20042010 Ver 1_Complete File_20041216

{ 4FWA'ER
\p? QG
r
a ?
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
February 4, 2005
DWQ# 04-2010
Forsyth County
Mr. Steve Williams, President
A. T. Williams Oil Company
5446 University Parkway
Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27105
A1PPR, OVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification with Additional Conditions
Dear Mr. Williams:
A. T. Williams Oil Company has our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions, to impact by
excavation, and to place permanent fill in, 349 linear feet of perennial stream in order to: 1) remove three
existing corrugated metal pipe culverts, 348 feet in length and 16 feet in diameter; 2) to restore 349 linear feet
of stream to open channel; and 3) to stabilize 349 linear feet of stream channel and banks, along a section of
Peters Creek located at 598 Peters Creek Parkway in Winston-Salem, Forsyth County, as described in your
application received by the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) on December 16, 2004. After reviewing your
application, we have determined that this activity is covered by General Water Quality Certification Numbers
3494 and '3495, which can be viewed on our web site at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. These
Certifications allow you to use Nationwide Permit Numbers 3, 13, and 27 when they are issued by the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers. In addition, you should secure any other applicable federal, state or local permits
before you proceed with your project, including (but not limited to) those required by Sediment and Erosion
gonjtrol, Non-Discharge, and Water Supply Watershed regulations. Also, this approval will expire when the
accompanying 404 permit expires unless otherwise specified in the General Certification.
This approval is valid only for the purpose and design that you have described in your application. If you
change your project, you must notify us in writing, and you maybe required to send us a new application for a
new certification. If the property is sold, the new owner must be given a copy of the Certification and
approval letter and is thereby responsible for complying with all conditions. If total wetland fill for this
project (now or in the future) exceeds one acre, compensatory mitigation may be required as described in 15A
14CAC 2H .0506 (h). For this approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed in the attached
gertification, as well as the additional conditions listed below:
1. Appropriate sediment and erosion control measures 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 at NCDENR
regional offices or the central office), whichever is more appropriate, shall be designed, installed and
maintained properly to assure compliance with the North Carolina water quality standards that are
applicable to Class C waters as described in 15A NCAC 02B.0211 Fresh Surface Water Quality
1, Carolina
e
Nt"affy
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Wetlands Certification Unit 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 Phone [phone] FAX [phone]
2321 Crabtree Blvd. Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 Internet httnll:h2o.enr.state.nc.uslncwetiands
Customer Service Number: 1-877-623-6748
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper
Mr. Steve Williams
Page 2
February 4, 2005
Standards For Class C Waters. Such measures must equal or exceed the requirements specified in the
most recent version of the North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Manual. These measures must
be maintained on all construction sites, borrow sites, and waste pile (spoil) sites, including contractor
owned and leased borrow pits, which are associated with this project.
2. Soft bank stabilization methods, such as the use of erosion control matting and the planting of
appropriate ground cover, shall be utilized to the maximum extent practicable. Where riprap is required
for slope protection and stabilization, it shall be limited to a maximum of 10 feet upslope from the toe of
the stream bank, except in the area immediately adjacent to the east end of the concrete box culvert
under Academy Street. In this area only, and in accordance with the dimensions specified on the site
plan, riprap may be placed from the toe of the stream bank to the top of the stream bank. The original
grade and elevation of the stream's cross-section must be maintained along the entire reach being re-
opened and stabilized. Riprap should not be placed in the stream channel.
3. If concrete is used with any fill material, it shall not be allowed to come in contact with surface waters
until it has cured.
4. Upon finishing the project, the Applicant shall fill out and return the enclosed "Certificate of
Completion" to notify NCDWQ when all work included in the §401 Certification has been completed.
This certificate should be returned to the Wetlands/401 Certification Unit of the NC Division of Water
Quality at the address listed on the form. Along with the Certificate of Completion, please send
photographs of the re-opened and stabilized stream reach.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory hearing. You
must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send a written petition
which conforms to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of Administrative
Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, N.C. 27699-6714. This certification and its conditions are final
and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act.
If you have any questions, please telephone Daryl Lamb in the DWQ Winston-Salem Regional Office at 336-
771-4600, extension 293.
Sincerely,
x i ?.??-
Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
i
AWK/cdl
Attachments
cc: Andrea Wade, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
Winston-Salem DWQ Regional Office
Central Files
Wetlands/401 File Copy
Carl von Isenburg, P. E., GeoScience & Technology, 2050 Northpoint Drive, Suite A, Winston-Salem,
NC 27106
041-Zo10
PNO Ncimce
D p
6dhndagy, P. A.
V „Practical Engineering &
Environmental Sohdions"
2050 Northpoint Drive • Suite A • Winston-Salem, NC 27106
Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone] i4w ? _J_
e-mail: [e-mail] Iff- P-1
1=e=braze--y 1, 2005
Mr. Todd Tugwell
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
US Army Corps of Engineers
6508; Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 1 20
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
Telephone [phone]
Mr. Johr- Dorney
Division of Water Quality
NCOENR
-1=10.!' Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, l`ierth Carolina 27607
Te!ePh me 1 919) 733-1786
ti
`)
3
DEW - x
WATER STWOMiRi QUALITY
6RAWH
F_E: RfLonctiucti-H Notification ; vpplicatiDn
Peters Cree- 'Academy St. Culvert Modifications
AT Williams Oil Co. & Peters Creek Stoiage,.U.C
Winston-Salem. Forsyth County, NC'
Dear. Mr. Tugwell and Mr. Dorney:
The wr ler met at the site with Mr. Daryl Lamb of NCDEN, R Divisi it i Water Quality, Winston-
Salen, Office, on January 26'. At Mr. Lamb's request, we are foiwardinn ccvtected pagers of the
cover letter, reflecting the exclusion of the single-lane bridge that had been contemplated. The
bridge is cost prohibitive at this stage. It may be reconsidered later
The priginal and one (1) copy of this application are enclosed for 0-e Cnq-)s of E ngiri?Ys. Sedan (7)
copies are enclosed for the Division of Water Quality. Please lest us know if you have any questions
or require further information with regards to this application.
With best regards,
GEOSCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, P.A.
P
Sen )r C-:ivii Engin r
ealclcsures: Original and one (1) copy to Todd Tugwe 1, COE
Seven (7) copies to John Dome y,1`h4WQ
eoSc0ence
®?®9 ?o AAo
"Practical Engineering &
Emi ronineental Solutions"
2050 Northpoint Drive • Suite A • Winston-Salem, NC 27106
Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
e-mail: [e-mail]
December 5, 2004
Mr..
Div..
Dorney
of Water Quality
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Telephone [phone]
RE: P reconstruction Notification Application
Peters Creek/Academy St. Culvert Modifications
AT Williams Oil Co. & Peters Creek Storage, LLC
Winston-Salem, Forsyth County, NC
Dear Mr. Tugwell and Mr. Dorney:
On behalf of AT Williams Oil Co, LLC. (Williams), Geoscience & Technology, P.A. is pleased to
submit the enclosed Preconstruction Notification Form (PCN) for proposed culvert modifications
in. Peters Creek in Winston-Salem, NC. The following text contains additional information
concerning the proposed project. Where the information pertains to specific items in the PCN, the
PCNsection numbers are referenced.
lac ound
Williams, owners. of the property at 598 Peters Creek Parkway, on the northwest corner of the
intersection of Peters Creek Parkway with Academy Street (hereafter referred to as the subject site
or subject property) retained GeoSci for en 'neefinb a and environmental consulting services :elated
;?
to modifications of the existing culverts. Fuisyth County tax records indicate the property contains
1.2 acres and is designated as Block 1009 Lot 102. Williams and the owners of the adjacent
property to the north (address 550 Peters Creek Parkway), propose to modify the culvert that
currently pipes approximately 349 linear feet of Peters Creek across their properties. Adjacent
property to the north is owned by Peters Creek Storage. [..C and is designated as Block 1009 Lot
200$. -
Mr. Todd Tugwell
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
US Army Corps of Engineers
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
Telephone [phone]
Mr. Todd Tugwell
Mr John Dorney
Decec ber 5, 2004
Page '2
The e. xisting culvert consists of three- (3) parallel 16-ft. diameter corrugated metal pipes (CMP) that
were 'installed in the 1960's. These pipes have deteriorated and need to be removed or replaced in
order to mitigate po ntial hazards due to sinkholes and potential for flooding Peters Creek
Parkway, a state roa In fact, a large sinkhole developed on or about January 5, 2004, which
required immediate att. ntion. The overburden on the pipes was partially removed to relieve the load
on th pipes, while the design of the modification was completed.
The existing pipes terniinate in a concrete transition box structure, which feeds the water into a
double 20 x 15-ft. concrete box culvert under Academy Street. Both the transition box and the
Academy Street culverts appear to be in sound condition. Existing site conditions are documented
on the attached plan drawing S1.
Todd Tugwell with the Raleigh office of the Army Corps of Engineers indicated in a November 11,
20031 telephone message that Nationwide permits 3, 13, and 27 may apply to this project. Based on
GeoSci's analysis of the three permits, it appears that the project does not match all of the criteria
for an y one of the three. NWP 3 could be loosely applied as this project is a "...repair,
rehabilitation, or replacement of a previously authorized, currently serviceable, structure...".
Howiever, `previously authorized' and `currently serviceable' may not apply in this case. NWP 13
may apply to the bank stabilization portion of the overall project. NWP 27 may apply to the
restoration of 349 feet of Peters Creek to an open channel.
Peters Creek is an urban stream that joins Salem Creek approximately 1 mile south of the subject
property. Salem Creek is a tributary of Muddy Creek, which it joins approximately 6.5 miles
southwest of the Peters Creek/Salem Creek juncture. Both Peters Creek and Salem Creek are Class
`C' ''i waters according to the NC Division of Water Quality (DWQ) basinwide stream
classifications available on DWQ website as of the date of this application.
Project Description PCN 4IIL 10)
The proposed modification consists of.
1) removal of the existing three pipes and conversion to open channel, for the entire 349 ft. length;
2) protection of the toe of the outside (eastern) bank of the stream with rip-rap;
3) stabilizing the slopes/banks with erosion control mats with permanent, woven reinforcing for
vegetation;
4) leaving the cone transition structure in place to reduce encroachment at the curb line of the
turn lane from so thbound Peters Creek Parkway to Academy Street; and
5) Installation of class 2 riprap adjacent to the latter, where the slope increases from 1.511:1 V to
1H:1V.
The modifications are described on the attached drawings S2 and S3.
Wetlands Impacts (M.1)
There are currently no wetlands existing on the subject site. Peters Creek is piped in CMP and there
nt floodplain. Therefore, there are no proposed wetland impacts. The proposed culvert
is no adj
4ce
excavati _ and restoration of open stream channel may promote the development of wetlands
adjacent the stream; however, based on the stream gradient and slope of the proposed stream
banks, the potential for riparian wetland development as a result of the project is considered
minimal.
Mr. Tydd Tugwelt
Mr. J?'?hn Dorney
Decer6er 5, 2004
Page 3
Strewn In acts (,§ VI.3)
xcavation of the exis "n 349-feet of CUT and
Proposed stream impact 001 will occur during the e ti g
stabilization of the stream banks. Impact will consist of excavation in the stream bed and possible
he'av equipment encroachment during grading of the side slopes. Sl petbank stabilization will
occur as the excavation proceeds up- and downstream. EromatTM C60 e osion control matting will
be anchored to the side slopes following grading (see drawing S3). The n t result of this impact will
be positive as 349-feet of formerly enclosed stream will become open channel.
It ,appears that the net impact to Peters Creek is a positive one, considering that 349 feet of existing
coveted stream will be returned to open channel, less the impact of the one-lane bridge, of which the
abutments will not be in the flood plain.
4YHJ impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
The deterioration of the existing stream culvert presents a public hazard in the form of sinkholes
and die possibility of collapse causing pipe blockage and flooding, and ust be mitigated as soon
as passible. Therefore, it appears that some sort of construction must cur and an impact to the
stream is unavoidable.
Geo$ci and Williams considered four options.
dp*n #1:
1) Replacement of the entire existing CMPs. The construction impact to the stream with the
Rs option is probably the same as the proposed impact 001.'
2) his option was rejected based on prohibitive cost.
Option #2:
1) Replacement of approximately 83.4 ft. of conduit on the upstream] end, close to the existing
alignment, to provide access to the two properties from Peters Creek Parkway.
2) Replace-Went of approximately 66.4 ft. of pipe at the downstream end (total 149.8 ft.).
3) conversion of the balance, approximately 198-ft., to open channel. The plan to replace 150 feet
f pipe is driven by the need to retain access to two existing businesses and to retain some
sable land surface on which to conduct one of them, which would otherwise be rendered
ithout economic value.
4) This option was rejected based on prohibitive cost.
Option #3:
1) Replacement of approximately 83.4 ft. of conduit on the upstream end, close to the existing
alignment, to provide access to the two properties from Peters Creek Parkway.
2) Leave in place, but rehabilitate the flow line of, approximately 66.4 ft. of pipe at the downstream
end (total 149.8 ft.).
3) conversion of the balance, approximately ;198-ft., to open channel. The plan to replace 150 feet
9f pipe is driven by the need to retain access to two existing businesses and to retain some
usable land surface on which to conduct one of them, which would otherwise be rendered
without economic value.
4) This option was rejected based on prohibitive cost and the remaining future liability for the
emaining, deteriorating CMP.
#4:
ovation. of all existing CMP and existing property access drive from Peters Creek Parkway.
un Bank stabilization.
Mr. Tpdd Tugwell
Mr. John Domey
Deceoiber a`, 2004
Page 4
3) This option will impact 349 feet of stream during excavation and stream bank stabilization with
a net result of 349 linear feet of stream returned to open channel.
4) This option was selected for its lowest overall cost and lowest future liability for maintenance.
The subject property currently contains approximately 78% impervious surface area (0.93 acres).
Theproposed project will decrease impervious surface area to 23% (0.28 acres). This is another
ppsi ve aspect of the modifications. As indicated above, erosion control matting will be placed on
the side slopes following grading. Standard construction erosion and sediment controls will be
employed during both phases of the project.
The ,original and one (1) copy of this application are enclosed for the Corps of Engineers. Seven (7)
eopips are enclosed for the Division of Water Quality. Please let me know if you have any
questions or require further information with regards to this application.
With hest regards,
GEOS CE AND TECHNOLQGY, PA.
I e °
y, o
garlvon nburg
Senior Civil Eng n
enclosures: PCN'
Origilit posao.e.)"copy to Todd Tugwell, COE
Seven (7) copies to John Dorney, DVG'Q
I

?Ihn(DR(0)RV9
2050 Northpoint Drive - Suite A - Winston-Salem, NC 27106
Phone: [phone] - Fax: [phone]
e-mail: [e-mail]
FObroary 1, 2005
Mr. ''odd Tugwell
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
US Amy Corps of Engineers
6508; Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
Telephone [phone]
Nor. ohn Dorney
Divi ion of Water Quality
NC' FNR
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh. North Carolina 27607
a":?!ephone [phone]
RE: :-econstruction Notification Application
eters Creelc'Academy St. Culvert Modifications
AT Williams Oil Co. & Peters Creek Storage, LLC
INinston-Salem, Forsyth County, NC
Dear Mr. Tugwell and Mr. Dorney:
The writer met at the site with Mr. Daryl Lamb of NCDENR Division of Water Quality, Winston-
Salero Office, on January 26`'. At Mr. Lamb's request, we are forwarding corrected pages of the
cover; letter, reflecting the exclusion of the single-lane bridge that had been contemplated The
bridge is cost prohibitive at this stage. It may be reconsidered later
The original and one (1) copy of this application are enclosed for the Corps of Engineers. Seven (7)
copies are enclosed for the Division of Water Quality. Please let us know if you have any questions
or require further information with regards to this application.
With !best regards,
GEO CCIIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, P.A.
Carl vba-Ysenb , P
Senior Civil Engin
enclosures: Original and one (1) copy to Todd Tugwell, COE
Seven (7) copies to John Dorney, DWQ
I
i
eosecimlaRogy, P. A.
"Pmaicd Engineering &
F.ycvirann?rttal Solulionr"
2050 Northpoint Drive • Suite A • Winston-Salem, NC 27106
Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
e-mail: [e-mail]
Deceipriber 5, 2004
Mr. Todd Tugwell
Raleili Regulatory Field Office
U$ A -my Corps of Engineers
6508 ! ails of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
Tele one [phone]
Mr. John Domey
Divis'on of water Quality
NCD,NR
4401 eedy Creek Road
Ra,eith, North Carolina 27607
Telephone [phone]
RE: Preconstruction Notification Application
Peters Creek/Academy St. Culvert Modifications
AT Williams Oil Co. & Peters Creek Storage, LLC
Winston-Salem, Forsyth County, NC
Mar Mr. Tugwell and Mr. Dorney:
On behalf of AT Williams Oil Co, LLC. (Williams), Geoscience & Technology, P.A. is pleased to
submit the enclosed Preconstruction Notification Form (PCN) for proposed culvert modifications
in Peters Creek in Winston-Salem, NC. The following text contains additional information
concerning the proposed project. Where the information pertains to specific items in the PCN, the
PCN section numbers are referenced.
WillilIns, owners. of the property 'at 598 Peters Creek Parkway, on the northwest corner of the
intersection of Peters Creek Parkway with Academy Street (hereafter referred to as the subject site
or subject property) retained GeoSci for engineering and environmental consulting services related
to modifications of the existing culvert,. Fuisyth County tax records indicate the property contaiim
1.2 acres and is designated as Block 1009 Lot 102. Williams and the owners of the adjacent
property to the north (address 550 Peters Creek Parkway), propose to modify the culvert that
curre?y pipes approximately 349 linear feet of Peters Creek. across their properties. Adjacent
pry, to the north is owned by Peters Creek Storage.. LLC and is designated as Block. 1009 Lot
Mr. Todd Tugwell
btr. Jo 'tn Dorney
Dece ber 5, 2004
Page
The existing culvert consists of three- (3) parallel 16-ft. diameter corrugated metal pipes (CMP) that
were installed in the 1960's. These pipes have deteriorated and need to be removed or replaced in
order to mitigate potential hazards due to sinkholes and potential for flooding Peters Creek
Par; v ay, a state road. In fact, a large sinkhole developed on or about January 5, 2004, which
required immediate attention. The overburden on the pipes was partially removed to relieve the load
on the pipes, while the design of the modification was completed.
The existing pipes terminate in a concrete transition box structure, which feeds the water into a
dqube 20 x 15-ft. concrete box culvert under Academy Street. Both the transition box and the
A¢a my Street culverts appear to be in sound condition. Existing site conditions are documented
orb the attached plan drawing S 1.
Todd!Tugwell with the Raleigh office of the Army Corps of Engineers indicated in a November 11,
2003 telephone message that Nationwide permits 3, 13, and 27 may apply to this project. Based on
GeoSj is analysis of the three permits, it appears that the project does not match all of the criteria
for any one of the three. NWP 3 could be loosely applied as this project is a "...repair,
rehabilitation, or replacement of a previously authorized, currently serviceable, structure...".
However, `previously authorized' and `currently serviceable' may not apply in this case. NWP 13
may ',apply to the bank stabilization portion of the overall project. NWP 27 may apply to the
re$to?'ation of 349 feet of Peters Creek to an open channel.
Hy ftlogic Conditions
Peters Creek is an urban stream that joins Salem Creek approximately 1 mile south of the subject
property. Salem Creek is a tributary of Muddy Creek, which it joins approximately 6.5 miles
southwest of the Peters Creek/Salem Creek juncture. Both Peters Creek and Salem Creek are Class
`C' *aters according to the NC Division of Water Quality (DWQ) basinwide stream
classifications available on DWQ website as of the date of this application.
Pr.^ject Description (PCN §111.10)
The proposed modification consists of:
1) removal of the existing three pipes and conversion to open channel, for the entire 349 ft. length;
2) protection of the toe of the outside (eastern) bank of the stream with rip-rap;
3) stabilizing the slopes/banks with erosion control mats with permanent, woven reinforcing for
Vegetation;
4) having the concrete transition structure in place to reduce encroachment at the curb line of the
turn lane from southbound Peters Creek Parkway to Academy Street; and
5) Installation of class 2 riprap adjacent to the latter, where the slope increases from 1.511:1 V to
tH:1V.
The rjnodifications are described on the attached drawings S2 and S3.
Wctl#nds Impacts (4VI.1)
Them are currently no wetlands existing on the subject site. Peters Creek is piped in CMP and there
is;noadjacent floodplain. Therefore, there are no proposed wetland impacts. The proposed culvert
excavation and restoration of open stream channel may promote the development of wetlands
adjacent to the stream; however, based on the stream gradient and slope of the proposed stream
banks, the potential for riparian wetland development as a result of the project is considered
minimal.
i
Todd Tugwell
M . John Dorney
riNber 5, 2004
Page$
sed stream impact 001 will occur during the excavation of the existing 349-feet of CMP and
zation of the stream banks. Impact will consist of excavation in the stream bed and possible
equipment encroachment during grading of the side slopes. Slope/bank stabilization will
as the excavation proceeds up- and downstream. EromatTM C60 erosion control matting will
shored to the side slopes following grading (see drawing S3). The net result of this impact will
;itive as 349-feet of formerly enclosed stream will become open channel.
It appears that the net impact to Peters Creek is a positive one, considering that 349 feet of existing
covered stream will be returned to open channel, less the impact of the one-lane bridge, of which the
abutments will not be in the flood plain.
!-I e eterioration :of the existing stream culvert presents a public hazard in the form of sinkholes
an die possibility of collapse causing pipe blockage and flooding, and must be mitigated as soon
as po;sible. Therefore, it appears that some sort of construction must occur and an impact to the
stream is unavoidable.
i and Williams considered four options.
O ti¢n #1:
1) Replacement of the entire existing CMPs. The construction impact to the stream with the
placement option is probably the same as the proposed impact 001.
2) is option was rejected based on prohibitive cost.
Option #2:
1) Replacement of approximately 83.4 ft. of conduit on the upstream end, close to the existing
alignment, to provide access to the two properties from Peters Creek. Parkway.
2) R' placement of approximately 66.4 ft. of pipe at the downstream end (total 149.8 ft.).
3) C nversion of the balance, approximately 198-ft., to open channel. The plan to replace 150 feet
o pipe is driven by the need to retain access to two existing businesses and to retain some
u$able land surface on which to conduct one of them, which would otherwise be rendered
without economic value.
4) This option was rejected based on prohibitive cost.
Option #3:
1) Replacement of approximatcly 83.4 ft. of conduit on the upstream end, close to the existing
alignment, to provide access to the two properties from Peters Creek Parkway.
2)'i heave in place, but rehabilitate the flow line of, approximately 66.4 ft. of pipe at the downstream
1 e d (total 149.8 ft.).
3) j Conversion of the balance, approximately 198-ft., to open channel. The plan to replace 150 feet
o pipe is driven by the need to retain access to two existing businesses and to retain some
uable land surface on which to conduct one of them, which would otherwise be rendered
without economic value.
4) This option was rejected based on prohibitive cost and the remaining future liability for the
remaining, deteriorating CMP.
O tin #4:
1) cavation of all existing CMP and existing property access drive from Peters Creek Parkway.
2) Stream Bank stabilization.
i
Mr. Tmdd Tugwell
Mr. John Dorney
Dgcenpber 5, 2004
3)' s option will impact 349 feet of stream during excavation and stream bank stabilization with
a; et result of 349 linear feet of stream returned to open channel.
4) s option was selected for its lowest overall cost and lowest future liability for maintenance.
The subject property currently contains approximately 78% impervious surface area (0.93 acres).
The proposed project will decrease impervious surface area to 23% (0.28 acres). This is another
itia aspect of the modifications. As indicated above, erosion control matting will be placed on
j th s de slopes following grading. Standard construction erosion and sediment controls will be
e pl; yed during;both phases of the project.
The nginal and one (1) copy of this application are enclosed for the Corps of Engineers. Seven (7)
copies are enclosed for the Division of Water Quality. Please let me know if you have any
questions or require further information with regards to this application.
G O CE AND TECHNOLQGY, P.A.
`e ?zz 4?psa
Carl on enburg E4 ?O3
Senior Civil EnginDer, " . ..
enclosures: PCI? ` •. ??'
ginaY 'e O copy to Todd Tugwell, COE
10
Seven (7) copies to John Domey, DWQ
. of
IT
QG
`C
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
February 4, 2005
DWQ# 04-2010
Forsyth County
Dear Mr.
ams, President
Oil Company
Parkway
North Carolina 27105
of 401 Water Quality Certification with Additional Conditions
A. T. 1JVilliams Oil Company has our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions, to impact by
?xcavai I
and to place permanent fill in, 349 linear feet of perennial stream in order to: 1) remove three
on,
existm cprrugated metal pipe culverts, 348 feet in length and 16 feet in diameter; 2) to restore 349 linear feet
of stream ?o open channel; and 3) to stabilize 349 linear feet of stream channel and banks, along a section of
Peters Creek located at 598 Peters Creek Parkway in Winston-Salem, Forsyth County, as described in your
application received by the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) on December 16, 2004. After reviewing your
applicant" , we have determined that this activity is covered by General Water Quality Certification Numbers
X4914 and 3495, which can be viewed on our, web site at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. These
?e#ifi at' ns allow you to use Nationwide Permit Numbers 3, 13, and 27 when they are issued by the U.S.
y Co>?ps of Engineers. In addition, you should secure any other applicable federal, state or local permits
before ?yop proceed with your project, including (but not limited to) those required by Sediment and Erosion
Control, Non-Discharge, and Water Supply Watershed regulations. Also, this approval will expire when the
accompaniymg 404 permit expires unless otherwise specified in the General Certification.
val is valid only for the purpose and design that you have described in your application. If you
r project, you must notify us in writing, and you may be required to send us a new application for a
cation. If the property is sold, the new owner must be given a copy of the Certification and
tter and is thereby responsible for complying with all conditions. If total wetland fill for this
v or in the future) exceeds one acre, compensatory mitigation may be required as described in 15A
.0506 (h). For this approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed in the attached
n, as well as the additional conditions listed below:
1. Appropriate sediment and erosion control measures which equal or exceed those outlined in the most
r -.cit version of the North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Planning and Design Manual or the
o h Carolinas Surface Mining Manual (available from the Division of Land Resources at NCDENR
r gi?nal offices or the central office), whichever is more appropriate, shall be designed, installed and
n4ai'' tamed properly to assure compliance with the North Carolina water quality standards that are
applicable to Class C waters as described in 15A NCAC 02B .0211 Fresh Surface Water Quality
Noe Carolina
rtur2y
Qaroli a D vision of Water Quality
ed ds (certification Unit 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 Phone [phone] FAX [phone]
2321 Crabtree Blvd. Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 Internet hW/.,h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands
custo?mer'IService Number: 1-877-623-6748
An Equal O portunity/AtBmmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper
Mr. Steve Williams
Page 2
February 4, 2005
Standards For Class C Waters. Such measures must equal or exceed the requirements specified in the
most recent version of the North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Manual. These measures must
be maintained on all construction sites, borrow sites, and waste pile (spoil) sites, including contractor
owned and leased borrow pits, which are associated with this project.
2. Soft bank stabilization methods, such as the use of erosion control matting and the planting of
appropriate ground cover, shall be utilized to the maximum extent practicable. Where riprap is required
for slope protection and stabilization, it shall be limited to a maximum of 10 feet upslope from the toe of
the stream bank, except in the area immediately adjacent to the east end of the concrete box culvert
under Academy Street. In this area only, and in accordance with the dimensions specified on the site
plan, riprap may be placed from the toe of the stream bank to the top of the stream bank. The original
grade and elevation of the stream's cross-section must be maintained along the entire reach being re-
opened and stabilized. Riprap should not be placed in the stream channel.
3. If concrete is used with any fill material, it shall not be allowed to come in contact with surface waters
until it has cured.
4. Upon finishing the project, the Applicant shall fill out and return the enclosed "Certificate of
Completion" to notify NCDWQ when all work included in the §401 Certification has been completed.
This certificate should be returned to the Wetlands/401 Certification Unit of the NC Division of Water
Quality at the address listed on the form. Along with the Certificate of Completion, please send
photographs of the re-opened and stabilized stream reach.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory hearing. You
must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send a written petition
which conforms to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of Administrative
Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, N.C. 27699-6714. This certification and its conditions are final
and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act.
If you have any questions, please telephone Daryl Lamb in the DWQ Winston-Salem Regional Office at 336-
771-4600, extension 293.
Sincerely,
Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
AWK/cdl
Attachments
cc: Andrea Wade, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
Winston-Salem DWQ Regional Office
Central Files
Wetlands/401 File Copy
Carl von Isenburg, P. E., GeoScience & Technology, 2050 Northpoint Drive, Suite A, Winston-Salem,
NC 27106
Facility Marne A. T. Williams Oil Co. County Forsyth
Project*n* 104 2010 Regional Contact: Daryl Lamb
Date: 1 /31 /2005
Comments (continued from page 1):
OrigMally. the three barrel CMP culvert ran 0 If from h private access road south down Paters
cc: Regional Office Page Number 2
Central Office
MEMORANDUM
TO: John Dorney Regional Contact:
Non-Discharge Branch WQ Supervisor:
Date:
SUBJECT: WETLAND STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Facility Name A. T. Williams Oil Co.
Project Number 04 2010
Recvd From APP
Danrl Lamb
Steve Tedder
County Forsyth
County2
Region Winston-Salem
Received Date 12/16104 Recvd By Region
Project Type excavation, stream restoration
Certificates Stream
Permit Wetland Wetland Wetland Stream Class Acres Feet
Type Type Impact Score Index Prim. Supp. Basin Req. Req.
31 27 Stream O Y O N F- 12-9 3-12 S ?F-X0,701. F- 49.00
Mitigation Wetland
MitigationType Type Acres Feet
Is Wetland Rating Sheet Attached? Q YO N Did you request more info? Q Y (0 N
Have Project Changes/Conditions Been Discussed With Applicant? Q Y O N
Is Mitigation required? p Y (9 N Recommendation: Q Issue 0 Issue/Coed O Deny
Provided by Region: Latitude (ddmmss) 360505 Longitude (ddmmss) 801530
Comments:
Site visit made on 01/26/2005. The proposed project is a continuation of emergency repairs that
were made on a three-barrel C=MP culvert in Peters Creek in January 2004. The culvert has been in
place since - 1960 and provides access into businesses located across Peters Creek from Peters
?' e
Greek Parkway, which parallels the stream. The repairs were necessitated by the partial collapse of
the culvert and the subsequent development of a sink hole. The repairs were conducted under a
USACF NW 3 permit . Written concurrence was not required for using WQG# 3494 for the
emergency repairer The property owners subsequently decided that permanent repair of the culvert
was not feasible, and a free-spamingbrodge was prohibitively expensive, The City of
Winston-Salem has agreed to allow wcess into the businesses from Peters Greek Parkway by an
existing side street (Academy Street) which intersects the parkway - 350 feet south of the existing
culvert . Academy Street crosses Peters Creek utilizing a concrete transition box and a concrete
double box culvert These structures are sound and will remain in place.
cc: Regional Office
Central Office Page Number 1
Date: ('12/21/04
Triage Check List
Project Name: A.T. Williams Oil Co.
DWQ#: 04-2010
County: Forsyth
To: Daryl Lamb, Winston-Salem Regional Office
60-day Processing Time: 12/16/04 to 2/13/05
From: Cyndi Karoly Telephone : [phone]
D
g
0
ri?r G?!'V
The file attached is being forwarded to your for your evaluation.
Please call if you need assistance.
Stream length impacted
Stream determination
Wetland determination and distance to blue-line surface waters on USFW topo maps
Minimization/avoidance issues
Buffer Rules (Meuse, Tar-Pamlico, Catawba, Randleman)
Pond fill
Mitigation Ratios
Ditching
Are the stream and or wetland mitigation sites available and viable?
Check drawings for accuracy
Is the application consistent with pre-application meetings?
Q Cumulative impact concern
i
Comments: As per our discussion regarding revision of the triage and delegation processes,
please review the attached file. Note that you are the first reviewer, so this file will need to be
reviewed for administrative as well as technical details. If you elect to place this project on hold,
please ask the applicant to provide your requested information to both the Central Office in
Raleigh as well as the Asheville Regional Office. As we discussed, this is an experimental, interim
proc dupe as we slowly transition to electronic applications. Please apprise me of any
complications you encounter, whether related to workload, processing times, or lack of a "second
reviewer" as the triage process in Central had previously provided. Also, if you think of ways to
improve this process, especially so that we can plan for the electronic applications, let me know.
Thanks!,

eR(agy
P. A.
V "Practical Engineering &
F.nvihmff enlal Solutions"
2050 Northpoint Drive • Suite A • Winston-Salem, NC 27106
Phone: [phone] o Fax: [phone]
e-mail: [e-mail]
December 5, 2004
Mr. Todd Tugwell
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
US Army Corps of Engineers
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
Telephone [phone]
Mr. Jahn Domey
Divis ion of Water. Quality 1042010
NCDIFNR
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Telephone [phone]
RE: Preconstruction Notification Application
Peters Creek/Academy St. Culvert Modifications
AT Williams Oil Co. & Peters Creek Storage, LLC
Winston-Salem, Forsyth County, NC
Dear Mr. Tugwell and Mr. Domey:

#Ift&§
DEC i
1
r s V 2004
q+?psaua?,?,
T0a%MCy
On behalf of AT Williams Oil Co, LLC. (Williams), Geoscience & Technology, P.A. is pleased to
submijt the enclosed Preconstruction Notification Form (PCN) for proposed culvert modifications
in Peters Creek in Winston-Salem, NC. The following text contains additional information
coocejniing the proposed project. Where the information pertains to specific items in the PCN, the
PCN Section numbers are referenced.
BaPkground
Williams, owners of the property at 598 Peters Creek Parkway, on the northwest corner of the
intprsec:tion of Peters Creek Parkway with Academy Street (hereafter referred to as the subject site
or ublject property) retained GeoSci for engineering and environmental consulting services related
to modifications of the existing culverts. Forsyth County tax records indicate the property contains
L. aeres and is designated as Block 1009 Lot 102. Williams and the owners of the adjacent
property to the north (address 550 Peters Creek Parkway), propose to modify the culvert that
currently pipes approximately 349 linear feet of Peters Creek across their properties. Adjacent
property to the north is owned by Peters Creek Storage. LLC and is designated as Block 1009 Lot
200B.
1-r9
Mr.' T(4d Tugs el.'
Mr. Jo n Dorsey
December 5, 2004
Page 2,1
The existing culvert consists of three- (3) parallel 16-ft. diameter corrugated metal pipes (CMP) that
were installed in the 1960's. These pipes have deteriorated and need to be removed or, replaced in
order 'to mitigate potential hazards due to sinkholes and potential for flooding Peters Creek
Parkway, a state road. In fact, a large sinkhole developed on or about January 5, 2004, which
requi *d immediate attention. The overburden on the pipes was partially removed to relieve the load
on thepipes, while the design of the modification was completed.
The existing pipes terminate in a concrete transition box structure, which feeds the water into a
doable 20 x 15-ft. concrete box culvert under Academy Street. Both the transition box and the
Ac=hed treet culverts appear to be in sound condition. Existing site conditions are documented
on plan drawing S 1.
Todd Tugwell with the Raleigh office of the Army Corps of Engineers indicated in a November 11,
2003 telephone message that Nationwide permits 3, 13, and 27 may apply to this project. Based on
GeoSci's analysis of the three permits, it appears that the project does not match all of the criteria
for any one of the three. NWP 3 could be loosely applied as this project is a "...repair,
rehabilitation, or replacement of a previously authorized, currently serviceable, structure...".
However, `previously authorized' and `currently serviceable' may not apply in this case. NWP 13
may apply to the bank stabilization portion of the overall project. NWP 27 may apply to the
restoration of 349 feet of Peters Creek to an open channel.
Hydrologic Conditions
Peters; Creek is an urban stream that joins Salem Creek approximately I mile south of the subject
property. Salem Creek is a tributary of Muddy Creek, which it joins approximately 6.5 miles
south -est of the Peters Creek/Salem Creek juncture. Both Peters Creek and Salem Creek are Class
`C° Yvaters according to the NC Division of Water Quality (DWQ) basinwide stream
classifications available on DWQ website as of the date of this application.
Project Dcscrition (PCN 4111.10)
The proposed modification consists of.
1) removal of the existing three pipes and conversion to open channel, for the entire 349 ft. length;
2) cp?nstruction of a one-lane prefabricated steel truss bridge for right turn only access to the
properties from Peters Creek Parkway;
3) protection of the toe of the outside (eastern) bank of the stream with rip-rap;
4) stabilizing the slopes/banks with erosion control mats with permanent, woven reinforcing for
vegetation;
5) leaving the concrete transition structure in place to reduce encroachment at the curb line of the
turn lane from southbound Peters Creek Parkway to Academy Street; and
6) Installation of class 2 riprap, fully grouted, adjacent to the latter, where the slope increases from
115H: 1V to 1H: 1V.
The modifications are described on the attached drawings S2 and S3.
Wetlands Impacts MI. D
There are currently no wetlands existing on the subject site. Peters Creek is piped in CMP and there
is no ;.adjacent floodplain. Therefore, there are no proposed wetland impacts. The proposed culvert
excavation and restoration of open stream channel may promote the development of wetlands
adjacent to the stream; however, based on the stream gradient and slope of the proposed stream
banks, the potential for riparian wetland development as a result of the project is considered
minir uil.
1
Mr. TkW-d Tugwe.'l
M. Jahn Dorney
Doceitiber 5, 200A
Page .3
Stream Imnacts (M.3
Proposed stream impact 001 will occur during the excavation of the existing 349-feet of CMP and
stabilization of the stream banks. Impact will consist of excavation in the stream bed and possible
heav? equipment encroachment during grading of the side slopes. Slope/bank stabilization will
occur as the excavation proceeds up- and downstream. EromatTM C60 erosion control matting will
be anchored to the side slopes following grading (see drawing S3). The net result of this impact will
be positive as 349-feet of formerly enclosed stream will become open channel. The piers for the
one-lane truss bridge will be out of the flood plain.
It appears that the net impact to Peters Creek is a positive one, considering that 349 feet of existing
covered stream will be returned to open channel, less the impact of the one-lane bridge, of which the
abutments will not be in the flood plain.
VII: Im act Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
The deterioration of the existing stream culvert presents a public hazard in the form of sinkholes
and the possibility of collapse causing pipe blockage and flooding, and must be mitigated as soon
as possible. Therefore, it appears that some sort of construction must occur and an impact to the
stream is unavoidable. GeoSci and Williams considered four options.
Optl n #1:
1),! Replacement of the entire existing CMPs. The construction impact to the stream with the
replacement option is probably the same as the proposed impact 001.
2) T?_s option was rejected based on prohibitive cost.
Option. #2:
1) Replacement of approximately 83.4 ft. of conduit on the upstream end, close to the existing
at to provide access to the two properties from Peters Creek Parkway.
2) Replacement of approximately 66.4 ft. of pipe at the downstream end (total 149.8 ft.).
3) Conversion of the balance, approximwely 198-ft., to open channel. The plan to replace 150 feet
of pipe is driven by the need to retain access to two existing businesses and to retain some
usable land surface on which to conduct one of them, which would otherwise be rendered
thout economic value.
4) This option was rejected based on prohibitive cost.
Option #3:
1) Replacement of approximately 83.4 ft. of conduit on the upstream end, close to the existing
alignment, to provide access to the two properties from Peters Creek Parkway.
2) Dave in place, but rehabilitate the flow line of, approximately 66.4 ft. of pipe at the downstream
emd (total 149.8 ft.).
3) of the balance, approximately 198-ft., to open channel. The plan to replace 150 feet
?nvcrsion
pipe is driven by tre need to retain access to two existing businesses and to retain some
usable land surface on which to conduct one of them, which would otherwise be rendered
without economic value.
4) This option was rejected based on prohibitive cost and the remaining future liability for the
remaining, deteriorating CMP.
Opti nn #4:
1)' ts?cavation of all existing CMP and existing property access drive from Peter:; Creek Parkway.
2)' nstruct a bridge for access to properties from Peters Creek Parkway.
3) Stream Bank ;stabilization.
Mr Todd Tugwell
Mr. John, Dorney
December 5, 2004
Page 4
4) This option will impact 349 feet of stream during excavation and stream bank stabilization with
a pet result of 349 linear feet of stream returned to open channel.
5) This option was selected for its lowest overall cost and lowest future liability for maintenance.
XI: toimwater and Controls
The subject property currently contains approximately 78% impervious surface area (0.93 acres).
The proposed project will decrease impervious surface area to 23% (0.28 acres). This is another
positive aspect of the modifications. As indicated above, erosion control matting will be placed on
the side slopes following grading. Standard construction erosion and sediment controls will be
employed during both phases of the project.
i
The o ginal and one (1) copy of this application are enclosed for the Corps of Engineers. Seven (7)
copieVare enclosed for the Division of Water Quality. Please let me know if you have any
questions or require further information with regards to this application.
Carl
enclosures
PCN form,' ,. ..::
Original and one (1) copy to Todd Tugwell, COE
Seven (7) copies to John Dorney, DWQ

office se Only: 4 L O 1 0 Form Version May 2002
USACi? Action ED No. DWQ No. ?i
(If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".)
1.
Processing
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit ?
? Section 10 Permit ?
© 401 Water Quality Certification
Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NWP 3, NWP 13, and NWP 27
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here: ?
4. If payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) is proposed for
mitigation of impacts (verify availability with NCWRP prior to submittal of PCN), complete
section VIII and check here: ?
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the tap of page 2 for further details), check here: ?
11. Applicant Information
1. Owner/Applicant Information
Name: A.T. Williams Oil Company; Steve Williams, President
Mailing Address: 5446 University Parkway
Winston-Salem, NC 27105
Telephone Number: 336.767.6280 ext 1005 Fax Number: 336.767.8940
E-mail Address:
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name: Carl von Isenburg, P.E.
Company Affiliation: Geoscience & Technology, P.A.
Mailing Address: 2050 Northaoint Drive
Winston-Salem, NC 27106
Telephone Number: 336.896.1300 Fax Number:336.896.1020
E-mail Address: cvi 0 geotec.com
Page 5 of 12
III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: Peters Creek/Academy St. Culvert Excavation
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only):
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): 6825-82-2179
4. Location
County: Forsyth Nearest Town: Winston-Salem
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): NA
Directions to site (include road numbers, landmarks, etc.):Site located on the northwest corner
of the intersection of Peters Creek Parkway and Academy Street approximately 1800 feet south
of Business 1-40 in Winston-Salem, NC. See Attached Figure 1.
15. Site coordinates, if available (UTM or Lat/Long):36° 5'4.6" N; 80° 15'29.62" W
(Note - If project is linear, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that separately lists the
coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
:6. Property size (acres): 1.2
7. Nearest body of water (stream/river/sound/ocean/lake): Peters Creek
18. River Basin: Yadkin
(Note - this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at hqp://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)
19. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: Site is a former convenience store/gas station. Adjacent site to
the north is a self-storage facility. Peters Creek is piped beneath lot 102. The conduit piping is
decaying and sinkholes have developed. See accompanying text for additional background on site
conditions.
Page 6 of 12
j I
10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Applicant proposes to remove three existing 348-ft long X 16-ft diameter CW conduits and restore to an open
channel. Construction plans are attached as Sheets S1, S2 and S3. Further explanation of project details are found
in the attached text. Equipment to be used includes trackhoes, backhoes, and other earth-moving equipment.
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work:
The purpose of the project is to mitigate the potential hazard(s) posed by the deterioration of the existing
conduits and the potential for the formation of additional sinkholes and flooding of a state road (Peters Creek
Parkway). See attched text for addtional information on the history of sinkhole formation.
11V. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested andlor obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
pertifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules.
To our knowledge, no jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or
obtained for this project.
V. Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
?t is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
:wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. The applicant must also
provide justification for these impacts in Section VII below. All proposed impacts, permanent
and temporary, must be listed herein, and must be clearly identifiable on an accompanying site
plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial) must be shown on a
delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems. Wetland and stream
:evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate. Photographs may be
included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for wetland or stream
imitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional space is needed for
'fi'sting or description, please attach a separate sheet.
Page 7 of 12
E
Provide a written description of the proposed impacts:
other
2. Individually list wetland impacts below:
Wetland Impact
SiwNumber
indi " e on ma
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
acres Located within
100-year Floodplain**
es/no Distance to
Nearest Stream
(linear feet
Type of Wetland***

List,Ieach impact separately and identity temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not lamed to: mechanized clearing, grading, till,
excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams, separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
10OWear floodplains are identified through the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(FIRM), or FEMA-approved local floodplain maps. Maps are available through the FEMA Map Service Center at 1-800-358-9616, or
online at hqp://www.fenia.zov.
*** List a wetland type that best describes wetland to be impacted (e.g., freshwater/saltwater marsh, forested wetland, beaver pond,
Carolina Bay, bog, etc.) Indicate if wetland is isolated (determination of isolation to be made by USACE only).
List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: 0.0
Total area of wetland impact proposed: 0.0
3. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts below:
Stream Impact
Site Number
indicate on ma
Type of Impact* Length of
Impact
linear feet
Stream Name** Average Width
of Stream
Before Impact Perennial or
Intermittent?
leases ecify)
001 Excavation 349 Peters Creek 30 feet Perennial

* List beach impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: culverts and associated rip-rap,
dams (separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding), relocation (include linear feet before and after, and net loss/gain),
stabilization activities (cement wall, rip-rap, crib wall, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is
proposed, plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams must be included.
** S names can be found on USGS topographic maps. If a stream has no name, list as UT (unnamed tributary) to the nearest
named stream into which it flows. USGS maps are available through the USGS at 1-800-358-9616, or online at
us s. ov. Several internet sites also allow direct download and printing of USGS maps (e.g., www.ftozone.com
ww? mMuest.cont: etc.).
Cumulative impacts (linear distance in feet) to all streams on site: 349
Page 8 of 12
i
4. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.) below:
Open Water Impact
Site Number
indi to on ma
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
acres Name Waterbody
)
(if applicable) Type of Waterbody
(lake, pond, estuary, sound,
bay, ocean, etc.
Not Applicable
I.

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: fill, excavation, dredging,
flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
5. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ? uplands ? stream ? wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.): Not Applicable
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.): Not Applicable
Size of watershed draining to pond: Expected pond surface area:
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once' the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts.
Tate deterioration of existing stream culverts presents a public hazard in the form of sinkholes and potential flooding
of a state road (Peters Creek Parkway) and must be mitigated as soon as possible; therefore, the proposed impacts are
unavoidable. The applicant and consultant considered full and partial replacement of the existing three 349-foot
culverts (see attached text). The proposed project actually will have a net postive impact on Peters Creek by restoring
349-feet of the stream to an open channel.
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
Page 9 of 12
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on March 9, 2000, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
I lacking a required mitigation plan or NCWRP concurrence shall be placed on hold as
incomplete. An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration
in DWQ's Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
hqp://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetiands/strmgide.html.
1. Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
Based on the nature of the proposed project and the apparent net positive impact on Peters Creek,
mitigation is not proposed.
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration
Program (NCWRP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCWRP at
[phone] to determine availability and to request written approval of mitigation prior
to submittal of a PCN. For additional information regarding the application process for the
NCWRP, check the NCWRP website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htm. If use of
the NCWRP is proposed, please check the appropriate box on page three and provide the
following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet): None
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet): None
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): None
Amount of Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): None
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): None
Page 10 of 12
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state) funds or the use of public
(federallstate) land?
Yes ? No
If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ? No
If yes, has the document review been fina,lized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please attach a
,copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter.
Yes ? No
X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
;and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers trust be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
j Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
;(Meuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and
Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please identify )?
Yes ? No X? If you answered "yes", provide the following information:
Identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers. If buffer
mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the buffer
multipliers.
I
l
(square feet Mitigation
Zone* Impact Multiplier
Required
1 3
2 1.5
Total
s Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from near frank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of zone 1.
Page 11 of 12
If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e., Donation
,of Property, Conservation Easement, Riparian Buffer Restoration / Enhancement, Preservation or
Payment into the Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as
identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or.0260.
None proposed.
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
i
Describe impervious acreage (both existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site.
Discuss stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands
downstream from the property.
Total acreage of the site is approximately 1.2 acres. Existing impervious acres is approximately 0.93.
Proposed impervious acres is 0.28. Standard construction erosion and sediment control practices will be
employed.
XII. Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
Not Applicable
XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H.0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ? No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application?
Yes ? No
XIV. j Other Circumstances (Optional):
,It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
'choose to list constraints associated withconstruction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, acres ' 'lity problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
Based on the appear of sinkhole on January 6, 2004, ememergency mitigation of hazards required
some structural rem atio e7his is d scribed in the attach text.
LAppflcant/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
i
Page 12 of 12
m
M [V
L~ O I~ ~
Z F.
U ~ W
0 W o:
Z a
U U)
0 w
Demolitior. of Storage U DISTURBED AREA 598 PETERS CREEK PARKWAY: 44,030 SP, (1.01 AC) nolitior. of Storage Units by Others _---DISTURBED AREA 550 PETERS CREEK PARKWAY:10,696 SQ. FT. (0.25 AC)
Relocation of Gzte by 0 / ~-I i nation of Gzte by Others ~
I 1 / Fence by Others
F~"k
rr,, rn V
N 03tl 30' 40" E 271.0 ' ~ j / ~ ~ - - Existing 15' Gate ~ ~ r
__~---~50' ROW i\ / ' w r~
I \ , ~ ~T~ ~ ~ ro hr"k
I R 50.000 V1 in ~ ~ '
Retaining Wall to Remain ` ~ N _ _ a ~ ~ Starm drain MH ~T~ ~ / ~
_ -Line Striping TP oo Inv, aut fi5.8 W t~ TP ,y ~ Re lace cover ~
W ~ ,i a~~, with inlet grate.
W ~ ; ~ ~ ~ `1 ~ ' ~0.~.', fi`~ ~
I-- ~ '1 ~ 39 O/ ~ OS,~~ ~ H
V) ~ 1-112" skim coat as halt - ~ p ~6 ~ _ _ _ _ _ - - - Cap Ex. 12"Water. x
~ p ~ ° Saniti Sanitary Sewer-___ .~~r- _ x`_---x ~ l
Segmental Block ~ _ _ _ _ _ W Retaining Wall _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - V
~ \ '-ReCocate Tf~- ~ , ~ ~ X t f'~
Q l ~ 3 _
U ~'~ClO ! - - F Reinforced concrete °o ! ' - Re Iaceasphalt,MEG Q / % ` - r l ^ WATER A ~ p grade beam on steel :d concrete n ~ ~ o ~ \ b x~ am on steel TP N
W ~ .r•~ NEW 12 auger piles. ~ - ~ \ ~ a` es. ~ I v ~
Z i - ~ / >o
J -
~ ao ~ r ~ --72 \ ~ Cg Z / /
/ 1 ~ H 1
Z 10 & / -70 ~ _ ~ ~i~-- _ ' Curb Inlet r L!1 Cap / ?-1 N
U ~ , / ~ _ r t S1N~C ~K H IS RE
~ / r- End of Existing ~ RS 0 Center Pi PEA
I Water meter ' _ _ Pe / Splash pad. ~ ~
t ~ Class 1 RiuP~P ~ - - N• a on Filter Fabric. / ~ w
~ 'r Sig ~i~~ , m y / o;
! I~ ~ _ i o - / i ~
i i - So - I ~ ~ ~ 79,4 ,a ~
- i ~ ~ , - _ ~ /
6 / 7• / fi
o 1 I l/ I ^ / t, ~ / / m x. ~ / ~ jog ~ o~
I t b I Cn I ~ / 0 I / / x Eo / p
~ I MH li i ~ prctength126'•1 ~ / EG / ~ ~ y O
2 - 2 - 20'x15' ( , r gr ate ~ 147,5 I - - -
boxculverts - - I D• { v / ~ ' rv ~ ~ ~ Top of Slope h~ ~ ~
U ~
j ~ i ! ~ C Class 1 riprap, (See Sections) i i JJ Nominal edge of Channel ~..1-~ ~ ° A w ~ d ~ m
I I ` ~ U
i~ ~ ~ 0 0 Vo~~
t ~ .9 ~ - - -I- i s. - i sz Reinforced concrete W W ~
grade beam on steel ~ ~ ~ / ~ o ~
i ~ z auger piles, Z a ~ ~
~ - i - i MH S OOd 01' 20" E 242.09' ~ - ~ f_ ~ ~ - - - - 4) .-9~ - - - - - ~ ~ o
30" 5S - - •__.30'~ SS - I"J~ T G) . N 0
~ NEW 12" WATER 3 0 i ~ ~ ~ - _ _I~ f_~ . - Telephone Box T ~ ' ° ' ~ . Cap Ex,12"Water.
_ - o
Concrete walls and - - - - - - -r'~ phone Bn.~
steellwood-framed roof I 'LJ of ex~stmg transition _ ~ , _ - - - - _ ~ ~ ~30 ~ - ~,SS_ _ ~
structure to remain. ~ - 30" S: _ - ~ Exi ting curb cut->
t Ex. San. MH - - - - - - - ew Guardratl L - - - - New Guardrail on LIMITS LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE
existing guardrail ~ Top.. . s Ex. CB ~ Inv. 53.10 New curb and gutter. Light Pole (Typ) New curb and gutter. footing. Weld po is Top: 68.41 Matchlmeet existing Meet existing Ex, San. MH
#o stubs. Inv. !n: 60.60 i Top: 69.20 RIGHT TURN IN, NO EXIT Inv. 56.12 ,,ee'rozea.
e Inv. Out: 59.45 ~S~~a r: dp..• ~/ad'~d,
~ PETERS CREEK PARKWAY / e b Y 6B u y+ s ~ N ~ ye~as ,y
Outfall daylights an Riprap Slope- 120' ROW ? ~ l+Y~ d k+~`" Q J °'a H F~4 r~ s ~
A t! p~ ~`f ~w ~~N €d® !~m
~ ~ ~ ~
a Od~B Eli .0,,
g c ~ S o ~
N ~ p Q ~ ~ O ~ a ~
PLAN
Scale 1" : 20'
Q tlJ
0
a
a Q
a a
a a m _ ~ rn
N V C i6 ~ m
a o° m ~ to Z
N a y ~ d
n ° U d a N v o ~ 0:
~ ~ a .ts v ~
~ E ~ ~ W ~ ~ ti ~
Q ~
m
> > No
U U U U ~
0
Z
W d th N O

ro M
U N O
1.5 Z
U
1.0 fl W ~
o.
U N 0
100 year flood stage ~
Class 2 Riprap
,r- Centerline Centeriine ~ ~ Bridge Support Pads fully grouted with
Bridge Support Pads i oncr t 3,000 ps c e e Channel bottom not covered
1
Single-Lane (12 ) i Prefabricated Steel Truss Bridge ~ East Bank Filter Fabric - W ~
West Bank I
- 100.0 ^ . Gl~
h~"1
U
, i Centerlines ~ i i ~ ~ ~
Steel Auger Piles ~ ~ j Centerlines Nominal width of channel 3.1' 3 ~
Steel Auger Piles W
r'te'
i 1 ~T~ r--i W U~
i .y Match existing CROSS SECTION C-C a ~
LOOKING SOUTH ~
NTS ~ Min,
3.0
-Ta of Sla e
i p p Channel bottom, U stream wall of ~ ~ p , . Face of GuardraEl
I Not covered. Cut and remove this area, to / Transition Box 1.0
increase open cross-section / E..~ I area ical 4 locations .
RYp ~ ) i 1.0 ~ ~ ~ ~
in. Nominal width of channel 33.1'
' I ~ I Class 2 Riprap
full routed with I I y9 I 3,000 psi conaeie I I ~
I I r I I
CROSS ECTION ON BRIDGE CENTERLINE
NTS I i H Filter Fabric I ~ I
. I ~ M i
~ ~ i ~
I ! I i I I
i i I N
I I i
I ~ I i ~ I
0
3.00 o ~ M
Min. Face c,f Guardrail. Align with Existing 0 ~
Eromat C60 erosion control matting. CROSS SECTION D-D ~ a, ~ o LOOKING SOUTH a v, .W ~
Anchor along top edge in trench and U ~ , NTS ~ ~ Q ~
lap joints, progressing uphill and upstream. Q} ~ ~m
Sta le mat er manufacturer's specifications, PETERS CREEK PARKWAY P P ~ yin v ~ wJ ~o oU
West Bank securing laps with staples at18" centers, min. East Bank Place bottom edge under block {Typical). C) o ~
~~~.~z owW~~
a o~ U ~j ~ ~y rl
1.5 1.5 O
1.0 i 1.0 V i ~ V ~ p ~
Eromat G60. ~ . N 0 cn
Lap and anchor same
as East Bank 100 year flood stage
Channel bottom not covered
5 \
~ ~ 2
Geogritl. ~ ~ e,~saiesss®rceatao
Length and specification tE ayd~ i
to be determined b y Eromat captured under np rap
engineer before fill is placed. 1-112" Wearing Course aand Skim Coat ~ ~ o ~
Class 1 rip rap ~i' 2.112"Binder Course ~ o~ L~° m~ ~w ~ ~e ~ a
in. Nominal width of channel over filter fabric. 33.1' ~y an ® ~ ,~P ~p ~
Existin Pavement ~ s ~ 9 6 ABC Stone @ 'ae eg 'Op b~
i~ ~~e _ y, a~
CROSS SECTION A-A
NTS ~ M O O
~ O N O F
a TIO ~ a ~ PAVEMENT CROSS SEC N ~ O
Stele 1 • :1'
U
0 a a
I m 755 ~
755 3 ' _ _ ~ New Open Trapezolda! Channel 0 tr
f/1 I .X ~ 352.T n. a
w _
C N d c JT
~i ~ I L
~ ..~T N' a 0
N _ ~ i ~ Q ~ i „N This invert is based on , o_
I
~ a rou h measurement. ! ~ - - g i Contractor shall survey I ~ a
} ~ Q actual inverts and work 'a
fades upwards. ~ 0 ~ ~
9 y U a ~
~ 8% ~ ~ _ 51ope: 0.93 - 750 N
-750 ~ ne1 Bottom Chan W ~ 4- a
0 j a ~
1 - ~ ~ N
I I i tfJ f0 ~ ~
m ~ Z ~ ~ = 0

rn a 'o ~ m a~. n ~ > ~ ~
v I ~ ~ , ~ I I v m `o a W
I I ' 1 ~ I ! ~ I ~ ~ I ~ I ~ ' ~ i I ` ~ ! 1 i I i Q~ u. u_ o
~ ~ ~ I i 1 I ~ 1 a i i ~ I ~ A l i ~ I ~ i 1 1 i j ~ l~ I i I ' ~ ~ ~ i ' ~ ~ ' i i I
I ~ ~ ~ - ~,,,n n~en ocean o~~n ~~~n ~~an awn ~~an 9i0n ~+nn 3+1n 3- Finn ~+'~n ~+hn 3+3n 3+4n 3+51} 3+60 3+70 3+80 3+g0 4+00 4+10 4+20 4+30 4+40 ti
Station 0+00 0+10 0+20 0+30 0+40 0+50 0+60 0+70 0+80 0+90 1+UU 1+1u 1+zu 1+3u 1+4u 1+3U 1+bu I+/U I+ou I*yv ZTuu tTIU e_Tr_u Ir. - w ~u w -
z
a~ U U U U
Q
LONGITUDINAL SECTION ALONG CENTERLINE OF CHANNEL
Horiz. Scale 1":20' 0 Z
Vert. Scale 1": 2'
w M N ~ O ~

M
U N O
Z
Business 40 ~ ~ U
- „ w
Z ~ 0 a: a
v
N ~ Site ~
X
Academy Street
3
.x ~
Y ( ~ ~ W P'1
U ~ ~
~ N Dad 30' 4D" E 271.09' ~ \ V1
f _ i5D'ROW - ~ d . N
r i I~~ W I
O m
s ~ ~ ~ N
~ o ~ ~ o Grass------ I _ ~ a N ~
W ti ~ EXISTING 16 DIA. CMP A ~ W V1 3 ~ t
W _ a~ / ~ TO BE REMOVED (3) ~ r,,,~ ~ ~ a
CL j _ _ f- ~i a~ ` F , ~ 15' Gate ~ Top f Slope ~..1
~ 6 ~ ~so~~ ~ I LOCATION MAP (NTS) s, ~ i / 4~ ~
/1 ~ a / ~ ~ Concrete pad over 3 U5Ts i -Grass ~ ~
' - ~ Building ~ x~- X V 1
/ 1 O i ~ ~l U
Q o, 1A ~ M / i ~ ~ ~ \ mm
U o / a o i ~ t x• V J v~ H
W ~ ~ J a 3 I - ~
? ~ Monitoring well ro ~ i ~ N N
~ ~ I ~°o i
ao _ ~ "~-s~ ~ W ~ CB Z ~ , „ ~ ~ I ~ ~ x-72 ~ -J
~ ~ ~r o, ~ i ~ i, 5
~ Monitoring yell m ~ ~ I _ ~ a , f ~ ~
~ 1 Monitoringwe ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i NEL
' t N ~ m ~ i G~ M..~
' ~ - ~ Water meter ~ ~ ! f _ -6" PVC - - - - 9" FVC- - - ~ - EXtgtt ~~EK ~ _ `--E ~ RS ~ ` ~ ~ PEA
IMPACT 001 _ --i - - . -
s~ EXCAVATION OF EXISTING CMPs---- r - - / f ~
F - ss ~
~ _ - ; ~ - _ _ ~ ~
- 'm _
-l ~ ~ _ r ~ ~ / - ~ 1
1 f rv
i , ~ / 9.4 - -6 PVC 1 ~ )tt~~` ; CENTERLINE f ~ _ ~ x. 4 N
(?MH I ~ _ m n d h" ~ ~ ~
storm rate 2 - a' 2 20'x 15' ~ g ~ ~ ` ~ r ~ ; / ,o ~ O
box culverts - I - _ fD - ~ I m , _ ~ S - i / s o q ~ o
_ ~ ~ - \ ~ ~0 - - To of Sloe ~ ~ ~ ~
cn ~ I i p p ~ > ~ t U ~ ~ ao
I I Q 1 - -6" PVC - ~ ~ \ ~ oti _ ~ I 4 ~ ^ ~ W t~ ~ ~ fi
i ~ ~ ~ - - , i in i r TP ll ~ m ~ M f W r i ~ ~ M ~
~ = - s. ~ t crass - - ~ ~ ~ ~ WJ ~ 0 0
i ` I ~ 70.~ - o I ~ ~ - V ~ a~ 0 ~ ~Z
~ \ ~ ~:...r- -70 I i ww 0~ ~
I _ ~ i I j r.. 1 \ _ ro a S OOd 01' 2D" E 242.09' o i I n o ~ z~
i _ 3Q„ 5S o
~ ; _ , ~ Grass ~ I T U a o ~-Grass y--~ T ~
z 1~ ~ N 0
I I ~ PP -PP- T
~ PP J ! ' Telephone Box
4 - - X30"SS X30" SS - -
Ex. San. MH ~ To :
Ex. CB I P Top: 68.41 ~ Inv. 53.10 - Light Pole ITyp).
Inv. In: 60.60 L Ex. San. MH Top: 69.20
Inv, Out: 59.45 f ~ Q Inv. 56.12 .tp~SfFi53i!(yy~~
PETERS CREEK PARKWAY 'o k+~~/ y~ °a
120' ROW 6~~sew®aea's ~s " ~ ~ -~a ~ °s if,~
..5~ W; to o~
®C. Cy 9 ~
d+ a ~`C~ y®
J,rf ~'4ea
jpd X11 14
O ~ W
PLAN ° o a
~ Scale 1" : 20' ' ~ ~
DEC 16 2004
DENR • WATER aWWTY
WETLMIDS AND STOl~MIIUEA BRNiCH 0
w
0 a
a
Q
V
N
~ Z 0 Q Z ~ ~
D c a
ro ~ ~ ~ U
~
J lL ~ SEC ~ 6 ?00
4
DE* W 'E }
~NDS,y~ R QU m
TWA L z
U U ~
0 z
r O