Transmission Main Route':
r �Q�
s
0ILO
BRYA
G .r
N
�O •� F�ChL�ER�1 � ;R�*' Oy�y`p..'� .,�'�• ,�i►•1t'r�VAL,h
r .r.
s v
DO
� 3P IN ,• ,'.•rr
Q�fEyy,rRV C" y ti
°'' a �.�`��F1.lf•� r �.Y-,r. M�_� 1 2 y � 'y', FipRoJ
ffy R� Oy PUS
Blow Off 1 \� W; , . z�
y Stream Impacts: 0.001 acre v° •. o
�Q •�'� Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre �°y---
o° Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acre
=i m n._.m'_.GIS�Lc .� •J �
Z' r
S20 3
'•F,RE° ��`� Stream Impacts: 0.006 acre y m w
y� Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre est s
mss`` QOQ Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acre
�� �r• O za'*` 4 3•� HOL ANrDR
A
r Stream is culverted from � , • ,, j .
west of the ball field to :
'• � KENTUCKY'D "T-
Rand
;TRand Mill Road.
impacts will occur.
I � r{
LEY °
KE? " ► ,� Continued on Figure 3
WA E�
Legend PLAN VIEW
Transmission Main Route Dempsey E. Benton V TP Figure
Blow Off Location City of Raleigh 4
Neuse River Buffer
Surface Waters o 0.125 025 0.5
Miles
1 inch = 0.25 mile

E.B. Bain WTP
'ALKEI
SPE ARC DR
J
Wetland 4a
Wetland Impacts: 0.02 acre
S22 , t
Stream Impacts: 0.009 acre ,c
Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre
Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acreMIR
+
t--- — --
Wetland 3
Wetland Impacts: 0.46 acre
E RD
tCVAPPASO
'T a
SHERWEE DR
�Q Q
1Gq
R
7■N" !
N
J S17 . N
s
Stream Impacts: 0.014
Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre a sem.
Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acre`All
�A
A
Blow Off 4
►;. Stream Impacts: 0.001 acre
Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre r
Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acre ALD DR +
kL. s
OI,BERD�y� y,
cgMPANELeP,; �
CNR`5?t ELKNART;DR ,
,�
t,<
RALEIGH VIEWRD t4b 01D G
ILI !4
L
°
Stream Impacts. 0.003 acre :ROBBING LN2
Buffer Zone 1 Impacts. 0.055 acre
ww Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acre 0
S15 r,
Stream Impacts: 0.004 acre
A
Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre Nl N
Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acre
,
Blow Off 3a
Stream Impacts: 0.001 acre
0.
1
Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre `
Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acre
1
. ____
#_ S24
;
i
- ,; Stream Impacts: 0.009 acre
- Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre
y ;'V-
+.,, , Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acre
I
ILY
CIRCLE LN o
f
Q
S
TRYON RD
J
(P p _
S21 _L
iI Stream Impacts: 0.006 acre
c�2 LEA Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre
m Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acre
r
� T ,
PQ + +
Legend
Transmission Main Route
Blow Off Location
Neuse River Buffer
Surface Waters
Transmission Main Route
SOUTHE
RLYND RD
75, 0
NPA
a
Continued on Figure 4
PLAN VIEW
Dempsey E. Benton V TP Figure
City of Raleigh 5
0 0.125 0.25 0.5
Miles
1 inch = 0.25 mile

M
!" " NSA My
y \ i!"
{ -
?
?. r.. . ,.
View of restored stream channel at S21
wow"
f?
?T/®x/2009 10:15
?3'j$
?:?•? U?? fr'''y' 5..?lr1 , .. ,?
View of restored stream channel at S23
? ARCADIS
ARCADIS
Infrastructure, environment buildings 801 Corporate Center Drive
Suite 300
Raleigh
Jamie Shern North Carolina 27607
Tel [phone]
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Fax [phone]
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office www.arcadis-us.com
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587
WATER RESOURCES
Subject:
City of Raleigh Dempsey E. Benton Water Treatment Plant Project - Request for
Permit Modification
USACE Action ID Numbers 200320193, 200620626-2006628, and Nationwide
Permit Numbers 12 (Utility Line Activities) and 30 (Residential, Commercial, and Date:
Institutional Developments) 1 June 2009
Dear Jamie:
Contact:
Linda Diebolt
In association with construction of the Dempsey E. Benton Water Treatment Plant
(WTP), upgrades to the Lake Benson and Lake Wheeler dams
and construction of Phone:
,
water transmission mains, Nationwide Permit (NWP) Numbers 12 and 39 were 919.854.1282
issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) on 5 April 2006 and a permit

modification was issued in March 2008. A permit modification request for Email:
[e-mail]
replacement of a culvert that was irreparably damaged during installation of the water
line was submitted in April 2009. The attached Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) Our ref:
application is being submitted to request a permit modification for impacts associated NC703027.1000
with installation of the water line.
Two of the three impacts listed in the attached PCN application are associated with a
Notice of Violation (NOV) issued by DWQ on 26 May 2009 (NOV-2009-PC-0383). The
third impact included herein is in association with an impact that was included in the
2006 permit, but was removed in 2008 via the permit modification. The stream
impacts were removed from the permit in 2008 since at that time the stream was no
longer receiving stormwater flow due to construction of the site and was no longer
jurisdictional. Since that time, the site has been developed by a third party (not the
City of Raleigh), and a stormwater pond now drains into the stream channel. The
stream is presently jurisdictional; therefore, the proposed impacts to the stream are
included in the attached PCN application.
The violations listed in the NOV were in association with unauthorized activities at
S21 and S23. During construction activities associated with installation of the water
line in the vicinity of S21, unanticipated impacts beyond those previously authorized
ARCADIS
occurred. The authorized impact at S21 is 40 feet of temporary excavation, and a
total of 75 feet of stream was temporarily impacted by excavation activities. The
water line has been installed in this portion of the project corridor, the stream has
been restored to the original profile, the stream banks have been stabilized, fill
material has been removed from the stream channel and riparian areas, and the
riparian buffer zone has been replanted.
Per the NOV, non-authorized fill material was placed within S23 during construction
activities. S23 was previously approved for temporary excavation impacts of 40 feet.
The unauthorized fill material that was placed within S23 was within the 40-foot
project corridor and impacted 25 feet of stream. At present, the impacted portion of
the stream has been restored to the original profile, the stream banks have been
stabilized, fill material has been removed from the stream channel and riparian
areas, and the riparian buffer zone has been replanted.
Please feel free to call or e-mail me if you have any questions or require additional
information.
Sincerely,
ARCADIS
-Unda Diebol
Senior Scielst
copies:
City of Raleigh
ARCADIS

Jamie Shern
1 June 2009
Page:
2/2
ARCADIS
ARCADIS
Infrastructure, environment, buildings 801 Corporate Center Drive
Suite 300
Raleigh
North Carolina 27607
Ms. Cyndi Karoly Tel [phone]
N.C. Division of Water Quality Fax [phone]
401 Wetlands Unit www.arcadis-us.com
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1650
WATER RESOURCES
Subject:
City of Raleigh Dempsey E. Benton Water Treatment Plant Project - Request for
Permit Modification
DWQ Project # 06-1144 Ver 2.
Date:
Dear Cyndi: 29 May 2009
In association with construction of the Dempsey E. Benton Water Treatment Plant Contact:
(WTP), upgrades to the Lake Benson and Lake Wheeler dams, and construction of Linda Diebolt
water transmission mains, Nationwide Permit (NWP) Numbers 12 and 39 were
issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) on 5 April 2006 and a permit Phone

modification was issued in March 2008. A permit modification request for 919.854.1282
replacement of a culvert that was irreparably damaged during installation of the water Email:
line was submitted to the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) in April 2009. The [e-mail]
attached Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) application is being submitted to
request a permit modification for impacts associated with installation of the water Our ref:
line. NC703027.1000
Two of the three impacts listed in the attached PCN application are associated with a
Notice of Violation (NOV) issued by DWQ on 26 May 2009 (NOV-2009-PC-0383). The
third impact included herein is in association with an impact that was included in the
2006 permit, but was removed in 2008 via the permit modification. The stream
impacts were removed from the permit in 2008 since at that time the stream was no
longer receiving stormwater flow due to construction of the site and was no longer
jurisdictional. Since that time, the site has been developed by a third party (not the
City of Raleigh), and a stormwater pond now drains into the stream channel. The
stream is presently jurisdictional; therefore, the proposed impacts to the stream are
included in the attached PCN application.
The violations listed in the NOV were in association with unauthorized activities at
S21 and S23. During construction activities associated with installation of the water
line in the vicinity of S21, unanticipated impacts beyond those previously authorized
ARCADIS
occurred. The authorized impact at S21 is 40 feet of temporary excavation, and a
total of 75 feet of stream was temporarily impacted by excavation activities. The
water line has been installed in this portion of the project corridor, the stream has
been restored to the original profile, the stream banks have been stabilized, fill
material has been removed from the stream channel and riparian areas, and the
riparian buffer zone has been replanted.
Per the NOV, non-authorized fill material was placed within S23 during construction
activities. S23 was previously approved for temporary excavation impacts of 40 feet.
The unauthorized fill material that was placed within S23 was within the 40-foot
project corridor and impacted 25 feet of stream. At present, the impacted portion of
the stream has been restored to the original profile, the stream banks have been
stabilized, fill material has been removed from the stream channel and riparian
areas, and the riparian buffer zone has been replanted.
Please feel free to call or e-mail me at [e-mail] if you have any
questions or require additional information.
Sincerely,
ARCADIS
._Ci da Die It
Senior Sc ntist
Copies:
City of Raleigh
ARCADIS

Cyndi Karoly
29 May 2009
Page:
2/2
o?0F W ATF9OG
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
®Section 404 Permit El Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 12 or General Permit (GP) number:
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
1 g. 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: City of Raleigh Dempsey E. Benton Water Treatment Plant Project - Permit
Modification Request
2b. County: Wake
2c. Nearest municipality / town: Raleigh
2d. Subdivision name: n/a
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no: n/a
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed: State of North Carolina School for the Blind
3b. Deed Book and Page No. n/a
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
3d. Street address: 116 W Jones St
3e. City, state, zip: Raleigh, NC 27603
3f. Telephone no.: Unknown
3g. Fax no.: Unknown
3h. Email address: Unknown
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: Municipality
4b. Name: Dale Crisp, Director of Public Utilities
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
City of Raleigh
4d. Street address: One Exchange Plaza, Suite 620
4e. City, state, zip: Raleigh, NC 27602
4f. Telephone no.: 919.857.4540
4g. Fax no.: 919.857.4545
4h. Email address: [e-mail]
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name: Linda Diebolt
5b. Business name
(if applicable): ARCADIS
5c. Street address: 801 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 300
5d. City, state, zip: Raleigh, NC 27607
5e. Telephone no.: 919.854.1282
5f. Fax no.: 919.854.5448
5g. Email address: [e-mail]
Page 2 of 12
B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID): 1702806512
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): Latitude: 35.724859 Longitude: - 78.625756
(DD.DDDDDD) (-DD.DDDDDD)
1 c. Property size: 98.77 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to Wildcat Branch
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water: C; NSW
2c. River basin: Neuse
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:
S15 is located in an undeveloped portion of a commercial property, S21 is located in an undeveloped portion of the
Highway Patrol Training Facility, and S23 is located in an undeveloped tract of land and is within an existing sewer
easement. The vicinity of the project consists of roadway easements, light industrial development, and wooded,
undeveloped areas.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
None.
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
Approximately 500 feet of stream exists within the property.
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The project consists of installation of a water line. During pipe installation, impacts to S21 were greater than anticipated or
previously permitted. The approved authorized impact at S21 is 40 feet of temporary excavation; however, 75 feet of S21
was temporarily impacted during installation of the water line. During clearing activities associated with the project
corridor, unauthorized fill material was temporarily placed within the stream channel of S23 within the project corridor.
This PCN application is being submitted to request an after-the-fact permit modification for an additional 35 feet of
temporary excavation to S21 and temporary fill within S23. Impact approval for S15 is also included herein.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The water line is installed using an excavator. During construction, temporary impacts to S21 exceeded the authorized
impact for this stream. A Notice of Violation issued by DWQ on 26 May 2009 (NOV-2009-PC-0383) includes the
aforementioned exceedance. The S21 stream channel that was impacted during construction activities has been restored
to the original profile, the stream banks have been stabilized, all fill material has been removed from the stream channel
and riparian zone, and the riparian buffer has been replanted (see attached photos). The temporary fill material that was
placed within S23 and riparian zone has been removed, the stream banks have been stabilized, and the riparian buffer
has been replanted (see attached photos).
Page 3 of 12
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
Project Information and Prior Project History
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Comments: No jurisdictional determination (JD) was issued
by USACE as the delineations were finalized during the
Rapanos legal battle when no JDs were being issued. ? Yes ® No ? Unknown
However, impacts to Waters of the US associated with the
Dempsey E. Benton WTP project were permitted without
modification of the jurisdictional boundaries, inferring USACE
agreement with the jurisdictional boundaries shown on the
design plans.
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
? Preliminary ? Final
of determination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas? Agency/Consultant Company: ARCADIS
Name (if known): Linda Diebolt Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
A NCDWQ stream determination for the applicability of Neuse River Riparian Buffer Rules was conducted at the WTP on
April 14, 2003 and issued August 28, 2003 (No. NBRRO-03-199).
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.
Impacts to jurisdictional resources along the force main for the Highway 50 wastewater pump station have been permitted
under a Nationwide Permit (NWP) #12 (Action ID No. 200421195 and 200421196; August 16, 2004). A 401 Water
Quality Certification (WQC) for the force main was issued by NCDWQ (Project No. 04-0921; July 30, 2004). As part of
the permitting for the Dempsey E. Benton WTP and its associated pump stations, water transmission mains, intake and
discharge sites, and other structures, a NWP #12 and #39 were issued by the USACE on April 5, 2006 (Action ID Nos.
200320193 and 200620626-200620628). Approval of the 401 WQC and Authorization Certificate per the Neuse River
Buffer Protection Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0233) with Additional Conditions was issued on November 26, 2006 (NCDWQ
Project No. 06-1144). However, after the aforementioned Section 401 and 404 approvals were issued, a portion of the
previously permitted transmission main was rerouted. Impacts to jurisdictional areas from the rerouted transmission main
are less than the impacts included in the April 5, 2006 USACE NWP #12 and #39 and the November 26, 2006 WQC. A
permit modification for replacement of a culvert that was damaged during installation of the water line was submitted 23
April 2009.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? ? Yes ® No
6b. If yes, explain.
Page 4 of 12
C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. 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
W5 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W6 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
2g. Total wetland impacts
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
le
Permanent P or
( ) intermittent DWQ - non-404, width (linear
Temporary (T) (INT)? other) (feet) feet)
S21 ? P ®T Excavation UT to Walnut ? PER ® Corps
6
75
Creek ® INT ® DWQ
S23 ? P ® T Placement of Fill UT to Walnut ® PER ® Corps 3 25
Creek ? INT ® DWQ
S15 ? P ®T Excavation UT to Walnut ? PER ® Corps
4
40
Creek ® INT ® DWQ
S4 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S5 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S6 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts 140
3i. Comments:
S21 has approved authorization for 40 feet of temporary excavation; however, an additional 35 feet of temporary excavation
authorization is requested.
S23 has approved authorization for 40 feet of temporary excavation; however, placement of fill was not approved within the
Page 5 of 12
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
project corridor and is requested.
S15 was included in the 2006 permit application; however, at the time of reinvestigation associated with the relocated project
corridor, S15 was not jurisdictional. Development of the site by a third party (not the City of Raleigh) in which S15 is located
was underway at the time of the site reinvestigation in 2008. The stream channel and the headwaters of the stream had been
significantly modified and sheet flow of stormwater from the site was not entering the channel. However, since 2008, the site
has been developed and stormwater retention ponds now discharge into the old channel. Therefore, S15 is currently
jurisdictional and approval of temporary excavation impacts to this channel is requested.
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 individual) list all open water impacts below.
4a. 4b. 4c. 4d. 4e.
Open water Name of waterbody
impact number - (if applicable) Type of impact Waterbody type Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or
Tem ora T
01 ?P?T
02 ?P?T
03 ?P?T
04 ?P?T
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If and or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a. 5b. 5c. 5d. 5e.
Wetland Impacts (acres) Stream Impacts (feet) Upland
Pond ID
b Proposed use or purpose (acres)
num
er of 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 an 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 Buffer Zone 1 impact Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P) or for impact Stream name mitigation (square feet) (square feet)
Temporary T required?
Non-
61 ®P ? T electric Unnamed tributary to ? Yes 2100 1400
utility line Walnut Creek ® No
crossing
Non-

B2 ®P ? T electric Unnamed tributary to ? Yes
2400
1600
utility line Walnut Creek ® No
crossing
B3 ?P?T ?Yes
? No
6h. Total buffer impacts 4500 3000
6i. Comments: B1 is adjacent to S21 and B2 is adjacent to S15
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.
During design of the project, impacts to jurisdictional areas were avoided by using trenchless construction techniques to
traverse some of the jurisdictional streams within the project corridor. Impacts to jurisdictional streams that are impacted
by open-cut pipe installation were minimized by having stream crossings with 15 degrees of perpendicular.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Using trenchless construction techniques to traverse some of the jurisdictional areas within the project corridor avoids
impacts to those jurisdictional areas. Additionally, impacts to jurisdictional areas that will be temporarily impacted by
open-cut pipe installation methods will be minimized by the use of Best Management Practices and adherence to the
Sedimentation and Erosion Control Plan.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State? ? Yes ® No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply): ? DWQ ? Corps

2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project? ? Mitigation bank

? Payment to in-lieu fee program
? Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter) Type Quantity
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: linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature: ? warm ? cool ?cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only): square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4f. Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested: acres
4h. Comments:
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.
Page 8 of 12
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
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: Buffer mitigation is not required for the proposed activities.
Page 9 of 12
E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. 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.
? Yes ®No
Comments: The proposed project will not provide impervious surfaces.
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project? <0.001 %
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan? ? Yes ® No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why: The project area contains less than 24%
impervious surface area, consists of installation of a subsurface water line, and no increase in impervious surface will
occur.
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
? 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?
? Phase II
3b. Which of the following locally-implemented stormwater management programs ? NSW
? 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

4a. Which of the following state-implemented stormwater management programs apply ? HQW
? ORW
(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)
1a. 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: FONSI attached
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):
A Notice of Violation (NOV) was issued by DWQ on 26 May 2009 for unauthorized impacts to S21 and S23 (NOV-2009-PC-
0383).
S21: During construction activities associated with installation of the water line in the vicinity of S21, unanticipated impacts
beyond those previously authorized occurred. The authorized impact at S21 is 40 feet of temporary excavation, and a total of
75 feet of stream was temporarily impacted by excavation activities. The water line has been installed in this portion of the
project corridor, the stream has been restored to the original profile, the stream banks have been stabilized
fill material has
,
been removed from the stream channel and a riparian areas, and the riparian buffer zone has been replanted.
S23: Non-authorized fill material was placed within S23 during construction activities. S23 was previously approved for
temporary excavation impacts of 40 feet. The unauthorized fill material that was placed within S23 was within the 40-foot
project corridor but only impacted 25 feet of stream, per NOV. At present, the water line has been installed in this portion of
the project corridor, the stream has been restored to the original profile, the stream banks have been stabilized
fill material
,
has been removed from the stream channel and riparian areas, and the riparian buffer zone has been replanted.
Construction activities at S15 have not yet occurred.
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
dditi
l d ? Yes No
®
a
ona
evelopment, 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.
A complete analysis of impacts associated with this project is provided in the Environmental Assessment (EA) that was
generated for this project. A copy of the FONSI is attached.
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.
No wastewater will be generated from the proposed project.
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?
® 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?
A Final Biological Assessment (BA) was submitted to the USACE in July 2005 for the Dempsey E. Benton WTP that
described in detail the findings and approach to evaluating the instream flow study results, the impacts of the Dempsey E.
Benton WTP project, and mitigation for impacts to the dwarf wedgemussel. The Final BA initiated formal Section 7
Consultation under the Endangered Species Act. A Final Biological Opinion (BO) was signed by the USFWS in February
2006. The conclusions of the Final BO were provided in the previously submitted PCN Application Form for the Dempsey
E. Benton WTP project.
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?
Determination made based upon data available through NC Center for Geographic Information and Analysis (NC CGIA).
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?
Review of NC State Historic Preservation Office and Office of State Archaeology maps was conducted as part of the
development of the EA for the Dempsey E. Benton WTP project. Additionally, the EA was reviewed through the state
clearinghouse, and a FONSI was issued by the state.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain? J E Yes ® No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? FEMA FIRM Panel 3720170200J (effective date May 2,
2006)
Dale Crisp 29 May 2009
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name Applicant/ g nt's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only a authorization letter from the applicant
is ided.
Page 12 of 12
E.B. BAIN
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Transmission Main Route
DEMPSEY E. BENTON
WATER TREATMENT PLANT -
currently under construction
Legend
Transmission Main Route
0 0.375 0.75 1.5
Miles
1 inch = 0.75 mile
SITE LOCATION MAP
Dempsey E. Benton WTP
City of Raleigh
Source: 7.5 Minute USGS Topographic Maps
Garner, Lake Wheeler, Raleigh West,
and Raleigh East, North Carolina
N
Figure
1
. (91A, M
l c?v
77?? Cp1il
p k
two Transmission Main Route
DEMPSEY E. BENTON
WATER TREATMENT PLANT - i} .
© p ©v m. currently under construction!
ai oo v *Mff w
, MO 'v?CiJ' '
I .''I ,
.
v f rte, L I 'G 3 C? G
?
?
m (
?!y?
.b
r a M
D
b
D
• G?3 1w
rte-.

0?: O? ryy??
U'LL'f
D .

ft=
,
t?s
?ate--m n t %inn
t-% (Ew b p M% t 0a

rp ??j
T1?3 M01 l p ; • ?
?,
MO MM
v
p
p
p
?

?
ryy?IL•73
U/I

D
O v

MS
M
MM
? RNI
ry P MOM "4' '
w
( IM (EN
Mo M I

tup
qw,
@tL
' °?'
Cam ('m M?-j A (1419
gems ? D
MID
G ? `mil' a ? ` C C C 13 r :
U• '1a M aMwfl-
Mo era
Legend SOILS MAP Figure
Transmission Main Route Dempsey E. Benton WTP
0 0.375 0.75 1.5 City of Raleigh
Miles
1 inch = 0.75 mile
M nn ,, 6?m V. 41 RaWw Ran .,M-
Mk.
E.B. BAIN ?w
M' I WATER TREATMENT PLANTI? m
(ftmg
to. its
mg -;607e-Mn
Mo IV
. ' _ < r to a ?a r r° Ir. ? y OREGON TRL'Eta
Legend PLAN VIEW
Transmission Main Route Dempsey E. Benton WTP Figure
City of Raleigh 3
0 0.125 0.25 0.5
Miles
1 inch = 0.25 mile
-°# Continued on Figure 5 N
r '7
T11
I
S14
Stream Impacts: 0.006 acre°Oq
4, Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre _ DA
�CND�XD
hANjCAC Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acre s° 03o
HENRY OR. CAPITA
Blow Off 2
Stream Impacts: 0.001 acre •. CURTISS DR , ARELEAN ST
Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre
fcP�GPNRo;- Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acre w CHARLES ST
' Transmission Main Route
L
J.
Y� PAF
� VZ �y FAYEDR GS)'•� �'�BRYA'pp�
m�rAwl y�ty p a °
hLER RD F h CO W
X41is x: C-2 O 4 Q
JU'�Q D,DR
m F Q NS
vf
SPRING �• Z
R/N .Rt, 20 BIOW Off 1 ti PUS JO-
Q� S` y. u Z SSTO
yQ Stream Impacts: 0.001 acre Pc� q•. o
aQs� Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre
a
o c Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acre ZU. (T "
AXUM RD �Q a� p /Ylv),
� F
_G1.! SJR !• Q
R� KRO Jam.
20 SSag ,
�FREO� �
c Stream Impacts: 0.006 acre R a "
z
Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre ;,.
LE SMITH
Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acre j:P WtA DR
9'�'
.71
• 2O 2a }. ', HOLMAN DR
�#401
Stream is culverted from
�o west of the ball field to
east of Rand MITI Road. KENTUCKYD
No impacts will occur.;
O
OLE pit T
R
Continued on Figure 3 wA ESP"°0 `
Legend PLAN VIEW
Transmission Main Route Dempsey y E. Benton WTP Figure
Blow Off Location
Neuse River Buffer City of Raleigh A
Surface Waters 0 0.125 0.25 0.5 '�F
Miles
1 inch = 0.25 mile

RALEIG
7
ILEAGNES R D a •� }
y1 s m S23
Wetland 4 -- ° Stream Im
Wetland Impacts: 0.02 acre = Buffer Zon
Buffer Zon
` r
S22 _ S15
Stream Impacts: 0.009 acre New Impa,
Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre '� Stream Im
Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acre Buffer Zon
Buffer Zon
Wetland 3 Blow Off 3
Wetland Impacts: 0.46 acre Stream Imp
z Buffer Zorn
z y Buffer Zorn
co CHAPANOKE RD"
SHERWEEDR
`er
O L'qe
CIRCLE LN o
x
TRYON RDS
O
A e' E.TRYON RD
S21
Stream
Stream Impacts: 0.006 acre
o LEA Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre
Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acreNMI,
'PO
Legend PL
Transmission Main Route
Blow Off Location DempseClt
Neuse River Buffer
Surface Waters 0 0.125
1 in(
. 3
14,40 oo
O
0
)3 acre :ROSSING LNZ
Is: 0.055 acre
Is: 0.037 acre 0
� U
� o
Y y
)4 acre �� NEW PR
ts: 0.055 acre
ts: 0.037 acre
)1 acre
s: 0.055 acre
s: 0.037 acre
m Impacts: 0.009 acre ;
r Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre
r Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acre f
Transmission Main Route
—3SOUTHERL'ND 'RD
0,
:1 N�
" Continued on Figure 4
IE
,nton WTP Figure
leigh 5
0.5
� Miles
e
E.B. Bain WTP
N
--__J
ALK R sr
S17
Stream Impacts: 0.014 acre ev5�
s
fy�
PENMARC DR
.. Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre
M
_ Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acreVx
p
f_
i
•'
Blow Off 4
UE D R
v ;3 Stream Impacts: 0.001 acre
Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre
Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acre RALD DR
�, +
G TE,ST_'!i'ra�.!•�.n
1,
r o
MBE RDAL
C9M�..._.. - _
Z
RALEIG
7
ILEAGNES R D a •� }
y1 s m S23
Wetland 4 -- ° Stream Im
Wetland Impacts: 0.02 acre = Buffer Zon
Buffer Zon
` r
S22 _ S15
Stream Impacts: 0.009 acre New Impa,
Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre '� Stream Im
Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acre Buffer Zon
Buffer Zon
Wetland 3 Blow Off 3
Wetland Impacts: 0.46 acre Stream Imp
z Buffer Zorn
z y Buffer Zorn
co CHAPANOKE RD"
SHERWEEDR
`er
O L'qe
CIRCLE LN o
x
TRYON RDS
O
A e' E.TRYON RD
S21
Stream
Stream Impacts: 0.006 acre
o LEA Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre
Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acreNMI,
'PO
Legend PL
Transmission Main Route
Blow Off Location DempseClt
Neuse River Buffer
Surface Waters 0 0.125
1 in(
. 3
14,40 oo
O
0
)3 acre :ROSSING LNZ
Is: 0.055 acre
Is: 0.037 acre 0
� U
� o
Y y
)4 acre �� NEW PR
ts: 0.055 acre
ts: 0.037 acre
)1 acre
s: 0.055 acre
s: 0.037 acre
m Impacts: 0.009 acre ;
r Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre
r Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acre f
Transmission Main Route
—3SOUTHERL'ND 'RD
0,
:1 N�
" Continued on Figure 4
IE
,nton WTP Figure
leigh 5
0.5
� Miles
e