DRAFT  ENVIRONMENTAL  IMPACT  STATEMENT
CRABTREE CREEK, WAKE  COUNTY,   NORTH CAROLINA
                EPA PROJECT C370344
                    JANUARY 1975
         UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EPA 904/9-75-001
   REGION IV
1421 PEACHTREEST, N. E.
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30309

-------
                    DRAFT

       ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
 CRABTREE CREEK, WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA

             EPA PROJECT C3703U4
                  Prepared By
        Environmental Protection Agency
                   Region IV
            Atlanta, Georgia  30309

             In Cooperation With

        The State of North Carolina
Department of Natural and Economic Resources
                   Approved by
                                                January  10,  1975
                                 istrator       Date

-------
                   TABLE OF CONTENTS
I,  General Descriptive Information  	    1
    A. Project History	•	    2
    B.  Project Description-"-—	    4
       1,  Proposed Project Facilities	    7
           a.  Oak Park to Richland Creek	•	    7
           b.  Richland Creek	———	    g
           c.  Force Main and Pumping Station	    3
           d.  I-*»0 to Gary Wastewater Treatment Plant	    9
       2.  Service Areas	—    9
           a,  Richland Creek Interceptor—•	   12
           b.  Mobile City Interceptor  —	—   15
           c.  Morrisville Interceptor  —•	   15
           d.  Coles Branch Interceptor	•	   ig
           e.  Future service Areas	   17
    C.  Description of Project Area	   21
       1.  Natural Resources	•	   21
           a.  Surface Water	—	——	—   21
           b.  Geology	«	   24
           c.  Soils   	   25
           d.  Groundwater	—	   28
           e.  Climate	   28
           f.  Vegetation and Wildlife	   29
           g.  Air Quality	   34
       2.  Community Resources 	   38
           a.  Wastewater Systems	•	—	   33
           b.  Water Supply	>	»-   40
       3.  Population Projections 	   44

 II.  Interrelationship With Other Projects, Programs
      or Efforts	   51
    A. Federal	   51
         1. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)	   51
         2. Soil Conservation Service (SCS) 	   53
         3. Corps of Engineers (COE)  	   58
    B. State	.	   60
    C. Region J Research Triangle Planning
           Commission  	,	,	   63
    D. Wake County  	-_.	   63
    E. Cities	„	   65
         1, Raleigh	.	.	   65
         2. Gary —	.	   67
    F. Public	.	   69

-------
III.  Alternatives	    71
      A.   No Action	    71
      B.  ' Alternative Routing	    75
         1.  Walnut Creek  	    75
         2.  Pump to New Hope Basin	    79

 IV.  Impact of the Proposed Project	    82
      A.  Primary Impacts	    82
         1.  Beneficial Impacts 	    82
         2.  Adverse Impacts  	    84
             a.  Wastewater and Sludge Disposal 	    84
             b.  Erosion and Sedimentation   	    85
             c.  Construction Inconveniences and Annoyances   86
             d.  Aesthetics	    87
             e»  Disruption of Natural Drainage Patterns -    89
             f.  Archeological, Historical and Cultural —    90
             g.  SCS Flood Control Structures 	    91
         3.  Alterations of Ecosystems   	.	    92
         H.  Growth and Development Impacts	    98
     B.  Secondary Impacts  	•	   100
         1.  Stream Flow   	   101
         2.  Erosion and Sedimentation	   106
         3.  Water Quality	   109
         4.  Community Services and Utilities 	   112
         5.  Air Quality Assessment	   118

  V.  Adverse Impacts Which Cannot Be Avoided and
          Mitigative Measures 	   122
     A.  Adverse Impacts That Cannot Be Avoided 	   122
         1.  Primary Impacts  	   122
         2.  Secondary Impacts  	—-—	—	   123
     B.  Mitigative Measures to Adverse Primary impacts —   123
         1.  Wastewater and Sludge Disposal 	   123
         2.  Erosion and Sedimentation  	   124
         3.  Archeological Impacts  	   128
         H,  SCS Flood control Structures  	   129
         5.  Aesthetic Losses  	>	   129
         6.  Alterations of Ecosystems 	   129
     C.  Mitigative Measures to Secondary Impacts 	   135
         1.  Flooding  	   135
             a.  SCS Flood Control Project	   136
             b.  Floodplain and Floodway Ordinances 	   133
             c.  Stormwater Runoff Ordinances 	   144
             d.  Channel Improvements  	   146
         2.  Erosion and Sedimentation	   147
         3.  Water Quality  	   149
                             ii

-------
                                                              Page


 VT.  Relationship Between Local Short-term Uses of
      Man's Environment and the Maintenance and      	    153
      Enhancement of Long-term Productivity

VII.  Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of
      Resources  	•—•	    159

References	    162
                             111

-------
                    List of Figures
No..                    Title                         Page

Fig. 1   Crabtree Creek Interceptor Sewer              5
Fig. 2   Existing Land Uses                           10
Fig. 3   Proposed Open Space - Adopted Thorough-
           fare Plans                                 11
Fig. 4   Upper Crabree Creek Basin Present and
           Ultimate Sewage Loading                    13
Fig. 5   Wastewater Collection System, Gary, N.C.     18
Fig. 6   Bedrock Geology                              23
Fig. 7   Soils                                        26
Fig. 8   Wake Wastewater Facilities Plan, Wake        39
           County, North Carolina
Fig. 9   Wake Water Facilities Plan, Wake County,     41
           North Carolina
Fig. 10  Project Total Water Use for Wake County      42
           and Raleigh
Fig. 11  Future Projected Areas Served by
           Municipal Water Systems - Wake County,     43
           North Carolina
Fig. 12  Wake County Population Projections,
           1970-2000                                  45
Fig. 13  Town of Gary Population Projections,
           1970-2000                                  46
Fig. 14  Town of Morrisville Population
           Projections, 1970-2000                     47
Fig. 15  SCS Flood Control Project Map, Crabtree
           Creek Watershed                            57
Fig. 16  Flood Stage Profiles                         59
Fig. 17  Crabtree Creek Interceptor Sewer,
           Perimeter Service Areas                    gg
Fig. 18  Effects of Urban Development on Flood
           Hydrographs                               103
Fig. 19  Effect of UrbaniEation on Mean Annual
           Flood                                     104
Fig. 20  Thoroughfare Plan, Wake County
                          IV

-------
                    List of Tables
No..           Title

Table 1       Project Costs
Table 2       Population and Wastewater Usage
                Projections
Table 3       Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat
Table H       National Primary and Secondary Ambient
                Air Quality Standards
Table 5       Crabtree Creek Watershed Projections
Table 6       SCS Flood Control Structure Data
Table 7       2020 Capacity - Walnut Creek
                Interceptor
Table 8       1970 Capacity - Crabtree Creek
                Intercepting Sewer
Table 9       Requests for Point Source Discharge
Table 10      Average Annual Flood Damages
Table 11      Service Area Property Owners
  4
 14

 32

 37
 48
 56

 77

 78
 83
107
154
                      Appendices
No.
    1    Initial Public Correspondence
    2    Notice of Intent
    3    Inspection Reports and Data on Existing
            Wastewater Treatment Plants
    4    Woody Vegetation Inventory
    5    Region J Concurrence
    6    Handout Distributed at the Corps of
            Engineers' November 28, 1973
            Public Meeting on the
            Crabtree Creek Study
    7    Wake County Plan of Action
    8    Raleigh Resolution to Establish a Policy
            for the Extension OF City Facilities
    9    Project Flood Control Petition
   10    Request for Archeological Study
   11    Acknowledgments
168
173

176
185
189
191
199

221
223
225
229

-------
           SUMMARY SHEET FOR ENVIRONMENTAL
                   IMPACT STATEMENT
      CRABTREE CREEK, WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Draft    (X)
Final    ( )

            Environmental Protection Agency
                       Region IV
             1421 Peachtree Street, N. E.
                Atlanta, Georgia  30309
    1.   Administrative Action  (X)
         Legislative Action     ( )
    2.   The subject action of this Environmental
Impact Statement is the awarding of grant funds for the
construction of an interceptor sewer line in Wake
County, North Carolina to service the upper drainage
basin of Crabtree Creek,  The present EPA grant offer
is $2,445,750 of a total estimated project cost of
$5,300,000 for approximately 92,000 linear feet of pipe
sized from 48" to 12", 12,600 linear feet of 20" force
main, and one pumping station.
    3.   The major impacts of the project are divided
into the following: a) beneficial, b) growth and
development, c) primary adverse and d) secondary
adverse impacts.  The main beneficial impact of the
                          VI

-------
                                                                          -h
    WAKE WASTEWATER FACILITIES  PLAN
EXISTING
PHASE  I - CONST BY I9T5
PHASE  (I - CONST BY 980
PHASE  III - CONST BT 1990
PHASE  IV - CONST BY 2000
PUMPING STATION
WASTEWATEfl TREATMENT PLANT
WAKE  COUNTY
   NORTH CAROLINA
                                                                       FIGURE 8

-------
    WASTEWATER  COLLECTION  SYSTEM
EXISTING SEWER LINES_ a

EXISTING FORCE MAIN

EXISTING PUMPING STATIONS

EXISTING WASTE TREATMENT PLANT
APPROXIMATE SERVICE ARC
OF COLEt IKAHCH S.T.P.
    TOWN   OF

   GARY

WAKE  COUNTY.  N.C.
              FIGURE

-------
project is the establishment of a regional wastewater



collection system providing for  (1)  the elimination of



present and possible future wastewater discharges to



Crabtree Creek and its tributaries,  (2) discontinuance



of use of septic tanks in the unsuitable soils in the



Upper Crabtree Basin, and (3) factors other than



wastewater disposal to be the developmental constraints



in this basin.



    The major growth and development impact will be the



stimulation of the rate of development and the



allowance of increased densities in the project service



area.



    The major primary and secondary adverse impacts are



listed below followed by mitigative factors and



recommended control measures.



    A.   Primary



         a.   construction Erosion and Sedimentation



    Sewer line construction adjacent to a waterway



presents a potential for significant amounts of soil



erosion from excavation and surface traffic.  In order



to lessen this potential impact. Wake County shall



provide to EPA and the North Carolina Sedimentation



Control Commission for approval an erosion and
                          VI1

-------
sedimentation control plan which indicates those
specifications to be included in the construction
contract for the proposed project.  As a minimum,
control measures shall comply with the North Carolina
and Wake County erosion and sedimentation control
requirements and whenever possible provide a 10 meter
(33 feet) buffer between the creek bank and the edge of
the construction right-of-way.
         b.    Archeological and Historical
    No adverse impacts are anticipated on
archeological, historical or cultural resources;
however, a preliminary survey of the construction
right-of-way shall be made before construction begins
to determine if any unique sites would be damaged by
the proposed construction.  If any areas are
identified, measures will be taken to avoid irreparable
damages.
         c.     Odors
     Since the proposed project is approximately 10
miles long and ties in with an interceptor that is
also about 10 miles long, there is a possibility that
the wastewater may become anaerobic and produce
offensive odors.   To alleviate this potential impact,
the design of the lift station will include facilities
for aeration of the wastewater.

                         viii

-------
         d.   Alteration of Ecosystems
    The proposed project will clear a 12.5 meter (40
ft.) right-of-way. Preservation of certain unique
vegetative communities is desirable for use in the
proposed greenway system and for other recreational and
aesthetic uses.  Therefore, a 20 meter (61 ft.)  wide
vegetative survey will be made to determine unique
areas.  Route realignment will be considered in those
areas identified.
    B.   Secondary
         a.    Flooding
    Development of the Upper Crabtree Creek Basin
associated with the proposed project will increase the
probability of damages from flooding in downstream
areas.  The completion of the SCS flood control project
is one method of mitigating this adverse impact.  Grant
funds shall be withheld from the proposed project until
all land rights have been acquired for Soil
Conservation Service Control Structures located within
each proposed service area, or until other measures are
taken, including but not limited to channelization,
                          IX

-------
urban runoff controls, developmental restrictions, and



other land use modifications which will insure adequate



flood control as determined by the State of North



Carolina, the SCS, the COEr and the EPA.  Grant funds



shall be withdrawn January 1, 1976, from the proposed



project if land rights are not acquired for the SCS



structures or agreement on other measures to insure



adequate flood protection is not reached.



         b.   Developmental Erosion and Sedimentation



    Development of the Upper Crabtree Basin will



significantly increase the amount of sediment reaching



Crabtree Creek.   Wake County has enacted the Wake



County Erosion and Sedimentation Control Ordinance in



order to reduce this potential impact.



         c.   Demand for Community Services



    The project will allow an increase in the rate and



density of growth in the service area.  Associated with



this growth is the need for water supply,



transportation, power, schools, open space and



recreational facilities, shopping areas, fire and



police protection, health facilities, and garbage



pickup.  In order to adequately supply these services a

-------
comprehensive program of land use and community



services planning should be initiated.



    4.   The alternatives considered were the "no



action" alternative and possible alternative routing



systems to satisfy the wastewater collection needs of



the upper Crabtree Creek basin.  A routing along Walnut



Creek to the Neuse River Sewage Treatment Plant and a



system discharging to the New Hope Basin are evaluated.



    The proposed project is considered the most



appropriate course of action following provisions of



flood protection.



    For purposes of this EIS, EPA, Region IV, Atlanta,



Georgia is the "responsible Federal agency" as required



by NEPA.



    The following Federal, State, and local agencies



and interested groups were invited to comment on the



draft impact statement.
                          XI

-------
                   FEDERAL AGENCIES

Department of Housing and     Federal Power Commission
  Urban Development           Department of the Interior
Dept. of Health, Education    U.S. Coast Guard
  & Welfare                   Corps of Engineers
Economic Development          Dept. of Transportation
  Administration              Dept. of Commerce
Soil Conservation Service     Federal Highway
Forest Service                  Administration
                  MEMBERS OF CONGRESS

Sam J. Ervin, Jr.             Jesse A. Helms
U.S. Senate                   U.S. Senate

Ike Andrews
U.S. House of Representatives
                         STATE

Governor of North Carolina    Water Quality Division
Clearinghouse and Informa-    Office of Air and Water
  tion Center                   Resources
                         LOCAL
Wake County Manager            Wake County Planning Dept.
Wake County Board of               Agricultural Extension
  Commissioners                    Service
Wake Soil and Water Conserva-  Region J - Research
  tion District                  Triangle Regional
Mayor, Raleigh                   Planning Commission
City Planning Department         City Manager
Department of Parks and       Mayor, Gary
  Recreation
                   INTERESTED GROUPS

Oak Park-Glen Forest-Deblyn   Sierra Club
                          xn

-------
  Park Civic Association      League of Women Voters
Raleigh EGOS                  Crabtree Creek Improvement
Laurel Hills Homeowners         Corporation
  Association                 Jaycees
Citizens Land Use Planning    Wake Engineering Study
  Council, Inc.                 Group
Chamber of commerce
Crabtree Creek Citizens
Advisory Committee


    The draft statement was made available to the

Council on Environmental Quality and the public on

January 31, 1975.
                          Xlll

-------
         DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT

      CRABTREE CREEK, WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
                  EPA PROJECT C370344
I.  GENERAL DESCRIPTIVE INFORMATION
    The Administrator of the Environmental Protection

Agency through Title II of the Federal Water Pollution

Control Act  (PL 92-500) is authorized to make grants to

any State, municipality or intermunicipal or interstate

agency for the construction of publicly owned treatment

works.  The Federal Share of construction costs shall

be 75 percent of the total eligible costs.  Each

applicant for a grant shall submit plans,

specifications, and cost estimates for approval; and

must show that such works are in conformance with

applicable areawide or State plans.  Further, the

proposed works must be certified by the appropriate

State water pollution control agency as entitled to

priority over other works in the State, and that the

size and capacity of such works, relate directly to the

needs to be served by such works including sufficient

reserve capacity.

    Wake county, in response to present and future

anticipated water quality problems, has requested funds

for the construction of an interceptor sewer line to

service the Upper Crabtree Watershed area.  At present.

-------
nine existing wastewater treatment plants discharge to



Crabtree Creek or its tributaries; the Brier Creek



Plant, Mobile City Plant, Gary's Coles Branch Plant,



three plants in the little Brier Creek Basin, two



plants on Sycamore Creek, and one facility serving a



quarry on Crabtree Creek.  Septic tank malfunctions and



applications for site approvals for additional



treatment facilities in this basin further indicate the



need for a comprehensive program for wastewater



transmission and treatment.



    A.  Project History



    The Environmental Protection Agency  (EPA) received



an application on June 30, 1971 for grant funds for the



construction of an interceptor sewer to serve



Morrisville, a mobile home park, a portion of Gary, and



future service areas west of Raleigh, North Carolina.



An environmental impact appraisal was made from



information supplied by the applicant. Wake County,



North Carolina, and a negative declaration was



published on December 12, 1972.  On December 29, 1972



EPA offered Wake County $2,UU5,750, which was 75



percent of the total eligible project costs.  This

-------
grant offer was formally accepted by the Wake County



Commis sloners.



    Following the grant announcement, concerned persons



contacted EPA, the Council on Environmental Quality



(CEQ), and the North Carolina Department of Natural and



Economic Resources.  Ms. Anne Taylor, Conservation



Chairman of the Research Triangle Group, Sierra Club,



and  Mr. Floyd Hedgepeth and Mr. Robert E. Giles,



representing the Oak Park-Glen Forest-Deblyn Park Civic



Association, expressed concern about flooding, sediment



control, floodplain regulation, and area planning



(Chapter II.E and Appendix 1).  The CEQ also forwarded



additional information that had been brought to its



attention by the League of Women Voters, Wake



Environment, and the Sierra Club.



    After review of the new information and



consultation with the State of North Carolina



Department of Natural and Economic Resources, agreement



was made to prepare a joint Federal-State environmental



impact statement, and a notice of intent was released



on September 2, 1973.  (Appendix 2)

-------
    B.  Project Description

    The EPA project 370344, Crabtree Creek, Wake

County, North Carolina, includes interceptor sewer

lines, a force main, and a pumping station.  (Figure

1) .  Table 1 gives projected costs, available funds and

desired additional funds.

                        Table 1

         Project Costs Table (August 24, 1973)

Project Summary

Land & Rights-of-way               $  300,000
Construction                        4,195,386
A/E Services                          300,000
Legal fi Fiscal                         76,000
Administrative                         10,000
Project Contingency
   TOTAL PROJECT COST              $5,300,000

Available Funds

EPA Grant Offer*  (75%)             $2,445,750
State Supplemental Grant*  (12.5%)     407,625
Acreage Fees  (Advance)                450,000
Additional To Be Requested  (EPA)    1,203,140
Additional To Be Requested  (N.C.)     192,375
County of Wake                        320,000
Town of Gary                          180,000
    TOTAL AVAILABLE FUNDS          $5,300,000
*  EPA ruled $3,261,000 as eligible costs in their grant
   offer of 12-29-72.

NOTE: Revised cost estimates by Wake Engineering Study
 Group

-------
    The effluent from this project will be routed to



the existing interceptor at the old non-operating Oak



Park Wastewater Treatment Plant on Crabtree Creek.



This 30-inch interceptor is expected to be adequate



until 1985 or 1990, at which time a parallel 42-inch



interceptor is planned.  Parallelling of this



interceptor is required regardless of the contribution



from the proposed project due to increased flows from



existing service areas.  The wastewater from the



Crabtree Creek project will be conveyed via the



existing and future interceptors to the new Neuse River



Wastewater Treatment Plant now under construction.  The



initial plant capacity will be 30 million gallons per



day  (mgd) with secondary extended aeration biological



treatment followed by sand filtration.  Average



biological oxygen demand  (BOD) and suspended solids



(SS) removal are anticipated to be 97-98 percent,



giving an effluent containing approximately 6 parts per



million  (ppm) BOD and 5 ppm SS.  Ultimate capacity is



expected to be 100 mgd by incremental increases in



plant size.  The impacts associated with this plant are



not within the scope of this EIS.

-------
                   CRABTREE CREEK  INTERCEPTOR
                              SEWER
PERIMETER SERVICE AREAS

        GARY

  I. .'..I  RALEIGH

-------
    1.  Proposed Project Facilities



    For discussion, the proposed project facilities are



separated into four segments; Oak Park to Richland



Creek, Richland Creek, force main and pumping station,



and 1-40 to Gary's wastewater treatment plant (See



Figure 1).



         a.   Oak Park to Richland Creek



    The proposed H8-inch interceptor sewer ties in with



the existing system at the old Oak Park Wastewater



Treatment Plant located off Oak Park Road on the north



edge of Crabtree Creek.  The line then follows a



westerly course through the backyards of property



owners on a 40-foot right-of-way.  The interceptor is



to be placed at an average depth of ten feet except at



station 10+00, where drainage for an existing ditch



must be provided.  The interceptor crosses Crabtree



Creek at station 25+38.65, approximately 850 feet south



of Duraleigh Road, and then passes under the Duraleigh



Road bridge.



    The interceptor must then pass the Nello Teer Rock



Quarry, near two settling ponds situated close to the



creek.

-------
    The interceptor crosses Crabtree Creek at station



15+57 and back at 52+82.  It then proceeds upstream to



where it follows Richland Creek.



        b.  Richland Creek



    From the confluence with Crabtree Creek a U2-inch



interceptor crosses under Richland Creek and follows



the west bank.  It crosses Ebenezer Church Road and



Reedy Creek Road.  In these areas occasional steep



slopes may necessitate placement close to the bank.  On



the southwest side of Reedy Creek Road the interceptor



splits to a 36-inch main and a 21-inch main.  The 36-



inch main connects to the 20-inch force main around



Umstead State Park, and the 21-inch main serves the



Upper Richland Creek Basin.



        c.  Force Main and Pumping Station



The 20-inch force main connects to the 36-inch



interceptor line at Trenton Road and roughly follows



Interstate 40 northwest to the pumping station located



slightly northeast of I-UO on Crabtree Creek.  This



pumping station will have three pumps initially with



future plans for a fourth.  Two 750 gallons per minute



(gpm) and one 2000 gpm pumps are planned, operating on



power supplied by three 150 horsepower (hp) electric

-------
motors with a standby generator.  Initial capacity
would be 2000 gpm  (2.88 mgd).  Ultimate capacity is
projected to be 12,000 gpm  (17.3 mgd).
        d.  I-HO to Gary Wastewater Treatment Plant
    The 42-inch influent line to the pumping station
passes under 1-40 adjacent to the south bank of
Crabtree Creek.  The sewer then follows the southern
edge of the proposed Soil Conservation Service's (SCS)
flood control structure No. 23 and passes under the
flood pool on Reedy Creek,  At station 178+66.21 the
15-inch Mobile City interceptor ties in, and passes
under the flood pool and up a small tributary of
Crabtree Creek.  The trunk interceptor then passes
under Highway 51 and the Southern Railroad tracks near
Morrisville.  It follows Crabtree Creek, then up coles
Branch, skirts around the SCS control structure No, 18
and ties in with the Gary treatment plant influent
line,
    2.  Service Areas
    Figure 2 gives existing land uses and Figure 3
presents the proposed open space and the adopted
thoroughfare plans for the project service area as
established by the Region J Research Triangle Planning

-------
      RESIDENTIAL.  MOLT I-FAMILY
      RESIDENTIAL,  ISOLATED MOBILE  HOMES
      RESIDENTIAL.  MOBILE HOMC COURTS
 • •  .  RESIDENTIAL.  ISOLATED BUILDIN4S
     [RESIDENTIAL.  SINGLE  FAMILY  BUILT-UP
BB               AREAS
     [COMMERCIAL
__„,,,  INDUSTRY (INCLUOIN**RESEARCM TRIAN4LE
•Hill       PARK. MININ4 AND  QUARRIES)
MB  UNIVERSITY  LAND ..--
MB  UMSTEAD  STATE  PARK
      RALEIGH - DURHAM AIRPORT
 ••  OTHER STATE LAND                   /
 IP   80LF COURSES
      CHURCHES                <
 Q   SCHOOLS
 t-    AIRPORTS
      OTHER PUBLIC USES
  —  OVERHEAD  TRANSMISSION LINES
  ---  PIPE  LINES
  X    CONDEMNED OR  ABANDONED STRUCTURES
                 (»    /'"ml   ~JW   />
       DETERMINED BY REGION J,
       BESEARCH TRIANGLE PLANNING COMMISSION
      APRIL 1969 -    i  .mim
      •I «-z>^J S

-------
  F"*«i
                                                                                                                                 LEGEND
                                                                                                      ADOPTED THOMOUOHFAM  PLAN*         imTM
                                                                                                           MAJOT THOKXNHnm
                                                                                                           "WOO  TNOKOIMHFDW
                                                                                                      EXISTING  OPEN SPACE
                                                                                                         PUBLIC AND DMTITUTIOHM.' I
                                                                                                     OPEN SPACE PMPWAL*
                                                                                                       COXfS  OF  IMM»m MMUVOm
                                                                                                       ST«Tt
                                                                                                       CKumf owiTiMTtMHic
                                                                                                         HOmiAl  »0«C        FLOOO  ITMMf MI*
                                                                                                                              •ami
                                                                                                                            H.UH on Exromvi nc*tnm°*ii>!!Lt
                                                                                                                                            M OTHUI KVtl.«M|«
                                                                                                                      DEVELOPED BY KEGION J,
                                                                                                                      RESEARCH TRIANGLE  PLANNING COMMISSION
                                                                                                                      APRIL
V

-------
Commission.  As may be seen from Fig. 2, existing land



use in the project service area is predominantly rural



with the major development located along arterial



roadways in Cary, in Morrisville and east of Umstead



State Park.  Following placement of the proposed



interceptor, additional development is anticipated.



The following sections discuss the design flow and



approximate densities of the project service areas



divided by secondary interceptor tie-ins and their sub-



basins as shown on Figure U.



         a.   Richland Creek Interceptor



    The proposed Richland creek interceptor will serve



various State-owned properties, including the State



Fairgrounds, Carter Stadium, and the National Guard



Headquarters.  Further, residential, commercial, and



industrial needs in this basin will be satisfied.



    The area is presently served by the 8-inch House



Creek, the 12-inch Rocky Branch, and the 2t-inch Walnut



Creek interceptors.  These lines are presently at or



approaching capacity and future development and



expansion of facilities suggest a need for additional



capacity.  The present peak flow from the Richland



Creek  Basin is estimated to be 1.9 mgd.  Table 2
                          12

-------
outlines population and wastewater usage projections



for this basin as determined by the Wake Engineering



Study Group.

-------
                        Table 2
      Population and Wastewater

STATE OWNED  (50%)

N.C.S.U.  (35%)
N.C. National Guard (5%)
Umstead State Park  (5%)
State Fairgrounds  (5%)

           POPULATION TOTALS

    *These are temporary crowds

Waste Flow generated 8  10 gpd
SPeak Rate
PRIVATELY OWNED
Usage Projections
        POPULATION*
  PRESENT      FUTURE
  48,000±
     500

 120,000

 168,500

only
 80rOOO±
  1,000

200.000

281,000
1,685,000gpd  2,810,000
Residential  (30%)
Commercial  (9%)
Industrial
      700±
      200±
           POPULATION TOTALS

Waste Flow generated 8 250 gpd
a Peak Rate

PUBLICLY OWNED  (10%)

Schools (less than 156)
R/W, Etc. , (Approximately 7%)
Other Public Owned  (256)

            POPULATION TOTALS

Waste Flow generated S 20 gpd
a Peak Rate

TOTAL FLOW GENERATED
      950±
   14,000
    1,400
      350

   15,750
  237,500 gpd 3.937,000 gpd
      100
      240
    4,500 gpd
      800

      800

     1600±


    32,000 gpd
                                   1,927,000 gpd  6,779,000 gpd
** For design purposes, an ultimate peak flow of  5,000,000
gallons per day is used.  The reasons for this are as
follows:  the complexity of usage of the area, the time of
peak crowds at sporting events and the State Fair, and the
large percentage of this area is state ownership.
                          14

-------
        b.  Mobile City Interceptor



    This interceptor will serve the Mobile City Mobile



Home Park located northeast of Morrisville.  The line



will eliminate the Mobile City 21,000 gpd extended



aeration treatment plant discharging into an unnamed



tributary of Crabtree Creek.  This tributary has an



average discharge of 0.8 cubic feet per second  (cfs)



and a 7-day, 10-year minimum flow of 0 cfs.  At certain



times the flow from the wastewater treatment plant is



the entire flow of this tributary.



    The plant is presently discharging an effluent with



a 5-day BOD of 10 milligrams per liter  (mg/1) and a



suspended solids concentration of 9 mg/1.  The average



flow is estimated to be 16,000 gpd, serving



approximately 100 trailers.  Inspections on August 16



and 29, 1972 by the State Office of Water and Air



Resources show DO in the stream to be less than 4 ppm



(Appendix 3),  This water quality violation can be



directly related to the Mobile City treatment plant.



    The owner of Mobile City has applied for a permit



to construct additions to this plant raising its
                          15

-------
capacity to 0.5 mgd.  Future peak loading on the
proposed interceptor is projected to be 1.8 mgd (Figure
<*)-
       c.  Morrisville Interceptor
    Approximately 200 residents of the city of Morrisville
are served by septic tanks and drainfields.  Due to the
low permeability of the soils in the area, several
drainfields have failed.  Large lots are required by
the County Public Health Department to help minimize
unsanitary conditions.  The interceptor would allow an
elimination of the health hazards attributable to
septic tank failure in this area.
    Projections of growth for Morrisville  (Figure 14)
show a greatly increasing population.  Waste disposal
is and would be a limiting factor for this growth.
Present and future peak flows expected in this
interceptor are 0.1 mgd and 0.8 mgd respectively
 (Figure H).
    d.  Coles Branch Interceptor
    The proposed interceptor would eliminate the Gary
wastewater treatment plant located on Coles Branch
northwest of Gary.  The plant has a capacity of 100,000
gallons per day with a present average flow estimated
                          16

-------
to be 60,000 gpd.  It is a trickling filter type plant

with effluent grab samples showing a 5-day BOD of 22

mg/1, fecal coliform values of 1000/100 ml and

suspended solids of 44 mg/1 (Appendix 3).  During dry
                                r
periods the effluent comprises the entire flow of Coles

Branch.  This plant is causing water quality violations

of both dissolved oxygen and fecal coliforms.  Coles

Branch is a Class C water with DO and fecal coliform

limits of 4.0 mg/1 and 1000/100 ml respectively.  Water

quality data show a DO of 1.4 and fecal coliform

concentration of 6100/100 ml.  (See Appendix 3.)

    This treatment plant serves a small portion (about

500) of Gary's approximately 10,000 persons.  The

remainder of Gary's residents are served by pumping to

the Walnut Creek interceptor (See Figure 5) .

        e.  Future Service Areas

    The proposed Crabtree Creek interceptor sewer is

designed to satisfy existing and future demands for

sewerage in the project area.  Figure 4 summarizes

present and projected ultimate flows in each segment of

the project interceptor.  The area adjacent to and east

of Morrisville is expected to experience pronounced

residential growth.  Mr. E. N. Richards proposes to
                         17

-------
develop the land south of Crabtree Creek when sewerage
facilities are provided.  This area is expected to be
developed as mixed residential, with both single family
and multi-family dwellings.  Figure 4 gives projected
ultimate flows from this area  (PT. "I" and PT. "K")  as
5.1 mgd (25,000 persons at 200 gpcd peak flow).  This
flow would accomodate a gross density of approximately
7 persons per acre.
    Mr. J. T. Hobby has submitted an application for
additions to the existing Mobile City Wastewater
Treatment Plant  (Table 8).  The proposed interceptor
would allow expansion of the mobile park and
residential growth in the adjacent properties without
additional wastewater discharges to the Crabtree Creek
Basin.
    The wake County Planning Department proposes the
land northeast of Morrisville be developed as light
industrial.  Presently the area is rural with
approximately one-third of the non-residential land in
crops and pasture.  Grains, corn and tobacco are the
major crops.  A few industries operate in this area  (A.
R. Gray Steel Fabricating Company, Tar Heel Wood
Treating Company, Truss Builders, and Koppers Company),
                           19

-------
and additional industries are expected to locate in the



area following the availability of adequate sewerage.



There are three wastewater treatment plant discharges



in the Little Brier Creek Basin serving



industries(Appendix 3).  Sycamore Creek, in a basin



adjacent to the Brier Creek Basin, is classified "B" by



the State for recreational purposes in Umstead Park.



It receives the discharge from two inadequate



industrial sewage treatment facilities.  An interceptor



force main and pumping system to tie in with the



Crabtree Creek interceptor is proposed to eliminate the



wastewater discharges in these basins and to satisfy



future wastewater disposal needs.  The projected flow



(Figure 4) from this area is 13.3 mgd, which is



sufficient to serve the Brier Creek and Stirrup Creek



basins at a gross density of 7 persons per acre.



    A 635-acre industrial park is planned by Mr. J. W.



York, immediately north and west of the confluence of



Coles Branch and Crabtree Creek and adjacent to the SCS



flood control structure No. 18.  This development is



also awaiting the provision of wastewater collection



and treatment.  Interceptor Pt. "C", the tie in point



to the trunk interceptor, is anticipated to have a
                          20

-------
wastewater flow of 3.4 mgd which is sufficient capacity
for greater than 9 persons per acre.
    The proposed Crabtree Creek interceptor, excluding
the Richland Creek  portion, is projected to service a
combined present population of approximately 1000,
Future flows in the interceptor are designed for a
population in excess of 80,000  (20 mgd).
    C.  Description of Project Area
    1.  Natural Resources
        a.  Surface Water
    The Crabtree Creek Watershed encompasses 90,750
acres in Wake and Durham Counties  (See Figure 15).  The
headwaters begin on the east side of a ridge extending
roughly from Research Triangle Park southward to the
city of Apex.  The watershed extends north above
William B. Omstead State Park and the Raleigh city
limits.  The southern boundary runs through the Raleigh
city limits separating the Crabtree Creek and Walnut
Creek watersheds.  Crabtree Creek discharges to the
Neuse River southeast of Raleigh,  approximately 20
miles from its origin.
    The project area topography shows a relief rarely
exceeding 180 feet.  The stream gradient of Crabtree
                          21

-------
Creek west of the Jonesboro fault (Figure 6) averages
approximately 10.5 feet per mile and east of the fault
approximately 2.8 feet per mile.  The Richland Creek
gradient is approximately 37 feet per mile.
    Stream flow data for Crabtree creek shows great
variation.  At Crabtree Creek just west of I-40, the 7-
day 10-year low flow is 0,3 cfs (USGS).  At US 70 the
7-day 10-year low flow is 2.2 cfs (USGS) Conversely, on
February 2, 1973 and June 29, 1973, stream flows were
estimated by the USGS to be 10,400 and 12,500 cfs at
Highway 70.  These flows were the highest on record and
constituted an estimated 20-year flood (a flood which
has a probability of occurring once every 20 years).
    The water quality of Crabtree Creek is generally
good.  Data supplied by the North Carolina Department
of Natural and Economic Resources, Office of Water and
Air Resources, show that from the confluence of coles
Branch to the abandoned wastewater treatment plant in
Oak Park, DO is 6.0 mg/1 and above throughout.  Fecal
coliform values range considerably, from less than ten
to above 10,000 per 100 ml sample.  From this data it
appears that either the chlorination of wastewater
discharges is inadequate or septic tank drainfields are
                        22

-------
       CRABTREE CREEK  INTERCEf
                    SEWER
     T^LIASSIC CONGLOMERATES. SILTSTONI

[| | | | PHYLLITES & CREEXSTCrE SCHIST

     GRANITE

     HORNBLENDE GNEISS

     '-""LSIC GNEISS
t
                  INTERCEPTOR
                  SCS  FLOOD
                  CONTROL PROJECTS
                    SEDIMENT POOL

-------
short-circuiting directly to surface waters.  As

described previously, the water quality of Coles

Branch, Brier Creek, and an unnamed tributary (Mobile

City Discharge) are in various degrees of degradation.

         b.  Geology

    The discussion of geological features, soils, and

groundwater has been excerpted from a Statement of

Impact, Proposed crabtree Creek Sewer Outfall, as

prepared by Geological Resources, Inc. for J. W. York

and Company, Realtors.

Bedrock Geology

         The area of the proposed sewer outfall is
    divided into eastern and western portions by the
    Jonesboro fault  (Figure 6), a regional fault
    which extends in a northeasterly direction from
    Chesterfield County, South Carolina into Granville
    County, North Carolina.  The fault dips approxi-
    mately 65 degrees west-northwest....
    The Jonesboro fault has been inactive
    since the late Triassic or early Jurassic period
    (approximately 180 million years ago)  and poses
    no threat of earthquake to the area.  The fault
    now serves only as a boundary between the Triassic
    sedimentary rocks of the basin to the west and the
    pre-Triassic igneous and metamorphic rocks to the
    east.

         Field inspection of the area reveals that
    the outcropping Triassic sedimentary rocks are
    poorly consolidated siltstones, sandstones, and
    conglomerates.

         Triassic rocks are usually encountered be-
    tween 35 and 100 inches below the surface (Soil
                         24

-------
Survey of Wake County, North Carolina, U.S. Depart-
ment of Agriculture, Soil conservation Service,
1970, pp. 21 and 61) and are difficult to dig or
blast.  These rocks are indurated well enough
to refuse light digging equipment, and because
of their clay content they tend to absorb the
shock from blasting, producing large boulders
rather than shattering into small pieces.

     East of the Jonesboro fault, the rocks are
igneous and metamorphic in origin, with moderate
to well-developed jointing and fracturing.  Folia-
tion in the metamorphic rocks strikes northeast
and dips steeply to the northwest in the area
between Raleigh and the fault.

     Along Coles Branch between Gary and the
Jonesboro fault, the rock types are phyllite
and greenstone schist (Figure 6).  Along Inter-
state Highway 40 between Raleigh and the fault,
the rock types are hornblende gneiss and felsic
gneiss interrupted by a granite body in the
William B« Omstead State Park area.

     c.  Soils

     Soils west of the Jonesboro fault, in the
Crabtree Creek area, are within the Creedmoor-
White Store association (Figure 7).  These soils
have a reddish brown to yellowish brown sandy
loam topsoil with a red to brownish red clayey
subsoil.  The subsoil has a low permeability pro-
ducing a very shallow perched water table during
the wet seasons (Soil Survey of Wake County,
pp. 20, 60, 61, and 123).   Montmorillonite, the
dominant clay mineral in Triassic soils, expands
when wet and creates a relatively impermeable
soil.  When over six percent of a soil is
montmorillonite, expansion problems may result
(personal communication, Mr. Robert Kirby, Soil
Conservationist, Wake County Planning Department,
1974)-  Montmorillonitic soils also have the
property of thixotrophism, a property which
causes undisturbed stable loam soils to become
somewhat liquid upon being disturbed.
                      25

-------
RABTREE CREEK  INTERCEPTO
        SEWER

-------
     Because of slow permeability of Triassic
subsoils and underlying rocks, a relatively
smaller amount of rainfall is absorbed into
the ground west of the Jonesboro fault compared
to the area east of the fault.  Thus, for a
given amount of rainfall, surface runoff will
naturally be greater for areas west of the fault
than for areas east of the fault.

     Natural fertility of both Triassic soils
and soils formed from crystalline rocks is low,
and both require proper application of lime and
fertilizer for good crop growth.  Both soil
types become cloddy and form a crust at the sur-
face if worked when either too wet or too dry.
Because of the more impermeable nature of Triassic
soils, which retain a very shallow water table
for a longer period of time compared to soils
east of the Jonesboro fault, it is difficult to
obtain a uniform stand of crops because of cloddy
soils (Soil Survey of Wake county, pp. 63-68).

     The alluvial soils making up the flood
plain along Crabtree Creek are mostly soils of
the Chewacle Series and congaree Series.  These
fine, sandy loam soils have good infiltration
capabilities, but because of high water table
(season high depth to water table in soils of
Chewacle Series is approximately 1.5 feet;
season high depth to water table in soils of
the Congaree Series is approximately 2.5 feet—
Soil Survey of Wake County, pp. 18-19) these
soils have a limited capacity to absorb
additional water.

     Soils in the area derived from igneous and
metamorphic rocks are divided into the Cecil-
Appling, Herndon-Georgeville, and Cecil associa-
tions (Figure 7).  All of these soils have moderate
permeability and shrink-swell potential and are
typically in areas characterized by a gently
sloping to moderately steep, well-drained
topography.
                      27

-------
         d.    Groundwater

         Groundwater in the area to be served by
    the Crabtree Creek sewer outfall is generally
    of good quality.  Ground water yields in the
    crystalline rocks east of the Jonesboro fault
    average 10 to 20 gallons per minute (10 to 15
    gallons per minute in saprolite); groundwater
    yields in the Triassic rocks west of the Jones-
    boro fault average approximately 5 gallons per
    minute (3 to S gallons per minute in overlying
    soils) (Ground Water Bulletin Number 15,
    pp. 100-101).

         Due to compaction, cementation, and intimate
    mixing of sand and clay, the Triassic sedimentary
    rocks are practically impermeable, and very
    limited percolation occurs along joint and frac-
    ture planes.  However, joints and fractures
    permit moderate water percolation in the granite
    gneisses and schists east of the fault.

        e.  climate

    The Raleigh-Durham area lies between the mountains

on the west and the Atlantic coast on the south and

east.  The mountains form a partial barrier to cold air

masses moving eastward from the interior.  As a result,

this area enjoys a favorable climate where only a few

days in the mid-winter have a temperature below 20°F.

The average length of frost-free growing season is

about 210 days.

    Summer climate is influenced by the ocean, bringing

warm temperatures and high humidities to the area.

kf';exnoon temperatures reach 90°F or higher an average
                         28

-------
of every third day in mid-summer but rarely exceed
1000.
    The 43.6 inch yearly average rainfall is well
distributed throughout the year with the heaviest in
July  and the lightest in November.  Summer rainfall is
generally produced by thundershowers and is
occasionally accompanied by strong winds and intense
rains.
        f.  Vegetation and Wildlife
    The proposed project area lies within the eastern
United States geographical and climatological region.
Plentiful rainfall, combined with a long growing
season, relatively mild winters, and the absence of any
unusual limiting factors, allowed the development here
of a well diversified mesophytic deciduous forest.  A
few limited modifications of the natural forest were
made by the aboriginal population in the last few
thousand years, but its almost total alteration was
accomplished within the last 300 years by European
settlers.  As the climax vegetation was removed, biotic
communities representing earlier successional stages
become more prevalent.  In many cases and at various
times, these communities were, in turn, cut over.  In
                         29

-------
some places, land whose natural cover was removed for
use in row-cropping has been allowed to recover much of
its original species diversity.
    These man-induced changes, which took place
irregularly and sporadically both in space and time,
have left the project area a patchwork of agricultural
lands, open fields and pastures, pure pine stands,
unclassified previously logged areas, hardwood groves,
roads, rights-of-way, narrow strips of bottom land
vegetation along major and minor watercourses, and
suburban and urban development.  As a result, there is
a great variety of trees, shrubs and associated flora.
Appendix H lists some of the more common and
interesting species.
    Since much of the proposed sewer line right-of-way
for this project lies adjacent to streams, tree species
commonly found in floodplain areas will be most
frequently encountered, including American beech, tulip
tree, ironwood, river birch, black gum, red maple,
sweetgum, American sycamore, and several species of
oaks.  Since streamside areas offer limited
opportunities for intensive farming or for building
permanent structures due to the obvious flooding
                          30

-------
hazards, many stretches of the creeks and streams have
remained undisturbed.  As a consequence, species
diversity is high, vegetative structure and biomass are
great, many ecological niches are present, and physical
factors such as wind, temperature, and humidity are
well damped within the sub-crown forest ecosphere.
Such a community has high aesthetic appeal and
represents an advanced stage of ecological succession.
    Intimately associated with this diverse vegetative
cover are a great many species of vertebrate and
invertebrate animals.  Table 3, prepared by the Soil
Conservation Service, gives an overview of population
and habitat trends for the most common game and trapped
species within Wake County.  The principal game species
found in the central and western portions of the
project area include white-tailed deer, turkey, bob
white quail, mourning dove, gray squirrel, eastern
cottontail rabbit, woodcock and wood duck.  Mr. P. S.
Morgan of the U. S. Fish and Wildlife service noted
that the deer and turkey populations are generally
confined to the lands adjacent to the Raleigh-Durham
Airport and the William B.  Omstead State Park.
                         31

-------
                                                                Table 3 •
                                                     WILDLIFE AND WILDLIFE HABITAT
SPECIES
Deer, whitetailed
Rabbits, cottontail
Rabbits, marsh
Squirrels, grey
Bob white
Dove, Mourning
Ducks
Geese
Turkey j
Furbearers:
Mink, Muskrat
Raccoon
Fisheries
Warm-water
Population
Rating
Good

X

X
X
X





X

X
•air
X













Poor


X



X
X
X

X .



Existing
Habitat
Good!
X
X

X
X
X







X
Fair











X


Poor


X



X
X
X

X



Habitat
Trend
Up





X







X
Down
X


X




X





Same

X
X

X

X
X


X
X


Habitat J
Potential
Good
X
X

X
X
X





X

X
Fair


X





X

X
..


Poor






X
X






No. Acres
Potential
habitat
275,000
375,000
50,000
300,000
375,000
75,000
20,000
unknown
175,000

50,000
100,000

20,000
Comments







One flock in county





Over 3,000 ponds in
Wake County.
N>

-------
    J. D, Bayless and W. B. Smith of the North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission reported species from the
following orders of insects commonly found on stream
bottoms; Diptera (mosquitoes), Trichoptera (caddis
flies), Coleoptera  (beetles), Ephemeroptera  (mayflies),
and Odonata (dragonflies).  Oligochaeta (aquatic worms)
and Gastropoda  (snails) were also found.  Many of these
animals are food for the largemouth bass, redfin
pickerel, redbreast sunfish, bluegill, crappie, channel
catfish, yellow bullhead and a variety of shiners and
darters present in portions of Crabtree Creek, local
farm ponds, or the 100-acre Umstead Lake.  No
anadromous fish runs have been reported in the streams
in the proposed service area.
    The project area supports many more mammalian and
avian species as well as various reptiles and
amphibians.  The numerous terrestrial invertebrates
are an important link in the area's food chains, and
the resident bacteria, fungi, and other micro-organisms
are necessary components of the nutrient recycling
processes.
                          33

-------
    g.    Background and Present Air Quality


    Under the Clean Air Act of 1970 EPA was required to


set National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) that


affect public health and welfare,.  To implement these


standards EPA in conjunction with each state Air


Pollution Control Agency developed a State


Implementation Plan (SIP).  Each State was divided into


sub-districts known as Air Quality Control Regions


(AQCRs).  These regions were then classified on a
                                                     V

priority basis for each of 5 pollutants.  The priority


classification ranged from priority I thru III, three


being the lowest.  These classifications were based


upon either measured ambient air quality data where


such data was available or estimated ambient air


quality where data did not exist.  These AQCR


classifications were then published in the SIP.  Wake


County is part of what is known as the Eastern Piedmont


AQCR.  The Eastern Piedmont is classified as follows:
                           34

-------
          Pollutant
                Priority Classification
    Sulfur Dioxide (S02)
    Participates, (Part)
    Oxidants (Ox)
    Carbon Monoxide  (C)
    Nitrogen Dioxide  (NO2)
                        III
                         I
                        III
                        III
                        III
    A priority I means that the AQCR presently violates
the NAAQS, and priority III means that they do not
violate the standards.
    The present existing ambient air quality for 1973
is as follows:
Pollutant  Location  County
Part.      Raleigh   Wake
Part.
SO2
SO2
Raleigh   Wake

Raleigh   Wake

Raleigh   Wake
                     Site                 Averaging
                    Address  concentration      Time
121 Sea-  75 ug/m3
board Ave.
121 Sea-  157 ug/m3
board Ave.
a465 Six- 21 ug/m3
Forks Rd.
4465 Six- 108 ug/m3
Forks Rd.
                                                AGM
Max 24-hc
  AAM
Max 24-he
                          35

-------
    There is no measured air quality data for the
Raleigh area for CO2, Ox, and NO2.  The area is
classified priority III for the above pollutants.
    As mentioned earlier, the Federal Government sets
minimum air quality standards for certain pollutants,
although the States may set more stringent standards if
they wish.  National primary ambient air quality
standards are set to protect the public health and
secondary standards are set to protect the public
welfare.  Such primary and secondary standards have
been set for carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, nitrogen
dioxide, photochemical oxidants, particulate matter,
and sulfur dioxide (Table 4) .  Each standard specifies
an averaging time, frequency, and concentration.  The
averaging times are 1, 3, 8,  and 24 hours, and. 1 year.
The frequency parameter column of Table 2 specifies
either annual maximum concentrations for averaging
times of 24 hours or less, or an arithmetic or
geometric mean for a 1-year period.  The standards
specify that the maximum concentrations are not to be
exceeded more than once per year.
                         36

-------

-------
DURHAM AND WAKE
      NORTH CAROLINA

-------
 Table 4  NATIONAL PRIMARY AND SECONDARY AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
Pollutant
Carbon
monoxide
Nitrogen
dioxide
Photochemical
oxidants
Particulate
matter

Sulfur
dioxide

Type of
standard
Averaging Frequency
time parameter
Primary and 1 hr Annual maximum3
secondary 8 hr Annual maximum
Primary and
secondary
Primary and
secondary
Primary
Secondary
Primary
Secondary
1 yr Arithmetic mean
1 hr Annual maximum
Concentratior
pg/m3
40,000
10,000
100
160
ppm
35
9
0.05
0.08
24 hr Annual maximum 260
24 hr Annual geometric mean 75
24 hr Annual maximum
24 hr Annual maximum
1 yr Arithmetic mean
3 hr Annual maximum
150
365
80
1,300
—
0.14
0.03
0.5
aNot to be exceeded more than once  per year.
                                     37

-------
    2,  Community Resources



        a.  Wastewater Systems



    The present and proposed collection systems for the



Raleigh-Wake county project areas are shown in Figure



8.  The project area is served by ten wastewater



treatment facilities - the Walnut Creek Plant and the



previously identified Coles Branch (IB2d), Mobile City



(IB2b), the Brier Creek Plant  (IB2e), three plants in



the Little Brier Creek Basin, two plants on Sycamore



Creek, and one facility serving a quarry on Crabtree



Creek.  The old Walnut Creek plant serves all of



Raleigh, Richland Creek, and most of Gary.  This



trickling filter plant was built in 195U and is now



overloaded and causing considerable water quality



degradation in Walnut Creek.  The new Neuse River



Wastewater Treatment Plant  (IB) will eliminate all of



these plants, providing the proposed interceptors are



built.  The Neuse River Wastewater Treatment Plant will



be a regional facility designed to provide adequate



service to the county area through 2020.
                          38

-------
        b.  Water Supply
    Present and proposed water supply systems to
satisfy demands in Raleigh and Wake County are
presented in Figure 9.  The Neuse River and Lake
Raleigh are the present raw water sources.  Present
capacity of the Northside water treatment facilities is
25 mgd from the Neuse River, and the capacity of the
Southside plant is 12 mgd from Lake Raleigh. (Figure 9)
    According to the Wake County Water Use Study (1970)
surface waters are expected to remain the major source
of water supplies in Wake County.  Dp to 300 million
gallons of water per day may eventually be obtained
from the proposed Falls of the Neuse Reservoir and the
New Hope Reservoir, a supply that should be adequate
for 50 years.  Lake Raleigh and the Southside Water
Treatment Plant are projected as standby supplies to be
used during periods of peak demand.  The same report
gives projected water use for wet and dry years (Figure
10).
    Fig. 11 shows future water supply service areas.
Note that the project area is not proposed to be served
until sometime after 1980.  Provision of adequate water
supplies for the city of Raleigh assumes construction
                          40

-------
                                                                     BILLION   GALLONS
vo
en
o
vo
»j
o
oo
o
<£>
vo
o
N>
o
o
o
to
o
to
O
to
o
M

O
O
G
2
                    M H
                       O
                    O (-3
                    O J>  *d
                    ^H t"'  ?o
                    S     O
                    ^3 S!  Q
                    K >  M
                       H  O

                    2 JJd  M
                    O     D
                       G

                    > W
                    f
                    M
                    H
                    O
                    ffi

-------
  WAKE   COUNTY

NORTH   CAROLINA

      WAKE COUNTY WATER USE STUDY
DEPT. WATER & AIR RESOURCES, NORTH CAROLINA
           JUNE 1970
                                       43
FUTURE  PROJECTED ARE

 SERVED BY MUNICIPAI

  WATER SYSTEMS
1980


2020       " "~"


             FIGURE 1]

-------
of the controversial Falls of the Neuse Reservoir.  In
the interim. Wake County is proposing to provide a raw
water supply from Beaverdam Creek to alleviate the
immediate needs.  (See Appendix 7,)
    The Gary area is  in need of additional water
supplies.  Distribution and storage systems are
inadequate.  In order to satisfy future demand from
development in the project area, additional water
supplies and storage capacity will be needed.
    3.  Population Projections
    The following figures and tables give projected
populations for Wake county, Raleigh, Morrisville, and
the Upper Crabtree service area.
                          44

-------
600
            WAKE  COUNTY
      POPULATION  PROJECTIONS
           J970  thru  2000
                     N.C. SOCIAL SCIENCE
                     ADVISORY COMMITTEE
                     RESEARCH TRIANGLE
                     REGIONAL PLANMNS
                     COMMISSION  (I96S)
                     WAKE ENOINEERINS
                     STUDY GROUP

-------
POPULATION   IN   THOUSANDS
               ro
               o

-------
       TOWN OF MORRISVILLE
      POPULATION  PROJECTIONS
          1970  thru 2000
                   RESEARCH TRIANGLE
                   REGIONAL PLANNING
                   COMMISSION (I960)
                   WAKE ENGINEERING
                   STUDY GROUP
                                                                     FIGURE 14
1940

-------
                        Table 5

         Crabtree Creek Watershed Projections

                                 1970          1980        1990
    Area                       (census)        tEst.)      (Est.)

Raleigh urbanized area         152,289      210,000      275,000
 (Bureau of Census definition)
Town of Gary                     7,389       30,000 (2)   NA
Wake County                    228,453      288,910      342,277
Crabtree Creek_Watershed (1)
    Wake County part            15,449       23,204       29,515
    Durham County part         T   928	1,392	1,768
                Both            16,377       24,596       31,283
(1) Upstream from intersection of Crabtree Creek and U.S.
    Highway 70
(2) Town of Cary located on drainage divide; southern
    half drains into Walnut Creek basin; northern into
    Crabtree Creek.  Present estimate for 1980 being
    revised downward by Cary Planning Department.
Wake county Planning Department, 1974.


    The Wake County Planning Department projections

(Table 5) indicate a population increase in the Upper

Crabtree Basin of approximately 8000 in 1980 and 14,000

by 1990.  These projections appear small when compared

with the project design flow.  Construction of the

project may greatly increase the population growth in

this area.  Since the projections were made on the

assumption that the watershed population would continue

to increase at about the same rate as previous growth
                           48

-------
rates Of townships within the watershed, a higher
growth' rate might be expected with the  provision of
sewer and water utilities in the project service area.
    From the Wastewater Treatment and collection Master
Plan  (1971), the predicted population for the upper and
lower Crabtree creek Basin is as follows:
    1973    107,9
-------
transportation corridors suggest the desirability and
inevitability of future growth and development.
                          50

-------
II.  INTERRELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER PROJECTS, PROGRAMS
     OR EFFORTS

     A.  Federal

     1.  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

    The EPA through the Federal Water Pollution Control

Act Amendments of 1972 has authority to improve water

quality by administering a program of grants for

research, planning, engineering, and construction of

wastewater treatment facilities and their

appurtenances.  The Amendments also authorize EPA to

establish the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination

System, under which EPA establishes a permit system for

the discharge of any pollutant into the waters of the

United States.

    Section 208 of the Amendments provides for the

development of an areawide multifacet wastewater

management plan in areas with complex point and non-

point source wastewater problems.  The 208 plan will

include controls for municipal and industrial point

source wastes systems, for pollution emanating from

diffuse sources, for protection of the groundwater and,

for disposal of residual wastes.  This program also

includes the use of non-structural techniques,
                          51

-------
including the control of the use of land for water
quality management.  The program provides for a one-
year period, following designation of a 208 planning
agency, to set up a continuing planning process and two
years thereafter to submit the initial plan to the
Administrator.  The Raleigh area has been designated
the first 208 planning area in the 0. S.  The effective
date of designation was April 10, 1974, and Region J
Research Triangle Planning Commission is the designated
planning agency.
    The EPAr through the mandate of the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, is co-author
of this environmental impact statement.  NEPA provides
that a detailed statement by the responsible official,
on recommendations or reports on proposals for
legislation and other major Federal actions
significantly affecting the quality of the human
environment, be prepared.  In the present context, the
issuance of grant funds for construction of the
proposed project is considered a significant Federal
action.
                           52

-------
    2.   Soil Conservation Service (SCS)
    The development of the Crabtree Watershed
associated with the proposed project will increase the
probability of flood damages in the downstream areas
(See IVBl.)  The SCS has an ongoing flood control
project in the Crabtree Creek basin.  In March 1964 the
SCS released the Crabtree Creek Watershed Work Flan.
The objectives of the plan were to reduce floodwater
and sediment damage on agricultural floodplains and to
provide 100-year storm frequency protection for the
urban and industrial-zoned floodplain in and adjacent
to the city of Raleigh by utilizing structural works of
improvement, supported by land treatment.
    This study was initiated as a result of a flood
which occurred in May 1957, which hydrologic
determinations indicated the storm to be of 6.7-year
frequency.  The storm flooded 50 homes, the Farmers
Market, and other properties, causing damages estimated
to be in excess of $100,000.  Projections indicated a
once-in-a^century storm would have damaged 189 homes
and endangered numerous lives.
    Following the flood, several committees were formed
to study the problem and to recommend action.  Wake
County, the city of Raleigh, and the Neuse River Soil
                         53

-------
Conservation District  (later replaced by the Wake and



Durham County Soil and Water Conservation Districts)



then jointly sponsored an application for funds under



the Watershed Protection and Flood Protection Act,



Public Law 566.  Planning assistance was authorized by



the SCS on April 15, 1958, and the State then passed



legislation enabling the establishment of either a



watershed improvement district or a countywide program.



The result was the formation of an improvement district



which became the sponsor of the project in October



1960.  The Crabtree Creek Watershed Work Plan was then



prepared by the SCS, and Administrator Donald A.



Williams authorized operations on September 25, 1964.



    On November 2, 1965 a referendum was passed by the



county voters to establish a countywide watershed



improvement organization with the power to levy taxes.



In May 1968 Wake voters approved a million dollar bond



referendum to support the project.



    The original plan called for 15 flood control



structures and channel improvements.  Since that time,



structures No. 7, 15, 16, and 21 have been eliminated,



and the proposed channel improvement program below



structure No. 25 has been taken over by the Corps of
                         54

-------
Engineers.  Table 6 shows the design data for the
remaining structures.
    To implement the plan, the Wake Soil and Water
Conservation District was formed.  Its function was to
obtain land, easements, and rights-of-way and a limited
power of eminent domain was  initially provided (when
75 percent of the total easements in a construction
unit has been obtained). Since that time, comprehensive
power of eminent domain has been provided.  Monies for
property must be raised locally, while monies for
construction of the control structures are provided by
the SCS through P.L. 566 funds.  It was expected that
most of the land  would be donated by developers, but
this has not been the case.
    Completion of the project has been very slow.
Three structures, Nos. 2, 3, and 18, have been
completed, and No. 22 is under construction, and
construction of No. 1 is to begin soon. (See Figure
15).  There are not sufficient funds available for
outright acquisition of the remaining lands, nor a
reasonable expectation that they will be donated.
Speculation has occurred and has greatly increased land
prices.
                          55

-------
Table 6 ~ Structure Data
STRUCTURES WITH PLANNED STORAGE CAPACITY
CRABTREE CREEK WATERSHED, NORTH CAROLINA
ITEM 	 	
Class of Structure
Drainage Area
Controlled
Curve No. (l-day)(AMC II)
Elevation Top of Dam
Elevation Crest Emergency Spillway
Elevation Crest High Stage Inlet
Elevation Crest Low Stage Inlet
Maximum Height of Dam
Volume of Fill
Total Capacity!/
Sediment Submerged
Sediment Aerated
Retarding
Between High and Low Stage
Surface Area
Sediment Fool
Retarding Fool
_ Principal Spillway Design
j£ Rainfall Volume (areal)Q day)
Rainfall Volume (areal)UO day)
Runoff Volume (10 day)
Capacity of Low Stage (Max.)
Capacity of High Stage (Max.)
Freq. operation - finer. Spillway
Dimensions of Conduit
Emergency Spillway Design
Rainfall Volume (ESH) (areal)
Runoff Volume (ESH)
Storm Duration
Type
Bottom Width
Velocity of Flow (V4)
Slope of exit channel
Max. reservoir water surface elev.
Freeboard Design
Rainfall Volume(FH)(areal)(-hrs.)
Runoff Volume (FH)
Storm Duration
Max. reservoir uwater surface elev.
Capacity Equivalents
Sediment Volume
Retarding Volume
STRUCTURE NUMBERS
UNIT 1 1 2 | _3 1 SA 1 11 1 13
A A A B B c
Sq.Mi. 2.06 1.43 2.33 8.85 4.57 8.15
Sq.Mi.
81 81 81 80 76 79
Ft. 321.5 341.5 358.5 329.4 343.5 285.0
Ft. 316.0 335.5 352.5 323.0 336.0 275.0
Ft. 333.0 349.5
Ft. 305.0 326.0 342.5 306.5 Dry Pool 252.0
Ft. 32.5 34.0 35.0 42.5 48.0 51.0
Cu. Yds. 67, 474 53,469 97,272 (29,600) 106,200 177,944
Ac.Ft. 668 476 785 2,890 1,339 2,640
Ac.Ft. 167 114 199 315 - 356
Ac.Ft. 22 16 25 415 217 89
Ac.Ft. 480 346 561 2,160 1,122 2,195
Ac.Ft. - 223 349 2,160

Acres 28.6 26.7 45.0 62.0 - 53.0
Acres 64.2 57.0 80.0 280.0 85.0 143.0

In. 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.1 8.0 8.0
In. 13.7 13.7 13.7 13.7 13.7 13.7
In. 9.01 9.01 9.01 8.85 8,03 8.69
cfs 106 20.5 34 410 120 175
cfs - 99 155 - - -
% Chance 1111 11
Ft. or In. 30" 30" 36" 3-10' x 10' 30" 36"

In. 10.28 10.28 10.28 8.9 9 56 12 10
In. 7.92 7.92 7.92 6;47 6 59 9.41
Hrs. 6666 66
Veg. Veg. Veg. Concrete Drop Veg. Veg.
Ft. 250 130 300 . 260 328
Ft/Sec. 5.44 6.16 6.23 . 6.0 8.8
Ft /Ft. .035 .035 .033 - .040 'o25
Ft. 317.8 337.3 354.2 324.7 338.1 278.9

In. 25.08 25.08 25.08 15.40 23.30 29.50
In. 22.47 22.47 22.47 12.77 19.88 26.53
Hrs. 6 66 6 6 6
Ft. 321.5 335.5 358.5 329.4 343.5 285.0
/
In. 1.71 1.70 1.79 1.55 .89 1.02
In. 4.37 4.54 4.52 4.58 4."60 5.05




18 20




ft 22B
A C B
2.51 10

79 80
334.0
329.0
-
316.0
34.0
99,837
714
91 940
12 123
611


22.0
77.0

8.0 7
13.7 13
8.69 8
106

1 1
30"

10.28 11
7.66 9
6 6
Veg.
320
5.2
.035
330.6

25.08 29
22.15 26
6 6
334.0

.77 1
4.56
.92 3.73

79
354.0
349.0
-
335.0
39.0
- 69,410
1,117
180
18
919


36.0
99.0

.8 8.0
•7 13J7
.85 8.69
118

1
-I 30"

.98 8.80
.49 6.26
6
Veg.
160
5.53
.033
350.8

50 15.40
70 12.61
6
354.0

83 .99
4.61




23
C
51.84
28.10
80
298.0
284.9
-
276.0
42.0
(64,400)
9,298
1,850
148
7,300


511.0
1,096.0

7.7
13.5
8.67
1,205

1
2-5.5' x 5.5-

10.28
7.79
6.2
Veg.2/
400 U
7.6
.027
288.1

25.08
22.31
6.2
298.0

1.58
5.77




25
C
81.86
56.92
73
274.1
258.5
-
Dry Pool
„
_
4,569

969
3,600


_
392.0

7.7
13.5
7.19
3,350

1
2-7' x 9 '

10.72
7.28
8.82
Veg.
400
10.2
.025
263.0

26.36
22.39
8.82
274.1

.71
2.65
\J Crest of Emergency Spillway
2_/ Dependent on Obtaining Adequate  Bulk Length
                                                                                                                                     Date:  August 1973

-------
    Should the SCS project be completed, flood
protection from the 100-year storm will be provided for
the city of Raleigh, and the severity of flooding in
the upper watershed will be reduced.  Figure 16 gives
the projected flood stages for combinations of
development or no development and structures or no
structures.  Sediment delivered to the mouth of
Crabtree Creek will be reduced from 176,100 tons to
47,100 tons annually (as estimated in the 1964 plan).
The plan calculates a primary benefit cost ratio of 2.5
to 1.
    3.  Corps of Engineers (COE)
    The Wilmington District of the Corps of Engineers
is studying Crabtree Creek from Umstead State Park to
the*Neuse River in an effort to control flooding,
improve water quality, and upgrade environmental
quality.  The proposed project interceptor and the
associated development will greatly affect this COE
project by increasing the flows and stages that must be
accommodated.  The study allows for considerable
citizen participation through public meetings.  A list
of problems, needs, and solutions has been prepared as
a result of these meetings in collaboration with the
                         58

-------
Crabtree Creek Citizens Assistance Committee formed in

conjunction with this study.   (See Appendix 6.)

    Future meetings will discuss alternatives for the

watercourse, and from this input a recommendation as to

the most reasonable course of action will be made.  The

Corps of Engineers contact for the project is Mr. James

Waller, P.O. Box 1890; Wilmington, North Carolina

28401.

    B.  State

    The State of North Carolina Department of Natural

and Economic Resources has primary responsibility for

permitting point source discharges and sewer line

construction, administering the State Clean Water

Grants program for wastewater treatment works projects,

and developing and administering a sedimentation

control program.

    Permit  program regulations provide that a permit

shall be required to: 1)  make any outlets into the

waters of the State; 2)  construct or operate any sewer

system, treatment works or disposal system within the

State; 3) alter, extend, or change the construction or
      t
method of operation of any sewer system, treatment

works, or disposal system within the State; or 4) enter
                         60

-------
into a contract for the construction and installation
of any outlet, sewer system, treatment works,
pretreatment facility or disposal system or for the
alteration or extension of any such facilities.
    The Clean Water Bond Act of 1971 authorized  $50
million from the Pollution Control Account for use in
making state grants of up to 25 percent for the
construction of wastewater treatment works projects
approved for Federal grants.  A resolution establishing
a policy setting limitations on State Clean Water
grants for wastewater treatment works projects accepted
for Federal construction grants was certified January
18, 1973.  This resolution limits the amount of funds
available to 25 percent of the total cost or 50 percent
of the non-federal share of the eligible project cost,
whichever is less.  In the case of Crabtree creek, the
Federal government (EPA) is proposing to supply 75
percent of the eligible project costs, with the state
share being 12.5 percent.  (See Table 1.)
    The State of North Carolina is in the process of
establishing a program for sedimentation control.  The
1973 session of the General Assembly ratified the
Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 on May 9,
                         61

-------
1973 to establish a program for the control of
pollution from sedimentation.  The stated purpose of
this act is to provide for the creation,
administration, enforcement of a program and for the
adoption of minimal mandatory standards which will
serve to permit development of the State to continue
with the least detrimental effects from pollution by
sedimentation.  This act provides for the creation of
the North Carolina Sedimentation control commission
under the Department of Natural and Economic Resources,
charged with developing and adopting rules and
regulations for the control of erosion and
sedimentation.
    The State of North Carolina enacted an
environmental policy act in 1971.  This act, very
similar to the National Environmental Policy Act,
provides for the preparation of a detailed statement by
the responsible official generally paralleling the
Federal requirements.  The Crabtree Creek project has
been determined to require a state environmental impact
statement.  This document is being prepared as
fulfillment of both Federal and state requirements.
                         62

-------
    C.   Region J Research Triangle Planning Commission
    Region J is the regional planning authority for the
project area.  This commission has approved the
proposed project as consistent with regional planning
objectives.  (Appendix 5).  Further, as presented in II
A. 1., Region J has been designated the planning agency
for the 208 areawide wastewater management plan.
    D,  Wake^County
    wake County is the applicant for the proposed
project, and in this role  assumes primary
responsibility for satisfaction of application and EPA
grant conditions.  Further, the county assumes
responsibility for mitigating potential adverse
environmental impacts of the project.  The County
Commission, in response to this requisite, has passed a
resolution presenting a plan of action to provide
reasonable assurance that there will be no increase in
the probability of flood damages and no increase in the
extent of sedimentation resulting from development
prompted by sewer line construction.  The resolution
may be found in Appendix 7.
    The resolution recognizes that extension of water
and sewer utilities into the Upper Crabtree Creek
Watershed will encourage and facilitate development of
                          63

-------
land.  It also recognizes that completion of a major
sewer outfall prior to completion of flood control
programs may cause an increase in flood and erosion
intensity as a consequence of development.
    The plan commits the Wake County Planning
Department to completing a geophysical study to
determine what changes in land use regulations will be
necessary to prevent an increase in the probability of
flood damage or sedimentation.  These land use
restrictions are to be included in the county
comprehensive plan and land use code system, which is
anticipated to be adopted in 1975.  Floodplain and
erosion control ordinances were adopted on June 3,
1974, and the county is committed to a program for
accelerating completion of the flood control program.
Recognition of these problems and the commitment to
their solution is a major step in preventing
environmental degradation from future development of
the Upper Crabtree Watershed.
    The Wake County Department of Public Health has
authority for permitting septic tank installation.  The
department requires residences in the Upper Crabtree
Watershed utilizing septic tanks to have large lots  (40
                          64

-------
- 60,000 square feet).  Minimum allowable lot sizes are
30,000 square feet without public water supply and
20,000 square feet with a public water supply.
    E.  Cities
    1.  Raleigh
    The city of Raleigh has a significant interest in
the proposed project since the wastewater collected by
this interceptor will be transported through its
Crabtree Creek trunk sewer and treated at the  new
Neuse River treatment plant (Chap. I.E.)-  The city
exercises primary responsibility for extensions of
sewer and water service and maintenance in the Raleigh
"perimeter area." This perimeter area is shown on
Figure 17.
    The city reserves the right to approve the plans
and specifications of other interceptors outside its
perimeter area tying in to the city system.  In order
to protect itself from possible increased flood damage,
the city passed a resolution (Appendix 8)  to establish
a policy regarding the expansion of city facilities.
The resolution resolves that
    ...the city of Raleigh joins the County of Wake
    in taking a position of not encouraging develop-
    ment of land which will necessarily result in
                         65

-------
    greater liquid runoff, soil erosion and sedimenta-
    tion until adequatje devices have been installed
    to reduce those adverse effects of land development

    ,..the City of Raleigh, to that end, hereby states
    a policy of not extending water and sewer service
    facilities — or a^ny other facilities under its
    control — into arjeas of Wake County outside
    the City Limits, e'xcept in unusual circumstances,
    unless and until a|reas into which such services
    are extended and the area within the City Limits
    of the City of Raleigh are adequately protected,
    through the installation of related flood control
    and other such devices, and unless and until adequate
    facilities are available for the supply of water
    and the treatment of sewage.

    The city has also passed floodway and sedimentation

ordinances to help solve the flooding and siltation

caused by further development within the city limits.

There is still considerable undeveloped property within

the city.  Coordination or a combination of programs

between the city and county could minimize costs and

increase efficiency.

    2.  Gary

    The northern portion of the city of Gary lies in

the Upper Crabtree Creek Watershed.  Should the

proposed project be constructed, growth to the north

and west of Gary will be accelerated.  Careful

coordination of control programs between the city of

Gary,  city of Raleigh and Wake County in the areas of
                          67

-------
utilities hookup, erosion and sedimentation, design
densities, and land uses is necessary to ensure
adequate and uniformly enforceable programs.  Gary also
has contractual agreement with Wake County delineating
a perimeter service area (Figure 17).  Gary assumes
responsibility for water and sewer hookup and
maintenance in this perimeter area.
    Since Gary has the ability to annex portions of the
Crabtree Creek Basin outside its present incorporated
limits, it must coordinate extensions with Wake County
to assure that the percentage of impervious surfaces
above any one flood control structure does not allow a
hydrologic overload to occur.  Guidelines now being
prepared by the Wake County Planning Department will
provide the necessary data.  The Region J 208 planning
process may also provide future guidance.
    Cary has indicated it intends to pass a
sedimentation and erosion control ordinance similar to
the Raleigh and Wake County ordinances.  Should
annexation become a reality, the city must take a
responsible position in this regard and in following
land use restraints and impervious surface limitations
in the watershed.
                          68

-------
    F.  Public
    Various groups and citizens in the Wake County area
have been active in environmentally sensitive matters.
The citizens to Save Umstead State Park had a profound
influence on the area surrounding and in this park.
The Raleigh-Durham Airport expansion plans were altered
to eliminate the use of park lands and to reorient the
proposed runway so the flight path would not be
directly over the park.  This citizen's group was also
instrumental in assuring that the SCS flood control
structure in the park would be a dry dam.
Additionally, the relocation of the project interceptor
around the park is  attributable largely to the efforts
of this group.
    Another citizen's effort in the Wake County area is
Project Flood Control.  A petition circulated and
signed by 6,000 residents of Wake County called for
floodplain ordinances, soil erosion and sedimentation
ordinances, controls for public works projects, and
completion of the SCS flood control structures
(Appendix 9).  This endeavor has contributed
substantially toward educating the public about these
                         69

-------
major current, environmental issues and influenced
passage of these ordinances.
    Various other groups have likewise contributed
substantially to identifying the environmental problem
areas within Wake County.  The Oak Park-Glen Forest-
Deblyn Park Civic Association, the Sierra Club and the
Crabtree Creek Citizens Assistance Committee (CCCAC)
have been especially active.  The CCCAC was formed as a
result of the public participation program initiated by
the corps of Engineers on their study of alternatives
for the Crabtree Creek channel between Umstead Park and
the Neuse River.
                         70

-------
III.  ALTERNATIVES
Alternative routings of interceptors capable of
satisfying the wastewater collection and disposal needs
of this basin plus the "no action" alternative are
discussed in this chapter.
    A.  No Action
    The alternative of "no action" represents the
withdrawal of EPA grant funds from the Crabtree Creek
interceptor project.  Should no action be taken, the
adverse primary and secondary impacts attributable to
its placement would not occur, and the benefits of
adequate regional wastewater treatment would not be
realized.  Further, other adverse and beneficial
impacts would occur.
    Development of the upper basin would still occur,
although at a different pace and in a different
pattern.  Due to the large lot size required for septic
tanks, many areas would develop at a lower density.  In
other areas, developers may attempt to install their
own package plants which would result in higher density
development.  For a package plant, siting approval
would be required from the State office of Water and
Air Resources and the discharge would require a
                          71

-------
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit
from the EPA.  Although a very high degree of treatment
would be required, a plant failure above Omstead state
Park would be undesirable since Crabtree Creek in the
Park is designated a Class B water (water contact
recreation area).  Due to low flow conditions  in this
basin immediately above the Park  (0.3 cfs, 7-day,10-
year) , a relatively small amount of dilution water is
available to serve as a safety buffer for Park users.
For example, a typical package treatment plant serving
3,000 persons at peak discharge during low flow
conditions would only provide a three parts sewage to
one part natural flow dilution (assuming 200 gallons
sewage per capita per day peak discharge).
    The above limitations on discharges to Crabtree
Creek could be expected to stimulate the use of septic
tanks for development.  However, this area is not very
suitable for septic tanks since it has soil
permeability limitations.  Large lots would be required
to ensure maintenance of health standards.
Nevertheless, malfunctions could still be expected to
occur.
                          72

-------
    In addition to the threat to water quality and
sanitary conditions in the Upper Crabtree Creek Basin,
to a lesser extent the same secondary impacts of
development would occur under this alternative.  There
would be an increase in runoff due to an increase in
impervious surfaces, an increase in sedimentation, an
increase in urban runoff pollution, and an increased
demand for community services.  Since development would
be expected to proceed at a slower rate and to be at a
lower density, these impacts would be less immediate
and less pronounced without the interceptor.
    Should this "no action" alternative be opted, some
other action would be necessary to improve the water
quality of Coles Branch.  This could be accomplished by
upgrading the existing Gary plant to provide advanced
waste treatment (since Coles Branch has a 7-day, 10-
year low flow of 0.0 cfs), by pumping the wastewater
from this plant to the existing Walnut Creek
interceptor, or by using an alternative disposal
method.  Spray irrigation is possible if a proper area
with adequate soil drainage could be found, but in this
area this seems unlikely.   Pumping to the Walnut creek
interceptor is also feasible and would  involve the
                          73

-------
construction of a small pumping station and
approximately one mile of force main.
    "No action" may also be expected to have an impact
on land use planning for the Crabtree Basin.  The rate
of development might be slowed and allow the
preparation of the county land use plan and the
regional 208 planning program to occur before
irrevocable land use commitments are made.
Unfortunately, deleterious developments could
nevertheless occur.  Clustering of high density
developments around package plants in close proximity
to watercourses presents a situation that could result
in deleterious impacts.  Alterations to natural
drainage and potential erosion and sedimentation
problems would be greatest in these areas.
    The Wake County Planning Department, in the Flan of
Action (Appendix 7), has given assurances that the
present zoning of the Upper Crabtree Basin for septic
tanks will be maintained unless the petitioner can
present evidence demonstrating that existing zoning was
applied in error or that circumstances have so changed
since existing zoning was applied that the ordinance
must be changed in the public interest,  strict
                         74

-------
adherence to this policy will provide a check against
poorly planned and environmentally undesirable projects
on a case by case basis.
    The alternative of "no action" must be considered
as a desirable alternative should efforts fail to
provide adequate flood and sedimentation control.  EPA
does not desire to aggravate existing adverse
conditions,  still, the more appropriate course of
action would allow completion of the regional
wastewater collection system following provisions for
flood and sedimentation protection to downstream areas.
Preventive action now would allow maintenance of
environmental -quality where future remedial action
would probably be more difficult and more costly.
    B.  Alternative Routing
    1.  Walnut Creek
    The proximity of the existing Walnut Creek
interceptor which serves Gary suggests consideration of
its use for transporting the wastewater generated in
the Upper Crabtree Basin.  The proposed interceptor
includes a pumping station to be built west of Umstead
State Park.  By expanding the lift capability of this
station, the wastewater from the upper basin could be
                         75

-------
pumped along Reedy Creek Road to the Walnut Creek
interceptor and thence to the new Neuse River
wastewater treatment plant.  This would eliminate the
force main around the Park, while the Richland Creek
and Turkey creek areas would continue to go to the
existing Crabtree Creek interceptor.
    There are several problems with this approach.  The
Walnut Creek interceptor is presently considered
adequate to the year 2020  (See Table 7).  should the
Upper Crabtree Basin wastes be added, a parallel
interceptor would be required by 1995.  Further, the
proposed paralleling of Crabtree Creek would still be
necessary without the contribution from the Upper
Crabtree area.  As may be  seen from Table 8, sections
of the Crabtree trunk sewer are already at capacity.
With continued expansion of existing service areas
paralleling will be required within ten years.
    This alternative, therefore, is considered
unreasonable since it 1) would necessitate additional
expenditures of funds for  pumping and paralleling the
existing Walnut Creek interceptor, 2) would not avoid
paralleling the existing Crabtree Creek interceptor, 3)
would not avoid any adverse primary or secondary
                           76

-------
                    TABLE 7




2020 CAPACITY - WALNUT CREEK INTERCEPTING SEWER
Location
From

Gary
Macednia
Road
Lake
Raleigh
Lake
Wheeler
Road
Highway
#70
Cloverdale
Road
Cloverdale
Creek
Area
Served Sewer
To (Acres) Size
Macedonia
Road 3, 770 25"
Lake
Raleigh 6, 980 30"
Lake Wheeler
Road 9,130 30"

Highw ay
#70 11,050 30"
Cloverdale
Road 14, 730 42"
Cloverdale
Creek 17,990 42"
Existing
STP 19,160 42"
Required
Capacity
frngd)

3.77

6.98

9.13

11.05
14.73

17.99
19.16
Existing
Sewer Capacity
(mgd)

6.50

14.00

15.00

13.00
20.00

20.00
20.00
                    77

-------
                            TABLE 8



          1970 CAPACITY - CRABTREE CREEK INTERCEPTING SEWER
Area
Location Served
From
House
Creek
Mine
Creek
Beaver
Dam
Creek
Big
Branch
Pigeon
House
Creek
Marsh
Creek
To Acres
Mine
Creek 3,340
Beaver Dam
Creek 10,540

BiS 13,660
Branch
Pigeon House
r* « A ' ' J u
Creek
Marsh
Creek 23,890
Pumping
Station 30, 140
Sewer
Size

30"

36"

36"
24"
36"
30"

42"
42"
Existing
Capacity Sewer
Required Capacity
mgd rngd

2.30 7.50

7.25 12.00

9.40 14-°°
4.50
13.40 13-°°
8.00

16.40 17.50
20.70 17.50
           The above analysis is based on a maximum flow of 250 gallons




per capita per day and the present population density of 2, 75 people




per acre.
                                78

-------
impacts due to the proposed project, and 4) would cost

more than the proposed projects.

    2.  Pump to the New Hope Basin

    This alternative was recommended in the Research

Triangle Planning Commission's Development Guide based

on information available in 1969, which projects 12 mgd

of the Upper Crabtree Watershed wastes will be pumped

to the New Hope River Basin via a pump located just

west of 1-10 on Crabtree Creek.  This alternative would

eliminate the force main around the Park but would

still require the Turkey Creek and Richland Creek

interceptors.

    The commission supported this proposal due to the

following two factors:

    •    an effort to keep as much waste as possible
         out of the Neuse River, the Neuse being a
         major water supply source for the Raleigh
         portion of the Region and for downstream
         uses,  with the Neuse being a water supply
         stream, it was logical to use the Cape Fear
         basin for as much thoroughly treated
         effluent as possible.  (It is noted that
         North Carolina water law does not prohibit
         inter-basin transfer between the Neuse and
         the Cape Fear Basins.)

    •    an effort to eliminate the temptation of
         running a major outfall through Umstead
         State Park.
                          79

-------
    Both the Neuse Basin and the Cape Fear Basin in the
Research Triangle Region contain the sites for major
Corps of Engineer reservoir projects, the Falls of the
Neuse and the Wilson Mills Reservoir in the Neuse Basin
and the New Hope Reservoir in the Cape Fear Basin.
    The Environmental Protection Agency, since the
preparation of the Development Guide, has established
equal water quality standards for reservoirs in both
basins.   Therefore, there is no longer merit in
endeavoring to make the wastewater treatment process
easier in the Neuse Basin by pumping some of the burden
into the Cape Fear Basin.  Such an effort would merely
intensify the difficulty in the Cape Fear Basin.
    The pumping and piping costs associated with this
alternative would be significantly higher than those of
the proposed project.  Further, it has no particular
environmental advantages,  wastewater from the Richland
and Turkey Creek Basin would still necessitate
construction of the Oak Park section and Richland Creek
section of the  project.  Also, the proposed project
avoids the deleterious impacts of a major outfall in
Umstead State Park since the effluent will be pumped
around the area.  Additionally, equivalent adverse
                          80

-------
primary and secondary impacts would occur by pumping to
the cape Fear basin.  For these reasons, this
alternative was discarded.
                         81

-------
  .  IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT



    The proposed project will have both beneficial and



adverse impacts on the human environment.  These



impacts may be subdivided further into primary and



secondary effects.  The following chapter is a



discussion of these impacts.



    A.  Primary Impacts



    Primary impacts may be classified as those effects



which are a direct result of the project.  In the case



of the Crabtree Creek interceptor sewer these include:



improvement of water quality in the Upper Crabtree



Basin, stimulation of development, alteration of



ecological communities, erosion of soil from the



construction areas and loss of certain aesthetic



values.  These and other primary impacts are directly



attributable to the proposed project.



    1.  Beneficial Impacts



    The major beneficial impacts afforded by the



project are the elimination of present and possible



future wastewater discharges to Crabtree* Creek and its



tributaries, and the provision for regional wastewater



treatment.  The Coles Branch, Mobile City and, in the



future. Brier Creek plants, which now contribute to the
                          82

-------
pollutant loading on Crabtree Creek, will be

eliminated.  Future discharges, the possibility of

which may be evidenced by the presently unapproved

requests for point source discharges received by the

North Carolina Office of Water and Air Resources since

1970  (Table 9), will be precluded.  Further, present

and future septic tank operation in the unsuitable

areas of the Upper Crabtree Basin may be avoided.

                        Table 9
          Requests for Point Source Discharge
Persons Requesting
Site Approval/Purpose

Wester Lloyd
Mobile Home Park

Taylor Realty Company
Industrial Park

Castleberry Edgerton Co.
Mobile Home Park

Adams Realty Co.
Industrial Park

J. W. York
Subdivision

The Ervin company
Subdivision

Mobile Townes Corp.
Mobile Home Park

Ogburn Realty Company
Industrial Park
            Wastewater Discharge
 Date       Volume Requested	

 8-1970        50,000 gpd


 5-1970         2,500 gpd


 7-1972        25,000 gpd


 8-1970        90,000 gpd
             (5,000 gpd approved)

 5-1971       500,000 gpd


 5-1971       500,000 gpd


 6-1970        80,000 gpd (est.)


12-1970        10,000 gpd (est.)
                            83

-------
    The placement of the proposed interceptor will also
facilitate implementation of good planning and land use
objectives.  Areawide wastewater collection will allow
other environmental considerations to be foremost among
development priorities.  Instead of development being
located convenient to waste treatment facilities with
spotty uncoordinated growth, considerations such as
slope, transportation, vegetation, soils, water supply,
and aesthetic values can have a greater bearing on the
location and type of development.
    2.  Adverse Impacts
             a.  Wastewater and Sludge Disposal
    The project will initially transport a peak of 2.3
mgd of wastewater to the Neuse River Wastewater
Treatment Plant with ultimate peak flow projected at 20
mgd.  This project further commits the city of Raleigh
to its program of incremental increases in the size of
the new Neuse River Wastewater Treatment Plant.  The
impacts associated with this plant are beyond the scope
of this environmental impact statement.  (I.B.)
    Following treatment, the effluent will be
discharged to the Neuse River containing 6 ppm BOD and
5 ppm suspended solids attaining 97-98 percent
                           84

-------
removal.  Due to the low flow characteristics of the
Neuse River, a high removal percentage is required to
meet water quality standards.
    The sludge generated at the Neuse plant will be
disposed by landfilling adjacent to the treatment
facilities.  A research grant to recycle this sludge on
North Carolina State farm lands and to study the
effects has been proposed.  This project is in the
planning stage.
              b.   Erosion and Sedimentation
    Underground sewer line construction requires
excavation for pipe installation.  Erosion of the
exposed soils with the resultant sedimentation may be
the result.  Exposure of unprotected soil to the
erosive energy of falling rain and overland flow, plus
the action of men and machines at construction sites,
can cause significantly increased soil loss and
siltation.  This loss of top soil not only is a waste
of a valuable natural resource, but often creates
undesirable sediment deposition in downstream areas.
Continuation of this deposition can significantly
affect the water-carrying capacity of a stream channel
and increase flood stages.  Further, increased
                           85

-------
turbidity may inhibit aquatic flora and fauna and
significantly change the established predator-prey
relationships.  Photosynthetic activity of rooted
aquatic plants may be impaired.  Sediment contribution
may also adversely affect water temperature, especially
during the summer months.
    In the  case of this project, the situation is
compounded since construction will occur adjacent to a
stream course.  This poses the possibility of
disturbing the creek bank or adjacent rooted vegetation
and could cause significant erosion from soil transport
by the natural stream flows.
              c.  Construction Inconveniences and Annoyances
    There will be minor inconveniences to traffic
during crossing of roadways.  Three paved roads,
Ebenezer Church Road, Old Trinity Road, and the Youth
Center Drive, must be disrupted.  Two unpaved roads,
Reedy Creek Road east of 1-40 and Trenton Road, will be
affected.  Trenton Road may be closed during
construction since the interceptor is projected to run
400 feet down its center line.  N. C. 54 and 1-40 at
Richland Creek will be traversed by boring or tunneling
and no disruption of traffic is expected.  The
                          86

-------
remaining roadways, Duraleigh Road, Reedy Creek Road
west of 1-40 and 1-40 at Crabtree Creek, will be
crossed by passing underneath existing bridges.  The
impact on traffic from these crossings, excepting
Trenton Road, is anticipated to be slight and of short
duration.
    Dust could present problems should dry conditions
prevail.  Standard methods for dust control will be
utilized, including watering, and no significant
impacts are anticipated.
    Noise may be a substantial annoyance to residents
living in close proximity to the construction.
Equipment will be operated only during daylight hours,
and the contractor should be directed to keep muffler
systems functioning on all machinery.  This impact will
be of limited duration.
              d.   Aesthetics
    Tree loss along Crabtree Creek  will be a major
aesthetic loss.  As proposed, the project will cut a 13
meter (40-foot) right-of-way, resulting in a tree loss
swath of at least 13 meters and possibly 16 or more
meters  (50 feet) due to root damages.  Many trees,
notably the beech, tulip tree, and loblolly pine, will
                         87

-------
not survive damage or disturbances to their root
systems.  Deposition of sediment, changes in water
table, or damage to the roots will result in a high
death rate.  Special care should be given in developed
areas where private yards are to be traversed if
unnecessary tree loss is to be avoided.  Reductions in
the width of right-of-way should be made wherever
possible in these areas.  A width of 10 meters (33
feet) or less is possible and should be attempted in
existing residental and other particularly aesthetic
areas.
    Regrowth of vegetation will not be allowed since
access to the interceptor must be provided and damage
to the pipe must be avoided.  Maintenance of the
interceptor right-of-way is to be provided by the city,
although property owners may wish to give greater care
to maintaining this area.
    The original proposal for high manholes has been
changed to provide sealed, bolted down covers.  Plans
call for a vent which would be above the 100-year flood
level.  This vent would be a visual distraction.
    Since right-of-way clearing provides easy access
from existing roadways, hikers, bicyclists, and
                         88

-------
motorcyclists may attempt to utilize this scenic route.



Following revegetation, management and surveillance of



the right-of-way may be desirable.  The proposed



greenway system provides a means for this kind of



management.



    Odors may be a substantial annoyance to persons



subjected to them.  Whenever wastewaters are allowed to



become anaerobic, that is, without oxygen, malodorous



gases may escape and become a nuisance to nearby



residences.  In the case of the Crabtree Creek project,



there is a possibility that due to the length of the



interceptor, flow time may sufficiently long to allow



the oxygen in the wastewater to be expended.  Should



this condition occur, odors would be produced.



              e.  Disruption of Natural Drainage Patterns



    In some areas the interceptor will cross ditches



and other small surface water channels.  This could



result in disruption of the natural drainage patterns



of some areas, creating ponds or wet areas.  Due to the



depth of the interceptor these instances are expected



to be rare, and measures to preclude this occurrence



have been provided in the engineering plans and



specifications.  Inspections should be made during and
                        89

-------
following placement of the interceptor to ensure that



all areas have been adequately identified and



protected, especially in existing residential areas



(i.e.. Oak Park).  In those areas where problems occur,



French drains or other relief methods must be utilized



to provide adequate drainage before final grant



payments will be made.



         f.  Archeological, Historical and Cultural



    Two residences are listed in the Wake County



Historic Inventory, the Trinity Road Cottage and the



Nancy Jones House.  Neither are located along the



alignment of the interceptor sewer and no impact is



anticipated.  Mr. Thornton Mitchell, Acting State



Historic Preservation Officer, states that care should



be taken during sewer construction to protect the



integrity of the Nancy Jones House; however, the



restoration of the Trinity Road Cottage has lessened



the importance of the building historically by gutting



the interior and covering the original brick exterior



with stucco.



    Crabtree Creek itself is of considerable historical



importance to Wake County as one of the earliest



settlement areas.  The 1775 Mouzon map (London) is one
                         90

-------
of the first showing the existence of the creek, which
was named while the area was still part of Johnson
County.
    The State Department of Art, Culture, and History
indicates that little is known of the archeological
significance of the area.  However, at least two early
mill sites are known to exist in the area and there may
possibly be more.  Also, it is likely that a number of
aboriginal sites exist within the project area as the
creek and its tributaries would have provided favorable
living conditions.  The North Carolina Department of
Art, Culture, and History recommends that a survey be
taken along Crabtree Creek before the sewer lines are
laid (Appendix 10).  In this way, significant
archeological artifacts would not be destroyed.
    g.  SCS Flood Control Structures
    The laying of the project pipe may affect the
future construction of the SCS control structures.
Structures 11, 25, 23, and 18 all lie adjacent to the
proposed project.  The interceptor is planned to skirt
around Structure 25 on the south side and to have
sealed bolted man-hole covers where the cover is below
the 100-year flood level.  The interceptor is also
                          91

-------
routed to avoid Structure 18 on Coles Branch by passing



on the north side above the 100-year flood level.



     3. Alteration of Ecosystems



    Laying the large sewer lines involved in this



project will involve the use of mechanized equipment.



As a consequence, a right-of-way approximately 13



meters  (40 feet) in width will have to be cleared of



all impeding vegetation.  A trench about three meters



(nine feet) wide will be excavated, with the removed



dirt temporarily piled adjacent to the cut.  Wheeled



and tracked vehicles will ply the right-of-way,



compressing the upper soil layers of areas not trenched



or covered with removed soil.  The branches of trees



and shrubs that extend into the working space of the



entrenchment machines will be removed.  In general, the



natural communities located in the path of the line



will be severely traumatized.  Most subterranean and



surface forms of insects and other invertebrates will



be killed when the soil horizons are mixed, covered, or



crushed by heavy equipment.  The population dynamics of



the soil micro-flora and fauna will also be



significantly altered.
                           92

-------
    After the sewer pipe is in place, the ground
surface above it will be seeded with quick-growing
grasses to control erosion.  The right-of-way will be
kept permanently clear of any vegetation that might
hinder periodic maintenance and inspection.  This means
that no significant woody vegetation will be allowed to
encroach.  Normal plant succession on disturbed land in
the Crabtree Creek area leads to a forest cover as the
climax type, thus continuous effort and energy will
have to be expended to maintain the right-of-way.
    The degree of permanent change made in the biotic
community located on the right-of-way site depends
naturally upon the original type of community.  Areas
that have been cleared within the last two years and
areas used as pasturage will experience little change.
Within two to five years, surface indications of the
presence of the line on these sites will be very small.
Areas thickly covered with large deciduous trees and
their associated understory vegetation will suffer the
greatest temporary and permanent alterations.
    In most cases, species diversity will be reduced
along the right-of-way whenever it passes through a
natural community, although in some special cases, such
                         93

-------
as routing through a dense eight to fifteen year old



pure pine stand, overall diversity will be increased.



The greatest expected changes will occur to the



streamside ecotone dominated by gums, beech, river



birch, sycamore, tulip tree, and several species of



oaks, where natural succession has been left



undisturbed by man for a few decades.



    When deciduous trees with trunks and foliage



extending over a few meters in height are removed from



the right-of-way, suitable habitat for several species



of warblers and woodpeckers who feed largely within the



middle and upper story forest layers will be reduced.



Birds who originally feed within the cleared area will



be forced to move their feeding areas to adjacent



suitable territory or to remain and utilize the food



associated with low-growing shrubs and grasses.  While



attempting to move their feeding areas, these birds



will be forced into competition with nearby established



members of the same species occupying and feeding in



the same ecological niche.  If they attempt to keep the



same geographical location for their feeding area, they



will have to compete with other species of birds who



will move in and who are already fully adapted to
                          94

-------
utilizing the food produced by a low-growing shrub and
grass community.  In either case the displaced bird is
at a great disadvantage.
    It is commonly believed that destruction of an
area's wildlife habitat will result in a movement of
the displaced animals into suitable surrounding areas
not directly affected by the given project.  This is a
partially true but grossly misleading belief.  If an
adjacent similar habitat is acceptable, it usually is
already saturated to its carrying capacity with a
population of the same or closely competing species.
When this is the case, ingress of additional
individuals will result in a population size and
resultant density above the supporting capabilities of
the remaining habitat.  The net result will be the
death of the excess population least able to obtain
food and shelter, almost all of whom will be those
animals who have been displaced from their home range.
    Conversely, those species, such as sparrows,
mourning doves and the like, who are adapted to making
maximum utilization of food produced by annuals,
grasses, and low shrubs will benefit from an opening up
of the forest canopy.
                         95

-------
    On the ground, population shifts in the small
mammals will occur as species of insectivores (shrews,
moles), mice, rats and voles, adapted for life on the
forest floor, are replaced by species adapted for life
in a more open environment.  These changes will also
influence the local population of raptorial birds
(hawks and owls) who prey on these animals.  The
primary food supply for the gray squirrel will also be
removed when the trees are cut, although it probably
will be a visitor to the area after the ground cover
has regrown.
    Larger and wider-roaming mammals, such as the
raccoon and opossum, will be less affected by the
right-of-way clearing due to their adaptability and
omnivorous feeding habits.  One large mammal, the
beaver, which occurs in the area, is adapted to making
a home in the nearby stream and feeding upon the
succulent portions of streamside woody and semi-woody
vegetation.  They, and other semi-aquatic mammals, such
as the otter and mink, usually move away from sites
extensively visited by humans.  Their continuing
presence will depend upon the relative increase in
human use of the cleared right-of-way.
                         96

-------
    The aquatic communities in Crabtree Creek may be
altered as well.  If additional clay, silt and sand
enter Crabtree Creek as a result of streamside
construction, the primary productivity of the green
plants in the stream will be reduced to the extent they
are excessively shaded from the sun by the suspended
and deposited particules.  Of course, where
construction is so close to the stream that a portion
of the tree canopy formerly shading the stream is
removed, available sunlight at the water's surface
would go up, counterbalancing to some extent the former
effect.  If the vegetative canopy along the creekbank
is cut away, increased diurnal variations in water
temperatures will also result.  During the day, due to
increased direct solar radiation, temperatures will
increase; in the evening, decreased vegetative
insulation will allow greater heat loss and an
associated lowering of temperature.  These temperature
alterations may affect spawning and fry survival.
    The texture of a stream bottom influences the
species mix of benthos living on and in it.  A rocky
bottom will support one set of species on it while
pebblely, sandy, silty, and clay bottoms will have
                         97

-------
different faunal associations.  An increased layering
of the smaller particules likely to wash off
construction sites onto the larger rocks and pebbles
usually found in undisturbed Piedmont streams will
cause a loss of available habitat for some life forms
such as caddis flies and an increase in suitable
substrata for forms such as aquatic worms.  This will
affect the species diversity and population  of game
and other fish which feed on these types of organisms.
    4,  Growth and Development Impacts
    There will be major impacts from the proposed
project on land use and development.  Adequate sewerage
will allow development to occur faster than might
otherwise be expected.  The proposed interceptor is
designed to serve a population of at least 80,000
persons, 70,000 of which may be expected to reside west
of a north-south line through Umstead State Park.
Proposed densities vary from five to greater than nine
persons per gross acre (gross meaning total land
area,ineluding residential dwellings, streets,
commercial enterprises, schools, floodplains, open
space, etc.).  The net densities of some areas may be
somewhat  higher.
                         98

-------
    Densities without the interceptor could be expected
to be lower.  Should package plants discharging to
Crabtree Creek be built, localized growth around these
plants could be expected, but a limited number of
persons could be served.  The Wake County Plan of
Action Resolution states maximum capacity of Crabtree
creek and its tributaries to be the wastewater
generated from 3,000 persons.  This quantity would
still, under low flow conditions, provide only one part
natural flow to three parts treated sewage flow.  The
use of septic tanks might therefore be expected.  Lot
sizes of 40,000-60,000 square feet have been required
by the Public Health Department in this area which
would cut maximum gross densities to between three to
five persons per acre.  Minimum allowable lot sizes
have been set at 30,000 square feet where a public
water supply source is not available and 20,000 square
feet where water is supplied.  Even at this lower
figure, maximum net densities would be approximately
seven persons per acre.
    Presently, there is no comprehensive land use plan
for the Upper Crabtree Basin; however, the Wake County
Planning Department is working on such a plan.  It is
                            99

-------
therefore impossible to compare the design flows of the
various segments of the interceptor with approved
county plans.  The rate and density of residential
developments may be set by individual zoning requests.
    The rate of development, type of land use, and
population density all have significant impacts on both
local watercourses and their surrounding areas.  The
higher the density, the greater the amounts of
impervious surfaces and runoff, and the more
significant the impact on streams.  The higher the
density, the greater the impact on transportation,
community services, recreational facilities, commercial
establishments, and practically all other urban
activities.  These impacts are discussed in the
following section. Secondary Impacts.
    B.  Secondary Impacts
    Secondary impacts are those changes resulting from
a  direct or primary impact of a project.  Often,
secondary impacts are impacts that are already
occurring or may occur with or without the  project
interceptor.  EPA participation in funding the Crabtree
Creek  interceptor sewer will result in increased
severity of certain environmental problems.  This
                          100

-------
interceptor will increase the amount and speed of
urbanization in the Upper Crabtree Watershed and will
cause aggravation of certain impacts of development.
    1.  stream Flow
    Development of a rural watershed has been
repeatedly shown to have significant effects on stream
flow characteristics.  Urbanization can double or
triple flood magnitudes in the Piedmont North Carolina
area  (Putnam, 1972).  This increase can be attributed
to  (i) increases in impervious surfaces causing a
decrease in infiltration and, therefore, an increase in
the volume of runoff, and (2) hydraulic changes of the
basin decreasing the time necessary for the rainfall to
reach the watercourse.
    The volume of runoff is governed primarily by
infiltration characteristics and is related to the
percentage of impervious surfaces, slope, soil type and
vegetative cover.  Urbanization includes the
construction of roofs, parking lots, and streets which
significantly increases the impervious surfaces and
decreases the surface available for infiltration to
groundwater.  Typical urbanization of a rural area may
increase the percentage of impervious surfaces from
                          101

-------
practically zero to 30 percent or more,.  The associated
loss of vegetative cover decreases the  rainfall
intercepted and retained on foliage.  The net result is
a significant increase in the volume of runoff.
    Urbanization likewise reduces lag time, the average
time necessary to move storm water across land surfaces
to the stream channel (Figure 18).  Sewers,, gutters,
and paved surfaces allow storm waters to flow unimpeded
and reduce the lag time.  This reduction can greatly
increase the flood stage in a receiving stream.  When a
particular volume of water falls on an area, if the
time for this water to reach the stream channel
decreases, the rate of discharge in the stream must
increase.  This increase in discharge results in a
higher stage and increased flooding.
    The combination of increased volume and decreased
lag time can have drastic effects on downstream areas.
Figure 19 shows some typical ratios for storm water
discharges after urbanization vs. discharges before
urbanization.  For example, if an area becomes
urbanized such that 20 percent of the area is
impervious and only 10 percent is sewered by storm
sewers, the peak discharge will be twice as much after
                          102

-------
                                           Hydroulicolly  improved  bosin hoving

                                           associated impervious  surface
                                             Hydrauli colly improved  bosin hoving

                                             natural  basin  surface
                                                          Natural channels and

                                                          natural bosin surface
                                 TIME
 Figure J18—Schematic  drawing illustrating  the effects of urban development on


    flood hydrographs.   Hydrographs are not  to scale.   T , T    and T ,  lag times;
                                                             n   s j       u


    P , P , and P  flood peaks of  the hydrographs for  the three basin types shown
     XI   S        XJL



Robert Coughlin  and Thomas  Hammer,  "Stream  Quality Preservation Through

Planned Urban  Development," EPA, May 1973

                                       103

-------
       100
  01
  W)
  CO
  S-l
  01
  CO
   o
   4-1
   CO
   0)
   >
   S-i
   0)
   CO

   CO
   0)
   S-j
  M-l
   O

   4J
   C
   01
   o
   u
   0)
          0
20        40         60        80

    Percent of Area  Impervious
100
                         Figure 19


        EFFECT OF URBANIZATION ON MEAN ANNUAL FLOOD
             FOR A 1-SQUARE-MILE  DRAINAGE AREA


Source:  Leopold, "Hydrology  for  Urban Land Planning," U.S.
         Geological Survey  Circular 554, Washingtion, 1968;
         p. 5.
                              104

-------
              ..j.. i- .r,.i :r B^ r i ~
                               LEGEND
                    807° DEVELOPMENT LEVET. WITHOUT SCS DAMS  \   '
,j1^     	  EXISTING DEVELOPMENT WITHOUT SCS DAMS
         	80°/°DrVELOPMENT LEVEL WITH II SCS DAMS
         	EXISTING DEVELOPMENT WITH II SCS DAMS
   _                TOP OF  LOW BANK
L "'• '     	  STREAM BED



-------
NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWA
US HWY I (NORTH BLVD)
SEABOARD COASTLINE RAILROAD
LASSITER MILL RD_
YADKIN DRIVE -pir;
US HWY I BYPASS (BELTLINE) EAST
US HWY I BYPASS (BELTLINE) WESTp
             ^~m
US HWY 70 EAST         	
SHOPPING CENTER ENTRANCE / BLUE RIDSE R
SHOPPING CENTER ENTRANCE-EDWARDS MILL T "
                                                              TiLi'\i-'T. f ••

-------
urbanization as before.  Th graph is not specific for
Crabtree Creek, but it illustrates similar greatly
increaed stream flows in other areas which may be
expected in this basin.  As may be readily seen,
increased impervious surfaces and increased storm
sewerage can greatly affect stream flows.
    Another effect of urbanization, somewhat less
known, is the change in low flow characteristics.
Since the low flow is basically groundwater seepage
into the stream, an increase in the percentage of
rainfall that runs off due to increased impervious
surfaces represents a similar decrease in rainfall that
percolates into groundwater storage.  The net result is
often decreased flow available from groundwater.  In
areas which commonly have zero or very low flows, an
increase in the frequency of these conditions may be
expected.
    The impacts of urbanization on stream flows
described above will occur to varying degrees in the
Upper Crabtree Creek Basin.  The Corps of Engineers,
Wilmington District, has computed dollar damages per
year from flooding for conditions with and without
development and with and without the SCS control
                        105

-------
structures (Table 10).  As may be seen from this table,
80 percent development of the watershed would raise
annual damages from $3.7 million to $5.7 million if the
SCS structures were not built,.  If the structures are
built, then even with 80 percent development, flood
damages are estimated at $1-9 million or about half the
damages under existing conditions.  The flood stages
associated with the varying conditions are given in
Figure 16.  This figure shows flood stages for a 100-
year storm of approximately two and one-half feet
greater than present stages due to 80 percent
urbanization of the Crabtree Basin without the SCS
structures.  Flood stages with 80 percent development
of the Upper Crabtree Basin with the structures are
shown to be three to four feet lower than present.
    The actual damages incurred and other adverse
impacts will depend on the measures taken to mitigate
these impacts.  Chapter IV presents a discussion of
available mitigative measures.
    2.   Erosion and Sedimentation
    Development of a watershed can increase the amount
of erosion and the resultant sedimentation in two ways.
First, runoff from construction sites that have been
                        106

-------
                                                TABLE 10

                                         Average Annual Flood Damages
                           Wake Forest Rd.-
                           Farmers Market Area
                       Crabtree Valley
                       Mall Area
Existing Development
  Without SCS Structures
$3,100,000 (84%)
$400.000 (11%)
                       Average Annual
                       Damages	
$3.700.000
Existing Development
  With SCS Structures
 1.300.000 (95%)
  23,000 (2%)
 1,400,000
80% Development
  Without SCS Structures
 4,500.000 (79%)
 900,000 (16%)
 5,700,000
80% Development
  With SCS Structures
 1.800,000 (95%)
  42.000 (2%) J
 1.900.000
                                                                             Corps of Engineers Letter
                                                                             January 29, 1974

-------
stripped of vegetation carry large quantities of silt
into the waterways.  Secondly, an increase in runoff
causes increased erosion of the channel banks.  These
two sources can greatly increase the total sediment
loading on a receiving stream.
    Piedmont lands have been estimated by Wolman (1964)
to produce sediment yields of 500 tons per square mile
per year.  Sediment yields from urbanizing areas have
ranged from 1,000 to more than 100,000 tons/square
mile/year.  Other researchers (Guy and Ferguson, 1962;
Keller, 1962; wark and Keller, 1963) have estimated
that urbanization increased sediment yields from four
to 250 times that of rural areas.  Additionally, the
increase in sediment production through erosion of
channel banks due to increased peak flows has been
estimated as high as five times the usual production
from a non-urban area.
    Uncontrolled development of the Upper Crabtree
Creek Basin can be expected to significantly increase
the production of sediment as described.  The highly
erodable Creedmore-white Store, Cecil-Appling and Cecil
association soils, which predominate in the upper
basin, make the erosion potential more serious.  The
                          108

-------
adverse impacts associated with erosion and
sedimentation that are described in the primary impacts
section will also occur from this secondary source.
Aquatic fauna and flora growth will be inhibited, and
flood stages may rise due to deposition of sediment  in
the stream bed.
    3.   Water Quality
    There can be little doubt that as a watershed
becomes urbanizedf the quality of its surface water
decreases.  As discussed previously, the sediment
loading increases due to construction runoff and stream
bank erosion.  Following construction, materials found
on street surfaces wash into adjacent surface waters,
causing urban runoff in many respects to be similar to
sanitary sewage.
    Street surface contaminants are comprised primarily
of particulate matter but also include soluble and
suspended matter.  These constituents come from  the
degradation of asphaltic and concrete pavements,
various contributions from motor vehicles (e.g.,
leakage of fuel, lubricants and fluids; particulates
from tires, clutches and brakes; dirt and rust; and
components from wrecked vehicles), fallout from the
                         109

-------
atmosphere, vegetation (e.g., leaves, branches),
litter, spills, and other sources,  in some areas lawn
fertilization may also become significant contributors
to ur&an runoff pollution.  Particular land uses
dictate which of the above sources are significant in
any individual urban area.
    Constituents of urban runoff may lower the
dissolved oxygen content of receiving waters by adding
oxygen-demanding materials to the stream,  A low oxygen
content can result in oxygen starvation for fish and,
in extreme cases, production of noxious odors.  One
measurement of the ability of a waste to deplete waters
of oxygen is the biochemical oxygen demand  (BOD).  The
BOD is measured by determining the amount of oxygen
necessary for the biological degradation of a waste for
a specified length of time, usually five days.
    The BOD contribution has been evaluated by various
researchers in terms of pounds per curb mile  (Ibs/curb
mile) found on street surfaces.  Values for BOD
contributed to watercourses per storm have been
reported as low as 0.8 Ibs/curb mile  (Water Pollution
Aspects of Urban Runoff, 1969).  Following dry periods
with continued buildup of pollutants, values as high as
                         110

-------
50 Ibs/curb mile (Water Pollution Aspects of Street
Surface Contaminants, 1972) have been reported.  BOD
values between five and 20 Ibs/curb mile are typical in
urban residential areas.  During the first minutes of
rainfall, the discharge of these pollutants occurs
rapidly,, and concentrations of oxygen-demanding
material can reach significant proportions.  In cases
of low stream flow with a light rainfall, very high
concentrations of oxygen demanding materials (BOD) in
the receiving waters may occur.  Should this low flow
conditions persist, continued oxygen utilization may
result in low or zero dissolved oxygen concentrations,
killing aquatic aerobic organisms.
    Other pollutants which can cause adverse impacts
are nutrients (phosphates, nitrates, and ammonium
nitrogen), heavy metals (zinc, copper, lead, nickel,
mercury, chromium, etc.) and various pesticides.  An
abundant supply of the nutrients necessary for growth
can result in algal blooms.  During daylight hours,
photosynthesis by these algal organisms may raise
dissolved oxygen concentrations above the saturation
level.  But during the nightime hours, algal
respiration can reduce oxygen concentrations to very
                          111

-------
    4.    Community Services and Utilities
    With increased development comes the necessity of
providing community services such as water supply,
transportation, power, recreation, schools, health
facilities, fire and police protection and garbage
pickup.  Each of these services is provided to the
general public through taxation, special assessments,
or service charges,  since each involves an expenditure
of natural and economic resources, impacts are
involved.
    Most of the water supply needs of the city of
Raleigh and the surrounding area are presently
satisfied with water originating from the Neuse River.
Future plans project raw water supplies from the
proposed Falls of the Neuse Reservoir.  As yet, there
is no final decision on building this reservoir.
Construction of the proposed interceptor sewer commits
the raw water resources of the Neuse to satisfying the
water supply needs of approximately 80,000 persons  (10
mgd at 125 gpcd) .
    Similarly, land and economic resources must be
committed toward supplying the projected population
with roadways and/or mass transit facilities.  Present
plans provide for a system of arterial roadways
                         112

-------
low levels.  Death and settling of these organisms can
contribute significantly to the benthic (bottom) oxygen
demand of the water.  Unsightly conditions, odors, and
fish kills may be the ultimate result of this over-
enrichment.
    Heavy metals and pesticides concentrations may also
affect the ecological balance.  With high levels, they
can become toxic to certain aquatic organisms, changing
or destroying the naturally occurring trophic (feeding)
structures.  For example, a certain fish may be able to
survive a certain concentration of a toxicant, but the
organisms that the fish uses as a food source may not
be able to survive.  Species diversification is often
reduced, with only a few tolerant species flourishing.
Lower levels of these toxicants can cause chronic
effects on organisms; changes in activity levels,
reproduction rates, etc.
    Following urbanization of the Upper Crabtree Creek
Watershed, storm water runoff will contribute to the
pollutant loadings, and the water quality of Crabtree
Creek may be expected to deteriorate.  Control
measures exist and are discussed in Chapter V.
                         113

-------
connecting the project area to State Highway 54, 1-40,
Duraleigh Road (1664)  and Highway 70. (See Figure 20.)
Urbanization of the Upper Crabtree Creek Basin may be
expected to significantly increase the volume of
traffic using these corridors.
    The possibility of mass transit for the Triangle
area has not been intensively researched, existing rail
lines from Raleigh to most major populated areas
(Durham, Research Triangle, Gary, Wake Forest, Wendell,
Zebulon, Garner, and Fuquay-Varina)  suggests the
possibility of such a system.  The incorporation of
plans for mass transit facilities into the Wake County
Master Transportation Plan needs to be given future
consideration to assure this option remains open should
population densities increase sufficiently to make
these facilities cost effective and environmentally
desirable.
    Population growth also increases the generation of
solid wastes.  Land use plans being developed by the
Wake County Planning Department should consider and
specify the appropriate ultimate fate of solid waste
generated by the proposed population.  Planned land
filling prior to development can often provide much
                         114

-------

-------
needed land for recreational purposes or open space.
By planning the location of a landfill area, the
potential for reuse may be more fully utilized.
    In addition to these required services, the
increased power demands necessary to satisfy a
population of 80,000 will need to be supplied.
Assuming approximately 27,000 residences, approximately
135 MVA of electric power will be required.  Utilities
such as water and sewage and commercial establishments
within the area would require  another 135 MVA giving a
total estimated demand for the area of 270 MVA.  At the
present time, the following distribution substations
serve the area of the Crabtree Creek Basin:  1)  Prison
Farm substation located to the north of the Raleigh
beltline and east of Interstate 40, 2)  the Gary
Substation located in Gary, 3)  the Raleigh-Durham
Airport Substation located just north of S.R,  1002 and
northeast of the airport, 4)  the Leesville Substation
located to the east of Highway 70, and 5)  the Oak Park
subdivision substation.  Each of these  substations has
a present capacity or can be expanded to 100 MVA,
Future plans call for the establishment of stations in
Gary, Morrisville and to the west of the present
                          116

-------
Crabtree Valley Shopping Center, each of which  will
have an ultimate capacity of 100 MVA.  In addition,
there are plans to install a 500/230 KV bulk power
substation to the north of the Raleigh-Durham Airport,
This power demand may initially require additional
burning of fossil fuels.  The Shearon Harris Nuclear
facility, when completed, will provide further
generation capacity  (Correspondence, Earl F.
Stephenson, Carolina Power and Light, April 12, 197U).
    Schools and recreational areas also will be needed.
The usage of Umstead State Park may be expected to rise
considerably due to the increased proximity of
residential areas.  Additional facilities will be
required to accomodate this use, i.e., parking, trails,
picnic areas, etc.  Plans are being developed by the
State Parks Department to provide the additional
facilities and allow for usage and preservation of the
ecological integrity of this park area.
    The need for comprehensive planning in this
watershed is great.  Haphazard growth, indifferent to
areawide planning objectives, stimulated by available
utilities, could have a marked impact on the future
quality of life for persons in this watershed area and
                         117

-------
on existing usage of downstream areas.  The 208
Facilities Plan, Wake County Land Use Plan, and a
coordinated effort between Raleigh, Gary, Morrisville,
and Wake County offer great possibilities to avoid
foreseeable developmental problems.
         5.   Air Quality Assessment
    Wake County which is part of the Eastern Piedmont
AQCR is classified as follows:
                         118

-------
    Pollutant          Priority Classification
    S02                        III
    Part                        I
    Ox                         III
    CO                         III
    NO2                        III
    Since a priority classification of III indicates
pollutant concentrations below the natural Ambient Air
Quality Standards, particulates become the major
concern.  Particulates which have a significant effect
on air quality come from large point sources greater
than 100 tons per year.  Because necessary dust control
measures will be used, the construction of the
interceptor sewer would be considered a very small
overall source of particulate air pollution.
Electrical power for this project will come from an
existent coal fired plant for the interim.  The coal
fired plant is presently being controlled by State
regulations.
    When housing projects begin to develop in and
around the interceptor sewer, electrical power is to be
furnished by a new nuclear power plant.  Nuclear power
does not emit significant amounts of particulates.  The
                         119

-------
small amount emitted would come from emergency diesel
generators which have no significant impact upon air
quality.  There will only be slight emissions of sulfur
dioxides from the emergency diesel generators and none
from the nuclear power station.  Therefore, there are
no significant impacts expected by the construction of
this project on air quality.
    Pollutants emitted from automobiles are classified
priority III and do not violate the ambient standards,
although automotive traffic contributes to increasing
the amount of particulates in the air by stirring up
materials located on roadways.
    To assure that the ambient air quality standards
are not violated at some future date, EPA has developed
Indirect Source Regulations.  The regulations require
that an assessment be made of the effect of a project
classified as an indirect source.  An indirect source
is one that does not emit pollutants itself, but one
which would create an air pollution problem by inducing
mobile source activity such as with parking facilities,
shopping centers and housing developments.  Each State
was given the option to develop their own Indirect
Source Regulations.  North Carolina is one State that
                         120

-------
did.  These regulations have also been approved by EPA.
During the development of these regulations, certain
size cut-offs were set for various types of projects.
Projects which are above these sizes would be required
to obtain a permit to construct.  These cut-off sizes
were set very conservatively to protect air quality.
After comparing the size of this project with the
criteria, we conclude that it does not qualify as an
Indirect Source under state regulations.
    The regulation adopted by the State of North
Carolina and approved by EPA applicable to this project
are Regulation No. 9-1(b).  This section deals with
population densities and requires an air quality
assessment if the population density is greater than or
equal to 12 persons per acre.  Since the projected
density for this project is 7.4 persons per acre, no
assessment is necessary.  This project should not cause
a violation of the NAAQS nor should its potential
growth.
                         121

-------
V.  ADVERSE IMPACTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED AND MITIGATIVE
     MEASURES
    In all construction projects, certain impacts are
unavoidable and represent an irreparable loss of a
resource.  However, with many of these impacts, actions
can be taken to reduce considerably the severity of the
adverse effects.  This section lists those adverse
impacts that cannot be avoided and discusses  the
measures that may be taken to mitigate them.  In many
cases, the measures necessary to alleviate a problem
are not within the jurisdiction of the Environmental
Protection Agency or the North Carolina Department of
Natural and Economic Resources.
    A.   Adverse Impacts Which Cannot Be Avoided
    Adverse impacts that cannot be avoided are listed
below.  These impacts were discussed in Chapter IV.
    1.  Primary Impacts
        a.  Wastewater and sludge disposal
        b.  Erosion and sedimentation from the inter-
            ceptor construction
        c.  Archeological, historical, and cultural
            impacts
         d.  SCS flood control structures
                         122

-------
        e.  Aesthetic losses
        f.  Disruption of ecological systems
    2.  Secondary Impacts
        a.  Changes to flood stages and low flows
        b.  Erosion and sedimentation from develop-
            mental activity
        c.  Changes in water quality
        d.  Demand for community services and resources
    B.  Mitiaative Measures to Adverse Primary Impacts
    Although the preceeding impacts cannot be totally
avoided, there are measures that can be taken to reduce
the adverse effects.  These measures are discussed in
the following sections.
    1.  Wastewater and Sludge Disposal
    Discharge of the treated wastewater from the Neuse
River Sewage Treatment Plant generated in the Upper
Crabtree Basin will contribute to the pollutant loading
on the Neuse River below Raleigh.  As discussed
previously, the Neuse River Sewage Treatment Plant is
designed to reduce BOD and SS concentrations in the
effluent to 6 mg/1 and 6 ppm, respectively.  At
ultimate design flow, 100 mgd, this plant will allow
maintenance of fish and wildlife water quality
                         123

-------
standards.  The proposed Falls of the Neuse Reservoir
would allow an even greater dilution capacity by low
flow augmentation.
    Sludge disposal will be accomplished by landfill
adjacent to the sewage treatment facility.  A program
has been proposed to study the effects of recycling
this sludge on North Carolina State University farm
lands.  Results from this study may indicate a means
for recycling this potential resource.
    2.  Erosion and Sedimentation
    Erosion and sedimentation can be controlled in
practically all instances of sewer line construction.
Lack of adequate precautions has caused the adverse
impacts of the past.  By providing a sufficient
vegetative buffer between the edge of the right-of-way
and the stream bank, the major effects may be
mitigated.  Special erosion control efforts must be
taken for stream crossings, steep banks, and other
cases which require the disturbance of the natural
stream bank.  Timely efforts of revegetation and proper
construction techniques can assure maximum  protection.
    The natural bank of a creek is held in place by the
root systems of the vegetation.  The ground foliage
                         124

-------
filters sediment from overland flow and protects the



soil from the erosive energy of rain.  Whenever this



vegetation is appreciably disturbed, high stream flows,



overland flows, and rainfall can erode the unprotected



soil.  To avoid this condition a minimum natural buffer



of at least 10 meters (33 feet) between the edge of the



construction right-of-way and the stream bank should be



provided to protect the vegetation on the creek edges.



A 10 meter (33 foot) buffer will ensure that the roots



of the large trees on the bank will not be appreciably



disturbed.  Many mature species of trees have a root



spread of up to 10 meters in radius.  Also, trees on



creek banks often extend root systems appreciably



further upland for support.  Root damage from



construction vehicles may damage or kill some



particularly sensitive species of trees in the buffer



zone, e.g., beech, tulipwood, loblolly pine, but major



vegetative losses will be avoided.



    In those areas where this setback cannot be



provided, special erosion control techniques should be



used.  Riprap can be used to protect exposed banks with



steep slopes or temporary measures, such as chemical



soil binders or nettings, may be used until a
                        125

-------
vegetative cover is provided.  Techniques and available



materials are presented in the Environmental Technology



Series publication "Guidelines for Erosion and Sediment



Control Planning and Implementation" and the Office of



Water Programs Operations publication "Comparative



Costs of Erosion and Sediment Control, Construction



Activities."



    By utilizing proper construction techniques and



prompt revegetation, the remaining dangers of erosion



may be avoided.  The stockpile of excavated soil,



construction equipment, and heavy traffic should be



kept on the upland side  (away from the creek) of the



ditch to avoid disturbances to the root systems of



trees in the buffer zone.  This will also minimize



disturbed soil available for possible erosion on the



creek side of the construction trench.  Unnecessary



clearing should be avoided, and damage to remaining



vegetation should be kept at a minimum.  In areas where



the property owners do not wish to retain their lumber,



all wood should be chipped and placed on the exposed



soil immediately following compaction.  The chips will



provide protection from  sheet erosion and will help



dissipate the energy of  rain.
                          126

-------
    Revegetation should follow placement as soon as

practicable, but in no case should soil remain exposed

longer than 30 days following construction activities

on that area.  Continuous revegatation presents the

most desirable condition, although practicality

limitations may dictate revegetation in segments.

    The State of North Carolina, in the Sedimentation

Pollution Control Act of 1973 has presented mandatory

standards for land disturbing activity which are

similar to the above recommendations.  These standards

are listed below:

    (a)  No land disturbing activity shall be per-
         mitted in proximity to a lake or natural
         watercourse unless a buffer zone is pro-
         vided along the margin of the watercourse
         of sufficient width to confine visible
         siltation within the twenty-five percent
         (25%) of the buffer zone nearer the land
         disturbing activity, provided, that this
         subsection (a)  shall not apply to a land
         disturbing activity in connection with the
         construction of facilities to be located
         on, over, or under a lake or natural
         watercourse.

    (b)  No slope may be graded to an angle greater
         than the angle of repose for saturated
         soil conditions applicable for the type
         of soil involved; unless the soil on such
         slope is retained by some adequate erosion
         controlling structure or device.  In any
         event, soil left exposed will, within 30
         working days of completion of any phase
         of grading, be planted or otherwise pro-
                          127

-------
         vided with a ground-cover sufficient to
         restrain erosion.

    (c)   Whenever land disturbing activity is under-
         taken on a tract comprising more than one
         acre, if more than one contiguous acre is
         uncovered, a ground-cover sufficient to
         restrain erosion must be planted or other-
         wise provided within 30 working days on
         that portion of the tract upon which
         further active construction is not being
         undertaken, provided, that this subsection
         (c)  shall not apply to cleared land form-
         ing the basin of a reservoir later to be
         inundated.
    To insure implementation of the above

recommendations, an erosion control plan should be

prepared for the project and submitted to North

Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission and to EPA

for approval before construction begins.

    3.  Archeological Impacts

    At present there are no known significant

archeological sites endangered by the proposed Crabtree

Creek interceptor sewer.  In order to ensure that no

historically valuable sites are destroyed, a

preliminary survey of the interceptor right-of-way

should be made, and potentially significant locations

identified.  Prior to construction in those identified

areas,  their archeological worth should be determined.
                          128

-------
Possible rerouting to avoid the site or removal of
artifacts should be investigated in those areas deemed
historically significant or particularly unusual.
    4.  SCS Flood Control Structures
    The proposed interceptor on Richland Creek shall be
designed so that construction of the SCS structure 11
is not impaired.  This may be accomplished by
realignment of the interceptor and/or provision of
sealed, bolted down covers, vented above the 100 year
flood level.  Further, the interceptor should not be
aligned where it would be adversely affected by the
location or construction of structure 25 on crabtree
Creek below the confluence of Richland Creek.
    5.  Aesthetic Losses
    Odors will be controlled by providing aeration of
the wastewater at the proposed pumping station.  This
will be accomplished by locating an aerator in the wet
well or by other appropriate methods.  Plans and
specifications shall include the facilities prior to
final approval.
    6. Alterations of Ecosystems
    Four criteria for preserving the vegetation in any
given area are:
                          129

-------
    (1)   It is aesthetically pleasing and has



recreational potential,



    (2)   It is a rare biotic association, either



considered on a local or regional basis.



    (3)   Its existence is the result of a long



successional process and would take a considerable



amount of time to become reestablished.



    (4)   Its preservation will ensure direct economic



benefits.



    The ecotonal vegetation occupying the streamside



water-land interface on much of the project area meets



all of the above criteria.  A walk through the pathways



under a canopy of trees by Crabtree Creek is certainly



pleasing.  The proposal to extend the Capital City



Greenway system along Crabtree Creek and to develop the



land around the SCS structure 23 into a recreational



area demonstrates its potential.



    Stream beds and the narrow strips of associated



vegetation occupy only a fraction of one percent of the



project area.  These bottomland sites in the Piedmont



area are continually being impacted by  adjacent



development or are succombing to development themselves



as local suburban building sites run out.  Therefore,
                          130

-------
these areas are becoming increasingly rare over a wide
area as urbanization proceeds.
    The presence of large - over 1/2 meter dbh
(diameter breast height) - beech trees along the
proposed sites in association with other vegetative
members of a climax community indicates a long passage
of time since early successional stages.  As beech
trees are relatively intolerant to the widely
fluctuating humidities and temperatures found in early
serai stages, their recolonization will be postponed.
Once beech seedlings have started, several decades are
required before trees of the 1/2 meter dbh class are
regrown.
    Many of the streambanks juxtuposed to the proposed
sewer line rights-of-way are vertical in aspect for one
to three meters (three to ten feet)  immediately
adjacent to the flowing water.  As the soil itself in
these areas does not have a particularly steep angle of
repose, it is clear that these vertical banks are being
supported by the vegetation clinging to them.  Their
cover ranges from small liverworts and mosses to over
1/2 meter (18 inches)  diameter river birches.  The
small plants hold the soil grains in place from gravity
                         131

-------
and the larger tree roots provide protection from
erosion by swiftly moving water during periodic floods.
Without this root matrix to hold these banks in place,
serious slumping into the creek would take place.  On
Crabtree Creek just below Oak Park a collapse of the
creek banks was noticed only six weeks after vegetation
was disturbed.  A previously emplaced large interceptor
sewer line was put in danger of being undermined.
Corrective action utilizing backfill and rip rap is
expensive, time consuming and wasteful of resources.
    Because of its value in reducing the initial
construction cost, and in reducing the cost of
maintenance through erosion control along these
bottomland sewer rights-of-way as discussed in Section
V.B.2, a minimum of a 10 meter  (33 foot) undisturbed
buffer should be left: between the right-of-way and the
stream*s vertical banks whenever practical.
    To reduce adverse impacts on Crabtree Creek itself
and on the valuable streamside community, line
placement will be made at a distance greater than 10
meters whenever a less complex vegetative association
such as pasture, open field or a young pine stand is
adjacent and its location doesn't pose exceptional
                         132

-------
slope or grade problems.  These type communities



represent an earlier stage of ecological succession and



their disruption would represent a smaller loss of



biotic information and structure.



    In order to ascertain the types of cover growing on



the proposed sewer rights-of-way and therefore whether



the line routing should be changed,  a vegetative



survey will be made to determine the frequency of



occurence and basal area of certain species of trees



along the proposed right-of-way.  This survey should



utilize standard statistical biological field sampling



methods, such as quadrats, random pairs, line



intercept, transects, or a variable-radius plotless



method, and describe in general the types of natural



communities growing within the proposed right-of-way



boundaries.  A primary vegatative survey will be made



of 100 meter (328 feet)  sections along the right-of-



way,  only trees over six inches dbh will be sampled.



    The area included in each primary 100-meter section



will be that area within 10 meters (33 feet)  on either



side of the proposed right-of-way centerline unless the



centerline is closer than 10 meters from the edge of



the vertical creek banks in which case the section
                        133

-------
width will run 20 meters  (66 feet) from the edge of the



vertical banks.



    Whenever it is determined that 60 percent of the



trees sampled in any 100 meter long section of right-



of-way are either beeches, sweetgums, black gums,



sycamores, ironwood, or 1/2 meter  (18-inch) dbh and



larger oaks, an additional secondary vegetative survey



will be required.



    This secondary survey will run parallel to, and



share a common boundary with, the primary 20-meter-wide



survey.  It will extend 60 meters  (200 feet) in depth



perpendicular to the primary survey boundary away from



the creek bank.



    The secondary survey will be divided into three



parallel strips 20 meters wide and 100 meters long.



The three parts will be called Secondary A  (closest to



the primary survey), Secondary B  (next furtherest



away), and Secondary C (furtherest from the primary



survey)•  Sampling will proceed on the Secondary A, B,



and C strips as it was carried out on the primary



survey.



    If this secondary survey discloses an airea where



there are no trees over 1/6 meter  (six inches) dbh, or
                          134

-------
where more than 60 percent of the individuals sampled

are species other than those listed above, the survey

site will be marked on a map as an area of potential

alternative routing.

    Engineering cost estimates will then be made

regarding the placement of the sewer line on said

alternative route.  If these estimates are no larger

than 125 percent of the original proposed routing, then

a change in line routing to the secondary surveyed site

will be made.  If any areas are found where an

exceptionally unique ecotonal community exists, EPA

reserves the option of relocating the interceptor

regardless of the cost estimates.

    C.   Mitigative Measures to Adverse Secondary
           Impacts

    1.  Flooding

    As discussed in Chapter IV, Impact of the Proposed

Project, there is a great potential for increased

flooding due to development of the Upper Crabtree

Watershed.  The use or non-use of measures to lessen

the impact will determine the actual effects on

downstream properties.  The following are some measures

which would mitigate these impacts.
                         135

-------
         a.  Soil Conservation Service Flood Control



Project



    The SCS has an ongoing program to construct flood



control structures in the Upper Crabtree Basin (Chapter



II.A.2).  Various difficulties have been encountered,



with the result that only three of 11 structures have



been built, although a fourth is under construction.



Of the remaining seven, two are to be let for contract



soon and the remaining five are stalled, awaiting land



acquisition.  Two of the these five are considered the



major flood control structures of the plan.



    The Corps of Engineers flood damage data (Table 9)



shows the amount of protection that may be afforded by



the construction of these dams.  A saving of $2.3



million per year would result with existing land use,



and $3.8 million per year would be saved with 80



percent development.  Completion of these dams would



mitigate the impact of developing the upper watershed



since 80 percent development, without the dams, would



increase damages by $2.0 million/year above present



annual losses, while  80 percent development, with the



structures, would have $1.8 million less than present



annual losses.  Adherence to land use and impervious
                         136

-------
surface limitations developed by the Wake County



Planning Department will be necessary to assure that



the design hydrologic capacities of the proposed



control structure will not be surpassed.  Coordination



of sewer hookups, land use planning, and zoning between



Wake County, Gary and Raleigh will be necessary.



    Completion of this flood control project is one



method whereby the threat of increased flooding may be



eliminated.  Grant funds shall be withheld from the



proposed project until land rights have been acquired



for the Soil Conservation Service control Structures



located downstream of each respective proposed service



area, or until other measures are taken, including but



not limited to channelization, urban runoff controls,



developmental restrictions, and other land use



modifications which will insure adequate flood control



as determined by the State of North Carolina, SCS, the



COE, and the EPA.  Grant funds shall be withdrawn



January 1, 1976, from the proposed project if land



rights are not acquired for the SCS structures or



agreement on other measures to insure adequate flood



protection is not reached.
                       137

-------
    Should the rights to the property for structure 11
(Richland Creek)  and structure 25 (the Umstead Park Dry
Dam) be acquired, construction of this segment shall
proceed to provide service to the State facilities
presently at capacity.  If the remaining property
rights are not obtained and other measures are not
agreed upon, the project scope shall be reduced to
include only this construction.
         b.  Floodplain and Floodway Ordinances
    For the protection of persons who, knowingly or
unknowingly, desire to reside in or utilize floodplain
areas, many localities have adopted ordinances to help
protect persons and properties from undue damage or
injury.  The city of Raleigh and Make County have
passed such a floodplain and floodway ordinance.  These
ordinances also provide protection for properties above
and below developments from becoming flooded by
limiting changes in upstream or downstream channels.
    The major requirements of the Raleigh ordinance are
as follows:
     (A) Building Permits shall be required for all
        proposed new construction and for all major
        repairs to existing construction within the
        floodplain area.
                         138

-------
(B)  Before a building permit shall be issued
    for any new construction or substantial
    improvements within the floodway fringe
    area,  the plans for the proposed construc-
    tion (including prefabricated and mobile
    homes)  shall indicate that said construc-
    tion:

    (1)  will be protected against flood damage,

    (2)  is designed or will be modified and
        anchored to prevent the flotation col-
        lapse or lateral movement of the
        structure,

    (3)  will involve the use of materials and
        utility equipment which are resistent
        to flood damage,

    (H)  will involve the use of construction
        methods and practices which will mini-
        mize flood  damage.

(C)  Before a building permit shall be issued for
    any major repairs within the floodway fringe
    area,  the plans for the proposed repairs
    shall  demonstrate that said repairs:

     (1) will involve the use of construction
        materials  and utility equipment which
        are resistant to flood damage,

     (2) will involve the use of construction
        methods and practices that will minimize
        flood damage.

(D)  Any and all new construction or substantial
    improvements of residential structures with-
    in the floodway fringe area shall have the
    lowest floor (included basement)  elevated
    to or  above the level of the 100-year flood.

(E)  Any and all new construction or substantial
    improvements of nonresidential structures
    within the flood plain area shall have the
                     139

-------
        lowest floor (including basement)  elevated
        to or above the level of the 100-year flood;
        or together with attendant utility and sani-
        tary facilities shall be floodproofed up to
        the level of the 100-year flood.

    The ordinance passed on June 3, 1974 by the Wake

County Commissioners is similar to the Raleigh

ordinance*  Its purpose and intent is as follows:

    ".-.to declare that certain areas of the
    County shall be designated as floodways
    and floodway fringes; and to help control
    and minimize the extent of floods by pre-
    venting obstructions which inhibit water
    flow and increase flood height and damage,
    and thereby to prevent or minimize loss
    of life, injuries, property damage, and
    other losses, both public and private, in
    flood hazard areas, and to promote the
    public health, safety, and welfare of the
    citizens."

    Generally, any use having low flow obstructing

characteristics shall be permitted within floodway

areas provided the one-hundred year flood level is not

increased, and that no equipment or material shall be

stored which may be flammable, explosive, toxic or

which could otherwise be injurious to human, animal or

plant life.

    The following requirements must be met to obtain

approval of plans and building permits to construct,

add to or alter in the floodway fringe areas.
                         140

-------
 (1) Application for a building permit,
accompanied by plans for the proposed
development shall be presented to the
Board of Adjustment for review and
approval, approval with modification, or
rejection.

 (2) The plans shall consist of but not be
limited to the following:

    (a) a general site plan showing the
    location and type of buildings and
    structures to be erected, areas to
    be filled, and the boundaries of the
    floodway fringe;

    (b) cross sections at intervals not
    exceeding fifty (50) feet, prepared
    by a registered engineer, landscape
    architect, or architect showing the
    regulatory flood protection eleva-
    tion, boundaries of the floodway and
    floodway fringe, existing and proposed
    contours, floor elevations, and a
    profile of the associated streams; and

    (c) such hydrologic calculations as
    needed and necessary, as well as
    applicable structural and nonstruc-
    tural flood proofing measures and
    soil erosion and sedimentation
    control plans.

 (3) In considering such permit and plans
the Board of Adjustment shall consult with
the Wake soil and Water Conservation Dis-
trict, who after receipt and review of the
appropriate data related to the request,
shall make a recommendation to the Board.

 (4) No permit shall be granted:

    (a) for a development on one side of
    a stream which would raise the regula-
    tory flood protection elevation more
                    141

-------
        than one-half (1/2)  foot, or for a
        development on both sides of a stream
        which would raise the regulatory flood
        protection elevation more than one (1)
        foot;

        (b)  for a development which does not
        meet the standards of the code, or
        meet or exceed the technical standards
        and specifications of the soil conserva-
        tion Service, as adopted by the Wake
        Soil and Water Conservation District;
        or

        (c)  for a development which may result
        in the pollution of, or injury or dry-
        ing up of any stream or creek, or other-
        wise endanger the public health, safety,
        or general welfare.

    (5)  A certificate of compliance must be
    issued by the zoning enforcement officer
    prior to the utilization of any structure
    approved as a special use of a floodway
    fringe area.

    The ordinance also affects the placement of water

and sewer systems in floodway fringe areas.  These

systems are to be designed to minimize and eliminate

infiltration of floodwaters.  This interceptor is

designed to minimize this possibility.

    There is an interesting relationship between flood

plain usage and sewer line construction  with regard to

the proposed greenway system,  since the proposed

interceptor is  adjacent to streams in floodplain

areas, a multipurpose right-of-way could be utilized to
                         142

-------
provide many uses for floodplain land while reducing
overall individual costs,.
    Since sewer line right-of-way will require
continued maintenance, the greenway system management
process could be available to provide this service.
Access and usage of the right-of way could be
controlled most effectively by patrolling and providing
public facilities.  Aesthetic values for the right-of-
way area may be significantly increased by park
landscaping and management.  The expected advent of
floodplain zoning suggests a public usage of these
areas.   Utility placement and recreation are two uses
that are particularly suited for this purpose.
    Implementation of the above Floodplain and Floodway
ordinances will mitigate the effects of flooding under
existing conditions in Raleigh and Wake County.
Outright purchase of projected downstream flood hazard
areas is a possible mitigative measure to increased
flood stages.
                       143

-------
         c.  stormwater Runoff Ordinances

    Since urbanization is shown to increase storm water

runoff, development plans should include provisions for

controlling increases in runoff.

    The city of Raleigh has taken such action through

their Erosion and Sedimentation control Ordinance.  The

city's ordinance provides that:

    After the completion of construction on each
    land-disturbing site to which this ordinance
    applies, provisions shall be made, on or off
    the site, for the impoundment of enough of the
    natural liquid runoff from the site for a long
    enough period of time to limit the rate of
    such runoff leaving the site to that which
    would result from a two (2) year frequency
    storm if the site were developed in single
    family homes at a density of four  (4) familes
    per acre or less and if impoundment were not
    provided; provided, no impoundment shall be
    required of runoff from sites developed
    for residential purposes at a density of
    four (4) familes per acre or less; pro-
    vided further, part of the space, including
    parking areas, otherwise required by law
    to be left open, may be jointly used to
    satisfy the impounding requirements herein;
    provided still further, this standard shall
    not apply to sites of two  (2) acres or
    less in size unless such site is part of
    a larger subdivision or other project
    area which, when fully developed, will
    generate a more significant amount: of
    runoff.
        calculations and plans for impoundment
    structures and areas must receive the approval
    of the Chief Engineer of the City before any
    building permit may be issued*
                         144

-------
    Wake County also recently passed such an ordinance

which will mitigate the increase in runoff attributable

to urbanization„  The major provisions of the County

Erosion and Sedimentation Control Ordinance regarding

urban runoff provide that

    after the completion of construction on
    each land-disturbing site to which this
    ordinance applies, provisions shall be
    made, on or off the site, for the impound-
    ment t during storms, of that quantity of the
    natural liquid runoff from the site which
    is equal to the calculated difference
    between the amount of runoff which would
    result from a two (2) year frequency storm
    on that land if it were zoned and developec
    for residential purposes at a density no
    greater than four (4) families per acre and
    that which would result from a storm of the
    same frequency on the same land if developed
    to the degree for which it is actually zoned;
    provided, no impoundment shall be required
    of runoff from sites developed for residen-
    tial purposes at a density of four (
-------
As with the erosion control program, coordination
between city and county could simplify operation and
provide uniform control management.
    The combination of urban runoff controls with
construction of the SCS flood control structures
represents the best solution for mitigating the impact
of development in the Upper Crabtree Watershed on
flooding.  Since an urban runoff ordinance has been
passed, some of the increased damages predicted by the
Corps of Engineers due to development with the
structures as compared to no development with the
structures will be avoided.
         d.  Channel Improvements
    The Corps of Engineers  (COE) is investigating
alternatives for flood control for the Crabtree Creek
channel from Umstead State Park to the Neuse River
 (Chapter II).  This study will provide the necessary
information on the benefits attributable to various
channel alterations and the environmental consequences
resulting from each.  From this analysis a decision as
to best usage of the channel will be determined and
further flooding protection may be afforded  (Appendix
6).
                         146

-------
    2.  Erosion and Sedimentation
    Chapter IV discusses the impact of construction of
a sewer interceptor in an undeveloped area on erosion
and sedimentation.  Without the provision of control
measures, there would be greatly increased top soil
loss from developmental construction sites and
deposition in downstream waterways.  Various structural
and vegetative measures exist to control sediment
production, and enactment of an erosion and
sedimentation control ordinance is a means for assuring
uniform control standards and adequate protection for
downstream areas.
    The State of North Carolina has initiated a program
for erosion and sedimentation control (Chapter II and
IV).  In this endeavor, the State is to provide rules
and regulations for preventing excessive sedimentation
by March 1975.  The proposed regulations are similar to
those enacted by the city of Raleigh (Chapter II).  The
State plan will require individual governmental bodies,
i.e., region, county, or city, to enforce uniform
sedimentation ordinances.  Erosion control plans must
be prepared for developments over a specified size and
approved by local and state agencies.
                         147

-------
    The Wake County government has passed an erosion



and sedimentation bill, which provides that it is



unlawful to conduct any land disturbing activity



without first obtaining a permit from the county.



Agricultural activity, forest production and



harvesting, mining activities and any land disturbing



activities at any one time, on any one tract, by any



person that do not not exceed one acre in surface area



are excluded from this requirement.  In order to obtain



a permit, a soil erosion and sedimentation control plan



must be submitted to and approved by the county.



Further, before approval of an application for building



construction, a certificate of preliminary erosion



control compliance indicating that initial soil erosion



and sedimentation controls as specified on the approved



plan have been installed must have been given by the



county.  Implementation of this control program before



construction in the Upper Crabtree Watershed begins  is



considered imperative to avoid unnecessary soil erosion



and deposition.



    Some sedimentation control benefits will also be



realized by the construction of the SCS flood control



structures.  These structures are designed to include a
                         148

-------
total of 6,266 acre-feet for sediment,  A reduction in
sediment production reaching the sediment ponds by on-
site control will allow retention of the aesthetic
qualities of a permanent pool behind these structures.
Proposed recreational uses of the control structures
will be greatly enhanced by reduced sedimentation,
    3.  Water Quality
    Urbanization of a watershed often signals an
increase in the contribution of pollutants to
watercourses from runoff.  This byproduct of
development has just recently been generally recognized
as a significant contributor to pollutant loadings.
Chapter IV discusses sources of pollutants and general
impacts.  Fortunately, methods are available to lessen
the impact of this non-point source of contaminants
    The completion of the SCS control structures will
have a marked beneficial effect on the downstream water
quality.  Particulate material suspended in solution
will settle out in the sediment ponds behind these
structures.  Since approximately 75 percent of the BOD
in an urban runoff sample has been shown (Water
Pollution Aspects of Street Surface Contaminants, 1972)
to be associated with particles larger than 43 u
                         149

-------
(microns), most of the biological oxygen demanding
material would be deposited in the sediment pools, or
in the upstream channels.
    Nutrients, heavy metals, and pesticides are, to a
lesser extent, also removed by settling,  A large
portion of these pollutants are adsorbed, adhering to,
or complexed with particulate matter.  The extent of
their disolution from the sediments back into the water
is not well defined, and future benthic demands
associated with the deposition of these particulates
are likewise unknown.  Onsite urban runoff control
measures, as discussed in the chapter under stormwater
runoff ordinances (Chapter I.C), would reduce the
contributions of pollutants to the SCS sediment ponds.
The capture of the first flush of urban runoff from a
rainfall event can significantly reduce the benthic
pollution contribution to the SCS sediment ponds.  The
Wake County Soil and Erosion Control Ordinance provides
that after completion of construction on each land
disturbing site of five acres or larger, to which this
ordinance applies, provisions shall be made on or off
the site, for the impoundment, during storms, of that
quantity of the natural liquid runoff from the site
                          150

-------
which is equal to the calculated difference between the
runoff which would result from a two year frequency
storm on that land if it were zoned and developed for
residential purposes at a density no greater than four
familes per acre.  Runoff may be captured in many ways,
but by designing control structures to retain the
initial flush for sufficient time to allow for
sedimentation of the larger particulates, a significant
amount of the pollutants contributed to watercourses by
urban runoff may be contained on the sites where they
are generated.
    An additional or alternative measure may be taken.
Provision for sheet flow of the initial flush of runoff
across a vegetated area would allow for deposition of
particulates and percolation of the most concentrated
polluted runoff waters.  In this manner the ion
exchange and filtering capacity of the soil may be
utilized.
    This may be accomplished partially by not
installing curbs and storm sewers unless hydraulicly
necessary.  In this manner, as mentioned above the
runoff generated on these surfaces will experience
overland flow and major pollutant reductions may be
                        151

-------
accomplished through vegetative filtration and
percolation through soil to the groundwater.  In many
sections of proposed service areas, curb and guttering
may be required because of the topography of the land,
since erosion of road shoulders or ponding on private
property must be avoided.
    The SCS control structures, the implementation of
the sedimentation control ordinance and limited use of
storm sewering and curbed streets would appreciably
mitigate the impact of urbanization on water quality in
downstream channels and future sediment lakes.  The
above combination of measures provides maximum water
quality protection by utilizing the most practicable
control methods.
                        152

-------
VI. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCAL SHORT-TERM USES OF MAN'S
    ENVIRONMENT AND THE MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT OF
    LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY
    Approval of the proposed project, has been
conditioned on prior assurance of adequate flood
control measures.  The completion of the Soil
Conservation Service's flood control structures as
planned will provide this protection.  Development of
the upper watershed must not be allowed at the expense
of further endangering property and lives in downstream
areas.
    Some owners will gain considerable increases in
property values following placement of this
interceptor.  Persons and companies holding greater
than 100 acres in the upper watershed are listed in
Table 11.
    These persons will realize an increase in property
values and a potential decrease in development costs.
The benefits may or may not be reflected in the
ultimate cost to the buyers.  Nevertheless, the
ultimate cost to the human environment will be reduced
by assuring a maintenance of water quality standards.
                      153

-------
                    TABLE 11



TAX MAP       PARCEL    PROPERTY  OWNERS                 ACREAGE

256
275


276


277
278
295
298


317

318
319



320
321
344
371
372

376


400

427
8
21
24
25
12
9
16
6
3
7
4
6
10
7
15
6
9
10
13
25
15
3
27
16
17
19
1
7
41
1
9
10
Wi 1 1 i am J . Marti n
Earl T« Jones
Ideal Development Corp.
// n n
Truman W« Mill er
n a
Joyce Heinyen & Alice Eve
Ze 1 ma K i ng
E, G » Sp i kes
W. V. Roberts
R. A. Isley
Ethel Sorrel 1 B 1 ackman
S. B. Jones
J . B« Wi 1 k i nson
Junius Sanders
// n
Airpark Industrial Center
n n n
a a n
a n n
Charles Wray
R. E. Shuffler
C i ty of Raleigh
V ac i 1 i os Chi otak i s
Jesse Marcom
Contiental Can Co. Inc.
Raleigh Memorial Park
James Poyner
// //
Ste 1 la Watkins
Dav id Wi 1 1 i ams
Routh D i xon
361
179
76
104
118
31
142
342
104
106
106
247
104
172
189
114
13
61
21
57
127
105
120
121
102
100
135
81
29
173
210
1 1 1
                           154

-------
Page 2
428           I      Bobby Murray                        127
              3      WiIbur L. Combs                     |65
429           4      E. N. Richards                      47
              5      "  "  "                             48
              6      "  "  "                             58
              7      "  "  "                            399
430          19      J. DeWhitte Davis                   163
455          10      J. J. & Hazel R. Williams           126
             21      Omer G. & Betty J. Ferrell           4
             22      "          "        "               52
             23      "          "        "               48
             24      WiI I is Smith, Jr.                   176
456          20      J. W. York & Westhall Inc.         203
458           I      John D. & Thelma Lynch, et-al       150
              2      E. N. Richards, & R. A.Bryan       301
              4      John D. & Thelma Lynch, et-al       133
460           I      Joe W. Barber & Reid S. Towler      |6|
485           2      Willie Lee Edwards                  101
              5      W. L. Edwards, Heirs               201
486           7      Charles B. Upchurch                 100
              8      "       "     "                     40
              9      "       "     "                     88
              5      Southern Pine Mgmt. Co.            104
487           I      J. W. York & Westhall Inc.         422
490        130      Jerry J.  Nowell                    170
514           I      Cleo S. Baucom                     I 17
              2      William B. Upchurch                100
              3      "       "    "                      87
             4      Randolph D.  Mi I Is                  200
515           I-      Wachovia Bank & Trust              250
             6      John W.  & Maggie B. Sears          100
             12      Sidney W.  Stone                    122
                          155

-------
Page 3

516           1      T. V. Martin                         105
              2     Wachovia Bank & Trust                316
520           7     Windsor Park Inc.                    130
543           3     Margaret S.Pointer                   120
              5       "          "                        137
              8     R. S. Barker                         147
544           7     Jack-Hoi Ii  Inc.                      122
             12     Wachovia Bank & Trust                308
570           i      Thurman J.  & Lucille W. Howe I I        100
571           3     W. J. Booth                          195
              9B    "       "                             .93
             14     Five Inc.                             286
             82     "    "                                103
                           156

-------
    The construction of the proposed interceptor has
the potential for enhancing of the human environment
through provision for a maintenance of long-term
environmental quality.  The provision of regional
wastewater collection will allow other environmental
factors to be the developmental constraints; e.g.,
soils, slope, transportation; water supply, etc.
Alternatively, development dependent on other
wastewater disposal methods such as package treatment
plants would provide situations for spotty
uncoordinated growth.
    The project area is located centrally to Raleigh,
Durham, and Chapel Hill.  Research Triangle Park and
the Raleigh-Durham Airport are nereby.  Inevitably,
human use of this area will increase.  This use must be
designed to provide maximum long-term desirability by
orderly planned development.  Provision of recreational
facilities, open space, transportation corridors,
educational facilities, and commercial centers must be
coordinated into a functional community.
    Wake County, Gary, and Raleigh, through land
zoning, control of water and sewer hookups, and various
ordinances, have the necessary tools to coordinate
                        157

-------
development.  Construction of the proposed interceptor
stimulates the need for utilizing these managing
mechanisms.
                         158

-------
VTI.  IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS
      OF RESOURCES
    The proposed project, causes irreversible and
irretrievable expenditure of certain labor, material,
land and community resources.  The construction process
will utilize considerable manpower and will commit
approximately 105,000 linear feet of concrete pipe and
right-of-way.  Development induced by these available
utilities will commit service area land resources by
systematically reducing the number of alternative uses
available.  Evolving land use patterns and economic
restraints will gradually narrow the options.  Further,
community resources must be committed to provide the
services necessary for establishing and maintaining a
functional community.
    The design capacities of the interceptor segments
allow for densities of seven to nine persons per acre.
Even though the placement of this interceptor does not
set the future usage, it supports development up to
this ultimate capacity.  As development proceeds,
certain alternative uses of land may be lost.  Existing
farm, pasture, and open land will experience increasing
developmental pressure.  Higher land values caused by
                          159

-------
the availability of utilities will exert great pressure
on land owners to either commit their land to usages
yielding greater monetary benefits or to sell their
property to others who wish to exploit this natural
resource.  The potential for public acquisition or low
density usage will be greatly reduced following
placement.
    The project commits the local governmental bodies
to provide considerable community services, including
transportation corridors, water supply, schools, fire
and health protection facilities, and recreational and
open space.  Plans for providing these resources must
be devised to ensure availability of these support
services in a timely and cost effective manner.
    The proposed project right-of-way presents an
opportunity to commit land resources for multiple uses.
The Capitol City Greenway concept provides a system
whereby a utility corridor may serve as an open and
recreational space, a floodplain area, and as a
transportation corridor for bicyclists and pedestrians.
In order to fully realize the potential of the multiple
use, plans for incorporating this system must be made
now to ensure minimum costs while maximizing benefits.
                         160

-------
Increased land prices and potential conflicting
developments may preclude implementation of this plan
at a later date.
                        161

-------
                      REFERENCES
American Public Works Association; "Water Pollution
Aspects of Urban Runoff," Water Pollution Control
Research Series, 11012-01/69, January 1969.

"An Appeal"  (Petition); Project Flood Control, July
1973.

Armstrong, T. F., Department of Natural and Economic
Resources; Written Communication, November 23, 1973.

Becker, Burton C. , et al; "Guidelines for Erosion and
Sediment Control Planning and Implementation,"
Environmental Protection Technology Series, EPA-R2-72-
015, August  1972.

Bosch, L.; Written Communication, October 1, 1973.

Caddell, W. F., Jr., State of North Carolina Department
of Transportation and Highway Safety; Written
Communication, December 20,  1973.
Gary City Council and Wake County Board of
Commissioners; "Town and County Water and Sewer Main
Agreement," May 10, 1973.

Consoer, Townsend and Associates and Peirson and
Whitman, Inc.; "Master Plan, Wastewater Treatment and
Collection, Raleigh Metropolitan Area," May 1971.

Corps of Engineers; "Neuse River Basin, North
Carolina," December 31, 1963.

Coughlin, Robert E. and Thomas R. Hammer; "Stream
Quality Preservation Through Planned Urban
Development," Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
Series, EPA-R5-73-019, May 1973.

"Crabtree Creek Watershed Fact Sheet," February 1973.
                        162

-------
Economic Systems Corporation; "Storm Water Pollution
From Urban Land Activity," Water Pollution Control
Research Series, 11034 FKL 07/70, July 1970.

Ellwood, Eric L., North Carolina State University;
Written Communication, January 23, 1974.

Engineer Agency for Resources Inventories;
"Environmental Reconnaissance Inventory of the State of
North Carolina," December 1973.

Environmental Impact Appraisal

Environmental Protection Agency; "The Control of
Pollution From Hydrographic Modifications," 1973.

Flournoy, W. L., Jr.; "A Report to the City Council on
the Benefits, Potential, and Methodology of
Establishing a Greenway System in Raleigh."

Flournoy, W. L., Jr., Wake County Planning Department;
Written communication.

Geological Resources, Inc.; "Statement of Impact of
Proposed Crabtree Creek Sewer Outfall," February 1974.

Giles, Robert; Oral Statement for Hearing, August 9,
1973.

Giles, Robert; Written Communication, April 25, 1973.

Giles, Robert; Written Communication, October 26, 1973.

Gluckman, Stephen J., State of North Carolina
Department of Cultural Resources; Written
Communication, January 29, 1974.

Hardee, Joseph; "Revised Cost Estimates by Wake
Engineering Study Group," August 24, 1973.  Harland,
Bartholomew and Associates; "Long Range Thoroughfare
Plan, Raleigh Urban Area," 1967.

Harton, Thomas G., Department of Natural and Economic
Resources; "The state of Water Resource Management in
North Carolina."
                         163

-------
Hazel, Robert B., State of North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission; Written Communication, December
11, 1973.

Hedgepeth letter

Health, Education and Welfare; "Water resource Study,
Neuse River Basin, North Carolina,11 May 1964.
Howells, David H., UNC Water Resources Research
Institute; Written Communication, December 18, 1973.

Kaiser, Edward J., et al; "Promoting Environmental
Quality Through Urban Planning and Controls,"
Socioeconomic Environmental Studies Series, EPA-600/5-
73-015, February 1974.

Langston, Vann; Oral Statement for Hearing, September
4, 1973.

Leopold, Luna B.; "Hydrology for Urban Land Planning -
A Guidebook on the Hydrologic Effects of Urban Land
Use," Geological Survey Circular 554, 1972.

Matuszeski letter

Mitchell, Thornton W., State of North Carolina
Department of Art, Culture and History; Written
Communication, April 18, 1974.

Moore, Gardner, and Associates, Inc.; "Crabtree Creek
Watershed Water and Sewer Needs 1970-2000," January
1970.

Morgan, Phillip S., Fish and Wildlife Service; Written
Communication.

National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration,
Department of Commerce; "Local Climatological Data,
Raleigh, North Carolina," 1972.

North Carolina Board of Health; "Regulations Governing
Sewage Disposal in Wake County," October 8, 1973.
                         164

-------
North Carolina Board of Water and Air Resources;
"Regulations Governing the Filing of Applications and
Issuance of Permits for Discharges to the Surface
Waters," November 15, 1973.

North Carolina Board of Water and Air Resources;
"Resolution of the North Carolina Board of Water and
Air Resources Establishing a Policy Setting Limitations
on State Clean Water Grants for Wastewater Treatment
Works Projects Approved for Federal Construction
Grants," January 18, 1973.

North Carolina Board of Water and Air Resources; "North
Carolina Water Plan Progress Report, Chapter 25, The
Concept of Basin and Region Reports in the North
Carolina Water Plan" (Draft), May 1971.

North Carolina Environmental Policy Act, July 21, 1971.

North Carolina State Highway Commission; "Thoroughfare
Plan, Wake County, North Carolina," December 1972.

Office of Water and Air Resources; "Interim Water
Quality Management Plan for Sub-Basin 09-02 (Wake
County Area)," September 1972.

Palisoul, Alan, Department of Natural and Economic
Resources; Written Communication, February 4, 1974.

Putnam, Arthur L., U.S. Geological Survey; "Effect of
Urban Development on Floods in the Piedmont Province of
North Carolina," 1972.

Raleigh City Council; "City of Raleigh Flood Plain
Ordinance."

Raleigh City Council; "City of Raleigh Soil Erosion
Ordinance," July 11, 1973.

Raleigh City Council and Wake County Board of
Commissioners; "City and County Water and Sewer Main
Agreement," August 7, 1972.
                        165

-------
"Report of Proceedings at Special Meeting of the North
Carolina State Stream Sanitation Committee," October
18, 1960.

Research Triangle Regional Planning Commission; "A
General Plan for the Development of the Research
Triangle Region as Affected by Waste Disposal and Water
Resources," June 1962.

Research Triangle Regional Planning Commission;
"Research Triangle Region Development Guide," April
1969.

Sartor, James D and Gail B. Boyd; "Water Pollution
Aspects of Street Surface Contaminants," Environmental
Protection Technology Series, EPA-R2-72-081, November
1972.

Scott, John, Wake County Planning Department; Written
Communication, February 24, 1974.

Scott, John, Wake County Planning Department; Written
Communication, July 11, 1974.

"Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973," May 9,
1973.

Smith, Ann Webster, Advisory council on Historic
Preservation; Written Communication, January 8, 1974-

Soil Conservation Service; "An Appraisal of Potentials
for Outdoor Recreational Development, Wake County,
North Carolina," August 1973.

Soil Conservation Service; "Crabtree Creek Watershed
Work Plan," March 1964.

Soil Conservation Service; "Guide for Sediment control
on Construction Sites, North Carolina," March  1973.

Soil Conservation Service; "Soil Surveyr Wake County,
North Carolina," November  1970.

Stem, George L., Soil Conservation  Service; Written
Communication, October 24, 1973,
                         166

-------
Stephenson, Earl F., Carolina Power and Light, Written
Communication, April 12, 1974.

Stewart, Pearson H., Research Triangle Regional
Planning Commission; Request for Certification of
Functional Water/Sewer Planning and Programming,
December 20, 1971.

Thronson, Robert E., Environmental Protection Agency;
"Comparative Costs of Erosion and Sediment Control
Construction Activities," EPA-430/9-73-016, July 1973.

University of Cincinnati, Division of Water Resources;
"Urban Runoff Characteristics," Water Pollution control
Research Series, 11024 DQU 10/70, October 1970.

Wake county Board of Commissioners, "Resolution to
Amend the Wake County Zoning Ordinances," June 3, 1974.

Wake County Board of Commissioners, "Wake County Plan
of Action," June 3, 1974.

Wake Engineering Study Group; "Report on Wake County
Water and Wastewater Engineering study," Vol. 1 and 2.

Wake Engineering Study Group; "Upper Crabtree Creek
Area Wastewater Needs, Wake County, North Carolina,"
June 1971.

Waller, James O., Corps of Engineers; Written
Communication, May 15, 1973.

Waller, James O., Corps of Engineers; Written
Communication, January 29, 1974.

Water and Air Quality Control Committee; "Proposals
Relative to the Upgrading of classification and Water
Quality Standards."

Williams, J. O., Public Works Commission; Written
Communication, July 18, 1974.

Wray, John D., Department of Water and Air Resources;
"Wake County Water Use Study," June 1970.
                        167

-------
         APPENDIX 1



Initial Public Correspondence
          168

-------
                OAK PARK - GLEN FOREST - DEBLYNPARK

                            Civic Association

                             Raleigh, N.C. 27612

                            P.  0. Box 303S7
                                                       April 25, 1973
Mr. Jack Ravan, Regional Administrator
Environmental Protection Agency
li|21 Peachtree Street, N. E.
Atlanta, Georgia  30309
                                Reference'.  EPA Project C3703UU
                                           Wake  County, N. C.
Dear Mr. Ravan:
The Environmental Protection Agency proposes  to  make  a grant of Federal funds
for the construction of waste treatment facilities  in Wake County, including
a large sewer outfall line along Crabtree  Creek  west  of the City of Raleigh.

You have already heard from other citizen  groups in Wake County who have ex-
pressed serious environmental concerns  about  this project as presently proposed.
This Association expresses, on behalf of its  members, these same concerns and
joins with others in strongly urging that  you take  prompt action to ensure the
preparation of an Impact Statement with respect  to  this EPA grant project, in
accord with the National Environmental  Policy Act,

This Association shares with your agency,  with County officials and with others
the desire to see adequate provision for waste treatment facilities throughout
Wake County, to eliminate the continuing and  worsening pollution of our streams.
But the very laudable objective of purer and  cleaner  streams should be achieved
by means which are entirely compatible  with other equally vital environmental
interests.

Your prompt action in requiring the Impact Statement  in accord with applicable
Federal laws and regulations will be greatly  appreciated.

We shall look forward to hearing from 3»-ou  in  the near future.

                                              Sincerely,
                                             Robert E. Giles
                                             President
cc:  Mr. Waverly Akins, Chairman
     Wake County Board of Commissioners

     Mr. Joseph Sanders
     County Coordinator
Mr. John Scott, Director
County Planning Department

Members, County Planning Board
                                       169

-------
                                            ^•312 Oak Park Road
                                            Raleigh, N. C. 2?6l2
                                            April 21, 1973
Mr. Jack Ravan, Regional Administrator
Environmental Protection Agency
1421 Peachtree Street, N. E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30309 (J
Reference;  EPA Project
            Wake County, N. C.

Dear Mr. Ravan ;

By letter dated December 29, 1972, to Mr. Garland H. Jones, County Manager,
Mr. James R, Westlake of your office extended to Wake County an offer of a
Federal grant of $2, W-5 , 750 for the construction of proposed waste treatment
facilities.  This offer was subsequently accepted by the County.

This project includes what has come to be called the Crabtree Creek sewer
outfall line.  Property owners residing in Oak Park whose land would be
traversed by the proposed outfall line became aware of the project in
February of this year when an engineering firm, retained by the County,
conducted surveys across our property,

Enclosed is a copy of a letter dated February 23, 1973, signed by twelve
property owners in Oak Park, addressed to Mr. Joseph Sanders of the Wake
County government.  This letter sets forth the concerns which we have
expressed to the County regarding this proposed project.

We now restate these same concerns to the Environmental Protection Agency,
Furthermore , we feel that these additional points must be stated :

   The proposed sewer outfall will open an additional 29,000 acres of land
   for development.  This additional 29,000 acres in the Crabtree watershed
   lies "upstream" of Oak Park, which is in turn "upstream" from the City
   of Raleigh.  Development of this additional 29,000 acres, and the
   associated increase in runoff and sediment buildup, will greatly
   increase the flood potential of Crabtree Creek.  It should be noted
   that on February 2, 1973, a 3.5 inch rain caused considerable flooding
   and extensive damage along the Crabtree throughout the City of Raleigh.
   The February, 1973, flood was considered to be a once in two to five year
   frequency flood.  Development of the upper Crabtree watershed, which will
   follow the proposed sewer outfall, can only create more flooding for land
   which is already flood-prone and will undoubtedly create a much greater
   flood plain.  That is, land which is not now considered to be in the flood
   plain will eventually flood with every heavy rain unless proper planning
   and timing are exercised .

   It is true that flood control dams are being built along the Crabtree.
   However, the program to build the dams was initiated as the result of
   a flood which occured in Kay, 1957. There were originally 15 dams planned
   along the creek, but due to a number of problems that number has been
   reduced to 11.  Of the 11, only two dams have been completed with a third
   structure to be completed this year.  It is evident that at this rate, the


                                      171

-------
    To Mr. Jack Ravan
- - Page 2
    completion of these 11 dams lies well in the future and it can
    reasonably be pondered if all 11 will ever be completed.  It appears
    quite evident on the other hand that the proposed Crabtree Creek sewer
    outfall would be completed in a much shorter time.  The subsequent
    development of the upper Grabtree watershed would then precede the
    flood control measures.  Furthermore, the limits of the flood plain for
    a once in 100 year frequency flood should be calculated taking into
    account the increased runoff resulting from the development of the
    upper Crabtree watershed.  This additional development will undoubtedly
    require more stringent flood control measures than are currently proposed
    for the 11 dams.  It appears quite obvious that the impact of the proposed
    Crabtree sewer outfall has yet to be brought into focus.

I am writing to you as the Chairman of -^c\e Oak Park property owners group,
to submit our formal, official request that the Environmental Protection
Agency, in conformance with the National Environmental Policy Act, ^4-2 United
States Code, Sections 'i-321 et.seq, and in conformance with Executive Order
No. 1151^, 35 F.R. ^24-7, March 5, 19?0 take prompt action to ensure the
preparation of an Impact Statement with respect to this EPA grant project.
It appears to us that award of this grant is indeed an action on the part of
the Environmental Protection Agency "Significantly affecting the quality of
the human environment;" and therefore, the provisions of the Federal statutes
and of Executive Order No. 1151^ pertaining to an Impact Statement are
clearly applicable.

County officials have been most courteous and helpful to us in furnishing
information on the status of the project.  However, it seems to us that
fundamental issues of marked environmental concern have not been given full
and adequate consideration—in a coordinated manner—by such agencies as  the
Soil Conservation Service, the Corps of Engineers, and the City of Raleigh,
particularly with respect to flood control implications.  In order for the
environmental issues to be fully resolved, we feel that an Impact Statement is
in order.

Your prompt consideration of this request will be greatly appreciated, and
we shall look forward to hearing from you.

                                          Sincerely yours,
Co;  Mr. Waverly Akins, Chairman
     Wake Co. Board of Commissioners

     Mr. Garland H. Jones
     County Manager
                                          Lloyd M. Hedgepeth
                      Mr, Joseph Sanders
                      County Coordinator

                      Mr. John Scott, Director
                      County Planning Department

-------
        SIERRA CLUB  £S  Joseph LeConte  Chapter
        ... To explore, enjoy and preserve the nation's forests, waters, wildlife and -wilderness . . ,
 March 25 *  1973


 Mr.  Jack Ravan,  Regional Administrator
 Environmental Protection Agency
 1^21 Peachtree Street,  N. E.
 Atlanta, Georgia  30309

 RE:   PROJECT EPA C 370  344-
      CRABTREE GREEK SEWER OUTFALL

 Dear Mr. Ravam

 As Mr. Matuszeski suggested in his letter of March 16, 1973,
 I am providing a brief  analysis of the issues we believe need
 to be given special consideration.

 Of great concern to us  is the  capability of Crabtree Creek to
 carry the  quantity and  quality of increased runoff from
 development which will  result  from the installation of this
 line.  The  eleven dams  planned by the  Soil Conservation Service
 will perhaps alleviate  the 'existing flooding when they are
 completed.   There are presently tw© dams completed with a third
 under construction.  Land acquisition  is held up in court pro-
 ceedings.   The Corps of Engineers is studying the flooding
 along the  creek  wilh input from the Crabtree Creek Citizens
 Advisory Committee  as a result of public outcry when SCS
 first published  its watershed  program  of extensive channelization.

 We know  that heavy  development, which this major outfall is
 designed to accommodate,  will  greatly  increase  the amount--arnd
 rate  of  runoff in the watershed above  the City  of Raleigh and
 although the  line does  circumvent Umstead Park,  we believe
 the  valued  laurel and rhododendron in  the Park  will suffer or
 be lost  as  Crabtree Creek adjusts itself to the  increased
 flow and sediment over  a  long  term period.

 Sediment control, floodplain regulation  and area planning,
 though all  are imminent,  are not yet applied to  Wake County.
 There are differences of  opinion as to whether  sediment control
 measures could adequately control upstream developm»nt.
 It may bo that the proposed Wake County  Development Guide's
 relation to development in the  upper watershed will be useful.
 This  is  being prepared  in Mr.  John Scott *s office,  Wake  County
Planning Department.

-------
Mr. Jack Ravan                 -2-                March 25. 1973
We might also mention a decisi©n by a private developer and
the City ©f Raleigh t© install a smaller sewer line through
unique vegetation ©n the s@uth "bank ®f Grabtree Creek directly
paralleling the route ©f the subject sewer ©utfaLl causing
d@ubl@ destruction in that particular area.  The City has chasen
net to provide an envirsnmenta.l impact study for that develop-
ment or that sewer line, although residents of the area requeued
it.

Flooding of Crabtree Creek is a majer problem for which we
believe there is, under existing conditions, an environmentally
s®und remedy.  We believe the environmental impact of thio
praject as planned will be quite extensive and we will appreciate
the opportunity t© be of assistance as you study the matter.

With kind regards, I am

Yours very truly,
Anne Taylor, /Conservation Chairman
Research Triangle Gr©up

421? Laurel Ridge
Raleigh, N. C.  2?6.12
CC» '<• Council on Environmental Quality

-------
   APPENDIX 2




Notice of Intent
       173

-------
NOTICE OF INTENT

     The Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV, and the State
jof North Carolina will prepare an environmental impact statement on
EPA Wastewater Treatment Project C-370344, the Crabtree Creek inter-
ceptor sewer system.

     EPA proposes to contribute $2,445,070 toward a total cost of
$3,561,000 for the project.  The balance will be paid by Wake County,
the applicant, and the State of North Carolina.

     The facilities are to be located in Wake County, west of Raleigh,
North Carolina and include interceptor lines, a force main, and a
pumping station.

     Major issues to be addressed in this'statement include

     •  Flood frequency and magnitude

     •  Water quality and secondary effects

     •  Sedimentation

     •  Wildlife and vegetation

     •  Aesthetics.

     Comments are invited and should be sent to

               David R. Hopkins
               Chief, EIS Branch
               Environmental Protection Agency
               1421 Peachtree Street, NE
               Atlanta, Georgia  30309

     A public hearing will be held following publication of the draft
environmental impact statement.
                                            Jack E.  Ravan
                                            Regional Administrator
                             175

-------
              APPENDIX 3

Inspection Reports  and Data on Existing
      Wastewater Treatment  Plants
                 176

-------
         INSPECTION REPORT
   MOBILE CITY MOBILE HOME PARK
  WASTEWATEP TREATMENT
            WAKE COUNTY
Randall Kornegay, Analytical Chemist
      Central Regional Office
 Office of Water and Air Resources
         October 16, 1972
                    177

-------
     The wastewaLer treatment facilities serving Mobile City Mobile Home
Park near Morrisville (SR 1613)  were inspected on September 6,  1972.

     The treatment facilities consist of a 2J,000 GPD extended  aeration
type, chlorination, and the discharge of the treated effluent into an
unnamed tributary to Crabtree Creek, in the Neuse River Basin.
PERSONNEL

     Mr. J. T. Hobby, Jr., President
     Mr. Cecil Sears, Manager (WTPO I - Grandfather Clause)
OPERATOR CLASSIFICATION FOR TREATMENT FACILITIES

     WTPO I
PERMIT
     Number 561
     Expiration Date:  June 30, 1969
RECEIVING STREAM

     The effluent discharges into an unnamed tributary to Crabtree Creek.
The average discharge of the receiving stream is 0.8 cfs and the 7-day
10-year minimum discharge is 0 cfs.

     The following data was obtained from the. Stream Monitoring Section
of the Office of Water and Air Resources:

Upstream
                      Dissolved
   Date               Oxygen	         Temperature

8-16-72               8.0 mg/1               20°C
8-23-72               7.2 mg/1               24°C
8-29-72               6.',1 rag/1               25°C
9-6-72                8.7 mg/1               19°C
9-13-72               7.0 mfi/1               19°C
                                  178

-------
 Downstream

Date
8-16-72
8-23-72
8-29-72
9-6-72
9-13-72
Dissolved
Oxyjjen 	
3.0 mg/1
5.2 mg/1
3.6 rng/1
8.0 mg/1
5.2 mg/1
                                            Temperature_        pH

                                                 22°C           6.4
                                                 22°C           7.1
                                                 23°C           6.5
                                                 19°C           5.1
                                                 19°C           6.5
     The stream was noted to be turbid and to have a slight sulfide odor
at times, downstream from the treatment facilities.
LABORATORY AND FIELD TESTS

     Effluent

     B.O.D. - 5 day, mg/1     - 10
     Residue: Suspended, mg/1 -  9
              Volatile, mg/1  -  S
              Fixed, mg/1     --  1
     Dissolved Oxygen, mg/1   -  0.0  *
     Temperature, °C          - 23
     Chlorine. Residual, mg/1.  -  1.5
     Flow Rate at 11:30 a.n, , GFD - 185,000
*  Note:  Test was made before ch]orinaticn.
MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION

     1.  Aeration basin has a sufficient amount of air induced, light brown
color, and a musty odor.

     2.  Floating solids were present in the settling basin indicating a
poor return of solids to the aeration basin.

     3.  In general, the proper maintenance and operational procedures are
followed in a satisfactory manner..
                                 179

-------
LABORATORY FACILITIES (Reports and Records)

     Facilities are not available to perform the necessary wastewater
analysis.   Records are not kept and reports are not prepared.
DESIGN CRITERIA FOR PERFORMANCE
     The treatment facilities are expected to effect overall reductions
in pollution as follows:

     B.O.D. - 92%
     Total Solids - 85%
     Suspended Solids - 90%
     Colifo:-m Bacteria - 98"
     Flow - 21,000 GPD
PERFORMANCE

     The treatment facilities are effecting overall reductions in
pollution as follows:

     Using the data obtained from the laboratory section of the Office
of Water and Air Resources and the standard data of raw wastewater (B.O.D.
and Suspended Solids - 250 ing/1) .

     B.O.D. - 96%
     Suspended Solids - 96%
     Flow (estimated) - 36,000 GPD (serving 100 trailers)
Conclusions

     The treatment facilities were performing in accordance with the
conditions of the permit and protecting, water quality standards at the
time .of the inspection.  However, due to the poor return of solids'from
the settling basin to the aeration basin, water quality standards in the
receiving stream could be violated at times.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

     1.,Explore the possibility of constructing a fine solids settling
pond for the effluent.
                                    180

-------
    C.  Office of Water and Air Resources
          Inspection Report oir
    Wastcwater Treatment Facilities
               Date of  Inspection
                 9/27/73
                              County
                             Wake
                                  A. GENERAL INFORMATION'
 1.  PLANT
 (a)   NAME
      (b.) OV.'NL'R
       Gary Wastewater Treatment Plant     Town of Gary
                 (c).  LOCATION
                       Gary
 2.  Description  of__T_rc_atTrent Fad1 it i es (include Design Flow)

         The treatment facilities (secondary type)  providing a capacity of 100,000 GPD,
    consist of primary and secondary settling, low rate filtration with recirculation,
    sludge drying beds,  and the discharge of the treated effluent into Coles Branch, a
    tributary to Crabtree Creek, in the Neuse River Basin.
Location of Discharge:
    Adjacent to Treatment Facilities.
3.  Personnel

    Mr.  Harry Conte - Town Manager
    Mr.  Norman Padget - Director of Public Works
    Mr.  John Smith - Operator
  * Mr,  Carltou Ruth - Operator
    *  Present during inspection
4.   Tr ea tmcn t Fa c 11 i tie s C! 1 a s s i fj c a i i on

       WTPO     I
                        Permit Stratus
                       Number:  T-563.
                       Expiration Date:
                                                                       4-30-76
5.  Rec e iv ing Stream S t a t i;; t i c :;
    Name of Stream:
    River Basin:
    Stream Classification:
    OWAR Sub Baii in No. :
    EPA Sub Has in No.:
Coles Branch
Neuse River
"D"
09-02
03-04-02
          County:      Wake
          I'.S'.cf.S. No.:
          Location:
          7-LViy,  10-Year  Min.  Dis:
Estimated Avi'7'age Discharge:    Q  cfs
          Drainage Area:
Page 1
                                              181

-------
                                       - VI SUM. OBSERVATION - UNIT PROCESS
 RATING COOKS: S  S.ili-.f.i. UM\ , \\  \\n ..iti-
          C ONUI ! ION OH Ar 't 'i ••• 'M '!

     o no UN tv.

     HUIL 1>!NC. b

     PO 'I A HL. r  W A i [ i J _.U ) > I > i ' I M ,

     s -\ h n Y i r \ i ..lit r •a

     o > r> A 'j5 ( s

     STORM WAi L^!- OVt 'U i ("MN".
                                    '
     M A! N T LN AN ^ " O I" C O 1 . L !  . i.U' N
                                     if
                                     H
                                     S —
       k--Periodic- break-downs-has-oecurred-at  Greenwood
        - Forest  and -Stoney Brook-Pump -Stat-i-ons——	—
     DlSPO 5 AL O I" SC n I  I Ml N C,S

     C O M M I N U T O R
       l "T  C M AM H ["
     DISPOSAL OF- GUI "1
     S E T T L_ 1 N C, T A N K 5
     SCUMHFMOVAl
                                              NeecLto ..waste .sludge-.
     oi G n o i i- 1
     G ALJ P HO LiiJ C ! I (i N
     HEATING !~ Ql 11 :-".![
     SI- UDU I". l'UM"i
     D R Y I N G T3 L C '
:j -.11 NT
i

	




"~ '
     VACUUM '"I L T •: K

     INC IN T..H A 1 I On

     DISPOSAL OF SLUOGl
S

s
     LAD CON
 or /
 UJ ••
 \- a
    | — Iriekling Filter    -
    - ... Sec&adary Clarlf ier
                                      U
                                      U
                                      U
         No flow measurements  made.
         No records kept      	
         No lab controls made
         Some  leakage from  seal.	
      LFI'UU U'N I
      ITKFKC 1 I Vi:
      CONT AC I TIMt
      CON T AC 1 TAr. K.
"Page 2
                                                      182

-------
                                       Plant  Performance
-From;  (Month  _XearJ - Jlll^C'lonlh   Ycvir)
                                                           Mix. Flow  .Month   Hiu. Flow  Mor
 Average  Annual _ No data available
 Average  Max.
 Flow  Month
                                                                               __
                                        QjJji.'-J.PJL ..    "IJI0"'"^!  Inllut-nt  Kt" 1'luent   Removal
 Average  Min.
 11 ow Month
Design
                                      Fqu i pmpjj_t_Prc)J^ram
Routine Maintenance	 x
                       _M c qua t e  3 n a d c qu a to	______	Comment s
Records	X	.	No records kept

Spare Parts Inventory	x	

                             Laboratory Tests  (Performed  by Water & Air)

                                         jnfluent  (Grab Sample)           Effluent
B.O.D., 5-day, mg/1                               130                        22
Residue:  Suspended, mg/1                         108                        ^4
          Volatile, mg/1                           52                        22
          Fixed, mg/1                              56                        22
PH                                                7.1                       7.1
Estimated Flow - 60,000 GPD

Design Flow - 100,000 GPD

Comments:
     The treatment facilities  in  general are  operated  and  maintained in a satisfactory
manner.  The system is in need of  sludge removal  and effluent chlorination.  Chlorination
of the effluent is needed due  to  the  low flow of  the receiving stream in a congested area-;
Periodic break-downs have occurred at  the Greenwood Forest and Stoney Brook pump stations
due to mechanical failure.  These  two  pump  stations will be replaced by December 31, 1973
by the new Southeastern Regional  Pump  Station.  The operator of the facilities is not certi-
fied.  The treatment.facilities will  be abandoned when Raleigh's new treatment plant is
placed into operation.

Recommendations?
     1.  Remove sludge.
     2.  Install- chlorination  unit and maintain residual of 1.0 mg/1.
     3.  File request for operator's  certification.
Inspection Performed by:        'Randall Kornegay,'Analytical  Chemist


                                            183
Jage   3

-------
    River Basin
          DATA SUMMARY
OFFICE OF WATER AND AIR RESOURCES
River Miles   Stream Classification
Station Number
NeimP
Station

Name: Coles Branch near
D
Carv. N
.C.
31C

Station Location:   Located on Coles Branch.  0.3 mi.  below point  of  effluent  discharge  from
Tjaj£n of Ca^y 99W385 treatment
Date Col ected
Day
Time
Kscharge
Temp. °C
n n MR/1
D-°' % Sat.






pH
AIL T It-u t0 8*3
AlkuiiuiLy to 4;5
to 4 . 5 Mg
Mgjl
Ms/1
/I
AcidlL* to 8.3 Mg/1
30 min. Settlable
Arsenic Mg/1
c nnn at 20° C
j Day DOD —£$,-(,
Cadmium Mg/1
Solids

Mg7l
Ibs/day

T i ,1 ru,l ,, 0rPanlc MS/1
Inorganic Mg/1
COD Mg7l
Chlorides Mg/l


„, . Hexavalent Mg/1
Total Mg/1
Cobalt Mg/1

Color units
Copper Mg'/l
Cyanide Mg/1
, per/100 MF
•H e
rH H 	
3 £ MPN/lOOml
Flouride Mg/1
Formaldehyde M_g_/l
Grease Mg/1


Fecal
Total
Fecal
Total



Hardness as CaCO-j Mg/1
Iron Mg/1
Lead Mg/1
Mercury ug/1.
Nickel Mg/1
Ammonia
Nitrogen Total Ki
Nitrate
Phenols Mg/1
Phophorous Mg / 1
Total




MB,/!.
cldahl Mg/1
^Nitrite Mg/1



Residue :r~ 	 v ' •,'
. Suspended
B' Dissolved
Resin Acid Soap M«/l
Sulfate Mg/1
Sulf ide M^/l


Synthetic Detergent ME/!
Turbidity units
Zinc MR/1


8-29-73
T
1035

24/75
1.4
16
7.4
0
150




18












6100

























1




















































lant.


























































































































































t































—

























                                                  184

-------
        APPENDIX 4




Woody Vegetation Inventory
           185

-------
     Woody Vegetation of the Umstead Park-Research Triangle Area
Scientific Name
Common Name
Acer negundo L.
Acer rubrum L.
Acer saccharum ssp. floridanum (Chap.) Desm.
Aesculus sylvatica Bartr.
Ailanthus altissima (Mill.) Swingle
Albizia julibrissin Durazz.
Alnus serrulata (Ait.) Willd
Amelanchier arborea (Michx.f.) Fern.
Aralia spinosa L.
Asimina triloba (L.) Dunal

Bacharis halimifolia
Betula nigra L.

Campsis radicans (L.) Seemann
Carpinus caroliniana Walt.
Carya carolinae septentrionalis
Carya cordiformis  (Wang.) K. Koch
Carya glabra  (Mill.) Sweet
Carya ovalis  (Wang.) Sarg.
Carya ovata (Mill.) K. Koch
Carya tomentosa Nutt.
Castanea pumila Mill.
Catalpa bignonioides Walt.
Ceanothus americanus L.
Celtis laevigata Willd.
Cephalanthus  occidentalis L.
Cercis canadensis  L.
Chionanthus virginicus L.
Cornus amomum Miller
Cornus florida L.
Corylus  americana Walter
Corylus  cornuta Marsh.
Crataegus sp.

Diospyros virginiana L.

Euonymus americanus L.
boxelder
red maple
Florida maple
painted buckeye
ailanthus
mimos a
hazel alder
downy serviceberry
Devils-walkingstick
pawpaw

groundsel tree
river birch

trumpet vine
ironwood or American hornbeam
southern shagbark hickory
bitternut hickory
pignut hickory
red hickory
shagbark hickory
mockernut hickory
Allegheny chinkapin
southern catalpa
New Jersey tea
sugarberry
common buttonbush
eastern redbud
fringetree
silky dogwood
flowering dogwood
American hazel
beaked hazel.
hawthorn

common persimmon

strawberry bush
                                186

-------
Scientific Name
Common Name
Fagus grandifolia Dherh.
Fraxinus americana L.
Fraxinus pennsylvanica Marsh.

Gleditsia triacanthos L.

Hamamelis virginiana L.
Hydrangea arborescens L.

Ilex decidua Walt.
Ilex opaca Ait.

Juglans nigra L.
Juniperus virginiana L.

Kalmia latifolia L.

Ligustrum sp.
Lindera benzoin (L.) Blume
Liquidambar styraciflua L.
Liriodendron tulipifera L.
Lonicera japonica Thunberg
Lonicera sempervirens L.

Magnolia tripetala L.
Malus pumila Mill.
Melia azedarach L.
Morus rubra L.
Myrica cerifera

Nyssa sylvatica Marsh.

Ostrya virginiana (Mill.) K. Koch
Oxydendrum arbo"reum (L.) DC

Parthenocissus quinquefolia
Paulownia tomentosa (Thunb.) Sieb. & Zucc.
Plnus echinata Mill.
Pinus serotina Michx.
Pinus taeda L.
Pinus virginiana Mill.
Platanus occidentalis L.
Prunus angustifolia Marsh.
Prunus serotina Ehrh.
Pueraria lobata (Willd.) Ohwi
American beech
white ash
green ash

honeylocust

witch-hazel
wild hydrangea

possumhaw
American holly

black walnut
eastern redcedar

mountain-laurel

privet
spicebush
sweetgum
tulip tree or yellow-poplar
Japanese honeysuckle
trumpet honeysuckle

umbrella magnolia
apple
chinaberry
red mulberry
wax myrtle

black gum or black tupelo

eastern hophornbeam
sourwood

Virginia creeper
royal paulownia
shortleaf pine
pond pine
loblolly pine
Virginia pine
American sycamore
Chickasaw plum
black cherry
Kudzu
                                187

-------
Scientific Name
Common Name
Quercus alba L.
Quercus coccinea Muenchh.
Quercus falcata Michx.
Quercus marilandica Muenchh.
Quercus michauKii Nutt.
Quercus nigra L.
Quercus phellos  L.
Quercus prinus L.
Quercus rubra L.
Quercus stellata Wangenh.
Quercus velutina Lam.
Rhododendron sp.
Rhus copallina L.
Rhus glabra L.
Rhus radicans L.
Robinia pseudoacacia L.
Rosa sp.
Rubus sp.
Salix nigra Marsh.
Sambucus canadensis L.
Sassafras albidum (Nutt.) Nees
Smilax sp.
Sorbus arbutifolia (L.) Heynhold
Staphylea trifolia L.
Styrax grandifolia Ait
Symplocps tinctoria (L.) L'Her.
Tilia heterophylla Vent.
Tsuga canadensis (L.) Carr.
Ulmus alata_ Michx.
Ulmus americana L.
Ulmus rubra Muehl.
Vaccinium arboreum Marsh.
Vaccinium sp.
Vibrunum acerifolium L.
Viburnum dentatum L.
Viburnum prunifolium L.
Viburnum rufidulum Raf.
VItig sp.
white oak
scarlet oak
southern red oak
blackjack oak
swamp chestnut oak
water oak
willow oak
chestnut oak
northern red oak
post oak
black oak

azalea
shining sumac
smooth sumac
poison ivy
black locust
wild rose
blackberry

black willow
American elder
sassafras
greenbriar
red chokeberry
American bladdernut
bigleaf snowbell
common sweetleaf

white basswood
eastern hemlock

winged elm
American elm
slippery elm

tree sparkleberry
blueberry
maple-leaved viburnum
southern arrow-wood
blackhaw
rusty blackhaw
grape
                                 188

-------
     APPENDIX 5




Region J Concurrence
             189

-------
                   THE  RESE/°CH   TRIANGLE   REGIONAL   BANNING  COMMI55I
                         CLARENCE D. JONES, Chairman
                         E. K. POWE, First Vice-Chairman
                         JAMES R. HINKLE, Second Vice-Chairman
                         HARVEY D. BENNETT, Secretary-Treasurer
                                                     ROBERT M. HANES MEMORIAL BUILDING
                                                     P. 0. SOX 122S5
                                                     RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NORTH CAROLINA
                                                     (Area Code 319) 543-8302
                                                     PEARSON H. STEWART, Executive Director
    CHAPEL HILL • ORANGE COUNTY • DURHAM «,DURHAM COUNTY  .  RALEIGH . WAKE COU
                                                                October  31,  1972
            Mr. Waverly  Akins, Chairman
            Wake  County  Commissioners
            P. 0.  Box  266
            Fuquay-Varina,  North Carolina

            Dear  Waverly:
                                                  J U
                                                       DEC 2 01972
                                           RE:   A-95  Regional Review
                                                 Interceptor Outfalls to serve
                                                 the Upper Crabtree Creek  Basin,
                                                 Wake  County (Clearinghouse  No.
                                                 72-0020)

            At  its  regular meeting on October 2^,  1972,  the Research Triangle
            Regional  Planning Commission voted  unanimously to comment as
            follows concerning the.above referenced  project.

            The sewer  interceptor outfall proposed to serve the Upper
            Crabtree  Creek will  follow the Crabtree  upstream to its
            confluence with Richland Creek, up  Richland  Creek to the
            vicinity of  1-kO, then generally westerly to the near
            vicinity of  the Crabtree.  Thereafter, the interceptor will
            follow  the Crabtree  to a point just south and west of the
            Town of Cary.   This  route goes around, rather than through,
            Umstead State  Park.

            The area to  be served is one that holds  promise of
            considerable development in the next several  decades,
            development  of various sorts including residential development
            at urban densities.   The area, centered  among Raleigh, Cary
            and the Research Triangle Park will come under the urbanizing
            influence  of the places named.  Soils  in the Crabtree Basin
            are not suitable to  development based both on septic tanks and
            on site water  supply.  Consequently, adequate wastewater collection
            and transmission lines and, eventually,  an adequate water distribution
            system must  .be provided.
   CHAPEL HILL
ORANGE COUNTY
HOWARD N. LEE
 Mayor
JAMES C. WALLACE
HARVEY D. BENNETT
 County Board Chairman
CLARENCE D. JONES
OSCAR R. EVVING
                                        DURHAM
                                  DURHAM COUNTY
JAMES R. HAWKINS
  Mayor
E, K. POWE
OEWEY S. s'CARBOfJO
  County Board Chairman
W. W. EDWARDS
RALPH P. ROGERS, JR.
                                                                         RALEIGH
                                                                     WAKE COUNTY
THOMAS ORADSHAW
  Mayor
JAMES D. RAY
GEORGE R. GOOQWI1
  County Board Men-
JAMES R, HINKLE
WILLIAM McLAURIN

-------
                                  -2-
The provision of treated water.o.-J th<5 collection, treatment
and disposal of wastewater in this area must involve the use
of Raleigh's water supply and sewerage sys.tems.  Both Raleigh
and Wake County are to be commended for their foresight that
will enable the City and County to grow together.

The benefits and advantages of a' regional utility system are
difficult to over-emphasize.  This proposed interceptor is
•adjudged a most acceptable addition to a Raleigh area regional
uti1i ty system.

                                   Cordially,
                                    -^
                                    -A. t  ,,    __—v

                                   Pearson H.' Stewart
PHS:ns
cc:  Joseph Sanders
     Wi11iam Carper
     Mayor Thomas Bradshaw, Jr.
     Benjamin Seymour

-------
                 APPENDIX 6

Handout Distributed at the Corps of Engineers
   November 28, 1973 Public Meeting on the
               Crabtree Creek Study
                      191

-------
                            Reference Section


     This reference section is provided to furnish you with more
information on the (1) problems and needs, (2)  things which can
be done, (3) study history, and (4) governing directives.

     The explanations of the problems and needs and the things
which can be done are listed by number and color-coded to  correspond
with the listings on pages 3 to 5.   You, the public, are urged  to
review these lists and make further suggestions on the problems and
needs and the things which can be done to solve them.


                   Explanations of Problems and Needs

Flood Damage

     1.  Determine fextent of flooding;  Where will flooding occur? How
         serious can it be?Will future development affect flooding? How
         much effect will the 11 Soil Conservation Service (SCS) structures
         have?  How much flood control is desirable?  (See the  flood-plain
         maps included in this packet.)

     2.  Establish flood-plain regulations:  Such Regulations will facilitate
         future planning by delineating flood-prone areas.  Upcoming  decisions
         by the Raleigh City Council  on flood regulations  will  affect this stui

     3.  Promote 11 SCS structures;  There is lack of public support  for
         these dams which will reduce flooding throughout  the study area.
         While 11 dams are proposed and funded, three have been completed,
         and there has been some difficulty in acquiring easements to build
         the rest.

     4.  Remove old dam ruins (Anderson Drive):  These old ruins cause
         increased flooding just upstream.Adjacent owners support removal.

     5.  Clean up stream:  There is a need for removal  of  minor obstructions
         to flow.Civic groups might take this on as a project.

Water Quality

     6.  Improve water quality:  Should Crabtree Creek be  used  for swimming?
         What is involved to upgrade classification? A class "B" stream is
         suitable for swimming.  Major improvements would  be necessary to
         upgrade the stream from its  present "C" classification to a  "B"
         classification.

     7.  Control  Irosion;  New construction sites and other disturbed areas
         are sources of sediment entering the stream.   What is  the extent
         of this problem, and what  can be done?


                                      193

-------
Open Space And Environment


     8,  Retain Lassiter's Mill  dam:   The  dam has  aesthetic,  recreational,
         and historic value.There 1s strong citizen  support for  its
         retention.

     9.  Establish greenway system;  There 1s citizen  support for  a
         connected park and trail  system along the stream.  There  1s also
         some landowner opposition.  The city 1s  now developing  a  plan.

    10.  Reclaim Nello Teer rock quarry:  State law now requires a
         reclamation plan, and one exists.  There are  questions  about  the
         life of the quarry and whether 1t could  and should be  Included  1n
         future plans for the stream.

    11.  Reclaim cutoffs left by channel changes;  Where the  channel has
         been straightened, there are old  channel  sections  which are cutoff•
         They hold stagnant water and breed mosqultos.

    12.  Provide additional recreation areas;  Should  the full  range of
         recreational activities be considered as possibilities  for the  area?

    13»  Preserve natural areas;  Undeveloped areas, containing  unusual or
         scarce plant or animal life should be preserved.

    14.  Protect environment during project implementation:  During
         possible construction phases, measures should be undertaken
         to protect, all aspects of the environment.

    15,  Protect f 1 s h and wi 1 dl 1fe:  Insure that fish  and wildlife species
         are protected and that their future is secure.

General Considerations

    16.  Rights of landowners:  The property rights of landowners  are
         essential considerations in any plan.

    17<  Land use;  Land use planning for  the stream area should reflect
         consideration for plans in the general area.

    18.  Plans for the stream area will be evaluated for their  economic,
         environmental, and social effects.
                                       194

-------
         Explanations Of Things Which Can Be Done About Flooding


Non-Structural Measures

     1.  Establish flood-plain regulations and flood-Insurance program;
         Flood-plain regulations prohibit building In  the  floodway and
         they permit building elsewhere only If the structures are
         elevated above the flood level  (see No.  5). Communities which
         Intend to establish flood-plain regulations become  eligible to
         participate 1n the subsidized National  Flood  Insurance Program,
         which makes flood Insurance available to existing property
         located 1n the flood plain  where 1t was  not previously.

     2.  Move out flood-threatened bulldings;  Remove  from the flood plain
         any building which is likely to incur major damage  from flooding,
         or act as a dam if left standing.

     3.  Re-develop threatened areas;  Re-plan and re-build  neighborhood
         and commercial districts so they will no longer be  vulnerable  to
         flooding.  This can mean to build them higher, or to move them.

     4.  Build above the flood level;  Build on "stilts",  or fill  the land
         to a safe level.

     5,  Establish an early-warning   plan  for floods;   Provide for notlfi-
         cation of each occupant of  the flood plain when flooding  is
         expected.

     6.  Establish an emergency evacuation plan;   Provide  for temporary
         evacuation of each f1ood-plai n occupant, and  perhaps some
         valuables, when flooding is  expected.

     7,  Manage land to slow down surface flow;   Promote gradual runoff of
         stormwater by techniques such as contour plowing  and surface drainage
         in wide vegetated channels.

     8.  Clean up the stream;  Remove debris, snags and other minor obstructions
         which cause water to back up in the stream channel.

     9.  Do nothing;  Leave things as they are.

Structural  Measures Outside The Study Area

    10.  Provide more temporary stormwater storage; Build more ponds or
         lakes which can hold back some of the floodwater  for release later
         when the stream can take it  without flooding.   The  11 SCS structures
         are examples of this*
                                           195

-------
       Explanations Of Things  Which Can  Be  Done  About  Flooding  (cont.)


      11,  Build small flood-retarding devices throughout watershed:  Use
           suitable street crossings,  park  bridges,  parking  lots,  and similar
           structures, as locations for  small  stormwater storage devices.

      12.  Do nothing;  Do no  structural  work  outside  study  area.

Structural Measures Within The Study Area

      13.  Floodproof bui1dings:   Close  all  openings,  temporarily  or permanently,
           where floodwater can enter, treat walls  to  prevent seepage,  provide
           valves on drains and sewer  pipes, and use waterproof electrical
           wiring.

      14.  Modify bridges:  Make bridges higher  or  longer  so that  floodwaters
           will not back up behind them,

      15.  Modify the channel:  Straighten, widen,  and/or  smooth out critical
           segments of the channel in  various  combinations  of ways so more
           water can be carried within the  channel.

      16.  Divert main channel flood flow;   Build an auxiliary  floodway channel,
           one that is dry except at flood  time, to carry  floodwaters around
           critical stream segments.

      17.  Divert storm drainage:  Intercept all or some of the storm drainage
           entering upstream from critical  segments of the  stream, and  by-pass
           it downstream.

      18.  Build levees:  Build grassy banks along  the stream to contain a
           large flood within  safe limits.

      19.  Build floodwalls:   Build a  narrow concrete  wall  along the stream
           to contain a large  flood within  safe  limits.

      20.  Use Lasslter's Mill dam for flood control;   Re-build flood gates in
           dam to lower flood  elevation  behind dam, or increase temporary
           storage capacity of lake behind  dam.

      21.  Remove Lassiter's Mill dam:  Remove the  obstruction  to  flow  in order
           to lower the flood  level upstream.

      22.  Remove minor obstructions to  flow:  For  example,  remove old  dam
           ruins near Anderson Drive.

      23.  Modify obstructing  pipe lines:  Relocate pipes  and elevated  manholes
           which exist above ground in the  floodway where  they  collect  debris
           and obstruct flow.

      24.  Remove channel fediment;  Remove sandbars and other  deposits where
           excess sediment deposits have reduced natural flow capacity.

      25.  Do nothing;  Do no  structural work  within the study  area.

                                              196

-------
 Explanations Of Things Which Can Be Done About Water Quality
26.  Build sediment traps:  Construct basins, or small ponds, in
     which sediment will accumulate for periodic economical removal
     so that deposition in the stream will be reduced.

27.  Stabi1ize streambanks:  Make streambanks resistant to erosion
     and undercutting to cut off that source of sediment.

28.  Remove channel sediment:  Remove contaminated channel deposits.

29.  Ma i n ta1n mln1mum f 1ow:  Maintaih sufficient flow during dry
     periods for the preservation of stream life and for the dilution
     of contaminants.

30.  Manage land to release minimum pollutants;  Control the release
     of pesticides, fertilizers, and other contaminants from land areas
     within the watershed.

31.  Raise oxygen content of streams;  Increase the amount of dissolved
     oxygen available to fish and other stream!ife by installing
     artificial rapids, or by mechanically bubbling air through the
     water.

32.  Upgrade stream classification:  A higher stream classification will
     limit stream uses which degrade water quality.

33.  Establish sediment, control ordinance:  By limiting the quantity of
     sediment released from land under construction, the quantity of
     sediment which reaches the stream is correspondingly reduced.

34.  Stop untreated waste discharge:  Insure that no inadequately treated
     municipal, commercial, or industrial wastes are released to the
     stream system.

35.  Route urban runoff through vegetated strip;  Create vegetated areas
     near the stream across which storm drainage can flow in thin sheets.
     Natural filtering action will  improve water quality.

36.  Collect worst urban runoff and by-pass downstream:  By routing
     particularly poor-quality surface runoff downstream, some segments
     of the stream can enjoy higher quality.

37.  Collect worst urban runoff and treat it in a plant:  Transfer poor-
     quality surface runoff to a treatment plant, either a conventional
     sewage plant or a special  one  for stormwater.

38.  Collect worst urban runoff and treat it in the interceptor lines:
     Install  treatment devices in the collecting lines to improve water
     quality before release.
                                     197

-------
   Explanations Of Things  Which  Can  Be  Done About Water Quality  (cont.)


    39.   Install  treatment ponds for urban runoff;   Build  treatment  ponds  to
         allow contaminants to settle or  be consumed before  reaching the
         stream.

    40,   Do nothing:   Take no action regarding  water quality.


Explanations Of Things Which Can Be  Done  About  Open Space  And  Environment

    41.   Retain Lassiter's Mill  dam: Preserve  the  dam, but  do not re-build
         the mill.

    42,   Establish greenway trail system; Provide  a system  of parks, nature
         walks, bike trails, and other  trails along the stream.

    43.   Provide additional recreation  activity: Develop  a  variety  of
         facilities in or near the flood  plain  for  recreation.

    44.   Preserve natural  areas:  Select  representative or unusual
         natural areas for preservation in their natural  state.

    45   Beautify the landscape;  Execute a  program of regrading, planting,
         and otherwise enhancing the general  view along  the  stream.

    46.   Operate fish and wildlife programs;  Establish,  stock,  and  maintain
         habitats for fish, birds, and  animals  along the  stream.

    47.   Protect environment during project  implementation;   Reserve and  protect
         resources which are part of final  plan.Manage  any construction
         with minimum environmental  effect.

    48.   Clean the entire stream area:   Remove  refuse and  debris from the
         entire stream area.

    49.   Beautify man-made structures:   Modify  or hide distractive
         structures in the stream area  such  as  sewer lines,  manholes, and
         bridges.

    50.   Promote   beautification program by landowners:   Provide free
         education, coordination, and advice to landowners as to how to
         improve  their streamsfde property.

    51.  Re-claim abandoned facilities;  Re-claim mined-out quarries.
         Restore  or modify cut off stream meanders.  Include otherwise
         unusable properties.

    52.  Do  nothing;  Take no action regarding open space and environmental
         needs.
                                            198

-------
        APPENDIX 7




Wake County Plan of Action
              199

-------
                         RESOLUTION
   TO ADOPT A PLAN OF ACTION TO MANAGE- LAND USES AND PUBLIC
   FACILITIES WITHIN THE UPPER CRABTREE CREEK WATERSHED"FOR
   THE PURPOSE OF MINIMIZING INCREASES (.N FLOOD DAMAGES AND
   SEDIMENTATION
     WHEREAS, the Board of Commissioners of the County of Wake is
cognizant of the fact that recent floods - - of a magnitude which
occur about once every fifteen years - - did cause extensive damage
to properties located along Crabtree Creek downstream from Umstead
State Park; and
     WHEREAS, the Board is aware that conversion of land from rural
to urban-type uses, hereafter referred to as development, causes
increases  in the volume and velocity of surface runoff of rainwater,
because impervious materials such as roofs and pavement reduce
absorption of water into the ground; and
     WHEREAS, the Board is likewise aware that extension of water
and sewerage systems into the upper Crabtree Creek watershed will
encourage and facilitate development of land, especially in view
of the proximity of the watershed to the Research Triangle Park,
the Raleigh-Durham Airport, aesthetic attractiveness of the landscape,
and U, S« Highway  1-40; and
     WHEREAS, the Board has officially adopted the Wake County Water
and Wastewater Facilities Plan which proposes extension of utilities
into the upper watershed as an immediate need; and
     WHEREAS, of the nine  impoundments proposed as flood control
structures in the upper Crabtree Creek watershed, as parts of the
Crab'tree Creek flood control project, only three have been completed,
and unless significant changes are  initiated, the remaining structures
may require up to eight and a half years to build; and
     WHEREAS, the Board realizes that completion of major sewer
outfalls prior to completion of flood control programs may cause
an increase  in flood and erosion intensity as a consequence of
deveIopment,
     NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Commissioners resolves, That a plan
of action  is necessary to coordinate public works and private devel-
opment within the upper Crabtree Creek watershed to provide reasonable
assurance that there will be no increase in the probability of flood
damages or in the extent of sedimentation as a result of development
prompted by sewer-line construction.
"Upper Crabtrce Creek watershed  is here defined as that portion of
 the watershed upstream of Crabtree Valley Mall
                             201

-------
  Resolution

  Page 2

       FURTHER,  the Board of Commissioners  resolve  that  the  plan

  of action shall include the following  elements:

  I.  Complete the geophysical study of  soils,  topography, etc.

      started in September,  1973  by the  Wake  County Planning

      Department to determine:

      A.  Existing drainage  characteristics of  the  land;

      B.  Effects of future  development  related to  increase  in
          surface runoff, flood elevations, and sedimentation .  .  .

          1.  with existing  flood .retention structures,

          2.  with existing  land  use regulations,

          3.  with additional flood retention structures  in  place;

      C.  Maximum amount of  impervious surfaces within the water-
          shed under various conditions-,  such as listed under B.
          above;

      D.  What changes in land use  regulations  will be necessary
          to pre/ent increase in  probability  of flood damage or
          sedimentation.

 II.  Expedite initiation of flood  plain and  erosion control

      regulations in coordination with the  work of  the Raleigh-

      Wake County Land Use Code Committee and the U. S. Environ-

      mental Protection Agency's  proposed "208  planning program,

      in the event the latter goes  into  effect.

III.  Explore possibilities  of new  appi'oaches to reduce  the  time

      required to complete the system of dams and flood  control

      impoundments in the Crabtree  Creek Watershed  Project from

      seven and a half years to a shorter period.

           In any event, expedite completion  of the Project  as

      soon as possible.

 IV,  Apply existing County  land  use regulations and health  regu-

      lations to help minimize development  impact,  to  the extent

      possible,  and to encourage  developers to  employ, voluntarily,

      runoff and sediment control techniques.

  V.  Coordination of sewer  extension timing  with:  (1) Progress

      on the Crabtree Creek  Watershed Project;   (2) cor.Dletion

      of the study described in element  I,  above;  (3)  and enact-

                              202

-------
Page 3




    ment of new land-use regulations, as required, in such manner




    that extension of sewers will not initiate, encourage, or




    facilitate untimely, large-scale development which would




    increase the probability of flood damage or degree of




    sedimentation.




     In adoption of this policy the Wake County Board of Commiss-




ioners take note of and call attention to the fact that its




plan of action cannot, alone, accomplish all desired public




purposes.  Intergovenmental cooperation and coordination will




also be required.




     For example, the role of the County in extension of a




major sewer interceptor into the upper Crabtree Creek basin




is chiefly that of funding.  The Count}' of Wake has entered into




contractual agreements with the City of Raleigh and the Town




of Gary whereby, x\'ithin established geographic bounds, known




as "perimeter areas," those municipali'ties will assume respon-




sibility for installation, maintenance and management of water




and wastewater utility systems.  The County may or may not provide




financial assistance in providing major lines and treatment




facilities, and to that extent the County may play a part in




the timing of capital improvement programs.




     Further, the Commissioners are aware that whereas extension




of a major sewer interceptor into the upper basin of Crabtree




Creek will induce development, it is not likely that s.uch deve-




lopment will begin on a significant scale until contracts for




the project have been awarded and construction i-s under way.




It is reasonable to anticipate that developers may begin grading




and land preparation activities at approximately the same time




work begins on the interceptor.  Erosion, sedimentation and




flooding problems customarily accompany such activities.   However,




the Commissioners intend to have an erosion control ordinance
                               203

-------
RcsoIut ion
Page 4
in effect by that time,
     Completion of the entire interceptor, however, wiii require
up to four and a half years which corresponds to the most optimistic
estimate of the length of time required for completion of the nine
•flood control impoundments upstream of State Road  (649 (Ebenezer Road).
     Four major activities will  be carried on simultaneously within
the upper basin:
     I.  Construction of the Crabtree Creek interceptor;
     2.  Construction of flood control impoundents;
     3»  Private land development dependent upon public sewerage
         facilities (the interceptor);
     4«  Private land development dependent upon private sewage
         treatment facilities.
     Elements of the plan of action out-lined above, must be applied
with proper timing in order to be most effective.  The Commissioners
estimate the foI lowing sequence of activities and events governmental
and private, which may affect flood damage probability; the kind of
problems that may result; and the action to be taken by the Com-
missioners to minimize undesirable consequences.
                            YEAR 1974
Governmental activities and events;
     I.  County:  Completion, Element I  - - geophysical study of
                  upper Crabtree Creek watershed - - including
                  amendment of Zoning Ordinance to reguI ate.surface
                  coverage of land by impervious materials.
     2,  County:  Preparation of flood plain and erosion control
                  ordinances for adoption either as separate
                  ordinances or for incorporation  into the Zoning
                  Ordinance.  (Element !I) (adoption of erosion
                  control ordinance might be delayed by changes
                  made in State law and policies during the current
                  session of the General  Assembly.')
     3«  County;  (a)  Acceleration of land acquisition for proposed
                       i mpoundments.
                  (b)  Expedite progress on two  impoundments (sites  I
                       and I3)/  one under construction and one for
                       which funds are now available.
                  (c)  Revise  Crabtree Creek Watershed Project in attempt
                       to fund and  schedule simultaneous construction
                       of a I I impoundments - - a crash program - - to
                       effect completion of the project at  least by
                       the middle of  1978 and sooner if-possible.
     4«  Preparation of comprehensive plan and completely revised
          land use code system for County.
     5.  City of Ralojgh;
                  (a)  Construction of new sewage  treatment" pI ant by
                       C.ity of Raleigh.
                  (b)  Construction by City of main  interceptor  from
                       new treatment plant, up Neuse River  and Crabtree
                       Creek, to existing pump i 119  station on Crubtroo
                       Creek where existing outf.ill  along the trc-.ek
                       now terminates.
                                204

-------
Resolution

Page 5
     Completion of these two elements  is  necessary  before 'the. prpposed •

upper basin  interceptor (E.P.A. Project C370344)  can  serve  the area.
"Completion  is scheduled for February,  1976.
     &•  City of Raleigh and Town  of Gary;   Start: o,f l construct ion
         of Cary water storage tank ( I or 2  mi I I i on. .-gal. Ions)  an.d:I ,,
                                              £a>y;j~;r;: l,i to  2 yea,rs
         4rv4*pper Crabtree basin  depends  upon  pubsU-G water
         *j*^0*»hdwater  resources  generally  very  po.ojS,
     7%  Fecter-a-l , r Environmental Protection  Agency^  ^opefu II y,^ aw.ar,d
         of $2.6 million grant, E.P.A.  Project C37t)"344 for Crabtree
         Creek Sewer  Interceptor.

Private Activities;
     I.  Sporadic development within  upper  basin mostly single-family
         dwelling units;  limited  by groundwater resources;
         guhfcatfi I ity  of soi Is for • septic  tanks; -capab Hi ty of -streams
         to receive effluent  from private treatment plants (package
         plants) .
     2,  Submission of petitions  by property owners,  to amend zoning
         map to  permit developments anticipating availability of
         public  water and sewer facilities.
     3.  Some unauthorized  land-disturbing  activities - - grading,
         road building - -  in preparation for  development.

Potential  problems accruing from  private  action;
     In reference to  numbers  immediately  above . • -.
     (I) Some  increase  in surface runoff, erosion,  and sedimentation
         but probably not significant amount in I974.
     (2) Arbitrary rezoning may make  water  and land management much. -
         more difficult  later;
     (3) Land disturbance without proper  authorization may not only
         aggravate  water management  problems  but" a I so tends to
         commit  developers  to projects they may not be able to
         complete under existing  or proposed land use regulations;
         vested  rights may  not  accrue from  their actions.
County action to minimize undesirable consequences;
     In reference to  numbers  above ...
     (I) (a) Strict enforcement of land use regulations.
         (b) Encourage County and State public health agencies
             to  do  likewise with  pub I i c. heal th regulations.
         (c) Encourage strict policy  in reference to j.ssuance of
             permits  for private  treatment  plants (Presently, Crabtree
             Creek and  its  tributaries hcve a capacity to receive
             treated  effluent from a  maximum population of 3,000 at
             3/4 dilution ratio.)  This is  a function of the N. C.
             Office of Water  &  Air Resources.
     (2) App.l i cat ion. of policy  which  would  maintain existing zoning
         unless  petitioner  can  present evidence which demonstrates
         that existing zoning was applied in error or that circumstances
         have so changed since  existing zoning was applied that the
         Ordinance must be  changed in the public interest.  Further,
         that evidence submitted  in support of petition must be more
         than fairly  debatable  in order to  overcome presumption of
         validity of  existing zoning.  Such policy is in keeping with
         basic  legal  principles protecting  the public and private
         interests against  arbitrary,  capricious,  discriminatory,
         conf i scatory,  legislative and discretionary abuse •
                               205

-------
Resolution
Page 6

         (3) Enforcement of existing ordinance  requiring permit
             prior to  land disturbing  activities.

                              YEAR  1975.
Governmental activities and events;
County*  (I) LsiWid us^^rega-itiEfti^nfeicirPteffect  governing .rat io of,>
             tmpenv-K0u=s -mate-ri^a t-s ai^e'a- to  gross  acjresage.vofT.il-aml
             wjth.in the watershed.   These  regu lat iari^I.wi I I i.be ,  ,
             txased upon quantitative data  deterroi nfeds.io the
             geophysical  study ;  Element I  above.   Regulation of
             the  amount of  impervious materials  used in development
             can-  control  surface runoff to the extent that, when
             ail  proposed flood  control  structures of the watershed
             project  are  in  place,  flooding  from a 100-year storm
             would be less than  would occur  in runoff from the  same
                  in  its  natural  condition during a -100-year storm.
             •Without the-complete sys-tem of.  dams  in'-place, -increase  in
             runoff resulting from development may ;b'e controlled  by;

             (a)  regulation  of  amount of  impervious land cover;
             (b)  requiring private,  on-site  retention structures
                  and  landscaping  designed  to retard runoff;  and
             (c)  enforcement of flood plain  and  erosion control
                  ordi nances.
          (2) County;   Accelerated work on  construction of impoundments.
          \3) G i ty-County;  Land acquisition  and 'construction  of
                           inceptor  into upper^ Crabtree  Creek basin.
          (4) Raleigh;
             (a)  Completion  of  sewer interceptor from Crabtree Creek
                  pumping station  to -treatment plant site.
             (b)  Construction of  sewage treatment plant.

          (5) Gary-Raleigh;   Construction of  water main from Raleigh
                             to  Cary  and elevated tank in Cary.
          (6) County-Raleigh; Completion of  comprehensive plans  and
                              revised land use code — new planning
                              system.
          (7) Raleigh-Durham  Airport  Authority;   Construction of  new
              10,000  runway.   (Erosi on and flood retention controls are
              integral  parts  of  the  airport expansion plans.)   FAA
             approval  of environmental impact statement pending.

 Private  activities;
          (I) When the upper  Crabtree Creek basin interceptor becomes  a
             definite, firm  project, considerable development  activity
             will probably start, including  several projects invo 1 v i ng
              100  acres or more.
          (2) Numerous, petitions  to change zoning within the Crabtree
             Creek headwaters area  will probably be filed.

 County action  to  minimize undesirable consequences;

      • In  reference to numbers above:
          (I)  (a)  Land use controls  will be  in effect, ^s outlined
                  above, to control  development characteristic^.
                  Enforcement will be accomplished by means of  a
                  land use code  that  Integrates  and coordinates
                  zoning,;  subdivision regulations, use  of flood
                  plains, erosion and sedimentation regulation,
                  and change in ratio of permeable area  to  i mpcrtiu'-nb I e
                  ground cover-

                                   206

-------
 Resoluti on

 Page 7

              (b) Implementation of land use policies, to the extent
                  possible in keeping with the rights of property
                  owners,  to preclude extensive surface- runoff in
                  any.subbasin prior 'to completion of-adequate public
                  or private' flood retention structures downstream.

              (c) Assignment of construction priorities.to,impoundments
                  dowhst^eain^f aHeas«. !|'?'|£&1 y to develop first.  For
                  example', ass-u-mibg: th;at- the interceptor f.rpm .the
                  vicinity, of Oak Park subdivision,  up Richland Creek
                  to -I nterstate-40 highway, will  be  completed first, it
                  becomes  imperative that flood retention structure
                  number eleven on Richland Creek be completed .as
                  soon  as.possible.   Similarly, during 1975  priorities
                  should be assigned to impoundments downstream of
                  tracts of land known to be "ripe"  for major development,

                                   YEAR 1976

 Gp^er'nm'enta I  activities and events;

      I.   County;   All  land-use controls  described above will be in
                   effect,

      2.   County;   Construction of sewer  interceptor system  proceeding.

      3«   County;   Construction of impoundments in Crabtree  Creek
                   Watershed Project proceeding,  either simultaneously
                   or on priority basis in coordination with completion
                   of segments of the interceptor.

      4«   Raleigh:  New  sewage treatment plant completed.  Sewage, from
                   connections in the Crabtree Creek- basin may then
                   proceed by gravity flow to the new treatment plant.

      5. Cary-Raleigh; .Completion o*" water main from Raleigh'to Cary
                       and completion of  Gary's elevated storage tank.
      6. Raleigh-Durham  A irport Authority:  Construction of 10,000 runway.

      7« .TV* i ang-ie-J Counci I  of Governments;  Probable  completion of

                   of Areawide Waste  Treatment Management Planning
                   Process plan,  E.P.A. "208" project.
 Private Activities;

      I. Probable  acceleration of development anticipating public
        water supply from Cary and  eventual  availability of public
        sewerage  faci!ities.

 Governmental action  to  minimize  undersirable consequences;

      In reference  to numbers  above:

          (l) Application  of  policies  and  land use reguI ations_ out Iined
             above,  all ordinances  strictly  enforced,  and coordination
             of public  and private  activities  to  effect water management
             through the  mechan i sm'.of  a comprehensive  planning program
             and day-to-day  operational decisions.
                                 \
 Municipal activities to minimize undesirable consequences;

     WHEREAS; the County Commissioners  can  not  speak  for the  City of

 Raleigh or Town of Cary,  it  is appropriate  in  this plan of  action to

 mention that, both municipalities may play  a  leading  role by  using

 sewer and water extension policies to  holp guide  development into

the proper places at the  proper time.  Officials  are  aware  of the need,

 Intergovernmental coordination  is expected.

                            207

-------
jReso lut ion
Page  8*

                        YEARS  1977  through  1978
Governmental  activities and  events;

      I,  County;  Construction  of sewer • interceptor  and flood retention
                  structure  systems  will  proceed simultaneously.
                  Both, according to, opt imistic  estimates,  may be
                  completed  during  1978.
     2. Ra I e igh-Durham A^r-typ'r^t" Au'-tfobyfcj'ty>   Extensive .'construction
                   act i vi ty> rlQted'itoi~A-i rport  expansion program,
                   i nvo 1 v "fwig^Ve"Ty.  I a'rge'-sea le earthrrioving.   (The
                   Authority  has' recog-ni-zed,  in advance,  potential
                   runoff  and sedimentation  problems and have included
                   on-site- control  and  abatement techniques in engineer-
                   ing plans.)

     3« Imp lementat iorv_" of- t*evi-sed rcomprehensi ve plans  and regulations
        steming from the  work- -of -the- Raleigh-Wake County Land Us-e
        Code Committee.   The problem of  possible increase  in flooding
        resulting  from sewer- induced development will  likely be reduced
        "through the application of a comprehensive plan-based system
        of land use regulations as part  of  a code that  also includes
        articles of procedure designed to provide maximum  resistance
        to attempts to change plans or amend regulations in an arbitrary,
        capricious, discriminatory, or otherwise unlawful  manner.
Private activities

     Development of land  within the watershed  will  likely  proceed
     apace.  Completion of major  development such as  industrial parks,
     planned communities,  shopping centers, etc. will coincide
     approximately with completion of  the  interceptor and  impoundment
     systems.

Governmental activities to minimize tinders irab I e consequence^:

     I, Continued  application of  policies -and  regulations  outlined
        above.

                             SUMMARY
     WHEREAS, this plan of action acknowledges that private development

of the upper Crabtree Creek  watershed  will  be  stimulated by the prospect
of public sewage facilities,  and  that  such  development  would, if un-
controlled/increase the amount of flood  damage both within the headwaters
and downstream, the Commissioners  feel  reasonably assured that such a
threat to the public health, -safety, and general welfare need not,
and probably will  not, mater i a I ize '• ffth is plan of action is consci-
entiously carried  out,

     THEREFORE, the Board of Commissioners  of  Wake County  do hereby

declare by resolution its intent  to administer this plan of action

to the best of its ability.

     The date of effect of this resolution  shall be from and after

its passage.
                             208

-------
                         ElSOJr. MI1.O
              t:-.c  Wake  Cc'.:r.ty  Board cf Ccrr/i ! r,<: : cr.ers recognises a
greet  need to control soil  erosion ana sedimentation and those
activities which result in  erosion and sedimentation within Wake
County;  and
     WHEREAS, the  Wake  County  Board of Coitrn i ss i oners recognizes tht-
need to  establish  a  county-wide  erosion and sediment control program;
and
     WHEREAS, the  North Carolina General  Assembly through Chapter 392
of the Session  La"s  of  North Carolina,  1973,  and other laws, has
delegated to locV governments the power  to control  such erosion ard
sedimentation;  ai.cl
     WHEREAS, the  WaKe  County  Board of Commissioners desires to exercise
such power.
     NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT  RESOLVED BY THE  WAKE  COUNTY BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS,  that  the following ordinance be adopted:
         AN ORDINANCE TO PROVIDE  FOR THE CONTROL  OF SOIL EROSION
                            AND SEDIMENTATION
                               ARTICLE I
     Section I.  TITLE
     This ordinance  shall be known and may  be  cited  as the Erosion
and Sedimentation  Control Ordinance of V'ake County.
     Section 2.  JURISDICTION-
     (l)  This  ordinance is hereby adopted  by  the Wake County Board
of Commissioners to  apply to all  of Wake  County  outside  of the in-
corporated areas and their  extraterritorial  jurisdiction.   However,
this ordinance  may apply within  the incorporated areas or the extra-
territorial jurisdictionaI  areas of municipal ities upon  proper re-
solution by the governing bodies of the respective municipalities  and
agreement by the Wake County Board of  Commissioners.
     (2)  Notwithstanding the  provisions  of G.S.  N3A-56(4)  and
Article  II, Section  3(2)(d) of this ordinance, the Wake  County Board
of Commissioners hereby declares the  intent that  all  the  departments
and agencies of the  County  and its contractors and subcontractors  shall
comply with the regulations of this ordinance  where  they  are more
restrictive than similar regulations of the North  Carolina Sediment
Control Commission.
     (3)  The Wake County Department of Natural  Resources  shall  provide
assistance to the Wake  Soil  and  Water  Conservation District  to review
and comment on  sediment control  plans.
                                209

-------
     (4)  The W?kij County Department of Natural I  Resources  shal I  be
responsible for approval, issuance of permits related to,  and  enforce-
ment of  sediment control plans.
     (5)  The Director of the Wake County Department of  Natural  Resources
shall annually furnish the Wake County Boarc' of  Commissioners  personnel,
equipment, space, ;.nd budget needs to  implement  this program.
                                ARTICLE  II
     Section I.   PURPOSES
     This ordinance  is adopted for the purposes  of:
     (I)  reguI atitg land-disturbing activn ies  to  prevent unnecessary
          soil  erosion and sedimentation  in order that water pollution
          from sedimentation may be control'ed,  that the obstruction
          of natural and artificial drainage ways may be prevented,
          and that flooding may be  inhibited.
     (2)  establishing procedures through which  these purposes can  be
          fulfiI led.
     Section 2.   DEFINITIONS
     As used in this ordinance, unless the  context  clearly indicates
otherwise, the following definitions apply:
     (I)  Active  Construction - means  activities which contribute
          d i rectIy to the completion of facilities  contempIated or
          shown on the construction plans.
     (2)  Adequate Erosion Control Measure, Structure, or  Device -  means
          one which  controls the soil  material within the  land area under
          responsible control of the person conducting the land-disturbing
          act i v ity.
     (3)  Buffer  Zone - means the strip of  land  adjacent to a  lake  or
          natural watercourse, the width of which  is measured  from  the
          edge of the water to the nearest  edge  of  the disturbed area,
          with the twenty-five percent  (25%) of  the strip  nearer the
          land-disturbing activity containing  natural or artificial  means
          of confining visible siltation.
     (4)  D i st r i ct - means the Wake Soil  and Water  Conservation District
          created pursuant to Chapter  139,  North Carolina  General Statutes.
     (5)  Eros i on -  means the wearing  away  of  land  surface by  the action
          of wind, water, gravity, or  any  combination thereof.
     (6)  Ground  Cover - means  any  natural  vegetative  growth or other
          material which renders the soil  surface  stable against acccIei
          ated erosion.
                                    210

-------
                              •3-
 (/)  .k'?JiP_ J^J\ _ jja1?-u-r-.a i Wi.tercou r sc  - means  any  stream,  rivet-,  brook,
      swamp, so ind, boy, creek,  run, breach, canal,  waterway,  estuary,
      and any reservoir, lake or pond,  natural  or  impounded,  in which
      sediment may be moved or carried  in  suspension,  and which could
      be damaged by accumulation of sediment.
 (8)  Land-distjrbing Activity - means  any use  of  the  land by an/
      person ii. residential,  industrial, educational,  institutio la I,
      or commeicial development, highway and road  construction and
      maintenance that results in  a change in  the  natural  cover or
      topograpl y and that may cause or  contribute  to sedimentati )n.
 (9)  Person Engaged in or Conducting  Land-disturbing  Activity - means
      the individual, partnership, firm, association,  joint  ventjre,
      public or private corporation, trust, estate,  commission,  board,
      public or private institution, utility,  cooperative,  interstate
      body, or other legal  entity, financially  responsible for the
      land-disturbing activity.
(10)  PI an - means erosion and sedimentation control plan.
(II)  Protective Cover - means natural  or  artificial ground  cover
      of grass,  trees,  shrubs, or  mulch sufficient to  reduce  erosion
      potential  to within allowable limits.
(12)  Sed iment - means solid particulate matter, both  mineral  and
      organic, that has been or  is being transported by water, air,
      gravity, or  ice from^its site of  origin.

(13)  Si 11 at i on - means sediment resulting from accelerated erosion
      which is settleable or removable  by  properly designed,  con-
      structed,  and maintained control  measures; and which has
      been transported from  its  point  of origin within the site
      of a  land-disturbing activity; and which  has been deposited,
      or is in suspension in water.
(14)  Tract - means all contiguous land and bodies of  water in
      one ownership, or contiguous land and bodies of  water in
      diverse ownership being developed as a unit, although not
      necessarily all at one time.
(15)  Uncovered - means the removal of  ground  cover  from,  on,  or
      above the soiI surface.
(16)  Undertaken - means the  initiating of any  activity,  or phase
      of activity, which results or wi I I result in a change  in
      the ground cover or topography of a  tract of I and.
(17)  Work i ng Days - means days  exclusive  of Saturday  or  Sunday
      during which weather conditions  permit  land-disturbing
      activity to be undertaken.
                              211

-------
                                -Bi-

     section 3,  .SCOPE. _AND_jEXjC_LLl_Sj.p_N_S
     (!)  This ordinance sh<=>tl apply to  I e»nH-d i sturb i ng  activities
undertaken by any person, with the  Following  exclusions:
          (a)  Land-disturbing activities  undertaken  on  agricultural
               land for the production oF  p ants  and  animals useful  to
               man but not  limited  to:   forjge  and  sod crops,  grain
               and feed crops, tobacco,  cotton,  and peanuts;  dairy
               anirials and  dairy products; poultry  and poultry products;
               livestock,  including the  bre3ding  and  grazing of any
               or nlI  such  animals; bees anJ  apiary products;  and fur animals.
          (b)  Land-disturbing activities  undertaken  on  forest land
               for the production and harvesting  of timber and timber
               products.
          (c)  Land-disturbing activities  undertaken  by  persons who
               are otherwise  regulated by  the provisions of G.S.  74-46
               through G.S. 74-68,  the Mining Act of  1971.
     (2)  This ordinance shall not  apply to the following land-disturbing
activities, as such activities are  subject to the control of the North
Carolina Sediment Control  Commission.
          (a)  Land-disturbing activities  conducted by the State.
          (b)  Land-disturbing activities  conducted by the United States'.
          (c)  Land-disturbing activities  conducted by persons hevir.g
               the power of eminent domain.
          (d)  Land-disturbing activities  conducted by iocal  governments.
          (e)  Land-disturbing activities  licensed by the State or the
               United States.
          (f)  Land-disturbing activities  funded in whole or in part
               by the State or the  United States.
     Section 4.  PERMITS
     Except as provided  in  Section  3  herein,  it shall  be unlawful to
conduct any-land-disturbing activity  without  first obtaining a permit
from the County.  Permits  may be obtained upon submitting a soil erosion
and sedimentation control  plan and  the  application, fees and security
deposit prescribed by the  County and  by  obtaining approval of the
proposed project.  No permit  shall  be  issued  until  such  time as the
County  is assured that the  proposed land-disturbing activity will be
carried out  in accordance  with the  proposed  soil  and  sedimentation
control plan.  A certificate  of preliminary  erosion control compliance
shall be  issued,  indicating that  initial soil erosion and sedimentation
controls have  been  installed. This certificate shall be  issued prior
to the  approval by the County of an application for building construction
 in the  County,  in any of the  incorporated areas of the County, or extra-
territorial  jurisdictionaI  areas of the  municipalities oF the County
subject to  this ordinance.
                                212

-------
     Ko ,-iormit shall be reC|Uired  for  i lu:  Co li ow i r,(j  land-disturbing
act i\ i fc i cs«
     (I)   Those done for the purpose  of fig it ing  fires,
     (2)   The stockpiling of raw  or processed  sand,  stone,  or gravel
          in concrete, asphalt, and material  processing  plants and
          storage yards, provided that sedi-'nerit control  measures hav«
          been utiI  ized to protect against  off-site  damages.
     (3)   Land-disturbing activities  at any one time,  on any  one trf.ct,
          by any person or persons that do  not exceed  one  acre in
          surface area.
     Section 5.  APPROVAL OF P_LAN_S
     (I)   A copy of each final soil erosion and sedimentation control
          plan shall be submitted to  the Wake  Soil  and Water
          Conservation District at the same time  a  copy  thereof is
          submitted to the Wake County Department of Natural  Resources
          for approval.  The Wake Soil and Water  Conservation District,
          within 20 days after receipt of the proposed plan,  or within
          such additional  times as may be prescribed by  the Board of
          County Commissioners, shall review the  soil  erosion and
          sedimentation control plan  and submit  its  comments  and
          recommendations to the Wake County Department  of Natural
          Resources.  Failure of the  Soil  and Water  Conservation
          District  to submit its comments and recommendations within
          20 days or within the prescribed additional  time shall  not
          delay final  action on the proposed plan by the Wake County
          Department of Natural Resources,
     (2)   The Wake  County Department  of Natural Resources, within 30
          days of receipt  of each soil erosion and sedimentation control
          plan submitted to it, shall notify the person  submitting the
          plan that  it has been approved,  approved with  modifications,
          op disapproved.   No plan shall  be approved unless and until
          it complies w i th all  appI i cab Ie State and County reguI at i ons
          for soil  erosion and sediment control.
     (3)   AppIication for  amendment of an erosion control plan in
          written and/or graphic form may be made at any time under the
          same conditions  as the original  application.   Until  such  time
          as said amendment is approved by the Wake County Department
          of Natural Resources, the land-disturbing activities shall  not
          procf.ed except in accordance with the erosion  control  plan  as
          originally approved.
                                    213

-------
             6,    :N3PECTiONS
          Agents and officials oP the County may inspect the sites
          of land-disturbing activities for which permits have been
          issued ai  reasonable times to determine whether the
          activities are being conducted in accordance with the
          plan anc to determine whether the measures required  in
          the plan are effective in control!ing erosion and sediment
          resulting from land-disturbing activities.  Notice of the
          County's- right to make such inspections shall be  included
          in the certificate of the plan's approval.
     (2)   If, through inspection, it is determined that a person
          engaged in land-disturbing activities has failed to
          comply with the approved plan, a notice to comply shalI
          be served upon that person by registered mail.  The  notice
          shalI  set forth the measures necessary to achieve compl  iance
          with the plan and shall state the time within which  such
          measures must be completed.   If the person engaged  in the
          land-disturbing activities fails to comply within the time
          specified, he shall be deemed in violation of this ordinance.
     Section 7«    FEES
     The fees charged by the County for the administration  and en-
forcement of this ordinance sKall be prescribed by the Wake County
Board of Commissioners.
     Section 8.    APPEALS,
     (I)  The disapproval or modification of any proposed erosion
          control plan by the County shall entitle the person  submitting
          the plan to a public hearing before the Director  of  the Wake
          County Department of Natural Resources if such person submits
          written demand for a hearing within 15 days  after receipt of
          written notice of the disapproval or modification.
     (2)  Hearings held pursuant to this Section 8(1)  above shall be
          conducted within 30 days after receipt of the request and
          notice of such hearing shall be published at  least  once,
           in a  local  newspaper  not  less than seven  (7)  days before  the
           date  of the  hearing,
     (3)   The Director  shall  make  his  recommendation  to the Commissicners
           of Wake County  within  five  days  after  the  date  of the hearing.
     (4)   The Wake  County Commissioners shall  render  its  decision on  any
           erosion control  plan  for  which  a  hearing  is requested  at  one
           of its next  two regular  meetings.
                                    214

-------
                             ~7 -
     All unco/erec! areas existing on the effective date of this
     ordinance shall  be provided with protective cover within
     90 days  after the effective date >f this ordinance unless
     an extension of time is granted.
(2)  All areas uncovered subsequent t... the effective date of
     this ordinance shall be provided with protective cover
     within 60 days after commencement of land-disturbing
     activities,  unless a longer or shorter time is specified
     in the permit or unless an extension of time  is granted,
     provided that in no instance shu!1  the establishment of
     protective cover be delayed more than 30 working days/
     after the completion of any disturbance of land upon which
     further active construction is not being undertaken.
(3)  Upon the identification and illustration by the County
     Commissioners of those portions of each property adjoining
     or tangent to a natural watercourse or to a publ ic water
     impoundment  area, upon which building is proposed, required
     by G.S.  II3A-57(I) to remain as buffer zones,  such buffers
     shalI  be provided of such length, width, and design to
     control, detain, or confine sedimentation consistent wiih
     the provisions of this ordinance.  This standard shall not
     be construed to require the dedication of such buffer zones
     to public use, without due process of law,  including just
     compensat i on.
(4)  After the completion of construction on each  land-disturbing
     site to which this ordinance applies, provisions shall be
     made,  on or  off the site,  for the impoundment, during storms,
     of that quantity of the natural liquid runoff from the site
     which is equal to the calculated difference between the
     amount of runoff which would result from a two (2) year
     frequency storm on that land if it were zoned and developed
     for residential  .purposes at a density no greater than four
     (4) families per acre and that which would result from a
     storm of the same frequency on the same land,  if developed
     to the degree for which it is actually zoned;  provided, no
     impoundment  shalI  be required of runoff from sites developed
     for residential  purposes at a density of four  (4) families
     per acre or  less;  provided further,  part of the space,
     including parking areas, otherwise required by law to be
     left open, may be jointly used to satisfy the  impounding
                             215

-------
     rcqu i rc'iiionts herein;  pro\ idcu still furtlicr, this stcr.uorc!
     shalI  not apply to sites oi  five (5) dcres or  less  in s i-o
     unless such site is part of  a larger subdivision or other
     project area which, when fuI ly de/eloped, wi I I  generate  a
     more significant amount of runoff.   All calculations and
     plans  for impoundment structures and areas must receive
     the approval of the Wake County Department of  Natural
     Resources before any building permit may be  issued.
(5)   During construction,  the planned soil erosion  and sedi-
     mentation control practices  and devices shalI  be employed
     to restrict sedimentation soil losses from each land-
     disturbing site  in accordance with plans approved by the
     Wake County Department of Natural  Resources.   Such  erosio'i
     and sedimentation control  measures, structures, and devices
     shall  be so planned,  designed, and constructed as to provide
     control from the calculated peak rates of runoff from a
     ten-year frequency storm.   Runoff  rates shall  be calculated
     using the procedures in the USDA,  Soil Conservation Service's
     "National Engineering Field Manual  for Conservation
     Practices", or other acceptable calculation  procedures.
     Runoff computations shall  be based on rainfall data published
     by the National Weather Service for the area.
(6)   FoI lowing the completion of construction, provisions shall
     be made to  limit calculated, anticipated annual soil  losses
     from unpaved areas of developed sites to two (2) tons per
     acre or  less per year and not to exceed four (4) tons per
     acre from any unpaved sloping area following the completion
     of construction  using the Universal Soil Loss  Prediction
     Equation with the  adopted standard factors  as  a guide.
(7)   All soil erosion and sedimentation control  plans and
     measures shall conform to the minimum  applicable standards
     specified  in the Wake Soil and Water  Conservation  District's
     Standards and Specifications  for Soil  Erosion  and  Sediment
     Control  in  Urbanizing Areas as adopted by the  Wake  County
     Board  of Commissioners  and amended and supplemented from
     time to  time.  A copy of the  current  Standards and  Speci-
     fications shall  remain, at all times,  on file  in the  office
     of the Director  of the  Wake County Department  of Natural
     Resources.
(8)  The angle for  graded slopes and  fills shall  be no  greater than
     the angle which  can be  retained  by vegetative  cover or
     other  adequate erosion  control devices or  structures.    in
     any event,  slopes  left  exposed will,  within 30 working  days
                               216

-------
     of co'np I ei. i on o1  ony phase  of  grading,  be  planted or otliurw i r-e
     provided with ground cover,  devices,  or structures sufficient
     to restrain erosion.
Section 10.   f EN_A_LT j_E_S
A,   Civil Pena11 i es
(I)  Any person who violates  any of the  provisions of this
     ordinance, or rule or order adopted or  issued pursuant to
     this ord:nance, or who  initiates  or continues a land-
     disturbing activity for  which  an  erosion control  plan is
     required except  in accordance  with  the  terms, conditions,
     and provisions of an approved  plan,  shalI  be  subject to
     a civii penalty of not more than  $100.   No penalty shall
     be assessed until the person alleged  to be in viol at ion
     has been notified of the violation.   Each  day of a con-
     tinuing violation shall  constitute  a  separate violation,
(2)  The Wake County Board of Commissioners  shalI  determine the
     amount of the civil penalty to be assessed under this
     subsection and shalI make written demand for  payment upon
     the person in violation, and shall  set  forth  in detail  a
     description of the violation for  which  the penalty has
     been imposed.   In determining  the amount of the penalty
     the Commissioners shall  consider  the  degree and extent of
     harm caused by the violation and  the  cost  of  rectifying
     the damage.  If the payment is not  received or equitable
     settlement reached within 60 days after demand for payment
     is made,  the matter shal1 be referred to the  County Attorney
     for institution of a civil  action in  the name of the County,
     in the appropriate division of the  General  Court  of Justice
     for recovery of the penalty.   Any sums  recovered shall  be
     used to carry out the purposes and  requirements of this
     ord i nance.
B.   Criminal  Penalties
     Any person who knowingly or  willfully viol ates any provision
     of this ordinance, or rule  or  order adopted or issued
     pursuant  to th i s ord i nance,  or who  know i ngIy  or willfuI Iy
     initiates or continues a land-disturbing activity for
     which an  erosion control plan  is  required  except  in accordance
     with  the  terms, conditions,  and provisions of an  approved
     plan,  shall be guilty of a  misdemeanor  punishable by
     impr isonment not to exceed  90  days,  or  by  a fine  not to
     exceed :iO,000,  or by both,  in  tne discretion  of the court.
                              217

-------
Sec I i <,r, I I .
(l)  Whenever the Commi ^sioners of Wake  County  have  cciuse ro
     believe that any person  is violetint;  or  threaten i ny to
     violate this ordinance or any rule  or  ord'-M-  adopted or
     issued pursuant to this  ordinance,  or  any  term, condition,
     or provision of an approved erosion control  plan,  they may,
     either before or after the institution of  any other action
     or proceeding authorized by this ordinance,  institute a
     civil  acbion in the name of the County for injunctive
     relief to restrain the violation or threatened  violation.
     The action shalI  be brought in the  Superior  Court  of
     Wake County.
(2)  Upon determination by a  court that  an  alleged violation
     is occurring or is threatened,  it shall  enter such orders
     or judgments as are necessary to abate the violation or
     to prevent the threatened violation.   The  institution of
     an action for  injunctive relief under  this section shall
     not relieve any party to such proceeding from any  civil
     or criminal penalty prescribed for  violations of this
     ord i nance.
Section 12.    CIVIL RELIEF
(I)  Any person  injured by a  violation of this  ordinance,  or
     of any rule, regulation, or order duly adopted  by  the
     Commissioners of Wake County, or by the  initiation or
     continuation of a  land-disturbing activity for  which an
     erosion control plan  is  required other than  in  accordance
     with the terms, conditions,•and provisions of an  approved
     plan,  may bring a  civil  action against the person  alleged
     to be in violation.  The action may seek:
          a.   Injunctive re I ief;
          b.  An order  enforcing the ordinance  or rule,
              regulation, order, or erosion control  plan
              v i oIated;  or
          c.  Damages caused  by the violation;  or
          d.  Both damages and  injunctive  relief; or
          e.  Both damages and an enforcement order.
     If the amount of actual  damages as  found by  tne court or
     jury in suits brought under this Section 12  is  five hundred
     dollars ($500) or  less,  the plaintiff  shall  be  awarded
     double the  amount  of  actual damages.   If the amount of
     actual damages as  found  by the court  or  jury is greater
     than fiv~ hundred  dollars  ($5C'?)f the  ^ I a i. .tiff shall
                               218

-------
          pocL'i\i:  deiiuKjcs  in  t!u>.  di.icunt  .so IOUP.CI.
     (2)  Civil  action  under  til i s Section  12 shall  be brought in
          the  Superior  Court  of  Wake  County,   The  court, in  issuing
          any  fincjl order  in  any  action  brought pursuant to this
          Sect i on , I 2 may award costs  of  I i t i gat i on  ( i nc I ud i ng
          reasonable attorney and expert witness  fees) to any party,
          whenever it determines  that such an award is appropriate.
          The  court may,  if a temporary  restraining order or
          preI i m i nary  i njunct ion  is  sought,  require the filing oF
          a bond or equivalent security,  t'r e amount of such  bond
          or security to be determined by  the court.
     (3)  Nothing  in this  Section 12  shall  restrict any right which
          any  person (or class of persons) fnay have under any statuie
          or common law to seek  injunctive or other relief,

                                 ARTICLE  I I 1
     Sect i on  I.  Noth i ng  i n th i s  ord i nance shaI I  restr i ct any r i ght
which any person or class  of  persons  may have under any statute or
common  law to  seek injunctive or  other rel ief.
     Section 2.  If any provision of  this  ordinance or the application
thereof to any person or circumstance is declared to be inval id,  such
invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of the
ordinance which can be  given  effect without  the inval id provision or
appIication, and to this end  the  provisions  of this ordinance are
declared to be severable.
     Section 3.  This ordinance  shalI  become effective on and after
12:01 A.M., October I,  1974.
     Adopted th i s_3rd___day of	June	,  1974.
                                    219

-------
               APPENDIX 8

Raleigh Resolution to Establish a Policy
  for the Extension of City Facilities
                      221

-------
     A PETITION FOR REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES IMPOSED UPON THE CITIZENS OF WAKE COUNTY.
    Many homeowners and many small business establishments have suffered crushing damage from the
    flooding of Crabtree Creek and other streams in this county. This has been due, in large measure, to
    the pell-mell, haphazard land development which has been permitted in this county.
    We, the undersigned, do now call upon each and every member of the Wake County Board of Commissioners
    and we do now call upon each and every member of the Raleigh City Council to heed the injuries visited
    upon the persons and the  property of countless citizens; and we do petition these elected public officials to
    do  the following:
                                                          (5)  Stop projects for extending sewer lines west of
                                                               Raleigh which will permit further land develop-
                                                               ment until effective flood control measures in
                                                               the Crabtree Creek basin has been completed.
(1)
     Take appropriate action to condition the issu-
     ance and continuing validity of any building
     permit for any structure in the county upon a
     showing that the structure will not contribute
     to  the flooding of other property and a show-
     ing that the  builder is adequately providing for
     surface water runoff and protecting against soil
     erosion, to the end that the property of others
     is not damaged1

(2)   Enact effective ordinances for floodplain con-
     trol  to the  end that citizens  throughout the
     county will  qualify for flood damage insurance
     under Federal programs,

(3)   Take effective action to assure that no public
     works construction, whether buildings or sewer
     lines or streets or highways, will contribute to
     flooding or damage to other property.

(4)   Get  underway promptly effective  action to
     complete adequate flood control dams in the
     Crabtree Creek basin.

                   Signature
                                                          (6)  Get  underway promptly  effective action to
                                                               clear  the  Crabtree and  other waterways of
                                                               debris and obstructions and provide for appro-
                                                               priate dredging, consistent with other environ-
                                                               mental impact concerns, of those shallow por-
                                                               tions of the waterway channels.

                                                          (7)  Institute a system of early warning of possible
                                                               flooding  to  reach ALL citizens in the flood
                                                               susceptible areas.

                                                          (8)  Provide for emergency post-flood public services
                                                               for flood victims, trash and damaged property
                                                               removal, street and road washing to clean away
                                                               silt and mud. and appropriate health protection
                                                               measures to guard against insect breeding.
                                                                              Address
Mail To: PROJECT FLOOD CONTROL, P. 0. BOX F26374, RALEIGH, N. C. 27611 or 2719 ROTHGEB DRIVE, Raleigh, N. C. 27609

-------
          APPENDIX 9




Project Flood Control  Petition
                     223

-------
                        RESOLUTION NO. (1974) J^-2  	


A RESOLUTION TO ESTABLISH A POLICY FOR THE EXTENSION OF CITY FACILITIES

     WHEREAS, the City of Raleigh has recently suffered extensive flood
damage; and

     WHEREAS, the City of Raleigh, through its policy of extending
City facilities, has the power to encourage development of various
areas of Wake County in and around Raleigh; and

     WHEREAS, the County of Wake is aware of the need to protect its
county seat, Raleigh, from flood damage;  and

     WHEREAS, the County of Wake has recently assumed a more active
role in providing flood protection devices for the benefit of citizens
of Raleigh and the remainder of Wake County; and

     WHEREAS, the County of Wake is in a position to expedite the
development of flood control devices still further.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OF
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA:

     Section 1.  The County of Wake is hereby commended for its efforts
to provide flood protection for its citizens, in Raleigh and elsewhere.

     Section 2.  That the City of Raleigh joins the County of Wake in
taking a position of not encouraging development of land which will,
necessarily, result in greater liquid runoff, soil erosion and
sedimentation until adequate devices have been installed to reduce
those adverse effects of land development.

     Section 3.  That the City of Raleigh, to that end, hereby states
a policy of not extending water and server service facilities — or any
other facilities under its control -- into areas of Wake County outside
the City Limits, except in unusual circumstances, unless and until
areas into which such services are extended  and the area within the
City Limits of the City of Raleigh are adequately protected, through
the installation of related flood control and other such devices, and
unless and until adequate facilities are available  for the supply of
water and the treatment of sewage.

     Section 4.  All resolutions, policies and other such actions of
the Raleigh City Council in conflict herewith are hereby repealed to
the extent of said conflict.

     Section 5.  That this resolution shall  be effective immediately
upon its adoption.

Adopted:   2/7/74

Effective: 2/7/"

-------
            APPENDIX 10




Request for Archeological Study
                  225

-------
                               STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
                              Department of Cultural Resources
                                      Raleigh 27611


James E. Holshouser, Jr.                                               Division of Archives and History
     Governor                                                          H. G. Jones, Director
   Grace J. Rohrer                     16 January 1974
     Secretary
          Ms. Jenny Munro, Project Assistant
          United States Environmental Protection Agency
          Region IV
          1421 Peachtree Street, N.E.
          Atlanta, Georgia  30309

          Dear Ms. Munro:

               Thank you for the opportunity to comment on historical and  cultural
          resources near the proposed Crabtree Creek Interceptor  Sewer, Wake  County.
          We have consulted the National Register of Historic Places and can  report
          that no National Register properties or properties under  consideration
          for nomination lie in the project area.

               It should be noted, however, that Crabtree Creek is  itself  a natural
          feature of considerable historical significance as one  of Wake County's
          earliest landmarks and focuses for settlement.  The Mouzon map (London,
          1775) shows the existence of Crabtree Creek—so named when the area was
          still part of Johnston County.  The historical importance of the creek
          requires that two steps be taken:  the investigation of potential archae-
          ological sites and the protection of its natural condition.

               Since the creek and its tributaries provided a favorable living  area
          for aboriginal settlement, it is likely that a number of  aboriginal archae-
          ological sites exist within the project area.  In addition, at least  two
          early mill sites are known to exist, and there may be more.  Little or no
          archaeological survey work has been done; we would like the opportunity
          to perform such a survey.  For further information, please contact  Dr.
          Stephen J. Gluckman, Chief, Archaeology Section, of this  Division.

               Despite rapid development which has altered the natural growth along
          some sections of the creek, much of the creek remains in  its natural  con-
          dition and is recognized by environmentalists as being  an important eco-
          logical and recreational resource.  Given the significance of the creek
          to the history of Wake County, any further development  along its banks
          should be done in a manner to protect the natural growth  along its  banks.
                                            227

-------
Ms. Jenny Munro, 16 January 1974, Page 2
Thus we would urge that any sewer installation follow the guidelines for
erosion and sediment control in the publication EPA-R-2-72-015.  As you
know, it has been suggested that the sewer line installation, if done
according to these guidelines, could become part of the proposed greenway
system.  Such a project would enhance the historical and cultural sig-
nificance of the creek to Wake County.

     Please let us know if we can provide any additional information or
assistance.

                                        Sincerely yours,
                                               ones

-------
   APPENDIX  11






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
         229

-------
              ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Environmental Protection Agency
Region IV

    Project Officer - Robert B. Howard

    Project Assistants - Jenny Munro
                            and
                         Hannah Reid
State of North Carolina
Department of Natural and
   Economic Resources

    Project Officer - Fred Armstrong
                 231

-------
CRABTREE CREEK  INTERCEPTOR
         SEWER

-------
UPPER CRABTREE CREEK BASIN
     a ULTIMATE" SCWAGF LOADfNG

-------