20090693 Ver 1_401 Application_20090609

Ms. Chapman
NC Division of Water Quality
[-:R @ IN OVI 19 5
JUN 1 5 2009
401/Wetlands Unit DENR. wATER QUALITY
2321 Crabtree Blvd, Suite 250 WETLANDS ANDSTORtuiWATERBRANCH
Raleigh, NC 27604
Thank you again for helping us through this filing process.
June 15, 2009
09-0693
I wanted to give you a quick history of our involvement with the property. The property was purchased
by my father-in-law back in 1970. To the best of our knowledge, the house, pool, barn (boathouse),
retaining walls, and road where built between 1969 and 1972. We purchased the property early in 2006
to keep the bank from foreclosing on it. We cared for my father-in-law with brain cancer until his death
at the end of July. We moved into the house in August of 2006. The property and house was in ill
repair. Every time it rained the pond stayed red from the runoff of clay for a week. The rain ate ditches
in the landscape and started to tear down the old block retianing wall. Our only intention was to
improve the property and the water quality of the pond. When we purchased the property there was
no easements listed for the pond, nor did the State have any maps of the pond or knowledge of its
existence until Mr. Richmond came out in July of 2008. 1 would like to finish planting sod and trees, but
since the notice came out I was told to hold off. I included pictures that we found from sometime in the
80s and some current pictures from this year. I also have a video of the pond and property during a
heavy rainfall showing there is no sediment or runoff going into the pond, if that is helpful to you I can
provide it on DVD.
Thank you again for all of your help,

Christopher & Jennifer Mitscherlich
9508 Bartons Creek Road

Raleigh, NC 27615
[phone]
Application for a buffer authorization Page 1 of 1
From: Chapman, Amy <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
Subject: Application for a buffer authorization
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 10:02 am
Attachments: PCNv1_4.pdf (476K)
Chris,
Attached is the form you need to fill out. Check "Riparian Buffer Authorization" in box A 1d.
Check No in boxes 1f, 1g, and 1h.
Answer questions, A2, A3, B1-B6, C6,
For D1a, state this-impact has already occurred and is in the same footprint of the pre-existing wall and road
except for (how ever many feet of fill) for the wall that is additional.
Answer questions 6a(No), Fla, 2b, 2c, and sign and date the application.
Please attach the pics and plat we discussed earlier to your completed application and mail it to the email addy
in my signature block below.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks.
-Amy
Amy Chapman
NC Division of Water Quality
401/Wetlands Unit
2321 Crabtree Blvd, Suite 250
Raleigh, NC 27604
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
*Please note my email address has changed*
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and
may be disclosed to third parties.
Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
http://webmail.aol.com/42953/aol/en-nc/mai]/PrintMPCcn(y,- ,
'09-0693
N A?rF9?G

Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
1 a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps: ? Section 404 Permit ? Section 10 Permit
1b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: or General Permit (GP) number:
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps? ? Yes ? No
1 d. 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 ?X 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 ?X No
1 g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below. ? Yes ?X No
1 h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)? ? Yes ?X No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project: 9508 BARTON CREEK ROAD
2b. County: WAKE D
2c. Nearest municipality / town: RALEIGH lul
2d. Subdivision name: N/A jUN 2009
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no: N/A DENR-
3. Owner Information SAND STORMWATER BRANCH
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed: CHRISTOPHER & JENNIFER MITSCHERLICH
3b. Deed Book and Page No. BM1986 PG 1087
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable): N/A
3d. Street address: 9508 BARTONS CREEK ROAD
3e. City, state, zip: RALEIGH, NC 27615
3f. Telephone no.: 919-796-1428
3g. Fax no.: 919-8764659
3h. Email address: [e-mail]
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.4 January 2009
4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is: ? Agent ? Other, specify:
4b. Name:
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
4d. Street address:
4e. City, state, zip:
4f. Telephone no.:
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
5c. Street address:
5d. City, state, zip:
5e. Telephone no.:
5f. Fax no.:
5g. Email address:
Page 2 of 10
B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID): 1718.02-55-6372
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): Latitude: Longitude:
1 c. Property size: 3.59 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water to proposed project: MITSCHERLICH POND
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
2c. River basin: NUESE RIVER BASIN
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:
RESIDENCE
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 0.5
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 100
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
RECONDITION AND MAITIAN GRAVEL ROAD TO BOAT HOUSE. REBUILD RETAINING WALL. REPLACE RETIANING WALL DRAINS
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
See attachment
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? ? Yes ? No 0 Unknown

Comments: NOV-2008 wQ oo7a
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made? ? Preliminary ? Final
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): Martin Richmond Agency/Consultant Company: NC DWQ
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past? ?Yes 0 No ? Unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? ? Yes ?X No
6b. If yes, explain.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.4 January 2009
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.
Wetland impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary 2b.
Type of impact 2c.
Type of wetland 2d.
Forested 2e.
Type of jurisdiction
Corps (404,10) or
DWQ (401, other) 2f.
Area of
impact
(acres)
W1 Choose one Choose one Yes/No
W2 Choose one Choose one Yes/No
W3 Choose one Choose one Yes/No
W4 Choose one Choose one Yes/No
W5 Choose one Choose one Yes/No
W6 Choose one Choose one Yes/No
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.
Stream impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T) 3b.
Type of impact 3c.
Stream name 3d.
Perennial (PER) or
intermittent (INT)? 3e.
Type of
jurisdiction 3f.
Average
stream
width
(feet) 3g.
Impact
length
(linear
feet)
S1 Choose one
S2 Choose one
S3 Choose one
S4 Choose one
S5 Choose one
S6 Choose one
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
3i. Comments:
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.4 January 2009
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.
Open water
impact number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T 4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable) 4c.

Type of impact 4d.

Waterbody
type 4e.

Area of impact (acres)
01 Choose one Choose
02 Choose one Choose
03 Choose one Choose
04 Choose one Choose
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If and or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a.
Pond ID number 5b.
Proposed use or
purpose of pond 5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres) 5d.
Stream Impacts (feet) 5e.
Upland
(acres)
Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded Filled Excavated
P1 Choose one
P2 Choose one
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:
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. Project is in which protected basin? ? Neuse ? Tar-Pamlico ? Catawba ? Randleman ? Other:
6b.
Buffer Impact
number -
Permanent P or
Temporary (T 6c.
Reason for impact 6d.
Stream name 6e.
Buffer
mitigation

required? 6f.
Zone 1
impact

(square
feet 6g.
Zone 2
impact

(square
feet
B1 Yes/No
B2 Yes/No
B3 Yes/No
B4 Yes/No
B5 Yes/No
B6 Yes/No
6h. Total Buffer Impacts:
6i. Comments:
Page 5 of 10
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
The impact is already constructed and is the same footprint of the pre-existing wall road and out falls, except for 3 addition feet of fill added for
retaining wall and additional gravel and crush and run to replace worn gravel and crush and run.
•
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Set up 3 rows of silt fences to protect the water.
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

El 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: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one Quantity:
Quantity:
Quantity:
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Makin 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: Choose one
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 6 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.4 January 2009
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 7 of 10
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
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules? ? Yes ? No
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
? Yes ? No
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project? %
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:
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?

3b. Which of the following locally-implemented stormwater management programs
apply (check all that apply): ? Phase II
? NSW
? USMP
? Water Supply Watershed
? Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached? ? Yes ? No
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review

4a.

Which of the following state-implemented stormwater management programs apply
(check all that apply): ?Coastal counties
?HQW
?ORW

?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 8 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.4 January 2009
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, ?X Yes ? No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. Is this an after-the-fact permit application? ?X Yes ? No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
Attacted are the document from NC DWQ and our responses.
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.
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.
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.4 January 2009
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
habitat?
? Yes ? No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
impacts? El Yes ? No
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted. -
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat? ? Yes ?X No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
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
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
? Yes ? No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
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:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
C?,,"3 M"+TQl, r l C_l?
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant is provided.) Date
Page 10 of 10
B. Project Information and Prior Project History
3e
Tear down old block retaining wall, rebuild new retaining wall with keystone block. Install proper
drainage for retaining wall behind block. Regrade road and add new gravel to road. Planting of weeping
willows along pond, Cherrie trees above retaining wall, and black walnut trees by boathouse. Add
topsoil to all disrupted areas and plant sod.
Type of equipment used will be tractors and a mini-excavator.
l wAT`9Q
O G
r
> i
O Y
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Coleen M. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
July 29, 2008 . 0 9- 0 6 9 3
CERTIFIED MAIL #7006 0810 0002 6049 6225
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Christopher Mitscherlich
Jennifer T. Mitscherlich
9508 Bartons Creek Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27651
CERTIFIED MAIL #7006 0810 0002 6049 6171
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Christopher Mitscherlich
Jennifer T. Mitscherlich
2801 Nashford Place
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Subject: NOTICE OF VIOLATION and
RECOMMENDATION FOR ENFORCEMENT
NOV-2008-WQ-0074
Mitscherlich Residence 9508 Bartons Creek Rd
Neuse River Buffer Violation
Wake County
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Mitscherlich:
On July 18, 2008, Martin Richmond of the NC Division of Water Quality (DWQ)
Raleigh Regional Office conducted a site inspection of construction activities at your
property located at 9508 Barton Creek Road in Wake County.
During the inspection DWQ staff noted impacts to approximately 400 linear feet of an
unnamed tributary (and pond) of Falls Lake, Water Supply IV, Nutrient Sensitive Waters
(NSW), Critical Area (CA). These impacts include removal of trees and clearing of
undergrowth vegetation, introduction of fill material, construction of impervious surfaces,
and establishment of stormwater outfall(s) within the 50-foot Neuse River Riparian
Buffer
The Buffer Rules apply to riparian buffers directly adjacent to surface waters in the
Neuse River Basin (intermittent streams, perennial streams, lakes, ponds and estuaries). N"o ?` Carolin
NatkullY
N. C. Division of Water Quality 3800 Barrett Drive
Raleigh Regional Office [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper
• Page 2 of 3
Christopher Mitscherlich
Wake County
The protected buffer extends 50-feet landward from the landward edge of coastal marsh
(as identified by the Division of Coastal Management) or from the top of bank of any
feature shown as surface waters on either a paper copy of the soil survey maps prepared
by the Natural Resource Conservation Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture or
the most recent version of the 1:24000 scale quadrangle topographic maps prepared by
the U.S. Geological Survey. The protected riparian buffer has two zones: Zone 1 consists
of a vegetated area that is undisturbed except for uses provided for in Item (6) of this
Rule (Title 15A NCAC 02B .0233); Zone 2 shall consists of a stable, vegetated area that
is undisturbed except for activities and uses provided for in Item (6) of this Rule (Title
15A NCAC 02B .0233). The purpose of these rules is to protect and preserve riparian
buffers in the Neuse River Basin to maintain the nutrient removal functions of these
streamside areas necessary to protect surface waters.
As a result of the site inspection and a file review, the following violations are noted:
Item I. Neuse River Buffer - Vegetation
15A NCAC 02B .0233 (4)
Zones 1 and 2 of the riparian buffer remain in vegetation that is undisturbed except for
those uses provided for in Item (6) of this Rule.
Item II. Neuse River Buffer - Diffuse Flow
15A NCAC 02B .0233 (5)
Diffuse flow of runoff shall be maintained in the riparian buffer by dispersing
concentrated flow and reestablishing vegetation.
Requested Response
Accordingly, you are directed to respond to this letter in writing within 30 calendar days
of receipt of this Notice. Your response should include the following:
1. Please explain why these impacts occurred without prior authorization.
2. Please provide documentation (including a detailed site map/survey) depicting all
jurisdictional water features (e.g. streams, wetlands, buffers) on the site. This
documentation should describe and quantify the impacts to those jurisdictional
features, and should include plans to avoid further stream and buffer impacts on the
site.
3. Please submit the following documents for review and approval:
a) Riparian Zone Restoration - Please submit a Restoration Plan to this office for
review and approval. This plan must account for both re-establishment of
riparian vegetation and removal of all impervious surface and stormwater
outfall(s). This plan must be developed to ensure that at least two native tree
species are planted at a density sufficient to provide 320 trees/acre at maturity.
This density is usually achieved by planting approximately 436 trees/acre on a
10 ft. x 10 ft. grid or 681 trees/acre on a 8 ft. x 8 ft. grid. Please see the
Guidelines for Riparian Buffer Restoration (October 2004) for assistance in
Page 3 of 3
Christopher Mitscherlich
Wake County
developing your plan. This plan must include the types of native woody
vegetation selected, methodology of planting, and a site map indicating the
location of the replanting efforts. In addition, this plan must describe any and
all activities associated with removal of the impervious surface and
stormwater outfalls.
b) Major Variance Application - If you wish to pursue a possible variance, such
that impacts or portions of the impacts may remain, you must submit an
application for a major variance, as required under 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(9)(c). Persons who wish to undertake uses designated as prohibited may
pursue a variance. A major variance request pertains to activities that are
proposed to impact any portion of Zone 1 or any portion of both Zones 1 and
2 of the riparian buffer.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. This Office is considering sending a
recommendation for enforcement to the Director of the Division of Water Quality
regarding these issues and any future/continued violations that may be encountered.
Your above-mentioned response to this correspondence will be considered in this
process. This office requires that the violations, as detailed above, be abated
immediately. These violations and any future violations are subject to a civil
penalty assessment of up to $25,000.00 per day for each violation. Should you have
any questions regarding these matters, please contact Martin Richmond or myself at
[phone].
Si c ely,
i
Danny S th
Regional Supervisor
Surface Water Protection Section
cc: Raleigh Regional Office File Copy
John Hennessy - NPS-ACO Unit, Archdale Building
DWQ Central Files
Mr. Dave Parnell, Wake County Environmental Services
November 14, 2008
Mr. Danny Smith
NC Division of Water Quality
Raleigh Regional Office
3800 Barrett Drive
Raleigh, NC
Subject: Notice of Violation received NOV-2008-WQ-0074 for the Mitscherlich Residence 9508
Bartons Creek Rd
Dear Mr. Smith:
When we purchased the property all impervious surfaces and structures were existing. These
structures were originally installed between the years of 1969 and 1972 when the house was
built. We have only tried to provide upkeep to the structures and are willing to work with
government agencies in any reasonable way to upkeep and/or improve the water quality.
Since we received the Notice of Violation I have spoken with Dr. Greg Jennings from NC State
University on several occasions and Mr. Martin Richmond with DWQ to try to find the best
ways to restore and improve the stream and pond on my property. Dr. Greg Jennings visited
my property on November 7th to inspect the stream and pond and give recommendations on
how to improve it. Dr. Jennings advised me that the stream was functioning exactly as
intended and that I should plant some dormant trees around the pond with 10ft by 10ft spacing
in between in the months of January and February. Dr. Jennings is willing to answer any
questions you may have on his site visit or his recommendations, you can reach him by e-mail
at [e-mail]
The following issues were listed on the letter and my response is written beside them:
1. Removal of Trees: All trees that were removed were diseased and/or damaged by
beavers in the property. This can be seen in the attached pictures.
2. Clearing of Undergrowth Vegetation: Undergrowth vegetation has been replanted as
can be seen in the attached pictures. I will plant dormant trees in the months of January
and February around the pond as advised by Dr. Jennings.
3. Constructions of Impervious Surfaces/Introduction of Fill Materials: There were no
building impacts only renovations. All structures (road, walls and barn) were existing
when we purchased the property which was built around 1969. See attached pictures
4. Establishment of Storm water Outfall(s): Drains from the house foundation were
existing and made out of Terra Cotta piping. The Terra Cotta piping suffered damage
throughout the years and we replaced it with corrugated piping.
I tried to schedule a site visit with Mr. Martin Richmond before I wrote this response. I spoke to
Mr. Richmond two or three times but our schedules impeded our meeting. I would like to meet
with Mr. Richmond in the near future to see if he has any recommendations on how I can
further improve my pond and stream.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to give me a call.
Thank you,
Christopher Mitscherlich
9508 Barton Creek Rd
Raleigh, NC 27615
919-796-1428
May 7, 2009
Mr. Danny Smith
NC Division of Water Quality
Raleigh Regional Office
3800 Barrett Drive
Raleigh, NC
Subject: Notice of Violation received NOV-2008-WQ-0074 for the Mitscherlich Residence 9508
Barton's Creek Rd
Dear Mr. Smith:
Following is the revised response to the letter that I previously responded in a format that
Martin Richmond requested:
Following are the impacts that were noted during the inspection performed by DWQ
staff, which was listed on the letter sent to us with their response:
1) Q. Please explain why these impacts occurred without prior authorization.
A. I did not know that my creek and manmade pond were considered to be within the
critical area of Neuse River Basin or that there was an easement extending from this
man made pond. When we purchased this property it was not stated within any of
the documentation accompanying the property about any easement for around the
water. Upon meeting with Mr. Richmond it was stated that the NCDWQ had no
records or maps that the pond or stream existed. Therefore how could I have
known that we needed to acquire prior authorization to provide upkeep or rebuild
impervious surfaces and structures that existed on the property. These structures
were originally installed between the years of 1969 and 1972 when the house was
built. We have provided some old photos of the property in our original response on
Nov 14th 2008 and to Mr. Richmond during the site visit.
a) Q. Removal of Trees
Most of the trees that were removed were diseased and/or damaged by
beavers in the property. This can be seen in the attached pictures. We still
are in the process of trying to save several trees on the property that are
diseased and getting ready to fall. Several of these trees have not fallen and
can still be inspected. We have not yet hired a tree expert to visit the site,
but we spoke to a landscaper about these problems about four years ago and
they said to remove all the diseased trees in the area to not let the disease
spread. We wanted to plant dormant trees in the months of January and
February around the pond as advised by Dr. Jennings with NC State
University, but unfortunately it has taken longer than expected time to get a
correct survey of the property and recombine the three parcels to 2 parcels
to where they make sense. This process is still not yet completed or
approved by the county.
b) Q. Clearing of Undergrowth Vegetation
A. A lot of the Undergrowth vegetation was disrupted during the repairing
of the road and rebuilding of the wall. The undergrowth vegetation has been
replanted as can be seen in the attached pictures.
c) Q. Constructions of Impervious Surfaces/Introduction of Fill Materials
All structures (Gravel road, walls and barn) were existing when we purchased
the property; its estimated these were built between 1969 to 1972. Which
can be seen in the original responses attached pictures.
Barn: During site visit the original pictures of the barn in the late 70s early
80s were shown to Mr. Richmond and his colleague. They both agreed that
even though restoration work was done to the barn, that the foot print had
not changed.
Gravel Road: During site visit the original pictures of the road in the early
80s were shown to Mr. Richmond and his colleague. The road was originally
graded when the barn was built this was the only access to the two door
garage as seen in the photos attached in the original response on Nov. 14th
2008. Mr. Martin stated that we should have had NCDWQ come and inspect
the road and get approval before adding additional gravel or clearing weeds
that have grown on it. I explained to Mr. Richmond that we did not know
that we were supposed to contact anyone because we were never notified
by anyone or supplied with any documentation during our closing. Mr.
Richmond advised us that we would need to apply for a major and minor
variance for the road.
Retaining wall: The retaining wall was originally built from concrete block
and was painted. The wall was in need of serious repair, a wood wall was
built in front of a section of the wall to try and retain the blocks and mud.
After we purchased the property during every rain the pond would turn red
from the gullies rutted out by the rain and the damaged wall. We built a
solid retaining wall with proper drainage then planted sod to control the flow
of water. We have taken a video during a heavy rain showing how well the
wall works and how no mud at all is entering the pond from our property.
We were once again unaware that we needed to contact NCDWC to rebuild
the wall. Our intentions were to only improve the water quality in the pond
not to harm the easement. Mr. Richmond also advised us to apply for a
major and minor variance for the retaining wall.
d) Q. Establishment of Storm water Outfall(s)
Drains from the foundations were existing and made out of Terra Cotta
piping. The Terra Cotta piping suffered damage throughout the years and
was replaced in part of the Terra Cotta with hard plastic pipe that was
damaged on the ends. When we rebuilt the wall we replaced the pipe with
corrugated piping. Some of the original Terra Cotta is still in place up by the
house. We were also unaware that we needed prior inspection before
replacing this pipe. Mr. Richmond also advised that we would need to apply
for a variance.
2) Q. Please provide documentation (including a detailed site map/survey) depicting all
jurisdictional water features (e.g. streams, wetlands, buffers) on site. This documentation
should describe and qualify the impacts to those jurisdictional features, and should include
plans to avoid further steam and buffer impacts.
We have been working with two separate surveying companies to try and provide and
accurate map of the property, 30 and 50 foot nuese riparian buffer. We had to disengage
the contract with the first surveying company and owner Leon Hussey. Mr. Hussey said that
they needed more time to research all the gaps and overlays in the county records for the
transfer between owners of the three tracts. We then hired Angle Right surveyors to pick
up where the previous surveyor left off. We decided to clean up the tracts by combining
them into two parcels. There are still gaps between our property and adjoining neighbors
that are unaccounted for. We have submitted the preliminary survey that has all of the
property, improvements, and easements on it. We cannot get the completed plans until
the recombination is approved by the county.
3) Please submit the following documents for review and approval:
a) Riparian Zone Restoration
In the original response letter, an initial restoration plan of planting some dormant trees
around the pond with 10ft by 10ft spacing in between in the months of January and
February was proposed. Upon our onsite meeting with Mr. Richmond he advised us to
not include our restoration plans with this letter until we worked further through this
process.
b) Major Variance Application
Do not understand the filing process. We would like to make an
appointment with someone at NCDWQ to help file these applications
correctly.
In Closing:
Mr. Richmond was very polite and helpful to us in explaining how the easements
came about and what theses easements mean. He also stated that there was no
impact to water, only to the easement. I hope that the NCDWQ can continue to
work with us as landowners through this process because buffer easements or
restoration are not our expertise. We are trying to provide all information asked of
us in a timely manner; unfortunately, these are old parcels that have been split up
and added to many times and have still been left in three pieces. The county admits
to not even having records of the house that exists on the property let alone the
walls, roads, and barn. Hiring the right surveyor for the property has also been a
challenge there are several areas in the records that are unclear, overlap or don't
meet. We have scheduled several charitable events with the North Carolina based
Children's Homes and the Girl Scouts of America. We look forward to working with
the NCDWQ in any way we can to help us speed up this process so others and
ourselves can enjoy the property for years to come.
Thank You for all of you help,
Christopher Mitscherlich
Jennifer T. Mitscherlich
�_--r
'�t�. ��-
J

1
2
iqw\s

3
y
I q 90 'S
S
6
fu\1of a 00$

7
i?o

?c.\1 0? X008
?sµuo c.t4444E /MAA/

k 9+
a
l x?
nt;
1 ?
Z.

e?
¢

44
^r
A

a

Fa?\ (:).? agog
9

3Y,
v
?A
V.? X' ? ?? ? tµl? t
s, y.: Atm. 4
.?6? o ? (9 00 a?
Ip

Y
Ws1J {1w t
? ,?.. YQ
$
+ H y
4

?r A?..
Y
i?
_'"
GF
LT
i 9F

` ?y y '

O, b
{cx\\ ? 4 d00 8
?1fiv? ?e.?1
X11 ?F ?$

/V/"'
17
CL,
R:
?Q9o& 2o0 8

l?
/9
8oos-

rill"
t: Z

2/
q"u o?dacR
71k)?; AJ

22
z?
?M

S?& 0-? ?)Oc a
pole

.-..
?..,
slow
W A?_.

//5/o
lo 9
& / OS
LEGEND: LINE BEARING DISTANCE
EIP Q EXISTING IRON PIPE L1 S 50'20'38" w 25.44'
BEIP~i BENT EXISTING IRON PIPE L2 S 09'36'11" E 36.75'
IPSO IRON PIPE SET L3 S 2703'55" E 78.71' U DuHpplr RD. ECM 83 EXIST, CONCRETE MONUMENT
y ~ EIS ~ EXIST. IRON STAKE CURVE RADIUS ARC LENGTH CHORD LENGTH CHORD BEARING DELTA ANGLE o BARYONS w NPS 0 NO POINT SET CREEK EXt ~ C1 432.28' 152.25' 151,46' S 33'18'12" f 20'10'45"
2~ ~ohF R/w RIGHT OF wAY C2 432.28' 43.44' 43.42' S 20'20'06" E 05°45'26" --W"d. ...m..~~
o Rp Rp -OHE- OVERHEAD • -..,..e... .o,,,.~, EIP ELECTRIC UNE
~ SITE y ~ POWER POLE W
HEIR EXISTING IRON ROD ~''f T ~ • 't r
r° Nit
u,s, ~ ' EXISTING DAM ` ~ ~
w.o~ x
~ ~ , o. ~z
N.T.S. M.,,"-- I # 1 1 Z ~ t ~ EIP A '02
VICINITY MAP , ~ ~ FLAT IRON .T ABOVE ~ I 1 ~ GRADE ®TOP ~ O az
REFERNCES: EIP i ,t ` CONTROL CORNER ~0
BM 1971 PG 4$8 ""`f ~ t I ` ~ r.,~- t a~ 1.
BM 19$2, PG 997 ~ ~ .
BM 19$3, PG 1116 N/F u' ~1 ; i DB 4220, PG 636 PIN 1718.15-5-2971 ~ ; N• ;t t
DB 2102, PG 526 ~ ~
DB 11909, PG 1935 ~C i w ~,L 3
DB 7650, PG 402 S ~ 6 ~ OTHERS AS NOTED ON FACE OF PLAT A~. c~~ ~ „ W 6 EXISTING POND ! r
~ ,
A9., ~ S IPS ~ ~ r-
'J ~ ~ f ~
l ~ MUIR FIELD SUBDIVISION , , BM 1983, PG 1116
°ye OZ 81 ~ ~
OHE i i ~ ~ ~P~ Z ~ ~ t
~ ~ ti i EIP G ~ ~S E
CONTROL CORNER\~.. ~,S'(it~ ~ W ~ r~N~ 1r ~ '
~ r '9/H SF , , ;4 EIP ~
\ N 't
to qS *.i . , S 0, A ,EXISTING BOAT HOUSE
1' ~ LT $RICK 2 STORY ,y cP 'v' \ x"22 \ NEW LOT 2 AREA ~RJ ~o, • go ~ ~ ~9, rr,
~ ~~y ~ ~ , i I \ , C'''., \ 40 057.93 SF ~Y ti t s
I. _ _ PLANNING DIRECTOR 6~ ~ I IPS F ~ EIP. 4• A AND REVIEW OFFICER OF WAKE COUNTY, CERTIFY THAT THIS ~ ~ ~ ~ O.92AC ~ S ` G~, ~ l!1
PLAT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A SUBDiV1510K AND THAT IT > ti--~•••••-•••~••--~. F` ' ti, ~ F MEETS ALL STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS FOR RECORDING. \ ~ ~ \ ~ ~ 1, 61 ~ ~ , • GS APPARENT GAP ~AP
BECAUSE OF ITS "EXEMPT" STATUS, THE COUNTY HAS NOT ~ ~ ~ ` NEW 1 ~ G ` ~ ~ ; rs N ~G
REVIEWED 1NIS PLAT FOR COMPLiANGE WITH APPLICABLE LOT A % g 3 ~ ~ S F M N , ~`,r, STANDARDS AND OTHER SUBDIVISION REGULA110NS {E.G., \ C S ~ ~ ~ \ B F'~.; ~ ~ F
ROAD STANDARDS . PROSPECTIVE PURCHASERS SHOULD BE ~ •"t ,ioy~ ~ \ G,~ f ~ ~ 259 ~ ~ rn ~ \ ~'•w.,~r~ s~~:. ; AWARE THAT PLANS FOR BUILDING AND DEVELOPMENT MAY d~ , ~ X ~n ~ ; . O,a k~
BE DENIED FOR LOTS THAT DO NOT MEET APPLICABLE ~ ~ ` n N 'p ' ~ tiC to
COUNTY STANDARDS, THIS APPROVAL EXPIRES IF NOT 60 , r j ° ~ a ' \,G~ IPS S ~ RECORDED BEFORE_.___~_ . \ IPS ~.,6 ' ~ { ~ z ~ ~ ~ f ~`'\~~'P~"'~ 0 sr PIN:1718A2-55
N/F ,t ~ \yy`F,~,, tx' EIP 1:1718.02-55-9263
CREASMAN , t ~ v ~ ~
PIN 1718,02-55-1262 , n ~ j ~ N N s ' GX. DAiE PLAh'NIN6 DIRECTOR/REVIEW OFFICER tJ PIN: 1718.02-55-6372 ~ ~ o ~ '~t ~ C~j, ~ \ i I
m ~ ORIGINAL ARE4 LOT 1 t ~ } i z -c .o EIP \ ` `EIP ~ \ ~ 0 \
1 ~ 156,532.50 SF k ~ ~ ? OLD PROPERTY LINE y \ ~ 88.9 N IPS WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA ~ ; 3.59AC ~,,i r' \ S~, '•~.,w w ~
WE CERTIFY THAT WE ARE 7NE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY SHOWN AND ' ~ ~ - A E NEW AREA LOT 1 7 s, ,
DESCRIBED HEREON, WHICH IS 1N THE SUBDIVISION JURISDIC110N OF THE { EXISTING Q A h COUNTY OF WAKE AND THAT wE HEREBY ADOPT THIS PLAT WITH OUR FREE t 156 856.97 SF R 6S A - • ^c~ " `'EIP
CONSENT. s, m ~ POOL/PATIO A EA 3 . 9' !y p fO N _ ` 3.60AC
- / ~ ` NI ' O10 PROP ~ ~ ~ ~
CHRISTOPHER MITSCHERLICH DATE , z ~ ERTy LIN'•"•°' o ~ SO' . ~ { ; ~ ; E ~ r~ N EIP (q EItP O FU
~ D PIN: 1718.02-55 8135 ~ M eGF .
JENNIFER T, MISTSCHERLICH~ DATE ~ $ ORIGINAL AREA LOT 2 0 FFR
I ' r ` N 83' 40,382.40 SF 56'03, W ~
° : 503.7¢' N F
v / MUIR FIELD SUBDIVISION
BM 1980, PG 389
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ~
COUNTY OF WAKE ~ EIP N/F N/F ;S:
1 A NOTARY PUBLIC Of TH PIN 1716.15-54-3781 LANE R-40W SETBACKS: - E COUNTY AND STATE l ' ' FRONT CORNER ..............30 AFORESAID, CERTIFY THAT THE OWNERS LISTED ON THIS PLAT, PERSONALLY I PIN 1718.15-54-7829 .............30
APPEARED BEFORE ME 1HIS DAY AND ACKNOWLEGDED THE EXECUTION OF ' I SIDE ................................15 .............15
THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT. WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFlCIAL SEAL THIS REAR ...............................30 ~~_DAY OF ____N_~ , 2009. .............30
NOTE:
NOTARY PUBLIC 1. ALL DISTANCES ARE HORIZONTAL GROUND DISTANCES UNLESS OTHERWISE ~ 09 0
SPECIFIED. 6 9 2. THIS PROPERTY SUBJECT 70 ALL EASEMENTS OF RECORD THAT A TITLE
THIS SURVEY IS OF ANOTHER CATEGORY, SUCH AS THE OPINION OR TITLES SEARCH MAY DISCOVER. p ~ RECOMBINAITON OF EXISTING PARCELS, A COURT ORDERED
SURVEY, OR OTHER EXCEPITON TO THE DEFINITION OF 3. AREA WAS CALCULATED BY COORDINATE METHOD. ~ }I, 1~
SUBDIVISION. 4. DASHED LINES HAVE NOT BEEN SURVEYED UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 5. THIS SITE, IS GREATER THAN 2,000 FEET FROM AN NCGS MONUMENT.
"I Michael P, Tutt certif that this lat was drawn under m su ~UN 1 3 ~Q 900 0 y p y pervlslon Q~ 0 50 100
I from an actual survey made under my supervision; that fhe boundaries not (
surveyed are clearly indicated as drown from information noted an plat; DENR-WATERCilAli3t` that the ratio of recision as calculated is 1: 40 000 • that this lat was ~ P ~ P ~ETLANDSANOST{~dfAT,fR;B~id ~ ~
prepared in accordance with G.S. 47-30 as amended. Witness my original 1 inch = 5i signature, registration number and seal this ~ day of A.D., 1 inch = 50 ft.
REV. DESCRIPTION BY DATE DRAWN BY: MPT CHECKED BY RECOMBINATION SURVEY OF. IECKE® BY:
Surveyor ANGLE SCALE: 1 =50 Registration number: L-4443
SURVEYING THE PAST AND THE FUTURE tODAY DATE OF SURVEY: 4 10 2®®9 10/2009
919-81 -43 4 PROPERTY OWNERS; 0 2
603 HARDlNG STREET RALEIGH, NC 27604 CHRISTOPHER AND JENNIFER MITSCHERLICH BARYONS CREEK TOWNSHIP, WAKE CNTY, NORTH CAROLINA JOB NUMBER SHEET 1 SHEET 1 OF 1
9508 BARYONS CREEK RD.
RALEIGH, NC 27615 09_104-BARTONSCR...