20191250 Ver 1_PCN Form Submission_20190919

DWR
MOM— of Water Resources
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
September 29, 2018 Ver 3
21nitial Review
Has this project met the requirements for acceptance in to the review process?*
r Yes
r No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
G Yes r No
Oange only if needed.
BIMS # Assigned
20191250
Is a payment required for this project?*
r No payment required
r Fee received
r Fee needed - send electronic notification
Reviewing Office*
Central Office - [phone]
Information for Initial Review
1a. Name of project:
Elliott Road Extension
1a. Who is the Primary Contact?*
William Sullivan
1b. Primary Contact Email:*
[e-mail]
Date Submitted
9/19/2019
Nearest Body of Water
Booker Creek
Basin
Cape Fear
Water Classification
WS-IV; NSW
Version# *
1
What amout is owed?*
r $240.00
r $570.00
Select Project Reviewer*
April Norton:eads\arnorton
1c. Primary Contact Phone:*
[phone]
Site Coordinates
Latitude: Longitude:
35.933112-79.023420
FA. Processing Information U
County (or Counties) where the project is located:
Orange
Is this project a public transportation project?*
r Yes r No
Is this a NCDOT Project?*
r Yes r No
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
* Section 404 Permit (wetlands, streams and waters, Clean Water Act)
r Section 10 Permit (navigable waters, tidal waters, Rivers and Harbors Act)
1b. What type(s) of permit(s) do you wish to seek authorization?

fJ Nationwde Permit (NWP)
r Regional General Permit (RGP)
r Standard (IP)
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified bythe Corps?
r Yes r No
Nationwide Permit (NWP) Number:
NWP Numbers (for multiple NWPS):
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:
W 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular
r Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
r Individual Permit
14 - Linear transportation
le. Is this notification solelyfor the record because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWR 401 Certification:
For the record only for Corps Permit:
r 401 Water Quality Certification - Express
fJ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1f. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?*
f Yes r No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
r Yes r No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
r Yes r No
Acceptance Letter Attachment
RES CF02 - SOA Dairyland - Elliott Road Extension_135.2.pdf
RS_SOA_Elliott Road EMension_26.8.pdf
1h. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties?
r Yes r No
1j. Is the project located in a designated trout watershed?
O Yes r No
B. Applicant Information
1d. Who is applying for the permit?
rJ Owner r Applicant (other than owner)
le. Is there an Agent/Consultant for this project?
r- Yes r- No
2. Owner Information
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
Town of Chapel Hill
2b. Deed book and page no.:
n/a
2c. Responsible party:
Lance Norris
2d.Address
Street Address
6850 Millhouse Road
Address Line 2
City
Chapel Hill
Fbstal / Zip Code
27516
2e. Telephone Number:
[phone]
2g. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
State / Ftovince / legion
NC
Q�untry
USA
2f. Fax Number:
145.06KB
127.74KB
r Yes r No
r Yes r No
U

C. Project Information and Prior Project History
1 • Project Information
1b. Subdivision name:
(if approp9ate)
1c. Nearest municipality / town:
Chapel Hill
2. Project Identification
2a. Property Identification Number:
Linear Transportation Project
2c. Project Address
Street Address
Elliott Road
Address Line 2
city
Chapel Hill
Postal / Zip Cade
27514
3. Surface Waters
3a. Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project:*
Booker Creek
3b. Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving water:*
WS-IV: NSW
3c. What river basin(s) is your project located in?*
Cape Fear
3d. Please provide the 12-digit HUC in which the project is located.
03030002
4. Project Description and History
2b. Property size:
13.4
State / Rrmince / Edon
NC
Cbuntry
USA
4a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this application:*
The project is located within the Chapel Hill town limits in Orange County, NC. The project study area is loosely bound by Fordham Boulevard (NC 15-501) to the west and Ephesus
Church Road to east and intersected by Booker Creek. The project study area is composed of existing roadways, retail centers, and multi -family facilities. Land use in the vicinity of the
project is composed primarily of medium to high density residential areas and commercial/retail centers.
4b. Have Corps permits or DWR certifications been obtained for this project (including all prior phases) in the past?*
r Yes r No r Unknown
4d. Attach an 8 1/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the USGS topographic map indicating the location of the project site. (for DWR)
03b_Fig 2_USGS.pdf 1.42MB
4e. Attach an 8 1/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the published County NRCS Soil Survey map depicting the project site. (for DWR)
03d_Fig 4_NRCS.pdf 1.44MB
4f. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
0
4g. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:
678
4h. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:*
The purpose of the proposed project is to extend Elliott Road from Fordham Boulevard (NC 15-501) to Ephesus Church Road to help address bicycle, pedestrian, auto, and transit
safety and connectivity concerns in the Ephesus Church/Fordham District of Chapel Hill.
4i. Describe the overall project in detail, including indirect impacts and the type of equipment to be used:
The proposed project would extend Elliott Road approximately 1,200' from Fordham Boulevard (NC 15-501) east to Ephesus Church Road and improve intersections at the two project
termini. The new road and intersections will include a dividing median, gutter, sidewalk, planting strip, bicycle accommodations, and the potential for on -street parking. Equipment typical
of roadway projects Will be used, including bulldozers, excavators, pavers, and skid -steers.
4j. Please upload project drawings for the proposed project.
09_Elliott Road Plan Sheets.pdf 3.1MB
5. Jurisdictional Determinations
Sa. Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the propertyor proposed impact areas?*
r: Yes r No C Unknown

Comments
5b. If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination, what type of determination was made?*
F Preliminary r Approved r Not Verified r Unknown r NIA
Corps AID Number:
SAW-2019-00113
5c. If 5a is yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): William Sullivan
Agency/Consultant Company: Kimley-Horn
Other:
5d. List the dates of the Corp jurisdiction determination or State determination if a determination was made by the Corps or DWR
A Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination for the proposed project was submitted to Samantha Dailey of the USACE on November 5, 2018 and an email response was received on
January 18, 2019 (SAW-2019-00113). A PDF of the email response has been attached. Note, since the submittal of the PJD request package, it was determined that the Booker Creek
crossing below the existing Elliott Road is a box culvert and not a bridge; therefore, the request package has been updated to reflect this and is attached.
5d1. Jurisdictional determination upload
07_ElliottRd_Ext_PJD_Request _20190916.pdf 5AMB
07b_RE_ Stream Determination Request Elliot Road Extension.pdf 15.13KB
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?*
r^ Yes M No
Are any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permits(s) used, or intended to be used, to authorize any part of the proposed project or related activity?
The proposed Elliott Road extension is a single and complete project.
D. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
la. Where are the impacts associated with your project? (check all that apply):
E Wetlands W Streams -tributaries W Buffers
r- Open Waters r Pond Construction
3. Stream Impacts
3a. Reason for impact (?)
3b.lmpact type *
3c. Type of impact*
3d. S. name*
3e. Stream Type*
Type of
3gSwidth *
3h. Impact(?)
F
�[3f.
urisdiction*
length*
S1
Site 1 - Culvert Extension
Permanent
Culvert
Booker Creek
Perennial
Both
30
43
Average (feet)
(linear feet)
82
Site 1 - Rip Rap Stabilization
Permanent
Rip Rap Fill
Booker Creek
Perennial
Both
30
53
Average (fed)
(lir�arfed)
S3
Site 1 - Construction Access
Tem ora
P rY
Other
Booker Creek
Perennial
Both
30
15
Average (feet)
(linearfeet)
S4
Site 2 - Construction Access
Tem ora
P rY
Other
Booker Creek
Perennial
Both
30
7
Avera,C7e (fed)
(linear fed)
S5
Site 3 - Culvert Extension
Permanent
Culvert
Booker Creek
Perennial
Both
30
23
Average (feet)
(linearfed)
S6
Site 3 - Culvert Extension
Permanent
Culvert
Stream SB - LIT to Booker
Perennial
Both
3
30
Creek
Average (feet)
(linear fed)
S7
Site 3 - Rip Rap Stabilisation
Permanent
Rip Rap Fill
Booker Creek
Perennial
Both
30
39
Average (feet)
(linearfed)
S8
Site 3 - Construction Access
Tem ora
P ry
Other
foker Creek
Perennial
Both
30
19
Average (feet)
(linear fed)
S9
Site 4 -Road Crossing
9
Permanent
Fill
Stream SC - UT to Booker
Intermittent
Cor s
P
3
90
Creek
Average (feet)
(linearfed)
31. Total jurisdictional ditch impact in square feet:
0
31. Total permanent stream impacts: 31. Total temporary stream impacts:
278 41

31. Total stream and ditch impacts:
319
3j. Comments:
Unavoidable impacts to Booker Creek, SB, and SC will result from the proposed project. Temporary stream impacts totaling 41 linear feet will result
from the project due to the access and easements necessary for construction. Permanent impacts totaling 186 linear feet will result from culvert
extensions and fill. Permanent, no net -loss of water impacts totaling 92 linear feet will result from the installation of rip rap to protect the banks along
Booker Creek.
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWR)
6a. Project is in which protect basin(s)?
Check all that apply.
F Neuse r Tar -Pamlico
F Catawba F Randleman
F Goose Creek P Jordan Lake
F Other
6b. Impact Type 6c. Per or Temp 6d. Stream name 6e. Buffer mitigation required? 6f. Zone 1 impact 6g. Zone 2 impact
Site 1 - Road Widening (Elliott Rd)
P
Booker Creek
No
6,687
1,771
Site 2 - Road Widening (Elliott Rd)
P
Booker Creek
No
1,714
256
Site 3 - Road Widening (Fordham Blvd)
P
Booker Creek
No
4,686
2,708
6h. Total buffer impacts:
Zone 1 Zone 2
Total Temporary impacts: 0.00 0.00
Zone 1
Zone 2
Total Permanent impacts: 13,087.00
4,735.00
Zone 1
Zone 2
Total combined buffer impacts: 13,087.00
4,735.00
6i. Comments:
Permanent buffer impacts will result to the Jordan Lake Buffer Zones 1 and 2 around Booker Creek due to road perpendicular road widening. The
three impacts sites are two separate road crossings. Impacts at the Elliott Road crossing (Site 1 and 2) will total 10,428 sq. ft. Impacts at the Fordham
Blvd crossing (Site 3) will total 7,394 sq. ft. In accordance with the Jordan Lake Watershed Table of Uses, road crossings impacting less than 150 feet
or 1/3 acre of buffer are considered "Allowable".
Supporting Documentation
2019-09-16_Elliott Extension —Permit Drawings.pdf 2.02MB
E. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
la. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:
Impacts to the jurisdictional streams and riparian buffers within the project area have been avoided and minimized to the extent practical throughout
the design of the project. The road extension and intersection improvements have been located to avoid all wetland features within the project vicinity
and to make use of the existing transportation facilities to the extent possible. Where feasible, fill slopes have been tightened to avoid additional
impacts to streams and riparian buffers. Rip rap placed along the Booker Creek culvert extensions will be keyed in to the banks to reduce fill impacts.
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques:
Impacts to streams and riparian buffers within the corridor will be minimized to the extent practical throughout the construction process. Equipment
staging and construction access Will be located in upland areas throughout the corridor, and silt fencing will be installed around the permitted limits of
disturbance to ensure all equipment and construction is contained. Sediment control measures will be used throughout the project to reduce
stormwater impacts to receiving waters and minimize runoff from the construction sites.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
r Yes r No
2c. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
P DWR W Corps
2d. If yes, which mitigation option(s) will be used for this project?

W Mitigation bank r Payment to in -lieu fee 17 Permittee Responsible
program Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
Restoration Systems - Benton Branch; RES - Dairyland
3b. Credits Purchased/Requested (attach receipt and letter)
Type: Quantity:
Stream 162
Attach Receipt and/or letter
RES CF02 - SOA Dairyland - Elliott Road EMension_135.2.pdf
RS_SOA_Elliott Road Extension_26.8.pdf
SB_NCSAM Rating Calculator v2.pdf
SC—NCSAM Rating Calculator v2.1.pdf
3c. Comments
145.06KB
127.74KB
4.24KB
68.26KB
The Town has reserved 162 stream credits from the RES - Dairyland and Restoration Systems - Benton Branch mitigation banks located within the
primary service area. For the 66 linear feet of permanent impacts to Booker Creek resulting from culvert extensions, the Town has secured 132
stream credits (2:1 ratio). Stream SB is a degraded, incised perennial stream within the project area that primarily conveys stormwater from the
upslope development and backflowfrom Booker Creek. Outside of the project area to the north, Stream SB is intermittent and located within a
roadside ditch. Stream SB scored "Loud' on the attached NCSAM assessment. Due to the degraded nature and lack of function of stream SB, the
Town has secured 30 stream credits for the 30 linear feet of permanent impacts to stream SB (1:1 ratio). Stream SC is a weak, channelized
intermittent stream carrying only stormwater from the surrounding development. Stream SC has formed from multiple small stormwater pipe outlets
scouring out the natural drainageway. Stream SC scored "Loud' on the attached NCSAM assessment. Due to the artificial nature and lack of function of
stream SC, no compensatory mitigation is proposed for the 90 linear feet of permanent impacts to Stream SC.
6. Buffer mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) - required by DWR
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires buffer mitigation? If yes, you must fill out this entire form - please contact DWR for more
information.
C Yes
r No
F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWR)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
la. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
r Yes
r No
What type of SCM are you providing?
r Level Spreader
r- Vegetated Conveyance (lower SHWT)
r- Wetland Swale (higher SHWT)
r- Other SCM that removes minimum 30 % nitrogen
rJ Proposed project will not create concentrated stormwater flow through the buffer
Diffuse Flow Documentation
2019_06_ 11 _75%_Drainage_Desig n_Narrative. pdf
EC —Sheets _Elliott _Full Set.pdf
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. Is this a NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's Individual NPDES permit NCS000250?*
r Yes r No
2b. Does this project meet the requirements for low density projects as defined in 15A NCAC 02H .1003(2)?
r Yes r No
21.47KB
1.38MB
Comments:
Stormwater at the western portion of the site will be collected in a curb and gutter system. Stormwater in the central portion of the site will be collected and discharged into an onsite
catch basin. Stormwater along the eastern portion of the site will be collected and diverted into the eAsting pipe network.
G. Supplementary Information v
1. Environmental Documentation
la. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federallstate/local) funds or the use of public (federal/state) land?*
r Yes r No

1b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State (North Carolina)
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)? *
r Yes r No
Comments:*
The project is not receiving any federal funding at this time. The project is below the minimum criteria for a state environmental document.
2. Violations (DWR Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWR Water Quality Certification Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), or DWR Surface Water or Wetland Standards or
Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?*
r Yes r No
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWR Requirement)
3a. Will this project result in additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?*
r Yes r No
3b. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
The proposed project is a whole and complete project creating a logical connection between two roads in the Town of Chapel Hill. No additional
impacts tied to or resulting from the project are anticipated.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)
4a. Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project?*
r Yes r Nor N/A
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or habitat?*
r Yes r No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act impacts?*
r Yes r No
5d. Is another Federal agency involved?*
r Yes r No r Unknown
5e. Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?
r Yes r No
5f. Will you cut anytrees in order to conduct the work in waters of the U.S.?
r Yes r No
5g. Does this project involve bridge maintenance or removal?
r Yes r No
5h. Does this project involve the construction/installation of a wind turbine(s)?*
r Yes r No
5i. Does this project involve (1) blasting, and/or (2) other percussive activities that will be conducted by machines, such as jackhammers, mechanized pile drivers, etc.?
r Yes r No
5j. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat?

The USFWS lists five federally protected species for Orange County: bald eagle, Cape Fear shiner, dwarf wedgemussel, Michauxs sumac, and
smooth coneflower. A review of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) element occurrence database records (updated July 2019)
revealed one recent (1992) and one historic (1922) occurrence of smooth coneflower within 1.0-mile of the project limits.
Suitable habitat for the Cape Fear shiner may be present within the study area in Booker Creek. The project boundary is within the Cape Fear River
Basin; however, Orange county is outside of the known distribution of the Cape Fear shiner. Additionally, the project area is separated from known
populations by a manmade impoundment and Jordan Lake. A review of the NCNHP database records (updated July 19) indicates no known
occurrences of Cape Fear shiner within 1.0 mile of the project area. Due to the separation from known populations and the lack of known
occurrences, it has been determined that the proposed project will have no effect on this species.
Suitable habitat for dwarf wedgemussel may be present within the study area in Booker Creek. However, the project is located within the Cape Fear
River basin; a watershed not known to support dwarf wedgemussel. A review of the NCNHP database records (updated July 2019) indicates no known
occurrences of dwarf wedgemussel within 1.0 mile of the project area. Due to the separation from the mussel's known range and the lack of known
occurrences, it has been determined that the proposed project will have no effect on this species.
Suitable habitat for Michauxs sumac exists within the study area along the roadsides, utility rights -of -way, and maintained easements. However, many
of the areas of suitable habitat within the project study area are heavily maintained by mowing or the application of herbicide and present only
marginally suitable habitat. Kimley-Horn biologists surveyed areas of suitable habitat within the study area on September 27, 2018 and no Michames
sumac individuals were identified. In addition, a review of the NCNHP database records (updated July 2019) indicates no known occurrences of
Michau:rs sumac in or within 1.0 mile of the project area. Due to the lack of known occurrences and the lack of observed individuals, it has been
determined that the proposed project will have no effect on this species.
Suitable habitat for Smooth coneflower exists within the study area along the roadsides, utility rights -of -way, and maintained easements. However,
many of the areas of suitable habitat within the project study area are heavily maintained by mowing or the application of herbicide and present only
marginally suitable habitat. Kimley-Horn biologists surveyed areas of suitable habitat within the study area on September 27, 2018 and no smooth
coneflov,er individuals were identified. A review of the NCNHP database records (updated July 2019) indicates the historic occurrence (1922) of
smooth coneflower, located approximately 1,500 feet north of the study area, is likely no present due to development; and the recent (1992)
occurrence of smooth coneflower, located approximately 5,000 feet east of the study area, was relocated to the NC Botanical Garden. Due to the lack
of observed individuals and abundance of development in the area, it has been determined that the proposed project will have no effect on this
species.
Habitat for the bald eagle primarily consists of mature forests in proximity to large bodies of open water for foraging. Large dominant trees are utilized
for nesting sites, typically within 1.0 mile of open water. One water body, Eastwood Lake, located approximately 1.0 mile west of the project area was
identified as being large enough or sufficiently open for foraging. However, Eastwood Lake is surrounded by development and no mature forests with
large dominant trees are located within the project area. Additionally, a review of the NCNHP records (updated July 2019) indicates no known
occurrences of bald eagle within 1.0 mile of the project area. Due to the lack of nesting habitat in or around the project area and the lack of known
occurrences, it has been determined that the proposed project will have no effect on this species.
Consultation Documentation Upload
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as an Essential Fish Habitat?*
r^ Yes r No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact an Essential Fish Habitat?*
The NOAA Essential Fish Habitat Mapper was reviewed on August 20, 2019. No essential fish habitat was found within the project area or within the
vicinity of the project.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation status?*
r^ Yes r No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?*
A reviewof the NCSHPO database performed on September 18, 2019 found two Determined Eligible Historic Districts located within 1.0 mile of the
project area. The Glen Lennox Commercial & Residential Historic District and the Greenwood Historic District are located approximately 1.0 mile south
of the study area. Due to the developed nature of the project vicinity and the minimal impacts anticipated, it has been determined that the proposed
project will have no effect on any historic or archeological resources.
7c. Historic or Prehistoric Information Upload
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?*
B Yes r No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
The project received a No -Rise Certification on February 6, 2019.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?*
The FEMA Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map (DFIRM) Panel 3710979900L (effective 10/19/2018).
Miscellaneous
Comments
Miscellaneous attachments not previously requested.

03a_Fig 1_Vicinity.pdf 447.18KB
03c_Fig 3_JDMap.pdf 2.46MB
05_DataForms.pdf 142.19KB
Signature
m By checking the box and signing below, I certify that:
• I have given true, accurate, and complete information on this form;
. I agree that submission of this PCN form is a "transaction" subject to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• I agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• I understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as a written signature; AND
• I intend to electronically sign and submit the PCN form.
Full Name:
William Sullivan
Signature
Date
9/19/2019