19960894 Ver 1_COMPLETE FILE_19960917

TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP
A T T O R N E Y S A T L A W
A L I M I T E D L I A B I L I T Y P A R T N E R S H I P
BANK OF AMERICA CENTER
1111 EAST MAIN STREET
RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23219
www.troutmansanders.com
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FACSIMILE: 804-697-1339
MAILING ADDRESS
P.O. BOX 1122
RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23218-1122
Shannon R. Varner
[e-mail]
March 22, 2005
Ms. Cyndi Karoly
Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources
2321 Crabtree Boulevard
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-2260
Ms. Noelle Lutheran
Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845
Re: Hestron Shopping Center, Morehead City, North Carolina
Dear Ms. Karoly and Ms. Lutheran:
Direct Dial: 804-697-1331
Direct Fax: [phone]
Enclosed please find a copy of Wal-Mart's response to the United States Army
Corps of Engineers ("Corps") regarding mitigation issues associated with the Hestron Shopping
Center in Morehead City. The response notes some differing positions between the Corps and
your agency regarding appropriate mitigation. However, as expressed in the response, options
exist which can meet both agencies' needs.
It is our hope that the enclosed letter will bring the DWQ and the Corps together
on the appropriate steps to take with regard to Hestron Shopping Center mitigation. Please do
not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or comments or if Wal-Mart, Wal-Mart's
wetland consultants or I can be of any assistance.
1
i
ATLANTA • HONG KONG • LONDON • NORFOLK • RALEIGH • RICHMOND
TYSONS CORNER VIRGINIA BEACH • WASHINGTON, D.C.
TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP
Ms. Cyndi Karoly
Ms. Noelle Lutheran
March 22, 2005
Page Two
Sincerely,
- Shannon R. Varner
1350621
Enclosure
cc: Jennifer May-Brust, Wal-Mart
Steve Howe, Wal-Mart
.Gayla Hoipkemeier, Wal-Mart
Ashley H. Story, Esquire, Troutman Sanders LLP
Bob Belcher, Malcolm Pimie
Todd Simmons, Freeland & Kaufmann
Mickey Sugg, US Army Corps
ATLANTA • HONG KONG • LONDON • NORFOLK • RALEIGH • RICHmoND
TYSONS CORNER • VIRGINIA BEACH • WASHINGTON, D.C.
TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP
A T T O R N E Y S A T L A W
A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP
BANK OF AMERICA CENTER
1111 EAST MAIN STREET
RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23219
www.troutmansanders.eom
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FACSIMILE: 804-697.1339
MAILING ADDRESS
P.O. BOX 1122
RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23218.1122
Shannon R. Varner
[e-mail]
March 21, 2005
Mr. Mickey T. Sugg
United States Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
Re: Hestron Shopping Center, Morehead City, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Sugg:
Direct Dial: 804.697-1331
Direct Fax: [phone]
This is in response to the Corps' January 6, 2005, letter to Wal-Mart and our subsequent
conversations requesting alternative proposals addressing issues you have raised regarding
compensatory mitigation for the development of the Cypress Bay Shopping Center/Hestron
Shopping Center in Morehead City, North Carolina ("Hestron Shopping Center"). Wal-Mart
appreciates the Corps' comments commending it for its efforts in pursuit of alternative
mitigation sites. Wal-Mart has expended considerable effort and funds since being contacted by
you to address mitigation and permitting issues and is committed to identifying an equitable
resolution to this matter. As you have requested as a response to the Corps' January 6, 2005,
letter, Wal-Mart has developed alternative compensatory mitigation proposals that address your
concerns and meet the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) regulations. I believe it
useful to first discuss this situation's background in order to put the alternative proposals in
context.
Hestron Corporation obtained Corps Permit No. 199603796 on January 29, 1998, for
impacts to 21.01 acres of wetlands for the expansion of the Hestron Shopping Center. That
permit was transferred to Tribeck on April 30, 1998. Hestron also obtained North Carolina
Division of Water Quality 401 Certification No. 3146 for the impacts. Wal-Mart acquired a
portion of the Hestron Shopping Center in 2000 after all permitting was completed, after wetland
impacts had occurred, and after compensatory mitigation efforts where undertaken. Wal-Mart
was not involved in wetland impacts or in the original compensatory mitigation plan design.
ATLANTA - HONG KONG LONDON • NORFOLK - RALEIGH • RICHMOND
TYsON3 CORNER VIRGINIA BEACH - WASHINGTON, D.C.
TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP
Mr. Mickey T. Sugg
March 21, 2005
Page 2
Of the wetlands impacted by Tribeck during site development approximately one-half
were on the area subsequently acquired by Wal-Mart. Compensation for Tribeck's impacts to
the 21.01 acres of wetlands included both on and off-site efforts. On-site efforts included a
combination of restoration, preservation, creation and enhancement. The Corps and DWQ have
confirmed that the on-site mitigation areas are protected. The off-site mitigation is the 51 acre
Laurel Road Mitigation Site, a portion of which includes the planned restoration of 23.6 acres.
All 51 acres were placed under a permanent conservation easement in 1998. You and Wal-
Mart's wetland consultant, Malcolm Pirnie, have visited the Laurel Road Site and have identified
five (5) successfully restored wetland acres leaving an apparent 18.6 acre restoration deficit at
the Laurel Road Site. A summary of both off-site and on-site existing mitigation is provided
below (note that the apparent failure to restore 18.6 acres at Laurel Road is listed as "upland
preservation").
Mitigation Type Offsite (Laurel
Road Onsite
Restoration 5.0 2.41
Creation - 1.48
Enhancement - 9.61
Wetland Preservation 27.4 0.23
Upland Preservation 18.6 -
Total 51.0- 13.73
It is important to recognize several issues relating to the original permitting and
mitigation plan developed for Tribeck by Land Management Group. First, it appears, in
retrospect, that the mitigation plan design was flawed from the outset. Both the Corps and the
DWQ have expressed misgivings about the mitigation plan since making it a permit condition.
Second, it also appears that the jurisdictional, determination used for quantifying the impacts and
for development of the on-site mitigation plan had expired and was of questionable validity.
Third, Wal-Mart had no involvement with the design of the mitigation plan. Fourth, despite
apparent shortcomings in the mitigation plan there have been successes which will continue to
provide environmental benefits. These successes and environmental benefits should be
recognized and should be given credit in consideration of proposals put forth to address
mitigation shortcomings. Benefits associated with both the on and off-site mitigation efforts
included the perpetual protection of those areas providing long term habitat, water quality, flood
attenuation and other environmental benefits.
Wal-Mart has undertaken considerable effort to assess the quality and effectiveness of the
on and off-site mitigation plans, to identify potential alternatives to the Laurel Road restoration
area, and to meet with the Corps to assess potential alternative sites and to assess on-site
mitigation efforts. During this process you, Bob Belcher of Malcolm Pirnie and I have had a
TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP
A T T O R N E Y S AT L A W
A LIMITED LIA.SILITY PARTNERSHIP
Mr. Mickey T. Sugg
March 21, 2005
Page 3
number of discussions on how to resolve permitting and mitigation issues. Early on you
indicated that you would not prefer a payment to the Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (DENR) Wetland Trust Fund. Instead, following your guidance and with the
understanding from DWQ that DWQ would be following your lead on mitigation alternatives,
Wal-Mart went to considerable efforts and expense to identify numerous preservation sites. Sites
were narrowed and you and Bob Belcher met on some sites to determine their suitability. Two
sites, the McCotter Property and the Lewis Property, were identified during those visits as prime
candidates as preservation alternatives.
Following those site visits, you, Bob Belcher, representatives of DWQ and I met on
September 1, 2004, to discuss those sites and resolution of permitting, compliance and mitigation
issues through one of their preservation. At our September 1, 2004, meeting we learned that
DWQ had issues with preservation and would rather have some form of restoration or payment
to the (DENR) Wetland Trust Fund - an opposite view from that expressed by you.
DWQ has indicated that their regulations require that restoration or creation be provided
at a 1:1 ratio to impacts. However, while DWQ regulations do indicate a preference for
restoration or payment into the DENR Wetland Trust Fund over preservation, the agency clearly
has the authority to allow alternatives. For example 15A NCAC 02H .0506 (h) (6) states: "All
mitigation proposals shall provide for the replacement of wetland, acres lost due to the proposed
activity at a minimum of a 1:1 ratio through restoration or creation prior to utilizing enhancement
or preservation to satisfy the mitigation requirements, unless the Director determines that the
public good would be better served by other types of mitigation." (Emphasis added). The DWQ
regulations also contemplate that preservation is an appropriate option and spells out that it may
be provided at a 5:1 ratio.
We are hopeful that, following your receipt of this letter, additional discussions will take
place to resolve the differing positions of the agencies on appropriate methods for compensating
for impacts. However, at this point we are faced with conflicting agency positions that would in
effect require double compensation if both were to be met. On the one hand DWQ is now
suggesting payment into the DENR Wetland Trust Fund. On the other you have indicated
limited interest in the DENR Wetland Trust Fund and a strong preference in environmentally
valuable preservation areas. Obviously DWQ has stepped back from its position that it would
follow your lead but I believe that options exist that satisfy both agencies' requirements without
requiring double compensation. Below I outline several alternative proposals.
Alternative 1 - DENR Wetland Trust Fund
Payment into the DENR Wetland Trust Fund has been recommended by DWQ as a
means to ensure the 1:1 criteria of 15A NCAC 0214.0506 (h)(6) is met. Currently the project
contains 8.89 acres of restoration and creation (5 successful acres at Laurel Road and 3.89 acres
TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP
Mr. Mickey T. Sugg
March 21, 2005
Page 4
onsite) An additional 12.12 credits / acres would need to be added to the existing mitigation to
meet DWQ's recommendation. This alternative consists of a one hundred forty-eight thousand
seven hundred eighty five dollars and twelve cents ($148,785.12) (based on 12.12 acres times
$12,276) payment to the DENR Wetland Trust Fund for the purchase of 12.12 credits.
Implementation of this alternative would require the preparation and submittal of a
request for acceptance into DENR Wetland Trust Fund after receiving confirmation from the
Corps and DWQ that this alternative is acceptable to fulfill all obligations with regard to all
permitting, compliance and mitigation requirements of the above referenced Section 404 permit
and 401 certification and that, if necessary, permit and mitigation plan amendments have been
approved.
This would be the most expedited means for resolving permitting, compliance and
mitigation issues.
Alternative .2 - Preservation of the McCotter Property
The McCotter Property is ±215 acres in size and located less than 2.5 miles north of
Hestron Shopping Center (Figures 1 and 2). The property is immediately northwest of the
confluence of the Newport River and Sandy Branch. The McCotter Property is underlain by
Tomotley fine sandy loam, Goldsboro loamy fine sand, Mastontown mucky loam and Hobucken
muck.
Preservation of this property provides a unique opportunity to protect several habitat
types including pocosin, bottomland hardwood swamp, estuarine marsh, and pine uplands
against development and/or other anthropogenic impacts. Approximate acreage for each of the
communities is provided in the table below.
Community Type Acres
Pocosin 73
Bottomland Hardwood 65
Estuarine Marsh 66
Pine Uplands 11
Total 215
Preservation alone of the approximately 73 acres of pocosin wetland would exceed the
5:1 preservation to impacts ratio requirements in the DWQ regulations (12.12 acres times 5
would require 60.6 acres of preservation). However this site also has many added benefits which
further make it in the "public good" discretion of DWQ as an alternative mitigation method to
restoration, creation or payment to the DENR Wetland Trust Fund. An additional benefit of the
TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP
A T T O R N E Y S AT L A W
A LIMITEO LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP
Mr. Mickey T. Sugg
March 21, 2005
Page 5
preservation of the McCotter Property is that it is adjacent to the North Carolina Coastal Land
Trust 1,100 acre easement along Walker's Millpond, Black Creek and the Newport River. In
addition to the wetland and habitat preservation value, the McCotter Property would provide an
approximately 3,700 linear foot buffer along the northern shore of the Newport River upstream
of the above referenced easement and an approximately 4,800 linear foot buffer along the
western bank of Sandy Branch.
At our September 1, 2004, meeting we suggested preserving the approximately 73 acres
of pocosin wetlands on this property. Wal-Mart is now near completion of negotiating the
acquisition of the entire 215 acres. Wal-Mart will need to complete its due diligence on the
McCotter Property but based on site visits issues are not anticipated. Purchase and recordation
of preservation restrictions could occur as soon as practicable after receiving confirmation from
the Corps and DWQ that this alternative is acceptable to fulfill all obligations with regard to all
permitting, compliance and mitigation requirements of the above referenced Section 404 permit
and 401 certification and that, if necessary, permit and mitigation plan amendments have been
approved.
Alternative 3 - Preservation of Lewis Property
The Lewis Property is adjacent to the Croatan National Forest, is ±80 acres in size and is
shown on Figures 1 and 3. The proposed mitigation would not include approximately 3-acres
currently being used as a shooting range or an exiting right of way to the range. Preservation of
this property provides an opportunity to protect the pocosin community which dominates the site
against development and/or other proposed anthropogenic impacts. The Lewis Property is
underlain by Pantego fine sandy loam, Rains fine sandy loam and Mastontown muck.
Wal-Mart is in negotiations for the purchase of the Lewis Property. Lewis has signed a
purchase agreement that is currently being reviewed. Wal-Mart will need to complete its due
diligence on the Lewis Property but issues are not anticipated based on site visits. Purchase and
recordation of preservation restrictions could occur as soon as practicable after receiving
confirmation from the Corps and DWQ that this alternative is acceptable to fulfill all obligations
with regard to all permitting, compliance and mitigation requirements of the above referenced
Section 404 permit and 401 certification and that, if necessary, permit and mitigation plan
amendments have been approved.
Alternative 4 - Restoration of Laurel Road Site
This alternative involves the restoration of 18.6 acres at Laurel Road that was determined
not successfully restored during the implementation of the original mitigation plan developed by
Land Management Group. However restoration activities would involve a significant amount of
time, money, effort and uncertainty and is not in our view a practicable alternative. We mention
it only because of its status as part of the existing mitigation plan.
TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP
ATTOR NEYS AT LAW
A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP
Mr. Mickey T. Sugg
March 21, 2005
Page 6
Restoration would require clearing and stumping the existing dense sweet gum and
loblolly pine and extensive earthwork to re-grade the 23.6 acres of previous agricultural fields.
Earthwork would include but not be limited to removal of field crowns, filling of internal ditches
and the construction of a shallow berm around the perimeter of the site.
This restoration attempt is not without risk. In order perform the required earthwork the 5
acres of successful restoration adjacent to the ditches would have to be re-graded. The site
would also require extensive post construction management with herbicides to prevent the re-
establishment of sweet gum and loblolly pine. Even if this was accomplished there is no
guarantee that the new grade would achieve the required hydrologic requirement. Guy Pierce of
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program and you have both expressed this opinion. In
addition, the long term nature of the rehabilitation efforts coupled with the uncertainties of
success do not provide the immediate benefits provided by the preservation alternatives or
payment into the DENR Wetland Trust Fund.
In summary, Wal-Mart has identified means for resolving both DWQ and Corps
mitigation concerns and requirements. Payment into the DENR Trust Fund meets both agencies'
requirements though it is not the preferred method of the Corps. The McCotter Property
provides a unique opportunity to provide preservation of multiple ecologically valuable
resources and it is within DWQ authority to pursue such an option and appears to be the Corps
preferred method. The Lewis Property also provides compensation greater than a 5:1 ratio and
valuable ecological benefits in the public good. Rehabilitation of the Laurel Road restoration
area is not practicable. I am hopeful that we will be able to reach an agreement. Obviously,
assurances are needed from the Corps and DWQ that an approach is acceptable as means for
resolving all permitting, compliance and mitigation issues.
By submitting these proposals Wal-Mart is not indicating that it is the responsible party
for the permitting and mitigation failures associated with the Hestron Shopping Center
development. Nor should this be viewed as Wal-Mart considering that Tribeck is not a
responsible party. The Corps has issued letters to both Tribeck and Wal-Mart indicating
responsibility for compensatory mitigation. Under the permits, as both the Corps and DWQ have
acknowledged, Tribeck is the responsible party. Tribeck has apparently failed to respond to the
Corps' recent letters. However, Wal-Mart has cooperated with the Corps and DWQ in an effort
to find an equitable solution to Corps concerns given that it is mindful of the need for the Corps
and DWQ to resolve these issues, Wal-Mart's desire to remove the cloud and uncertainty over
the property and mitigation associated with the Hestron Shopping Center of which Wal-Mart is
part and its desire to resolve the Corps claims made against it (whether it is the actual responsible
party or not) and to play a role in assuring that wetland mitigation issues are properly addressed
in an environmentally beneficial manner.
TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP
Mr. Mickey T. Sugg
March 21, 2005
Page 7
As a final note, I was pleased to read in your January 6, 2005, letter that information we
provided in September 2003 assisted you in determining that the 404(b)(1) avoidance and
minimization issues have been addressed. As always, please feel free to contact me if you have
any questions or if I can be of any assistance in reaching resolution.
Sincerely,
Shannon R. Varner
1349920
cc: Jennifer May-Brust, Wal-Mart
.Steve Howe, Wal-Mart
Gayla Hoipkemeier, Wal-Mart
Ashley H. Story, Esquire Troutman Sanders LLP
Bob Belcher, Malcolm Pirnie
Todd Simmons, Freeland & Kauffman
Cyndi Karoly, NCDWQ
Noelle Lutheran, NCDWQ
.1'` '1
TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP
A T T O R N E Y S A T L A W
A L I M I T E D L I A B I L I T Y P A R T N E R S H I P
BANK OF AMERICA CENTER
1111 EAST MAIN STREET
RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23219
www.troutmansanders.com
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FACSIMILE: 804-697-1339
MAILING ADDRESS
P.O. BOX 1122
RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23218-1122
Shannon R. Varner
[e-mail]
August 25, 2004
Mr. Mickey T. Sugg
United States Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
Re: Hestron Shopping Center, Morehead City, North Carolina
Dear Mickey:
Direct Dial: 804-697-1331
Direct Fax: [phone]
In preparation for the September 1 meeting, you requested an outline of a
proposal addressing issues which have been identified with regard to the permitting and
compensatory mitigation for the development of the Cypress Bay Shopping Center/Hestron
Shopping Center in Morehead City, North Carolina ("Hestron Shopping Center"). Wal-Mart is
happy to cooperate in this effort and as you know has expended considerable effort since first
being contacted by you. In order to put this proposal in context, I think it is necessary to provide
some background.
Hestron obtained permits (Corps Permit No. 199603796 and associated North
Carolina Department of Water Quality 401 Certification No. 3146) in 1998 for impacts to 21.19
acres of wetlands for the expansion of the Hestron Shopping Center. Wal-Mart acquired a
portion of the Hestron Shopping Center in 2000 after all permitting was completed and after
wetland impacts had occurred.
ATLANTA • HONG KONG • LONDON • NORFOLK • RALEIGH • RICHMOND
TYsONS CORNER • VIRGINIA BEACH • WASHINGTON, D.C.
r"' w
TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP
A T T O R N E Y S AT L A W
A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP
Mr. Mickey T. Sugg
August 25, 2004
Page Two
Compensation for Hestron's impacts to the 21.19 acres of wetlands included both
on and off-site efforts. On site efforts included a combination of restoration, preservation,
creation and enhancement. It is our understanding that these efforts where begun in 1999 and
completed in 2000. You and Wal-Mart's consultant, Malcolm Pirnie, have met at the Hestron
Shopping Center to assess the on-site mitigation. The off-site mitigation is the 51 acre Laurel
Road Mitigation Site, a portion of which includes the planned restoration of 23.6 acres. All 51
acres were placed under a permanent conservation easement in 1998. You and Malcolm Pirnie
have visited the Laurel Road Site and have identified five (5) successfully restored wetland acres
leaving an apparent 18.5 acre restoration deficit at the Laurel Road Site.
Wal-Mart has undertaken considerable effort to assess the on and off-site
mitigation plans and effectiveness, to identify potential alternatives to the Laurel Road
restoration area, and to meet with the Corps to assess potential alternative sites and to assess on-
site mitigation efforts. During this process you, Malcolm Pirnie and I have had a number of
discussion on how to resolve permitting and mitigation issues. I believe that the following is
consistent with those discussions and will resolve these issues.
1. Identify and preserve 37 acres of wetlands to act as compensation in lieu of the
apparent failure of 18.5 acres of restoration at the Laurel Road mitigation site. The original
mitigation plan called for restoration of 23.6 acres at Laurel Road at a 5:1 ratio. Based on site
visits by the Corps, 5 acres of restoration have succeeded at Laurel Road, leaving an 18.5 acre
restoration "deficit." This "deficit" equates to 3.7 acres of wetland impact (18.5 divided by 5) at
the Hestron Shopping Center. Multiplying 3.7 times the preservation ratio of 10:1 in the Hestron
Shopping Center permit equals 37 acres of preservation to compensate for the 3.7 acres of
impact. The entire 51 acre Laurel Road site will remain in preservation. No additional
monitoring of Laurel Road is proposed nor is it proposed for the new preservation site since they
are established wetlands.
2. After reviewing nine potential sites and visiting three sites with the Corps,
potential wetland preservation sites have been identified which contain more than 37 acres of
wetlands. Wal-Mart would be willing to move forward with the in-kind preservation of these
"excess" acres (on the order of 30 acres above the 37 required for the 3.7 acres of impact),
provided the excess acres will be deemed to serve as compensation in the event that there are any
failures in the on-site mitigation efforts and to resolve any permitting and compliance issues with
regard to the Hestron Shopping Center expansion.
?- `rt
TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP
Mr. Mickey T. Sugg
August 25, 2004
Page Three
3. Hestron Shopping Center on-site monitoring is proposed for three years (2004,
2005 and 2006). For the creation and restoration areas within Wal-Mart's control monitoring
will be for vegetation (including survivability of planted specimens), hydrology and soils. Based
on conversations with you, no additional monitoring is proposed for the enhancement and
preservation areas. Wal-Mart will attempt to conduct similar monitoring in the mitigation areas
outside of its control. We can discuss monitoring details during our meeting and if the agencies
wish we can then submit a revised monitoring plan.
4. Items 1-3 will represent Wal-Mart's obligations with regard to all Hestron
Shopping Center permitting, compensatory mitigation and compliance issues.
I look forward to a productive meeting with you and NCDWQ on September 1. 1
am hopeful that we will be able to reach an agreement on this approach. Obviously before Wal-
Mart can move ahead with this proposal it will need assurances from the Corps and NCDWQ
that this approach is acceptable.
Sincerely,
'? 7-' annon R. Varner
1270893
cc: Chris Gregory
Gayla Hoipkemeier
Todd Simons
Bob Belcher
- I
•
e !i
E4
tiw pPOW
,
Ne
L ''r
_ 1
.. i
R
., -., t
fee
y , ' I 1 Legend
i 7
Onsite Mitigation 1„
V Laurel Road
1
Lawton �J-� Crab Point
point r 1 -VillageMcCotter Property
�B ,_ �I � Lewis Property
Cr&b PADint
} 1, - =w• _ 2,000 4,000 8,000 12,000 16,000
3
Neck ° Feet
I 1 i 1 ^ l- 1 , � .._ ~-'•. L j �1 Y JIL+ :,. � -. --- ,.- � — �r
r
a
1 —7•- 1_ f_ Y'J,.,r''/,
II {i _ � _ _ _ = r c� �4� r fr� • 71 5 l _
rt
�_ ., (•u t�rrt CI unty Tax I)rI'm nnirm _ I -,�'• - I S 4
Carteret County, North Carolina
August 2004
WAL-MART # 1355
RN I Vicinty Map Figure 1
Existing and Potential Mitigation Sites

01
' � '- � • a 111 � L h�# e � � _\ �,. � \j ] � 1
-
U `
.... ' - Yip
-
-
or -1k
41,
..
�•�i 1 '
I
rAt-
_ r
41
a
—+.0 � I ✓� +� '` 1 rye" _ �,.� - «r r
t
I. • wit -111
AM
v r ..
s �M
s
1F � r
I1 r.l
'0
iO
C.
a 4t AIL
fi
Legend
!� �, ., �. tr r +• ". �� Parcel Boundary
RDS Ecotone Well
4 �
AWIM
I AWAN& -'rV*:. + i 11 _ — Wetland Enhancement
w , - Wetland Creation
AL-
Ww"Va •–' 4 .. - Wetland Restoration
} • I .:y ' # -0 125 250 500 750 1,000 0111,
'� 1• • ; 1 Feet Wetland Preservation
Source: Carteret Cnu it 'I';ix I Apartment and Final Compensatory Mitigation I'LL t far the Hesttrm Shopping Center. N'epared by Land Management Group. Inc. July 1997. Mitigation boundaries arc npproxitnatr. r -�• _- -- •- ' ,�� I
cl i 1
Carteret County, North Carolina
August 2004
WAL-MART # 1355
R N I Cypress Bay Shopping Center Figure 2

1 ,r .?' IJ _. ... ?I.1 .Y 1 ?
A—W
'M. t� m • 'T-'
' 11, LOS W
�.a�r .Allb
44N
_ � � �*a " �"'+/,�R •",ril'�!� ' 1r�=r„ii�i + ":'• f fT' ` � �: ±✓�' r • ' ,� r � 1 '''i11 ` ..� .�"'. F " �: !4'�F�'( f" / • � "I�� 1 11fY,;�<C`� "a' A�N�y��` � , � ?,i
,,-.� • r .e 1 _ , ,r. 'V. -'� F o e. A y:.,/" �► 9 v1a� % _ ♦ Il,�rX, R
a
_ r �.e w. - '� ' • 'r •'' .,. .' .,� , t•� - 1 t���.. '-els ...
•
iq i Iw• ,r `�r't,'rti..'r+ r -. + .k`r, y,. aY 4a r �. A" . .!• �: `a • t' 1 1k r
..F :'I
it f�
It
s f #ri
+ " ♦ +S a
6 41 04 14- F jr, V
t e 4
I If
411
.411
Y C ►��rl �� � . Ir � �,f�ti�`a. �1►. �'� � � i f � § } ....,.w J rr r t �i i ��.,! tr� I r'` � y - r � ♦ • 'I+ � � # •� � •
_T 6 C t 1'. 1.}'r�'. • - .-^r.�'�° +,. �' E ti [M!j i�A �♦ i�C._ 4 L
s - i ) ii
r
�
f r ♦ t fill
�.►IN
+ •
, r
f
.. , � �� ,w�_!, '- ' I` � ��. � rte+' . a •'. � ��
C•
• iil r ! "��ja
fiyr,, •r
• 9- � � - lw.t 'rer '� ��r.. _ fi -i wr+i'._ s + .: a •• �.. e r •� {y_�" 1 - '•.r•` 6a :* .
6
u
Y
a bra £'� �' • �� ..� r ..� ;. ` ►r + ' 'l� �,, °'�-- •,. ' ~_- _ ..+ � .-�� , { ' j ..•..,.
'� ♦ ♦ ,, ear 1. t y� � '�` �Y �� ��. f:'.
# 1 qk w •
s
i
.,. ,
♦ 3 � /i '!t. � � : , a� � � 7 ` • � r • 4 : ; 4
{'ate y
_fit • * ' - '.
x�
`
T
j•
4. {
"' ,'" t $ • '"', \ r 3.r ` 0 125 250 500 750 1,000
,
Feet,;;
•v t i'� II �J� e t
Source: Carteret County Tax Department i _
- Ms&
Carteret County, North Carolina
WAL-MART # 1355
RNI Lewis Property
Alternative Pocosin Preservation
August 2004
Figure 5

/ r
`/ 12
/ f
Ct L< /`? ` G, zo S v ?G?s s? y

Regulatory Division
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
PO BOX 1890
WILMINGTON NC 28402-1890
January 6, 2005
Subject: Action ID No. 200200204
Mr. Blanton Hamilton
Tribek Corporation
200 Providence, Suite 106
Charlotte, North Carolina 28207
Dear Mr. Hamilton:
RECEIVED
JAN 1 4 2005
This letter serves as a follow-up to our ongoing evaluation of Tribek's noncompliance with
our January 29, 1998 issued permit for the expansion of Cypress Bay Shopping Center, near
Morehead City, Carteret County, North Carolina. Please reference our January 8, 2002 and
September 9, 2002 correspondences concerning our non-compliance action, and your October 2,
2002 response to satisfy the conditions of the authorization and to modify the permit. Also,
please be aware that our office has continued to coordinate with Wal-Mart's consultants to
evaluate and develop an appropriate mitigation plan to replace the failed Laurel Road mitigation
site and modify the on-site mitigation.
In reviewing your response, our office has determined that you have complied with the
avoidance and minimization requirements associated with the Clean Water Act Section 404(b)(1)
Guidelines for the permit modification. However, the mitigation component of the guidelines
has not been adequately fulfilled, and the wetland impacts associated with the issued permit have
not been completely mitigated. Our office is aware that there is a disagreement between Tribek
and Wal-Mart regarding responsibility for the required mitigation. It is our position that, in the
absence of a permit transfer signed by the transferee, the initial permittee remains responsible for
providing the appropriate mitigation; our records show Tribek Management, Inc. to be the
current permittee. We are also aware, by information that you provided, of the presence of a
signed agreement between Tribek Management and Wal-mart concerning the conveyance of
certain responsibilities of our issued permit, as well as the N.C. Division of Water Quality 401
Certification. We do not have a copy, however, of any such document in our file. Nonetheless,
our office has been coordinating the mitigation efforts with Wal-Mart, and we have requested
that they provide us with a complete mitigation package by January 18, 2005. We expect that
this package will include any additional mitigation requirements requested by the North Carolina
Division of Water Quality pursuant to the 401 Certification.
-2-
Additionally, our office has requested that Wal-Mart provide a signature on the issued
permit to validate the transfer of the permit as it pertains to the parcel in their ownership
(Reference our December 23, 2004 letter to Wal-Mart, a copy of which I have provided to you).
Failure to act expeditiously to provide the required mitigation may result in further
appropriate administrative or legal action, which may include the assessment of an
administrative penalty.
Thank you for your immediate attention and cooperation in this matter. If you have any
questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Sugg at [phone],
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office.
Sincerely,
Keith A. Harris, Chief
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office
Copies Furnished:
Mr. Pete Benjamin
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
Mr. Ron Sechler
National Marine Fisheries, NOAA
Pivers Island
Beaufort, North Carolina 28516
State Property Office
N.C. Department of Administration
116 West Jones Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
s. Noelle Lutheran
Division of Water Quality
N.C. Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845
Ms. Cyndi Karoly
Division of Water Quality
N.C. Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
2321 Crabtree Boulevard
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-2260
Ms. Linda Lewis
Division of Water Quality-Stormwater Section
N.C. Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845
j
-3-
U. S. Attorney
Eastern District of North Carolina
310 New Bern Avenue
Suite 800, Federal Building
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Mr. Mike Wiley
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Wetlands Protection Section - Region IV
61 Forsyth Street
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Ms. Linda Stabb, Planning Director
Town of Morehead City
Post Office Drawer M
Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
Mr. Chris Gregory
Wal-Mart Corporation
2001 SE 10th Street
Bentonville, Arkansas 72716-0550
Bob Belcher
Malcolm Pirnie, Inc.
701 Town Center Drive, Suite 600
Newport News, Virginia 23606
Mr. Todd Simmons
Freeland and Kauffman, Inc.
209 West Stone Avenue
Greenville, South Carolina 29609
Mr. Shannon Varner
Troutman Sanders LLP
Post Office Box 1122
Richmond, Virginia 23218-1122
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
PO BOX 1890
WILMINGTON NC 28402-1890
January 6, 2005
Regulatory Division
Subject: Action ID No. 200201244
Mr. Chris Gregory
Wal-Mart Corporation
2001 SE 10th Street
Bentonville, Arkansas 72716-0550
Dear Mr. Gregory:
This letter serves as a follow-up to our ongoing evaluation of Wal-Mart's noncompliance
with our January 29, 1998 issued permit for the expansion of Cypress Bay Shopping Center, near
Morehead City, Carteret County, North Carolina. Please reference your May 13, 2003 telephone
conversation with Mr. Mickey Sugg of my Regulatory staff and Mr. Sugg's continuing
coordination with your attorney, Mr. Shannon Varner of Troutman Sanders, and wetland
consultant, Mr. Bob Belcher of Malcolm Pirnie. Additionally, please reference our September
12, 2002 and April 28, 2003 correspondence concerning our non-compliance action.
On September 15, 2003, Mr. Varner provided our office, as directed in the September and
April letters, with information to satisfy the Clean Water Act Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines.
Upon reviewing the information, it has been determined that Wal-Mart has adequately addressed
the avoidance and minimization components of the guidelines. However, Wal-Mart and Tribek
Corporation has not satisfied the mitigation requirement to compensate for the wetland impacts
associated with the issued permit. In his May 13 conversation with you, Mr. Sugg informed you
that the current off-site Laurel Road mitigation area has failed to meet jurisdictional wetland
status; and it was strongly recommended that Wal-Mart pursue an alternative mitigation site.
Subsequently, Mr. Sugg has met, and discussed on the phone and through e-mail, with Mr.
Varner and Mr. Belcher on several occasions concerning Wal-Mart's options and available
practicable mitigation opportunities. We commend Wal-Mart for its pursuit to locate alternative
sites and its efforts to comply with the mitigation conditions of the issued permit; however, no
updated mitigation proposal has been submitted to our office. In order to avoid further
enforcement action, Wal-Mart must provide our office with a complete mitigation package by
January 31, 2005. This package should also include any additional mitigation requirements
requested by the North Carolina Division of Water Quality pursuant to the 401 Water Quality
Certification.
-2-
Additionally, our office requested, in the September 12th letter, that Wal-Mart provide a
signature on the issued permit to validate the transfer of the permit as it pertains to the parcel in
their ownership. To date, our office has not received a signed copy. We request that you, or the
appropriate personnel, provide a signature on page (4) of the enclosed copy of the permit to
validate the transfer of the permit.
Failure to provide a timely mitigation proposal may result in further appropriate
administrative or legal action, which may include the assessment of an administrative penalty.
Thank you for your immediate attention and cooperation in this matter. If you have any
questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Sugg at [phone],
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office.
Sincerely,
Keith A. Harris, Chief
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office
Copies furnished:
Mr. Pete Benjamin
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
Mr. Ron Sechler
National Marine Fisheries, NOAA
Pivers Island
Beaufort, North Carolina 28516
State Property Office
N.C. Department of Administration
116 West Jones Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Ms. telle Lutheran
D' of Water Quality
C. Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845
Ms. Cyndi Karoly
Division of Water Quality
N.C. Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
2321 Crabtree Boulevard
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-2260
Ms. Linda Lewis
Division of Water Quality-Stormwater Section
N.C. Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845
U. S. Attorney
Eastern District of North Carolina
310 New Bern Avenue
Suite 800, Federal Building
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Mr. Mike Wiley
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Wetlands Protection Section - Region IV
61 Forsyth Street
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Ms. Linda Stabb, Planning Director
Town of Morehead City
Post Office Drawer M
Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
Mr. Blanton Hamilton
Tribek Corporation
200 Providence, Suite 106
Charlotte, North Carolina 28207
Mr. Shannon Varner
Troutman Sanders LLP
Post Office Box 1122
Richmond, Virginia 23218-1122
Mr. Todd Simmons
Freeland and Kauffman, Inc.
209 West Stone Avenue
Greenville, South Carolina 29609
Bob Belcher
Malcolm Pirnie, Inc.
701 Town Center Drive, Suite 600
Newport News, Virginia 23606
-3-
Sugg, Mickey T SAW
From: Varner, Shannon R. [[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2004 4:56 PM
To: [e-mail]. miI
Subject: Morehead City; Hestron Shopping Center; Wal-Mart
Document.pdf
Mickey,
Per your request for some thoughts on the Morehead City wetland
mitigation issues, here are my thoughts which I hope will provide a
basis for some very productive discussions next week. Please feel free
to give me a call if you have any questions.
Shannon
1
TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP
A T T O R N E Y S A T L A W
A LIMITED LIAO ILITV PA RTN ER SNIP
BANK OF AMERICA CENTER
1111 EAST MAIN STREET
RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23219
www.troutmansanders.com
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FACSIMILE: 804.897-1339
MAILING ADDRESS
P.O. BOX 1122
RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23218-1122
Shannon R. Varner
[e-mail]
August 25, 2004
Mr. Mickey T. Sugg
United States Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
Re: Hestron Shopping Center, Morehead City, North Carolina
Dear Mickey:
Direct Dial: 804-697-1331
Direct Fax: [phone]
In preparation for the September 1 meeting, you requested an outline of a
proposal addressing issues which have been identified with regard to the permitting and
compensatory mitigation for the development of the Cypress Bay Shopping Center/Hestron
Shopping Center in Morehead City, North Carolina ("Hestron Shopping Center"). Wal-Mart is
happy to cooperate in this effort and as you know has expended considerable effort since first
being contacted by you. In order to put this proposal in context, I think it is necessary to provide
some background.
Hestron obtained permits (Corps Permit No. 199603796 and associated North
Carolina Department of Water Quality 401 Certification No. 3146) in 1998 for impacts to 21.19
acres of wetlands for the expansion of the Hestron Shopping Center. Wal-Mart acquired a
portion of the Hestron Shopping Center in 2000 after all permitting was completed and after
wetland impacts had occurred.
ATLANTA • HONG KONG • LONDON • NORFOLK • RALEIGH ` RICHMOND
TYsONs CORNER VIRGINIA BEACH • WASHINGTON, D.C.
TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERS NIP
Mr. Mickey T. Sugg
August 25, 2004
Page Two
Compensation for Hestron's impacts to the 21.19 acres of wetlands included both
on and off-site efforts. On site efforts included a combination of restoration, preservation,
creation and enhancement. It is our understanding that these efforts where begun in 1999 and
completed in 2000. You and Wal-Mart's consultant, Malcolm Pirnie, have met at the Hestron
Shopping Center to assess the on-site mitigation. The off-site mitigation is the 51 acre Laurel
Road Mitigation Site, a portion of which includes the planned restoration of 23.6 acres. All 51
acres were placed under a permanent conservation easement in 1998. You and Malcolm Pirnie
have visited the Laurel Road Site and have identified five (5) successfully restored wetland acres
leaving an apparent 18.5 acre restoration deficit at the Laurel Road Site.
Wal-Mart has undertaken considerable effort to assess the on and off-site
mitigation plans and effectiveness, to identify potential alternatives to the Laurel Road
restoration area, and to meet with the Corps to assess potential alternative sites and to assess on-
site mitigation efforts. During this process you, Malcolm Pimie and I have had a number of
discussion on how to resolve permitting and mitigation issues. I believe that the following is
consistent with those discussions and will resolve these issues.
1. Identify and preserve 37 acres of wetlands to act as compensation in lieu of the
apparent failure of 18.5 acres of restoration at the Laurel Road mitigation site. The original
mitigation plan called for restoration of 23.6 acres at Laurel Road at a 5:1 ratio. Based on site
visits by the Corps, 5 acres of restoration have succeeded at Laurel Road, leaving an 18.5 acre
restoration "deficit." This "deficit" equates to 3.7 acres of wetland impact (18.5 divided by 5) at
the Hestron Shopping Center. Multiplying 3.7 times the preservation ratio of 10:1 in the Hestron
Shopping Center permit equals 37 acres of preservation to compensate for the 3.7 acres of
impact. The entire 51 acre Laurel Road site will remain in preservation. No additional
monitoring of Laurel Road is proposed nor is it proposed for the new preservation site since they
are established wetlands.
2. After reviewing nine potential sites and visiting three sites with the Corps,
potential wetland preservation sites have been identified which contain more than 37 acres of
wetlands. Wal-Mart would be willing to move forward with the in-kind preservation of these
E`excess" acres (on the order of 30 acres above the 37 required for the 3.7 acres of impact),
provided the excess acres will be deemed to serve as compensation in the event that there are any
failures in the on-site mitigation efforts and to resolve any permitting and compliance issues with
regard to the Hestron Shopping Center expansion.
V
TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP
Mr. Mickey T. Sugg
August 25, 2004
Page Three
3. Hestron Shopping Center on-site monitoring is proposed for three years (2004,
2005 and 2006). For the creation and restoration areas within Wal-Mart's control monitoring
will be for vegetation (including survivability of planted specimens), hydrology and soils. Based
on conversations with you, no additional monitoring is proposed for the enhancement and
preservation areas. Wal-Mart will attempt to conduct similar monitoring in the mitigation areas
outside of its control. We can discuss monitoring details during our meeting and if the agencies
wish we can then submit a revised monitoring plan.
4. Items 1-3 will represent Wal-Mart's obligations with regard to all Hestron
Shopping Center permitting, compensatory mitigation and compliance issues.
I look forward to a productive meeting with you and NCDWQ on September 1. 1
am hopeful that we will be able to reach an agreement on this approach. Obviously before Wal-
Mart can move ahead with this proposal it will need assurances from the Corps and NCDWQ
that this approach is acceptable.
Sincerely,
L- / annon R. Varner
1270893
cc: Chris Gregory
Gayla Hoipkemeier
Todd Simons
Bob Belcher
- -
+ ? ',y Flan Q ( ,.?' ? .+-•-. ? ? n ? ',
N
Hadowpe
0
COW
?- Creek !
;f i
?- 4 \
1 h l I y 111 h Ir
MasonfoWn 46" 30
y
Holky
Un"
P 5 POOM ? _
--
,
1
ft-f
w, s r t' 4
Neo-POW.,
- - ' j Creek
Legend
,i
-7 !
O FJ
nsite Mitigation
ev.
Laurel Road
. r.
tawron Crab Point - ubst uo
-< t ti T f Point Village McCotter Property
l ®Lewis Property
Roy.
1 w if Syr. f
Graff Aoint - 0 2,000 4,000 8,000 12,000 16,000 -Neck
---- Feet
.° 1 I
S r 6v-t 1
.Y
4
rt
r } L.?
Carteret County, North Carolina
August 200
WAL-MART # 1355
IRNI Vicinty Map
Figure 1
Existing and Potential Mitigation Sites
PF
die, I/
/ •
" ''+► .
YAll wrl
�` i 9• 1 — a ..1
•
\ 1
r
...- -
x � r a
I i
.. d -.---
1--
y ICO
F _
` "Y1♦ _
r ,�Y !y4 S • r rY ( �
s _
Ow
af
ItPO
Owl
+
r
L(
I g . ,yy
r'1+' Ir . 111 .;}_.. a ` � h • 1
-= ♦ , s,r
Legend
As T r.l...�,„� A
°' F i Q Parcel Boundary
All Awilow%o
• �4 ! , �. �,` 4W of r <}AL.,a► : �;:" `��► • RDS Ecotone Well
Pr
dol_ .
*- Wetland Enhancement
1 �' .a Wetland Creation
'r' ' / - . -- T .M►'�" ,� t� a Wetland Restoration
St
I ;' sJ , 0 125 250 500 750 1,0 0
.r Feet Wetland Preservation
--
unic Tare U.•p:uun. m snJ I'in:d G+m prnsuWry Mitigation Plan for the Hestron Shopping Center, Prepared by Land Management Group. Inc. July 1997. Mitigation lxmndar— .r .ipprosim:ur. -- iMOW
Carteret County, North Carolina
WAL-MART # 1355 august 2004
RN I Cypress Bay Shopping Center
Figure 2

./y• y _'—�w.r.-�.r.,/'-+f 1!, I-�T�rIr - ,�` •f - ,Y. �� �� - s,Yr J1
3aw w • -
n
fl
ii
t•
�+��(i' *V.A- �����..���"�#✓`�� � p, ! �•..,+ a. 1��, I ,1.���/.,II• '+r, � I� • it
- y .>'K Q < _,,. fj, ,.r • 'I;'''7r i, I': '#,':. u • �''� - R'
W E
r
• ` = lam/ „ E-
•. � f' -t A ��.- . l�, tr .i _ � ♦.� • � .�
bA
/ 1 /
r .. ; � t 0 'N Y `• - �, . /�•'! , � 1' � �r � _--�'�-- _ - -mss
pf
P.
Aw
,
r ,
r
1 a
S
w
••aM
II __ � � •-�� .J Nt ` � ` 1 -. l"--•Ri i. � i��.•., yak :$
r fj�
�� .� + . t•.Ar
•I� r ti , • J R{ ; t�, t;. ., �„ fir} . f
r'
i �7► t„,.`�. - • /• ,..�'---''-'-_ �l k ,{ t- °�� �,J a. f/ ' ' .i; . r .., ,�F _ a �.. •r y / * t
♦. . M -' , 'f , �"' w� ► w♦ .� i ���"-^{z„4``, 6 ;~ 'IFi •. ,I i•Y r I,. .+ 1� +r:Si� y� ?�., `:, .I f�' il. • �r"
14
� s
_ .. � � - �� _• � ` + . s • r I� Jt , � . + f t• `_I' f+ � .• L �"ril ,' I r.• � �.,k„r "' � s• �1 / � , t, �i y � r ► � i
a `* r `; �rlr ' j/{-(yr�(,' ` :i^' 1j r� d` 1' r `; Ir .;...._:. �' ...R #f °`.q.«+••� pj1'
� .. , e 1 •�•�_ � ►' j ♦ �k � 1 r 1 � . J � t ^' •• '• lr !T(, f'1� • I♦ t • � j^r _I ti , ',1� �.• t .
` .. t �; �; .�_��� 1, j+i yY:r !� � , � �, • - t; '�`r • f a•� ~f tea, ar•M"•!.
i j J" ♦ .f •1•�Yt �. r fit . 4 J 1; f ♦ �t • ! k l
LA
\Lq,� 1
R • . � i a s,•• •wM�� ,�`f( ,� , � / .is i� • ��1, r >-r � /i 1 �,t1 �� '`'k+►e„ / t 'tI. 1 i J '� iJ'
- ,. a �. ,� r• �t • - � jt k t �. � S+. ��rs-' a � � _ : � � ' a�'•I ^� � � � } T.`,� ' �.'1
? t i. M •, tr t t r ..�, " U 125 250 500 750
eet
Ca' ent County Tax Oepartment jpw•.} . I ♦ imaw, 41A
rLIAT
Carteret County, North Carolina '}
WAL-MART # 1355 August 2004
RN I Laurel Road
Wetland Restoration and Preservation Figure 3

;' AL
. a
t
r: r RA
tc�
0
ASO4
,,,, �, -. • , . ., by : ' ;�*v '"-i+.�•- �,.�.,�=`''�
�� s�r `fit' � •' � . �..%.,,, -!_
`►
Ir
■ ,` h f ' l� -� _ 1 .� �' �� � ' � � � 's. "� "moi ,_ . � ! �.
���" � - �y .+/�� +�_ f°e. �, ark "[ P-`� ► -
al ,•- 1 as rr " +L. ♦ id's Ea+�
' - - � 'Ht`s "Y4.i�! - .'�- + •r �- �+>� { �""'
,r �r
t Fie
,
4°
c «.
4.
o� �..k a fns'
E \`
�W ,
Sourt:e: Carteret County Tsuc Ueim: nt . ":. : - �� \ �� _ r?—. .'i1 • ij 1(:.
Carteret County, North Carolina
WAL-MART # 1355
RN I McCotter Property
Proposed Pocosin Preservation
125250 500 750 1,000
Fee
August 2004
Figure 4

tl
11

? t
M
N
W

i
P R O P E R T / E S
RECEIVED
.January 23, 2002

REGULATORY
WILMINGTO-N FIELD OFFICE
Mr. Keith A. Harris, Chief
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office
Department of The Army
Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
Re: Action ID# 200200204
Dear Mr. Harris:
I am in receipt of your January 8, 2002 letter. Although the tone of the letter implies
otherwise, my company has actually gone to great lengths to cooperate with Mickey Sugg
and your staff to ensure compliance of the development with the permit dated January
29, 1998. Since the issuance of the permit, not only have we spent countless hours of
effort in attempting to adhere to its requirements; we have also invested the following
approximate amounts toward mitigation and compliance activities:
Installation of swamp chestnut, water oak,
black gum, green ash, and red maple trees
on the mitigation property $33,000.00
Plugging of ditches and installation of monitoring
equipment $5,000.00
Surveying of wetland areas on the Hestron tract $11,000.00
Legal fees $9,000.00
Wetland consultant fees for Land Management Group $13,000.00
Total $71,000.00
If this investment of time and effort is not evidence enough of our good faith attempt to
stay in compliance with the permit, then I will be happy to send you copies of
200 Providence Road 0 Suite 106 0 Charlotte, North Carolina 28207 0 704/33:3-8484 0 Fax: [phone]
COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE SERVICES
correspondence and other documents from my files so you can review in more detail my
work over the past four years to comply with the letter and spirit of the permit.
Mickey Sugg has stated in telephone conversations, and you mentioned in your letter that
there may be non-compliance with special conditions (a) and (c) of the permit because
not all buildings and improvements are located strictly within areas therefore as shown on
the site plan attached to the permit. Since the Corps of Engineers is in the business of
protecting the nation's wetland areas, I interpreted the key components of the permit
plans as the wetlands areas and not the precise building or parking footprints. My
understanding of the plan was that the wetlands were "sacred" and that we were to
develop around them, which we have done. Never in my mind was it contemplated that
the final plan would look exactly like the site plan in the permit. In fact, had we followed
the plan to the letter, there would be significantly more density built on the property than
what is currently there now. By scaling the permit plan, I would estimate that the total
amount of building area would have been approximately 625,000 square feet. The
existing buildings only total approximately 420,000 square feet -- 200,000 square feet
less the permitted site plan!
Additionally, the Division of Water Quality. (Storm Water Section) of the North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources as well as the Town of Morehead
City approved all plans for the development. Further, during construction, all wetlands
were surveyed and staked in order to protect them from construction traffic. As I have
told Mickey Sugg on several occasions during this process, our focus on the attached site
plan was on the wetland areas in order to ensure their protection; it was never to adhere
exactly to the building or parking footprints. With regard to special condition (c), I am
not aware of any excavation or fill material being placed outside the permitted area of
construction. Please advise me on this matter.
On October 12, 2000 Wal-Mart Stores East,.Inc., an Arkansas corporation agreed to
accept all responsibilities for permit conpliance. In addition to an assignment of permits
endencing this agreement, please also find enclosed two letters dated February 2, 2001 to
Mickey Sugg from me referencing this assignment. You will also note that this letter
refers to a conversation about continuing efforts by us to work with the Corps of
Engineers, Land Management Group and The North Carolina Division of Forest Services
to determine the best action steps for the Laurel Road mitigation tract.
Although the permit had been assigned to Wal-Mart several months earlier, we agreed to
stay involved in order to make the transition to Wal-mart's consultants and employees a
smooth one. I have been involved in several telephone conversations with Mr. Lyn
McAlexander of Wal-Mart as well as Freeland and Kaufman (Wal-Mart's wetland
engineer). Pursuant to our agreement, it was Wal-Mart's responsibility to execute all
necessary paperwork and to forward that to you. As evidenced from your letter, this has
not happened. Consequently, I have instructed my attorney to send to them a copy of the
permit for them to execute and return to us for submission to your office. We apologize
for the delay in getting this paperwork, but we will stay involved until it is completed to
your satisfaction.
Mr. Harris, as you probably are aware, the successful mitigation of wetlands is not an
exact science. It can be greatly affected by rain, drought, competing plant material, soil
conditions, seasonal changes, and many other factors. Unfortunately, as Mickey Sugg has
admitted to me on several occasions, in retrospect the Laurel Road property may have
been a poor site on which to attempt mitigation activities. Our effort has met with some
success and some failures, but regardless of the result, the intent was always there to meet
the requirements of the plan. On the Hestron tract we have gone to great lengths to
protect and preserve the wetlands areas as designated on the site plan. Granted, we have
a difference of interpretation about the site plan, but again, the intent has always been
there to adhere to its basic function: the preservation and mitigation of wetland areas.
The assignment of these responsibilities to Wal-Mart was a business decision agreed to
by both parties. Given that Wal-Mart was acquiring over half of the developable acres, it
was fair that they take over these responsibilities. We will work to make sure that all the
requisite paperwork is in your office in the near future. Finally, we have enjoyed
working with Mickey Sugg and your staff. I hope that he will attest to our
responsiveness and positive attitude when making the best efforts to manage the
adherence to the permit. I am certain that you see developers all the time who do not
make time for this process; we are not one of them.
Should have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to give .
me a call.
Very truly yours,
E. Blanton Hamilton, Jr.
EBH:pb
1 1
FM A W A W1
?° R O P L' R 7- / f S
February 2, 2001
Mr. Mickey Sugg
Department of the Army
Wilmington District, Corps. of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
Re: Permit Number 199603796 issued to Hestron Corporation for approximately 63
acres in Morehead City, North Carolina.
Dear Mickey:
Pursuant to the above referenced permit, please be advised that Southstar Holdings - Morehead
City II, LLC has sold its interest in the property and associated permit responsibility and liability
to Wal-Mart Stores East, Inc. in Bentonville, Arkansas. Once we have a contact person for you
to interact with, I will forward that information to you.
Please do not hesitate to call me at [phone] should' you have any questions or need
additional information.
Very truly yours,
E. Blanton Hamilton, Jr.
Partner
EBH: aj
200 Providence Road . Suite 106 • Charlotte, North Carolina 28207 • 704/333-8484 • Fax: [phone]
COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE SERVICES

P R O P f R T / E S
February 2, 2001
Mr. Mickey Sugg
Department of the Army
Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
Re: Permit Number 199603796 issued to Hestron Corporation for property in
Morehead City, North Carolina
Dear Mickey:
Thank you for returning my call on Monday, January 29, 2001. As we discussed, you are in the
process of determining the appropriate tree replacement methods for the off-site mitigation tract
located on Laurel-.Road in Carteret County. Possibilities include:
• Bush hogging, cutting down existing trees, or injecting the ground with some sort of
herbicide (possibly arsenic).
Since you are at least six months away from knowing which method is preferable, no action is
required at this time.
As we also discussed, the majority of the property (approximately 28 acres) has been conveyed
to Wal-Mart Stores East, Inc. In accordance with our contract, Wal-Mart will take responsibility
for all on-site and off-site wetland mitigation. Although I do not have a contact person for you at
this time, I will forward one to you once I have received it from Wal-Mart. We'll continue to be
available during the transition of responsibility.
It is my understanding that we will plan to meet either in person or via conference call in June or
July 2001. I will make sure that a Wal-Mart representative is in attendance at that time.
Thank you again for speaking with me about this matter. I look forward to continuing to assure
that the obligations set forth in the above referenced permit are met. Please do not hesitate to
call me at (704) 33-8484 should you have any questions or need additional information.
Very urs,
. Hamilton, Jr.
Partner
EBH:aj
cc: Paul Farley
Larry Baldwin
200 Providence Road • Suite 106 • Charlotte, North Carolina 28207 • 704/333-8484 • Fax: [phone]
COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE SERVICES
FROM :KENNEDY COVINGTON
704 331 7SSe
?001,11-1S
YOCT-16-2000 MON 03:26 PM WALMART LEGAL
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF CARTERET
FA}{ NO. 15012770233
ASSIGNMENT OF PERMITS
} se.
}
P. 02
SOUTHSTAR HOLDINGS-MOREHEAD CITY II, LLC, a North Carolina limited
liability company ("Assignor"), for and in consideration of the sum of TEN AND N01100
DOLLARS ($10.00) paid by OVAL-MART STORES EAST, INC.. an Arkansas corporation
("Assignee"), and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which
are hereby acknowledged, has GRANTED, ASSIGNED, SOLD, CONVEYED anti
DELIVERED, and does hereby GRANT, ASSIGN, SELL, CONVEY and DELIVER unto
Assignee, its successors and assigas, all of Assignors right, titlc and inteucst in and to the
following permits to the extent that they :relate to the portion of the propertq covered by the
Federal Permit (as hereinafter defined) and the State Certification (as hereinafter defined) that is
being conveyed from Assignor to Assignee contemporaneously herewith:
1. That certain Department of Army. Permit executed January 29, 1998 on behalf of
the Secretary of the Army through the U.S. Army Corps of Eno== (Action ID
No. 19963796) issued pursuant to Section 404 of the Class WEtter Act (the
"Federal Permit"}.
2. That certain Certification 3146 issued to Assignor by the North Carolina Division
of Water Quality pursuant to Section 401 of the Clan Water Act (the "State
Certification'').
Assignee, by its acceptance hereof, does hereby asm=e sad agree to perform any and a.II
obligations under the Federal Permit and the State Certification, and Assignee indemnifies and
agrucs to hold han..rduss froin and against any claims, dofaults or other liabilities (including,
without limitation, court costs and attorneys' fees) under or in any way relating to the Federal
Permit and the State Certification.
Executed as of the .k2-f_0'1 day of Sephwabet, 2000.
SOUTHSTAR HOLDINGS-MOREHE..AD CrTY II, LLC
By: Tribek Management, Inc.
By:
Its: President
WAL-MART STORES EAST, INC.,
An Arkansas corporation
By
Its: Az1:j{-_ Y? v resident
;p i VC41 M ),to ftal W= aft
WAL-MART LEGAL TEAM zaaoru.o zip;
:
late D - -
1
t?
14:43 #017 P.03/03
ASSIGNMENT OF PERMITS
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF CARTERET
ss.
)
SOUTHST AR HOLDINGS-MOREHEAD CITY, LLC, a North Carolina limited
liability company ("Assignor"), for and in consideration of the sum of TEN AND N01100
DOLLARS ($10.00) paid by SOUTHSTAR HOLDINGS - MOREHEAD CITY II, LLC, a
North Carolina limited liability company ("Assignee"), and other good and valuable
consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, has GRANTED,
ASSIGNED, SOLD, CONVEYED and DELIVERED, and does hereby GRANT, ASSIGN,
SELL, CONVEY and DELIVER unto Assignee, its successors and assigns, all of Assignor's
right, title and interest in and to the following permits to the extent that they relate to the property
owned by Assignee that is the subject of said permits.
1. That certain Department of Army Permit executed January 29, 1998 on behalf of
the Secretary of the Army through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Action ID
No. 19963796) issued pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.
2. That certain Certification 3146 issued to Assignor by the North Carolina Division
of Water Quality pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act.
All governmental licenses and permits relating to the property described in the
above-described permit and certification, if any, and to the extent assignable
under applicable law.
Executed as of the < `- day of Sep4oaiber, 2000.
SOUTHSTAR HOLDINGS-MOREHEAD CITY. LI.C
By: Tribek Management, Inc.
By:
Its: V..Vc.c, President
1880718.61
LB:
JAN.-25'02(WED) 15:27
A T T O R N E Y S AT L A W
William N. Harris
704,331.7426
whwTis0kennedycovington.com
January 23, 2002
Via Federal Express
Karen L. Roberts, Esq.
Wal-Mart Stores East, Inc.
Sam M. Walton Development Complex
2001 SE 10th Street
Bentonville, AR 72712-6489
P. 002
Re: Federal Wetlands Permit No_ 199603796 (the "Perzrar)
Morehead City, North Carolina Wal-Mart Store (the "Proper y")
Dear Karen,
I am enclosing for signature by Wnl-Mart Stores East, Inc. as trdmfe: -ee of the Property, a
copy of the above referenced Permit (with sigmtTre Addendum) to docu event the transfer of
said Permit.
As you may recall, paragraph 27 of the Purchase Agreement between Southstar
Holdings - Morehead City 11, LLC ("SouQlet:ar") Tend Wal-Mart Real Estate, 3usiness Trust dated
May 26, 2000 relating to the Property (the "Contract") provided that Wal 1ti fart was required to
assume all obligations and responsibilities to the U.S. Army Corps of Eng .veers (the "Corps")
pursuant to the Permit, a copy of which has been previously provided to you, and to release
and indemnify Southstar with respect thereto, To evidence this agreement, Southstar and Wal-
Mart executed an Assignment of Permits dated October 12, 2000 in connect on with the closing.
A copy of the Assignment of Permits is enclosed. In addition, paragrap) 1. 27 of the Contract
provided that Wall-Mart was to be responsible for ob g any consents from govenurteittal
authorities necessary for the transfer of the Permit.
My client has now received correspondence from the Corps indi :atirtg that General
Condition #4 of the Permit, requiring that the signature of the new owne t be obtained on the
Permit and a copy of the Permit be forwarded Lo the Corps, has not bw a fulfilled. I have
enclosed a copy of the Permit with an Addendum attached for Wal-Mart: s signature, Please
have the Addendum executed on behalf of Wal-Mart and return the d anxment to me for
submission to the Corps,
sV CUiP.kCNrldllT/GOaINgl a,{.dpits RANT( Or LMIRRICA CORPORATE CENTER LID;
ICFNNEpy COVTNCTON T,OADELL HICI<MAN, L.L-P.
C Ff 4 n L 0 T T E It A C E f 6 n B O C K R I L L phoac 704.331.7400 100 NOR'i i' TRYON STREET. 42nd FLOOR
j,+aan.rt? 704.131.7398 LHARLOT[G, NORTH CAROLINA 28202-4006
.JAN. -23' 02 (WED) 15: 27
Karen L, Roberts, Esq.
January 23, 2002
Page 2
Please contact me should you have any questions.
P. 003
Very truly yours, ,
William N. Harris
Far the Firm
WNH/ dam
Enclosure
cc: I& E. Blanton Hamilton, Jr.
Mr. Mickey Sugg, Department of the Army, Wilmington District; Cc rps of Engineers
2U3ZM(n
LM:
JAN,-20-02(WED) 15:27

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT
F. 004
HESTRON CORPORATION FMCEIVED
permittee^`_ •
Permit No. 1996e-1T 16 JAIL 2 'J 147`
'Cpl IWA
leaning orriFe ?«Re
NOTE: The term "you" and its derivatives, as woad in this permit, Molina tho pormitUe or ari; • future tramsfuma. The term
"this office" refers to the appropriate district or divialon office of the Corps of Eaglnsers having p rladiction over the permitted
activity or the appropriate official of that office actiaff under the authority of the commanding offs :er,
You are authorized to perform work in accordance with the terms and conditions specified below.
Project Description:
To discharge fill material within 21.01 arses of wetlands for the expanslon of the u tlating Cypress
Bay Shopping Center
Project Location:
above the headwaters of an unnamed tributary to Hull Swamp, near Morehead Clty, Carteret County,
North Carolina
Permit Conditions;
General Conditions:
1. The time limit for completing the work authorized ends on t)ecember 31, 2001 „ , If you find that you need
more time to complete the authorized activity, submit your request for it time extension to this ai! lee far enneideration at least
one month before the above date is reached,
2. You must maintain the activity authorized by this permit In Wood condltlan and In conformae no with the terms and condi.
tions of this permit. You, are not relieved of this requirement if you abandon the permitted actlui ty, although you may make
a good faith transfer to a third party In compliance with General Condition 4 below, dhould yc u wish to cease to maintain
tha authorized activity or Should you desire to abandon It without a good faith transfer, you ni sat obtain a modification of
this permit from this offh:e, which may require restoration of the area.
3. If you discover any PreviOusly unknown historic or archeological remains while accompllmlibi f the activity authorized by
this permit, you lriuat immediately untify this office of what you have found. We Will initiate the Federal and state coordina-
tion raquirad to determine if the remains warrant a recovery effort or if the site Is eligible for III, ing In the National Register
of Historic Places.
eNa ronm 1721, Nov 98 €ofT{oN of SEP 82 19 0e604.ETe. .(33 CFR 325 (Appendix A))
JAN. -23' 02 (WED) 15: 27
P, 005
4, If you sail the property associated with this permit, you must obtain the signature of the i sew owner In the apace provided
and forward it copy of the permit to this office to validate the tr"ar of this authorisation,
S. If a conditioned arater quality certification has been Issued for your project, you must corm) ply with the conditions specified
in the coruscation as special conditlaas to this permit, For your convenience, a copy of the a!irtification L attached if it con-
tains such conditions,
t?, You must allow representatives from this office to inspect the authorized activity at any tl be deemed necessary to ensure
that it L being or has boon accomplished In accordance with the terms and conditions of your pen snit.
Special Conditions :
See enclosed sheet.
Further Information:
1, Congressional Authorities: You have been authorized to undertake the activity described abov i pursuant to;
{) Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (89 U.B.C. 4o9).
pQ 6ection 404 of the Clean Water Act (SS U.A.C. 1844),
() Section 108 of the Marine Protection, Research and Ranotuariao Aet of 3,972 (39 U.B.C. 1. 18).
2. Limits of this autharhation.
a. This permit does not obviate the need to obtain other Federal, state, or local authorizationw required by law.
b. This permit does not grant any property rights or exclusive privileges.
c, Thin per=4 does not authorize ashy injury to the property or rights of ohhars.
d. This permit does not authorize Interference with any existing or proposed Federal project.
a. Limits of Federal Liability. in Issuing this permit, the Federal Government does not maume u liability for the following:
a, Danlagea to the permitted project or uses thereof as a result of other permitted or unpenr Itted activities or from natural
causes.
b. Damages to the permitted project or uses thereof as a result of current or future activit,ii a undertaken by or on behalf
of the United States in the public interest.
C. Damages to persons, property, or to other permitted or unpermitted activities or atru eturee caused by the activity
authorized by this permit.
d. Design or construction deficiencies associated with the permitted work.
a
JAN.-203'02(WED) 15:28 _ Y. UUb
e. Damage claims eseociated with any future modification, suspension, or revocation of this ?ermit.
4. Reliance on Applicant's Data; The determination of this office that issuance of this part lit is. not contrary to the public
interest was made in reliance on the information you provided.
5. Reevaluation of Permit Decision. This office may reevaluate its decision on this permit at any CFme the clrcutnatancea
warrant, Circumstances that could require a reevaluation include, but aria not limited to, the fol I. awing:
e, You fall to comply with the terms and conditions of this permit.
b. The inforniathm pruvlded by you in support of your permit application proves to Lave been false, Incomplete, or
inaccurate (See 4 above).
C. Gignirleant new information Surfaces which this office did not consider In reaching the oril Inal public interest decision.
Such a reevaluation may result in a determination that It is appropriate i;o uSe the auspeneic a, modification, and revocation
procedures contained In 08 CFR 326,7 or enforcement procedures such as those contained is 38 CFR, 828.4 and 828.5. The
referenced enforcement procedures provide for the issuance of an administrative order requirii g you to comply with the terms
and conditions of your permit and for the initiation of legal action where appropriate, You will be required to pay for any
corrective meaures orderdd by this office, and If you fall to comply with such directive, thbi office may in certain situations
(such as those specified in 89 CFR 200,170) accomplish the corrective measures by contract i r otherwise and bill you for the
cost,
A. Extenslona, General condition 1 establishes a time limit for the completion of the activity a athorized by this permit. Unless
there are circumstances requiring either a prompt completion of the authorized activity or a rF evaluation of the public Interest
clealaton, tho Carpe will nonnelly give favordble consideration to a request for an extension of thl u time limit,
Your signature below, as permittae, indicates that you accept and agree to comply with the term. and conditions of this permit,
i
(PE'RMITT??) (L° TEJ
HESTRON COR120RATION
HESTRON PLAZA, SUITE 202
MOREHEAD CITY, NORTH CAROLINA 28557
This permit becomes effective when the Federal official, designated to act for the Secretary of tii i Army, has signed below,
(DIBTRIC ENaINE2r<RJ
(D,1 TE
)
TERRY R. YOUNGBLUTH, COLONEL, EN
Whoa the strueturee or work authorized by this permit are still in existence at the time the propa $y is transferred, the terms and
conditions of this pertnlt will continue to be binding an the now owner(s) of the property. To vaJ idate the transfer of this permit
and the uAcciated liabilities associated with compliance with ita terms and conditions, have the tt lnsferee sign and date below.
SOUTHSTAR HOLDI;NGS--MOREHEAD CITY, LLC
By: TRIBER MANAGEMENT, INC.
By:
Its: JZYt President (I?,?TL)
vu-6. OOVERh MENT PRINTIN13 OFFICE 1080 - 7,T-426
M, -23' 02 (WED) 15:28
P. 007
ADDENDUM TO DEPARTMENT Of THE ARMY PERT! ,QT
PERMIT NO. 19960-1796
When the structures or work authorized by this permit are still . n existence at the
time the property is transferred, the terms and conditions of this perm t will continue to
be binding, on the new owner(s) of the prnpprty. To validate the trarif fer of finds permit
and the associated liabilities associated with compliance with its term ii and conditions,
have the transferee sign and date below.
WAL-MART STORES BAST, INC.
By, as of of Octob?: r 12, 2000
Its: (d?ite
2033019,01
LIB:
JAN. -230' 02 (WED) 15: 28
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
a. All work authorized by this permit must be done in strict compliance ? with the permit
plans.
b. No mechanized land clearing will take place at any time in waters of wetlands outside
of the permitted area of construction,
c. No excavated or fill. material will be placed at any time in waters or - vetlands outside
the permitted area of construction.
d. While accomplishing the authorized work, if the peralitwu discover i any previously
unknown Federally endangered or threatened species, the District Engineer i.ti all be immediately
notified so that required coefdination can be initiated with the U.S. Fish and'Vildlife Service
(USFWS).
F. UU8
e, Appropriate sedimentation and erosion control measures (i.c., silt fa 4ces, hay ba1CS, etc.)
will be implemented to minimize siltation or turbidity. Disturbed areas will bt immediately
stabilized to prevent erasion into adjacent waters or wetlands. .
f. All fill material will be clean and free of any pollutants except in trac:o quantities. Metal
products, orgame materials or unsightly debris will. not be used, ..
g. The activity will be conducted in such a manner as to prevent any significant increase in
turbidity outside the area of construction or construction related discharge. I tereases such that
the turbidity is 25 NTUs or less will not be considered significant.
h. This Department of the Army permit does not obviate the need to of Main other Federal,
State or local authorizations required by law.
i. All fill material used in the construction of the shopping center will come from an
upland borrow area.
j. If any fill material is taken offsite during the construction of the shop aing center or
mitigation sites, the material must be disposed of on an upland site.
k. All compensatory mitigation will be implemented in accordance to tl!e July 1997
Mitigation Plan and May 19, 1997, Addendum to the Mtigation Plan; and wi.l i include the
following conditions:
1. For the onsite mitigation: a final planting scheme, including numb, 3r of species/acre,
win be sent to our office for final approval prior to initiation; all monitoring v, ells will be
installed in accordance with the WRP's August 1993 Technical Note "Installir g Monitoring
Wells/Piezometers in Wetlands" and exact locations will be reviewed by our c Mee; an elevation
point must be surveyed in the undisturbed 1.31 acre wetland packet to be use as a benchmark for
JAN. -2T 02 (WED) 15: 28

-2-
the adjacent created wetlands; all mitigation sites -will be protected from van, talism; and the
monitoring period will begin upon the completion of the mitigation.
2. For the offsite mitigation: all ditch exits will be plugged; ditch ply ags will be of
sufficient size and immediately stabilized with annual grasses to prevent eros on, no fescue will
be permitted; any failure of these plugs must be immediately repaired; all ma utoring wells will
be installed in accordance to VW's August 1993 Technical Note "Installing; Monitoring
Welis/Piezometers in Wetlands" and exact locations will be reviewed by our affice; the
monitoring well located in the preservation area will be surveyed convention d or with GPS; and
in s t ec and Liql?idmbar s c' will not exceed 10% of the total tress: survival goat.
. 3, An as-built plan will be submitted to our office upon completion of the site prep
work and the planting of the vegetation.
4. The permittee shall maintain the mitigation areas in their natural 1 ,ondition in
perpetuity. Prohibited activities within the mitigation areas specifically inclu i le, but are not
limited to, the construction of structures of any kind, the discharge. of dredge- d or fill material,
excavation, the cutting, damage, or removal of any vegetation, grading, level ins, or any other
earth moving activity.
F. 009
5. Condition 4 above runs with the land shown as the mitigation ar,: as. The permittee
shall not sell or otherwise convey the property shown as the mitigation areas or any interest
therein, to any third party, without the express written consent of the Corps of Engineers, except
as provided in condition 6 below. It is the intent of the Corps of Engineers a ad the permittee that
the property may be conveyed to an acceptable nonprofit conservation organ zatioa, or a state or
local government willing to hold the area in perpetuity for conservation purp 3ses.
6. A conservation easement, approved by the Corps of Engineers, fix the offsite
mitigation area must be conveyed to an acceptable nonprofit conservation or;;anization, or a state
or local govenunent, and recorded in the Carteret County Register of Deeds prior to the
construction of the shopping center,
7, The permittee shall cause this permit, including these conditions i,nd the enclosed
mitigation site maps, to be recorded in the Carteret County Register of Deed, in such a manner
that it will appear in the chain of title of tho property snaking up the snitigatio areas, prior to the
construction oFthe shopping center. The permittee shall provide a copy of tk a recorded permit
to the Corps oFEagineers as soon as possible.
JAN.-23'02(WED) 15:29
c?
m
0
CD
0

tp to
aZ

g
D
°
l ? ?
N y n'
p o $ x
a
r a
a
s, ?

u
777
ddd
w
= yy
C
m 9
m I
I
.i.

a +? T r r c•.
r' •, co m p =
T N A
y
s 'S W b :?f
•a
= p
N 13 p I

17 13
F
N
N
W i `j '6R 111

A
? •y
?C
rm
.
O
L7
? m a
ti

8
Y, Ulu
ftm
r .q
t3
JAN. -2.3' 02 (WED? 15:29
ASSIGNMENT OF PERMITS
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, }
COUNTY OF CARTERET ss.
P, Oil
SOUTHSTAR HOLDINGS-MORETMAD CITY II, LLC, a North Carolina limited
liability company ("Assignor"), for and in consideration of the sum ca' TEN AND NO1100
DOLLARS($10.00) paid by WAL-MART STORES FAST, INC., ara Arkansas corporation
("Assignee"'), and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt an4 sufficiency of which
are hereby acknowledged, has GRANTED, ASSIGNED, SOLD, CONVEYED and
DELIVERED, and does hereby GRANT, ASSTGN, SELL, CON'VEV and DELIVER unto
Assignee, its successors and assigns, all of Assignor's right, title and nterest in and to the
following permits to the extent that they relate to the portion, of the pri tperty covered by the
Federal Permit (as hereinafter defined) and the State Certification.(as here wafter defined) that is
being conveyed from Assignor to Assignee contemporaneously herewith:
1. That certain Department of Army Permit executed. January 29, 1998 on behalf of
the Secretary of the Army through the U.S. Army Corps or Engineers (Action ID
No. 19963796) issued pursuant to Section 404. of the 1C lean Water Act (the
"Federal Permit").
2. That certain Certification 3146 issued to A.ssi.gnor.by the N, firth Carolina Division
of Water Quality pursuant to Section, 401 of the Clean «ater Act (the "State
Cerdflcation").
Assignee, by its acceptance hereof, does hereby assume and agree 13 perform any, and all
obligations sander the Fcdcral Permit and the State Certification, and Assignee indemnifies and
agrees to hold harmless from and against any claims, defaults or other liabilities (including,
without limGtation, court costs and attorneys' fees) under or in any way r.:lating to the Federal
Permit and the State Cartification.
C??vbe/
Executed as of the 4? day of Seg#kaler, 2000.
SOUTHSTAR HOLDINGS-MOREL, AD CITY II, LLC
By: Tribek Mana nt c.
$y:
Its: ?resident
WAL-NIART STORES EAST, INC,,
An Arkansas corporation
By;
Its: Preside at
t880715.131
LM;
.JAN. -23' 02 (WED) 15: 29
?OCT-18-2000 MON 03:28 PN WALMART LEGAL
FAX NO, 160127700: W
ASSIGNMENT OF PERMITS
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF CARTERET
}
P. 012
P, 02
SOUTHSTAR HOLDW S-MOREREAD CITY II, LLC, a Nor h Carolina limited
liability corn,My ("Asst orj. for and in consideration of the sum of 7 EN AND N01100
DOLLARS (S 10.00) paid by WAL-MART STORES EAST, INC., an At Icansas corporation
("Assiguea'j„ and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and w tTieiency of which
are hereby acknowledged, has GRANTED, ASSIGNED, SOLD, CONVEYND and
DELIVERED, and does hereby GRANT, ASSYGN, BELL CONVEY W1 I DELIVER unto
Assignee,. its successors mud assigns, all of A.saignur's right, title and inu rest in and to the
following permits. to the extent that they relate to the portion of the props;.ty covered by the
Federal Permit (as herein4er dewed) and the State Certification. (as herelnn ter defined) that is
being conveyed flow Assignor to Asaignao eontermporanoously harew"..
1. That certain Department of Army Permit executed January 29, 1998 on behalf of
the Secretary of the Array through the U.S. Army Corps of 8r Smears (Action ID
No. 19963796) issued pursuant to Section 404 of the Clet n Water Act (the
"Federal Perrrut" ).
2. That certain Certification 3146 issued to Assignor by the Nortt , Carolina Division
of Water Quality pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean WrLl er Act (the "State
Certifioation'?.
Assignee, by its acceptance hereof, does hereby assume and agree to I edorm any and all
obligations udder the Federal Permit and the State Certification, and Assign ie iudeaudfies and
agrede to hold huWless from and against any claims, defaults or other liabilities (including,
without limitation, court costs and attorneys' fees) folder or in any way relying to the Fedora!
Permit and the State Certification.
Lb(-v bar'
Executed as of the Aitl day of September, 2000.
SOL IrSTAR HOLDINGS-MORET-Ml 1D CITY II, LLC
By. Tribek Mauagernent, Inc.
By:
Its. Prv sident
WAII-MART STORES EAST, INC.,
An Arkar ms corporation
Its:_ And. Yi , resident
•'W r Ye a tp a terms on
yr
,) L-! RT LgpAL. TEW
?e v
April 28, 2003
Regulatory Division
Action ID No. 200201244
Mr. Lynn McAlexander, Civil Engineer Manager
Wal-Mart Corporation
2001 SE 10`h Street
Bentonville, Arkansas 72716-0550
Dear Mr. McAlexander:
This letter serves as a follow-up to our September 12, 2002 correspondence, received by
your office on September 16, 2002, concerning 'Val-Mart's non-compliance of our January 29,
1998 issued permit for the expansion of Cypress Bay Shopping Center, near Morehead City,
Carteret County, North Carolina.
As stated in our letter, the construction of the Wal-Mart facility is in non-compliance with
the permit's special conditions (a) and (c) due to the modifications of the original plan. In order
to bring your permit action into compliance, you were directed to provide additional information
to help our office determine if your modifications fulfilled your requirements set forth in the
Clean Water Act Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines. Additionally, we requested that you, or the
appropriate personnel, provide a signature on page (4) of the copy of the permit, which was
enclosed in the September letter, to validate the transfer of the permit as it pertains to the parcel
in Wal-Mart's ownership.
To date, our office has not received the requested information to determine if your current
construction design is eligible for permit modifications. If this information is not provided
within 2 weeks of the receipt of this letter, our office will assume that it is not your intention to
comply with the issued permit. Consequently, we will. then determine further appropriate
administrative or legal action, which may include the assessment of an administrative penalty.
CERT6FIED
RET`tJRN REC 4E 6UES- __)
Thank you for your immediate attention and cooperation in this matter. If you have any
questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Sugg at telephone [phone],
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office.
FILE NAME: wallmart(1)404b Lnon.doc
Sincerely, CESAW-RG/rs 114 5
CES A W-RG-LlHARRIS/s/ OVI-11
MAIL (CM-RRR)
CESAW-RG/FiT .R
Keith A. Harris, Chief
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office
Copies furnished:
Mr. Garland Purdue
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
Mr. Ron Sechler
National Marine Fisheries, NOAA
Pivers Island
Beaufort, North Carolina 28516
State Property Office
North Carolina Department of
Administration
116 West Jones Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Ms. Noel Lutheran
Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845
Ms. Linda Lewis
Division of Water Quality-Stormwater Section
North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845
U. S. Attorney
Eastern District of North Carolina
310 New Bern Avenue
Suite 800, Federal Building
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Mr. Mike Wiley
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Wetlands Protection Section - Region IV
61 Forsyth Street
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Ms. Linda Stabb, Planning Director
Town of Morehead City
Post Office Drawer M
Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
Mr. John Dorney
Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
Mr. Blanton Hamilton
Tribek Corporation
200 Providence, Suite 106
Charlotte, North Carolina 28207
September 12, 2002
Subject: Action ID No. 200201244
Mr. Lynn McAlexander, Civil Engineer Manager
Wal-Mart Corporation
2001 SE Wh Street
Bentonville, Arkansas 72716-0550
Dear Mr. McAlexander:
Please reference your November 14, 2001 and July 9, 2002 telephone conversations with
Mr. Mickey Sugg of my staff, regarding Wal-Mart's non-compliance of our January 29, 1998
issued permit (copy enclosed) for the expansion. of Cypress Bay Shopping Center, near Morehead
City, Carteret County, North Carolina. The purpose of this letter is to confirm that Wal-Mart
owns the tract where the facility is currently located, and to request additional information in
order for our office to determine your eligibility for a permit modification.
In the conversations, you were informed that the construction of the Wal-Mart facility is
in non-compliance with the permit's special conditions (a) and (c). Also, in the permit, it states
"If any change in the authorized work is required because of unforeseen or altered conditions or
for any other reason, the plans revised to show the change must be sent promptly to this office.
Such action is necessary, as revised plans must be reviewed and the permit modified." Wal-
Mart's modification to the original plans has violated the terms and conditions of the issued
Department of the Army (DA) permit. By copy of this letter, the U.S. Attorney's office is being
notified of this non-compliance action.
In order to bring your permit action into compliance, you must fulfill the requirements set
forth in the Clean Water Act Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines. As discussed with Mr. Sugg, these
guidelines provide for first, avoiding impacts to waters and wetlands through the selection of the
least damaging, practicable alternative; second, taking appropriate and practicable steps to reduce
impacts on waters and wetlands; and finally, compensation for remaining unavoidable impacts to
the extent appropriate and practicable. During the review of the initial project design, it was
demonstrated that the project avoided and minimized wetland impacts as much as practicable;
and was in compliance with the 404(b)(1) guidelines. To enable us to determine if your current
construction design complies with the guidelines, we request that you provide the following
additional information:
a. Permits for work within wetlands or other special aquatic sites are available only if the
proposed work is the least environmentally damaging, practicable alternative. Please furnish
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT RECUE? D
information regarding any other alternatives, including onsite upland alternatives, to the work for
which you have constructed, and provide justification that your construction layout is the least
damaging to water or wetland areas on the property.
b. It was necessary for you to have taken all appropriate and practicable steps to minimize wetland
losses. Please indicate all that your current construction has done, especially regarding development and
modification of plans and proposed construction techniques, to minimize adverse impacts to wetlands.
c. The Guidelines require that appropriate and practicable mitigation will be required for
all unavoidable adverse impacts remaining after all appropriate and practicable minimization has
been employed. With our January 29, 1998 issued permit, a mitigation plan was agreed upon and
implemented to compensate for the unavoidable loss of waters or wetlands in the initial permit
design. As you have discussed with Mr. Sugg on several occasions, specifically in a March 4,
2002 telephone conversation, the mitigation monitoring reports are demonstrating that the Laurel
Road mitigation site is failing to meet the hydrological and vegetative parameter. Without any
guarantees that the site will succeed, it is our position that you should seek other mitigation
options to fulfill this requirement.
The aforementioned, requested information is essential in bringing your permit into
compliance and for us to determine if your current construction design is eligible for permit
modifications. You should forward this information to us within two (2) weeks of your receipt
of this letter. Upon receipt of your response, we will then determine further appropriate
administrative or legal action.
Additionally, we request that you, or the appropriate personnel, provide a signature on
page (4) of the enclosed copy of the permit. This will validate the transfer of this permit as it
pertains to the parcel in Wal-Mart's ownership.
Thank you for your immediate attention and cooperation in this matter. If you have any
questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Sugg at telephone [phone],
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office.
FILE NAME: walmart404bl.non.doc
CESAW-RG ors K
Sincerely, CESAW-RG-L/HARRIS/s/
MAIL (CM-RRR)/J?
CESAW-RG/FILE
Keith A. Harris, Chief
Wilmington Field Office
?i1C1UaUIe
Copies furnished (without enclosure):
Mr. Garland Purdue
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
Mr. Ron Sechler
National Marine Fisheries, NOAA
Pivers Island
Beaufort, North Carolina 28516
State Property Office
North Carolina Department of
Administration
116 West Jones Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Ms. Noel Lutheran
Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845
Mr. John Dorney
Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
Ms. Linda Lewis
Division of Water Quality-Stormwater Section
North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845
U. S. Attorney
Eastern District of North Carolina
310 New Bern Avenue
Suite 800, Federal Building
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Mr. Mike Wiley
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Wetlands Protection Section - Region IV
61 Forsyth Street
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Ms. Linda Stabb, Planning Director
Town of Morehead City
Post Office Drawer M
Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
Mr. Blanton Hamilton
Tribek Corporation
200 Providence, Suite 106
Charlotte, North Carolina 28207

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT
HESTRON CORPORATION
Permittee_
Permit No, N 9g6l1?7$? ?W`.^
Iseuiug OPtice OUA [Alm
r. uu4
RECEIVZ4
JAN 2 ,q,?8

NOTE: The term "you" and its derivatives, as usnd in this pemit, means tho pormit as or as%:• fut=e transform. The term
"this office" refers to the appropriate district or divialon office of the Corps of Engineers having ji risdiction over the permitted
activity or the appropriate official of that office acting under the authority of the commanding offl -sr.'
You are authorized to perform work in accordance with the terms and conditions specified below.
Project Description;
To discharge fill material within 21.01 acres of wetlands for the expansion of the a fisting Cypress
Say Shopping Center
Project Location;
above the headwaters of an unnamed tributary to Null swamp, near Morehead City
North Carolina , Carteret County,
Permit Conditions;
General Conditions:
1. The time limit for completing the work authorized ends on pecember 31, 2001
more time to complete the authorized activity, submit your request for a time extension to this off leaf for you a nelde ono at least
one month before the above date is reached,
2. You must maintain the activity authorized by Chia permit in good coudlbion and in conformaa oe with the terms and condi-
tions of this permit. You, are not relieved of this requirement it you abandon the permitted actlii ty, although you may make
a good faith transfer to it third party In compliance with General Condition 4 below. Should yc u wish to cease to maintain
tho authuriavd activity or should you desire to abandon It without a good faith transfer, you m tat obtain a modification of
this permit from this offles, which may require restoration of the area.
i =r uu4 Vfi:iifl t;ccc?rlpil?sni?i wbe a©tivity ssithndzed by
thla permit, you Must Immediately notify this office of what you have found. We will initiate the Federal and state coordina-
tion required to dntarmine if the remains warrant a recovery effort or if the site Is eligible for 110Ing In the National Register
of Hiatodc Places.
eNa roam 1721, Nov 46 EDITION OF SEP 82 is 0060I_ETE.
(99 CPR 9$5 (Appendix A))
I
-.4J UL iIIGllJ ID; ZJ
P. 005
4, U you sell the property associated with this permit, you must obtain the aiipnature of the i mw owner in the space provided
and forward is copy of the permit to this office to validate the trauslor of this authori=tion,
S. if a condltloned mater quality eertiflestion has been Issued for your project, you must corn[ Ily'With the conditions specified
in the Cartllieation as apecW oonditloas to this parmio, B'oa your convenience, a copy of the c Irtificatlon is attached If It con.
talus such conditions,
e. You must allow representatives from this office to inspect the authorized activity at any V me deatned necessary to ensure
that It Is being or has been accomplished In accordance with the terms and conditions of your poi =sit.
Special Condition, e
See enclosed sheet,
Further Information:
1, Congressional Authorities; You have been authorized to undertake the activity described abov i pursuant to;
( ) Section 10 of the Rivers and Iferbora Act of 1898 (88 U.B.C. 408).
pQ 6ectlon 404 of the Clean Water Act (88 U.B.C. 1844),
( ) Section 108 of the Marine Protection, Reaearch &nii Ranotuarieo Act of 1972 (39 U.B.C. 1. 18).
2, Limits of this authorization.
a. This permit does not obviate the need to obtain other Federal, state, or local authorizatiorm required by Jaw.
b. This permit does not grant any property rights or exclusive privileges.
c. This permit does not authorize any injury to the property or rights of abhors.
d, Thin perralt does not authorize Interference with any existing or proposed Federal project.
S. Limits of Federal Liability. In issuing this permit, the Federal Government does not assume an!, liability for the following:
% Damages to the permitted project or uses thereof as a result of other permitted or unpenr ltted aetivltiee or from natural
cauoe8,
b. Damages to the permitted project or uses thereof as a result of current or future activity a undertaken by or on behalf
of the United i9tates in the public interest.
c• I)aniagea to persons, property, or to other permitted or unpermltted activities or stn otures caused by the activity
authorized by this perrrdt.
d. Design or construction deficiencies associated with the permitted work.
2
. -LJ ULiYYGUJ iJ?Ltj
e. Damage claims associated with any future modification, suspension, or revocation of this I mrmit,
P, 006
4. Reliance on Applicant's Data: The determination of this office that issuance of this pan 'it is not contrary to the public
interest was made in reliance on the information you provided.
6. Reevaluation of Permit Decision. This office may reevaluate Its decision on this permit at any time the circumstances
warrant, Circumstances that could require a reevaluation include, but are not limited to, the fol I. )Wing:
a, You fall to comply with the terms and conditions of this permit.
6. The information, pruvlcled by you in support of your permit application proves to lave been false, incomplete, or
inaccurate (See 4 above),
c. Slgnifleant new Information surfaces which this office did not consider In reaching the ori` inal public interest decision.
Such a reevaluation may result in a determination that it Is appropriate to use the auspensic n, modification, and revocation
procedures contained In 88 CFR 626,7 or enforcement procedures such as those contained is 88 CPR 826.4 and 826.5, The
referenced enforcement procedures provide for the issuance of an administrative order requiril % you to comply with the terms
and condltlon¦ of your permit and for the Initiation of legal action where appropriate, You will be required to pay for any
corrective trteasuros orderdd by this office, and if you fall to comply with such directive, t"i office tray in certain situations
(such as those apecifled in 89 CFA 209,170) accomplish the corrective measures by contract c r otherwise and bill you for the
cost,
6. Extension, General condition 1 establishes a time limit for the completion of the activity a athorized by this permit. Unless
there are clreumatanees requiring either a.prompt completion of the authorized activity or a rf *veluation of the public Interest
4eolai4n, the Corps will normally give ravareble coneideratioo to a request for an extension of th] 9 time limit,
Your signature below, as permittee, Indicates that you accept and agree to comply with the term, and conditions of this permit.
(11,? TEJ
HESTRON CORPORATION
HESTRON PLAZA, SUITE 202
MOREHEAD CITY, NORTH CAROLINA 28557
This permit becomes effective when the Federal official, designated to get for the Secretary of th I Army, has signed below,
S?k -Q". fika? ('1.19-%
(DISTRIC ENa1N,9JUR) (DzI TE)
hon TERRY R. YOUNGSLUTH, COLONEL, EN
kWo-
the structurea or work authorized by this pertrUr are still in existence at the time the props -ty ie transferred, the terms and
conditions of this permit will continue to be binding an the now owner(s) of the property. To validate the transfer of this permit
and the ueooiaod liabilities associated with compliance with its terms and conditiona, have the U.insferee sign and data below.
SOUTHSTAR HOLDINGS---MOREHEAU CITY, LLC
By: TRIBEK MANAGEMENT, INC.
By: Its: I/M,2 President --
(D, ATE)
vru.5- OOVERF MENT PRI"Nq OFFICE: less - hT-426
LJ vJLkIfuu) 1v-L,0
F, u07
ADDENDUM TO DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PEM,[TT
PERMIT NO-1996Q-3796
When the structures or work authorized by this permit are still . n existence at the
time the property is transferred, the terms and conditions of this perm t will continue to
be binding on the new owner(s) of the p-mperty. To validate the tranf fer of this permit
and the a3sociated liabilities associated with compliance with its term 3 and conditions,
have the transferee sign and date below.
WAL-MART STORES EAST, INC.
By as of Uctobi? r 12, 2000
I?' (datr.)
4033019.01
Lta.
. rv ..r ?i,uuf tv
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
a. All work authorized by this pern7 t must be done in strict eomplianco with the permit
plans,
b, No mechanized land clearing will take place at any time in waters of wetlands outside
of the permitted area of construction,
c. No n_cavated or fill material will be placed at any time in waters or, wetlands outside
the permitted area of construction.
r. VUb
d. While accomplishing the authorized work, if the permittee discover 3 any previously
unlamown Federally endangered or threatened species, the District Engineer }.r in be immediately
notified so that required coofdination can be initiated with the U.S. Fish and';Tildlife Service
(USFWS),
e, Appropriate sedimentation and erosion control measures (i.e., silt fir, tees, hay belts, etc)
will be implemented to minimize siltation or turbidity. Disturbed areas will b( immediately
stabilized to prevent erosion into adjacent waters or wetlands.
f. All fill material will be clean and free of any pollutants except in trace, quantities. Metal
products, organic materials or unsightly debris will not be used, -
g. The activity will be conducted in such a manner as to prevent any sil nifieant increase in
turbidity outside the area of construction or construction related discharge. I tereases such that
the turbidity is 25 NTU's or less will not be considered significant,
h. This Department of the Army permit does not obviate the need to of Main other Federal,
State or local authorizations required by law,
i. All fill material used in the construction of the shopping center will ci )me from an
upland borrow area,
j. If any fill material is taken offsite during the construction of the shoji ring center or
mitigation sites, the material rnusL be disposed of on an upland site.
k. All compensatory mitigation will be implemented in accordance to tl!e July 1997
Mitigation Plan and May 19, 1997, Addendum to the Mitigation Plan; and wil l include the
following conditions:
1. For, the onsite mitigation: a final planting scheme, including numb, )r of species/acre,
will be sent to our office for final approval prior to initiation; all monitoring w eUs will be
installed in accordance with the WRP's August 1993 Technical Note "Installir g Monitoring
Wells/Piezomat:ers in Wetlands" and exact locations will be reviewed by our c trice; an elevation
point must be surveyed in the undisturbed 1.31 acre wetland packet to be use as a benchmark for
L %J u.:,r?LVI i%J •co P. 009

.2-
the adjacent created wetlands; all mitigation sites will bo protected from van, laHsm; and the
monitoring period will begin upon the completion of the mitigation.
2. For the offsite mitigation: all ditch exits will be plugged; ditch pig igs will be of
sufficient size and immediately stabilized with annual grasses to prevent eros on, no fescue will
be permitted; any failure of these plugs must be immediately repaired; all mo. i toring wells will
be installed in accordance to WRFs August 1993 Technical Note "Installing Monitoring
Wells/Piezome-ters in Wetlands" and exact locations will be reviewed by our office; the
monitoring well located in the preservation area will be surveyed convention d or with GPS; and
Pin us t ec and LiQijidambar s c' will not exceed 10% of the total trey : survival goal.
3. An as-built plan will be submitted to our office upon completion of the site prep
work and the planting of the vegetation.
4. The permittee shall maintain the mitigation areas in their natural ,ondition in
perpetuity. Prohibited activities within the mitigation areas specifically inelu c le, but are not
limited to, the construction of structures of any kind, the discharge of dredged or fill material,
excavation, the cutting, damage, or removal of any vegetation, grading, level ing, or any other
earth moving activity.
5, Condition 4 above runs with the land shown as the mitigation are as. The perrnittee
shall not sell or otherwise convey the property shown as the mitigation area:, or any interest
thcrein, to any third party, without the express written consent of the Corps of Engineers, except
as provided in condition 6 below. It is the intent of the Corps of Engineers a end the permittee that
the property may be conveyed to an acceptable nonprofit conservation organ.zation, or a state or
local government willing to hold the area in perpetuity for conservation purp ises.
6. A conservation easement, approved by the Corps of Engineers, for the offsite
mitigation areft must be conveyed to an acceptable nonprofit conservation organization, or a state
or local govenunent, and recorded in the Carteret County Register of Deeds arior to the
construction of the shopping center.
7. The permittee shall cause this permit, including these conditions i nd the enclosed
mitigation site maps, to be recorded in the Carteret County Register of Deed;,, in such a manner
that it will appear in the chain of title of the property making up the rnitigatio z areas, prior to the
construction of the shopping center. The permittee shall provide a copy of tr a recorded permit
to the Corps of Engineers as soon as possible.
c~v'i ? ,
0
0
cc
0
V"
I I
d r
o
a
`z
ar
-4-
O
Q
I111??1'' 0.1
I i
•1', ? 'III t 1 j i ? ' ,
? ? z lllt??tl'Iji?
' 111 lili;??l tt
• lltl ll?l
1-1aJba -
0 &Ul0'dd
o"+ --
at
1
1w I. / ^ 1
?Y•I'
•xxx?
a?1
v?
d d"?f 1
r'? tid
?. ,
..? ;? ,. 111.•.1 .:': as •-,??d
II i • ? 111 +.u?? ?::
.• ? r
Ix .0
?-? lil ?i't - ? ''
f) ]kill 1,.
(ilk
tt
N
r
V

r. Ilr
• LG'?J ti. 4"
!
'
' 1
I I i 't 1 t??
?
111
? ?
,
I?
1
i' 2 ?
•I
!tlll
Z
',1111 I 1 ? b
1.'? I . 1 ? lC• may, J.?
e 4

2
y LL ?

a
y
o
_
u
L; ,. s 3
o'
t?
? =
W C
w
U4 W .
r
0
1
• O
1•y ? y
QI
Lo 'c O U.
j
Ili W R
O
'^
f
z a w '? •; i
r
f?
.i o
? o
? ?
5 d
C ?
'u
4
9
?y
? ?
,?, ,'
? R
Y iW.
W QF.
o l$l
!C -
iz a x ? w z ? ?
??
j Cp
SD O
k Y
R ?
S d
? J
IFl q
~
i

r?
It
.4.
N
;

W

K _

?
cm

?
s

l
R ,? ? ? oom o z w
T 1 w
a S (
LI O y ^[ C

? t V N
u"rl
d a
C o
S ya, p y,
F. S
4
F `''
W
x ? ?
W O
? W
tt
O ?
?' si
?
? 'c
W
Q .
w ?
V1 La l

rI I
O
D7
as
w
t4
W
J
CD
0
C
41-1
a
CD
LL
010 .d ? `-

September 9, 2002
Subject: Action ID No. 200200204
Mr. Blanton Hamilton
Tribek Corporation
200 Providence, Suite 106
Charlotte, North Carolina 28207
Dear Mr. Hamilton:
Please reference your August 27, 2002 telephone conversation with Mr. Mickey Sugg of
my staff, regarding Tribek's non-compliance of our January 29, 1998 issued permit for the
expansion of Cypress Bay Shopping Center, near. Morehead City, Carteret County, North
Carolina. The purpose of this letter is to request additional information in order for our office to
determine your eligibility for a permit modification.
As discussed with Mr. Sugg, prior to authorizing activities pursuant to Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act, the activity must comply with the Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines. These
guidelines provide for first, avoiding impacts to waters and wetlands through the selection of the
least damaging, practicable alternative; second, taking appropriate and practicable steps to reduce
impacts on waters and wetlands; and finally, compensation for remaining unavoidable impacts to
the extent appropriate and practicable. During the review of the initial project design, it was
demonstrated that the project avoided and minimized wetland impacts as much as practicable;
and was in compliance with the 404(b)(1) guidelines. To enable us to determine if your current
construction design complies with the guidelines, we request that you provide the following
additional information:
a. Permits for work within wetlands or otter special aquatic sites are available only if the
proposed work is the least environmentally damaging, practicable alternative. Please furnish
information regarding any other alternatives, including onsite upland alternatives, to the work for
which you have constructed, and provide justification that your construction layout is the least
damaging to water or wetland areas on the property.
b. It was necessary for you to have taken all appropriate and practicable steps to minimize wetland
losses. Please indicate all that your current construction has done, especially regarding development and
modification of plans and proposed construction techniques, to minimize adverse impacts to wetlands.
c. The Guidelines require that appropriate and practicable mitigation will be required for
all unavoidable adverse impacts remaining after all appropriate and practicable minimization has
been employed. With our January 29, 1998 issued permit, a mitigation plan was agreed upon and
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
IN
implemented to compensate for the unavoidable loss of waters or wetlands in the initial permit
design. As you have discussed with Mr. Sugg on several occasions, specifically in a March 4,
2002 telephone conversation, the mitigation monitoring reports are demonstrating that the Laurel
Road mitigation site is failing to meet the hydrological and vegetative parameter. Without any
guarantees that the site will succeed, it is our position that you should seek other mitigation
options to fulfill this requirement.
The aforementioned, requested information is essential in bringing your permit into
compliance, and to determine if your current construction design is eligible for permit
modifications. You should forward this information to us within two (2) weeks of your receipt
of this letter. Upon receipt of your response, we will then determine further appropriate
administrative or legal action.
Additionally, our January 8, 2002 letter referenced General Condition (4); and requested
you to obtain the signature of the new owners of the parcel where Wal-Mart is located, and
forward a copy to our office to validate the transfer of the authorization. In your January 23,
2002 response, you enclosed a copy of the permit with your signature, but no signature was
completed by Wal-Mart. Please be reminded it is in your best interest that Wal-Mart sign the
permit and submit a copy to our office.
Thank you for your immediate attention and cooperation in this matter. If you have any
questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Sugg at telephone [phone],
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office.
FILE NAME:tribek404b1.non.doc
Sincerely, CESAW-RG-L/SUGG/rs
CES AW-RG-L/HARRIS/s/
MAIL (CM-RRR)? `?6a
Keith A. Harris, Chief
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office
I N
Copies furnished:
Mr. Garland Purdue
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
Mr. Ron Sechler
National Marine Fisheries, NOAA
Pivers Island
Beaufort, North Carolina 28516
State Property Office
North Carolina Department of Administration
116 West Jones Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Ms. Noel Lutheran
Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845
Mr. John Domey
Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
Ms. Linda Lewis
Division of Water Quality-Stormwater Section
North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845
U. S. Attorney
Eastern District of North Carolina
310 New Bern Avenue
Suite 800, Federal Building
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Mr. Mike Wiley
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Wetlands Protection Section - Region IV
61 Forsyth Street
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Ms. Linda Stabb, Planning Director
Town of Morehead City
Post Office Drawer M
Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
Mr. Lynn McAlexander, Civil Engineer
Manager
Wal-Mart Corporation
2001 SE 10th Street
Bentonville, Arkansas 72716-0550
January 8, 2002
Subject: Action ID No. 200200204
Mr. Blanton Hamilton
Tribek Corporation
200 Providence, Suite 106
Charlotte, North Carolina 28207
Dear Mr. Hamilton:
This letter confirms the November 1, 2001 onsite inspection by Mr. Mickey Sugg of my
staff and his November 19, 2001 telephone conversation with you regarding Tribek's recent non-
compliance of our January 29, 1998 issued permit (copy enclosed) for the expansion of Cypress
Bay Shopping Center, near Morehead City, Carteret County, North Carolina.
As discussed, Mr. Sugg disclosed to you that your current construction of a strip retail
mall, the completion of Staples Retail Store and parking, the realignment of the main access off
NC Highway 24, and the construction of Wal-Mart is in non-compliance with the permit's
special conditions (a) and (c). Also, in the permit, it states "If any change in the authorized work
is required because of unforeseen or altered conditions or for any other reason, the plans revised
to show the change must be sent promptly to this office. Such action is necessary, as revised
plans must be reviewed and the permit modified." Tribek Corporation's modification to the
original plans has violated the terms and conditions of the issued Department of the Army (DA)
permit.
In the discussion, you informed Mr. Sugg that Tribek remains the owner of all parcels
with the shopping center except for Wal-Mart and it's parking facility. Additionally, you added
that all mitigation responsibilities, both onsite and offsite, associated with the permit have been
transferred to Wal-Mart Corporation as of October 12, 2000. Documentation disclosing this
transfer was faxed to our office on November 21, 2001.
In reference to our issued permit, General Condition (4) states "If you sell the property
associated with this permit, you must obtain the signature of the new owner in the space provided
and forward a copy of the permit to this office to validate the transfer of this authorization." This
condition refers to any parcels within the project area associated with the permit. Our file shows
that no signature of the new owner of the property has been provided to our office for the Wal-
Mart parcel or any other parcel that may have been sold. It is therefore our position that Tribek
to be fully responsible for compliance of all terms and conditions of the
DA authorization, including the mitigation component, until the proper documentation is
provided to our office.
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
In addition, our records show that Tribek has been previously cited, letter dated April 22,
1999, for its non-compliance to the mitigation requirements of this permit. This continual
disregard of the terms and conditions of the issued permit is of great concern to our office. By
copy of this letter, the U.S. Attorney's office is being notified of this recent non-compliance
action.
You are directed to submit a detailed written explanation of your activities to this office
within 10 days of your receipt of this letter. Upon receipt of your response, we will then
determine further appropriate administrative or legal action.
Thank you for your time and cooperation in this matter. Questions or comments should
be addressed to Mr. Sugg at telephone [phone].
FILE NAME:tribekl.non.doc
Sincerely, CESAW-RG-L4&U ' 4s(M5
CESAW-OC/LAMSQ F-- b/
CESAW-RG-L/HARRIS/s/
MAIL (CM-RRR)
CESAW-RG/FILE
Keith A. Harris, Chief
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office
Enclosure
Copies furnished (without enclosure):
Mr. Garland Purdue
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
Mr. Ron Sechler
National Marine Fisheries, NOAA
Pivers Island
Beaufort, North Carolina 28516
State Property Office
North Carolina Department of
Administration
116 West Jones Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Ms. Joanne Steenhuis
Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845
Mr. John Dorney
Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
Ms. Linda Lewis
Division of Water Quality (Stormwater Section)
North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845
U. S. Attorney
Eastern District of North Carolina
310 New Bern Avenue
Suite 800, Federal Building
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Mr. Mike Wiley
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Wetlands Protection Section - Region IV
61 Forsyth Street
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Ms. Linda Stabb, Planning Director
Town of Morehead City
Post Office Drawer M
Morehead City, North Carolina 28557

Regulatory Division
Action ID. 199603796
Mr. Charles Hester
Hestron Corporation
Hestron Plaza, Suite 202
Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
Dear Mr. Hester:

In accordance with your written request of August 30, 1996, and the ensuing
administrative record, enclosed is a permit to discharge fill material within 21.01 acres of
Section 404 wetlands above the headwaters of an unnamed tributary to Hull Swamp for the
expansion of the existing Cypress Bay Shopping Center, near Morehead City, Carteret County,
North Carolina.
If any change in the authorized work is required because of unforeseen or altered
conditions or for any other reason, the plans revised to show the change must be sent promptly to
this office. Such action is necessary, as revised plans must be reviewed and the permit modified.
Carefully read your permit. The general and special conditions are important. Your
failure to comply with these conditions could result in a violation of Federal law. Certain
significant general conditions require that:
a. You must complete construction before December 31, 2001.
b. You must notify this office in advance as to when you intend to commence and
complete work.
January 29, 1998
c. You must allow representatives from this office to make periodic visits to your worksite
as deemed necessary to assure compliance with permit plans and conditions.
-2-

The enclosed Notice of Authorization, ENG Form 4336, must be conspicuously displayed
at your worksite.
Sincerely,
G. Wayne Wright, Chief
Regulatory Division
Enclosures
Copy Furnished (with enclosures):
Chief, Source Data Unit
NOAA/National Ocean Service
ATTN: Sharon Tear N/CS261
1315 East-West Hwy., Rm 7316
Silver Spring, Maryland 20910-3282
Copies Furnished (with special conditions and plans):
Mr. John Hefner, Field Supervisor
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Fish and Wildlife Enhancement
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
Mr. Larry Hardy
National Marine Fisheries Service
Pivers Island
Beaufort, North Carolina 28516
Mr. William L. Cox, Chief
Wetlands Section - Region IV
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
61 Forsyth Street, SW
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
FILE NAME:hestron.68
CESAW-RG-L/SUGG/rs
CESAW-RG-L/JAHN ,E
CESAW-OC/Ll
CESAW-RG/S H/s/ _
CESAW-RG/FILE I
Mr. John Parker
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Mr. John Dorney
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Mr. Rob Wheatly
Wheatly, Wheatly Nobles and Weeks
Post Drawer 360
Beaufort, North Carolina 28516-0360
Messrs. Larry Baldwin and Paul Farley
Land Management Group, Inc.
Post Office Box 2522
JA ill Carolina 28402
Blind Copy Furnished:
CESAW-RG/Ramel

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT
HESTRON CORPORATION
Permittee
Permit No. _ 199603796
Issuing Office QESAW-R

JAN 2 . 19yg
7Q;Zy UAua,
NOTE: The term "you" and its derivatives, as used in this permit, means the permittee or any future transferee. The term
"this office" refers to the appropriate district or division office of the Corps of Engineers having jurisdiction over the permitted
activity or the appropriate official of that office acting under the authority of the commanding officer.
You are authorized to perform work in accordance with the terms and conditions specified below.
Project Description:
To discharge fill material within 21.01 acres of wetlands for the expansion of the existing Cypress
Bay Shopping Center
Project Location:
above the headwaters of an unnamed tributary to Hull Swamp, near Morehead City, Carteret County,
North Carolina
Permit Conditions:
General Conditions:
1. The time limit for completing the work authorized ends on December 31, 2001
more time to complete the authorized activity, submit your request for a time extension to this office for consideration at least --- _ If you find that you need
one month before the above date is reached.
2. You must maintain the activity authorized by this permit in good condition and in conformance with the terms and condi•
tions of this permit. You are not relieved of this requirement if you abandon the permitted activity, although you may make
a good faith transfer to a third party in compliance with General Condition 4 below. Should you wish to cease to maintain
the authorized activity or should you desire to abandon it without a good faith transfer, you must obtain a modification of
this permit from this office, which may require restoration of the area.
3. If you discover any previously unknown historic o: ;;.rc;:::•':o,'
"icsa rer,iaias viiiile ac•cotaplishit.g ti?e activity authorized by
this permit, you roust immediately notify this office of what you have found. We will initiate the Federal and state coordina-
tion required to determine if the remains warrant a recovery effort or if the site is eligible for listing in the National Register
of Historic Places.
ENG FORM 1721, Nov 86 EDITION OF SEP 82 IS OBSOLETE.
(33 CFR 325 (Appendix A))
1
4. If you sell the property associated with this permit, you must obtain the signature of the new owner in the space provided
and forward a copy of the permit to this office to validate the transfer of this authorization.
5. If a conditioned water quality certification has been issued for your project, you must comply with the conditions specified
in the certification as special conditions to this permit. For your convenience, a copy of the certification is attached if it con-
tains such conditions.
6. You must allow representatives from this office to inspect the authorized activity at any time deemed necessary to ensure
that it is being or has been accomplished in accordance with the terms and conditions of your permit.
Special Conditions:
See enclosed sheet.
Further Information:
1. Congressional Authorities: You have been authorized to undertake the activity described above pursuant to:
( ) Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 403).
(}Q Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344).
( ) Section 103 of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1413).
2. Limits of this authorization.
a. This permit does not obviate the need to obtain other Federal, state, or local authorizations required by law.
b. This permit does not grant any property rights or exclusive privileges.
c. This permit does not authorize any injury to the property or rights of others.
d. This permit does not authorize interference with any existing or proposed Federal project.
3. Limits of Federal Liability. In issuing this permit, the Federal Government does not assume any liability for the following:
a. Damages to the permitted project or uses thereof as a result of other permitted or unpermitted activities or from natural
causes.
b. Damages to the permitted project or uses thereof as a result of current or future activities undertaken by or on behalf
of the United States in the public interest.
c. Damages to persons, ; roperty, or to ether i>arniltted or unpermitied activities or causeu l,y t`ie activity
authorized by this permit.
d. Design or construction deficiencies associated with the permitted work.
2
e, Damage claims associated with any future modification, suspension, or revocation of this permit.
4. Reliance on Applicant's Data: The determination of this office that issuance of this permit is not contrary to the public
interest was made in reliance on the information you provided,
5. Reevaluation of Permit Decision. This office may reevaluate its decision on this permit at any time the circumstances
warrant. Circumstances that could require a reevaluation include, but are not limited to, the following:
a. You fail to comply with the terms and conditions of this permit,

b. The information provided by you in support of your permit application proves to have been false, incomplete, or
inaccurate (See 4 above),
C. Significant new information surfaces which this office did not consider in reaching the original public interest decision
Such a reevaluation may result in a determination that it is appropriate to use the suspension, -modification, and revocation
procedures contained in 33 CFR 325,7 or enforcement procedures such as those contained in 33 CFR 326,4 and 326.5. The
referenced enforcement procedures provide for the issuance of an administrative order requiring you to comply with the terms
and conditions of your permit and for the initiation of legal action where appropriate. You will be required to pay for any
corrective measures ordered by this office, and if you fail to comply with such directive, this office may in certain situations
(such as those specified in 33 CFR 209,170) accomplish the corrective measures by contract or otherwise and bill you for the
cost.
6, Extensions. General condition 1 establishes a time limit for the completion of the activity authorized by this permit. Unless
there are circumstances requiring either a prompt completion of the authorized activity or a reevaluation of the public interest
decision, the Corps will normally give favorable consideration to a request for an extension of this time limit,
Your signature below, as permittee, indicates that you accept and agree to comply with the terms and conditions of this permit.
(PERMITTEE)
HESTRON CORPORATION (DATE)
HESTRON PLAZA, SUITE 202
MOREHEAD CITY, NORTH CAROLINA 28557
This permit becomes effective when the Federal official, designated to act for the Secretary of the Army, has signed below.
(DISTRICT ENGINEER)
k '- TERRY R. YOUNGBLUTH; COLONEL, EN
(DATE)
When the structures or work authorized by this permit are still in existence at the time the property is transferred, the terms and
conditions of this permit will continue to be binding on the new owner(s) of the property- To validate the transfer of this permit
and the associated liabilities associated with compliance with its terms and conditions, have the transferee sign and date below.
(LA 7
3
* U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1986 - 717-425

SPECIAL CONDITIONS
4 a. All work authorized by this permit must be done in strict compliance with the permit
plans.
b. No mechanized land clearing will take place at any time in waters or wetlands outside
of the permitted area of construction.
c. No excavated or fill material will be placed at any time in waters or wetlands outside
the permitted area of construction.
d. While accomplishing the authorized work, if the permittee discovers any previously -
unknown Federally endangered or threatened species, the District Engineer will be immediately `
notified so that required coordination can be initiated with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS). ,
e. Appropriate sedimentation and erosion control measures (i.e., silt fences, hay bales, etc.)
will be implemented to minimize siltation or turbidity. Disturbed areas will be immediately
stabilized to prevent erosion into adjacent waters or wetlands.
f. All fill material will be clean and free of any pollutants except in trace quantities. Metal
products, organic materials or unsightly debris will not be used.
g. The activity will be conducted in such a manner as to prevent any significant increase in
turbidity outside the area of construction or construction related discharge. Increases such that
the turbidity is 25 NTU's or less will not be considered significant.
h. This Department of the Army permit does not obviate the need to obtain other Federal,
State or local authorizations required by law.
i. All fill material used in the construction of the shopping center will come from an
upland borrow area.
j. If any fill material is taken offsite during the construction of the shopping center or
mitigation sites, the material must be disposed of on an upland site.
k. All compensatory mitigation will be implemented in accordance to the Jul 1997
Mitigation Plan and May 19, 1997, Addendum to the Mitigation Plan; and will include the
following conditions:
1. For the onsite mitigation: a final planting scheme. including number of species/acre
will_be sent to our office for final approval prior to initiation; all monitorlm we1lS..???ill be ?, 1 J/,'?
installed in accordance with the WIZP's August 1993 Technical Note "Installing Monitoring
Well s/Piezometers in Wetlands" and exact locations will be reviewed by our office; an elevation
point must be surveyed in the undisturbed 1.31 acre wetland pocket to be use as a benchmark for
-2-
the adjacent created wetlands; all mitigation sites will be protected from vandalism; and the
monitoring period will begin upon the completion of the mitigation.
7* 2. For the offsite mitigation: all ditch exits will be plugged; ditch plugs will be of
sufficient size and immediately stabilized with annual grasses to prevent erosion, no fescue will
'be permitted; any failure of these plugs must be immediately repaired; all monitoring wells will
be installed in accordance to WRP's August 1993 Technical Note "Installing Monitoring
Well s/Pi ezomet ers in Wetlands" and exact locations will be reviewed by our office; the
monitoring well located in the preservation area will be surveyed conventional or with GPS; and
Pinus taeda and Liquidambar styraciflua will not exceed 10% of the total tree survival goal.
3. An as-built plan will be submitted to our office upon completion of the site prep
work and the planting of the vegetation. kotA
dvyy-
4. The permittee shall maintain the mitigation areas in their natural condition in
perpetuity. Prohibited activities within the mitigation areas specifically include, but are not
limited to, the construction of structures of any kind, the discharge of dredged or fill material,
excavation, the cutting, damage, or removal of any vegetation, grading, leveling, or any other
earth moving activity.
5. Condition 4 above runs with the land shown as the mitigation areas. The permittee
shall not sell or otherwise convey the property shown as the mitigation areas, or any interest
therein, to any third party, without the express written consent of the Corps of Engineers, except
as provided in condition 6 below. It is the intent of the Corps of Engineers and the permittee that
the property may be conveyed to an acceptable nonprofit conservation organization, or a state or
local government willing to hold the area in perpetuity for conservation purposes.
6. A conservation easement, approved by the Corps of Engineers, for the offsite
mitigation area must be conveyed to an acceptable nonprofit conservation organization, or a state
or local government, and recorded in the Carteret County Register of Deeds prior to the
construction of the shopping center.
7. The permittee shall cause this permit, including these conditions and the enclosed
mitigation site maps, to be recorded in the Carteret County Register of Deeds, in such a manner
that it will appear in the chain of title of the property making up the mitigation areas, prior to the
construction of the shopping center. The permittee shall provide a copy of the recorded permit
to the Corps of Engineers as soon as possible.

?* T
n CD
c Q'
11
c
CD
.r]
x
-•fi
CD
n
CD
CD
L2,
O
CD
H C
CD CD
CD
:3 O
c
CD J
C. = ?Dn - ?1 r1

?
?f'•w .rte. ' +1' 1I
t'`
Z
`
t
< `1111 till i ,
r

z
-•1 J t• ;?r t
GD C
?J_) ???`?,?.,-tt•..,,?-t- '? ?" f ?,? .i? X111
CD

CD
1-r
CD
Q
O

W
O
f] D
b
x
-1 b
? S m
{ q
y m p
?
D

Z

Y

i 3
•qi

m
O

O
i r m ?
Y P {

> ;O •m-1

r
> 'A
3 q
m m m 7
S1 O r
> D
ml
2
O b q
D D w
z
m m m m y
w IA :r

2

?
O

a v a
? A
O m

- S
D y
•c m n
a1 z
m =
x n'
'? m
N

?
r ?
z

Z
m q 2 O
n o
a o
m ? x
n ^ m O
0
o s
:,, ?
c
o
g

o' m .
z v n
o
c T K
c % o •a+
Y c O p

: a•
O
:!

- = >
N 2
O p O
? f
?

r
: xl v
` ? y
O 3
-t m
n
S
O
v. P O
m m A
n
m
a s <
A A O
Z C) n
m m c
%. m
ti + O
c m ;o
=
>
?
a
> -1
O
Y
-rc
.fir `- i.".•, `:?
b
.l
'`? .: i I Ill I t t, 1
J??. 'I f 111
G7
{
D
-C
N
A
.il•
o N%
Y
I ?
I
r
O
n
10
rt
q
b
z
1
O
0
2
cs
1 1 ?
I
l ll, It lli
•
l
IIt' 111111 I?
/
1 M1< ?
I I I` I I`? 1 I
v, O
?
I i.

.'•'
?;.:I it ;, • -? O
.
?

\ I1.: ?\ O
? '
,III t
b ? 1 rr`1
O
O
,r

Sh
°'°.orn9
Cen/-Ij
III

Q%
September 5, 2000
Regulatory Division
Action ID No. 199603796
Mr. Blanton Hamilton
Tribek Corporation
200 Providence, Suite 106
Charlotte, North Carolina 28207
Dear Mr. Hamilton:
This letter confirms my July 19, 2000, onsite meeting with your agent, Ms. Kim Williams
of Land Management Group, regarding mitigation compliance of our January 9, 1998, issued
Department of the Army permit for the expansion of Cypress Bay Shopping Center, near
Morehead City, Carteret County, North Carolina. Also, please reference the March 2, 2000,
mitigation monitoring report for the Laurel Road site.
As stated in the monitoring report, it was determined that the site met the wetland success
criteria for the initial year of monitoring. The report shows that all five monitoring wells,
including the reference well, exceeded the hydrology requirement of groundwater levels within
12 inches of the soil surface for 5% of the growing season. Additionally, the vegetative survey
depicted an average of 534.8 trees per acre, including the volunteer species, surpassing the 320
trees per acre requirement.
Upon reviewing the report, it was noted in Table (1) that the number of days > 12 inches
for well #1 (s34e12) was 44 days. In reading Figure 4 of the well results, my interpretation of
the 44 days does not imply consecutive days. In fact, the readings show the water table within
12-inches only 10 consecutive days, August 29 to September 8, 1999. This does not satisfy the
5% growing season (12 straight days) requirement. The only other time the water table was
within the 12-inch level during the growing season was for two days from October 18-20. The
water table patterns for well #2 (04207) were very similar to that of well #1. The reading
shows the water table within 12-inches for only about 11 consecutive days. The water table did
not reach 12-inches, outside the September month, at any other time during the entire growing
season.
These results are of significant concern for two reasons: 1) The hydrology parameter was
not met for these two wells, and 2) the high recorded water tables occurred during simultaneous
storm events, Tropical Storm Dennis and Hurricane Floyd. These rainfall events dropped over
20-inches in the area in a matter of days. Additionally, the results showed the other three wells
only meeting the hydrology parameter during this same time period. In fact, the longest reading
within the 12-inch level occurred for only 5 consecutive days. This was well #4 (s342adl) from
April 30 - May 5, 1999. As discussed in the meeting, the report must include the Wets Table that
shows normal or average monthly rainfall for the past 3 0 years. With this information, you can
extrapolate drought and excessive rainfall conditions occurring during the year, and aids in
interpreting normalcy for the recorded data.
In the vegetation sampling, it was noted that Table (2) included all volunteer species, and
did not incorporate any of the planted species. As discussed with Ms. Williams, the success
criteria of 320 trees per acre are based only on the planted species and the 10% Pinus taeda
(loblolly pine) and Liquidambar styraciflua (sweet gum) volunteer species. My inspection
revealed no evidence of survival for the planted species. It was noted that the predominant tree
species populated within the old cropland fields is sweet gum. As stated in our June 10, 1999,
the failure to comply with the "prescribed success criteria for planted vegetation may result in
the need to replant."
Based on the monitoring report and onsite inspections, it has been concluded that the site
does not meet the vegetation parameter, and fails to exceed the 5% requirement for wells #1 and
#2. Additionally, there is inconclusive evidence that the remaining wells satisfy the hydrology
parameter. The annual monitoring report must include the following: 1) As stated, provide the
Wets Table for average comparison, 2) GPS or conventional survey of all well and vegetative
sampling plots, 3) note all volunteer and herbaceous species to help record the condition of the
site, and 4) readjust Table 1 to include consecutive days.
To ensure compliance of the permit, you must entirely replant the site this winter prior to
conducting any construction within the permitted area. It is our recommendations that you
reconsider grading the cropland to eliminate drainage field crowns, and/or bush hogging all
cropland areas to promote growth for the planted species. When replanting the site, it is strongly
recommended that each planted species within the sampling plots be flagged for easy
identification and to differentiate planted and volunteer species.
Please be reminded that failure to meet the success criteria established in the mitigation
plan will result in the non-compliance of the issued permit.
Thank you for your immediate attention in this matter. If you have any comments or
concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Mickey Sugg
Regulatory Specialist
Wilmington Field Office
FILE NAME:hestron.mit.doc
CESAW RGL% /&LL A15
/
/G'
MAIL V§;Ita
CESAW-RG/FILE
C..
Copies furnished:
United States Attorney
Eastern District of North Carolina
310 New Bern Avenue
Suite 800, Federal Building
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601
Ms. Kim Williams
Land Management Group, Inc.
Post Office Box 2522
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
Mr. John Dorney
Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
Mr. Ted Tyndall
Division of Coastal Management
Hestron Plaza Two
151-B Hwy 24
Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
Ms. Joanne Steenhuis
Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405
Ms. Kathy Matthews
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Wetlands Protection Section-Region IV
61 Forsyth Street
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Ms. Linda Staab, Planning Director
Town of Morehead City
Post Office Drawer M
Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
a,.
June 10, 1999
Regulatory Division
Action ID. 199603796
Mr. Blanton Hamilton
Tribek Corporation
200 Providence, Suite 106
Charlotte, North Carolina 28207
Dear Mr. Hamilton:
Please reference our April 22, 1999 letter regarding our permit compliance concerns with
your Department of the Army Section 404 permit issued January 29, 1998 authorizing the
discharge of fill material into 21.01 acres of wetlands for the expansion of the Cypress Bay
Shopping Center in Morehead City, Carteret County, North Carolina. Also, this letter confirms
the May 18, 1999 compliance inspection conducted by Mr. Mickey Sugg of my staff with your
agent, Mr. Larry Baldwin of Land Management Group, at the compensatory mitigation site off
Laurel Road.
The inspection of the Laurel Road mitigation site confirmed that all offsite mitigation work
has satisfactorily been initiated. Accordingly, no further legal action will be taken in this matter
and our file will be closed as of the date of this letter.
During the inspection, Mr. Sugg noted that some of the newly planted trees were exhibiting
signs of stress and that some saplings were improperly planted. Additionally, he observed that
five-foot wide strips of vegetation, heavily populated with sweet gum (Liquidambar s aciflua ,
had been left throughout the restoration area. Although these strips of vegetation provide shade
and may reduce deer depredation on planted saplings, we are concerned that the sweet gum will
out-compete the more desirable planted species. Your attention is directed. to Condition (1)(2) of
your permit which states, "Pinus taeda and Liquidambar styraciflua will not exceed 10% of the
total tree survival goal." The success of this mitigation site is contingent on your compliance to
all of the conditions of the permit. Please be aware that failure to meet the prescribed success
criteria for planted vegetation may result in the need to replant the site.
l_
2
Thank you for your time, cooperation, and immediate attention to resolve this matter. If
you have any questions about this correspondence, or any related matter, please do not hesitate to
contact Mr. Sugg at telephone [phone], Wilmington District Field Office.
Sincerely,
Ernest W. Jahnke, M.S., P.W.S.
Assistant Chief, Regulatory Division
Copies Furnished:
United States Attorney
Eastern District of North Carolina
310 New Bern Avenue
Suite 800, Federal Building
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601
FILE NAME:hestro-l.doc
CESAW-RG,Ll& ? s?'^5
CESAW-OC ___
CESAW-RG/. /
MAIL
CESAW-RG/FILE
Mr. William Cox, Chief
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Wetlands Protection Section- Region IV
61 Forsyth Street
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Mr. Larry Hardy
National Marine Fisheries, NOAA
Habitat Conservation Division
Pivers Island
Beaufort, North Carolina 28516
Regional Director
National Marine Fisheries Service
Southeast Regional Office
Habitat Conservation Division
9721 Executive Center Drive
Saint Petersburg, Florida 33702-2432
State Property Office
North Carolina Department of Administration
116 West Jones Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
3
Mr. John Hefner
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
Ms. Joanne Steenhuis
Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845
Ms. Janet Paith
Land Quality Section
North Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845
Mr. John Dorney
Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Mr. David Franchina
Kennedy, Covington, Lobdell and Hickman, LLP
NationsBank Corporate Center
Suite 4200
100 North Tryon Street
Charlotte, North Carolina 28202-4006
Mr. Larry Baldwin
Land Management Group, Inc.
Post Office Box 2522
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
d Copy Furnished:
CESAW-RG-L\Richter

April 22, 1999
Action ID No. 199603796
Mr. Blanton Hamilton
Tribek Corporation
200 Providence, Suite 106
Charlotte, North Carolina 28207
Dear Mr. Hamilton:
This letter confirms the February 3, 1999 meeting between Mr. Larry Baldwin of Land
Management Group Inc., your consultant, and Mr. Mickey Sugg of my Wilmington Field Office
staff. The purpose of the meeting was to determine compliance with your Department of the
Army (DA) Section 404 permit (copy enclosed) issued January 29, 1998. The permit authorizes
the discharge of fill material in wetlands to facilitate the expansion of the Cypress Bay Shopping
Center near Morehead City, Carteret County, North Carolina.
During Mr. Sugg's inspection, it was revealed that offsite Laurel Road mitigation work
has not been completed since the final construction of the Lowe's facility on the permitted site.
In accordance with the issued permit, condition (k) states that "All compensatory mitigation will
be implemented in accordance with the July 1997 Mitigation Plan and May 19, 1997 Addendum
to the Mitigation Plan." As stated in the mitigation plan, all grading and ditching will be
completed by December 1997, and the vegetation planted prior to February 27, 1998. In
addition, condition (a) of the general conditions states that "You must notify this office in
advance as to when you intend to commence and complete work". With the exception of
installing ditch plugs, none of the required mitigation work has been completed. On this basis,
you are in violation of the terms and conditions of your DA permit.
In order to comply with the permit requirements, you must implement and complete all
aspects of the mitigation plan such as planting the trees, installing and surveying the monitoring
wells, and stabilizing the ditch plugs. All mitigation work must be completed within 30 days of
your receipt of this notice and prior to any additional construction in wetlands on the permitted
site. You are reminded that notification regardiag the commencement and completion of work is
required.
MAIL
-2-
Failure to comply with this directive may result in an immediate referral to the United
States Attorney for appropriate legal action. In addition, you should be aware that an
administrative fine can be levied as a result of non-compliance with individual permit
conditions. This would not preclude the requirement that wetland mitigation work be completed.
Your cooperation in resolving this matter in a satisfactory manner is necessary and will
be appreciated. Questions or comments should be addressed to Mr. Sugg at telephone (910) 251-
4811.
Sincerely,
G. Wayne Wright
Chief, Regulatory Division
Enclosure FILE NAME:hestron.non
CESAW-RG-L/SU
CESAW- - <JAHNKE
CESAW-OC/,£ : GP
CESAW-RG/JOHNSON
CESAW-RG
MAIL (CM-RRR)
CESAW-RG/FILE
.4
Copies furnished (w/o enclosure):
Mr. John Hefner
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 337261
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
Mr. Ron Sechler
National Marine Fisheries, NOAA
Pivers Island
Beaufort, North Carolina 28516
Regional Director
National Marine Fisheries
Service, NOAA
Habitat Conservation Division
9721 Executive Center Drive
Saint Petersburg, Florida 33702-2432
State Property Office
North Carolina Department of
Administration
116 West Jones Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Ms. Joanne Steenhuis
Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845
Ms. Janet Paith
Land Quality Section
North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845
-3-
United States Attorney
Eastern District of North Carolina
310 New Bern Avenue
Suite 800, Federal Building
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Mr. John Dorney
Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Mr. William L. Cox, Chief
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Wetlands Protection Section-Region IV
61 Forsyth Street
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Mr. Daivd Franchina
Kennedy, Covington, Lobdell and Hickman, LLP
NationsBank Corporate Center
Suite 4200
100 North Tryon Street
Charlotte, North Carolina 28202-4006
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT REQ iveo
HESTRON CORPORATION J1W 2 / 9h 8
Permittee
Permit No. 199603796?Q
Issuing Office CESAW-RG
NOTE: The term "you" and its derivatives, as used in this permit, means the permittee or any future transferee. The term
"this office" refers to the appropriate district or division office of the Corps of Engineers having jurisdiction over the permitted
activity or the appropriate official of that office acting under the authority of the commanding officer.
You are authorized to perform work in accordance with the terms and conditions specified below.
Project Description:
To discharge fill material within 21.01 acres of wetlands for the expansion of the existing Cypress
Bay Shopping Center
Project Location:
above the headwaters of an unnamed tributary to Hull Swamp, near Morehead City, Carteret County,
North Carolina
Permit Conditions:
General Conditions:
1. The time limit for completing the work authorized ends on December 31, 2001 . If you find that you need
more time to complete the authorized activity, submit your request for a time extension to this office for consideration at least
one month before the above date is reached.
2. You must maintain the activity authorized by this permit in good condition and in conformance with the terms and condi-
tions of this permit. You are not relieved of this requirement if you abandon the permitted activity, although you may make
a good faith transfer to a third party in compliance with General Condition 4 below. Should you wish to cease to maintain
the authorized activity or should you desire to abandon it without a good faith transfer, you must obtain a modification of
this permit from this office, which may require restoration of the area.
3. If you discover any previously unknown historic or arei:eoiogical remains -Ahile accomplishing the activity authorized by
this permit, you must immediately notify this office of what you have found. We will initiate the Federal and state coordina-
tion required to determine if the remains warrant a recovery effort or if the site is eligible for listing in the National Register
of Historic Places.
ENG FORM 1721, Nov 86 EDITION OF SEP 82 IS OBSOLETE. (33 CFR 325 (Appendix A))
e. Damage claims associated with any future modification, suspension, or revocation of this permit.
4. Reliance on Applicant's Data: The determination of this office that issuance of this permit is not contrary to the public
interest was made in reliance on the information you provided.
5. Reevaluation of Permit Decision. This office may reevaluate its decision on this permit at any time the circumstances
warrant. Circumstances that could require a reevaluation include, but are not limited to, the following:
a. You fail to comply with the terms and conditions of this permit.
b. The information provided by you in support of your permit application proves to have been false, incomplete, or
inaccurate (See 4 above).
c. Significant new information surfaces which this office did not consider in reaching the original public interest decision. `
Such a reevaluation may result in a determination that it is appropriate to use the suspension, modification, and revocation
procedures contained in 33 CFR 325.7 or enforcement procedures such as those contained in 33 CFR 326.4 and 326.5. The
referenced enforcement procedures provide for the issuance of an administrative order requiring you to comply with the terms
and conditions of your permit and for the initiation of legal action where appropriate. You will be required to pay for any
corrective measures ordered by this office, and if you fail to comply with such directive, this office may in certain situations
(such as those specified in 33 CPR 209.170) accomplish the corrective measures by contract or otherwise and bill you for the
cost.
6. Extensions. General condition 1 establishes a time limit for the completion of the activity authorized by this permit. Unless
there are circumstances requiring either a prompt completion of the authorized activity or a reevaluation of the public interest
decision, the Corps will normally give favorable consideration to a request for an extension of this time limit.
Your signature below, as permittee, indicates that you accept and agree to comply with the terms and conditions of this permit.
a E . " ;?? g---,z 4, - >-i.?-94?
(PERMITTEE) (DATE)
HESTRON CORPORATION
HESTRON PLAZA, SUITE 202
MOREHEAD CITY, NORTH CAROLINA 28557
This permit becomes effective when the Federal official, designated to act for the Secretary of the Army, has signed below.
(DISTRICT ENGINEER)
1 ' °1-i -4 8
(DATE)
TERRY R. YOUNGBLUTH, COLONEL, EN
When the structures or work authorized by this permit are still in existence at the time the property is transferred, the terms and
conditions of this permit will continue to be binding on the new owner(s) of the property. To validate the transfer of this permit
and the associated liabilities associated with compliance with its terms and conditions, have the transferee sign and date below.
(TRANSFEREE)
(DATE)
3
*U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1986 - 717-425
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
a. All work authorized by this permit must be done in strict compliance with the permit
plans.
b. No mechanized land clearing will take place at any time in waters or wetlands outside
of the permitted area of construction.
c. No excavated or fill material will be placed at any time in waters or wetlands outside
the permitted area of construction.
d. While accomplishing the authorized work, if the permittee discovers any previously
unknown Federally endangered or threatened species, the District Engineer will be immediately
notified so that required coordination can be initiated with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS).
e. Appropriate sedimentation and erosion control measures (i.e., silt fences, hay bales, etc.)
will be implemented to minimize siltation or turbidity. Disturbed areas will be immediately
stabilized to prevent erosion into adjacent waters or wetlands.
f. All fill material will be clean and free of any pollutants except in trace quantities. Metal
products, organic materials or unsightly debris will not be used.
g. The activity will be conducted in such a manner as to prevent any significant increase in
turbidity outside the area of construction or construction related discharge. Increases such that
the turbidity is 25 NTU's or less will not be considered significant.
h. This Department of the Army permit does not obviate the need to obtain other Federal,
State or local authorizations required by law.
i. All fill material used in the construction of the shopping center will come from an
upland borrow area.
j. If any fill material is taken offsite during the construction of the shopping center or
mitigation sites, the material must be disposed of on an upland site.
k. All compensatory mitigation will be implemented in accordance to the July 1997
Mitigation Plan and May 19, 1997, Addendum to the Mitigation Plan; and will include the
following conditions:
1. For the onsite mitigation: a final planting scheme, including number of species/acre,
will be sent to our office for final approval prior to initiation; all monitoring wells will be
installed in accordance with the WRP's August 1993 Technical Note "Installing Monitoring
Wells/Piezometers in Wetlands" and exact locations will be reviewed by our office; an elevation
point must be surveyed in the undisturbed 1.31 acre wetland pocket to be use as a benchmark for
-2-
the adjacent created wetlands; all mitigation sites will be protected from vandalism; and the
monitoring period will begin upon the completion of the mitigation.
2. For the offsite mitigation: all ditch exits will be plugged; ditch plugs will be of
sufficient size and immediately stabilized with annual grasses to prevent erosion, no fescue will
be permitted; any failure of these plugs must be immediately repaired; all monitoring wells will
be installed in accordance to WRP's August 1993 Technical Note "Installing Monitoring
Wells/Piezometers in Wetlands" and exact locations will be reviewed by our office; the
monitoring well located in the preservation area will be surveyed conventional or with GPS; and
Pinus taeda and Liquidambar stvraciflua will not exceed 10% of the total tree survival goal.
3. An as-built plan will be submitted to our office upon completion of the site prep
work and the planting of the vegetation.
4. The permittee shall maintain the mitigation areas in their natural condition in
perpetuity. Prohibited activities within the mitigation areas specifically include, but are not
limited to, the construction of structures of any kind, the discharge of dredged or fill material,
excavation, the cutting, damage, or removal of any vegetation, grading, leveling, or any other
earth moving activity.
5. Condition 4 above runs with the land shown as the mitigation areas. The permittee
shall not sell or otherwise convey the property shown as the mitigation areas, or any interest
therein, to any third party, without the express written consent of the Corps of Engineers, except
as provided in condition 6 below. It is the intent of the Corps of Engineers and the permittee that
the property may be conveyed to an acceptable nonprofit conservation organization, or a state or
local government willing to hold the area in perpetuity for conservation purposes.
6. A conservation easement, approved by the Corps of Engineers, for the offsite
mitigation area must be conveyed to an acceptable nonprofit conservation organization, or a state
or local government, and recorded in the Carteret County Register of Deeds prior to the
construction of the shopping center.
7. The permittee shall cause this permit, including these conditions and the enclosed
mitigation site maps, to be recorded in the Carteret County Register of Deeds, in such a manner
that it will appear in the chain of title of the property making up the mitigation areas, prior to the
construction of the shopping center. The permittee shall provide a copy of the recorded permit
to the Corps of Engineers as soon as possible.

C
fD
cD
n
cD
CD
a)
m
Q.
rt
CD
2
CD
N
rt
O
m
G
n
i
r
i
c
i
I
i
i
1
f
1
CD (D
CD
Q. ?
n
1`D
,' Jt •t; If

m
i w

1 c
T
>

? m
° CA >
A 9
n z

,,
ox
a 3
n
Z m
n
H
mo

m

?
ar

o
>
A
L^

o
9
m
o

p
a
3
P

m
o
{

y
r
D
+?•• +

m m Y
b
? a n

zb z
o ?
D a. w

P A

a O
m
i v
a z
D A p
? z
2 D
m m
m s
_A ?

i m
?
Q
m
-
.So

n m
a

^'
-'
y x
a
m
'D
.=
b m m y
w ??° :;
b z ?
. A z
x n'
m m
a

° s
j 2
rn

j m
?

y m ? 2

m
„
?
?
w m
°
x
C,
Y
T
r p
m

p
C
Ca
y i
m

-+
p
2
Z A
v O

O
P
i
A
n +
Y

? T
O
X7
? N
;- O
A

°
A
D
V.
p

••I
T

A °
v

Q

7 m
7$
n
S
71

n

? O
a a
' a
?
? Y
o m
C P
E °
C
a
s
z
m

N
c m
A
s
a
n
Ln
?,

u

c

m

m
^
o

>•
Z
< s
0
i GD1
m
n

„

" >

Y

v

n h
A
1
i
2J T
n CD
fn C
Q.
c Lo
V
llL+{?1, 111
t' to '?I{a?li?li '
FB
2
B
.yam J

+li 1
?' ? '+11 ll{ . {+ It l Y t
"? j-• 11 1 (1 KF
/`? '. r+l rl ILL, 1 ..rtw't
?•._? ?{i rllfl?It ?y
I f 11 It ? ? Z
n
2
aV
3
s? ^f
?`?,1J Y' x v ; ? `I
8
W
V
1
1
r
C
pJ?9 Cen'ef
1

0
II III
l, I l I r t a l •
l a
, a l i l l l ? l t + I?• i
?ti1I,I t?ll,,. ' Z!- <
Ill Lr,l I'l l'It _. "!.
? ?+Iltil •-?_?
??i•? w
t S ? 1 .
A I
' 1 l 1 t' 1 1. .
i 1 +1111
b + '1
I i .If;l
v
_x
7 -?

lalj
11, I
O
9
L
c
r
O
0
a
N
C)
J
D 4?-
m o
O
.A
O
O
co
O
O
N
y

FINAL COMPENSATORY MITIGATION PLAN
FOR THE HESTRON SHOPPING CENTER
USACOE Action ID# 199603796
NCDEHNR WQC# 960894
Prepared for:
The Hestron Corporation
Hestron Plaza
Morehead City, North Carolina
Prepared by:
Land Management Group, Inc.
Wilmington North Carolina
Job # 95-073
July 1997
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES .................................................... 4
LIST OF TABLES ..................................................... 5
INTRODUCTION ...................................................... 6
PRELIMINARY WETLAND STUDIES ................................... 7
HESTRON SITE ................................................. 7
Description and Classification ................ _ ................ 7
Reference Wetland ......................................... 7
Vegetation ................................................ 8
Soils ..................................................... 9
LAUREL ROAD SITE ............................................. 9
Description and Classification ................................. 9
Reference Wetland ........................................ 10
Soils .................................................... 10
IMPACT ASSESSMENT ............................................... 11
AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION ....................................... 11
MITIGATION ........................................................ 12
HESTRON SITE MITIGATION ..................................... 12
Restoration Mitigation ....................................... 12
Hydrological restoration ................................ 13
Plant community restoration ............................ 13
Creation Mitigation ......................................... 13
Enhancement Mitigation ..................................... 14
Preservation Mitigation ...................................... 14
UTILIZATION OF WETLANDS IN STORM WATER DETENTION .......... 14
LAUREL ROAD MITIGATION ...................................... 16
Restoration Mitigation ....................................... 16
Hydrological restoration ................................ 16
Plant community restoration ............................ 16
Preservation Mitigation ...................................... 17
MITIGATION IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE .............................. 17
MONITORING PLAN .................................................. 17
HESTRON SITE MITIGATION ..................................... 17
Hydrological restoration ................................ 18
Plant community restoration ............................ 18
Creation Mitigation ................................ 18

LAUREL ROAD MITIGATION ...................................... 19
Restoration Mitigation ..................................... 19
Hydrological restoration ................................ 19
Plant community restoration ............................ 19
AS-BUILT REPORT AND DRAWINGS .................................... 20
SUMMARY ......................................................... 20
LITERATURE CITED ................................................. 22
FIGURES, TABLES, AND APPENDCES .................. ........:........ 23
4
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Vicinity map of the Hestron Site . ................................ 24
Figure 2. Vicinity map of the Laurel Road Site .............................. 25
Figure 3. The Hestron and Bob-a-Lou Tracts ............................... 26
Figure 4. Reference wetland on the Hestron Site ............................ 27
Figure 5. N.R.C.S. soil map of the Hestron Site .............................. 28
Figure 6. The Laurel Road Site . .. . ..................................... 29
Figure 7. Reference plot and planting mixtures for the Laurel Road Site.......... 30
Figure 8. N.R.C.S. Soils map of the Laurel Road Site . ............ _ .......... 31
Figure 9. Site plan for the proposed shopping center on the Hestron Site......... 32
Figure 10. Specifications for stormwater management plan ................... 33
Figure 11. Specifications for the stormwater management plan ................. 34
Figure 12. Stormwater management plan overview . ......................... 35
Figure 13. Topographical map of the Hestron Site ........................... 36
Figure 14. Stormwater assimilation areas . ................................ 37
Figure 15. Monitoring wells/sample plots in the Hestron Site...... ............. 38
Figure 16. Monitoring wells/sample plots in the Hestron Site ................... 39
5
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Dominant vegetation of the Hestron Site . ........................... 36
Table 2 . Soil characteristics measured at three points at the Hestron Site. ........ 37
Table 3. Dominant vegetation of the Laurel Road Site. ....... .......... 38
Table 4 . Soil characteristics of the Laurel Road Site .......................... 39
Table 5. Mitigation summary of Hestron Corp. compensatory mitigation plan. ....... 40
Table 6. Increase in water yield of on-site wetlands from incorporation into stormwater
management plan . .............................................. 41
6
INTRODUCTION
Hestron Corporation (applicant) is proposing to construct seven buildings and
associated parking area to expand Cypress Bay Shopping Center. The following plan is
being processed under the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Action ID # 19903796 and The
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources WQC #
960894. Construction has been designed to minimize wetland impacts. The vast majority -
of on-site wetlands have been incorporated for use in the final storm water treatment plan.
The impacted wetlands are currently at a low functional capacity level due to isolation and
encroachment by an urban landscape.
This mitigation plan has been developed by Hestron Corporation to compensate for
the unavoidable impacts to 21.01 acres of jurisdictional wetlands from the expansion of
the shopping center. The impacted site (Hestron Site) is located near the junction of HWY
70 and 24 in Morehead City, North Carolina (Figure 1). A total of 13.73 acres (0.23 acres
preserved, 2.41 acres restored, 1.48 acres created, and 9.61 acres enhanced) will be
mitigated on-site at a ratio of 1 acre mitigated: 1 acre impacted. The balance of fill
impacted wetlands will be mitigated off-site. The off-site mitigation area (Laurel Road
Site) is located adjacent to Laurel Road in Carteret County (Figure 2). Off-site mitigation
will include the restoration of 23.6 acres of agricultural fields and the preservation of 27.5
acres of preserved pine/hardwood wetlands. Off-site mitigation ratios will be 5:1 for
restoration and 10:1 for preservation. Total mitigation will include 64.08 acres at a ratio of
3.08:1.
-i he Hestron Site consists of two nearly adjacent tracts (Hestron Tract and Bob-A-
7
Lou Tract) located between U.S. 70 and N.C. 24 approximately 1500 feet west of the
intersection of said roads in Morehead City North Carolina (Figure 3). The tracts are
located approximately 600-1000 feet apart and are separated by Cypress Bay Shopping
Center.
The Hestron Tract consists of 62.4 acres, including 22.1 acres of wetlands. 19.01
acres will be disturbed for the proposed buildings and adjacent parking.
The Bob-A-Lou Tract is comprised of 10.9 acres, including 5.55 acres of
wetlands. Two of these acres will be filled in order to complete a proposed retail building
and associated parking. The site is adjacent to existing sewer plant and fields.
PRELIMINARY WETLAND STUDIES
HESTRON SITE
Description and Classification
The wetlands of the Hestron Site are currently of low value for water quality
purposes (John Domey, personal communication 1996) and depapaurate of vegetation.
The wetlands of the site are classified hydrogeomorphically (Brinson 1993) as mineral and
organic soil flats. These are wetlands occurring along interstream divides that receive
precipitation as their sole water source. Since flats lack a supplemental water source, it is
poor drainage rather that allows flats to retain their wetland status.

The best available wetland for use as a reference wetland is a small wetland in the
8
southwestern portion of the tract (Figure 4). This area was chosen due to its presence on
site and that it will be preserved as part of the mitigation effort. This area will serve as a
benchmark in monitoring hydrological success of on-site mitigation.
Wetland Functions
The Hestron Site would normally function in both surface and subsurface water
storage, removal of elements and compounds in precipitation and dryfall, nutrient
transformation and processing, organic carbon storage, maintenance of typical vegetation
and habitat maintenance for vertebrate and invertebrate species (Rheinhardt et al. 1997).
Encroachment and isolation by an urban landscape, however, has reduced the sites's
functional ability. The site is partially ditched which reduces both surface and subsurface
water storage, removal of elements and compounds in precipitation and dryfall, nutrient
transformations, and organic matter storage. The lack of overstory reduces nutrient
transformations and processes and greatly reduces habitat maintenance for vertebrates
and invertebrates. Isolation by roads as well as urban landscape also hinders the site's
ability to function as habitat for vertebrate and invertebrate species.
Vegetation
Vegetation was sampled in three plots using methods described in the 1987 U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers delineation manual. All three test plots lacked overstory
vegetation; plot 1 Iccked a herh .;c-:?ous layer; ar.
Dominant vegetation is shown in Table 1.
9
Soils
The soils of the Hestron Site are mapped as Leon (Aeric Haplaquods) series,
Murville (Typic Haplaquods) series, and Torhunta (Typic Humaquepts) series (Figure 5).
All of these soils are hydric. Soil profiles were taken at each sample plot and are shown in
Table 2.
LAUREL ROAD SITE
Description and Classification
The Laurel Road Site (Figure 6) is composed of approximately 51 acres
immediately south of S.R. 1163 between HWY 101 and S.R. 1300 in Carteret County,
North Carolina. 23.6 acres are currently in agricultural production (restoration area). The
prior conversion statement is included in Appendix A. 27.4 acres (preservation area) were
converted to loblolly pine plantation 1978.
Prior to agricultural and silvicultural production, the Laurel Road Site would have
been classified as a mineral soil flat (Brinson 1993). Occurring on the interstream divide
between the North and Newport River, the site lacks a measurable degree of slope; which
impedes drainage. The lack of drainage and the presence of a low permeable soil layer
will allow the site to attain wetland hydrological conditions. The restoration area has
interior ditches at approximately 200 foot intervals. The preservation area has not been
ditched except for perimeter and roadside ditches.
10
Reference Wetland
As requested by DWQ, a monitoring well will be placed on site in the preservation
area (Figure 7) for use as a reference wetland. A monitoring well will be placed in this
area to help determine hydrological success of the Laurel Road mitigation area. This area
was selected since it will be preserved and is similar to the mitigation area.
Vegetation
Vegetation samples were taken on June 7, 1997 in one plot each of the agricultural
and plantation areas (Table 3) . The restoration area was in Triticum aestivum production
which dominated the herb layer. The preservation area is dominated by (Pinus taeda) and
Liquidambar styraciflua in the overstory, P. taeda, L. styraciflua, and Acer rubrum in the
shrub layer, and Woodwardia aerolata in the herb layer. Smilax rotundifolia was the
dominant woody vine.
Soils
The soils of the Laurel Road site (Figure 8) are mapped as Deloss fine sandy loam
(Soil Conservation Service 1987), a hydric mineral soil. Soil profiles taken in the sample
plots confirm the soil as of the Deloss series (Table 4).
Soil samples were taken from the Laurel Road Site and have undergone standard
soil nutrient analysis. Results are shown in Appendix B. The results show that the site is
more suited for bay-pocosin type vegetation rather than hardwoor? r m-- to hInh ' l nnr
low calcium and other nutrient levels.
11
IMPACT ASSESSMENT
The shopping center site plan (Figure 9) shows approximately ten acres of retail
space in seven buildings. Approximately eleven acres of parking is required for retail
space of this size. The remaining fill area is required for access roads, loading docks, and
other miscellaneous areas. The proposed development plan proposes a minimum amount
of retail space for a site of this size (Appendix C).
AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION
The applicant does not possess sufficient uplands to complete the project without
wetland impacts. The Hestron Site is in the best available location for a retail shopping
center in the Morehead City area. Location is by far the most important consideration in
determining the feasibility of such a shopping center. The location represents a major
retail area for the Morehead City area. If suitable uplands were available for the project,
the applicant would certainly not opt for expensive wetland mitigation. For these reasons,
the applicant believes that no practical alternative location is suitable for the project. Thus
the applicant has proposed to mitigate and offset unavoidable wetland losses.
The site plan has undergone nine different changes in order to minimize wetland
impacts. Typical shopping center development requires retail floor space to occupy
approximately 33% of all developed lands. Retail shopping area of the Hestron Site
occupies approximately 27% of the Hestron Site. The site plan also calls for restored,
created, enhanced, and preserved wetlands to occupy approximately 18% of the site.
Thus the shopping center land will have a greater wetland acreage than shopping and
12
parking areas. The applicant believes that wetland impacts have thus been avoided and
minimized to the greatest extent possible.
MITIGATION
Mitigation will occur both on-site and off-site. Early consultation with resource
agencies revealed the agencies' desire for on-site mitigation. The applicant has thus
utilized on-site mitigation to the greatest extent possible. The remaining mitigation will
occur at the Laurel Road Site. Total on-site mitigation will include both restoration,
creation, enhancement, and preservation. Off-site mitigation will include restoration and
preservation. The proposed shopping center and the Laurel Road Site are located
approximately nine miles apart.
HESTRON SITE MITIGATION
On-site mitigation will consist of restoration, creation, enhancement and
preservation (Figure 9). Deed restrictions will preclude additional wetland impacts in
perpetuity.
Restoration Mitigation
A total of 2.41 acres of wetlands will be restored on-site (Figure 9, Table 5). This
area consists of one wetland block where wetland hydrology no longer exists due to a
drainage ditch.
Hydrological restoration
Wetland hydrology will be restored through the filling of an existing drainage ditch
(Figure 10 #3) and through storm water recharge as a part of the storm water detention
plan. Details of wetland use in storm water detention are described in detail in a later
section.
Plant community restoration
Wetland vegetation will be established in the restoration area in the form of
overstory and emergent vegetation. Pending availability, Juncus effusus, Saururus
13
cemurus, and Typha latifolia will be planted throughout the restoration area. Nyssa
sylvatica and Acer rubrum will be planted at eight foot intervals along the perimeter of the
restoration area.
Creation Mitigation
Created wetlands total 1.48 acres of wetlands (Table 5). These wetlands will be
created through non-hydric soil excavation, hydrophytic vegetation planting, and through
storm water recharge. Approximately two or three feet of soil will be removed (Figure 10
#5) bringing the creation area to a grade level with adjacent wetlands. Precipitation and
storm water recharge will create wetland hydrology in the creation area. Hydrophytic
vegetation will be planted in a manner identical to restoration area. Organic strippings
from impacted areas will be placed in the creation area to provide a suitable substrate for
vegetation establishment.
Enhancement Mitigation
14
On-site enhanced wetlands total 9.61 acres (Table 5). These current wetlands will
be incorporated into the storm water retention plan. This detention plan will be described
in detail in a later section.
Preservation Mitigation
Preserved wetlands total 0.23 acres (Table 5). Appropriate deed restrictions will
ensure preservation of this wetland in perpetuity.
UTILIZATION OF WETLANDS IN STORM WATER DETENTION
The majority of on-site wetlands have been incorporated into the storm water
detention management plan for the shopping center (Figure 12). The existing open canal
ditch on the east end of the property will be reconstructed into a shallow 3:1 swale ditch.
(Figure 10 #3). Since the north end of the property is two feet lower than the south end
(Figure 13), storm water will be directed from south to north through an interconnecting
wetland/detention pond system. Storm water from impervious surfaces will be directed
through rip-rap into wetlands (Figure 10 #1). Water will then be passed through the
wetland system until they reach detention ponds. (Figure 10 #2). The water directed on
the west end of the property will pass through final treatment in a created wetland before
being transferred off-site.
provided per inch of rain. Rainfall input for each wetland was estimated using wetland
15
areas. Evapotranspiration was estimated as utilizing 25% of precipitation.
The stormwater input was calculated as 27,225 gallons of rainfall (3630 ft3) per
inch of rain. The mitigation areas of the Hestron and Bob-a-Lou tracts were divided
into four areas (Figure 14). Topographic maps (Figure 13) were used to estimate the
acreage draining to each area. The increased water inputs for each area are outlined
in Table 6.
Stormwater assimilation area 1 (Figure 14) contains 0.95 acres of created
wetlands and -2.15 acres of enhanced wetlands. It was estimated that approximately
9.3 acres of the Hestron Tract (46.6 acres of impervious cover) will drain into this area.
Thus the incorporation of this area into the storm water system yields a net increase of
33,832 ft3 of water/inch of rain. This area will be connected to drainage area 2 to
ensure that the area will not become over saturated due to this increase.
Stormwater assimilation area 2 (Figure 14) contains -0.14 acres of enhanced
wetlands. It is estimated that 10% of all impervious cover of the Hestron Tract will drain
into this wetland (in addition to the runoff from drainage area 1). This will yield a net
increase of 16,916 ft3 of water/inch of rain for this area. To ensure that the wetland
vegetation is not drowned out, this area will be connected to the next wetland drainage
area.
Stormwater assimilation area 3 (Figure 14) contains 0.9 acres of created
wetlands. Runoff from -20% of all impervious cover will be directed into this area. In
addition, runoff from assimilation area 2 will be directed into this wetland. The directed
stormwater will cause an increased water yield of 33,832 ft3 of water to this area. Any
16
excess water will be directed off-site.
Stormwater from approximately 50% of the impervious cover of the Hestron Tract
will be diverted into Stormwater assimilation area 4 (Figure 14). This area consists of
2.4 acres of enhanced wetlands and 4.5 acres of restored wetlands. The diversion of
stormwater will increase the water yield of these wetlands by 84,579 ft3. Excess water
will be directed from the wetland to the off-site drainage system.
The Bob-a-Lou tract will contain 5.35 of impervious cover in the current site plan.
The diversion of stormwater from this area will increase the water yield of the 3.5 acres
of wetlands by 32,126 ft3.
LAUREL ROAD MITIGATION
Off-site mitigation at the Laurel Road Site will total 51.1 acres (Figure 5). The
agricultural fields will be restored to wetland status with the remaining wetlands being
preserved in perpetuity.
Restoration Mitigation
Hydrological restoration
Wetland hydrology will be restored by filling all agricultural drainage ditches (Figure
15). The filling will remove all on-site drainage. The removal of all drainage will restore
wetland hydrology to all areas of the Laurel Road Site.
17
Plant community restoration
Plant community restoration will concentrate on the re-establishment of canopy
species. An equal number (pending availability) of local Fraxinus pennsylvanica, Quercus
bicolor, Quercus michauxii, Quercus phellos, and Liriodenderon tulipifera seedlings will be
planted systematically at a ratio of 600 trees/acre. Planting distribution is shown in Figure
7. Volunteer Acer rubrum, Liquidambar styraciflua, and Pinus taeda are also anticipated
by local surrounding seed sources.
Preservation Mitigation
The preservation area consists of 27.5 acres. This area (along with the restoration
area) will either be dedicated to an acceptable conservatory or perpetual trust.
MITIGATION IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
The implementation of the mitigation plan will occur in two phases. Weather
permitting, the grading and ditch filling will be completed prior to December 1997.
Vegetation planting will occur prior to February 27, 1998.
MONITORING PLAN
HESTRON SITE MITIGATION
Both hydrology and vegetation will be monitored in both the restoration and creation
areas. Hydrology will be monitored in the enhancement areas. Hydrology will also be
monitored in the preservation area for use as a reference wetland.
Restoration Mitigation
Hydrological restoration
18
A Remote Data Systems WL-40 groundwater monitoring well (WL-40) will be
installed established as shown in Figure 16. Data will be collected from the well on a daily
basis to monitor the success of hydrological restoration. The goal of hydrological
restoration will be the establishment of a groundwater table at or above 12" from the soil
surface for 12.5% of the growing season during periods of reasonably normal
precipitation. The success criteria will be the establishment of groundwater table at or
above 12" from the soil surface for either 5% of the growing season or the establishment
of a hydroperiod at least as great as that of the reference site. Groundwater tables will be
monitored for five years unless the project is determined as successful prior to that time.
Plant community restoration
A 50'x50' sample plot will be established adjacent to the well (Figure 16) to
determine the success of plant community restoration. Vegetation will be monitored
annually for five years. Success criteria will be the 70% survival of all planted vegetation,
including acceptable volunteer species, at the end of monitoring period. Any pine species
will not be considered acceptable.
Creation Mitigation
A WL-40 and 50'x 50' sample plot will be established as shown in Figure 16.
Hydrology and vegetation monitoring and success criteria will be identical to those criteria
19
of the restoration mitigation.
LAUREL ROAD MITIGATION
Restoration Mitigation
Hydrological restoration
Six WL-40s will be installed.as shown in Figure 17. Data will be collected from
these wells on a daily basis. As with on-site restoration, the goal of hydrological
restoration is the establishment of a ground water table at or above 12" from the soil
surface for 12.5% of the growing season during normal periods of precipitation.
Hydrological success criteria is the establishment of a groundwater table at or above 12"
from the soil surface for either 5% of the growing season or the establishment of a
hydroperiod at least as great as that of the reference wetland. Groundwater levels will be
monitored for five years beginning January 1, 1998. If the project is determined to be
successful prior to that time, monitoring will be terminated.
Plant community restoration
Six 50'x50' sample plots will be established adjacent to the WL-40s (Figure 17).
Vegetation will be monitored annually for five years. Success criteria will be either of 70%
survival of planted species by the end of the monitoring period or the survival of 320 trees
per acre at the end of the monitoring period, including acceptable volunteer species.
Pinus taeda and Liquidambar styraciflua seedlings which excead 10% of the total trees
present will not county towards survival goals.
20
AS-BUILT REPORT AND DRAWINGS
As-built drawings, photographs, plans, and specifications will be provided to the
appropriate regulatory agencies within 90 days after the mitigation project is completed.
Annual monitoring reports, including photographs and potential problem area
summaries, will be submitted in. January (beginning in January 1999) for the duration of
the monitoring period.
SUMMARY
Hestron Corporation is proposing to develop the Hestron Site in Carteret County,
North Carolina in order to expand the present Cypress Bay Shopping Center. The
applicant has avoided and minimized wetland impacts to the maximum extent possible.
However, the project will require the filling of 21.01 acres of wetlands. The applicant is
proposing both on-site and off-site mitigation to offset the unavoidable wetland losses.
The applicant has further minimized wetland impacts by incorporating on-site wetlands into
a storm water management program. All but one on-site mitigation areas have been
included in the storm water management program. The off-site mitigation area at the
Laurel Road Site, located approximately nine miles northeast of the Hestron Site,
occupies a similar topographic position with a soil type commonly found on mineral soil
flats. Mitigation ratios exceed overall ratios required by both the Corps of Engineers (1:1;
I`/10A clk'oc= n :rl` i1-,r,,mentL,l Protection Agency and D_',pLrtrn_e )t of the Araiy) and the NC
Division of Water Quality (1:1 restoration, 1:5:1 Creation, 21 enhancement, and 5:1
21
preservation; N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources 1995).
Success criteria and goals have been clearly defined and both mitigation areas will be
monitored for a period of five years or until success criteria have been met. When
compared with the current highly anthropogenic nature of the Hestron Site, the proposed
on-site and off-site mitigation will insure that the overall wetland functional capacity of the
Carteret County landscape will increase with a successful mitigation project.
22
LITERATURE CITED
Brinson, M. M. 1993. A Hydrogeomorphic Classification for Wetlands. Technical
Report WRP-DE-4. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station
Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Domey, John. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources, Division of Water Quality. On-site personal communication. December 18,
1996.
The Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of the Army. Memorandum of
agreement between the environmental protection agency and the department of the
army concerning the determination of mitigation under the clean water act section
404(b)(1) guidelines.
Farley, P.M. 1996. The Effects of Silvicultural Practices and Stand Development on
Surface Water Storage in Forested Wetland Flats. 'Masters Thesis. East Carolina
University. Greenville, NC.
Fetter, C.W. 1988. Applied Hydrology, Second Edition. MacMillan Publishing Company.
New York.
McCarthy, E.J., and R.W. Skaggs. 1992. Simulation and evaluation of water
management systems for a pine plantation watershed. Southern Journal of Applied
Forestry 16:48-56.
Rheinhardt, R.D., M.M. Brinson, and P.M. Farley. 1997. Applying wetland reference
data to functional assessment and restoration. Wetlands 17: 195-215.
Soil Conservation Service. 1987. Soil Survey of Carteret County. U.S.D.A. Soil
Conservation Service. Washington DC.
State of North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources 1997.
Report of Proceedings for the Proposed Rule Amendments and Adoptions Relating to
the Classification of Wetlands and Review Procedures for 401 Water Quality
Certifications for Activities Which Involve the Discharge of Fill Material Into Waters And
Wetlands: Volume I Summary and Recommendations. The Environmental
Management Commission. Raleigh, North Carolina.
Wetlands Research Program. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.
Technical Report Y-87-1. ?/?/ashington, DC.
Table 5. Mitigation summary of Hestron Corp. compensatory mitigation plan. 40
41
Table 6. Increase in water yield of on-site wetlands from incorporation into stormwater
management plan.
ecember 12, 1995
Hs. Gilda Pesta
282 Hardesty Cemeterv Rd.
tewport, N.C. 28570
,..
ar Ms. Pesta:
43
I .have completed a highly erodible land and wetland
?kdetermipatlorj for the farm areas delineated on the
.Each field has a sy;Mbol on it which represents its ASC5 ;,rap.
classification. The following symbol applies to this farm:
PC-Prior Converted wetlabe croed
are not affected by thewetland nconservationand
provisions as long as the field is not abandoned
(not cropped for 5 successive _ s
_. or small portion of the entire yfield Ycontainiing asion
hydric soil will result in ,. placing a PC on that field.
Normal maintenance of existing open ditches and adding
additional drainage within PC-Prior Converted wetland field
is allowable under the FSA regulations provided that no s
additional wetland, FW or FdP is converted.
Sincerely,
-Harry S. Tyson,
:.District Conservationist
, XT/clw
(Enclosed is a photocopy cf
'the map for this area and
_foz? SCS-CPA-026.
.ti
:If 1 can be of further assistance, please contact mP_
:,enclosure
9197265282
- at'_
USDA-Natural Resources Conservation se-vice
p•O. Box 125
Beaufor`, N.C. 28516
[phone] .

PAG:F ",a
T
C: :z
SCS-CPA-0: e
[ecr?:Segatt;:^ Service wt-_4 aht
H)GHLY EROOf9LE LAND ,"(D Wt f LLA1 47
CONSERVATION DET-ERM1NAT;10N
Name JI USCA Agency or Person P-eGtras;ing Cetarminatiar.

44
42n•.13 and:?yu ct =sr5on
2 C, of .z?Jesi
Cilda ?es;a
232 Hardescy C 11--'G-95
eaete:y Rd.
N«Pc:C r ii.C. 2S57C 3. C,^,urty
S. Far- Vo. srd Tract No.
Ca-Ceres
CR
8fCT" 1 • HIGHLY ERCQISL
E LAND
IS srd surrey -cw avxilab:a !Or making a highty arodNe lard determineticn? Y FIELD ^A•cst 7Q1 tL ACaES
es .,
Ara :harg h PJ •rodibl9 "M-20 units on ?his iar:mt? Yas ? A! NO 0

^' .

?.-:. --
?-
}•••= `:~,...1^
List nighty arodiblo flo
tda ttuC accardinq to ASCS records
W -?
:..
' t "
.
ere used tD Pf
Cop year dJnN 1981. t S85. odu an :';ricu!tural CJrrm°diry !n any f ti'p :.^? yr
List highly erodible fields -tat have been or will t)o cc-erred for '
h
'
.
e ac
..z,dinq :o ASCS rewrds, were not used for this
t
d
purpose any pm
d.
erep ^= c year 8on durinofg aq^r 1:8( -•119
enroll-ad in a USDA s41-
i
9
8
5; : and w an
caafer no
as
8
de ce d"raion ot t
progrzzh.
This 1•f10r1y 15rodibla Land determina:.on was corr;ole-ted in tha: CtP
ce T
,
`eb
sECT1c,;•t u - cal: rLANa ' ' - °:? •.::- -_:?:
I. Are (hare hvdnc Soils on Utis far ? Yes ?] r-- FIELD HO.t:t TOTAL ACRES
Wetlands (W). irv%rdinq abartdcned wetlands, or F
armed Wat'an;a (F-4'r) or Farmed'rr=w,n,!s Pasture (FwP)
We"ands may `se fanned under natural cor
S
t l `r t'
i
,
x
;
ons. Fa „ ed Wrdjr.ds z,)d =armed Ylettands Pastire may t?,
1:^,ted Zinc maintained in the sane manner as "*y ware price to Cacamo
abartdc
r 23
z
:.ad
, 1985, as long as Lhey are not
Pncr Converted Crcpland (PC). Wer'an6s that were cc
,
nvar
ad pricr t Cad`em6er 23, 1985. The use, ma
draina;6. an< art,rabcn o{ pr.-.r comyerte?d . R*L
L
end (PC) arty not suG
N
ts

I
eat to the wetland ?? uerva ion rxovia cra ur ur;J
area reverts to wedard as a result of aUarxionnsent
ifASs

4 Artif:eiat welands (AM. ArtiSaal wedartda
includes :-igaxn-" f
to Ole wetland :crtservaticn prcvia,ona,
K"im K et arhds, These wetlands are not:
su?ec
(Ain .-tat E.gsc: Wedands ifs .Theo w•r &Ms are to be fared earring :o the Rti _m?f-FrjF ^ agreement s ned
I.st Me lima Me minimal-effect detarrcirattcn was ntaa
'q
v.
SGti^ai^r Wetl
y arY17 (tilt"). Wft13md3 on t,bL-ta;6racn Is ac' ?-
i Convened between CeKamber 23. 1985 and N ?vg(y mklga"'q A trryuendy crcpp d area or a wedarhd
c rer.'Ibde 28, 1990.
Rastoratien wiL'l Yiol:con (R"-year). A restored wetla-xf •yaf waa in violation as a resu:i of -nvarsicn after
November 28, 1960• or (lye -4an$nq d an acrieultural oon
Aestcrahen w+thovt Vicla6on fiS nlOC?ty or forage c: co.
M. A rwstc-d wod2nd convened tw*'8on NC,1r,.o•ar 23, 1985 and
NovsrrttW 23, 199C, On wh;ch an agrcuhural a=modiy has n t beer.
• naplacement Wctlartds(R planted.
PM. Weds xs wNch are grtversd cr pu poses ow er than :o Increase prodLc- cn,
wn5re fie wed" values are being reciadod 81 a seccnd sits.
Gocd Fax,) Wadands (GFW+year). Weawdz: on which ASCS has ..etarm. nod a victatfcr` to be In
watlard has
bash rrrored. good faun and !no
r,.
Year that an agriGt c ?lt:.n ca,j =f.mrtrtoetodtty Is a ? on f1aher CeC9mber 23, 1985 and prr_r :° November 29, 1 S'90. In any
Y
Convened Wetland (Ce"Y490. Wcitards ?? on
Carycrl >e? se C aRer xvert Novied Y/aGands, you will ?irsetlGtbte far USDA bcnafl;,,.
' Drogram UneHts undi tt j:& wadand is reaxx.d, mbar 28. 1490• You wilt be ineGgibte for USDA
C nverad WeGand Nero ggrir_,zl ;CWNA), Wei that are eanverted for trey`s, fish produr~ton. shrubs,
cnnt ernes, vineyards Or bu5ding xnd mead cox
'Converted Wadand TaC'trticiS ' ?}c-Sort.
Error (Cy?)• Wetiartc?s that ware conned as a tezult C? , Ircarr
eCt detaray SCS -nation
-•°?w.i ??NabVrea On wp+Jgnda in feid3
10 FSA.
are txnziderad main(eranca and are Ir1 cocltp6anca
'he planned uteratlon n'teasures on wrdancta In Ae{.-cs
hsalted will cause tttio arse b burns a Co
nverbd Wsdand (CYY), $" item 22 fur irh/crn anon on CW. era not ccrtsSdered to be ma r tert,r [ g Arid it
wetland Catarmiraoon was yeatr.
cxrtg41ad in tt>f Setid and waa detiv r
Leman(}, a ocy`'111110 mthe pbrsoct on
Deterr;ination ';lade for cropland fields only--Does noc include ?'Dr>ds.
V4 rA'Jr the vAnw drier"""" it rwrm
irihilirt j . t%J'nA prUZram Ix r, °^d alegrutrt,nr ur< in drrrnni ((rtt 3d. $i
. and rdar r, rr?„d.# o ynawra of SCS Oizh G rlser
u vattoru;
ci, 7?61ic t?,iCr, and ? 31. Onta
W^?Dh}nr rr,trraraR ..Jrr ,wrr.ol A
(Q vl :? w.rl r 'KrJ rrirt m all dredr outlirtrd c1
A- I
N,
H10 ptl9lwifY 4r tr?I SOtr G'prt?K? s.NY{p? 1•'Y/?1?/[K.? h?'7l'tC, '(J'r '\ ? •r•
nLti+r'1 fo raa. r.?FQkx? ? ?. Ax. a
4 cr-c ?-- -..
45
b ?Sr? "?"?• ?i.?-'9°"'' ? ? •t?y •• n? 1,?..• L v r:"d ??+i?r ?+- Syr. ?",??.'
?•?•t+•• :>.ac ??r`•"7 ? ?: `/ ?`°" 1 ; l -.?,?5 7??? • „a I ??i? rra?• ?„r` ? ?? ? ? ,
't'4-^ G ?r:a ;:,:,?.?• \ .1{ X71, •t? ?'`7,??"?^•'•' ,?, :? ?•- ?(.??• .?•••? J:..
??" .,Y? `4 ' ?C ? ' I r 1:.,? "`,- . ? 1 ..`-?K. ? q.: ?3??; ,•?3?.a• '`'' ?+,?, ,J.L?(•r ?•i?, 1
-r,,, 1' .+- •?'.•. ?'•..y??s. ? ?tv ..? "?, ?1 T:"??• ,?Gy;lSi.l'• .rY. ?•{•, ??`,q ?-s,?t
a{`r?1 'F? • -+? ?j •• ? _ ,,._r, ? • W }? ?? •? ?J-?'?r ""f „ : i `4y'?••. tea ??1.T?'? :?y,?•
.?? •, a1 !R -. ? .r ?" n""?+ 1 t L l,`a )'?.-tS; ".'t -?J•'.+ •?F7 t`. ?!y ..
47 ;r
'?Sf.-: .:s•„ti'_".- y?r+•`, {{ rE ?, ???'' Ir bi. C.?a? ,J.? ,•.?•.7 .J?.
?. ? ?+ ii. _.??` Jam-. -'J .• 'l? a?? . '• t' ? ?-'a.?+`..'f. •'tr ? ••?..i. ? ?, J' ^{ ?` b• y'S? 1 ?'?+C.
?' ? "" a:1. i, ..y 1. ... -• Y- ,( ?-,pa ? ?. ?..??? : .a. ,• ? ?{ '+'+ ,ate S.y ,•.• •i • •
43
Jz?
74
Z-M
71 -f
.? •,...?.-?• ;+-:::'?i •?? ??.. `?.. 1 .tk,_ ,ice-?•'?- ?:
-44
-17
lvl
" `.•?t ?`^?.? .?* ;? • -sue "? ^ ``-r"?Y ' ? ?? S+'?`?--? ?,,,•.•'.,`? '_ ?N?' .',? ?' r-? }, ..

c!"1
(U
Z T
°
W '
CA's
0
Q c
O co
CO CV
Cl)
J N
ca "t
T
a C'
> N
c
? O
O
E O
U ? Zx
LL
V Co
°
Z C)
LU N
Q
W Cv
CD
J r-
a
/w
co
J
t
z r
? a
-
o c a
a
w
CE:
u
V
tL
..J
0
W
W
CL
? m
v<i t?r?m
C7
H
U)
c
a
z
<
D-
L)
G
Q
F-
LU
x
E
w
3
O
Q
2
.:.+ :11 v
J :r
W ?+- V
z
U) z
d < Q
z a rV L-
< N 0
:E In Z
•• N H
cl Z
z __.1
Q }" O H
J cr Q :s
0
W O
W F-
t- r-
N t`
O C3
:7
1..4
N
n r
H ?
W U
W LU
G <
lz
r
a
MW
cc
N
Cn
Z
J
r
w
d
f-
CT
e--
N
U
F-
m
O
w
m
LL
O
w
F-

Za
e

CL o 2 r r r r
Lr1 M T f^ Y1

W Z (?-
U o j . . • . e
w ¢ .- n a .- +n a

¢
CL
...-
+
F

C4 tM
W r \

m

• ?t 0% O t -0
o Y ¦ r f / .
_ N ?v ,o •.Q rV
C
C) ou
0 C3 00
e-
D
?..
•i0 L Q LLI Q'
o / / ¦ f •
U W C c
U E ?". u'1 b Q

.'rn
p .Z _.' oo .
-
!V
ti
ti
tr1
0%
'.-
p to 2 ¦ r / ¦ f

CCM
w
_

LL C / f ¦
/
¦
'10 10 .0
2 .m=
a ..

p'.. Sa ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦

LU
4

o co
' a
z •: z

N s:= n
a
.,: J -? J
?
a. > > J >

U
? cr:
03
U ,' : ?

O

Q

Q

O

O
< - E O: O co
M

em.
J
x

m c
= i
m
.. O f? ?. erg
z q •11 h ?o C
a E r

w

N ¢ (v N T- rl cv

O L
a L
i L
1w ! > > > G

In
a
co
dol.

!?

?•

f?

rrt

:?,
o E rl v. w .t ri
2
O Cn an t" r"„ t" ?" t-•_

=
a co .<
s ?' ; a
S'1
(?.
N
?U
J

a N .7 N !V

¢¢

• O M b O -0
Um
. w? N M ?7
< F ;. .

.
O :a
:
- f • • f
L"I

M LLI a O, O, Ch a

D M M M rl K
Z r
ul CC
J w
am

in Z ;v M ?7 L?
c I
U I
o ? Z
? C
c N
W
W
e
a c
CO
cn X = = <
N
vt W U) „ O

Z y _ J

W NN C
N_ - m of
C
J

W
J .m
N U
U ?, m `m C7
t= . g L
a ct g,
Cl) z

(n J
o u
G
?
z

o
<
E
-
a
H
Em
N tE

} =) C :? H
-j Z "
0

W w

OU U
J
S E
U n
w
W <
m
N
F
EE
o
O
co
to E
E
cn
Ww?:
?
Q
U
w
ui
<
¢ m
m

E
m
°O
w
¢ ¢.
W
a
U
O L)
U = n
n
w
z <
O LL LL
E
a
w
(n w
W ~
Z
c
c
Z E
< -
a
n
w
<
U
c
N N
N
E
n
a
¢.
:3 ..
L
J N f!J

N a
w -Z_..
..
6z
<
C
Z
?
E
cr

M w ¢ . '.:
-j w
CL M

N z

00
c=
U L)
c.
6 0
J ?
r =
zz
00
L) U
C Y
Y Y
zz
_r •r.
J
n
L?
L"
N
L"
z
C
C
Z
r
lL:
c

IIJ o
M
C. a
I l?l

(3
Z
?• T
n
W
C Y)
yy
cc "zt
O O .
O co
N
CO N
?r
...? •E
C C.0
. ?
T
N
J 0
O
_U U X
/? IT
V S
°
Z
? •c
VJ
aT
W N
W
Q
cr r-
w
m
Q
D f
Z t.
? a
¢ ?-
O cC
w
Q:
d
U-
J
a
d
Q.
O
to w
W
J
? m .
!o vtJm
C7
A
Z
Q
J
LL.
4'
O
V
z
a
x
H
w
w
O
rt
0

U) z
`J N
L:/ LU
v
J r
r- tC N
LW
LL u
z
4 d O
ZCL N F
d N L7
VI) 2
•• N H
nz
zt-m..a
QF-OH
..? Q LL rs
Z
w O

? x
r- P- a a x
T !\
\ \ O ?
f?j
Z
\ \ U O .e V
r' w a ` a
O 0 a¢
Q 1?
VJ y " ¦
H W
A ?- m
Uj ..
Ln
5 Q o Y ¦
HZ .?..;.
to ¢ - - M
W LL. C-T O
o = u fU o .p
x O co = 0. ¦
U p
W Uj W c CD
x .
W.. :.•_?
LL
tt a ¦
M. ?O
S co
C. ;r.
J:Yc N
O. ?n ¦
f~Y Ln
W W
CL Z "J
. ?a
cr to _. .. a.
J .OJ V U O
Z n r
Q
w
Q V) Q
Cn Z • • M
C7
Q n r
? n
U, z
y m (v
FQ- Y E sr)
O c t"
a
S
m ¢
cr? cc a o0
U) C\j
O E v
W = (? n
¢ a
O
_ d 0 a'
O
x m .?
a
acu ;a w
S
N ¢ Q b
U U¢ wn N
\ Z LL,
h T m m R?
m J ? M
Z
a.
W
Q w cc
U- J W
O am
-w
w J ¢
v' N X
Z
Q -
N
J
C.)
}Q
O
•o ?
p F:
0wa?
?? a;
O z - ¢
O U .:. U
_
W
w ¢
mF' E
O tq o
E
J E:
Ww?:..
x?cc
W J ¢
o.:. Q:
¢m m
mm: a.
U LLI,
co
W <
Z a m
O O U ?j
z
O U ?.. n.
a
Qz w
W 0 LL ' LL
w n
Lij n
W
..
w .' W
z'
c
Z 'r
W
Z c. ¢
N N N
E
a
¢ ....w.
1..
N• n
n
W "_- Z.
~ 61LIJ
¢ O Z ¢
I-z'Ea
W¢
J W
a m
d
z
?c
W
o c
c° 0
o H <
V O
2• O
v J
Q
y . J
N C
m C6
p s J
m : U
N ?
o ?' O
5 Q <
?
N j w\
N
R
P E
0c
C. a
T ?
c
cc
WLL
C C.
N V
0c
C G
W LL
> >
^z
JC
OF
c n
G C
c c
c c
z z
J
N v
cC:
LL, LL
cc
:L' U
?c
z
z
_z
`z
>
C
z
0
3LL
?v
?c
C
r:
> Z
.: C
< S
?r
L
:J

depth (in)
O N W .p (A 0) J 00 110 r ? ?--+ ? ?-• ? ?.- r F- r N
O - N w? Vi o\ J 00 110 O
• 0
w w
N w
\10 00
N w
.p
N
N
N
w CD
w
i
w w
0
o
`"Y?jf O ? O
OQ ``99
Od, 9
.l2 9
16. 9
20 .9
2Q ``99
2? 9
O 9
1, f
O 9
sf
O 9
?99
Imo` f
?.99
I)
.99
2jf
?99
2 9
?99
w w N N 1. 1
O Ut O (h O Vi
O
I s
1
I
i m a
d-.
I ®®
J
I?
I;
.11
(U!) ii-eium",
{
(J)
N W
00
N ?
N
cr
(D
? w
N
N
w
I
w w
O N
Q 00
o
depth (in)
OI v, .ice 41 w w
?' o v, o v, o vN, o v, o v, o
?I
Off. f `99
?f
:1 `99
ill
Imo, f `99
?I
I f `99
?I
I,? '99
?I
?I
2 f x'99
02 ?f9
.? 9
IO ??`9
I ??oa`9
9
Icfl ?d°•9
.? 9
2 ??.99
O? ?a°`'99
II ?`9
•? 9
I9 ?`9
e
13 I'99
9
•
O
(U!) iiujwLj
depth (in)
w w
N w
rn ?
110 00
?--W
N ?
N
w
(D
1.0
4-
'j
_w
w W
0
00
Oj to .A .1? w w N N •?
O ??, o v, o cn o v, o cn o v,
%
29 c?.
06.?p 99
9
10oy
Q,
9
I?+ %-9
0 t,
I? oy
`99
2 0 k9
p 9
.+ `.99
O$r?
9
O?dc`9
9
9
9
20?00.9
9
9
4, 00`9
.9
Ol f ''9.9
f
9f,6 1O
? O
I f?'O
O
2j f ?O
2 f?'O
?% 190
0
l?
I
•
I
I '
r
I
el- --
w
1

O ?-' N W -A Clt Q1 ?l QO ? r-+ r--? f-+ ? r-? r---+ r-+ `-+ ?-+ ?. [v

W
depth (in)
Oj 41
p o c-.,%
t 06 29
%o
060
% j %
06
cr, 2jr? %°O
CD
29
06 O
,
* 95r%19
%
N °EP o0
00
9 ? %
o ?.A O
O
o `Y °O
29
1 f2 "Y? °o
cn ° °O
o0
"o
0
P w w N N ' ' '. '
.
O cn O t.A O V, O LA O
r
•
r" s-
_
I+
s'? s
,s
r'ss?s ®®s
O r N W P UN 01 ?3 00

depth (in)
°j? 41 41 w
°? ?`° O cn O cn
,
,
,f o0
zs ?,
00
N `,t O
.? °??
f
o? X10
0
N I f?l,
w I, °O
f
j ? I`s?f°O
r 'o
o
29
C° ?j , f0
N f °
°
;l O
?F o5r% ?fo
q o
w 19 ,
00 `? °O
°O
20 a°,
°O
N 2? U'%o
'O
29
%
2 9
°O
O
O
?6'O
a
w N N ? .?-i
C) LA o v, o v, o
t.
September 17, 2001
Mr. Mickey Sugg
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402
John Dorney
NC Division of Water Quality
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, NC 27607
North Carolina
Coastal Federation

SEEP 21
A.
RE: Wal-Mart Super Center Morehead City (TRIBEK Properties - Action ID 199603796)
Dear Mickey and John,
The North, Carolina Coastal Federation (NCCF) is very concerned, about the lack of compliance
with the requirements of Permit No. 199603796 issued for expansion of the Cypress Bay
Shopping Center in Morehead City by allowing the filling 21.01 acres of wetlands.
The federal 404 permit states that any change in authorized work will require a permit
modification. Based upon our review of the permit file, we understand that no permit
modifications were issued. Thus, the project should have been developed in accordance with its
original 404 permit.
According to the ''.Department of the Army Permit Evaluation and Decision Document,`' signed
January 29, 1998 by Terry R. Youngbluth, District Engineer, the shopping center was suppose to
include a six building complex and a parking facility located west of the existing shopping center
and one building with parking located on the east side of the existing shopping center. (See
attached Figure 4, Reference wetland for the Hestron Site). This project design was adopted,
according to the US Army Corps of Engineers, to demonstrate that:
"...all practicable steps have been taken to reduce the adverse impacts to the aquatic
environment. One step includes reducing the amount of retail floor space typically
required for shopping center development. To be economically feasible, typical floor
space occupies approximately 33% of all developed lands. This would be approximately
25.8 acres for this proposed retail space. The applicant has reduced the wetland impacts
"Citizens-Worhiny Topther For A Healthy Coast"
Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone] • Email: [e-mail] • Website: www.n(coast.org
3609 Highway 24 (Ocean) Newport, NC 28570
.a. .
to 21.01 acres by reducing the amount of floor space to 27%. The site plan has
undergone nine separate modifications to obtain the 4.7 acre reduction. , The applicant
states that most commercial development cover approximately 67% of the property in
impervious surface, but this proposal has been reduced to approximately 40% total
impervious surface. Another step the applicant has taken is to incorporate the existing
wetlands into the stormwater treatment plan, instead of constructing detention ponds in
wetlands. Also, the plan was designed not to fragment the wetland system, but to
maintain it as a one system wetland as much as practicable. "
Without seeking modification to the permit, the Wal-Mart was reconfigured. (See the attached
NC DWQ storm water permit site plan that shows the reconfiguration:) In addition, a Staples
was constructed in an area that is designated by the permit "for the enhancement and preservation
of wetlands so as not to fragment the wetland system." A strip mall is currently being
constructed on the east site of the Wal-Mart, using space 'g'nat waas .-HOcuted fvr parking in the 404
permit to avoid wetland impacts elsewhere on the property.
Several large storm water detention ponds have been constructed on the west and in the middle
of the shopping center that were not authorized by the 404 permit. On the west side of the
property, a large elevated earthen dike at least a couple of hundred feet long has been constructed
within an area that is shown as "created" and "preserved" wetlands on the 404 permit. This dike
isolates created wetlands from preserved wetlands. East of the Staples in the middle of the
property, it does not appear that wetland hydrology has been restored as required. The existing
canal ditch does not appear to have been converted into a shallow 3:1 swale ditch as outlined in
the on-site mitigation plan. Instead, part of this "enhanced" wetland area-is now a parking lot
and store, and the remainder is being advertised as available "For Lease" on a large sign posted
on the property.
None of the required monitoring reports for the on-site mitigation are in the permit file. These
reports were to include groundwater monitoring data and sample plots to determine the success
of plant community restoration. On-site mitigation should have been completed by February 27,
1998.
We are also concerned about the failure of the oft-site compensatory wetlarld mitigation
associated with this project. As noted in numerous letters in the permit file, significant portions
of the required mitigation have failed. It has now been nearly 45-months since the 404 permit
was issued, and these noncompliance issues aren't resolved.
Based upon our review of the 404 permit, the permit file, and the project site as it is currently
constructed, it appears that a Notice of Violation is warranted and should be issued to all
responsible patties. A "stop work order should also be issued to stop construction on the strip
mall shopping center, and to prevent the commencement of work on the "Bob-a-Lou" Tract also
covered under the 404 permit.
Moreover, the entire shopping center and mitigation site should be evaluated to determine the
extent of wetland losses that have occurred as a result of unauthorized development activities.
r
Based upon this investigation, appropriate penalties should be levied to demonstrate the
importance of permit compliance. Noncompliance issues, including the completion of successful
mitigation efforts on-site and off-site, should be completely resolved before any further
development occurs at this shopping center. Finally, it may be appropriate to consider this track
record of permit compliance when making future decisions on permit applications by these
applicants to work elsewhere in wetlands.
Please inform us of all actionsyou take to address these noncompliance issues with this permit.
Sincerely,
Todd Miller
Executive Director
Attachments:
(1) Figure 4. Reference wetland for Hestron Site (Site plan attached to 404 Permit)
(2) DWQ Approved Site Plan for the,Stormwater Permit for Wal-Mart
(3) Page 3 of Permit Evaluation and Decision Document for 404 Permit (Minimization
Discussion requesting in the issuance of FONSI and 404 Permit)
cc: Mr. Rick Shiver
NC Division of Water Quality
127 Cardinal Dr. Ext.
Wilmington, NC 28405
Mr. Bill Ross, Secretary
NC DENR
,1601 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1601
Ms. Linda Lewis
NC Division of Water Quality
127 Cardinal Dr. Ext.
Wilmington, NC 28405
Mr. William L. Cox, Chief
US EPA, Region IV
61 Forsyth Street, NW
Atlanta, GA 30303
Ms. Tracy Rice
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
P.O. Box 33726 -
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
Mr. Ron Sechler
National Marine Fisheries Service
Pivers Island
Beaufort, NC 28516
Ms. Robin Smith, Assistant Secretary
NC DENR
1601 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1601
Mr. Derb Carter
Mr. Tripp Van Noppen
Southern Environmental Law Center
200 West Franklin Street, Suite 300
Chapel Hill, NC 27516-2520
r-
CM
O if p W r
J ?•?= 1 l l l I 1 j
X:L
.fir; 1
11 ,141
'f 11111411 (111(1
c"I
?tl,lll(1?1
. .r 1,11
?r
L
? r'alca
J GU,ddo?s N
J
® z
zi w
-lift) I
•r
Ilt' f'I'1'r• ,'' - '•
1
a v ??--?• ? f .lam ?%•- "'- ?_ •: 25:-?% :'
z. .5t
a 111, /? :•.` ••••:???='., 'f••!, •r
stilt ?? r. ..' •?.:• 'C m .? ', rf
'•? ? 1'u'1t1I1,2?? 1 ?,?'
•, ? 111,1,,,71• 3?> D r-?,
0
V
L•
w
< o
t 0
la o
J
J s
?
M
r0
t o
tt
c
a
? i
? >
>< x
4 p
r
W
D
p w O x 4 O
U

_
i ?

"
W' ¢
H
yl
a a
r
W
3 t

W
04 H
<
y
J
W
m
•?
< w d ?
< o
7 •?- 4
Z z
W

f/1 i

< a

S a

-? rc

C i

<

a W
x
N

w
?
<
C

a

z
W
21
o

W

J

s
.
O

C

!]
a
-'
YJ

+
°
W
W
s
W
¢

mw
W

?
°
x
a
a
U
i
w
•
r U ac t a.
Q n
tl1

?
C

l?
Q1

z
GI
r
v
j y
m?
U?
V
L ?
(1) Q3
L.L..
C/
-It
J
I?
? R
0
d
E
C
yr
d
U
C
L
d'
d
L
LL.
6* 4 '?a ?? id•l ?E AllE dE !! ?'? a i, ?€ g a
fill m IN, I
°, 11!1, f
8q E ?T
`{ dad ; ,'!I>;'•' 4? :?i ^ i 1 !I'
_ ?'?? __ •-''1 v',••' a `}I II ; g ` .. ..
"'?'? ? >? ! I ••' 1 ? ? I ;gkEi / 6i'i ,tti%"l??tjr`t "._ _._•_'_--=' ?I !J 1`?j - i` Ili 1
?p ,•` 6 ? ? ? iR ? ? .:! '.?? Nye' ' J ? r ?`!? i ' a y
j i 4 &a a ! S ` `? ' ?' r:' i rig i • ;d. I gI l _
X44-?_•=
:
MET
A g aft Q ££ O(
Fi 3
b i 1. E r /?' ON
I y5
I y ? Ra • 8 .1 4? t?.ir. ?. ASON'i? ?, •i? e e
Fr{ A
// a ?? ? ? 1 P ? • 8888R? ? i '11 ! `i ?! 11 i }1 G ? ?'
Jig
?? I, IY 1 j
c,? 3
--------------
dig. ?Z p§
?..:• f ? ?1 f 111+++
-' F?:y-, ,` ? ?`.. ? `•' { 0g I?b to / ? r?.
:
i
A.
f?'r includes scattered wetland fingers located throughout the tract. In light of the amount of
wetlands located on the property, and their configuration, total avoidance could not be
practicably accomplished in constructing a major retail shopping center.
The total acreage of the jurisdictional wetlands located on the Bob-a-lou Tract is
approximately 5,55 acres. The wetlands are located in the center of, and on the north side of, the
property. Total avoidance could not be accomplished due to the presence of an existing sewer
plant and drain fields located on the south side of the property.
b. Minimization: The applicant has demonstrated that all practicable steps have been
taken to reduce adverse impacts to the aquatic environment. One step includes reducing the
amount of retail floor space typically required for shopping center development. To be
economically feasible, typical-floor space occupies approximately 33% of all developed lands.
This would be approximately 25.8 acres for this proposed retail space. The applicant has
reduced the wetland impacts to 21.01 acres by reducing the amount of floor space to 27%. The
site plan has undergone nine separate modifications to obtain the 4.7 acre reduction. The
applicant states that most commercial developments cover approximately 67% of the property in
impervious surface, but this proposal has been reduced to approximately 40% total impervious
surface. Another step the applicant has taken is to incorporate the existing wetlands into the
stormwater treatment plan, instead of constructing detention ponds in wetlands. Also, the plan
was designed not to fragment the wetland system, but to maintain it as a one system wetland area
as much as practicable.
In the Bob?l ,Lou tract, the building and parking facility were redesigned to preserve the
main wetland system,as a whole and to incorporate it into the stormwater treatment plan. The
building was also downsized to further reduce.wetland impacts,
c. Compensat-gry Mitigation: Mitigation to offset the wetland impacts is proposed both
onsite and offsite. J onsite wetland mitigation for the Hestron Tract includes the preservation
of 0.23 acres, the r toration of 2.41 acres, the creation of 1.48 acres, and the enhancement of
6.06 acres. Restoration consists of filling in an existing drainage ditch and diverting water,
through stormwater management, into the area to restore hydrology. Hydrophytic vegetation,
including Juncus effusus, and Saururus cernurus will planted throughout the area with N ssa
svlvatica and Acer rubrum planted at eight foot centers along the perimeter. In the Bob-a-Lou
Tract, approximately 3.55 acres of wetlands will be enhanced by diverting water to the wetland
area. For further onsite mitigation details, reference the July 1997 mitigation plan and May 19,
1997, Appendum.
Offsite mitigation will take place on SR 1163 (Laurel Road) and will consist of
preserving 27.5 acres of forested wetlands and restoring 23.6 acres of prior converted wetlands.
This mineral soil flat is on an interstream divide that drains to the west to the Newport River and
to the east to the North River. To achieve the restoration, ditch plugs will be placed in the
interior ditches at approximately 200 foot intervals and 600 trees per acre will be planted.
Offsite mitigation ratios will be 5:1 for restoration and 10:1 for preservation. For mitigation
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources i •
Division of Water Quality A&14
James Hunt, Governor ? E H N F1
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
June 26, 1997
Mr. Charles Hester
Hestron Corp.
Hestron Plaza
Suite 202
Morehead City, NC 28557
Dear Mr. Hester,
Re: Certification Pursuant to Section 401 of the Federal Clean Water Act,
Proposed shopping center at US 70 and NC 24
WQC Project #960894, COE #199603796
Carteret County
Attached hereto is a copy of Certification No. 3146 issued to Hestron Corporation dated
26 June, 1997.
If we can be of further assistance, do not hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely,
r
4---
A. Preston oward, Jr. P.E.
Attachments
960894.wgc
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Wilmington Field Office
Wilmington DWQ Regional Office
Mr. John Dorney
Mr. John Parker, Division of Coastal Management
Central Files
Paul Farley; Land Management Group
Division of Water Quality • Environmental Sciences Branch
Enviro. Sciences Branch. 4401 Reedv Creek Rd.. Raleiah. NC 27607 Teleohone 919-733-1786 FAX # [phone]

NORTH CAROLINA 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
THIS CERTIFICATION is issued in conformity with the requirements of Section 401
Public Laws 92-500 and 95-217 of the United States and subject to the North Carolina Division of
Water Quality (DWQ) Regulations in 15 NCAC 2H, Section.0500 to Hestron Corporation
resulting in 27.4 acres of wetland impact in Carteret County pursuant to an application filed on the
12th day of September 1996 to construct an expanded Cypress Bay Shopping Center.
The application provides adequate assurance that the discharge of fill material into the waters
of Hull Swamp in conjunction with the proposed development will not result in a violation of
applicable Water Quality Standards and discharge guidelines. Therefore, the State of North
Carolina certifies that this activity will not violate the applicable portions of Sections 301, 302,
303, 306, 307 of PL 92-500 and PL 95-217 if conducted in accordance with the application and
conditions hereinafter set forth.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you submitted in your application,
as described in the Public Notice or as modified below. If you change your project, you must
notify us and you may be required to submit a revised application. If total wetland fills for this
project (now or in the future) exceed one acre, compensatory mitigation may be required as
described in 15A NCAC 2H.0506 (h) (6) and (7). For this approval to be valid, you must follow
the conditions listed below. In addition, you should get any other federal, state or local permits
before you go ahead with your project including (but not limited to) Sediment and Erosion
control, Coastal Stormwater, Non-discharge and Water Supply watershed regulations.
Condition(s) of Certification:
That appropriate sediment and erosion control practices which equal or exceed those
outlined in the most recent version of the "North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control
Planning and Design Manual" or the "North Carolina Surface Mining Manual" (available
from the Division of Land Resources in the DEHNR Regional or Central Offices) are
utilized to prevent exceedances of the appropriate turbidity water quality standard (50
NTUs) in all saltwater classes, and all lakes and reservoirs; and 10 NTUs in trout
waters);
2. All sediment and erosion control measures placed in wetlands or waters shall be removed
and the natural grade restored after the Division of Land Resources has released the
project;
3. Measures shall be taken to prevent live or fresh concrete from coming into contact with
waters of the state until the concrete has hardened;
4. Compensatory mitigation shall be done in accordance with the Corps of Engineers
requirements at least as described in the 28 May 1997 letter to Mickey Suggs from Paul
Farley and the "Compensatory Mitigation Plan" dated 13 March 1997. DWQ shall be
copied on the approved ratio, location, size and method of mitigation (restoration,
enhancement, creation and preservation) within 30 days after the 404 is issued and
annual reports for the entire length of the monitoring period. At least one monitoring well
shall be located in each of the ten restored, created or enhanced wetland areas on-site. A
final mitigation plan shall be sent to DWQ within two months of the issuance of the 404
Permit. This plan must include water budgets for each of the ten restoration, creation and
enhancement sites that also account for the stormwater management plan. Wetland fill
shall not occur until written concurrence is received from DWQ for that plan. As-built
plans will need to be provided to DWQ after the mitigation grading/planting is completed.
5. A stormwater management plan shall be submitted to DWQ within two months of
issuance of the 404 Permit.
Violations of any condition herein set forth shall result in revocation of this Certification and
may result in criminal and/or civil penalties. This Certification shall become null and void unless
the above conditions are made conditions of the Federal 404 and/or coastal Area Management Act
Permit. This Certification shall expire upon expiration of the 404 or CAMA permit.
If this Certification is unacceptable to you you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon
written request within sixty (60) days following receipt of this Certification. This request must be
in the form of a written petition conforming to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General
Statutes and filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447, Raleigh, N.C.
27611-7447. If modifications are made to an original Certification, you have the right to an
adjudicatory hearing on the modifications upon written request within sixty (60) days following
receipt of the Certification. Unless such demands are made, this Certification shall be final and
binding.
This the 26th day of June, 1997
DIVI ON OF WATER
A. Preston oward, Jr. P.E.
WQC #3146
it
TOTAL ACREAGES:
Total Acres = 78.17 acs
Total Uplands = 47.32 acs
Total 404 Wetlands = 30.85 acs
Total Wetlands Fill = 21.01 acs
Total Wetlands Preserved = 0.23 acs
Total Wetlands Restored = 2.41 acs
Total Wetlands Created = 0.95 acs
Total Wetlands Enhanced = 9.61 acs
WETLANDS MITIGATION:
On-Site Preservation 5:1 = 0.05 acs
On-Site Restoration 1:1 = 2.41 acs
On-Site Creation 1.5:1 = 0.63 acs
On-Site Enhancement 2;1 = 4.81 acs
Total On-Site Mitigation = 7.90 acs
[Balance of fill/impacted we tlands
21.01 - 7.90 = 13.11 acs wil l be
mitigated off-site at a 3.9 : 1.0 ratio.]
0.23 ac
HESTRON TRACT:
Total acres = 62.37 acs
Upland acres = 37.07 acs
Wetland acres = 25.30 acs
Fill Wetlands = 19.01 acs
Preserved Wetlands = 0.23 acs
Restored Wetlands = 2.41 acs
Created Wetlands = 0.95 acs
Enhanced Wetlands = 6.06 acs
1.45 acs
SCALE: 1 Inch = 400 Feet
MAY - 1997 0.95 acs
0.41 acs
(Revised 5/97) 0.23 ac
PLAN -- H
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN, 404 WETLAND FILL AREAS, AND
A
I
1
1
r

( 0ou"t }
1 eloPeq tl
S.
Parcel Devefo HighwaY 70
' our Peq
?y.
1. .., r Parcel
0.57 ac
Existing
a pond ?i McDonalgs
Existing Ditch pond
ro Exlsti
2.72 acs ai y, Pond
I . .. ...... A .
AE
PRESERVATION AREAS FOR FINAL STORMWATER TREATMENT
WITHIN THE HESTRON TRACTS
Morehead City West Area - Carteret County - North Carolina
2,25 acs
N
Existing
Shopping
Center
0.51
acs
0.68 acs
0.16 acs
_ F.: ; I ! o Existing
[? • ," :, •r• B a. Shopping
Center
d ?• Pond
hway 24
G
o'
o ,
X

Existing
j ' Seaver
I Plant &
I Draintields
N
BOB-A-LOU TRACT:
Total acres = 15.80 acs
Upland acres = 10.25 acs
Wetland acres = 5.55 acs
Fill Wetlands = 2.00 acs
Enhanced Wetlands = 3.55 acs
N C ri
Upland Areas 47.32 acres. Building Locations.
Enhanced Wetlands 9.61 acres. Stormwater directed to these areas.
T. , 404 Wetland Preservation Areas 0.23 acres. These wetland areas to preserved for final stormwater treatement.
----'_ Created Wetland Areas 0.95 acres. Upland areas to be converted to 404 wetland status.
•TT, Restored Wetland Areas 2.41 acres. Former wetland areas to be converted to 404 wetland status.
404 Wetland Impact 1 Fill Areas 21.01 acres. These wetlands to be altered for building and parking site improvements
LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP, INC.
X = Well Location

1.:
FILE MODE OPTION
---------------------------
050 MEMORY TX
REASON FOR ERROR
P. 1
COMMUNICATION RESULT REPORT ( AUG.26.2003 10:38AM )
TTI NCDENR WIRO
ADDRESS (GROUP) RESULT PAGE
---------------------------------------------------------------------
e-7578737752 OK P. 4/4
E-1) HANG UP OR LINE FAIL E-2) BUSY
E-3) NO ANSWER E-4) NO FACSIMILE CONNECTION
De State Of North Carolina
• pa?ent °fEnvironment and N$
i Wil?nington Regional office! Resources
Michael p. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross jr,, Secretly
PAX CO VIER S. Zr
Date: ZG, 0
To.
Co:
REMARK: D- Q. s rrx_?,
No. of Pu es;
From..,
co:
FA,X#: 9x 0.
35
G.,200
41
1 f ,
via f ?? -• fir'! r .
127 C4rd1nAl Drtvo E xconsto1r,11'llminQtnn, Vr p
S
a.01
q l'] A# Egoal gpport N.C. zs40&3A45 Telephone (910) sps-3904 Ros r?V 1 S !
.'!? / J fliPtnutive Actlon ?pl4ycr (910) 350an
7F•fJ r) q ? e-f ?'?? ?'7?.5 f??351r ?,1-O?S ?
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Wilmington Regional Office
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
FAX COVER SHEET
Date: zto O
To: No. Of Pa es:
CO: From:.
FAX #:-25-7 7 7? CO.
FAX#: X10-350-2004
REMARKS: ' (, o l- {it f r #}
GS o n Q. mt -
1^J"U' e i s jn V10 e- Cd " art Q 51- i s
127 Cardinal Drive Extension, Wilmington, L Y)" i rr-V I S S lr
N.C. 28405-3845 Telephone [phone] Fat (910) 350-200
is aneL An Equal Opport
unity Affirmative Action mployer
P i Ir?o le- 4 mLrt,`?ig a? rey??'re??? s o?si d-oF?'s?,
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, LTW*WA
Health and Natural Resources 4 • •
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary D H N R
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
June 26, 1997
Mr. Charles Hester
Hestron Corp.
Hestron Plaza
Suite 202
Morehead City, NC 28557
Dear Mr. Hester,
Re: Certification Pursuant to Section 401 of the Federal Clean Water Act,
Proposed shopping center at US 70 and NC 24
WQC Project #960894, COE #199603796
Carteret County
Attached hereto is a copy of Certification No. 3146 issued to Hestron Corporation dated
26 June, 1997.
If we can be of further assistance, do not hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely,
A. Preston oward, Jr. P.E.
Attachments
960894.wgc
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Wilmington Field Office
Wilmington DWQ Regional Office
Mr. John Dorney
Mr. John Parker, Division of Coastal Management
Central Files
Paul Farley; Land Management Group
Division of Water Quality • Environmental Sciences Branch
Enviro. Sciences Branch. 4401 Reedv Creek Rd.. Raleiah. NC 27607 TeleDhone 919-733-1786 FAX # [phone]
NORTH CAROLINA 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
THIS CERTIFICATION is issued in conformity with the requirements of Section 401
Public Laws 92-500 and 95-217 of the United States and subject to the North Carolina Division of
Water Quality (DWQ) Regulations in 15 NCAC 211, Section.0500 to Hestron Corporation
resulting in 27.4 acres of wetland impact in Carteret County pursuant to an application filed on the
12th day of September 1996 to construct an expanded Cypress Bay Shopping Center.
The application provides adequate assurance that the discharge of fill material into the waters
of Hull Swamp in conjunction with the proposed development will not result in a violation of
applicable Water Quality Standards and discharge guidelines. Therefore, the State of North
Carolina certifies that this activity will not violate the applicable portions of Sections 301, 302,
303, 306, 307 of PL 92-500 and PL 95-217 if conducted in accordance with the application and
conditions hereinafter set forth.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you submitted in your application,
as described in the Public Notice or as modified below. If you change your project, you must
notify us and you may be required to submit a revised application. If total wetland fills for this
project (now or in the future) exceed one acre, compensatory mitigation may be required as
described in 15A NCAC 2H.0506 (h) (6) and (7). For this approval to be valid, you must follow
the conditions listed below. In addition, you should get any other federal, state or local permits
before you go ahead with your project including (but not limited to) Sediment and Erosion
control, Coastal Stormwater, Non-discharge and Water Supply watershed regulations.
Condition(s) of Certification:
1. That appropriate sediment and erosion control practices which equal or exceed those
outlined in the most recent version of the "North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control
Planning and Design Manual" or the "North Carolina Surface Mining Manual" (available
from the Division of Land Resources in the DEHNR Regional or Central Offices) are
utilized to prevent exceedances of the appropriate turbidity water quality standard (50
NTUs) in all saltwater classes, and all lakes and reservoirs; and 10 NTUs in trout
waters);
2. All sediment and erosion control measures placed in wetlands or waters shall be removed
and the natural grade restored after the Division of Land Resources has released the
project;
3. Measures shall be taken to prevent live or fresh concrete from coming into contact with
waters of the state until the concrete has hardened;
4. Compensatory mitigation shall be done in accordance with the Corps of Engineers
requirements at least as described in the 28 May 1997 letter to Mickey Suggs from Paul
Farley and the "Compensatory-Mitigation Plan" dated 13 March 1997. DWQ shall be
copied on the approved ratio, location, size and method of mitigation (restoration,
enhancement, creation and preservation) within 30 days after the 404 is issued and
annual reports for the entire length of the monitoring period. At least one monitoring well
shall be located in each of the ten restored, created or enhanced wetland areas on-site. A
final mitigation plan shall be sent to DWQ within two months of the issuance of the 404
Permit. This plan must include water budgets for each of the ten restoration, creation and
enhancement sites that also account for the stormwater management plan. Wetland fill
shall not occur until written concurrence is received from DWQ for that plan. As-built
plans will need to be provided to DWQ after the mitigation gradingfplanting is completed.
5. A stormwater management plan shall be submitted to DWQ within two months of
issuance of the 404 Permit.
Violations of any condition herein set forth shall result in revocation of this Certification and
may result in criminal and/or civil penalties. This Certification shall become null and void unless
the above conditions are made conditions of the Federal 404 and/or coastal Area Management Act
Permit. This Certification shall expire upon expiration of the 404 or CAMA permit.
If this Certification is unacceptable to you you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon
written request within sixty (60) days following receipt of this Certification. This request must be
in the form of a written petition conforming to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General
Statutes and filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447, Raleigh, N.C.
27611-7447. If modifications are made to an original Certification, you have the right to an
adjudicatory hearing on the modifications upon written request within sixty (60) days following
receipt of the Certification. Unless such demands are made, this Certification shall be final and
binding.
This the 26th day of June, 1997
D ON OF WATER
A. Preston oward, Jr. P.E.
WQC #3146
1
Ywnd,Wa??? SwcV?, Ac.
At d)rece Zow 2522 .
90dmin , .NWA %wkw 28402
9d' . s1-o-452-0001
91ded _q
m.w g ?aldiedn
May 28, 1997
Mr. Mickey Sugg
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Branch
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28409
Re: Hestron Project
Carteret County
Dear Mickey:
RECL71V
SAY ? 1991
CNVlP,ONMFNTAC SC/ENCES
.V,d& Y4
.o.v a ..A ep. .9.1,
3805 Vid04vI& Wiwum
fW:,Gmilw", ?1'f8 2&W3
I have enclosed an outline of the proposed revisions to the permit application/mitigation plan that
we discussed in our meeting of April 8, 1997. As I metioned to you last week, Larry Baldwin, Monroe
McNeil, Blanton Hamilton, Fred Morton and myself'metwith John Dorney and Linda Lewis on Friday May 9,
1997 concerning the project. We have satisifed DWQ's concerns on the mitigation aspect of the project
and hope to receive the 401 certification within the next 1-3 weeks. We have also revised the site plan to
better serve the applicants needs and to also reflect DWQ's desire for larger, more contiguous wetland
blocks in the on-site mitigation with the wetlands serving as post storm water pond treatment. The total
wetland fill has not increased in the current site plan. I have also enclosed a copy of a letter from Mr.
Blanton Hamilton of Tribek Properties to Mr. Dorney concerning the project and last week's meeting.
Land Management Group believes that the attached information will complete the information that
you need and requested in our previous discussions concerning the project. I will be contacting you in the
next few days regarding proceeding with permit issuance. In the meantime, please contact Larry or me if
you have questions. Thank you for your assitance and patience in this matter.
Sincerely:
Paul M. Farley
Wetland Scientist
cc: Mr. Charles Hester
Col. Monroe McNeil
Mr. Rob Wheatly
M . Fred Morton
r. Blanton Hamilton
r. John Dorney
M
1
Addendum to Hestron Corporation Mitigation Plan
(Originally submitted March 13, 1997)
May 19, 1997
The following changes are submitted based on changes proposed in meetings with
Mickey Sugg of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on April 8, 1997 and with John
Dorney of the NC Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Division
of Water Quality on May 9, 1997. These changes affect the mitigation plan submitted
by Land Management Group on March 13, 1997.
1. Site Plan.
The site plan has been altered slightly (Figure 1). The alterations have
attempted to satify the applicants wishes to move the project closer to U.S. Highway 70
and to concentrate the on-site wetlands in larger more contiguous blocks as preferred
by the NC Division of Water Qualtiy (DWQ). Overall wetland fill area is unchanged the
fill and mitigation areas have been altered so that created, enhanced, and restored
wetlands are now concentrated in six blocks rather than eight as on the previous plan.
2. On-Site Mitigation
a. Water budgets - It is estimated that the wetland/stormwater system will
receive 3.5 gallons/ft2 of precipitation per inch of rain. It is estimated that this will
easily maintain jurisdictional hydrological conditions in the on-site wetlands.
b. Planting plan - Pending availablility, Juncus effusus Saururus cernurus, and
Typha latifolia will be planted throughout the restoration and creation areas. Nyssa
sylvatica and Acer rubrum will be planted at eight foot intervals along the permieter of
the areas. Success criteria will be the establishment of 70% herbaceous cover and
70% survival of woody species, including acceptable volunteer species. Any pine
species will not be considered acceptable. Vegetation will be monitored for five years
or until deemed a success.
c. Reference wetlands - The best available wetland to use for reference is the
small preserved wetland in the southwestern portion of the tract. A monitoring well and
30' x 30' vegetation plot will be established in this portion of the tract for use in
determing hydrological success.
d. Additional monitoring wells and vegetation plots - One monitoring well
and 30' x 30' reference plot will be established in each of the restoration, creation, and
enhancement areas of the Hestron Tract, as well as in the enhanced area of the Bob-a-
Lou tract. Hydrological success criteria will be either the establishment of a water table
within 12" of the surface for 12.5% of the growing season during normal precipitation
conditions or the maintenance of at least as long a hydroperiod as that of the preserved
I "Y
wetland. Hydrological monitoring will occur for five years or until the success criteria
have been met.
e. Organic material - previous organic strippings will be placed in creation area
to provide a suitable substrate for vegetation enhancement.
2. Off-site mitigation
a. Drainage removal - As required by DWQ, all ditches will be filled with
suitable fill material rather than ditch plugging proposed in mitigiation plan.
b. Reference wetland - As required by DWQ, a reference monitoring well and
vegetation plot will be established in the preserved wetland for use in determining
hydrological success of off-site mitigation.
c. Planting scheme - 600 trees/acre will be systematically planted throughout
the site. Success criteria will be either a 70% survival of planted species or the survival
of 320 trees per acre, including volunteer species. Pinus taeda and Liquidambar
styraciflua seedlings which exceed 10% of the trees present will not count towards
survival goals.
d. Implementation schedule - As described in the mitigation plan, all grading
and ditch plugging will be completed prior to December 1997, weather permitting.
Vegetation planting will occur prior to February 27, 1997.

LEGEND
X Well location
® Reference Well
Ditches to be fill
Figure 1. Well locations and LAND MANAGEMENT
ditch fill at the GROUP, INC
Laurel Road Tract.
May 19, 1997
Hestron Corp.
Carteret County, NC
imd ??lilaoza?n,,r?at 5we?' .96.
At 6/)d w .x 2522
Vambty1m, ??iet/a gut 28402
d'- 9Y0-452-000Y Ir
920&d 2. d&d
g

A& J-4
-TC/
9805 VUYAleWA .
wanington, ?w 28409
March 13, 1997
Mr. John Dorney
NC Dept. of Environment, Health, and
Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, NC 27607
F?
?py?29 X199,
Re: Hestron Mitigation Project
Carteret County
NCDEHNR WQC # 960894
Dear John:
I have enclosed a copy of the above listed plan for your review. Either Larry or myself will
be contacting you in the near future regarding the plan. I have hand delivered copies to Mickey
Sugg, COE, and Jim Gregson of your Wilmington office.
Thank you for your prompt attention. If you have questions, please contact Larry Baldwin
or myself.
Sin ly:
J
Paul M. Farley
Wetland Scientist
cc: Mr. Charles Hester
Col. Maylon McNeal
Mr. Fred Morton

COMPENSATORY MITIGATION PLAN
FOR THE HESTRON SHOPPING CENTER
USA60E Action'ID# 199'6W7J6
NCDEHNRWQC#?90894 .

Prepared for:
The Hestron Corporation
Hestron Plaza
Morehead City, North Carolina

' Prepared by:

' Land Management Group, Inc.
-
Wilmington North Carolina
glob #,95-073

March 13, 1997

0

1

1

I

TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES .................................................... 4
LIST OF TABLES ..................................................... 5
INTRODUCTION ...................................................... 6
PRELIMINARY WETLAND STUDIES ..................................... 7
HESTRON SITE ................................................. 7
Description and Classification ................................. 7
Wetland Functions ......................................... 7
Vegetation ................................................ 8
Soils. ................................................. 8
Laurel Road Site ................................................. 9
Description and Classification ................................. 9
Vegetation ................................................ 9
Soils .................................................... 10
IMPACT ASSESSMENT ............................................... 10
AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION ....................................... 10
MITIGATION ........................................................ 11
ON-SITE MITIGATION .......................................... 11
Restoration Mitigation ....................................... 12
Creation Mitigation ......................................... 12
Enhancement Mitigation ..................................... 12
Preservation Mitigation ...................................... 13
UTILIZATION OF WETLANDS IN STORM WATER DETENTION .......... 13
OFF-SITE MITIGATION ....................................... 13
Restoration Mitigation ...................................... 14
Hydrological restoration ................................ 14
Plant community restoration ............................ 14
Preservation Mitigation ...................................... 14
MITIGATION IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE ............................. 15
MONITORING PLAN .................................................. 15
ON-SITE MITIGATION ............................. 15
Restoration Mitigation ....................................... 15
Creation Mitigation ......................................... 15
OFF-SITE MITIGATION .......................................... 16
Restoration Mitigation ....................................... 16
Hydrological restoration ................................ 16

Plant community restoration ............................ 16
AS-BUILT REPORT AND DRAWINGS .................................... 16
SUMMARY ......................................................... 17
LITERATURE CITED ................................................. 19
I FIGURES, TABLES, AND APPENDIX .................................... 20
fl

11
t
fl

1

r

r.

4
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Vicinity map of the Hestron Site. ............................... 21
Figure 2. Vicinity map of the Laurel Road Site .............................. 22
Figure 3. The Hestron and Bob-a-Lou Tracts ............................... 23
Figure 4. S.C.S. soils map of the Hestron Site .............................. 24
Figure 5. The Laurel Road Site . ........................................ 25
Figure 6. S.C.S. soils map of the Laurel Road Site . ......................... 26
Figure 7. Site plan for the shopping center on the Hestron Site ................. 27
Figure 8. Specifications for storm water management plan . ................... 28
Figure 9. Specifications for storm water management plan . ................... 29
Figure 10. Storm water management plan . ................................ 30
Figure 11. Topo map of the Hestron Site .................................. 31
Figure 12. Hydrological restoration plan for the Laurel Road restoration area. ... 32
Figure 13. Cross sectional sketch of a typical ditch plug in the restoration area.... 33
Figure 14. Monitoring wells/sample plots in the Hestron Site ................... 34
Figure 15. Monitoring wells/sample plots in the Laurel Road restoration area. .... 35
1

5
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Dominant vegetation of the Hestron Site . ........................... 36
Table 2 . Soil characteristics measured at three points at the Hestron Site. ........ 37
Table 3. Dominant vegetation of the Laurel Road Site ......................... 38
Table 4. Soil characteristics of the Laurel Road Site .......................... 39
Table 5. Mitigation summary of Hestron Corp. compensatory mitigation plan. ....... 40

I

C
I

H

r
1

0

6
INTRODUCTION
Hestron Corporation (applicant) is proposing to construct seven buildings and
associated parking area to expand Cypress Bay Shopping Center. The following plan is
being processed under the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Action ID # 19903796 and The
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources WQC #
960894. Construction has been designed to minimize wetland impacts. The vast majority
of on-site wetlands have been incorporated for use in the final storm water treatment plan.
The impacted wetlands are currently at a low functional capacity level due to isolation and
encroachment by an urban landscape.
This mitigation plan has been developed by Hestron Corporation to compensate for
the unavoidable impacts to 21.01 acres of jurisdictional wetlands from the expansion of
the shopping center. The impacted site (Hestron Site) is located near the junction of HWY
70 and 24 in Morehead City, North Carolina (Figure 1). A total of 13.73 acres (0.23 acres
preserved, 2.41 acres restored, 1.48 acres created, and 9.61 acres enhanced) will be
mitigated on-site at a ratio of 1 acre mitigated: 1 acre impacted. The balance of fill
impacted wetlands will be mitigated off-site. Off-site mitigation will include the restoration
of 23.6 acres of agricultural fields and the preservation of 27.5 acres of preserved
pine/hardwood wetlands at ratios. The actual off-site mitigation ratios will be 5:1 for
restoration and 10:1 for preservation. Total mitigation will include 64.08 acres for a total S
ratio of 3.08:1. The off-site mitigation area (Laurel Road Site) is located adjacent to Laurel
Road in Carteret County (Figure 2).
The Hestron Site consists of two nearly adjacent tracts (Hestron Tract and Bob-A-

' Lou Tract) located between U.S. 70 and N.C. 24 approximately 1500 feet west of the
intersection of said roads in Morehead City North Carolina (Figure 3). The tracts are
located approximately 600-1000 feet apart and are separated by Cypress Bay Shopping
Center.
The Hestron Tract consists of 62.4 acres, including 22.1 acres of wetlands. 19.01
' acres will be disturbed for the proposed buildings and adjacent parking.
The Bob-A-Lou Tract is comprised of 10.9 acres, including 5.55 acres of
wetlands. Two of these acres will be filled in order to complete a proposed retail building
and associated parking. The site is adjacent to existing sewer plant and fields.
S PRELIMINARY WETLAND STUDIES
HE TRON
SITE
Description and Classification
' The wetlands of the Hestron Site are currently of low value for water quality
purposes (John Dorney, personal communication 1996) and depapaurate of vegetation.
The wetlands of the site are classified hydrogeomorphically (Brinson 1993) as mineral and
I organic soil flats. These are wetlands occurring along interstream divides that receive
precipitation as their sole water source. Since flats lack a supplemental water source, it is
poor drainage rather that allows flats to retain their wetland status.
Wetland Functions
The Hestron Site would normally function in both surface and subsurface water

1

storage, removal of elements and compounds in precipitation and dryfall, nutrient
8
transformation and processing, organic carbon storage, maintenance of typical vegetation
and habitat maintenance for vertebrate and invertebrate species (Rheinhardt et al. in
press). Encroachment and isolation by an urban landscape, however, has reduced the
sites's functional ability. The site is partially ditched which reduces both surface and
subsurface water storage, removal of elements and compounds in precipitation and
dryfall, nutrient transformations, and organic matter storage. The lack of overstory
reduces nutrient transformations and processes and greatly reduces habitat maintenance
for vertebrates and invertebrates. Isolation by roads as well as urban landscape also
hinders the site's ability to function as habitat for vertebrate and invertebrate species.
I Vegetation

Vegetation was sampled in three plots using methods described in the 1987 U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers delineation manual. All three test plots lacked overstory
vegetation; plot 1 lacked a herbaceous layer; and Plot 3 lacked a shrub/sapling stratum
Table 1. Dominant vegetation is shown in Table 1.
Soils
The soils of the Hestron Site are mapped as Leon (Aeric Haplaquods) series,
Murville (Typic Haplaquods) series, and Torhunta (Typic Humaquepts) series (Figure 4).
All of these soils are hydric. Soil profiles were taken at each sample plot and are shown in
Table 2.

u

r

Laurel Road Site
Description and Classification
The Laurel Road Site (Figure 5) is composed of approximately 51 acres
immediately south of S. R. 1163 between HWY 101 and S. R. 1300 in Carteret County,
9
North Carolina. 23.6 acres are currently in agricultural production (restoration area). The
prior conversion statement is included in the Appendix. 27.4 acres (preservation area)
were converted to loblolly pine plantation 1978.
Prior to agricultural and silvicultural production, the Laurel Road Site would have
been classified as a mineral soil flat (Brinson 1993). Occurring on the interstream divide
between the North and Newport River, the site lacks a measurable degree of slope; which
impedes drainage. The lack of drainage and the presence of a low permeable soil layer
will allow the site to attain wetland hydrological conditions. The restoration area has
interior ditches at approximately 200 foot intervals. The preservation area has not been
ditched except for perimeter and roadside ditches.
Vegetation

Vegetation samples were taken on June 7, 1997 in one plot each of the agricultural
and plantation areas (Table 3). The restoration area was in Triticum aestivum production
which dominated the herb layer. The preservation area is dominated by (Pins taeda) and
Liquidambar styraciflua in the overstory, P. taeda, L. styraciflua, and Acer rubrum in the
shrub layer, and Woodwardia aerolata in the herb layer. Smilax rotundifolia was the
dominant woody vine.

Soils

C
1

10
The soils of the Laurel Road site (Figure 6) are mapped as Deloss fine sandy loam
(Soil Conservation Service 1987), a hydric mineral soil. Soil profiles taken in the sample
plots confirm the soil as of the Deloss series. Soil descriptions are listed in Table 4.
IMPACT ASSESSMENT
The shopping center site plan (Figure 7) shows approximately ten acres of retail
space in seven buildings. Approximately eleven acres of parking is required for retail
space of this size. The remaining fill area is required for access roads, loading docks, and
other miscellaneous areas. The proposed development plan proposes a minimum amount
of retail space for a site of this size.
AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION
The applicant does not possess sufficient uplands to complete the project without
wetland impacts. The Hestron Site is in the best available location for a retail shopping
center in the Morehead City area. Location is by far the most important consideration in
determining the feasibility of such a shopping center. The location represents a major
retail area for the Morehead City area. If suitable uplands were available for the project,
the applicant would certainly not opt for expensive wetland mitigation. For these reasons,
the applicant believes that no practical alternative location is suitable for the project. Thus
the applicant has proposed to mitigate and offset wetland losses.
The site plan has undergone nine different changes in order to minimize wetland

n

L'
L

impacts. Typical shopping center development requires retail floor space to occupy
approximately 33% of all developed lands. Retail shopping area of the Hestron Site
occupies approximately 27% of the Hestron Site. The site plan also calls for restored,
created, enhanced, and preserved wetlands to occupy approximately 18% of the site.
11
Thus the shopping center land will have a greater wetland acreage than shopping and
parking areas. The applicant believes that wetland impacts have thus been avoided and minimized to the greatest extent possible.

MITIGATION
Mitigation will occur both on-site and off-site. Early consultation with resource
agencies revealed the agencies' desire for on-site mitigation. The applicant has thus
utilized on-site mitigation to the greatest extent possible. The remaining mitigation will
occur at the Laurel Road Site. Total on-site mitigation will include both restoration,
creation, enhancement, and preservation. Off-site mitigation will include restoration and
preservation. The proposed shopping center and the Laurel Road Site are located
approximately nine miles apart.
ON-SITE MITIGATION
On-site mitigation will consist of restoration, creation, enhancement and
preservation (Figure 7). Deed restrictions will preclude additional wetland impacts in
perpetuity.

L JIB

12
Restoration Mitigation
Restored on-site wetlands total 2.41 acres (Table 5). Wetland hydrology will be

u

1

u
restored through the filling of an existing drainage ditch (Figure 8 #3) and through storm
water recharge as a part of the storm water detention plan. Details of wetland use in storm
water detention are described in detail in a later section.
Wetland vegetation will be established in the restoration area in the form of
overstory and emergent vegetation. Acer rubrum, Nyssa sylvatica, Typha spp. and
Juncus effusus will be planted throughout the restoration area.
Creation Mitigation
Created wetlands total 1.48 acres of wetlands (Table 5). These wetlands will be
created through non-hydric soil excavation, hydrophytic vegetation planting, and through
storm water recharge. Approximately two or three feet of soil will be removed (Figure 9
#5) bringing the creation area to a grade level with adjacent wetlands. Precipitation and
storm water recharge will create wetland hydrology in the creation area. Hydrophytic
vegetation will be planted in a manner identical to restoration areas.
Enhancement Mitigation
On-site enhanced wetlands total 9.61 acres (Table 5). These current wetlands will
be incorporated into the storm water retention plan. This detention plan will be described
in detail in a later section.

' Preservation Mitigation
Preserved wetlands total 0.23 acres (Table 5). Appropriate deed restrictions will
1 ensure preservation of this wetland in perpetuity.

UTILIZATION OF WETLANDS IN STORM WATER DETENTION
The majority of on-site wetlands have been incorporated into the storm water
13
detention management plan for the shopping center (Figure 10). The existing open canal
ditch on the east end of the property will be reconstructed into a shallow 3:1 swale ditch.
(Figure 8 #3). Since the north end of the property is two feet lower than the south end
(Figure 11), storm water will be directed from south to north through an interconnecting
wetland/detention pond system. Storm water from impervious surfaces will be directed
through rip-rap into wetlands (Figure 8 #1). Water will then be passed through the wetland
system until they reach detention ponds (Figure 8 #2). The water directed on the west
' end of the property will pass through final treatment in a created wetland before being
transferred off-site.
' OFF-SITE MITIGATION
Off-site mitigation at the Laurel Road Site will total 51.1 acres (Figure 5). The
agricultural fields will be restored to wetland status with the remaining wetlands being
preserved in perpetuity.
1
C
C

14

u
r

Restoration Mitigation
Hydrological restoration
Wetland hydrology will be restored in by installing 37 ditch plugs in the agricultural
ditches (Figure 12). The plugs will consist of a 5-6' length of clean clay to fine-loamy fill
for the width and depth of the existing open ditch (Figure 13). The spacing between plugs
will be -300' or less. The installation of the plugs will maintain wetland hydrological
conditions throughout the entire restoration area, as recognized by the U.S.D.A. - S.C.S.
drainage guidelines for Deloss soil types and permeabilities.
Plant community restoration
Plant community restoration will concentrate on the re-establishment of canopy
species. An equal number (pending availability) of local Fraxinus pennsylvanica, Quercus
bicolor, Quercus michauxii, Quercus phellos, and Liriodenderon tulip/fera seedlings will be
planted systematically on twelve foot centers (300 seedlings per acre). Volunteer Acer
rubrum, Liquidambar styraciflua, and Pinus taeda are also anticipated by local surrounding
seed sources.
Preservation Mitigation
The preservation area consists of 27.5 acres. This area (along with the restoration
area) will either be dedicated to an acceptable conservatory or perpetual trust.

C

15
MITIGATION IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
The implementation of the mitigation plan will occur in two phases. The grading
and ditch plugging will be completed prior to December 1997. Vegetation planting will
occur prior to February 27, 1998.
MONITORING PLAN
ON-SITE MITIGATION
Restoration Mitigation
A Remote Data Systems WL-40 groundwater monitoring well (WL-40) will be
installed established as shown in Figure 14. Data will be collected from the well on a daily
basis to monitor the success of hydrological restoration. Success criteria of hydrological
restoration will be the restoration of a groundwater table at or above 12" from the soil
surface for 12.5% of the growing season during periods of reasonably normal
precipitation. Groundwater tables will be monitored from January 1, 1998 until the
success criteria is met or until January 1, 2001.
A 50'x50' sample plot will be established adjacent to the well (Figure 14) to
determine the success of plant community restoration. Vegetation will be monitored
annually for three years. Success criteria will be the 70% survival of all planted
vegetation, including volunteer species, at the end of monitoring period.
Creation Mitigation
A WL-40 and 50'x 50' sample plot will be established as shown in Figure 14.
C

LI
i

0

16
Hydrology and vegetation monitoring and success criteria will be identical to those criteria
of the restoration mitigation.
OFF-SITE MITIGATION
Restoration Mitigation
Hydrological restoration
Six WL-40s will be installed as shown in Figure 15. Data will be collected from
these wells on a daily basis. As with on-site restoration, success criteria will the
establishment of a ground water table at or above 12" from the soil surface for 12.5% of
the growing season during normal periods of precipitation. Groundwater levels will be
monitored from January 1, 1998 until the success criteria is met or until January 1, 2001.
Plant community restoration
Six 50'x50' sample plots will be established adjacent to the WL-40s (Figure 15).
Vegetation will be monitored annually for three years. Success criteria will be either of
70% survival of planted species by the end of the monitoring period or the survival of 320
trees per acre at the end of the monitoring period, including volunteer species.
AS-BUILT REPORT AND DRAWINGS
As-built drawings, photographs, plans, and specifications will be provided to the
appropriate regulatory agencies within 90 days after the mitigation project is completed.
Annual monitoring reports, including photographs and potential problem area

1

r!
17
summaries, will be submitted in January (beginning in January 1999) for the duration of
the monitoring period.
SUMMARY
Hestron Corporation is proposing to develop the Hestron Site in Carteret County,

d
E

n

North Carolina in order to expand the present Cypress Bay Shopping Center. The
applicant has avoided and minimized wetland impacts to the maximum extent possible. *Af
However, the project will require the filling of 21.01 acres of wetlands. The applicant is
proposing both on-site and off-site mitigation to offset the unavoidable wetland losses.
The applicant has further minimized wetland impacts by incorporating on-site wetlands into
a storm water management program. All but one on-site mitigation areas have been
included in the storm water management program. The off-site mitigation area at the
Laurel Road Site, located approximately nine miles northeast of the Hestron Site,
occupies a similar topographic position with a soil type commonly found on mineral soil
flats. Mitigation ratios exceed overall ratios required by both the Corps of Engineers (1:1;
MOA between Environmental Protection Agency and Department of the Army) and the NC
Division of Water Quality (1:1 restoration, 1:5:1 Creation, 2:1 enhancement, and 5:1
preservation; N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources 1995).
Success criteria and goals have been clearly defined and both mitigation areas will be
monitored for a period of three years or until success criteria have been met. When
compared with the current highly anthropogenic nature of the Hestron Site, the proposed
on-site and off-site mitigation will insure that the overall wetland functional capacity of the
r]
H

I Carteret County landscape will increase with a successful mitigation project.

u

u

18

19
' LITERATURE CITED
Brinson, M.M. 1993. A Hydrogeomorphic Classification for Wetlands. Technical
' Report WRP-DE-4. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station.
Vicksburg, Mississippi.
' Dorney, John. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources, Division of Water Quality. On-site personal communication. December 18,
1996.
' The Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of the Army. Memorandum of
agreement between the environmental protection agency and the department of the
' army concerning the determination of mitigation under the clean water act section
404(b)(1) guidelines.
' Rheinhardt, R.D., M.M. Brinson, and P.M. Farley. 1997. Applying wetland reference
data to functional assessment and restoration. Wetlands: in press.
Soil Conservation Service. 1987. Soil Survey of Carteret County. U.S.D.A. Soil
Conservation Service. Washington DC.
State of North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources 1997:
Report of Proceedings for the Proposed Rule Amendments and Adoptions Relating to
' the Classification of Wetlands and Review Procedures for 401 Water Quality
Certifications for Activities Which Involve the Discharge of Fill Material Into Waters And
Wetlands: Volume I Summary and Recommendations. The Environmental
' Management Commission. Raleigh, North Carolina.
Wetlands Research Program. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.
' Technical Report Y-87-1. Washington, DC.
n
U

11
11

1-7
L

J

FIGURES, TABLES, AND APPENDIX
20

i
i
21

N
1A

c?
:-? X115

x, a:

' 11
? 1 - 4T .. •'? :. ?t 1 t is
` ? '. ?r...l .•? Z • Ate: ? ,/.?:
.C
St Marks
Chap O
?? eM
Imo. i(?4`? , ' '9Np
A
r. p
7J

site boundaryr?- 1 Mart
?-W l \N .
0 1000 2000 4000
SCALE 1" = 2000'
Figure 1. Vicinity/topo map
of the Hestron Site.
LAND MANAGEMENT
GROUP, INC
March 10, 1997
Hestron Corp.
Carteret County, NC
i
22
N'
10 n.
North R
7 t
y:. Approximate site boundary
ri i
J
"48 fl \. Al
l _ y :f
0 1000 2000 4000
SCALE 1" = 2000'
Figure 2. Vicinity/topo map LAND MANAGEMENT Hestron Corp.
of the Laurel Road Site. GROUP, INC Carteret County, NC
March 10, 1997

M V
Z
N C) ?- j,
O N Oc
0
°o pU
O _d O r? T
m m Co y
J m
ca J U
m ?? Q
c Io n
pj o n o Cl U
O (n
`^ y as :v M
N a
n
_ a m ? m
= v y V r
?- c7 1a N
.NR n G 4 >
u- v m H a W Z a)
z W g o
W N ? b L ?
? 9 a C H c /?
H _ = r
? 3 0 ? a
i= L '? - G o N N m G Q O L
15
? a4i v, a Cam. Q ? G
o W a IL Q Z
,,,x\(+? i a a e m N ? r
1?'x?t?1f4 V i a 0 H m
,- m W W n t.) C m U N J
!O U m c0 ?q, ? W
m a
l?'? O C Q m ?
?? G 6 d Q L
;nt^ # ? N tL m c m
3 n: m
?a°' ? 6 S z a ? N
s m ?, m O
? l y - m - v J 11' ° N L'
C
j M?
(D 0
4,.
c Yr ?' C
I UL as
ill l ?' I o
- V u tJ
W W m
N ? N
O = O O
O
i
2 I-
i

24

0 1000 2000 4000
SCALE 1" = 2000'
Figure 4. S.C.S. soil map of
the Hestron Site.
LAND MANAGEMENT
GROUP, INC
March 10, 1997
Hestron Corp.
Carteret County, NC

25
"r.qR 1153 Laurai
N rt#n 1o1
LA
inglugaL ed
?.
[27.5 Acres Of Preserved
Pine/Hardwood Wetlands t I I
•-15-20 yrs OKI i I
1, I I I
I I I 1
l I I 1
i I [ 1 I
I
i Restoration Area
Preservation Area
Figure 5. The
Laurel Road Site.

LAND MANAGEMENT
GROUP, INC
March 10, 1997
300 600 1200
SCALE 1" = 600'
Hestron Corp.
Carteret County, NC
i
26

;ite©u

0 1000 2000 4000
SCALE 1" = 2000'
Figure 6. S.C.S. soils map
of the Laurel Road Site.
LAND MANAGEMENT
GROUP, INC
March 10, 1997
Hestron Corp.
Carteret County, NC

U
o Z
ti
N
U?
°o pU
co L
E I ai mL
E o _
C)
m CO LLI V
c rn a O U
^ m c Cl)
N - N 'C
_N c a ?
mC t y ? ? aai ?
v m a,
? ? o o m
V N N
Z rn
m a Z p r
v °? n t9 3
40
Cox 0
m w G
b N .1 w
N Q V
c E d
LLo c
j ?nN ?ry
P %+'K?r1`3 P ? ? m n ? Z
l?x?c"C ? N ? w N N
N m iu in <> ? ? ? U iv
N O ? «f y ? N (D ?- 6
?„ ? ?u .o c _ ?v 4
!C ?n;J N 1 .: O s L LL
W 'p C C
F.. _ N CL (D m C
a ? a L C
a Ir m O
m
? ?•? ` _ m X v a? a v ? r
U
? o `` r W a; t Q) 4)
b a 1 C C
w' 'Q O
LL 4? 4)
N2
u w _0)4) 4)
tit 1'i lug Qo
L=Li
y
V V V
m ? tV
tlf l7
N QWf N
O ? O
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
i
1
1
1
1
1
28
#1 SPECIFICATIONS SHEET FOR ON-SITE WETLANDS MITIGATION
WITHIN THE HESTRON TRACTS
Morehead City West Area - Carteret County - North Carolina
Screened Inlet With Curb & Gutter With Concrete
Rip-Rap To Prevent Rip-tap To Inclines To Allow Parking Lot
12' PVC Pipe On 0.25 in/10 linear It Grade Clogging Of Pipe Dissipate Flow Stommater Flow To Wetlands
Into Wetlands
Flow To Next Wetlands Area
Enhanced 404 Wetlands Area
#2 SPECIFICATIONS SHEET FOR ON-SITE WETLANDS MITIGATION
WITHIN THE HESTRON TRACTS
Morehead City West Area - Carteret County - North Carolina
Inlet Flow Pipe
----------- --------------
Controlled Water Level
Outlet Flow Pipe
Storrmnrater Detention Pond ----I
Receiving Pre & Post Wetland Treated Storrnwater
#3 SPECIFICATIONS SHEET FOR ON-SITE WETLANDS MITIGATION
WITHIN THE HESTRON TRACTS
Morehead City West Area - Carteret County - North Carolina
Fluctuating Water Level
t ft
Reconstruct Existing Open Canal Ditch To
A Shallow 3:1 Swell Ditch
Figure 8. Specifications for
storm water management plan.
LAND MANAGEMENT
GROUP, INC
March 10, 1997
Hestron Corp.
Carteret County, NC

#4 SPECIFICATIONS SHEET FOR ON-SITE WETLANDS MITIGATION
WITHIN THE HESTRON TRACTS

Morehead City West Area - Carteret County - North Carolina
u

ll
Existing Surface Existing Wetlands Existing Surface
Excavate 2-3 ft - 2_3 ft Excavate
- - - - - - - -
Wetland Creation Through Excavation Of Upland Area and Establishment
Of Hydric Vegetation (Red Maple, Blackgum, Cat-Tail, Juncus Grass)
i
'Z
#5 SPECIFICATIONS SHEET FOR ON-SITE WETLANDS MITIGATION
n

u

n
n

WITHIN THE HESTRON TRACTS
Morehead City West Area - Carteret County - North Carolina
Curbed Barrier
Concrete Apron For Flow To Wetlands
Rip Rap Dissipator
Impervious Surfaces
Wetland Area
Wetland Restoration and Enhancement Through Stormwater Recharge. Stormwater To Be Pre & Post Treated By
Wetilands Before and After Stormwater Detention Ponds.
Figure 9. Specifications LAND MANAGEMENT Hestron Corp.
for storm water management GROUP INC
plan. Carteret County, NC
March 10, 1997
30
r.
r
R
V y y

. r - J ?.M„ j
rn

f,uh

U -?11vv T----

<<<• 1 I i' x ,? 4 )' 70
?C Uzi ;,?' ..'':?• ?x ?
,9
1, ,.I('n. '{r ?t. : 'r•'''} 0 ''M??T ?$!
/.A Ot

•
•
I
,?
'• I
'
--
V

y = ta?t:•?

N.C. HIGHWAY 24
Arrows represent general water flow direction to wetland and detention ponds for storm wate treatment.
Figure 10. On-site LAND MANAGEMENT Hestron Corp.
200 400 800 wetiand use in GROUP INC Carteret County, NC
SCALE 1" = 400' stormwater management.
March 10,19W-

s w M w M M w M M M = M m# m m = MM
31
xn,r•

iV t4Na?1 USirrj?
lis?
?Y

%
C T

/
r
r /

\ V _
''
III .

JJ ?

ls
` .y
I ti
f \
;
-
r
•
II
?,
v? I
' l
P,
r ?? jt,
'?
\`
?
I
I `
?
I
`
'
I
? +l
?? eM ?`
ti
? ?
1 V+ L l+?
r
ib) 16) fi
` V
r
A• '?.rr` r
t
L
art

% N.C. HIGHWAY 24

TOPOGRAPHIC CONTOUR WITH ELEVATION IN FEET (By Stroud Englnarlnq Co)
001111111114 Ana wpTLAND AREAS AS DELINEATED IN THE FIELD
Figure Topo map LAND MANAGEMENT Hestron Corp.
200 400 800 F
tron Site. GROUP
INC Carteret County
NC
SCALE 1 400' ,
,
March 10, 1997

32
NCSR ii53 Laura K"°r
N
fro ?,? ti""''
I
I
I ?
4 I
? I t
it w t.7tiSNng
?
A9. DfthiK
1 O ? ar

t l l 1 l

?.JJ

(zT s acres or Preaervea .
Pjne/ Wd.d vueaaeds I ! I
2e yrs o[cy
?
?
4 i I

? I I I,

I ? •i i
i 1 I 1
l 1 I,

7
300 600 1200
SCALE 1" = 600'
Figure 12. Hydrological
restoration plan for the
Laurel Road restoration area.
LAND MANAGEMENT
GROUP, INC
March 10, 1997
Hestron Corp.
Carteret County, NC

33
Surface elevation varies 10.0'- 10.75'
---------- --------------------
2.5-3.5' I Water table at 9.5-10.5' f
after plugging of ditches.
Ditch plugs of clean, clayey to
fine-loamy fill materials.
Figure 13. Cross sectional
sketch of a typical ditch plug
in the restoration area.
LAND MANAGEMENT
GROUP, INC
March 10, 1997
Hestron Corp.
Carteret County, NC

U
M CD Z
O
U?
C )
C
m
n ? N c°c w V
m N ? ?
ro U
? ? D a ° to
'6 °p CO
N _
O
ti ro 4 0 0
W
ro a p?m
W Z
? p Cp N b
U m ro Q aw c
F
? ? ? ?p mgr ? T
^{pat m ? ? ? ? W:
co i m O J
N m N
a " V
jr-
3 s _p 3m
I w
C C
P;: 7
i% rn
kilt,
N N
t
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
35

Restoration -oc
boundary
LEGEND
mmmlw?
X Well/sample plot location
Current ditch location
Figure 15. Monitoring wells/ LAND MANAGEMENT
sample plots in the Laurel GROUP, INC
Road Site restoration area. March 10, 1997
iiiii
300 600 1200
SCALE 1" = 600'
Hestron Corp.
Carteret County, NC
36
Table 1. Dominant vegetation of the Hestron Site. Dominance was determined using
methods from 1987 Corps Delineation Manual (1987).
Vegetation Plot 1 Plot 2 Plot 3
Stratum
Oversto N/A N/A N/A
Shrub/sapling flex glabra flex glabra N/A
Ilex coreacea flex coreacea
L onea lucida Rhus copallina
Herbaceous N/A Osmunda Lyonea lucida
cinamonea Pteridium
Smilax laurifolia aquilinum
flex coreacea
Woody vines Smilax laurifolia Smilax rotundifolia N/A
Smilax rotundifolia

37

Table 2. Soil characteristics measured at three points at the Hestron Site.
(a)
Depth inches Horizon Color Texture
0-22 01 Black Sappric muck
22-36 Bh very dark gray-brown Loam sand
36-45 C1 ve dark gray-brown Loam sand
Remarks: Murville/Pamlico Series.
(b)
FDepth (inches) Horizon--i Color. Texture
0-26 O Black Sap ric muck
26-30 E dark gray Sand/loam sand
30-45 B very dark gray brown Loam sand
Remarks: Murville/Pamlico series. Located in depression.

Depth (inches) Horizon Color Texture
0-3 01 Black Sap ric muck
3-10 A Loamy sand/ 10%
organic matter
10-25 E light gray Sand
24-45 Bhir S odic horizon
Remarks: Leon series.
38
Table 3. Dominant vegetation of the Laurel Road Site. Dominance determined using
methods from 1987 Corps Delineation Manual (1987).
Ve etation Stratum Restoration Area Preservation Area
Overstory N/A Pinus taeda
Liquidambar st raciflua
Shrub/sapling N/A Pinus taeda
Liquidambar styraciflua
Acer rubrum
Herbaceous Triticum aestivum Woodwardia aerolata
Wood vines N/A Smilax rotunifolia

1

39
Table 4. Soil characteristics of the Laurel Road Site.
(a) Restoration Area
Depth (inches) Horizon Color Texture
0-17 A Very dark gray Sand loam
17-30 Bt g1 Dark gray Sand clay loam
30-45 Btg2 Dark gray Sandy clay loam
/Clay loam
Remarks: Deloss Series. Located in cultivated field.
(b) Preservation Area
Depth (inches) Horizon Color Texture
0-13 A Very dark gray brown Sand loam
13-20 Bt g1 Gray Sand clay loam
20-45 Btg2 Light gray Clay loam/Sandy
clay loam
Remarks: Deloss Series.

40
Table 5. Mitigation summary of Hestron Corp. compensatory mitigation plan.
Location Mitigation Type Ratio Area (acres)
Hestron Site Restoration 1:1 2.41
Hestron Site Creation 1:1 1.48
Hestron Site Enhancement 1:1 9.61
Hestron Site Preservation 1:1 0.23
Laurel Road Site Restoration 5:1 23.6
Laurel Road Site Preservation 10:1 27.5
TOTAL 3.08:1 64.83

F1,

USDA-Natural Resources Conservation Service
P.O. Box 125
Beaufort, N.C. 28516
[phone] ..
Is. Gilda Pesta
82 Hardesty Cemetery Rd.
ewport, N.C. 28570
have completed a highly erodible land and wetland
etermiration for the farm areas delineated on the ASCS map.
ach field has a symbol on it which represents its
lassification. The following symbol applies to tYiis farm:
PC-Prior Converted wetlands--can be cropped and
are not affected by the wetland conservation
provisions as long as the field is not abandoned
(not cropped for 5 successive years)--a wet depression
or small portion of the entire field containing a
hydric soil will result in placing a PC on that field.
Normal maintenance of existing open ditches and adding
additional drainage within PC-Prior Converted wetland fields
is allowable under the FSA regulations provided that no
additional wetland, FW or FWP is converted.
Enclosed is a photocopy of the map for this area and
form SCS-CPA-026.
If Y can be of further assistance, please contact me.
Sincerely,
;Harry S. Tyson, V
District Conservationist

WHErATLY 14HE TL'r HOEL
PAGE VD1
Z
I?i12 " 1595 15: d7 91972S5252 +niHE.=TL'Y NOEL F
;
•
1
?
_
:
'C
O.A. SCS-CPA-028
vic
1 Conservation Se I. Marne and Aed.-ass of ?erson 2. Date of Rewest

I r
e (.June at;
Gilda Pesta
11-30-95
282 Hardesty Cemeter
Rd
y
.
HIGHLY
EROOIBLE LAND AND WE7LAND
Nevpc: t , N. C. 2S570 3. County
CONSERVATION DETERMINA71ON Carteret
Name of USDA Agency or Person Requesting Determination. ' S. Farm, . and Tract No.
.Q. ..
SECTION 1 • MONLY EROMI.E. LAND
I FIELD NO.(s) TOTAL ACRES .
Is scd survey now availebte for mafti a highly erodible land determination? Yes •r No Y
'
Are there highly erodible soil map units on his farm? Yes []
' List rnghly erodible Was that. according to ASCS records. were used to produca an agricjhural commodity In any
crop year during 1981.1985.
List :iighly erodible fields that have been or will be converted for the production of agriculviral commodities and
.
according to ASCS records. were not used for thin purpose in any • crop year during M.1-1965; and were not
' enrolled in a USOA sat-aside or diversion pn:gFa n.
This Hi My Erodibla Land determination was comoleted in the: Cftice Z] Reid ? ;,•• ,,," ?-"= _ y
SECTION 11 - WETLAND
' 1. Are there hvdnc soils on this farm? Yes] No FIELD FiO.(s1 TOTAL ACRES

L Wetlands (W). including abandoned wetlands, or Farmed Wettards (FW) or Farmed Wedands Pastur8 (FWP).
Wetlands may be lrmed under natural conriif4ris. Fainted Wetlands and Farmed Wetlands Pasture may be
' farmed anC maintained in the same manner as I*y were price to Cacemoer 23, 1985, as Fong as they era not
aoari& sed.
Prier Converted Cropland (PC). Wetlands that were converted prior to December 23, 1935. The use, managerneat.
drainage, and alteration of prior converted cropland (PC) are not subject to the wetland conservation previsicns unless
' the area ravens to wetland as a result of abandonment. `_-? ?3•
1. Artificial Wetlands (AM. Artilcial wetlands includes irrigation-induced wetlands. These wetlands are not subject
to the wetland conservation previsions.
' S. Mirrmal Effect Wetlands (MW). These wedanda are to be farmed according :o the minimal-eMett agreement signed
at tie time the minimal-effect determination was mama,
6. Mitigation Wetlands (MIW). Wetlands on which a person Is actively mt0gsting a frequerdy cropped area or a wetland
converted between December 23. 1985 and November 28, 1990.
' 1. Restoration with Violation (RVW-year). A restored wetland that was in violadon as a result of aorivarsien after
November 28. 1990, or the planting of an agricultural commodity or forage crop.
8. Restoraton without Violation (RSW). A restored wedand convened between Gecamoer 23, 1985 and
N
,
ovemmoer 28. 1990, on which an agricultural commodity has hat beer planted.
9. Replacement Wetlands (RPM. Wetlands which are converted for purposes orier than :0 increase production.
where the wedand values are being repiaced at a second site.
0. Good Faits Wetlands (GFW+year). Wetlands an which ASCS has detartr..ned a violation, to be In good falth and the
t wetland has baan restored.
1. Converted Wetlands (CM. Wetlands converted after December 23, 1985 and prior to November 28, 1990. In any
year that an agricultural commodity Is planted on these Converted Wetlands. you will be ineligible for USDA benefits.
L Convened Weiland (CW+year). Wettar,ds convened after November 28.1990. You will be ineligible for USOA
program benefits undl this wedand is reafored.
3 . Converted Wetland Non-Agricullwal use (CWNA). Wetlands that are converted for tress, fish production. shrubs.
cranberries. vineyards or building and road cormetruedon.
' 8 . Converted Wetland Technkid Error (CWTE). Wetlands that were converted as a result c! incorrect determination
by SCS.
3. The planned alteration measures on wedarsda in F.elds are considered maintenance and are in compliance
with FSA.
11, The planned areration measures on wetlands In Reds are not considered to be mafnterttmrroe and if
installed win cause the aree to become a Conversed Wetland (CW). See item 22 for information on CWyear.
¦
f. The wetland determination was completed in the oytoe "l field C1 and was delivered-M. ' mailed to the version on 1 ?- 17 -v S
Determination made for cropland fields only--Does not include woryds.
I rertrfv riot the shave def-i-dov it rwrerr dnd adeenrrre jar ate in dereneining 30. Signature of SCS District Conservat(orust 31. Oate
rririhilirv frtr (:Si)A praxrd,n henefJrt. awd rAar werland hy&Woxy, hysinr joili. and
>rvdr„p)tYnr veteradon awder norwwl cirtwnutanerJ emsr oN all areas oarlined as
W,idxd L =J 'fWairf -W k4
Wwanoe end PrWrrrrrs aI th+ SeJr Conewvadon So -ollw avewebte wxww reQers! to rod, m9r.A& r, ockoW ev, ape, Of
90
l

:.r
. L

:r

?:??:.???'?\ ?,'? 3f v?•r??•Ss_•;?7+!'??'s?a"?"??{"?w`i?'i? ,L.? Q`?•'•;w?s?,?1?' "
'•5??.;K-?"a'»r-`.."` ??? to y" ?,?• : ? ? , , •J, ?...

+
1 ..r .-R•'•rs .r ::tit ?a.•.?: `?!,? ?+',y.!'-,:I»` ?'?:1e•`M-:T7 ?, :? ?'?.:,? ? "'r 1
4?7 .?.:..?' : 1? +?i a- ' ? 1'.° ? ?• ?..,''y. ? ...: ? L "yam'': • ??''? -. -'' 1
+..? ? •Q ? • C i ? • ? ?•?..?',• ?. ?X?.u?•tsst..r?ii.?11t.:??a•;
rig
• '?? .. .tom '... •?..i ?Y; 5:;? i ` i? ????• •? ;?":ar. t'.'S?i ? ? ?
T
/1t Y„fuLf y b__4L_?Sn' ?.J?_? ?• J• i• `?•? •'?!••i
, 4 `' al. i

FRI
I .,
I
P R O P E R T/ E S
9199
Fti?
May 16, 1997 `<0
Mr. John R. Dorney
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health & Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Dear John:
Thank you for taking some time to meet with Larry Baldwin, Paul Farley, Col. McNeil, Fred
Morton, Linda Lewis and me in Wilmington on May 9, 1997 regarding the proposed
development of the Hestron tract in Morehead City, North Carolina. I hope you will agree that
this was a productive meeting where we reached a mutual understanding on all major issues.
Although I recognize that the general layout of the site plan we discussed is not the perfect plan
in your personal opinion, you understand the constraints of the market and our willingness to
compromise to reach a wetlands plan that is a win/win for both parties. Larry Baldwin and Paul
Farley of Land Management Group will be submitting a revised plan for your review within the
next several days. This plan will reflect the changes discussed in our meeting. Specifically, we
will be creating a larger contiguous wetlands area in the southwest portion of the property, as
well as the central area adjacent to Wal-Mart's existing storm water detention pond. Our
buildings will be pushed away from Highway 24 and toward Highway 70. Providing that this
revised plan contains at least 13 acres of on-site wetlands and meets with your approval, we can
reasonably expect to have a 401 Certification within 2-4 weeks of submittal to you. I recognize
that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers must then review the plan in order to grant a 404
Certificate.
I believe that this plan represents a good compromise for both the State and the developer. As
you know, in addition to the 13 acres of on-site wetlands, we are also providing approximately
50 acres of off-site mitigation. For your information, most commercial developments cover
approximately 67% of the land in impervious area. This site is anticipated only to include
approximately 40% impervious area.
For these reasons, we feel strongly that our final site plan will be one which achieves a fair
balance between wetlands issues and market-driven commercial development.
200 Providence Road • Suite 106 • Charlotte, North Carolina 28207 • 704/333-8484 • Fax: [phone]
COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE SERVICES
J

Letter to John Dorney
May 14, 1997
Page 2
Thank you again for agreeing to meet with us. I look forward to your prompt review of our final
plan. If I can answer any questions for you about this project, please do not hesitate to call.
Very truly yours,
/?W?
E. Blanton Hamilton, Jr.
Partner
EBH:aak
cc: Charles Hester
Col. Monroe McNeil
Rob Wheatley
Fred Morton
Larry Baldwin
Paul Farley
ri
T"nd a&4"W""Int 5wfol Ac.
At 6/)ace fox 2522
Vd6mytm, JYowA %aedma 28402
9ed 9Y0-452-000
9?0&d Y .4(&d
Z., ,sir. A41..
1. ` J.
May 12, 1997
Mr. John Domey
Division of Water Quality
NC Dept. of Environment, Health, and
Natural Resources
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
Re: Meeting on May 9, 1997
Dear John:
gai& a
9 0. g,.A
3805 V**4e&W&,Wt*nM
Vdlmd,W&n, ,/b`8 28403
lkl'c
ti??2gl?k 99J
I am writing to summarize the meeting last Friday between yourself and Larry Baldwin,
Paul Farley, Monroe McNeil, Blanton Hamilton, Fred Morton, and Linda Lewis concerning the
Hestron property. I also want to formalize the changes that you requested for the application.
Concerning the on-site mitigation effort, Hestron Corp. agreed that a planting plan would
be provided. Juncus effusus, Typha latifolia, and Sarurus cenurus will be planted throughout the
creation, restoration and enhancement areas with Nyssa sylvatica and Acer rubrum planted at
approximately 8' intervals along the wetland edges. Species planted are flexible and subject to
your approval. As mentioned in my letter to Mickey Sugg (dated April 8, 1997), a monitoring well
and vegetation sample plot will be located in the restoration area and creation area of the
Hestron Tract, as well as in the enhancement area of the Bob-a-Lou tract. All areas will be
monitored for five years.
The off-site mitigation changes you proposed will also be implemented. All ditches will be
filled with suitable fill material (rather than plugged). A monitoring well will be established in the
preservation area for use as a reference site. Hydrological success criteria will be the
maintenance of wetland hydrology for 12.5% of the growing season during normal precipitation
conditions or the maintenance of a hydroperiod as long as that of the reference site.
A final stormwater plan will be submitted with stormwater ponds moved to utilize the
wetlands as post rather than pre-treatment areas.
?W
A final site plan will be sent to your office within a week. This site plan will not
significantly change the amount of wetland area impacted but will be redrawn to better satisfy the
client's needs and to allow for a more efficient stormwater plan.
On behalf of Land Management Group and Hestron Corp., I would like to thank you and
Linda for meeting with us and providing your inputs. We would appreciate your sending us 401
water quality certification approval as soon as possible. If you have questions in the meantime,
please contact Larry Baldwin or myself.
Sincerely,
V
Paul M. Farley
Wetland Scientist
cc: Mr. Mickey Sugg
Ms. Linda Lewis
Mr. Charles Hester
Col. Monroe McNeil
Mr. Blanton Hamilton
Mr. Fred Morton
Mr. Rob Wheatly
LIA
i
r?
n

1L\?

1 ?
i
A J

I
? V
I +
?j
1 3
1 1

i
I j=
?. ? ? •? Imo..
e? s/
? i s -I I i ? W i ? i !
i ;
V{ i 1
w 1 ? 1 ! `J I j 1 i I ,

l
9
i
f
F'
ly-j
I
I

f
1
i C' ..
f
?v

1WWW
t t
Coy,,, ? ???? 1
TOTAL ACREAGES:
Total Acres = 78.17 acs
Total Uplands = 47.32 acs
Total 404 Wetlands = 30.85 acs
Total Wetlands Fill = 21.01 acs
Total Wetlands Preserved = 0.23 acs
Total Wetlands Restored = 2.41 acs
Total Wetlands Created = 1.48 acs
Total Wetlands Enhanced = 9.61 acs
WETLANDS MITIGATION:
On-Site Preservation 5:1 = 0.05 acs
On-Site Restoration 1:1 = 2.41 acs
On-Site Creation 1.5:1 = 0.99 acs
On-Site Enhancement 2:1 = 4.81 acs
Total On-Site Mitigation = 8.26 acs
[Balance of fill/impacted wetlands
(21.01 - 8.26 =) 12.75 acs will be
mitigated off-site at 1.88 : 1 to 2: 1 ratio.]
0.23
HESTRON TRACT: -?
Total acres = 62.37 acs
Upland acres = 37.07 acs
Wetland acres = 25.30 acs
Fill Wetlands = 19.01 acs
Preserved Wetlands = 0.23 acs
Restored Wetlands = 2.41 acs
Created Wetlands = 1.48 acs
Enhanced Wetlands = 6.06 acs
0.98
SCALE: 1 Inch = 400 Feet
DECEMBER - 1996
(Revised 1/97)
PLAN -- G
/
/
LDe,,,.,joPed

;0.41 acs
0.63 a
LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP, INC.
VJ0
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN, 404 WETLAND FILL AREAS, AND
l PRESERVATION AREAS FOR FINAL STORMWATER TREATMENT r
JA WITHIN THE HESTRON TRACTS
l 7
• ? Morehead City West Area -Carteret County -North Carolina
ri
1
1
Existing Ditch
on ---
Existing
5 acs x. Shopping
a, Center
-o
d
0.51 10
acs v
co
d
0.68 acs
U_ghway 70
Existing
McDonalds

?. ?.
F- .1
B

16 acs
Existing
Shopping
Center
?1 4

7 ?`' " BOB-A-LOU TRACT:
Total acres = 15.80 acs
Existing Upland acres = 10.25 acs
Sewer Wetland acres = 5.55 acs
Plant 8 Fill Wetlands = 2.00 acs
Drainfields Enhanced Wetlands = 3.55 acs

.? wa 24
N.C. Hlgh Y Building Locations,
Upland Areas 47.32 acres. L? 9
Enhanced Wetlands 9.61 acres. Stormwater directed to these areas.
404 Welland Preservation Areas 0.23 acres. These wetland areas to preserved for final stormwater lreatement.
Created Wetland Areas 1.48 acres. Upland areas to be converted to 404 wetland status.
0 Restored Wetland Areas 2.41 acres. Former wetland areas to be converted to 404 wetland status.
0 404 Wetland Impact / Fill Areas 21.01 acres. These wetlands to be altered for building and parking site improvements.

? .r
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
James EL Hunt, Jr., Govemor
Jonathan B. Howesy Secretary
Steven J. Levitasy Deputy Secretary
A&41
1:3 F= " NJ F=?,
Division of Water Quality
Environmental Sciences Branch
4401 Reedy Creek Load
Raleigh, N.C. 27607
FAX:[phone]
FAX TO: V\&, ` ='701'1 FAX NUMBER:
FROM:.' r v?
PHONE:
NO. OF PAGES INCLUDING THIS SHEET: Lk I

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
C) FE [*NJ FI
April 15, 1997
Mr. Paul Farley
Land Management Group
P.O. Box 2522
Wilmington, NC 28402
Dear Mr. Farley:
Re: DWQ review of stormwater and mitigation plan
Hestron Project
DWQ #960894
COE #199603796
DWQ has completed its review of the mitigation plan dated 13 March 1997. Before
we can approve this plan, the following concerns must be addressed. Until these plans are
received, this application is incomplete and processing will not continue.
I. Mitigation
On-site: Creation and enhancement of small pockets of wetlands at the periphery
of the property is not acceptable due to the small fragmented size of these sites. The
restored, created and enhanced wetlands on-site must be designed to be in several large
contiguous units. Also water budgets should be provided for these areas to ensure that
jurisdictional areas will result. A planting plan will be needed for these areas.
Attached is a copy of DWQ mitigation protocol. Please be certain that all information
needs as described in the document are addressed. Reference wetlands for this effort
need to be located and monitored. Monitoring wells will need to be located in the
enhanced wetland area. Monitoring sites will be needed in each of the restored,
created or enhanced sites. Monitoring will need to be done for five years.
Off-site: Ditches should be filled rather than plugged to ensure that vertical
drainage of the site does not occur. Reference wetlands for this effort will need to be
located and monitored. A detailed schedule will be needed. Monitoring will need to
be done for five years.
II. Stormwater
No stormwater plan has been received for this site by DWQ. This plan must be
received before the 401 Certification can be issued. It is unclear whether the wetlands
planned to be retained on-site are of adequate size to assimilate the planned
stormwater. It is also unclear whether the planned design (Figure 8) will protect the
uses of the wetland. Our earlier approval of this area as stormwater assimilation was
Division of Water Quality - Environmental Sciences Branch
Environmental Sciences Branch, 4401 Reedy Creek Rd., Raleigh, NC 27607 Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Aff irmative Action Employer • 50% recycled/10% post consumer paper
Page 2
DWQ Project #960894
April 15, 1997
predicted on a larger amount of wetlands remaining on-site and for a detention pond -
wetland system. Please supply documentation with appropriate water budgets and
information to demonstrate that these remaining wetlands with the present design can
safely assimilate the stormwater.
Please call me at 919-733-1786 if you have any questions. Until these items are
adequately addressed, this project will remain on hold as incomplete.
Sincerely,
Dy
_ yI
cc: Mickey Suggs; Wilmington Corps of Engineers
Jim Gregson; DWQ Wilmington Regional Office
Linda Lewis; DWQ Wilmington Regional Office
Bradley Bennett; DWQ
Central Files

Y.
Y.y g: 57l
April 8, 1997
y?? $4ocq?, Ac.
Mr. Mickey Sugg
Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Branch
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
Re: April 8, 1997 meeting
concerning Hestron Permit
Dear Mickey:
At 0)pw Vow 2522
ftiiain$tan, ? WA %w"a 2840.2
del 910-452-000f
©"'- 0

guile Y4
Aa.,/eC)f.,96A
8805
Wming&n, M 28408
01%2Tgl CJ99?
I am writing as a follow up to our meeting which took place this morning at your office. This letter will'
summarize our conversations and your requests to complete the mitigation plan. I will attempt to list the
topics of discussion in the order that they occurred.
1. Laurel Road Mitigation
a. We agreed that maintaining the water table at or above 12" from the soil surface for 5% of the
growing season would be a more appropriate success criteria than the previously stated 12.5% of the
growing season. I agreed to make such a change in an addendum letter to you.
b. You pointed out that the mitigation checklist calls for a much higher number of trees to be
planted in the restoration area than originally proposed. We agreed that 600 trees would be planted per
acre. We agreed on a 70% survival goal including volunteer species. However, we agreed that Pinus
taeda and Uquidambar styraciflua seedlings which exceeded 10% (each) of the trees present would not
count towards the survival goals. We also agreed that a systematic planting scheme (where the wetter
species would be planted in wetter locations) would be appropriate.
c. You stated that it would be permissible to use the soil which currently forms a berm in
the preservation area for use in plugging the on-site ditches.
2. Laurel Road Monitoring Plan
A. You stated that a five year monitoring plan would be required rather than a three year
monitoring plan.
b. We agreed to move the well and vegetation sample plot locations.

c. We agreed to change the wording on page 15 from "reasonably normal precipitation" to "normal
precipitation conditions".
3. Deed Restrictions
You provided me with a draft copy of an acceptable deed restriction to insure wetland preservation.
I agreed to forward the copy to the applicant's attorney for his suggestions.
4. Hestron Site Mitigation
a. I agreed to provide a specific planting and monitoring scheme for the on-site mitigation areas.
We agreed that the success criteria would be modeled off those criteria at the Laurel Road Site.
b. We agreed that one monitoring well and vegetation sample plot would be placed in each of the
restoration area, the creation area of the Hestron Tract and in the enhancement area of the Bob-a-Lou
Tract.
c. We agreed that a suitable topsoil or some type of organic material should be applied in the
creation areas in order to provide a suitable substrate for vegetation establishment.
d. I agreed to insure that the proposed storm water pond in the northwest corner of the Hestron
Tract is not considered a part of the adjacent creation area. I have since contacted Mr. Baldwin by
telephone and he assured me that this was not the case.
5. Timetable
Our final discussion centered around a timetable for permit issuance. You stated that process
could begin as soon as the regulatory groups were satisfied that the conditions were met. Once these
conditions were met, you would send a letter of conditions to the applicant for his approval. After that has
been signed and returned, you will proceed with permit issuance. I told you that I would send an addendum
letter to you once I have received and addressed the final comments of the N.C. Division of Water Quality.
On behalf of Land Management Group, I would like to thank you for meeting with me this morning
and providing your input. I will send you the final corrections described above as soon as we can address
the comments of the Division of Water Quality. If you have questions in the meantime, please do not
hesitate to contact Larry Baldwin or myself.
Sincerei
Paul M. Farley
Wetland Scientist
cc: LarryBaldwin
Mr. Charles Hester
Mr. Blanton Hamilton
Col. Monroe McNeil
Fred Morton
r. John Dorney
Mr. Rob Wheatly
Adwl---
91o&t 2 d& d
9
DATE:
5wto' AC.
(.977/13(/t nM6fih C464a&a/ILlfd
9W df? Jgox ,25,21 R cFjvFG?
All , 1
*1d6m , ?1'oeA %w&w 1s4o.2
ly
Jd 9Yo-451-0009 ?M,?RON y/
gal& 94
T..y A.,,A C11.2 916h
3805 *16*4t4W& .4mme
' dminy&n, M 28403
January 21, 1997
SUBJECT: Revised wetland mitigation and impact acreages for the Hestron Tracts
(78.17 acres) to comply with U.S. Army Corps and NCDEH&NR-DEM
requests. Devlepment tracts located between NC Hwy 24 & US Hwy
70, and mitigation tract located on the south side of Laural Road,
Morehead City area, Carteret County, North Carolina.
TO: Mr. Mickey Suggs and Mr. John Dorney
Regulatory Branch NCDEH&NR-DEM Water Quality
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 4401 Reedy Creek Branch
P.O. Box 1890 Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890 [phone]
[phone] [WQC # 960894]
[Action ID # 199603796]
Please find the enclosed development plan (Plan "G") for the Hestron Tracts (78.17
acres) as it pertains to the areas of 404 wetlands to be impacted, minimization of wetland
impacts, and on-site mitigation. In addition, most of the on-site mitigation wetland areas
will be utilized in conjunction with the treatment of pre/post stormwater drainage waters.
This is the final result of several revised development plans in order to minimize 404
wetland impacts, generate on-site mitigation acreage, and also comply with the minimum
area needs for a major shopping center developement. We feel these on-site measures,
coupled with off-site mitigation for the balance of impacted 404 wetlands, should meet the
requests of all parties concerned.
The following is a summary of these revisions you requested during our 12/18/96 review
of the tracts, as compared to the plan initially proposed.
REVISED MITIGATION PLAN 1/21/97 INITIAL MITIGATION PLAN 6/24/96
1----Wetland impacts will be reduced to 21.01 1-Wetland impacts were to be 27.4 acres.
acres.
2---13.73 wetland acres will remain. 2---3.2 wetland acres were to remain.
-Im
pleuodoW plnea 'SIN
JaIsaH selaeuO -JVY
AlleaLM apnelO jIN :oo
MZ # SO`ddOHV `01701.# SSION
Aalaed Ined PUB OS/SSdO `u!Mplee ' AJ
uolleolidde I!wjed slu} o} uogual}e }dwoid not jol nog( Nueyl
-Aienjgad ul Neem }sold au} ueld uolle61}lw leu!l aul uL!M paaooid ll!M am sjuewwoo aau:pnj
;ou aneu em dl 9661. - Isn6ny souls sseooid ul uaaq seq uolleo11dde slut se `alglssod
se uoos se Wipwiad pue ueid uolle6l;lw leUld eu; o} peeooid o} paau 9M •suol;eoupeds
inoA o} suogeoldlpow }oedwl/uol}e6l}lw pue `96e9.aoe `dew pesoloue ell} Malnaa aseald
•ssaoons uo!;eB!;!w amsu! •ssaoons uo!;e6!;!w aansui
o; pejo;!uow pus pajaMe eq !i!nn A6o!ojpdH-L o; pajo;luow pus paja:He aq li!nn ABo!ojPAH-L
•s;old asa14;
jo 9n4e;uesaidaj aq ;ou p!nn smads pa;ueid
eou!s pepeau aq ;ou plno14s s;old eouajajaj
Q:ps jjp moons uo!;eB!;!w ao;!uow o; pasn
•peuueld ejem sold eouejejej aps-uo pus aq i!!nn s;oid eouejejej a;!s-up •smads Quid
a;ls--.40 's;old eouejejej ay; ;o an!}e;ussaidaa pus `=BjeemS `)ieo jejaM `a!deyy papedxe
eq o; sa!oads Quid pue `mB;aamS `Nao ja;eM 04101 uo!;!ppe u! Seale uo!}eJo;saJ ay; o;
`eldeyy ul p0;ueid aq o; ejann seaie uoisjo;sai peonpoi;u! aq ll!m sa!oads poonnpje14 j9144o pus
ay; `ease u0!;e6!;lw a;!s-.}o ay; u!14114N-9 snoient) `ease uo!;eMMU.1 alp-go ay; u!y;jAA-q
'R3H0d NNVHaaON gad ;u9wa3us4u9 J01 L : Z
pus uo!;ego;sea Jo; : L Senn pail U048Bl;!w : Z o; 6 : 99"L aq ll!M psi; uo!;eBamu
pN lemel ay; ui4:pm o!;e.1 uo!;eB!;!w ails-};O--g pN !eine-i ay; uiy;!nn ogej uo!;eB!;!w 9:s-. -g
•uogeogdde ;!weed -uo!;eogdde ;!uuad
M, ay; ul pepniou! ;ou ejann siaoied ;no----ti Vp{, ay; ul papn!oui aie slawad ;no 11V----ti
•sia;ennwio;s;o;uaw;eaj;;sod V aid •sje;ennwjo;s;o;uew;esi;;sod
jol pus uo!;e6!14w a;!s-uo se pam 4n aq p!nonn '8 aid jol pus uo!;eBi4!w ap -uo jol pez!i!;n eq
Se0ae U04BAJOSUOD pue!;aM 01!s-uo 0141--£ ll!M se91e uo!;eiuasuoo puei;aM 91!s-uo ayl--£
96/17Z/9 Nbld NOUVEMIM WIN L61L NV-ld NOIlbJIliW 03SIAMI
(panuquoo)
suolslASH uoge6l}lw uoJ}saH
Z abed

*40k,
TOTAL ACREAGES:
Total Acres = 78.17 acs
Total Uplands = 47.32 acs
Total 404 Wetlands = 30.85 acs
Total Wetlands Fill = 21.01 acs
Total Wetlands Preserved = 0.23 acs
Total Wetlands Restored = 2.41 acs
Total Wetlands Created = 1.48 acs
Total Wetlands Enhanced = 9.61 acs
WETLANDS MITIGATION:
On-Site Preservation 5:1 = 0.05 acs
On-Site Restoration 1:1 = 2.41 acs
On-Site Creation 1.5:1 = 0.99 acs
On-Site Enhancement 2:1 = 4.81 acs
-------------------------------------------
Total On-Site Mitigation = 8.26 acs
[Balance of fill/impacted wetlands
(21.01- 8.26 =) 12.75 acs will be
mitigated off-site at 1.88 :1 to 2 :1 ratio.]
0.23
HESTRON TRACT:
Total acres = 62.37 acs
Upland acres = 37.07 acs
Wetland acres = 25.30 acs
Fill Wetlands = 19.01 acs
Preserved Wetlands = 0.23 acs
Restored Wetlands = 2.41 acs
Created Wetlands = 1.48 acs
Enhanced Wetlands = 6.06 acs
0.98,
SCALE: 1 Inch = 400 Feet
DECEMBER - 1996
(Revised 1197) 0.23 ac
PLAN -- G /
A
/
DevetoPed
out
I Parcel
• r,

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN, 404 WETLAND FILL AREAS, AND
PRESERVATION AREAS FOR FINAL STORMWATER TREATMENT
} WITHIN THE HESTRON TRACTS
Morehead City West Area - Carteret County - North Carolina
I 0tlt
Pagel
'jigh\
Existing Ditch
1.82 acs
Existing
McDonalcls
A.
'.t_ .. '
F. B
;0.41 acs
LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP, INC.
!.25 acs a
2? 13
w„
0.51
acs
d
0.68 acs
16 acs
Existing
Shopping
Center
Existing
Shopping
Center
'e'4

NpI
U

Af-
Existing
Sewer
Plant &
Drainflelds
BOB-A-LOU TRACT:
Total acres = 15.80 acs
Upland acres = 10.25 acs
Wetland acres = 5.55 acs
Fill Wetlands = 2.00 acs
Enhanced Wetlands = 3.55 acs
,:......- .C. RI9hway 24
N.C
0 Upland Areas 47.32 acres. Building Locations.
Enhanced Wetlands 9.61 acres. Stormwater directed to these areas.
404 Wetland Preservation Areas 0.23 acres. These wetland areas to preserved for final stormwater treatement.
?_-_--] Created Wetland Areas 1.48 acres. Upland areas to be converted to 404 wetland status.
© Restored Wetland Areas 2.41 acres. Former wetland areas to be converted to 404 wetland status.
404 Wetland Impact f Fill Areas 21.01 acres. These wetlands to be altered for building and parking site improvements.

lxl%2dt?Z?OAt t ) Ax 2522
f1Uk , ?Yocl/a %acdma 28402
9d' - 9YO-452-000Y
4 A
DEC 3 0196 .
December 18, 1996
., WETLANDS GROUP
UnAwR AIIAtITY SECTION1
Mr. Mickey Sugg, Corps of Engineers
Mr. Allen Davis, Corps of Engineers
Mr. John Domey, NC Division of Water Quality
Mr. Jim Gregson, NC Division of Water Quality
99W&,-4
9C/006 -91"
3805 V*0&tW c .4-M"
9VdM#&n' M WWJ
Re: Summary of meeting and discussion concerning the Hestron 404 individual permit
and mitigation project
Gentlemen:
We are writing to summarize the above meeting which was held this afternoon
concerning the above project. Those present at the meeting were Mickey Sugg and
Allen Davis of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, John Domey and Jim Gregson of the
N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Division of Water
Quality, and Larry Baldwin and Paul Farley of Land Management Group.
Representatives of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service were not present. The following
items were discussed and agreed upon.
1. Minimization. It was agreed that proposed wetland impacts at the proposed Hestron
Shopping center should be significantly reduced. The initial development plan, 3-4
acres were to be preserved as for final stormwater treatment. It was agreed that 10-15
acres of preserved wetlands would meet minimization requirements for a development
project of this size. In addition, the revised development plans will utilize the preserved
wetlands for final stormwater treatment. This minimization will assist in reducing
mitigation acreage_ Land Management Group will consult with the property owner and
proposed developer to revise development plans to meet the above minimization
objectives

It was also agreed that any wetland areas on undeveloped outparcels would be
incorporated under the current 404 permit application.
2. Mitigation. Both the restoration and enhancement areas were reviewed on site.
a: ratios: It was determined that mitigation ratios would be higher than the
proposed 1:1 ratios (i.e. one acre mitigated vs.impacted) and that the ratios could go as
high as 2:1. The Division of Water Quality stated that the 1:1 ratio would meet their
policy guidelines but is recommending higher ratios for this project.
b: restoration. It was agreed that restoration will occur in the prior
converted/altered agricultural land on the Laurel Road mitigation tract. Final mitigation
acreage will be determined after the development plan has been redesigned. It was
agreed that the tree species planted would be composed of more Quercus spp. and
other hardwood species and that the vegetative success goals would be more clearly
defined. It was also agree that steps would be taken to control volunteer species. If
necessary, the agricultural field would be regraded to assist in meeting hydrologic goals.
Larry Baldwin of Land Management Group stated that time was an important concern of
the property owner. He stated that the applicant would strive to have a new site plan
and mitigation revisions completed by late December or early January and asked for a
prompt review from the agencies in order to acquire permit issuance.
Both Hestron Co. and Land Management Group would like to thank each of you for
your attendance and cooperation at this afternoon's meeting. If you have further
questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact either or both of us.
Sincerely:
Paul M. Farley
Land Management Group, Inc.
kw r) F &0
Larry F. Baldwin
Land Management Group, Inc.
cc: Mr. Charles Hester
Mr. Rob Wheatly
Mr. Monroe McNeal
? \ a
(Dee
i?r? ? - ? 1Z rrz.
(A4?q 1
5 akf' w?e? A.47
AP d
f
1

IV y/
WHEATLY, WHEATLY, NOBLES & WEEKS, AA.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
410 Front Street
A O. Box 360
Beaufort, N. C. 28516-0360
CLAUD R. WHEATLY, JR.
CLAUD R. WHEATLY, III
JOHN E. NOBLES, JR.
STEVENSON L. WEEKS
J. CHRISTY MAROULES
STEPHEN M. VALENTINE
December 9, 1996
Mr. John R. Dorney
Water Quality Certification Program
Environmental Sciences Branch
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
Re: Hestron Corporation
Your File No.: WQC #960894
Carteret County
Dear Mr. Dorney:
"r -06/w
Dee 1 SO 119*
ftIR,QN44SNTq? SC/?N
0
[phone]
Fax [phone]
Please be advised that I represent Hestron Corporation with
regard to the development and sale of its property in Morehead
City. As you are aware, Hestron Corporation has been dealing with
your office for approximately two years attempting to work out
various problems so that it might sell its property.
I received a copy of a letter from you to Larry Baldwin of Land
Management setting forth a two week deadline for him to respond to
you. You further stated that if you did not hear from Mr. Baldwin
within two weeks, you would assume this project was being
abandoned.
Please be advised that it is not the intent of Hestron to
abandon this project. We have been working for approximately two
years now trying to accommodate all of the various regulatory
agencies and have even acquired a mitigation site.
Should, through some inadvertence, Land Management or Mr.
Baldwin be unable to get some information to you, please advise the
undersigned. I have instructed Mr. Baldwin to respond to you as
promptly as possible. I assume since you have placed a two week
limitation on his responses to you, you feel that time period is
certainly reasonable. I don't understand why we can't have a two
week turn around on all responses even from your office. Your
response was dated November 26, 1996 to documents that had been in
your office for several months.
r
` Mr. John R. Dorney
December 9, 1996
Page 2
Again, time is getting critical to us. If you would copy me on
any information that you need from Baldwin or from Hestron, I will
make sure that it is forthcoming.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Should you
have any questions, please advise.
Very truly yours,
C. R. Wheatly, !II
CRWIII/gg
CC: Larry Baldwin
Charles Hester
Col. M. E. McNeil
\hestecs2\dorney.1t1
4
9?a4a a&mwem4mt 5WMA' inc.
At 4fA Ax 2522
9Vdmkt#m, ?Y&A %iitd(,n c 28402
d'. 910-452-0001
920&d 2. A"d
?' !! ?te,?en ..uouiaon
December 2, 1996
Mr. John Domey
Division of Water Quality
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
Re: Hestron Project
WQC #960894
Carteret County
Dear John:
ttrt: 05 /92C
pftr
???RCNMENrqtSClENC,'S
A& O
9J t4 9uk
3805 ?' 4 leQvl?Ie Awns e
'wUmaptm, M M403
I am writing in response to your letter dated November 26, 1996 concerning the
above project. Thank you for your response and for the opportunity to respond to your
concerns.
Regarding alternative site locations, the applicant does not possess sufficient
uplands to complete the proposed project, nor was land available in the immediate
area. Therefore, the applicant saw no other practical location for the project and has
proposed to mitigate for the wetland impacts. You will recall that I sent you a copy of
the mitigation plan on September 4, 1996.
The prior project that you mentioned (3.85 acres) was to complete only one
store. The larger site plan has made a larger fill area necessary. This is the reason
that the proposed fill area has changed and that mitigation has been proposed. The
mitigation ratios proposed were based on the new 401 certification requirements.
In regards to using wetlands as stormwater management, the applicant would
like to utilize current wetlands for stormwater management. However, D.E.M. does not

currently allow wetlands to be used for such a purpose
I have enclosed a copy of the applicants' response to the Corps letter that you
have cited. In discussions with Larry Baldwin, neither of us is aware that an on-site
meeting has been scheduled. We would like to schedule such a meeting as soon as
possible. Also, we would like to obtain a copy of the data sheets that you used to
determine that the project would be detrimental to water storage and pollutant removal.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. If you have further questions,
please feel free to contact Larry or myself.
Sincerely:
Paul M. Farley
Wetland Scientist
cc: Mr. Charles Hester
Mr. Rob Wheatley
Mr. Mickey Sugg, C.O.E.
???G? ? ???2171Gf/fL? ey'9tC.
5?t 0f? 5? ,2s2,2
Wd mAn? , SoWA %6dma 2840,2
d' . 9YO-452-0001
9?0&4 Se .4"d
Z., g A".
09t?en.A.W.
`&ap J
November 18, 1996
Mr. Mickey Sugg
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Branch
P.O. Box 2522
Wilmington, NC 28402
Re: Hestron Permit Application
Action ID No. 199603796
Dear Mickey:
yai& o
.T..y A.'A ITJ/ 9'.k
JW5 Va: rAIaed!!e .Wvmwti
Thank you for your letter dated November 5, 1996. l believe that we addressed some
of your concerns in our letters dated 10/24/96 and 11/6196 but will address all concerns
listed (in order).
a. As I stated in my previous letters, there is no practical alternative site location
available to Hestron Corp (applicant) for the project. As I previously mentioned, the
applicant would certainly utilize any upland area that would be available for the
expansion project, however, the applicant neither owns sufficient upland areas for the
project nor is such land available. Therefore, the applicant believes that no practical
alternative location is suitable for the project. Thus the applicant has proposed to
mitigate and offset wetland losses.
b1 As also stated previously, the site plan was engineered to county zoning
specifications. The proposed area for parking was not simply designed for patron
convenience.
b2. The applicant agrees not to alter the approximately four acres of wetlands for

landscaping purposes. Reduction of approximately four acres will eliminate the need for
enhancement mitigation and reduce somewhat the need for restoration.
b3. The area proposed for future development will be impacted by future retail
development. The applicant is being open and honest by stating that these areas will
be valuable real estate in the future. The applicant also anticipates that these areas will
also be heavily impacted by the shopping center expansion. Therefore the applicant
proposes to currently mitigate for possible impacts.
b4. Regarding your suggestion that the current wetlands be used for stormwater
retention; the Department of Environmental Management will not allow the using of
wetlands for stormwater treatment in their sediment/erosion control plans. The
stormwater detention ponds have been designed to D.E.M. specifications.
c1. The applicant would be better able to address the concerns of lost functions to the
Hull swamp watershed if the functions lost were defined. The proposed impacted
wetlands are among the lowest value for water quality according to assessment
methodology defined by the North Carolina Department of Environmental Management.
The impacted wetlands are classified hydrogeomorphically as flats ecosystems which
are formed along interstream divides and have some functions that are entirely different
than stream (ditch in this case) side wetlands (which would be classified as low order
riverine ecosystems). The applicant believes that the functional integrity of Carteret
County wetlands would be better served with a large off site wetland restoration and
enhancement effort than with small isolated wetland bodies which would occur if on-site
mitigation were used. These concerns are also addressed in the my letter dated
November 6, 1996..
c2. As noted in the mitigation plan, the restoration area has been classified as prior
converted wetlands by the N.C.N.R.C.S. A copy of the letter is included.
c3. Concerning the reference site, the site is adjacent, and the area sampled was
considered a representative target area of a pine/pine hardwood flat by the applicants'
consultants who have combined over 30 years experience working in forested wetlands.
The site has been altered previously, but lacks interior ditching. The only factor
affecting hydrology should be reduced basal area, but that basal area should not alter
the greatly alter the hydrology of the system.
c4. In the restoration area, the ditches will be plugged with earthen berms four 4' long
by 4' deep. The applicant proposes to use fill material from the ditch spoil piles of the
enhancement area (as suggested in your next paragraph). The monitoring wells are of
the WL-40 series by Remote Data Systems and will be systematically placed as shown
in the mitigation plan. Regarding the field crown, the applicant is concerned about soil
damage with crown removal but is willing to disk and grade the restoration area to a
more level grade. Vegetation and hydrology goals are simple and outlined in the
mitigation plan. The applicants propose to restore hydrologic and vegetative conditions
similar to those of the reference stand. The restoration area would also meet

jurisdictional hydrology and vegetation criterion established by the 1987 Wetland
Delineation Manual. Volunteer species will be encouraged, as this is a part of natural
succession. The volunteer Liquidambar styracif/ua have been disked under as the
restoration is currently under winter wheat cultivation. The proposed planting species
were selected because of their dominance in the reference site. The applicant would
also note that these flats ecosystems are generally not very diverse in the coastal plain.
Disturbances such as fires and hurricanes generally do not allow these systems to
reach a "climax" state.
c5. The applicants do not feel that wetland hydrology has been greatly altered in the
enhancement area. The enhancement area lacks interior ditching which would reduce
the subsurface storage of water. Absent of ditching, the bedding of pine plantation soil
surface has been shown to actually increase the space available for surface water
storage (Farley, P.M. 1996 The Effects of Silvicultural Practices and Stand Development
on Surface Water Storage in Forested Wetland Flats. Masters Thesis. East Carolina
University, Greenville N.C.). Regarding the selective timbering, the applicants feel that
the selective harvesting of trees will support a higher basal area more quickly than
clearcutting the area and planting seedlings, but is willing to do so if the Corps feels this
to be a more practical alternative. As mentioned in the previous paragraph, the
applicant is willing to use the piled material for the ditch plugs required in the restoration
area.
c6. A complete mitigation checklist will be forwarded to you within the next three days.
Larry and I would like to set a meeting with you, Steve Kroger of D.E.M., and/or other
representatives of your departments or interested parties to finalize plans. Also, we
would like for you to list me first on your future correspondence to Land Management
Group concerning the Hestron project. This will allow us to respond more quickly to
said correspondence.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to your questions. If you have further
questions, or if I can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely:
Paul M. Farley
Wetland Scientist
cc: Mr. Charles Hester
Mr. Rob Wheatley
waded aawnsuoo-isod %ol /pajohej %os jeAoldw3 u0110y anilewJijjy Apnluoddo lenb3 uy
6566-EEL-6l6 Xdd • 98L1-EEL-6l6 ououdalal • 5650-K91-Z ON `0101128 "PH ?eE)JO Apaaa LOVV
uoueag saouaioS jelu8wu0Jlnu3 . Al!lenp aaleM }o uoisiniQ
?1u'?68096
dnozO luowa2euuW puprl 'uimpleg Xim-l
sal. J Ie=OD
szaouT2ug jo sdzoD aaidjO uolfuiuzlitY, `f2nS Xa)lo W
009JO fBU0120g 6AA Cl uolfuiwliAk :oo
umBord uoupolpioD XIilpna raxpM
AauaoQ ugor
J`?ClaaaouiS
•suopsonb Xup anpq noX 3i 98LI-££L-6161e pogopa.t oq
ueo I •ume.zpglim sp loafo.zd aql .zapisuoo llim am pup loofoad sigl onsznd of lupm jo,8uot ou noX
1pg1 ouznssp iliM om `salaam oml ui noX wojj apoq 1ou op om 3I 'St,8£-got8Z DN `uolfuruUl!M
"1xg an. a leuipreD LZI 1u 009J0 6A1Q lpuoifa?I uol2uiLullM 0g11p uos 01O unit 'aI?1
of Xdoo Quo pup ow o1 uoupuuojui sigI jo Xdoo p i?utpuas Xq zallat stq; jo m up ag1 jo salaam om1
uiglim puodsaz asuald •uouuoi3 J0D IOt, inoX jo meinaz jno ui In3dloq oq S mu rofoid .moX zo3
Su21Sap anileuIalle Ssazppe of STddns upo noX wgl aniipzreu pup sdpw sr gons uopmuownoop
Xud •saaouifug jo sdzoD Xuud -S-fl oq1 wo.q .zallai 9661 jagwanoN s agl ui possazdxa
suzaouoo aq1 aaugs aM •alaldwoom loafoid sigl aapisuoo lsnuz am `panlosa.z OJU loafoad
snotnazd aqi pup su2is9p anueuaalte jo saailew a p Ii1u11 •zaileuz sigl ssnosip of aagwooaQ
Slrna zo3 polnpagos si 2upom aus-uo up imp puelszapun I upolo 1ou si supid zuowdolanap
ui afupgo sigl io3 aluuoum aq L •luawaiiuutw zalennuuols ioj spupllam futuipuzat 0q1 azililn o1
pue alis sap uo spuullam 3o sazou S8'£ ll?j 01 uuld u panozdde om Xlluoi3?a0dS •spuullam zo/puu
szalem osogl ui UU.3uiaeld o1 anueuzalle olquouand ou anuq noX Imp put, pauueld su pormnsuoo
oq lsnuz loafoad znoX Imp uouisod moX 2uiuoddns uoupwzojui grim sn apinozd aspald
•plog anupusiuiuzpp uo loafo.zd inoX
aauld woumfumW lelseoD 3o uoisiniQ 'D'N 041 zo/pue saaaui-5119 Jo sdzoD XULIV -S-fl 0q1 1041
(aallal si p jo Xdoo Kq) 2uusonbW azu am `uoupuuoJui leuouippp aniaoaz am iPu11 '(a)LOSO' HZ
DVDN Vgl Xq pagnbai su uopuaippaD Tot, moX 30 feluop piumol fuinouz OR am `azoJaiagZ
90S0' HZ DVDN HSI grim aauppzoaae ui spupllam zo/pup s.zalem ui pauueld su llinq oq lsnw
loofoad.moX wq1 apnlouoo 01 salg .mo ui luosaad st aouapina luaioi33nsui `azouuoqund lpnou?az
lumnllod pup a2eaois imm arp sasn osoq L 'loofosd sigl Xq panouiaz oq plnom gaigm sasn
1up3i3iufis paijuuapi anpq am `mainaz SIM uo pospg •luowdolanap .Ialuao fuiddogs zoj X1uno:)
jajau D ut XID ppagaroW apau OL DN 1p palpool spupllam JO/pup SJOI . 3o sazop I,-LZ olui
luualuuz il?J 3o aBapgostp oq1 aoj supld znM pamainW spg XuTuno jowjyM jo uoisini(I aq,I,
:uoASaH •JW ROG
AlunoD 1a.zal.iuD
V68096# DOM
L998Z DN `S1D ppaga. OW
ZOZ olinS
vZuld uo.usaH
•dioD uoalSaH
.za1SaH S;)I'EgD'JW
9661 19Z aagwanoN
?INHE3 a
ao}oaaia ,.3.d "Jr'paDn\oH uolsaad -b'
XR49JoaS 'sannoH ,8 UDL40uof
louaanog 'jr ''IunH .8 sawor
,44ijbn8 je4oM to uoisiniQ
saoinosad IbinION pup u4I0aH
'?uaWuoainu3 ?o ?uew podaQ
bu116aO0 UPON ?O G?D?S
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
IN REPLY REFER TO
Regulatory Branch
Action ID No. 199603796
November 5, 1996
n
Land Management Group, Incorporated m '' L
Attn: Mr. Larry Baldwin O
and Mr. Paul Farley
Post Office Box 2522
L
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402 n
Dear Messrs. Baldwin and Farley:
Reference our August 8, 1966, meeting and our August 22, 1996, and
October 22, 1996, telephone conversations regarding alternative analysis,
minimization and mitigation for impacts to 27.43 acres of wetlands associated
with expansion of the Cypress Bay Shopping Center in Morehead City, Carteret
County, North Carolina.
On February 6, 1990, the Department of the Army (DA) and the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) signed a memorandum of agreement
(MOA) establishing procedures to determine the type and level of mitigation
necessary to comply with Clean Water Act Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines. This
MOA provides for first, avoiding impacts to waters and wetlands through the
selection of the least damaging, practical alternative; second, taking
appropriate and practical steps to reduce impacts on waters and wetlands; and
finally, compensation for remaining unavoidable impacts to the extent
appropriate and practical. At present, we question whether your proposal
represents the least environmentally damaging, practicable alternative. To
enable us to process your application, in compliance with the MOA, you must
provide the following additional information:
a. Permits for work within wetlands are available only if the proposed
work is the least environmentally damaging, practicable alternative. Until
proven otherwise, it=is presumed that a least environmentally damaging,
practicable alternative is available for non-water dependent activities such
as a shopping center expansion. Please furnish information regarding any
other alternatives, including upland alternatives, and provide justification
that your selected plan is the least damaging to wetland areas.
b. You must take all appropriate and practicable steps to minimize
wetland losses. Presently, your plan indicates a significant area of wetlands
to be used for parking, landscaping, future development and detention ponds.
Please address the following concerns:
1. The design shows a significant amount of impacts incurred with
the construction of the parking facility. You must justify a need for the
large area to be used for parking. Why can't the existing parking area
accommodate additional patrons? Wetlands should not be adversely impacted
simply to convenience patrons.
2. Regarding landscaping, it would seem plausible that natural
vegetation should remain and even be enhanced with additional plantings of
native species. Such would reduce adverse impacts to wetlands by
approximately four (4) acres. Aesthetic impacts of wetlands will not be
considered practicable minimization or a practicable alternative.
3. Any proposal to fill wetlands for future development must be
justified. For us to complete a proper environmental assessment, the specific
purpose and need for any loss of wetlands must be identified. To simply
identify an area to be filled for future development is unacceptable.
4. The need to use wetlands as detention ponds should be adequately
addressed. Wetlands naturally filter impurities from surface drainage. As
they exist, can they be used instead of excavating detention ponds? If
detention ponds must be excavated, high ground alternatives are preferable. A
suggested alternative is utilize the high ground designated for future
development.
Please show all that you have done, especially with regard to development
and modification of plans and proposed construction techniques, to reduce
adverse impacts.
c. The MOA requires that appropriate and practical mitigation be
required for all unavoidable adverse impacts remaining after all appropriate
and practical minimization has been employed. You propose to compensate for
the 27.4 acre wetland loss by restoring 23.6 acres of cropland and enhancing
6.6 acres of forested wetlands located on the south side of SR 1163 (Laurel
Road), at the interstream divide of the North and Newport Rivers, near the
North River community in Carteret County. You propose to restore the cropland
by placing four (4) -earthen plugs in existing ditches and to enhance the
forested wetlands by selective timbering. Several issues must be addressed:
1. We are concerned that the mitigation site will not appropriately
compensate for the wetland functions lost within the Hull Swamp watershed
because of its distance from the work site. On site mitigation with in-kind
replacement is preferable. Consideration should be give to restoration and/or
enhancement of wetland areas adjacent to existing ditches at the work site,
especially within the area identified for future development. The applicant
should not eliminate design mitigation measures within the 27.4 acre impact
area. It is noted that the applicant's initial development design included
impacts to wetlands located on the east side of the existing shopping center.

2
Can this area be set aside for mitigation?
2. Your plan indicates that the 23.6 acres proposed to be restored
is currently in agriculture production, but our August 8, 1996 visit disclosed
an abundance of 5 to 10 year old sweet gum saplings inhabiting all farm
fields. It should be recorded that we can not concur that this area is in a
Prior Converted Status.
3. As noted during our meeting, we are concerned that the proposed
mitigation reference site has been significantly altered by ditch excavation
and selective timbering. What affect have these activities had on the
hydrology parameters? Are there more appropriate sites to reference? Please
justify the use of this site.
4. For the restoration site, your plan must include dimensions and
type of material for plugs, the depth and methodology for the monitoring
wells, and how the present field crown is to be addressed. This is
significantly important when establishing the hydrology parameters. The plan
should include hydrology and vegetative goals that must be measurable,
attainable and specific. State how the selected vegetation will be managed,
specifically addressing the volunteered sweet gum saplings that dominant the
farm fields. Why have other tree species not been selected for
diversification? Water oak, black gum, willow oak and yellow-poplar are
listed hardwoods suitable for Deloss fine sandy loam soils.
5. Your enhancement proposal states that the 6.6 acres were
converted to a pine plantation in 1978, but that wetland hydrological
parameters remain. Have not the ditches and plantation bedding (if present)
altered wetland hydrology? You must provide information supporting your
hydrology determination. If wetland hydrology is absent, the proposal must be
modified. Also, your plan states that enhancement will involve selective
timbering of loblolly pine between 1999-2003 when it becomes marketable. As
this aspect of your plan will not be considered enhancement, the 1:2 ratio is
not appropriate. During the onsite meeting, it was noted that the area has
side ditches with associated excavated material piles. Consideration should
be given to pushing the piled material into the ditches to improve water
exchange with the surrounding farmlands.
6. You should refer to the mitigation checklist and examine all
issues that have not been addressed.
The aforementioned, requested information is essential to the expeditious
processing of your application and should be forwarded to us within two (2)
weeks of your receipt.of this letter. Also, you should be aware that State
and Federal commenting agencies may recommend design modifications. As
discussed, meetings with agencies on the project and mitigation sites would be
appropriate.
3
L
If you have questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me t,
at telephone [phone].
Sincerely,
Mickey Sugg
Regulatory Specialist
Wilmington Field Office
Regulatory Branch
Copies Furnished:
Mr. Thomas Welborn, Chief
Wetlands Regulatory Section
Region IV
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Atlanta Federal Center
100 Alabama Street, SW
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Mr. Jim Gregson
Wilmington Regional Office
North Carolina Division of
Water Quality
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845
Mr. Kevin Moody
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Fish and Wildlife Enhancement
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
Mr. Charles Hester
Hestron Corporation
Hestron Plaza, Suite 202
Morehead City, North.Carolina 28557
Mr. John Parker
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Mr. John Dorney
Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
4
NC D`M WQ ENVSCI Fax:[phone] Nov 7 '96 8:59 P.01/01 r
;.;
.MORANI]UM PRINT NAMES
Reviewer;
,70HIiI'. DCIRNEY WQ sUPV .: _
ENV:IRONM'ENTAL • SCIENCES BRANCH DATE
(EJECT : WETLAND-,STAFF--';REPORT ARID RECOMMENDATIONS
t*EACH I'El MbIS BE` ANSWERED (USE N/A FOR NOT APPLICABLE) srJC
PERMI'T' YR: 96;.:' ',..... ;PERMIT NO : 0U00894 CC?UNTY? C'ARTERET
,PPLI,CANT. NAME : HESTRAN_;; PLAZA
PRO'JECT' TYPE : SHOPPING ; CENTER ?'iIT ? TYPE I ND
PER
E

[OE. . 1995Q3.796 DOT
:
DATE FRM CDA: • 6 / 17 / 9 6
RCD `:FROM : `.CDA : C 'E ...:.. ° :
REO_OFk'IEE.: WIRO
:....
:"VER AND-SUBBA.KN.
?:: a.`3 o,s v 3

-INDEXNO: 2) _'lLr
1
S'TR
STREAM CLASS : G . ' ..
N
WL `HYPE : poc
.
WL: IMPACT 2 l?/I -
WL,.REQUESTED.. 7.. ?/... WL_ ACX EST? : .Y/?
WL'_SCt)ItEt ) : 6
N/ WATER IMPACTED BY FILL? `
MITZGATI01:7 . MITIGATION TYPBi'e
MinakIUDT_S1•ZE DID YOU-REQUEST MORE INFO? .•Y/M
- `.; I9 WETLAND. RATING, SHEET ATTACHED?: Ya
•:'
HAVE.,* PR.OACT CHANGES/..CQINAITIONS a
BEEN DISCUSSED WITH APPLICANT? : Y/V
=REG01d4 NDATi0N !(C;Lrcle One) : ISSUE ISSUE/COND DENY
MMENTS
e
?O

• •. .?
C : Regloiial. Office is
Central.YFile.'s

NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
Water Quality Section
Wilmington Regional Office
Date: November 13, 1996
To: John Dorney 2?°?=
Environmental Sciences Branch
'?
From: James H. Gregso ???
Q'
,
Through: Ken Eagleson
Subject: Regional Office Review and Recommendations
Application for Permit for Excavation and/or Fill
Central Office Permit #960894
Hestron Plaza
Carteret County
The subject project is located adjacent to Cypress Bay Plaza, a Walmart shopping center
near the intersection of Highway 24 and Highway 70, near Morehead City. In 1994, H&H
Partnership applied for a 401 Certification to impact 3.85 acres of additional wetlands at the
Cypress Bay site for the construction of a commercial shopping center / Lowes. On January 10,
1995, a 401 Certification was issued for this project (/#94599) for the 3.85 acres of impact. A
condition of the Certification was that the wetlands behind the proposed store shall be used to
handle stormwater from a portion of the site. The current application for Hestron Plaza is to fill
the 3.85 acre area as well as the wetland area that would have received the stormwater from the
original H&H site. Total impacts are now 27.4 acres. Mitigation is proposed at 23.6 acres of
restoration and 6.6 acres of enhancement.
It would appear that the applicant had an economically feasible project at the time that only
3.85 acres of wetlands were going to be impacted. Significant uses were identified during the last
request. Therefor, it is unclear why further project minimization is not possible with this project.
The applicant has been contacted concerning a site visit to discuss these issues and as we discussed
yesterday, possibly early December would be a good time.
JHG:960894.Nov
cc: Wilmington Regional Office Files
Central Files
Adbl,.
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF September 12, 1996
Regulatory Branch
Action ID. 199603796
Mr. John Dorney
Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Dear Mr. Dorney:
Enclosed is the application of Mr. Charles Hester, Hestron Corporation,
Hestron Plaza, Suite 202, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557, at Telephone
No. [phone], for Department of the Army authorization and a State Water
Quality Certification to discharge fill material within 27.4 acres of Section
404 wetlands above the headwaters of an unnamed tributary of Hull Swamp for
the expansion of the existing Cypress Bay Shopping Center. Your receipt of
this letter verifies your acceptance of a valid request for certification in
accordance with Section 325.2(b)(ii) of our administrative regulations.
We are considering authorizing the proposed activity pursuant to Section
404 of the Clean Water Act, and we have determined that a water quality
certification may be required under the provisions of Section 401 of the same
law. A Department of the Army permit will not be granted until the
certification has been obtained or waived.
In accordance with our administrative regulations, 60 days after receipt
of a request for certification is a reasonable time for State action.
Therefore, if you have not acted on the request by November 12, 1996, the
District Engineer will deem that waiver has occurred.
Thank you for your time and cooperation. If you have any questions or
comments, please contact me at telephone [phone].
Sincerely,
i e SugjScWialist
Reg torEnclosure

n
z r t,
m
fi ?
A6
-2-
Copies Furnished (without enclosure) :
Mr. John Parker
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Mr. Jim Gregson
Water Quality Section
Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845
Mr. Larry Baldwin
Land Management Group, Inc.
Post Office Box 2522
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
w s'

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
l?o ley, FO
. ^s?F
September 12, 1996
Action ID. 199603796
PUBLIC NOTICE
Mr. Charles Hester, Hestron Corporation, Hestron Plaza,
Suite 202, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557, has applied for
a Department of the Army permit to DISCHARGE FILL MATERIAL WITHIN
27.4 ACRES OF SECTION 404 WETLANDS ABOVE THE HEADWATERS OF AN
UNNAMED TRIBUTARY OF HULL SWAMP FOR THE EXPANSION OF THE EXISTING
CYPRESS BAY SHOPPING CENTER approximately 0.3 mile west of
intersection with US Highway 70, near Morehead City, Carteret
County, North Carolina.
The following description of the work is taken from data
provided by the applicant, and from observations made during an
onsite inspection by a representative of the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers. The purpose of the project is to utilize a large
tract of land, commercially located, by expanding the existing
shopping facility with additional parking lots and a six (6)
building complex.
Plans submitted with the application show the project site
located directly west of the existing Cypress Bay Shopping
Center. The proposed activities include the construction of two
(2) stormwater detention areas, a landscaping area, three (3)
future development parcels, future parking, a 16.8 acre parking
facility, and an 8.95 acre building complex. Approximately
27.43 acres of wetlands will be graded and filled to facilitate
construction. The tract has been previously disturbed by
silviculture activities and by the excavation of ditches. The
entire area drains north through a culvert traversing US Highway
70, and terminates into Hull Swamp. The wetland within the
project area is primarily a scrub/shrub pocosin community. The
predominant vegetation, which is absent of any overstory, is Ilex
glabra, Ilex coreacea, Leonia lucida, Smilax laurifolia, Smilax
rotundifolia, Osmunda cinamonea, and scattered Pteridium
aquilinum. Leon sand, Murville mucky sand, and Torhunta mucky
fine sandy loam are the soil types within the project site. All
soils are listed in "Hydric Soils of the United States". Plans
showing the work are included with this public notice.
The applicant is proposing site specific compensatory
mitigation for the 27.43 acres of wetland impacts. The
mitigation will include the restoration of 23.6 acres of Prior
Converted (PC) Farmland and the enhancement of a 6.6 acre
forested area. Detailed plan sheets showing the extent of the
t
e
mitigation work may be examined in the Wilmington Regulatory
Field Office of the Wilmington District Corps of Engineers at
69 Darlington Avenue, Wilmington, North Carolina 28402.
The applicant has determined that the proposed work is
consistent with the North Carolina Coastal Zone Management Plan
and has submitted this determination to the North Carolina
Division of Coastal Management for their review and concurrence.
This proposal shall be reviewed for the applicability of other
actions by North Carolina agencies such as:
a. The issuance of a Water Quality Certification under
Section 401 of the Clean Water Act by the North Carolina Division
of Environmental Management.
b. The issuance of a permit to dredge and/or fill under
North Carolina General Statute 113-229 by the North Carolina
Division of Coastal Management.
C. The issuance of a permit under the North Carolina
Coastal Area Management Act (LAMA) by the North Carolina Division
of Coastal Management or their delegates.
d. The issuance of an easement to fill or otherwise occupy
State-owned submerged land under North Carolina General Statute
143-341(4), 146-6, 146-11, and 146-12 by the North Carolina
Department of Administration and the North Carolina Council of
State.
e. The approval of an Erosion and Sedimentation Control
Plan by the Land Quality Section, North Carolina Division of Land
Resources, pursuant to the State Sedimentation Pollution Control
Act of 1973 (NC G.S. 113 A-50-66).
The requested Department of the Army permit will be denied
if any required State or local authorization and/or certification
is denied. No Department of the Army permit will be issued until
a State coordinated viewpoint is received and reviewed by this
agency. Recipients of this notice are encouraged to furnish
comments on factors of concern represented by the above agencies
directly to the respective agency, with a copy furnished to the
Corps of Engineers.
This application is being considered pursuant to Section 404
of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). Any person may request,
in writing within the comment period specified in the notice,
that a public hearing be held to consider this application.
Requests for public hearing shall state, with particularity, the
reasons for holding a public hearing.
The District Engineer has consulted the latest published
version of the National Register of Historic Places for the
presence or absence of registered properties, or properties
2
r

listed as being eligible for inclusion therein, and this worksite
is not registered property or property listed as being eligible
for inclusion in the Register. Consultation of the National
Register constitutes the extent of cultural resource
investigations by the District Engineer, and he is otherwise
unaware of the presence of such resources. Presently, unknown
archeological, scientific, prehistorical, or historical data may
be lost or destroyed by work under the requested permit.
The District Engineer, based on available information, is
not aware that the proposed activity will affect species, or
their critical habitat, designated as endangered or threatened
pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973.
The decision whether to issue a permit will be based on an
evaluation of the probable impacts, including cumulative impacts,
of the proposed activity and its intended use on the public
interest. Evaluation of the probable impacts which the proposed
activity may have on the public interest requires a careful
weighing of all those factors which become relevant in each
particular case. The benefits which reasonably may be expected
to accrue from the proposal must be balanced against its
reasonably foreseeable detriments. The decision whether to
authorize a proposal, and if so the conditions under which it
will be allowed to occur, are therefore determined by the outcome
of the general balancing process. That decision should reflect'
the national concern for both protection and utilization of
important resources. All factors which may be relevant to the
proposal must be considered including the cumulative effects
thereof. Among those are conservation, economics, aesthetics,
general environmental concerns, wetlands, cultural values, fish
and wildlife values, flood hazards and flood plain values (in
accordance with Executive Order 11988), land use, navigation,
shore erosion and accretion, recreation, water supply and
conservation, water quality, energy needs, safety, food and fiber
production, mineral needs, considerations of property ownership,
and, in general, the needs and welfare of the people. For
activities involving the placement of dredged or fill materials
in waters of the United States, a permit will be denied if the
discharge that would be authorized by such permit would not
comply with the Environmental Protection Agencies' 404(b)(1)
guidelines. Subject to the preceding sentence and any other
applicable guidelines or criteria, a permit will be granted
unless the District Engineer determines that it would be contrary
to the public interest.
The Corps of Engineers is soliciting comments from the
public; Federal, State and local agencies and officials; Indian
Tribes and other interested parties in order to consider and
evaluate the impacts of this proposed activity. Any comments
received will be considered by the Corps of Engineers to
determine whether to issue, modify, condition or deny a permit
for this proposal. To make this decision, comments are used to
3

assess impacts on endangered species, historic properties, water
quality, general environmental effects and the other public
interest factors listed above. Comments are used in the
preparation of an Environmental Assessment and/or an
Environmental Impact Statement pursuant to the National
Environmental Policy Act. Comments are also used to determine
the need for a public hearing and to determine the overall public
interest of the proposed activity.
Generally, the decision whether to issue this Department of
the Army permit will not be made until the North Carolina
Division of Environmental Management (DEM) issues, denies, or
waives State certification required by Section 401 of the Clean
Water Act. The DEM considers whether or not the proposed
activity will comply with Sections 301, 302, 306, and 307 of the
Clean Water Act. The application and this public notice for the
Department of the Army permit serves as application to the DEM
for certification.
Additional information regarding the Clean Water Act
certification may be reviewed at the offices of the Environmental
Operations Section, North Carolina Division of Environmental
Management, Salisbury Street, Archdale Building, Raleigh, North
Carolina. Copies of such materials will be furnished to any
person requesting copies upon payment of reproduction costs.
All persons desiring to make comments regarding the
application for Clean Water Act certification should do so in
writing delivered to the North Carolina Division of Water
Quality, 4401 Reedy Creek Road, Raleigh, North Carolina 27607,
on or before October 4, 1996, Attention: Mr. John Dorney.
Written comments pertinent to the proposed work, as outlined
above, will be received in this office, Attention: Mr. Mickey
Sugg, Wilmington Regulatory Field Office, until 4:15 p.m.,
October 11, 1996, or telephone [phone].
4
r
Z% d LL. _
C !a
ea ? CO) o ? ? o
ca ao
ti ti u. • ti ti W Q o CL c?
? •- c
E uj c6 ui ui C6 6 V-
tom ?? a+? d
?.+ Ot,0000 ti Z C cam0
_ ?n-C;
Q CS CS 11 :. J d =a)
Go Cq M tQ Q M = c
m v > •o --
Q. Q co
O ?
of C Q.
? c -
. = Y
z
L L L L d. W
? 0000-
cc ? V Co
QQQQ? !? --- ?,
L _ Q a?
CL Z?
o ? H v `Q O ?
---o? c
Iz
m
'I c V
1m 'a C
o V
cis
0
a

C ?
C.) O M cp).
ac
slos
N E
Zc
ca go
W d m
J
Q N C
Q c L
a C CL
? H
Z
w
m
?4?? ?V
0
CL R
40
ID L1
' O O
m
0
cri 0 T ?,r
1 c = L
-A 7a cc
--,02
r
On
Ra L'
l
I
Ln
1
I
I AP WaB
14
?0 J?
l

-J Ln Z,-
.A a8
G' CH
r? SL
N
SCALE 1" = 2,258'
Figure 7. Soil map of LAND MANAGEMENT S.C.S. Soils Map
the impact site. GROUP, INC
March, 1996
5 AAXBT 3 b4
{
Idwooi,.. jo > 1,

•,y ? 1150 • - /-? ?• - - • ,
Nfler
O?ltte 'Sit e r ldafyrxia _ • '
?? 3t Mafks M ^ C? _ = ?
ld ° _ _ _ _. •?..:: '-_ ter;
s - Trailer ••SM r
.' -- "??• . Park 1 ;1i1 t
Sr j
c Dapeacor
o Daybeaco'+ o Dapm;on
o Ught
Foul.- -
Daybeacor
1.J O
T T 7? 7
N
SCALE 1:24,000
Figure 1. Impact Site. LAND MANAGEMENT Carteret County
GROUP, INC North Carolina
May 15, 1996
S1aevr- H o $ I
} •6
? -- _ -? ? li6i.` , • r ? j?163? I?vV -.fit _?? t
mitigation ;Tract
t 1'
f(, i+ua N ..{ lot
oI 111 ?.
r=
V )) '
?: I , l _•? X1161 t if;? / t
.purl 1 -..;,•` ? --°-=.•••-: ?_ a .. ;, ?' .
mtl
d ?aVD•:.A,%u71 ? ./ ,rte, . ? .. .3 ? ? ? ? ' •,• ?.'
`?, 1 ? •- /fit- ,?' . ?'???+?•?1?• .. .r.w'_..._.. ? 1 "
--zz,,.
N SCALE 1" = 2000'
s
Figure 2. Mitigation LAND MANAGEMENT Carteret County
Tract GROUP, INC North Carolina
May 15, 1996
S HEC'T 5 01%--f

19
N
Figure 10. S.C.S. soil LAND MANAGEMENT
map of the mitigation site. GROUP, INC
SCALE 1" = 2,258'
Hestron Tract
Carteret County, NC
S%?1awr 6 e4 "I
J
?( 0 - -

Jt?
•,? ? ,?, r ?' .•; ?x s. , fin. '?,r - .
Jwz
JZ ? .. TS)
C
Y
?•,? ,.i'ce'.. e ? .. ' a`S . e ;
C ?? ,?Wa??,YT+
'iko
it b,

J. 'Y.':$. rj i .tJ
h l'" k ~1
'
?,` ' R`a?4 fie" c?"
# k44.
1
r i

?a

A Restoration Ar'.
?7

l ?
^23:6 acres
41

R .t
?
.ail
j
•'.'•? ? _

t T .t ,?C. M ?•

Pk
`'•
t..

x

1
?. ?: ... .y -2`

J=

r,•a:
r.
1} '+i
, R•
y:
l ,1-
!L

411.
f." .,

x, ?` ? .. -tie; •'e

SNE eT ?1 ol?r?