19920445 Ver 1_COMPLETE FILE_19920903

Soil & Environmental Consultants, Inc.
3818 Bland Road ¦ Raleigh, North Carolina 27609 ¦ [phone] ¦ Fax [phone]
August 25, 1992
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Attn: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
Raleigh Field Office
6512 Falls of the Neuse Road
Suite 105
Raleigh, NC 27615-6846 Fro
Dear Mr. Alsmeyer: UU
2 61992
As requested please find enclosed copies of the 're it
Hope Valley Farms Nationwide 26 and 12 permit ap lick, DS GROUP
map. The acreages and locations of impacts have no _ ECTio
but, as per your request we are no longer showing the
approximate locations and impacts associated with the area
near Martin Luther King Jr. Parkway and Roxboro Road
intersection. We never include these in our permit request
(in fact the legend on the original map specifically excluded
them), but originally showed them for your information. We
have also indicated where existing Roxboro Road currently
ends on the map as per your request.
As discussed by phone we are still including impact "GGG" in
our Nationwide Permit 26 application since this property
could be accessed by Cook Road even if Martin Luther King Jr.
Parkway or Roxboro Road were never extended.
Please call if you require further information.
Sincerely,
6e 4??
Kevin C. Martin
cc: David Franklin, Wilmington Corps
John Dorney, DEM
Karl Schafer, DEM Raleigh Regional Office
Cultural Resources,
USF&WS
Hope Valley Farms, Mitch Barron
r_1
Soil/Site Evaluation ¦ Mapping and Physical Analysis ¦ Wetlands Mapping and Mitigation ¦ Environmental Audits
On-Site Waste Treatment Systems, Evaluation and Design
?Y

J.. n 5TA7p q,
A
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
James G.. Martin, Governor September 10, 1992 A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary Acting Director
American General Realty
c/o Hdpe Valley Farms
Attn: Mr, Mitch Barron
4501 Hope Valley Road
Durham, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Barron:
Investment Corp.
27707
Subject: Proposed Fill in Headwaters or Isolated Wetlands
Hope Valley Farms Subdivision
Durham County
DEM Project # 92445
Upon review of your request for Water Quality Certification
to place fill material in 2.7 acres of wetlands for road
construction, pond development and lot fill located at Hwy. 751
and South Roxboro Road in Wake County, we have determined that
the proposed fill can be covered by General Water Quality .
Certification No. 2671 issued January 21, 1992. A copy of the
General Certification is attached. This Certification may be
used in qualifying for coverage under Corps of Engineers'
Nationwide Permit No. 26. Pond design criteria as outlined in
Kevin Martin's August 1992 letter shall be a condition of this
certification.
If you have any questions, please contact John Dorney at
919/733-1786 or 919/733-1787.
Sincerely,
reston Howard, r. P. E.
APH:JD
Attachment
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Raleigh Regional Office
Raleigh DEM Regional Office
Mr: John Dorney
Central Files REGIONAL OFFICES
Asheville KeviftttXaBEtin,mfio!,1hand g? ronmentalirgamsulvan ton Winston-Salem
704/251-6208 919/486-1541 704/663-1699 919/571-4700 919/946-6481 919/395-3900 919/896-7007
Pollution Prevention Pays
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890 ?WEILANDS GROUPn^I
IN REPLY REFER TO September 30, 1992
Regulatory Branch
Action ID. 199203192 and Nationwide Permit Nos. 14 (Road Crossing)
and 26 (Headwaters and Isolated Waters)
American General Realty Investment Corporation
c/o Hope Valley Farms
Attn: Mr. Mitch Barron
4501 Hope Valley Road
Durham, North Carolina 27707
Dear Mr. Barron:
Reference the application of July 24, 1992, submitted on your behalf by
Soil and Environmental Consultants, Inc., for Department of the Army
authorization to discharge fill material within a total of 3.09 acres of
waters of the United States, for the construction of minor road crossings
(0.39 acre) and development of residential subdivision property (2.70 acre)
within wetlands and waters tributary to Third Fork Creek, in Durham, Durham
County, North Carolina.
For the purposes of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Regulatory Program,
Title 33, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 330.6, published in the
Federal Register on November 22, 1991, lists nationwide permits.
Authorization, pursuant to Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899
and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, was provided for fills for roads
crossing waters of the United States (including wetlands and other special
aquatic sites) provided:
a. The width of the fill is limited to the minimum necessary for the
actual crossing;
b. The fill placed in waters of the United States is limited to a filled
area of no more than one-third acre. Furthermore, no more than a total of 200
linear feet of the fill for the roadway can occur in special aquatic sites,
including wetlands;
C. The crossing is culverted, bridged or otherwise designed to prevent
the restriction of, and to withstand, expected highflows and the movement of
aquatic organisms;
d. The crossing, including all attendant features, both temporary and
permanent, is part of a single and complete project for crossing of a water of
the United States; and
-2-
e. For fills in special aquatic sites, including wetlands, the permittee
notifies the District Engineer in accordance with the "Notification" general
condition.
Authorization was also provided, pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act, for discharges of dredged or fill material into headwaters and isolated
waters provided:
a. the discharge does not cause the loss of more than 10 acres of waters
of the United States;
b. the permittee notifies the District Engineer if the discharge would
cause the loss of waters of the United States greater than one acre in
accordance with the "Notification" general condition. For discharges in
special aquatic sites, including wetlands, the notification must also include
a delineation of affected specific aquatic sites, including wetlands; and
c. the discharge, including all attendant features, both temporary and
permanent, is part of a single and complete project.
Your work is authorized by this nationwide permit provided it is
accomplished in strict accordance with the enclosed conditions. This
nationwide permit does not relieve you of the responsibility to obtain any
required State or local approval.
This verification will be valid for 2 years from the date of this letter
unless the nationwide authorization is modified, reissued, or revoked. Also,
this verification will remain valid for the 2 years if, during that period,
the nationwide permit authorization is reissued without modification or the
activity complies with any subsequent modification of the nationwide permit
authorization. If during the 2 years, the nationwide permit authorization
expires or is suspended or revoked, or is modified, such that the activity
would no longer comply with the terms and conditions of the nationwide permit,
activities which have commenced (i.e., are under construction) or are under
contract to commence in reliance upon the nationwide permit will remain
authorized provided the activity is completed within 12 months of the date of
the nationwide permit's expiration, modification or revocation, unless
discretionary authority has been exercised on a case-by-case basis to modify,
suspend, or revoke the authorization.
Questions or comments may be addressed to Mr. Eric Alsmeyer, Raleigh
Regulatory Field office, at telephone [phone], extension 23.
Sincerely,
G. Wayne Wright
Chief, Regulatory Branch
Enclosure
-3-
Copy Furnished (with enclosure):
Mr. Kevin Martin
Soil and Environmental Consultants, Inc.
3818 Bland Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609
Copies Furnished (without enclosure):
Mr. John Parker
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Mr. John Dorney
Wat Quality Section
D' ision of Environmental Management
orth Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687

MEMORANDUM #6 r
TO: John Dorney
Planning Branch
D
?""-'•°-4? INITIALS:
Reviewer : ltl'
WQ Date : ,
Date • ° ?.
2 g j992
i
SUBJECT: WETLAND STAFF REPORT AND
***EACH ITEM MUST BE ANSWERED (N/A-NOT APPLI
PERMIT_YR: 92 PERMIT NO: 0400445 COUNTY: DURHAM
APPLICANT NAME: HOPE VALLEY FARMS
PROJECT-TYPE! RESIDENTTIAL FILL PERMIT-TYPE: NW26
COE_#: DOT-#:
RCD_FROM CDA: APP DATE_FRM CDA: 08/07/92
REG OFFICE: RRO RIVER AND SUB_BASIN_#: 0•3 o6'05
STREAM CLASS: C NSW
STR INDEX NO : 16 - 511- I - l Z
WL_iMPACT?-.?Y N
acre T
WL_REQUESTED : "2.-70
HYDRO_CNECT?:(SN
MITIGATION? : Y/N -"S-r-eC.arn&V C7 S
MITIGATION SIZE:
MITI GAT I ON TYPE :
IS WETLAND RATING SHEET ATTACHED?:(DN
RECOMMENDATION (Circle One): ISSUE SSUE/CQ DENY
COMMENTS : S`rfe, 406 OA /A 114 fi .co AA,_ 4f . 7Ap- &/? Auv 04r-?
°s(ax d a, nat.t yy-, aiat5?n acc , -
19.I e'0111d .K J4A. Q A VW QJ-l 10 . ZZIAL ..LO A 4aO l tre?ZA,0?"'
,i vn` C;ak aku( 3MQwixi??. 7ZA4 ,?a x e f, Iyh,? ??
0?ua?.tw'
"1 Jh -A /W'e/`"`?
cc: Regional Office
Central Files
7" A.° a - ?r'a'Q" c aa,eo? ara?
C0_x 'WSX4 allzQ VIL a.GP-0- _4? sue-
/ h;rd Fork ?'retK 7 cye Few ZTar r?
WL_TYPE: 18 L
WL ACR EST? : (1?5N 9 , ?
WL_SCORE(#): 22 ?)
dl)t
to
PDD.
4)c cc
OWL ?ZldAi?. 4? CIL? 44Vu& 74 OX)? a&41?
d-K
?? f

WETLAND RATING SYSTEM WORKSHEET
!`< Project No. or description , tomr
Location -M' 5
County jam, gut h Nearest road or town Uv/
River basin L-19- Nearest strea Fork av<zk and classification
Evaluator
Agency and address
Date and time evaluated '14Lq/r2- 12.'0-0
Major Wetland Type a-MMLjWD 41]6 0j6bp //IV[1?? ? AV I' AA/b
Approximate size of wetland system' acres
Approximate extent of wetlands in area acres
within miles
Three most common plant species (in order)
Soil Series (if known) Cwa)
Hydrologic indicators L-'e?
Direct surface hydrolog' Ati-t
n cES NO
Existing Conditions
Drainage ?,,,dA'd
Disturbance ,&,A
Restoration potent
Restoration value
i
a
Is site known to provide habitat for rare, endangered or
threatened species?gyp _If so, list species observed or recorded.
Item No.
Location/Landscape
1 Natural area buffer
2 Sensitive watershed
3 Dispersal corridor system
Ecological Values
4 Special ecological attributes
5 Wildlife habitat
6 Aquatic life
7 Water storage
8 Streambank stabilization
9 Removal of pollutants
Human Values
10 Outdoor recreation/education
11 Economic value
Score (circle one)
9)
5 4
4 ' 3 2 1
2 1 0
5
5
5 4
4
4 3
3
3 2
a)?
2 1 0
p
0
5 4 3 © 1 0
5
5 4
4 3
3 1
1 0
0
5
5 4
4 0
3 2 1
2 0 0
0
Total score ZZ
Site description and notes: -74 3
3 211
13 ?6//e v?
daw
aP?? I J
Az?
A-t el
ur ? o ?t, i?? ,{ 57-
I
Id v
G G??
F?
<5 ,? -7k
- - ???``
17
?? °i? ?,,,? ? ? l ?C '? ??ilens ? ?j -/'o ???\? \o?? i ??? \/- ..•1??`?r' ? ?
IV I
-?/ 1 `,..- - ?: ? .,?j ; ?, '???- I v I ; ? <, fish ??? r? I' • , ?•`l
? \ //1J-_?i? ? ?, ?\ll ? e?` ? /7; ? ? ?ti 1i, ??'? ?;? ;.J???% l/i °°. cJ ? 1/???.
_ i hen Joul?n ! ? , /! _ _
I
- i r High
/ aieeg ualeYlF ge o- - r < / l _ . L?' ?? VA ?? r 1
,r =/ ,qty ? ? ????--. ..- -- y??'- + 'T`?! ? ?-. ??\ ?. J ,_
, ?.'j '???j?l `•`\ ? // \? `? ??
? ?,;?
4,04
y ` `'` 1 ?? / , - - 7?G? 1 r\II / ' i ? ."?V? • !-r_? • I / /Iii / ?- ( I• I ??.?/ r ?' J?C/
?J._ .?/? tom` -?-'?.` ..? III-??j`(?/?.. o/ ??, ? ', ?' ??
-? i Je b a. a3' t -A
v. i
DEM ID: 6 2 qqq
JOINT APPLICATION FORM FOR
NATIONWIDE PERMITS THAT REQUIRE NOTIFICATION TO THE DISTRICT ENGINEER
NATIONWIDE PERMITS THAT REQUIRE SECTION 401 CERTIFICATION CONCURRENCE
NATIONWIDE PERMITS THAT REQUIRE INDIVIDUAL SECTION 401 CERTIFICATION
WILMINGTON DISTRICT ENGINEER
CORPS OF ENGINEERS
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NC 28402-1890
ATTN: CESAW-CO-E
Telephone [phone]
WATER QUALITY PLANNING
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
NC DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH,
AND NATURAL RESOURCES
P: O. BOX 29535
RALEIGH, NC 27626-0535
ATTN: MR. JOHN DORNEY
Telephone [phone]
ONE (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED APPLICATION SHOULD BE SENT TO THE CORPS OF
ENGINEERS. SEVEN (7) COPIES SHOULD BE SENT TO THE N.C. DIVISION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT. PLEASE PRINT.
1. OWNERS NAME: American General Realty Investment Corporation
2. OWNERS ADDRESS:
_ c/o Hope Valley Farms
attn: Mr. Mitch Barron
4501 Hope Valley Rd.
Durham, NC 27707
3.. OWNERS PHONE NUMBER (HOME):
ACTION ID:
(WORK) : 919-493-3228
4. IF APPLICABLE: AGENT'S NAME OR RESPONSIBLE CORPORATE OFFICIAL, ADDRESS,
'HONE NUMBER: Soil and Environmental Consultants
attn: mr. Kevin Martin
an .
a ei g 919-790-9117
5. LOCATION OF PLANNED WORK (ATTACH MAP).
COUNTY: Durham
NEAREST TOWN OR CITY: T)iirham
SPECIFIC LOCATION (INCLUDE ROAD NUMBERS LANDMARKS, ETC.):
East of the intersection of Hwy 7?1 (Hope Valley Rd. an Sout
-Rnwhnrn 'Rnar7., uraci- niF T)QFQgQd rvt_ i,_ King .1r Ftn=rj
See enclosed vi ri n i +-v ma= _
6. NAME OF CLOSEST STREAM/RIVER: mhi rrl Fnrk rraak
7. RIVER BASIN: _ape Fear
8. IS THIS PROJECT LOCATED IN A WATERSHED CLASSIFIED AS TROUT, SA, HQW, ORW,
WS I, OR WS II? YES [. ] NO [X]
94.20 acres
9. HAVE ANY SECTION 404 PERMITS BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON THIS
PROPERTY? YES [ ] NO [X]
IF YES, EXPLAIN.
10 ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS LOCATED ON PROJECT SITE:
I
0000r% -2-

11. NUMBER OF ACRES2 OF WETLAND IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT:
FILLED: Utilizing Nationwide permit 26
DRAINED: 0
FLOODED: 0
EXCAVATED: 0
TOTAL IMPACTED: 2.7
12. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK (ATTACH PLANS) : Fill associated with
major and minor roads lots and cf-nrmc.zatcr retention facilities
for a large residential develo]mPnt-
13. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: Allow
residential development.
14. STATE REASONS WHY THE APPLICANT BELIEVES THAT THIS ACTIVITY MUST BE
CARRIED OUT IN WETLANDS. ALSO, NOTE MEASURES TAKEN TO MINIMIZE WETLAND
IMPACTS. See attached letter from Soil and Envirnnmpni-ni
Consultants
15. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
(USFWS) AND/OR NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE (NMFS) REGARDING THE PRESENCE
OR ANY FEDERALLY LISTED OR PROPOSED FOR LISTING ENDANGERED OR THREATENED
SPECIES OR CRITICAL HABITAT IN THE PERMIT AREA THAT MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE
PROPOSED PROJECT. HAVE YOU DONE SO? YES [X1 NO [ 1
. ' RESPONSES FROM THE USFWS AND/OR NMFS SHOULD BE ATTACHED.
-16.- YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER
(SHPO) REGARDING THE PRESENCE OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES IN THE PERMIT AREA WHICH
MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT?
HAVE YOU DONE SO? YES [X1 NO [ 1
RESPONSE FROM THE SHPO SHOULD BE ATTACHED.
17. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUIRED BY DEM:
A. WETLAND DELINEATION MAP SHOWING ALL WETLANDS, STREAMS, AND LAKES ON
THE PROPERTY.
B. IF AVAILABLE, REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOGRAPH OF WETLANDS TO BE IMPACTED BY
PROJECT.
C. IF DELINEATION WAS PERFORMED BY A CONSULTANT, INCLUDE ALL DATA SHEETS
RELEVANT TO THE PLACEMENT OF THE DELINEATION LINE.
D. IF A STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN IS REQUIRED FOR THIS PROJECT, ATTACH
COPY.
E. WHAT IS LAND USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY? 17rhan (T-) jTP1 np1= d
9z
F. IF APPLICABLE, WHAT IS PROPOSED METHOD OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL?

DATA FORM t
ROUTINE ONSITE'DETERMINATION METHOD
1?or9c,c?oo? S ?t'_.
COORDINATOR: TIME: DATE : 3 / S /g ?- COUNTY:
NEAREST TOWN: WATERWAY: -?-
Ql1AD' LOCATION:} arr ;? c5K?1or u4ISS1 a?? S o OC
pgOPERTY OWNER: (NAME/ADDRESS) PARTY UUING W RK:(NAMf;/ADOKESJ)
? /' X _ L - - rr.w ---A.e 1 l ©Il?sul ^ `?
L
PRUNE : (Q.lq )Yv - I t
PHONf:: ( )'Aot-1' 3 21
OTHER INDIVIDUALS PRESENT:
IS pItUPE1trY UNIFORM OR SEPARATE DISCRETE V VEGETATIVE UNITS
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-----------------------------
Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community?
Yes \,/ No (If no, explain on back)
Has the vegetations soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed?
vem • No V (If ves, explain an back)
5.
SAPLINGS/SHRUBS: 6•
1. CacV+v\v,S`- wto`trtlcev?0. ? 1? L 7.
Z.;cec c?acv `? Vic. 8.
3. WOODY VINES:
4. 1.
5.4. 2.
percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes V_ No
--Rationale: o c o +' u,c.?-ec
- > SO o ?--
W SOILS
Seriestphase: Subgroup:2 f 1 v?y a
Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes No Undetermined 1% 1
Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No V Histic epipedon P70 nt? Yes No V
Is the soil: Mottled? xe No Gleyed? Yes No -7
• R ? ?
Matrix Color. 1•S ys3? jO1Mottle Colors:
Other hydric soil Indicators:
Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes V No
Rationale:
VEGKTATION: (IN ORDER OF DOMINANCE, DRAW LINE ABOVE NON-DOMINANT SPECIES)
TREES: SPECIES---% COVER--INDICATOR GROUND COVER: SPECIES-% COVER-INDICATOR
1. cer' T- v\o?uw\ S- -uL 1. Catk,x st, E L
2. qkgCCUSp?elloS $" ?aLll? 2• N1.ccos?lg?o? ?_?Gw
3. e? a1a n 15 t a u G ?? 3.
4. 4.
5
HYDROLOGY
is the ground surface inundated? Yes No ? Surface water depth:
Is the soil saturated? Yes No k
Depth to free-standing water in pit/soil probe hole:
List othenfi id evidence of surface?inundation roil sacuratioInx. ?zke ??? C ?? ?. vie S
a S -?
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met?
Rationale:
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the plant community awetland? Yes V/ No V'S-In ve- \vk rd?? S o
Rationale for jurisdictional decision: pn\ t\ r e e c r, c 1 cc
No
PHOTOS TAKEN: YES NO Ny/ AUTHORITY: 10_ 404 10/404_ NONE_
JURISDICTION: ABOVE HEADWATERS ISOLATED_ ADJACENT NWP f/
DETERMINED BY:
- 1?
ROUTINE ONSiTEDETER(WNATION METHODS yve.
_ 3 / S / 1 c?a ry? -
COORDINATOR: TIME: DATE: COUNTY: IOU
_ g•-
NEAREST TOWN: v?u!-L1,\gLy" WATERWAY: --U-
QUAD: LOCATION: ??- e?;+.?cSK?'?oro? Nw '1S1 n? S• PROPERTY OWNER: (NAME /ADDRESS ) PARTY DOING W RK:(NAME/ADDI{ESS)
LLV19L1LC- n, 5 -4
Ali l n 0
PHONE : (eg )?9 3 2 i PHONE: (g?q)_- l t
OTHER INDIVIDUALS PRESENT:
IS PROPERTY UNIFORM OR SEPARATE DISCRETE -?e-/VEGETATIVE UNITS
---------------------------------------------------
Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community?
Yes No V (H no, explain on back)
Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed?
Yes V No (If yes, explain on back) /Lle w2j , o
-----------------------------
VEGETATION: (IN ORDER OF DOMINANCE, DRAW LINE ABOVE NON-DOMINANT SPECIES)
TREES: SPECIES ---% COVER--INDICATOR GROUND COVER: SPECIES-Z COVER-INDICATOR
1. 1. w ; m k *30 vi
2. 2. C?
3. v,(\E- 3.c. vcx S?. 14 L
4. 4.
5. 5.
SAPLINGS/SHRUBS: is 6.
L. "Zox\?X ?\\VL 2v? _ 7.
2. $ei tikes 'MI(A \k) 8.
3. WOODY VINES:
4. 1•
5._, 2• o
Percent of dominant species that are OBL. FACK and/or FAG
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes VNo
-Rationale:
Z:-0°cD 16, oc iJJc
SOILS
Seriestphase: Subgroup:2 ?"K ve u e Vk
Is the soil an the hydric sails list? Yes '? No Undetermined _
Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No LGHistic epipedon present? Yes No
Is the soil: Mottled? Yes No Gleyed? Yes ? No
Matrix Color. MSYRsr'a Mottle Colors* -7. rYRyl?
Other hydric soil indicators:
Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes ? No
Rationale:
HYDROLOGY
Is the ground surface inundated? Yes No Surface water depth:
Is the soil saturated? Yes ? No i k
Depth to free-standing water in piU/soii probe hole:
List other field evid/?ence of surf inundation q soil sh?aNturption. C ? 1 \ck Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes
Rationale:
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes No C a --?- I.
Rationale for jurisdictional decision:
No
r-k r; n
f S
PHOTOS TAKEN: YES NO Y AUTHORITY: 10 404 10/404 NONE_
JURISDICTION: ABOVE HEA WATERS ISOLATED ADJACENT NW-P#
DETERMINED BY:
MIA mll w
ROUTINE ONSITEDETER1wNATION METHOD'
DATE : 3 / /q1 COUNTY: Ou
h. COORDINATOR: TIME' - WATERWAY~
NEAREST TOWN: pwrlnn
(Zl1AD • LOCATION : o? a I`?? ?"? '1S1 a? S, jloxboco Kd e
PROPERTY OWNER:(NAME/ADDRESS) PARTY DOING W RK:(NAME/ADDRESS)
\ L __ .r,,.. o l t T'S.,41.;Z?S
z
0w, tvC Z?l'IO^7 Pt[UNE: CoLk"It) 10 - It
PHONE) 3 2Z.
OTHER INDIVIDUALS PRESENT:
IS PROPERTY UNIFORM OR SEPARATE DISCRETE _ VEGETATIVE UNITS
---------------------------------------------------
Do normal ronmentai conditions exist at the plant community?
Yes No (if no, explain onb adc) disturbed?
Has the vegetation,,. and/or hydrology been signifi miy
Yes No ? (If yes explain-an back)
___ ------- ------ ----
VEGETATION: (IN ORDER OF DOMINANCE, DRAW LINE ABOVE NON-DOMINANT SPECIES)
TREES: SPECIES---% COVER--INDICATOR GROUND COVER: SPECIES-% COVER-INDLCATOR
2.??t+c.yc???w \c? IF?11&_ 2.
3. aaec S Q?1oo? S N74 C_ t' 3.
4. 'Fa- C_ 4.
5. IR- L 5•
SAPLINGS/SHRUBS: 6.
1? S
2: ?
Ik 7.
8.
3. Q--ccc-s d?b0. S c? WOODY- VINES :
4. 1.
5._.: 2. 3 C?
percent of dominant species th at are OBL. F ACK and/or F1C,
Is the hydmphytic vegetation criterion met? Yes No A Lsig 40
-Rationale: ?\
ve 9L ' to 4` 'ctxC w+2.
SOILS
Sades/phase: CVtJ'n^pJ <- Subgroup•2 LA, `- m g )m lu?+
Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes No Undetermined
Is the soil a Histosoi? Yes _ No ?- Histic epipedon present? Yes No
S R 518
Is the soil: Mottled? `)f?e?I?_ No Gleyed? Yes No ?r
Matrix Color. S ` Mottle Colon::
Other hydric soil indicators:
Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes No ? ??f'?S ^?-? c?QlS c?
Rationale: 1k,??.n.,c.,l ctt 4 V c?C_ 50?
HYDROLOGY
Is the ground surface inundated? Yes No Y Surface water depth:
Is the soil saturated? Yes No L r
Depth to free-standing water in pit/soil probe hole:
List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation. o r '?
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes
Rationale:
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes Noy ctxf_'m C-e-
Rationale for jurisdictional decision:
PHOTOS TAKEN: YES NO
JURISDICTION: ABOVE HEA
No
AUTHORITY: 10 404 10/404 NONE \/
ATERS ISOLATED- ADJACENT NWP #
DETERMINED BY:

Environmental Consultants, Inc.
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609
August 4, 1992
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District Regulatory Branch, Raleigh Office
Attn: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
11413 Falls of the Neuse Road
Wake Forest, NC 27587
Dear Mr. Alsmeyer:
The purpose of this letter is to request Nationwide Permits
(Nos. 14 and 26) for the placement of fill material on the
project known as Hope Valley Farms, Durham, N.C. You have
visited the site on several occasions previously to approve
delineations and discuss permitting. The attached plans show
the locations of Wetlands and Waters of the U.S. as approved
by the Corps on the property, proposed "fill" sites and the
areas of Wetlands and Waters of the U.S. to be impacted at
each fill site. 0.39 acres of impact will be covered under
Corps Nationwide Permit 14 for road crossings and 2.70 acres
of impact will be covered under Nationwide Permit 26.
In the recent past, when dealing with wetland areas above
headwaters which require fill covered under Nationwide
Permits the Corps and DEM have issued permits/certifications
on a routine basis unless the wetlands are of exceptional
quality or if endangered species are involved. However, we
feel that in some cases our clients have been penalized for
reducing impacts "up-front" based on our recommendations.
Therefore, I hope you will consider that we have already made
considerable changes to the original plans to minimize the
project's impacts as much as possible. Based on the age and
advanced stages of the first phases of the project (e.g.
roads are already paved, most lots already have houses on
them) it is difficult to determine the extent of previous
impacts (if any) the project had. However, we are aware that
our client impacted .19 acre of vegetated wetlands above
headwaters that were contained on the bottom of an old farm
pond that was restored to its original dimensions. You and
Karl Schafer met us to review the area and we concluded that
Soil/Site Evaluation ¦ Mapping and Physical Analysis ¦ Wetlands Mapping and Mitigation ¦ Environmental Audits
On-Site Waste Treatment Systems, Evaluation and Design

t
prior to commencing work but we would include it on this.
Nationwide Permit ap2plication. It is shown on the attached
map as "Pond 8276 ft ." (Reference various site meetings
with Karl Schafer of DEM and you). Based on requests by DEM
the client has agreed to some conditions for lake
construction which include placement of small "forbay"
impoundments just above the head of the large lake which will
serve as "sediment traps" that can be maintained. Also large
trees and other natural vegetation will be maintained as much
as possible, especially on the north side of the lake. There
will likely be narrow grassed borders along the lake to
stabilize areas disturbed by construction and allow for some
recreational uses. But the entire area surrounding the lake
will not be cleared. Upland areas remaining in natural
vegetation will be thinned of underbrush as discussed with
DEM.
We should note that most of the impacts north of Juliette and
Donaldson Drive are composed of small areas of Waters
of the U.S. and/or wetlands located in the blank development
areas. At present we do not know the exact development plans
for the area but fill will be needed since these drainageways
dissect the development areas in some places. It is our
understanding that if we do not apply to the Corps for these
areas now that we may not be allowed another Nationwide 26
Permit for the project in the future. Since these are
relatively small areas we hope it will not affect the
issuance of the permit for the areas presently of most
concern. The ability to complete the current phase of the
project and expand in the future is of utmost concern to our
client. Therefore, we would appreciate a quick review of the
project so that the final development plans shown can be
completed in time to optimize construction during the
remaining favorable time this year.
Cumulative impacts are addressed in a graphic tabular form on
the attached map. We felt this approach would be easier for
all of us to follow and be more informative.
There are several items that I would like to point out that
you may want to discuss with me in further detail:
(1) Most of the impacts are along swales with non-hydric
soils and very little vegetation. These are claimed as
"Waters of the U.S." because of the evidence of flow
(e.g. displaced leaves and small scoured areas) which
occur due to the impermeable nature of surrounding
upland soils. Most all rainfall runs off into these

swales instead of-infiltrating into the soils. This is
common in other Triassic areas but the same landscape
positions in acid crystalline rock areas would rarely
meet wetland or Waters of the U.S. criteria.
The streams with the highest values from a water quality
or wildlife standpoint were avoided by the development
as much as possible. Based on our site meeting with Mr.
Schafer of DEM we believe he concurs that the project as
proposed will have minimal impacts to water quality. We
will be glad to discuss the project with you in further
detail if it is necessary. I should note that the
jurisdictional areas to impacted have very little water
quality or wildlife value for reasons mentioned earlier.
However, Mr. Schafer was concerned about stormwater. Mr
Schafer's concern was the potential off site effects of
runoff from this project. The proposed lake will be
designed to handle runoff from a large portion of the
project and that the other small tributaries drain into
extensive wetland areas along Third Fork Creek or its
tributaries which will serve to further "filter"
stormwater. Roughly, 30 acres of wetlands occur in the
large floodplain of Third Fork Creek within the
project's boundaries.
(2) The entire project area has over 90 acres of
jurisdictional wetland areas. Many are high quality
bottomland hardwoods. Most of those proposed for
..impacts are of low quality. Less than 4% of
jurisdictional areas on the project are to be impacted.
This low percentage further attests to the fact that.the
minimization and avoidance criteria have been met.
(3) Areas, AAA, BBB, CCC, DDD, EEE and FFF were delineated
and potential plans indicate roads there. But these
areas have not been addressed because these impacts
would be due to construction of Martin Luther King
Boulevard and extension of South Roxboro Road. There is
currently and Individual Permit for parts of these roads
issued to the city of Durham. We are not currently sure
of their final alignment. Regardless of whether or not
the roads are constructed in this area our clients
project could still be built. Based on conversation
with your staff and the Corps, the present situation
with these roads does not have any effect on the ability
to issue the requested Nationwide Permits. Impacts to
GGG are included in this permit application since even
though this may be commercial property, it does belong
a . _ -e
to our client and would require a permit for development
if the roads ever were constructed.
(4) Based on conversation with your staff and the Corps
under current "policy" non-vegetated areas of Waters of
the U.S. to be inundated by creation of lakes or other
impoundments are not considered to be adversely impacted
except for the dam area. Therefore since the areas in
HHH, III and JJJ meet this criteria for exclusion they
have not been included as negative impacts except for
the dam areas. These areas are either "gully-like"
channels with little or no vegetation, similar channels
or open water impounded by beaver activity. Unlike
normal "beaver areas", these are long and narrow and
bordered by steep slopes and contain little living
vegetation. Normally impounded beaver areas are in
broad flats which encourage emergent vegetation and
broad shallow impoundments.
While in acreage it appears that this project potentially has
significant impacts, site evaluations of the quality of the
jurisdictional areas leads us to believe that many that are
to be impacted probably should not be jurisdictional in the
first place. However, when interpreted literally the
"Manual" and the Clean Water Act definitions of Waters of the
U.S. would include these areas.
Please call if you have questions or require further
information.
Sincerely,
L G??
Kevin C. Martin
cc: (with enclosure) David Franklin, Wilmington Corps
USF&WS
N.C. Cultural Resources
John Dorney, DEM Water Quality Planning
Karl Schafer, DEM Raleigh Regional
Office